Slashdot Mirror
Psychopharm Going 'Mainstream' In Schools?
PizzaFace writes "Back in the day, college was a place where a lot of kids tried recreational drugs. Now the world's more competitive, psychopharmaceuticals are better targeted, and millions of students are routinely using drugs to work better and longer. Stimulants developed for attention deficit and narcolepsy are giving mentally healthy students an edge like athletes get from steroids or human growth hormone. These psychotropics seem fairly safe, but should they be banned in the interest of fairness, perhaps with enforcement by urine tests before exams? Or do we tell our kids that, if they want to compete in this brave new world, they better find some Adderall and jack their brains up like their classmates'." If college students are doing it, how many programmers are? What say you?
Drugs are no substitute for reading a lot, tinkering, listening to others and keeping classifying things with respect to what you already know. Learning is a very long-term process, certainly little understood, and no drug can kick you on that time scale. What drugs can certainly do is to make you think you are smarter and temporarily relieve the pain of learning. The problem is that anything that makes you different, smarter or otherwise, is painful in some way.
Well, one is a mildly psychoactive drug that's fairly harmless in moderate quantities. The other is used in the manufacture of an extremely physically and socially destructive substance. Sounds like the cops and politicians in your area are on the ball... have you seen what meth does to people?
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
These are amphetamines we are talking about. They're a lot less healthy than the recreational marijuana use favored by other students. Just because they have a brand name, doesn't mean they're safe.
What's the ugliest part of your body? Some say your nose, some say your toes, but I think it's your mind. -Zappa
You can't buy curiosity.
Someone who is curious continues to mull over material long after the test has been passed. Someone who only cares about the grade will forget about it after the test.
Smart employers can tell the two apart.
I do it. I have ADHD, but the Adderall does a heck of a lot more than keep my ADHD in line. It has been extremely beneficial to me at work and in my personal projects with programming and coming up with ideas. It is like caffeine x 10 without the jitters and with the ability to focus that amazing energy at whatever you want. Then again, since I have ADHD, maybe that is just normal to everyone else but something new to me? I think it has given me an edge over the average person. However, that is a side effect of the drug. I don't think I should be discriminated against for that. I am not abusing it, and it is working as the doctor hoped at keeping my ADHD in line. Before I found Adderall, nothing I had tried worked in terms of meds. I would not want to get out of bed and I had no energy, focus, or drive. I don't like the thought of people without actual medical need taking it to get ahead. I look at that as the same thing as teens smoking pot. Cancer patients smoking pot to alleviate pain and keep their food down is a hell of a lot different than Harold and Kumar getting stoned so the sliders at White Castle taste wicked and so they can "feel" the music.
I've a standing approach to legal and recreational drugs. I don't touch anything new to the market until it's been in wide use for at least 5 years. Let the military, professional jocks and paid lab rats take the initial risk. Drugs might jack you up but it's still rigorous logic and imagination that get the job done. A few years ago when a doctor asked me to write some tests I scored a 161 in a standard IQ test. I know 161 isn't first string but I also got an above average memory and I find I can move across most problem spaces. I very much doubt any drugs are going to improve on what I do now.
Meth amphetimine is dangerous cheap and plentiful. Long term use includes symptoms very like schizophrenia. I can't imagine why it's so widely used.
Recreationally beer, pot and mushrooms keep me amused and their long linage pretty much tell me what I need to know about harmful side effects.
just my loose change
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
theres lots of new players out there too. i'm bipolar+etc. and part of how I discovered this was that I started to go wacko when I was taking speed to be able to work 100+ hour weeks. unfortunately I just about nuked my brain in the process, but thats another story completely. now I need to very carefully control my dopamine levels with several different medications, but thats life as I know it.
But I did this at one time, taking amphetamine and methamphetamine as well as ritalin, modafinil, adderal and any number of other substances at work in order to be able to work longer and care less about doing other people's bidding. Don't forget the flipside, the taking B-vitamins to deal with the burnout, tyrosine to fix the receptor loss, benzodiazepines to deal with fact that you can't really sleep properly anymore. counselling to deal with the psychosis and the weird mental states you get into from the fact that your brain can't cope with being up for many days straight.
