So it's possible to get better sound quality with better quality tapes and players, but I'm pretty sure the player that's using that description falls neatly into the shitty equipment category.
This is a screener questionnaire, not a diagnosis tool. If you answer "very often" to enough of them then it's the author's suggestion that you should look into it, not that you have ADHD.
I wonder if finding it hard to answer these kind of questions could be an indicator for some other kind of neurodiversity.
> The ADHD epidemic is less about the discovery of a disease and more about the construction of one. Over the past two decades, we have witnessed the normalization of drugging children into classroom compliance — an act made possible only through the coordinated actions of pharmaceutical companies, medical professionals, school systems, and parents, all embedded in a culture that equates emotional and behavioral difficulty with biomedical defect.[1]
While I think lack of discipline is over simplistic, I also think that labelling and diagnosing children is a simple and effective way for parents to absolve themselves of responsibility for their own failures. Parenting is hard, but admitting that is harder.
I'm definitely not saying ADHD and Autism don't exist, I'm just saying that it's possible that ADHD diagnoses are higher than they should be. It's easier to externalise and medicate a problem than it is to look at your own behaviour as a parent.
There is a certain truth to this. The history of psychiatry isn't pretty.
It's called a "disorder" because it is maladaptive: it causes the individual to fail to adapt to the environment. Children and even adults with "attention deficit" often fail to adapt to school, leading to diagnosis. Plenty of teachers get fed up with impulsive children that are incapable of paying attention or even sitting still in class, and they send them to doctors in order to "fix" the kid so they can do their jobs.
It's somewhat self-contradictory though. When you look closer at these patients with "attention deficit", you find that a high number of them are capable of hyperfocus. There's almost always something that deeply engages them. For some it's computers, for others it's car engines, there's always something. You find that all these people with "attention deficit" can suddenly display the ability to pay attention to specific things for ten hours straight.
I make it a point to identify instances where the person is capable of deeply concentrating. I always try to disprove their notions that they are "dumb lazy kids". For me it's a matter of basic human dignity. Once that's out of the way, I may offer them drugs to help them cope with the environment they find themselves in. Not before.
Maybe the problem is just that these people are not compatible with the mass education system where you listen to lectures for hours on end. Maybe that's just the most efficient method for the school, not the best teaching method for these kids. Perhaps there is an environment where they are well adapted, where the disorder does not manifest. Until such an environment is found, drugs and therapy are available.
> It's somewhat self-contradictory though. When you look closer at these patients with "attention deficit", you find that a high number of them are capable of hyperfocus. There's almost always something that deeply engages them. For some it's computers, for others it's car engines, there's always something. You find that all these people with "attention deficit" can suddenly display the ability to pay attention to specific things for ten hours straight.
The problem is that even that hyperfocusing is not always helpful. Focusing on something for 10 hours straight while ignoring everything else - obligations, one's body's needs, etc - is not very much healthier than not being able to stay focused.
(Not that I disagree with much of what you're saying; just feel it's necessary to point out, as many people do think the hyperfixating on things is strictly an advantage)
I'd even argue that it's predominantly a negative experience outside of the social media circles that often glorify it.
In my experience it often creates an unbearable internal conflict where you're acutely aware that you really need (or want) to do something else, but you find it impossible to set your current task aside.
I would end up in situations where I'm not enjoying the hyperfocus activity because I'm simultaneously feeling guilty over not doing the more important thing, and there's would be nothing I can do about it. I could try to switch tasks but my mind would wander back, I would make more mistakes, if I had to talk to someone then I wouldn't be present and alert in the conversation, and would suffer even more negative consequences because of that.
Yes in my experience "attention deficit" is a misnomer. It's not a deficit in ability to pay attention, it's a chronic inability to exert meaningful control over it to the point that it negatively affects your life in a significant way.
I agree with this also. I'm not living in the USA, but from afar it looks like overmedication is a very valid concern that should be explored more.
I draw the line at overly dismissal point of views, telling those who suffer to just put themselves into it and show some discipline. I'm 38 years old and been gaslit by well intentioned people for 30 of those. It needs to stop.
Is this context loss? They never _knew_ the information, they just have a high percentage chance of hallucinating the right thing if it's in their training data or a high chance of hallucinating the wrong thing if they search for it (even higher if what they find is wrong).
Are they talking about cassette tapes? Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't remember that being a thing back in the day.
reply