Jump to content
CrazyBoards.org

Dr. AMen's ADD Sub-Types


Recommended Posts

So I picked up a copy of Dr. Amen's book, Healing ADD.  The breakdown of ADD sub-types was very interesting and was exactly what I was looking for in attempting to help my PDoc with appropriate diagnosis and treatment.  I was wondering how you all have identified with the different sub-types discussed in this book?  From looking at the list presented, treatment for ADD and ADD Inattentive is similar (regarding meds) - my PDoc suggested that I have hints of hyperactivity, though I seem to relate more to Inattentive than the former.

In addition, it seems that I also have many symptoms discussed in Type 3 (obsessive) ADD.  No OCD behavior, but I tend to obsess over different things - my friends frequently comment that I dwell on things too much, and that I worry needlessly.  This leads to considerable negativity (Type 5???), although I am not convinced of the Limbic problems yet.  This negativity could be a result of having untreated ADD for so long.

In any case, I am quite sure about the Type 2 Inattentive and hints of Type 1 and Type 3.  Have any of you found a similar diagnosis for yourself?  How did you and your PDoc deal with it?  How do you accurately diagnose this sort of thing without those brain scans mentioned in Dr. Amen's book?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a followup from my thread on the Barkley lecture.  Some of the comments you posted do ring true, but I have to disagree with the information processing bit (at least for now).  The first few days I had begun my Adderall intake I noticed a change that surprised me, since it had been entirely unexpected.  When speaking with my boss, the words he spoke just made sense, and I attribute this to an increased use of my working memory.

I have often described myself as only having two working memory chunks (as opposed to the human average of 7-9).  Manipulating working memory is crucial in forming internal representations of concepts (especially mathematical), and this is what I have pin-pointed as a part of myself that prevents me from understanding certain things.  I somehow seem to have gone about in spite of this shortcoming, but when I began Adderall, this "fog", this lack of access or use of my working memory, seemed to have lifted.  I was able to remember things from the past, remember what I had been doing in detail, and able to comprehend complicated conversations and participate in them intelligently.  This, to me, signals the input-problems that Barkley was referring to.

After reading Dr. Amen's sections on ADD Sub-types, Inattentive characteristics seem to define more of me than Hyperactive, though I am sure I have some hyperactive components as well.  Another thing I noticed was a strong relationship between my behavior and Dr. Amen's Obsessive ADD sub-type, which adds another host of complications to my day to day.  In any case, I just want this fog to go away - the Adderall does not have the same fog clearing effect it had, although I am able to prioritize more carefully now.  I want the fog gone!

By the way, I am 25 and male - not sure if this influences your responses much, but menopause won't be in the cards for me.  ;)

I hear in his lecture a fair lack of nuance about these differences (as sort of noted by Null),

I think the most important notion he puts across are that ADHD is more a response/time problem than anything else. He posits that responding to the NOW is irresistable (responding with as little as a glance or a fleeting thought is a form of output) - meaning that distractions come easily. In this case - the fog is just a bunch of extraneous stimuli that isn't prioritized, so it sort of bottlenecks on its way in AND out - with processing AND output preferentially tilted toward what is interesting at the moment. This could include responding to internal chatter (a form of output, even if it resides in the head), if the environment is dull enough. What does get through, however, is often processed and/or output quite efficiently.

I can tell by your writing skills that you have not had any difficulty processing what gets through - its just a matter of prioritizing incoming information and outgoing action.

Barkley says: So we start out with inhibition, the ability to wait and not respond to the world around us.

I think it often seems like we're not processing when we are struggling to ignore the response impulses and stay directed. It is probably a matter of processing the "wrong" information at the wrong time which makes us feel that way.

this is kind of borne out in Barkley's example of how ADHD kids will talk more than others until asked a direct question - in which case they answer more slowly. They aren't really processing so much as they are sorting output possibilities, is my guess...and that's probably the easy way to describe the above.

pigs

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When speaking with my boss, the words he spoke just made sense, and I attribute this to an increased use of my working memory.

DISCLAIMER: Of course, I don't know you at all, so most of my position is based on my reflections on my own inattention vs. ADHD characteristics. I'm not much formally educated (one of Barkley's dropouts), either, so that further impairs my ability to stand on anything as absolute fact. Mainly, my inner Hunter just wants to - well - HUNT - for a finer spin on things, always.

ASIDE: I, personally, would hunt with a hyperfocusing ADHDer any day - I'd eat a lot sooner than Barkley, for sure. The foggers/disinterested ADHDers wouldn't even pick up the bow, so no danger there.

BACK TO IT: I will say, for the sake of recreational debate, that the your sentence makes me think this: Adderall may be allowing you to listen with continuity, as opposed to unconsciously glomming onto particular words or phrases here and there (glomming being the response - or output, in this case), which would necessarily prevent you from receiving the entire message. Can't very well adequately process what you're not receiving. Almost "over-selective" attention rather than a lack of selective attention, in a sense.

Listening without continuity is like trying to keep your eye on and swing at several balls at once rather than just one.

I have read somewhere that ADHD readers (kids, in this case - but if you believe Barkley, we're still kids, only bigger. Especially you, green one who is only 25/16.)sometimes get side-tracked by the individual words/phrases as opposed to whole messages, and sometimes or often must re-read because of it. Do it all the time, myself, never mind the competing inner chatter or external stimuli.

One could, I suppose, interpret this as pure inattention/input processiog, but if you look at the paragraph above you can see where I just did it:

Note the parenthetical statement, excluding the Barkley age rank and gentle jab parts. I got sidetracked in my response to my own writing by fixiating on the term ADHD readers. "Which ADHD readers? Who are they?" I could not wait to see if the response - curiousity/questioning - was actually necessary. Remove the parenthetical response and you'll see that it wasn't, but it got me anyway. Add back in the Age rank/Jab and you'll see I got nailed three times by one phrase, going like a lemming over the cliff. Tripping over my own brain.

