>The current cost for EndeavorRx is $99 for a 30 day prescription.
Why is everything subscription based nowadays? Even without a subscription $99 would seem a lot to me. I guess because something something server costs and update development? Or is it just plain greed?
PS: Programming is absolutely fantastic, too, when you have ADHD (an probably even if you don't have it). It also doesn't cost a dime and there is plenty of content available for free. Might give that one a shot! Works wonders for me
It's a prescription (written note from the doctor) but this looks like a long term regimen so you could call it a subscription too. The reason is almost definitely profit. As a game there's no reason for it to be this expensive. As a medical treatment I doubt the R&D justifies the cost.
It's meant for kids so parents would be the ones paying. Obviously they're trying to profit and it does seem a bit overpriced (though there are extra logistical costs for anything to be medically approved, so it's not comparable to a normal game). But I highly doubt there was any intent to take advantage of people here.
It's because it makes more money and is more stable than once time buy. And it's especially expensive because it's "medical": both because it is more expensive to have a medical stamps of approval (although I'm not sure here) and because people don't have many alternatives
everything is subscription based, because companies have a continuous income stream (as opposed to one time large payment). With an continuous income stream you can plan better.
Well, one time payment can be turned into an income stream by investing the amount in treasuries or a time deposit account. That is the whole purpose of existence of financial markets.
Disagree. Profit is not the same as greed, and corporations regularly make decisions that are not profitably in the short or long term.
Look at the rise in DEI! As soon as rates went up, a lot of that started getting cut. That strongly suggests it was an unprofitable decision. So why was it made?
Because it was a good marketing stunt and they believed it would increase profits in the long term by hiring/keeping people that cared about that. Also, I wouldn't discount the fact that there's a lot of cargo cult induced decisions everywhere. But as soon as profits get hit, companies will correct course.
I don't think companies are perfect at optimizing for their profits (thankfully), but profit is and will always be their only driver for decisions.
A good example is how Google seemingly spoiled their employees with benefits and high pay. Their objective was to hoard talent so they could continue to grow their profits. It's not because they are thinking of the well being of their employees. As soon as they weren't growing as much, they had mass layoffs.
The only way a company isn't optimizing for profits is if it's smaller with owners that personally want to prioritize something else at the cost of profits. Which, in theory, means they will go out of business at some point because of being undercut by their competitors that don't care.
Companies are abstract entities that only serve one purpose: to make profit. Every single action is towards this goal. They are NOT people. Even the people behind them make decisions that they would never do individually but, behind the facade of a "company decision", they nevertheless do.
> Profit is not the same as greed
Greed is defined as:
An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth
For me that's basically the definition of a company's purpose. If companies only generated enough profits to survive, we wouldn't live in the world we live in today. Numbers must go up!
It makes more money for the people who peddle it, duh!
>PS: Programming is absolutely fantastic, too, when you have ADHD
Probably why I got into it (though Turbo Pascal / Delphi compile times were much more amenable to providing the dopamine rush than C++ even today).
That said, getting a diagnosis and access to medication [1] worked wonders for making other aspects of work much easier.
There's much more to software engineering than just programming, especially with larger projects and larger teams. And hyperfocusing on code to find yourself in the office at 3AM on the reg can end up being detrimental to one's ability to deliver consistent results on schedule, as well as setting and meeting expectations (...plus: being on time, completing the small tedious tasks, doing paperwork, filling forms, submitting reports, documenting, logging, planning, testing, avoiding feature creep, writing proposals and design docs, doing code reviews, being on call, ...).
The joy of programming does make all of this worth bearing. But stimulant meds take a significant chunk of pain out of it.
Imagine needing to submit a trip reimbursement report, deciding to do it between 5 and 5:30PM on Tuesday, and doing it then, without it being a monumental effort, even though the deadline is on Friday.
That's the superpower that meds give (...the superpower that non-ADHD people are unaware of having, it seems).
But yeah, a higher-than-average proportion of programmers are neurodivergent for a reason :)
Programming is not fantastic for ADHD. Especially when majority of people don’t have ADHD to begin with. They are looking for an excuse for their lack of ability to focus on a boring task.
