(Previously this page began with ”Planning the start-up of the ADHD school during December 2013” – but this has not happened and probably will not happen).
2025-07-01
In Sweden in many regions there is a reward for each ADHD diagnosis for Health Care. AS I see it the diagnosis can be done anyhow (hope I am wrong).
What I think about is that (have worked with a few (!) so called ADHDs and thought much about it.
What is needed is (money to) an international critical investigation to bring order if possible!
Very serious criticism has come from many, e.g. Allen Frances
But it get worse while power money is the leader of healthcare not only in the “ADHD” field.
As I see it we need to work at many levels and steps to bring optimal order, where most effective neuro-bio-psycho-physiologic-cultural ideographic moving up to nomothetic designs is reached and then simplification is done from those findings (different versions and degree of dysfunctions levels of ADHD – name should be changed removing e.g. the word psychiatric – as well as what kind of simplified diagnostic strategies (enabling health care to do it) given suggestions for interventions based on the individuals´ as q resource (e.g. as in my manual from my dissertation “patient as a reasonable competent by us educated resource and coworker in own rehab”), something health care staff can learn quite easily if motivated/interested.
I have found that very simple psychophysiological measure (by the patient her/himself) can give a first sign of chronical biopsychosocial stress or capacity to influence autonomic nervous system (ANS) oscillation pattern – an effective first “watershed” … something HC staff learn in a 1-2 hour workshop.
Summarizing
We need most advanced (scientific and clinical based) investigation real world related research and from that simplify also considering HC staff options to learn while working/family/hobbies …
Have too much texts of the above but too bad health to communicate. I have not published normally lats 25 years (too multidisciplinary and almost each day further redevelop my thinking … (by reason I can discuss elsewhere – perhaps)
Only pay HC for correct (as something like above) based diagnosis and not just at best guesses …
So called ADHD can be a resource is …
2013 I wrote the below
2013 -> The ADHD word/term should be changed to High Intense Persons (HIP) or other relevant word/concept that is also adequately defined (including how they are investigated and addressed)
Since there is a great deal of confusion about what a diagnosis actually ”is” – as well as its consequences – the following axiomatic definition-oriented text is proposed
Starting:
Simplistic diagnoses of so-called mental disorders (such as those in DSM 5) that do not identify biopsychosocial causes of (own and/or others’) observed behaviors do not meet the requirement for a medical diagnosis.
Biopsychosocial diagnoses that are not formulated as readable hypotheses in terms of predicted developments do not meet the requirement for a medical diagnosis.
Biopsychosocial medical assessment that does not identify capacities and positive characteristics but only focuses on possible (static) disorders does not meet the requirement for a medical diagnosis.
Suspicious symptom behaviors that are investigated and that are considered to have lifestyle-related causes (a number of which can be identified with current knowledge while others can be more hypothetically identified) should also be capacity tested, e.g. the effect of active and passive relaxation in terms of ADHD/HIP analyses.
In case of identified ADHD/HIP problems, biopsychosocial methods should constitute basic ”treatment” and pharmacological interventions as a temporary complement (unless life-threatening conditions are identified)
Since the ADHD term is most often used in health care in a destructive way – both in terms of incorrect diagnosis (e.g. DSM V) and incorrect, even harmful in the long run, use of drugs, we are working to change the ”word” to Hight Intense Persons (HIP) as well as definitions and what is required for effective investigation and action methods.
Basic literature for HIP education in terms of knowledge platform and action programs: Marthe Burge ́s ”The ADD myth; How to Cultivate the Unique Gifts of Intense Personalities”
To the above action program is added a stress medicine biopsychosocial toolbox that conveys through education and self-activities including psychophysiological stress profile analysis.
The problem with today’s attitude towards ADHD/HIP is
No acceptable method of diagnosis exists (except possibly for pharmacological interests, which also support patient associations). DSM 5 diagnoses in themselves are not only a destructive problem for those who are diagnosed, but also for society, as stigmats often have a predictive effect and ”lock” children and adults as sick, which makes effective interventions more difficult when needed.
Drugs are not only unnecessary when relevant knowledge of ADHD/HIP exists, but also develop destructive effects on neuropsychophysiological systems – even in terms of drug dependence. In addition, knowledge of pharmacological substances is extremely limited, especially its multifaceted integrated effects, which in itself calls for extreme caution even when neurological damage is identified.
