Comments
By nobodyandproud 2026-02-265:192 reply Worth a read (5-10 minutes). I found myself agreeing more than disagreeing.
That aside, some gems:
“…Among certain weak natures, coffee produces only a kind of harmless congestion of the mind; instead of feeling animated, these people feel drowsy, and they say that coffee makes them sleep. Such individuals may have the legs of serfs and the stomachs of os- triches, but they are badly equipped for the work of thought.”
“If the experience of the English is typical, heavy tea-drinking will produce English moral philosophy, a tendency toward a pale complexion, hypocrisy and backbiting.”
> instead of feeling animated, these people feel drowsy, and they say that coffee makes them sleep
Sounds like ADHD to me
By average_r_user 2026-02-269:24 This may not be strictly related, but my personal experience aligns with that. If I drink coffee after lunch, I get very sleepy and have my usual bowel movements. If I drink it after dinner, I become overstimulated and can’t sleep at all (which I realize is fairly typical). For context, I’m referring to classic Italian espresso.
This is such a BS lie sold by pharmaceutical companies, "stimulants are safe for your child, amphetamines will actually calm them down". There's a thing called fast caffeine metabolizers, and 50% of people have this genetic variation and perfectly explains why some people can nap after having caffeine, also tolerance.
I digress, but you will never convince me otherwise, that the wide spread promotion of amphetamines in children/young adults is anything but an experiment of Empire. I attribute the somewhat significant economic edge US society has over the rest of the world is due to its addiction to amphetamines, and the ruling classes project to push them onto working class people to make them more effective workers.
Its no different than how the Nazi's used amphetamines to simulate their population or how imperialist Japan did the same. Lets stop spreading this BS lie that stimulants calm people with ADHD down.
The well-documented scientific basis for the “calming” claim for ADHD medications is that by stimulating brain regions involved in attention, motivation, and regulation of behavior, it can reduce impulsivity and restlessness, giving the appearance of calming a person down if they have deficits in the latter areas.
This has been shown to help many people (a large majority) with ADHD, and it’s also been shown to not provide general neurocognitive benefits to people without ADHD.
IOW, the benefits come from improving attention and reducing impulsivity in people who have deficits in those areas.
See e.g. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6165228/ and then e.g. the three references it cites here:
> “It is important to note that a robust body of literature exists that supports the positive effects of prescription stimulants on neurocognitive functioning in children and adults with ADHD (e.g., [14,54,55]), underscoring the importance of baseline impairments in performance relative to improved effects.”
Reconciling this with your opinions on the matter is left as an exercise, but there’s some pretty clear and unambiguous science here.
By ycombinete 2026-02-268:103 reply Your parent literally said that nobody will ever convince them otherwise. It’s probably not worth trying.
By kintamanimatt 2026-02-268:491 reply Yeah, but while they might not be convinced, some stranger that needs this information may stumble across it -- and it may do them good to read it. ADHD is no joke and stimulant medications are vitally important, as one component, in the treatment of ADHD.
Incredibly false. see my comments below, there are way more potential risks that should out weigh any potential benefits, there are non-stimulant based treatments for ADHD that are just as effective and don't require you to play russian roulette with your sanity. Your comment is ill informed and incredibly dangerous.
By mapontosevenths 2026-02-2611:41 Thats strong advice. Where did you get your medical degree amd where can we read your research?
Obviously it must be vast, or you wouldn't be able to make sweeping claims that contradict soo much evidence to the contrary.
> you will never convince me otherwise
I suppose its good to have a religion.
I did notice that, but as others have pointed out, the rest of the audience is likely more important than the idiosyncratic biases of the OP.
The OP message of "big pharma is lying to us!" is an appealing one for many people. Pointing out that, in fact, there is serious scientific evidence to the contrary on that exact topic is "worth trying".
Otherwise, if we just abandon the concept of rational thought, we end up with people like the current president of the US, the guy in charge of Health and Human Services, and so on. There are, as philosophers put it, "facts of the matter", and we need to keep reminding people of that if we want to even achieve the minimal level of valid response shown in the movie Idiocracy. Currently, the United States is not actually achieving that level.
