This is a documentary video based on the use of adderall, a
pharmaceutical drug, and the increasing availability to students. It is
directed towards college students who are considering getting tested for
Attention Deficit Disorder or ADHD just for the perks of using adderall that allows
them to focus better in class. It also emphasizes that people with an ADD/ADHD disability are abusing adderall by selling it illegially. It is intended for this clip to inform the viewer about adderall abuse for the prescribed and unprescribed user. I found the video named Adderall Documentary on Youtube.
Discussion:
1. Should there be tighter restrictions on the quantity of prescribed adderall? Should patients be required to revisit their doctor before the next prescription is picked up?
2. Should there be legal criteria for a diagnosis of ADD to make sure patients have it?
3. Do you think that people who are prescribed adderall abuse the drug more than people who aren't prescribed adderall?
4. In your opinion, with people who are familiar with adderall, is their incentive to abuse it (get a high) or for educational purposes?
5. Should adderall be labelled as a performance enhancing drug?
5) Adderall is not and should never be labled a performance enhancing drug for those who have been prescribed it. Adderall helps people in many different ways, and the majority of people that are perscribed adderall have a disability of some sort. The problem is that people who are not prescribed adderall misuse it by obtaining it illegally. If someone who was not prescribed adderall uses the drug I believe it could potentially be a performance enhancing drug based on the situation.
ReplyDeleteBlog Prompt #4
ReplyDeleteThis documentary appeals to ethos in several ways to convince the viewer to see the drug the way the director intended. The first way the director appeals to the reader’s ethos is by having the PhD professor speak about why students turn to adderall. People with PhD degrees are generally very respected and therefore come across as a trustworthy source. It was beneficial for the director to use a professor because since professors are well educated whatever they say often comes across as fact even if it is just an opinion. The second way the documentary appeals to the viewer’s ethos is by using the interviews with random students. If the viewer is a student themselves they probably feel that they can relate to another student and their experiences. Also since the students are the ones using adderall themselves it increases their credibility on the subject since they would be the ones who actually have experienced the effects of the drugs and fully understand the reasons for using it.
While ADD is a diagnosable disability, it comes in varying degrees. Most people, while never diagnosed, have a slight form of ADD. With this in mind is obtaining adderall in an illegal method still abusing the drug? Do you think some students diagnose themselves to justify their use of adderall?
ReplyDeleteBlog Prompt #3: I believe that both the people who are prescribed adderall and the people who are not prescribed adderall can abuse it. However, I do not think that you can say that one group abuses it more than another because they may abuse it in different way. The people who are prescribed the adderall can abuse it by selling it to others or by using more than the appropriate amount. People who are not prescribed it can abuse it by just taking the drug. Therefore, you can not classify a group as abusing adderall more than the other group.
ReplyDeleteBlog Prompt #7:
ReplyDeleteThe drug Adderall has found itself in a place that can be described as rather grey in a world of black and whites (right/wrong, fact/option). Some arguments claim the drug is not a performance enhancing drug-
"...is not and should never be labled a performance enhancing drug for those who have been prescribed it." -Louis Berra.
The sediment causing the grey tone is seen when a similar argument is made.
"...who was not prescribed adderall uses the drug I believe it could potentially be a performance enhancing drug..." -Louis Berra.
The question from these arguments becomes "Does the drug enhance?". Clearly it does, sugar pills are not quite as successful on the prescription or illegal markets as those that have real effect.
For me the problem lies with the issue of legitimacy in those who claim to have this disablement. Clear problems lie here-
"Most people, while never diagnosed, have a slight form of ADD." -Sarah Bushman
All in one person taking this drug we see someone who uses the drug without the prescription being called a user of performance enhancing drugs, and simultaneously, one who could be treating a legitimate but un-diagnosed case of the same disability. This all assumes that a person visiting the doctor claiming this disability is there in the fullness of truth to begin with.
It is because of the shaded aspects of this topic that I say in response to the prompt that there is no response that this media provokes that causes its audience to want to "do" something about this material. The response it does pull is one that is highly personal to each individual and varies just as greatly. I do not surmise that there is any recognizable or even unified frontier of opinion developed by this media. The modern world is filled with people holding every opinion and view imaginable. Some studies are saying some (even most) are afflicted with this disability while opponents claim the condition is simply a characteristic of being human. The difference in result is seen when compared to a piece of media clearly conveying blatant and ignorant abuse against innocent minority groups (elders, racism, women etc.). Viewers are more likely to feel the need to "DO" something in such cases. While it does provide an interesting friction, I argue that this is about the limit of its effects.