The slant of this post was that there is something inherently UNFAIR about this, that "we" need to test against people doing this. There isn't a big worry because the people doing this all end up at one time or another like me, running on borrowed time means massive burnout. I aged biochemically about 10-15 years in the space of 3 years. Mileage may vary, but its not a smooth move. Ironically taking amphetamines to study isn't even a great strategy. Just going to class and paying attention is a better plan. Being on amphetamines reduces memory retention so much that its not worth the effort.
The big issue here, to me - is that people feel the need to self improve just so they can put out like whores for other people. Learn to live cheap and work less. Why do people feel the need to work harder and longer? I'm not sure why I did it, most of the money I was making was just going into the very drugs I was taking just to make more money for more drugs. Now I live on almost nothing and what unhappiness I have is mostly from the things lacking from my life from when that lifestyle caught up to me. Living on borrowed time catches up to a person. And when your employer finds out you're not just an eccentric hard working savant and really you're tricked out on speed you find out just how little they really care about you.
--- ask me about nihilism, I will have nothing to tell you.
So is rubbing alcohol and rock salt. Should we begin restricting those, too? Where does this argument end?
That's right. I know a lot of programmers and hackers who smoke weed. Not every day, but e.g. on weekends. And it's not bad(tm), after all. They do their work, they're successful, so no real negative side here.
A monkey is doing the real work for me.
You want the drugs made in your body instead. Running or any other proper endurance sport and the fitness imparted can make a huge difference (I find) to your ability to focus and deal with heavy workloads. Apparently cocaine and other similar drugs mimic the effect of endorphines, the drugs produced by the body under heavy excercise load. Why not cut out the expensive middle man and manufacturer your own?
YMMV of course!
Charlie
It isn't about what is more appealing, it is about what is sustainable. Stimulant abuse beyond caffeine really isn't very sustainable. Maybe it'll work for a college student for a couple of years, but a career programmer simply couldn't sustain it. They'd either burn out or get a nasty addiction on their hands. Stimulant addictions will mess you up pretty bad. Moderate recreational drug use like pot, on the other hand, is quite managable.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
Piracetam seems to have few if any side-effects, and someone I know that took it says it really helped him cram info in before a tough Cisco exam.
(No, it wasn't me.)
Get your own free personal location tracker
The ability to continue functioning in, for example, a sleep-deprived state might help a student in college, but it is by definition a short-term augmentation. Programmers, who might work on a project for months, prove their worth not by their ability to work extreme hours, but by their innate cognitive abilities. Their is no pill that will make you a great puzzle-solver. Alternatively, these drugs might do wonders to enhance the ability of a person to spend hours memorizing facts and figures, but those same people will fail to grasp the fundamental underlying science or concept.
As an example, I could teach a four year old that e^(i*Pi) + 1 = 0 (Eulers Formula) - furthermore, given a week or two, I could probably even get that same four year old to be able to repeat the entire series of steps to arrive at this formula. That child could then wow people with his "knowledge". But the child would have no idea who Euler was, what Euler's Formula means, etc.
At best, you'd end up with a person in your workplace who exhibits extremely erratic behavior.
There is no smart pill. Sorry.
Based on my own volunteer work in school programs, I would say that class sizes should rarely be above 15-20 in total, and should have 1 teacher/assistant competent in the subject for every 5-7 students. I also think kids should be streamed per subject, with some flexibility for when certain groups of kids happen to work well together. (No, that does not mean cribbing the notes.)
The problem with the existing system is that it is geared around people learning as and when the teacher gets round to it, rather than pushing people as far and as fast as they are able. It is no wonder that kids use drugs, but my guess is that its more to zone out the inadequacies of the educational system as it is to improve learning. You can't accelerate much beyond the speed the material is taught.
Based on research that has been caried out, I think that I'd extend this basic concept by throwing in a second or even a third language, as it appears that the complexity of language is such that learning new languages young boosts the growth of neural connections and seems to improve the capacity to learn. Languages, therefore, may provide a safe alternative to these drugs in that they'll boost intelligence and have no risk of later side-effects.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I think we should deregulate almost all drugs. If you want to mess up your body or your mind with steroids or "smart drugs", that's your business. If you want to feel good through chemistry, that should be your decision. If you die 30 years before your time because of various kinds of drug abuse, that's nobody's business but yours--just don't expect exceptional measures from doctors to try to reverse the effects.