By ycombinete 2026-02-2718:15 Well good on you for having the wherewithal for such an interaction. Keep fighting the good fight.
By cwillu 2026-02-269:42 Comment conversations are public; “everybody else” is part of the conversation.
Not everything can be understood through p values and studies with 13 PARTICIPANTS undergoing a ONLY TWO EXPERIMENTS each, nor should the observed effects on 13 PEOPLE (half placebo) be extrapolated out to justifying safety for hundreds of millions of people. Next time you want to prove a point, take the time to research good sources, and not just ask an llm use your brain for once.
Please go put your kid on amphetamines for 15 years and let me know how that works out for them..
Do you care how much incidents of psychosis it causes on a yearly basis?
I said that the Ruling class (aka these professors) are pushing an agenda, and then you choose to provide evidence published by the ruling class to support that agenda.
By cluckindan 2026-02-267:251 reply You did understand that the parent post was referring to the referenced articles within the linked article?
14: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1087054711427299 - N=50
54: https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpp.12917 - N=82
55: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01497... - review of 21 studies
Often prescribed to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, the risk was highest in those taking 30 mg or more of dextroamphetamine (which corresponds to 40 mg of Adderall),
The researchers identified 1,374 cases of individuals presenting with first-episode psychosis or mania, compared to 2,748 control patients with a psychiatric hospitalization for other conditions like depression or anxiety. They conducted a comparison analysis of stimulant use over the preceding month and accounted for other factors, including substance use, in order to isolate the effects of stimulants.
They found the attributable risk percentage among those exposed to any prescription amphetamine was nearly 63 percent and for high dose amphetamine was 81 percent. These findings suggest that among people who take prescription amphetamine, 81 percent of cases of psychosis or mania could have been eliminated if they were not on the high dose. While a significant dose-related risk increase was seen in patients taking high doses of amphetamine, no significant risk increase was seen with methylphenidate (Ritalin) use, which is consistent with previous research, including a 2019 study led by Moran.
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2024/09/high-doses-of...
Among 1,374 case subjects and 2,748 control subjects, the odds of psychosis and mania were increased for individuals with past-month prescription amphetamine use compared with no use (adjusted odds ratio=2.68, 95% CI=1.90–3.77). A dose-response relationship was observed; high doses of amphetamines (>30 mg dextroamphetamine equivalents) were associated with 5.28-fold increased odds of psychosis or mania
https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp.20230329
I don't care, the drug isn't safe. I've seen it permanently change many people. I don't care if they handpicked <100 individuals to prove safety. The doses cited above >40mg are pretty typical.
By mapontosevenths 2026-02-2611:48 Should we also outlaw penicillin because a tiny percentage of people who take too much have negative side effects?
Also the linked Harvard article points out that "no significant risk increase was seen with methylphenidate (Ritalin)".
It isnt stimulants in general, just Adderall, and just when you take too much.
By dgacmu 2026-02-2613:57 Your own quote literally states that methylphenidate didn't appear to cause any of these problems.
Q: what's the most widely prescribed ADHD medication?
A: Ritalin / Methylphenidate
> Methylphenidate remained the most widely prescribed drug, although the use of lisdexamfetamine and guanfacine has expanded in recent years.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12565614/
It's almost like ... you work with your doctor to identify an effective treatment that balances the costs and benefits for your particular situation.
This applies to most medicines and it's why we have a set of people trained to navigate those tradeoffs. You seem focused only on the negatives of ADHD meds, which are real, without acknowledging that for some patients there are large benefits too. That seems kind of myopic.
I think your take is a bit alarmist, if I were to be generous. On one hand, ya it's a pharmaceutical empire, but on the other, that empire's conduct is as detrimental to the people that actually do need those medications as they are to the people that might not. Nobody should be forcing their kids to take anything, but if a kid is struggling, it should be an accessible option, and it will probably help them get by in a system not designed for them. There's no reason to suggest that the general case is that a parent or some company is force feeding their kid meth.
