https://www.reynoldsclinic.com/why-french-kids-dont-have-adh....
> There’s also the differences in how children are brought up in America and in France. For example, French parents have set strict limits from the time they are born. The children are raised with limits such as not being allowed to snack whenever they want. They have four strict meal times and they know those are the times they are allowed to eat, not before. While they love their children just as much as others do, they do believe in forced strict limitations to help the children grow up in guidelines and feel safe and secure.
Really?
I have also had a number of friends with "ADHD" for whom the solution was "cut sugar, sleep enough, go into a room with no electronics (or a user account with nothing else installed), do some cardio".
I am not denying the existence of ADHD, but as a society, we look for shortcuts to problems that have real solutions and are therefore more likely to just pop a pill. See the sister comment, it addresses this too.
And furthermore - yes, cutting screen time in children dramatically increases their ability to focus later in life.
The reason parents are holding sugar back from kids is they think they're hyper due to a "sugar rush", which is completely placebo i.e. they're just acting like that because they heard you're supposed to.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01497...
I am not trying to move goalposts with the next statement, but I always assumed sugar has a similar effect to caffeine, in that you get a temporary boost that you pay for later. Study pointing to this quoted/linked below.
For me personally, energy drinks very much do seem to improve alertness, at the cost of crashing later. This is especially evident if drinking them two days in a row, where on the third day you absolutely have no energy left. And that's not even mentioning the absurd blood pressure spikes.
Anyway, this isn't an "argument" - I don't have one other than "that seems inconsistent with my experience." Though your own link seems to be pretty inconsistent as well*
* "Caffeine consistently improved marksman reaction time but did not improve marksmanship accuracy. However, there is some evidence that caffeine attenuates performance decrements in marksman accuracy caused by stress and fatigue if optimal dosing strategies are employed. Dosing strategies timed according to hours of wakefulness and time before testing could prevent performance deterioration. Doses of 100-200 mg every 2 hours may effectively improve accuracy during extended duty; however, further research is needed."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31045484/
* "The literature on CHO effects on cognition suggests that CHOs can improve cognitive functioning, particularly under circumstances where participants are asked to perform cognitively demanding rather than easy tasks (Mantantzis et al., 2017, Scholey et al., 2009, Sünram-Lea et al., 2002). In a similar manner, studies have found the protective effects of CHOs on mood to be more robust when participants perform demanding physical and cognitive tasks. In fact, whereas participants in control groups experience higher levels of tiredness after performing a cognitively demanding task, consumption of CHOs seems to protect subjective ratings of energy against a potential drop-off after high cognitive exertion (Benton and Owens, 1993, Owens et al., 1997). Additionally, exogenous energy supply in the form of CHOs has been shown to increase vigor and reduce fatigue under conditions of increased physical stress (Ali et al., 2017, Lieberman et al., 2002, Markus, 2007, Welsh et al., 2002) and cognitive demands (Owens et al., 1997, Smit et al., 2004). Therefore, it has been hypothesized that, similar to cognition, mood improvement following CHO administration is stronger when participants have to perform demanding cognitive or physical tasks (for a review, see Benton, 2002)."
Taking a neurological imbalance and turning it into a morality thing is abuse. Even if unintentional. This is real. Parents look for simple answers like "give em the strap" but how is that less reductive than "give em the pill"?
I think it’s ridiculous to make a blanket statement about how kids are raised in America vs France with zero evidence to back it up. There are plenty of strict parents in the US, and I’m sure there are plenty of lax parents in France. Plus, as the article states:
> The American psychiatrists believe that ADHD is a disorder based on biological issues.
So the way a kid is raised has nothing to do with whether or not they have ADHD.
According to the article, the real reason “Why French Kids Don’t Have ADHD” is because the doctors avoid that diagnosis:
> Basically the French community has decided to focus more on fixing the underlying causes of the problem behavior instead of giving it a wide range diagnosis.
Looking for underlying causes and fixing problem behavior sounds great, I just feel like the article is confuses having ADHD and being diagnosed with ADHD.
Despite my problems with the article, I actually do think that ADHD in children is over diagnosed in the US. And even if the disorder itself isn’t over diagnosed, I think ADHD medication are over prescribed to children. Those medications have can have negative side effects, like reducing appetite and therefore growth, but that’s not even my main problem with it. As other posters have described really well, ADHD medication can reduce creativity and problem solving skills. If a kid is medicated too young they might obey the rules a little too much and develop into a less creative, interesting, and dynamic person as a result.
> Numbers in America show that at least 9% of the children that are school-age are diagnosed with the disorder
That percentage seriously makes me think that we might be overdiagnosing based on personality type instead of just diagnosing based on underlying disorders. Either that or US schools are very different than French schools.