The only drugs that should be far more tightly regulated than they are are antibiotics and antivirals, because incorrect use by one person harms other people.
the problem lies in the double standard. you know how it works, laws are passed to prevent bad stuff(tm), most people will go on and do bad stuff(tm) and the police won't care, while they will bug to no end the only good guys(tm)
I agree with your statement only if taken out of context. In this case, the double standard is in favor of pharmacuticals. Ephedrine is not only more dangerous than Marijuana, but it is also used to create methamphetamine. I'm not saying I agree with the ID laws, just that you should reconsider which one is really the "bad stuff".
What's the ugliest part of your body? Some say your nose, some say your toes, but I think it's your mind. -Zappa
but not the fact of usage.
Onpoint 09/2002: College Students and Psychoactive Medication
Never mind the old equation of college and recreational drugs, the parents' old tiptoe through pot and peyote. A new generation is arriving at university heavily armed with prescriptions for Zoloft, Dexedrine, Paxil and Prozac. Xanax, Adderall, Cylert and Ritalin. And it's not about weekend benders. It's about ADD, anxiety, OCD and depression.
Officials say that today that about 40 percent of American college students are on psychoactive drugs. Everybody knows the number is huge. But what exactly does it mean? Up next On Point: the Medicated Generation goes to college.
---
And maybe the reason for the increasing levels of usage is that they are learning this from their days in grade school?
Better Living through Chemistry? (Dr. Leonard Sax)
This year some six million children in the U.S.--one in eight-- will take Ritalin. With 5 percent of the world's population, the U.S. consumes 85 percent of this drug. Have we considered the consequences?
and...
Despite their stubborn refusal to medicate their children with Ritalin, these other countries do not lag behind the United States in academic performance. On the contrary: according to the most recent studies, France, Germany, and Japan continue to maintain their traditional lead over the United States in tests of math and reading ability.
---
This article dates to 2000, but it's about the very same crisis that we've been hearing about more and more the last few years. Children are being medicated in order to get them to sit still in school (where 'unproductive' things like things like recess are being cut in favor of more cramming). Maybe a whole generation has been raised to think of 'learning' as something you need drugs to accomplish. And now we are beginning to see the consequences.
No, the problem with "just say no" isn't addiction, because to be addicted, you must have already not said no at least once already. The problem with "just say no", and in fact so much of the anti-drugs FUD out there, is the term: drugs. Drugs are meant to be bad... right? So what about all the drugs that you get from the doc/chemist? Okay, so drugs are bad if they're illegal, but drugs from the doc/chemist are good, because they're legal... so it's actually breaking the law that's bad, and the laws MUST be right... right?
Wrong. "Just say no!" teaches ignorance, it says don't question, don't learn, just repeat after me. But the truth is that illegal drugs aren't all the same, and the legal status of a drugs makes absolutely no difference to whether it's "good" or "bad" for you. The difference comes when whether you've learnt how to use the drugs responsibly.
The only drug I've ever become addicted to was one I was prescribed from a doctor, because I trusted/just accepted what I was told. All other drugs I've 'experimented' (recreational only, I stear well clear of the big addictive one's such as smack/crack) with, I've researched beforehand, and not hand anything like the same kind of problems with. I've even managed to boost my work productivity (programming) with some, which has saved my ass at least a couple of times.
Whenever I've seen people having problems with these drugs, is because they don't respect them, think that taking more == makes you cooler, they get competative ("I can handle more than you"), or often believe that the drug will solve something that it can't. But guess what... you get the same problems with legal as you do with illegal drugs. Just because it's legal, doesn't mean you won't become addicted, or that it won't screw your liver or whatever, and just because something illegal, doesn't mean it will.
I've become far more successful in my life, both work wise and socially, since I discovering what levels of different chemicals have different effects on me, what I can achieve in different states, and importantly: my limits. I can use amphetamines (the family ritalin is in, as is speed) to slam out code for 24hours straight, but the brain needs to rest, so if I keep doing it, I just end up being awake, and can't be productive. I've learnt this, I use it wisely, I use it responsibly, I monitor my health (physically and mentally) very closely. There's no reason why I should stop (except legal status).