Now - mathematics is not one of my strong areas (of interest, anyway. Never really gave it much of a shot). But I would imagine that, in some ways, it would be even harder to practice listening/reading continuity, because past the most basic two and twos, mathematics is not, in it's higher forms, particularly intuitive in the same way as language. At least not for most of us.

Of course, I really can't speak for you - I'm just getting all fired up in the brain picking it apart conceptually. I do that. I haven't read Amen's book, but perhaps I share the Obsessive sub-type traits with you.

Come to think of it, Jem probably does , too - which is likely what led me to the erroneous assumption (in both your cases) of feminiity. In my experience, women use more words and details than men - and you are both lengthy, detailed posters who tease apart ideas thoroughly, when in the mood.

Damn socialization...footses in mouth - both at once.

pigs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny that you attributed my words to a female, it is not the first time I have had my language described this way.  One of the unfortunate problems with text vs spoken word to communicate is that the nuances of speech do not come through.  I wasn't upset by your comments, I tend to react defensively to everything around me, and often find myself looking for fights/debates.

I also sometimes "have my blinders on," as my boss likes to say, so it sometimes takes prodding to get me out of a particular idea to consider other options.  What you say does make sense, especially regarding reading.  I don't know how to separate your continuity theory vs. the working memory theory I had mentioned.  It could be both.  Barkley mentioned the working memory part, I think that Amen did as well.  I just remember identifying with that portion of the paper, so I suppose that puts me in the combined category with some obsessive bits thrown in for good measure.

I wonder what you guys do for work - my interest in math comes from my career in finance, it is very mathematical and logical, so I run into lots of walls trying to understand all of this.  Then again, my undergraduate years were also filled with lots of running into walls - I studied computer science, where every freakin' concept seemed to exceed my working memory capacity.

When speaking with my boss, the words he spoke just made sense, and I attribute this to an increased use of my working memory.

DISCLAIMER: Of course, I don't know you at all, so most of my position is based on my reflections on my own inattention vs. ADHD characteristics. I'm not much formally educated (one of Barkley's dropouts), either, so that further impairs my ability to stand on anything as absolute fact. Mainly, my inner Hunter just wants to - well - HUNT - for a finer spin on things, always.

ASIDE: I, personally, would hunt with a hyperfocusing ADHDer any day - I'd eat a lot sooner than Barkley, for sure. The foggers/disinterested ADHDers wouldn't even pick up the bow, so no danger there.

BACK TO IT: I will say, for the sake of recreational debate, that the your sentence makes me think this: Adderall may be allowing you to listen with continuity, as opposed to unconsciously glomming onto particular words or phrases here and there (glomming being the response - or output, in this case), which would necessarily prevent you from receiving the entire message. Can't very well adequately process what you're not receiving. Almost "over-selective" attention rather than a lack of selective attention, in a sense.

Listening without continuity is like trying to keep your eye on and swing at several balls at once rather than just one.

I have read somewhere that ADHD readers (kids, in this case - but if you believe Barkley, we're still kids, only bigger. Especially you, green one who is only 25/16.)sometimes get side-tracked by the individual words/phrases as opposed to whole messages, and sometimes or often must re-read because of it. Do it all the time, myself, never mind the competing inner chatter or external stimuli.

One could, I suppose, interpret this as pure inattention/input processiog, but if you look at the paragraph above you can see where I just did it:

Note the parenthetical statement, excluding the Barkley age rank and gentle jab parts. I got sidetracked in my response to my own writing by fixiating on the term ADHD readers. "Which ADHD readers? Who are they?" I could not wait to see if the response - curiousity/questioning - was actually necessary. Remove the parenthetical response and you'll see that it wasn't, but it got me anyway. Add back in the Age rank/Jab and you'll see I got nailed three times by one phrase, going like a lemming over the cliff. Tripping over my own brain.

Now - mathematics is not one of my strong areas (of interest, anyway. Never really gave it much of a shot). But I would imagine that, in some ways, it would be even harder to practice listening/reading continuity, because past the most basic two and twos, mathematics is not, in it's higher forms, particularly intuitive in the same way as language. At least not for most of us.

Of course, I really can't speak for you - I'm just getting all fired up in the brain picking it apart conceptually. I do that. I haven't read Amen's book, but perhaps I share the Obsessive sub-type traits with you.

Come to think of it, Jem probably does , too - which is likely what led me to the erroneous assumption (in both your cases) of feminiity. In my experience, women use more words and details than men - and you are both lengthy, detailed posters who tease apart ideas thoroughly, when in the mood.

Damn socialization...footses in mouth - both at once.

pigs

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current - Mom, Graphic Designer (independent), PT Musician (these are the quiet days)

Former - Clinical/Admin (varying) Developmental Disabilities ( Mentally Retarded/Emotinally Disturbed/Severe [violent] Behavior Disorders)

(Plus the balnace in no particular order, some before former and some after)

Advertising Sales/Consulting & Super-Reluctant CEO-for-a-minute, Small  Network Administrator, Photograhper, Clerical, More musician, Dishwasher, Car detailer, Mobile Environmental Testing Laboratory Builder & Mechanic, Trim Carpenter, Bartender, Cocktail Waitress, noize musician (ala neubauten/swans), Sandwich maker, Donut Counter Person, Temp, Disc Jockey and low-end classical radio editor/producer, pool hustler, telemarketer and probably more that I've forgotten...

In typical ADHD fashion, I change up frequently. Cannot let the fog take over...til now. Tired, I give in.

pigs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...