They Say Post on overdiagnosis of ADD and ADHD in american children

When it comes to the topic of ADD and ADHD diagnosis to children, most of u would readily agree that it has increased in popularity when it comes to explaining the hyperactive energy and behavior of an American child. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of it being the correct diagnosis or just an easy "explanation." Whereas some are convinced that ADD and ADHD is being over-diagnosed to American children, others maintain that over diagnosis is not the case and every child diagnosed with ADD or ADHD has received the correct answer. In his article titled,  The misnamed ADHD is not over-diagnosed, Bob Hopper implies that there are many myths about ADHD in particular that need to be corrected therefore saying that it is not over diagnosed. As a psychologist specializing in attention issues, Bob argues that the disease is not being diagnosed, however there are misconceptions about ADHD that don't help to clarify that. According to Dr. Hopper there is a "quiet" type of ADHD that is frequently undetected. There are a series of tests that are given to help diagnose ADHD so, it is not a simple observational diagnosis. These tests include Intelligence tests and Continuous Performance Test. Where many people are quick to say that the child was simply diagnosed too quickly, Bob Hopper defends physicians by saying that "In Boulder County, my experience is that physicians are careful and conservative in the diagnosis and treatment of this condition, with consistent monitoring when medication is used." Bob Hopper decides to gravitate to the faulty system that schools have, making it difficult to keep even an undiagnosed patient attentive and engaged. More choices need to be established in classes and curriculum making it possible for ADHD patients, with great help from medications, to be able to succeed.

Frame your comments

I really liked Joe Posnanski's article on his opinion over baseball, Willie Mays to be more exact, and power enhancing drugs. I feel that there is a common thread belief that power enhancing drugs are only a problem in todays sports world. His response to Pete Hamill's essay is strong and makes valid points. Amphetamines back then, were todays majorly used steroids. Baseball was never an innocent game, and power enhancers were never not in the picture. While Joe Posnanski argues that power enhancing drugs have always been in the legend of baseball, Pete Hamill implies that this is only a problem in todays world. Pete Hamill is implying that baseball in the "back then" time was clean and innocent. While they may seem at odds about the innocence of baseball, I think that Joe makes it a great argument. Baseball is simply not a sport that is new to power enhancing drugs, America's favorite pastime was not fueled solely by joy and the "love of the game." Whether or not you'd agree with that is your choice, but I don't feel like the effect of amphetamines back then truly compares with the power of steroids today.