Take responsibility for your own life, for MORE of your own life, and you'll find you can be safer from most things, and see that some things are only "dangerous" if used irresponsibly (like powertools) but can be useful if used wisely (like powertools).
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
is that drugs can have nasty side effects both short and long term (yes I include caffine in this, but caffine is pretty damn mild as stimulants go).
the worrying bit is that people could feel pressured into using drugs without a proper understanding of any bad side effects they may have, I wonder if this was more of the reason for drug testing in sports than fairness considerations.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
I work in a pharmacy and my expierence with the ADHD medications shows how insanely stupid these college kids are being. We had a pharmacist lose his licence for slipping some of the ADHD pills on the sly; there is a reason the FDA classifies them as controlled substances, they are highly addictive. Some of them (Ritalin for sure, maybe Allderal as well) are narcotics which are the most addictive and most highly controlled category of legal drugs. In the state I live in (I'm not going to reveal that because the pill popping pharmacist is still under investigation by the state) controlled drugs are required to be locked in a cabinet that only the pharmacist can access.
Now, for further insight- I am a college student, a soon to be senior political science and history major, I pull 4.0's with nothing more than Earl Gray tea doused in honey to help me write those term papers on Progressive politics until 3:00 am. I equate taking controlled substances illegally in order to gain an "edge" to writing notes on the palm of your hand before stepping into the exam room. I got my high GPA the honest way, I'm going to take my GRE the honest way, and I'm going to persue my PhD the honest way.
Before popping the controls in order to push up those scores realize they are controls because they are highly addictive. If they were safe for use without a prescription then I doubt they would be locked under the counter and subject to an insane amount of paperwork and redundant checks before dispensing. Besides, taking an illegal drug to get your edge reflects badly on you and cheapens the meaning of everything you gained.
I am shocked that no one has mentioned the simple fact that IT DEPENDS on the person taking the drug.
I'll use food for my analogy.
I have a buddy who weighs about 120lbs (skinny), eats like a pig. I'm 205lbs (fatty) and I also have a terrible diet. Yet another friend is pushing 250lbs (fatty+), and he's a lifelong vegetarian. We're all about 6' tall.
I have no interest in splitting hairs between "food" or "drug"; both cause chemical reactions in the body, and these reactions are entirely dependant on any number of factors (diet, lifestyle, age, race, location, gender...I could go on and on and on...).
I for one think it is disgusting that we live in a country (USA) which advertises perscription meds to children every night during prime time, and then locks these same kids up a few years later for smoking dope. This isn't hypocritical; it's fucking asinine.
Call it "free markets", call it "the people", the verdict is in: WE LOVE DRUGS and WE LOVE FOOD. Both will affect each and every one of us in different ways, and legal or not, each must be used in MODERATION and with ALL DUE CAUTION.
barack to the future?
I am genuinely intrigued by this. You appear to be saying that programming is a menial task (or is it only VB programming? You know, you can wire DB fields to GUI forms all day long in C# too
First reaction: Are you sure you took the right job? Solving problems by writing some kind of obscure code that mere machines can understand should be a least a little entertaining even if you're forced to use VB *shrug*. Is it isn't, how do you manage deadlines and PHBs and retarded co-workers spitting out code like "If i = 0 Or i = 7 Or i = 14 Or i = 21 Or i = You_get_my_drift..."?
Second reaction: Oh, that's what the drug is for. Silly me.
More seriously, IMHO if you have to take drugs (okay, maybe except recreational ones, and even that I'm not so sure) in order to accomplish your job, you should change jobs. Maybe, somewhere on the way, you passed something that would have been exciting and entertaining to you, as well as make some money... Time to get back and find your True Function In Life (TM).
God, my english is awful tonight.
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
Many people are seeing these types of drugs as performance enhancing somehow in children and teenagers, but the truth is selective seratonin reuptake inhibitors don't have an immediate effect, or when taken at a 'therapeutic' level, are not that mind blowing in effect. Benzodiazepines such as Xanax, Klonipin, or Valium are not likely to help anyone with their job unless the recreational intake and effect of euphoria 'helps' your job. Those are prescribed for those who have social phobias and panic disorders, otherwise they're not too useful.
Contrary to what the submitter says about Adderall "jacking your brain up", is also another gross generalization. Unless you have ADD/ADHD or narcolepsy its not likely to be helpful on a clinical level, but unlike most amphetamines it doesn't have too many side effects.