It’s subscription and expensive because it’s another way to suck the money out of people who think they have ADHD.
We're sentient beings who have been co-opted into becoming part of an edit-run-debug cycle serving people who think they are changing the world. And if we opt out - we starve. Is it any wonder that some turn to drugs to cope with this reality?
Reminds me of a joke I heard from a comedian, cant remember who - "soon we will just become the part of our home entertainment system that eats and shits"
> Programming is not fantastic for ADHD. Especially when majority of people don’t have ADHD to begin with. They are looking for an excuse for their lack of ability to focus on a boring task.
An excuse, or an explanation?
I have ADHD and programming is and always has been fantastic for me, if the project is not boring.
I couldn’t disagree more. I went to the doctors at 20 for suspect ADHD, I loved Maths more than anything but my degree was going terribly. I couldn’t focus on the correct things to get the work done, I had no sense of time or organisation, everything was an eternity away until it was due now.
Time went on and it got worse and worse. Even non-academic, fun became a chore. Making music, playing games, going out; thinking about them became this litany of choices and todos I’d spiral down and I’d end up just sat there. Wasting time. But thinking how I could be enjoying myself, but unable to break myself labouring in thought of the gravity of execution needed.
I got diagnosed last year, and a year ago on Thursday, at 31, started Elvanse. I can’t for a second understate how much my life has changed for the better. Not only can I now do the boring stuff that life needs (who knew mechanical engineers did so much dull paperwork and standards), the fun stuff came back too.
I have no doubt that even if the rat race didn’t exist, if we lived in some languorous, indulgent utopia where we could do as we please every second, that I would be in bed. Miserable and crippled with option paralysis.
It’s so one dimensional and offensive to whittle ADHD down to “everyone has a lack of focus, they need to do something else”. I don’t see any difference between that statement and saying “depression doesn’t exist, just be happy”.
It’s not one dimensional. Every man and his dog now claims to have ADHD. It used to be a legitimate thing that a few people legitimately have. But now people are like “oh I can’t focus doing my laundry I must have adhd feed me drugs”
We shove drugs down kids throats claiming they have adhd because they can’t focus in economics class.
It’s no different from depression. We used to treat people with depression. Now we just go straight for the drugs.
If you get offended by the majority being called out for their non existent issues that’s on you. But you should be taking offense to people who claim to have ADHD when they don’t.
Based on the ADHD-content I get recommended online, I agree there seems to be a bunch of people wrongly self diagnosing with ADHD and romanticizing it. It's really cringe and annoying. However, I can assure you that it exists and that people really do suffer from it. I would never use it as an excuse for anything, I actually never mention my diagnosis IRL, but it is useful to know why I struggle with some things that others seem fine with.
Only comment I upvoted so far. But just want to clarify that I never said it doesn’t exist. Just the majority of people don’t have it. I’ve only met 2 people who really have it and they could barely function without drugs. But I’ve met multiple dozens of people who say “oh I have adhd” like it’s fashionable simply because they get bored at work. It bothers the hell out of me knowing there’s people who truly have adhd and suffer to various extents.
> I’ve met multiple dozens of people who say “oh I have adhd”
People say a lot of things. How many of those people are actually diagnosed and actively treated for ADHD? There is diagnostic criteria they need to meet to be diagnosed. Watching videos on tiktok isn't a diagnosis. It is quite evident when people are "faking" ADHD.
As someone who has struggled with ADHD my whole life and got a diagnosis in my 40s, I would much prefer children are overdiagnosed than not - and I really don't think thats as frequent a thing as is made out.
I guess it may be different in the US where there is a financial incentive to prescribe medications, but in the countries I have lived with universal healthcare its more likely underdiagnosed, IMHO.
I think you might be confusing visibility with existence. Someone with a partially treated disorder very much looks on the outside to be faking it. Someone who is managing their ADHD by orienting their life around it with a complex system of high-effort strategies to get by and isn't visibly ADHD (especially the inattentive variant which is more common in women) around others nonetheless deserves to not have to do all that if possible. They shouldn't have to perform their rock bottom for you to take them seriously.