If children and adults’ HIP is managed in a well-knowledge-based way, IB constitutes an asset for individuals and societies (see more e.g. Martha Burges’ book (”The ADD myth; How to Cultivate the Unique Gifts of Intense Personalities) which constitutes the clearest integrated description published so far – I think!)
Bo von Scheele 2013-11-10
ADHD – en myt som omformas till ett resursbeteende
(Tidigare inleddes denna sida med ”Planerar uppstart av ADHDskolan under december 2013″ – men detta har ej skett och sker troligen inte).
ADHD ordet/begreppet bör ändras till High Intense Persons (HIP) eller annan/andra relevanta ord/begrepp som också adekvat definieras (även hur de utreds och åtgärdas)
Eftersom det råder stor förvirring kring vad egentligen en diagnos ”är” – liksom dess konsekvenser – så föreslås nedan axiomatiska definitionsinriktad text
Utgångspunkter:
- Simplistiska diagnoser av s.k. mentala disorders (som t.ex. de i DSM 5) som ej identifiera biopsykosociala orsaker till (egna och/eller andras) observerade beteenden motsvarar inte kravet på medicinsk diagnos.
- Biopsykosociala diagnoser som inte formuleras som avläsbara hypoteser avseenden predicerade utvecklingar motsvarar inte kravet på medicinsk diagnos.
- Biopsykosocial medicinsk utredning som inte identifierar kapaciteter och positiva egenskaper utan enbart fokuserar på möjliga (statiska) disorders motsvarar inte kravet på medicinsk diagnos.
- Misstänkta symptombeteenden som undersöks och som anses ha livsstilsrelaterade orsaker (varav ett antal kan med dagens kunskap identifierats medan andra kan mer hypotetisk identifieras) bör även kapacitets testas, t.ex. effekt av aktiv och passiv avslappning när det gäller ADHD/HIP analyser.
- Vid identifieradADHD/HIP problematik bör biopsykosociala metoder via utbildning och egen skräddarsyende insatser utgöra grund ”behandling” och farmakologiska insatser som tillfälligt komplement (så vida inte livshotande tillstånd identifieras)
Eftersom ADHD begreppet oftast används inom hälso- och sjukvården på ett, på flera sätt, destruktiv sätt – både avseende felaktig diagnostik (t.ex. DSM V) och felaktig, även skadlig på sikt, användning av läkemedel så arbetar vi för att byta ”ord” till Hight Intens Persons (HIP) liksom definitioner och vad som krävs för effektiva utrednings- och åtgärdsmetoder.
Grundlitteratur för HIP-utbildning i termer av kunskapsplattform och åtgärdsprogram: Marthe Burge´s ”The ADD myth; How to Cultivate the Unique Gifts of Intense Personalities”
Till ovan åtgärdsprogram läggs stressmedicinskt biopsykosocial verktygslåda som förmedlar via utbildning och egenaktiviteter inklusive psykofysiologisk stressprofilanalys.
Problemet med dagens attityd mot ADHD/HIP är
- Ingen acceptabel diagnosmetod finns (utom möjligen för farmakologiska intressen, som också stödjer patientföreningar). DSM 5 diagnoser utgör i sig inte bara ett destruktivt problem för de som diagnostiseras utan också för samhället eftersom diagnosstämplar får ofta prediktiv effekt och ”låser fast” barn och vuxna som sjuka vilket försvårar effektiva insatser när så behövs.
- Läkemedel inte bara är onödigt när relevant kunskap om ADHD/HIP föreligger utan också utvecklar destruktiva effekter på neuropsykofysiologiska system- även i termer av drogberoende. Dessutom är kunskapen om farmakologiska substanser ytterst begränsad, speciellt dess multifaceterade integrerade effekter, vilket i sig manar till yttersta försiktighet även när neurologiska skador identifieras.
Hanteras barn och vuxnas HIP på ett väl kunskapsförankrat sätt utgör IB en tillgång för individer och samhällen (se mer t.ex. Martha Burges bok (”The ADD myth; How to Cultivate the Unique Gifts of Intense Personalities) som utgör den tydligaste integrerade beskrivningen som tills nu publicerats – anser jag!)
Bo von Scheele 2013-11-10