Most people who obtain prescription drugs are most likely to benefit from them and are relatively safe, and as far as SSRI's go, for example, recreationally students are better off without the drug due to sexual side effects, so they'd be more prone to be taking it for the actual label use.
Time to get back and find your True Function In Life (TM).
For most of us, that would be working and consuming goods like responsible corporate serfs.
If your parents are rich and willing, you can go to college and just study. Otherwise, you work and study.
Or you take out student loans, and pay them off after you've got your degree. So you can work less, or not at all, while you study.
If you own a portable music player, you can listen to your own playlist of music as you bop around. Otherwise, you don't.
This is an advantage? Besides, you can get a cassette player for $20 at Wal-Mart. Or a cheap portable radio from a dollar store. We're not talking uber-expensive, here.
If you have (for instance) a Bowflex and a personal trainer, you now have the opportunity to outperform most of your fellow atheletes in terms of how long it takes you to reach your potential, and how close you are going to get to it.
Or you can use the campus gym, and ask advice of the phys-ed instructors.
If you have a car, you drive to school. Otherwise, you walk, sponge, or use pubtrans.
Or you can take online classes that allow you to do everything at home. (Except the occasional proctored exam.) Speaking from experience, I can tell you this frees up your schedule like you wouldn't believe.
If you have a laptop, you have many performance-enhancing tools. Otherwise, not.
Sure. You can type up your notes in class, and record your lectures. Nothing you couldn't do just as well with a Gregg shorthand textbook and tape recorder. Or bite the bullet and find an old 386 laptop with DOS that someone's trying to get rid of. (And believe me, that works fine for notetacking. MS Edit isn't a bad editor.)
All of these "advantages" have one thing in common: Money; the ability to purchase the advantage.
All of these "advantages" have another thing in common, too: There are cheaper alternatives.
It's not about money, or about the rich keeping the poor down. As for drugs, I won't take stimulants without talking to someone who's willing to prescribe them. There's a reason things like Ritalin and Adderall are perscription medications. They either have side-effects that can harm you, or they haven't been in use long enough to prove that they're generally safe.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
One of the problems with "the perfect drug" scenarios are, if you get used to it, will you be able to deal without it?
You tend to adapt to the current circumstances and accept them as the new norm. So if I start permanently taking performance enhancers, say for concentration, chances are I will adjust either physically or mentally until my performance returns to 'acceptable', but now I get severely hyperactive without it, since I've become accustomed to letting the drugs do the work.
This kind of dependance on external factors is recognized as a bad thing. It's why they teach pencil-and-paper math in school, even though calculators are cheap and plentiful.
I think you'll find that most people today have the ability to function as human beings without anything but air, water and food. Having a large population dependant on a regular drug supply is a recipe for disaster, as sooner or later, they'll have to deal without them. No company would want their employees to start swinging from the chandeliers if their drug supplier failed to deliver...
Anyway, I think we'll have large debattes on eugenics long before we find some sort of side-effect-less superdrug. Biological wetware is a mess of spaghetti code and interdependancies that is best left untampered with for a while yet. "If it ain't broke," and all...
That is absolutely NOT out of place. The main thing ADHD drugs do is boost dopamine levels in the prefrontal cortex of your brain. Exercise does this too, as short term changes in gene expression result in increased calcium ion transport in the brain, which in turn raises dopamine levels. These changes last for about 56 hours. There is also some evidence of long-term favorable changes to dopamine receptors from exercise in animal models, but to what degree these studies apply to humans is unknown.
Bottomline: exercise absolutely helps concentration and mental function.
Also, meditation has been proven to increase dopamine levels in the prefrontal cortex as well.
However, these on their own were not enough to overcome my ADD and I still had to take drugs. But they help. I would greatly prefer to take nothing at all, but there are limits to "natural" cures.
Different levels for different people. You are exersizing, you just don't feel like it. You might also be throwing in a bit of meditation to your regimen. Think about it - mild physical stimulation (walking) and "quiet country lanes. No people. Nice and quiet. Time to think." Meditation, baby. You'd just not sitting the lotus position and reciting a mantra to allow yourself to relax.