I'm sure there are people who are knowingly or unknowingly "faking it" but there's no one to be offended on behalf of, I have pretty severe ADHD and I couldn't care less. They're not hurting anyone least of all me.
I work with 2 people who both have meds for ADHD who just take it at random. Could go a couple of weeks then be like “I’m adhding today I need meds”. I don’t believe for 1 second they have ADHD because those who truly have it don’t go through a week of “I’m fineeee” then “I’m feeling a like todays a difficult day I think I’ll take meds”. They need the meds to function.
>It used to be a legitimate thing that a few people legitimately have.
It used to be only a few people for different reasons. First it was thought that you grow out of it, so if they missed your diagnosis as a child, because you weren't hyperactive, then they didn't diagnose you at all. And on top of that we just know more about it now, so we can be more detailed on the diagnosis. Which makes it sound like "oh now everyone has adhd". No, that's not the case.
And yes, there are lots of people that pretend to have ADHD, because their attention span minimized because of social media and whatnot, but ADHD is more than that. A lot more. It's not only being unable to focus, it can have severe physical sensations too and is just a very very broad spectrum. Yes, ADHD is real. Yes, we get more diagnosis now, because we know more. No, it's not that easy. Same with depression.
Can relate to that story. Got my diagnosis at 32. The effect wasn't as severe for me under medication, but I can definitely notice it.
And that's the point, which sadly often gets "ignored". Yes, meds can have a shitload of side effects. Yes, they might offer no benefit to some people. Yes, there are even tons of ADHD people that don't even need them. But there are many many other people that manage to get a grip on their life. The fact that I now know that I can manage life was the biggest eye opener to me. Now I just have to figure out the best possible way to do that. With or without meds, I don't know. Only the future can tell. But for now, medication is a good helper
If you actually have a normal functioning brain (imo) the detriments out weigh the benefits: you will do more but the quality will be lessened and you’ll have fewer insights.
(Also this is apart from the ethics of abusing a medicine that is tenuously situated in the public mind but is literally life saving for a small population of people (untreated ADHD increases risk of early death and reduces lifespan more than smoking or diabetes)).
The key word here is medicine. Like the opioids it’s a powerful double edged sword. Using amphetamine to get a supra-physiological advantage is illegal, extremely unethical and probably a really bad idea health-wise (doubly so if you “prescribed” it to yourself).
Can relate as well. I thought it was bullshit before also. I was convinced. That assumption (from pop culture takes by people who poison the discourse because they can’t separate a “feeling” from an informed opinion) kept me from treatment way way too long.
It’s amazing to me as someone who is always careful to consider the source of my positions and how my words affect people that there are people out there who just say/write things. They feel it then they write it.
You do seem to be basically describing ADHD. Most people can direct their focus on something that doesn't immediately stimulate them, if they have the motivation for it.
(while I'm not claiming this is exactly the situation, your posts put me in mind of the projection of some homophobes: (heavily paraphrasing:) "Well, of course everyone finds their own gender sexy, the gays just don't resist that impulse!" -> "Well of course everyone finds focus extremely difficult except for on a few specific activities, just some are using a disorder as an excuse!")
I think ADHD is a well studied phenomenon and to brush it aside as just a lack of motivation is unjustified. People with ADHD are unable to focus even if they have the motivation.
>We label people and throw drugs at them and call them abnormal when in reality they aren’t doing what makes them happy. We try to force them to be happy doing shit.
We call them abnormal, because they are abnormal. It can be seen in brain scans, that the ADHD brain behaves different than most other brains. But that obviously doesn't imply that any Person with ADHD should take drugs because of that. Drugs are not a solution, they are an aid. Yes, people like different things.
Yes. But that's the baseline. People with ADHD can't focus even more, on books and most of anything else. They're worse at the whole class of things relative to most people, which is what turns it into a diagnostic category.
Why is everything subscription based nowadays? Even without a subscription $99 would seem a lot to me. I guess because something something server costs and update development? Or is it just plain greed?
PS: Programming is absolutely fantastic, too, when you have ADHD (an probably even if you don't have it). It also doesn't cost a dime and there is plenty of content available for free. Might give that one a shot! Works wonders for me