I'm one of those people that could have benefited from it MUCH earlier, it's also incredibly boring if you get the right one. I have no idea what they really do for people who don't have ADHD, but for me it basically lets me get places on time and have a passably productive day. It's also not that trivial to get depending on where you live, and potentially expensive.
> Please go put your kid on amphetamines for 15 years and let me know how that works out for them..
Please tell someone who's gone from having 7 jobs in 7 years to 1 job for 3 years that they don't need it.
We can have issues with the implementation, that's fine
Well I'm glad you haven't had any major side effects, just know you're playing Russian roulette with your sanity, and the way you perceive reality.. I'm not exaggerating here, give it a decade..or don't
And you're kind of confirming my original thesis, that its a class of drugs created by the ruling class for the working class to make the best workers for capital/ruling class, which it seems to have accomplished that in your case...
Among 1,374 case subjects and 2,748 control subjects, the odds of psychosis and mania were increased for individuals with past-month prescription amphetamine use compared with no use (adjusted odds ratio=2.68, 95% CI=1.90–3.77). A dose-response relationship was observed; high doses of amphetamines (>30 mg dextroamphetamine equivalents) were associated with 5.28-fold increased odds of psychosis or mania
By fragmede 2026-02-2610:48 > high doses of amphetamines (>30 mg dextroamphetamine equivalents)
If you do a harmful amount of something, it harms you. Seems pretty straightforwards. To vilify the whole concept seems a bit much though.
By brailsafe 2026-02-2619:24 > And you're kind of confirming my original thesis, that its a class of drugs created by the ruling class for the working class to make the best workers for capital/ruling class, which it seems to have accomplished that in your case...
I don't take amphetamine specifically, methylphenidate, which seems to have no pronounced influence on the apparently correlation based study outcome. Taking these drugs however is not something I approach lightly, but it's also not something I do for anyone else. If anything, it helps me maintain my own adult life. The job is an incidental but important factor.
I've heard anecdotal reports from many people with ADHD symptoms that stimulants (caffiene, ritalin, street drugs) do help them focus. And quite a few from people with ADHD symptoms that stimulants make things much worse. And there's also reports that the stimulants help with focus but cause other problems.
If you're using chemical interventions for ADHD symptoms, you've got to be evaluating the response as well as getting feedback from the patient. Starting with small doses when possible is probably advisable.
Many symptoms can be addressed by behavioral and environmental/situational changes rather than chemical intervention, but chemical interventions can be effective for many, even if they're not effective for all.
stimulants help everyone focus if dosed correctly!! I never said that it doesn't have that effect. I'm just arguing its very bad for the brain, and it mostly just benefits your employer/future employer at the risk of you going literally insane. Its a tool for Empire/Capital. Its very common for Empires to dose their working class on stimulants to achieve certain goals. It may help you but you're also risk of getting amphetamine induced psychosis, which should void any potential gain for any reasonable person..
By OkayPhysicist 2026-02-2618:05 "Mostly benefits your employer" my ass. ADHD isn't just "ugh, I don't like doing my job". Things you want to do, or need to do, even enjoy doing, and fully intend to do end up constantly pushed to the side when you're unmedicated. You end getting into difficult situations because you've managed to procrastinate taking the 10 minutes it takes to renew your car's registration for 6 months. You struggle to maintain relationships, both friendly and romantic, because people interpret your inability to focus on them as disinterest. You lose sleep, and not just a little, because you lay in bed and simply cannot focus on going to sleep long to actually do so. So you stay up until completely exhausted, but guess what? That doesn't align with anybody else's schedule.
Then you take a pill, and all of these problems just disappear. If you want to work out, you can just go to the gym and work out. No weird little ritualistic hacks, just "I want to do X, I shall do X". You receive a wedding invitation, and you can just spend the 10 minutes making travel arrangements, rather than procrastinating it for months. You can see that a load of laundry needs to be done, and just spend the 5 minutes loading the washing machine, rather than having to push past your brain screaming like you're trying to stick pins in your eye.
By antonvs 2026-02-2622:07 > stimulants help everyone focus if dosed correctly!!