And I'm not suprised that exercise started to add pounds. The most dangerous thing for me is starting to exercise - my body starts asking for more energy - more than I can burn when I'm ramping up. It's doubly bad if I get into a time crunch and let my exercising go by the wayside. For a couple weeks to a month, my body still expects me to hop back on the bike or into the pool any day, and demands calories to compensate. But instead I drive a desk for 10-12 hours - not much caloric demand there. Also, I can understand the boring side, too. I really enjoy swimming, but there is just nothing to keep the mind active. My second choice is cycling, on a old road bike on a set of rollers. It takes a bit to get used to (it's like riding on ice), but it does a good job, and even a new bike and a set of rollers is less than a stupid spinning machine. Plus you can always take the bike outside if the weather is nice, and you've trained your muscles to the motion. Oh, and boredom on the rollers - yeah, crushing. Except if you get a good audio player and listen to books. Not only does it pass the time, but you can relax with good reading material.
It's late, I'm rambling, and I really ought to consider getting back into the morning workout routine.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
That sounds a lot like me, actually. The strongest caffeine I ever use is English breakfast tea or really dark chocolate (I admit I'm chocoholic, just love the stuff but can't stand cheap Milk Chocolate). No drinking of coffee, at all, ever; though I do use it for flavoring purposes when cooking. I enjoy the effects of alcohol in smallish amounts, but can't stand the loss of coordination that comes with real drunkenness.
Frankly, widespread minority amphetamine use for studying alarms, not least because I was diagnosed with ADHD when younger. I go without meds for it out of principle, but it still angers me that kids who possessed normal mindless-studying capacity in the first place now take drugs invented for helping those without such capacity to get ahead. We're left behind, again; this time by people with no problem abusing our solution.
And what about the kind of society that demands this? Another comment states that the use of drugs by medical students for their residencies used to be routine. Why are we placing inhuman burdens on people that can only lead to the requirement of inhuman aide?
Btw, just friended you. Nice to know somebody else likes to run their own damn brain.
The class of drug Adderal and Ritalin belong to has another name.
SPEED. They are fucking hard drugs. You want to talk about a gateway drug? Jesus Christ.
America seriously needs to wake the fuck up from its asinine hypocrisy. We have fucking hard liquor advertizing on FUCKING RACE CARS. Every body and their mother is addicted to Caffeine. We are such a drug culture that it's such an absolute joke how much money we spend on the 'war on drugs'.
caffe-ine
coca-ine
Big diff, right?
Now the meat of the argument is that I think it should all be legal for adults. My huge problem is the generation of children we have gotten started on speed. We have 10 million teen-age addicts. 10 million kids intimately familiar with the street value of their little bottle of pills.
10 million kids with the taste of speed in their mouths. Does that not scare anyone else?
The college students I met this year (was a freshmen) for the most part did not use these kind of drugs. For the few that did, it was for finals week where they were up for 4 days strieght (why can't I spell anymore? Bah) or they would just use them to see how long they could stay up, but were not actualy doing anywork, they were playing WoW or something equaly stupid (I hate WoW). I think its kind of sad that people need think they need these drugs to compete. I for one will not be using these drugs and plan on "competing" just as they do.
But we're not talking about recreational drugs here. We're talking performance enhancing compounds. Sure, I'd choose sleep over caffeine any day, but in my world that probably wouldn't get me ahead, in fact if I slept as much as I should I probably couldn't even make the status quo. It's one thing to tell kids to entertain themselves with their toys and then allow them to entertain themselves with recreational drugs when they are mature enough to use them wisely. However, how can we expect our kids to grow into the neurotic workaholic freaks that we idealize if they don't get started early with performance enhancing compounds? Sure it's sick, and yes it scares me, but this isn't about drugs, laws, or rules nearly as much as it is about the society we've created. I can't imagine we'll ever really be able to turn back now.
ôó
>Adderall is becoming popular because it has signs of being just as nonaddictive as Ritalin & co., but with longer active period and less side effects.
>
>Speed is a different class of "uppers", namely amphetamines.
Umm, Adderall *is* amphetamines.
"* 1/4 Dextroamphetamine Saccharate
* 1/4 Dextroamphetamine Sulfate (Dexedrine®)
* 1/4 Amphetamine Aspartate
* 1/4 Amphetamine Sulfate"
-- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!