The science contradicts that. You need to re-read my original comment and its references and respond more seriously, if you're genuinely interested in the topic.
By dubeye 2026-02-2712:25 My experience is different. I was diagnosed with ADHD as a kid, but I never took medicine. I took amphetamines recreationally at uni, and the sense of calm and focus and relaxation it gives you is quite material. I think it stimulates the part of the brain that enables you to focus and relax.
I did briefly see a psychiatrist and took amphetamines under his care, but ultimately decided that I didn't want the hassle of medical supervision, so preferred non-medical treatments.
But the experience made clear to me that meds do have a role. I suppose I use coffee as a mild stimulant. Although it's so mild, I'd never really think of it in that way.
> I attribute the somewhat significant economic edge US society has over the rest of the world is due to its addiction to amphetamines
Over here in Europe getting prescription stimulants against ADHD is a fairly straightforward process. Or, at least, that's what I gathered from a conversation I recently had with a person taking them - they had no difficulties in this regard.
As an outsider I think one of the many reasons is the sheer amount of (often unreported) hours Americans put into work annually (and pay for that in their health).
For this same reason South Korea recently overtook Japan in terms of GDP per capita.
By this measure the mentioned countries (descending):
1. South Korea 2. USA 3. Japan
By scroogey 2026-02-2610:46 Am in Europe and have certainly not found it straightforward. It took several years for my friend to get prescribed, as well.
By dakolli 2026-02-2610:27 I never said its the only factor, but its typical for Empires of the last 150 years to get their populations hooked on stimulants, whether this is outright intentional (probably), or a side effect of growing Empires is up for debate.
Do your school counselors in elementary school work with psychiatrists to get parents to get children hooked in 5th grade because they are a more active than other kids?
By xorbax 2026-02-2617:37 So coffee doesn't calm people, so then why do stimulants also act oppositely for those people? It's not caffeine.
It isn't stimulating that part of "the nation", it's calming and focusing them.
> Lets stop spreading this BS lie that stimulants calm people with ADHD down.
Most people who follow the science and personal experience probably don't have any reason to follow your command, sorry.
By edg5000 2026-02-265:34 It's really hilariously written
I really like this essay and I managed to track down the original in French, for anyone who reads French:
https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Trait%C3%A9_des_excitants_mod...
The part about coffee is halfway down the page under the heading §III — du café.
By isodev 2026-02-266:13 Merci :)
I have a theory that the renaissance and perhaps more critically the industrial revolution that followed was in a large part driven by coffee.
Middle ages, things are a bit sleepy, dopey. Everybody is drinking beer all the time. progress runs at a slow pace.
Then there is this popular new tea sweeping the scene and boy howdy does it get you up and going. Now people are waking up and doing things.
Caffeine, It's a hell of a drug.
It’s more accurate to say that the “modern era” (1600s and onwards, the Enlightenment , etc.) was boosted by coffee, because the Renaissance was larger over by the time the bean arrived from Arabia.
Definitely a lot of modern ideas and institutions had their origins in coffee shops, though.
By dcminter 2026-02-268:35 > Definitely a lot of modern ideas and institutions had their origins in coffee shops, though.
There are accounts of discussions between Robert Hooke, Edmund Halley, and Isaac Newton in a London coffee house. It's a wine bar now and not notably highbrow :)
By AlecSchueler 2026-02-269:20 Lloyd's the insurance company was founded as a coffee house.
By bairymr 2026-02-265:16 There is some truth to this (https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1f111dq/til_...)
By johnfn 2026-02-268:26 Erdos famously took amphetamines his whole life, and they made him fabulously productive:
> In 1979, Graham bet Erdös $500 that he couldn't stop taking amphetamines for a month. Erdös accepted the challenge, and went cold turkey for thirty days. After Graham paid up--and wrote the $500 off as a business expense--Erdös said, "You've showed me I'm not an addict. But I didn't get any work done. I'd get up in the morning and stare at a blank piece of paper. I'd have no ideas, just like an ordinary person. You've set mathematics back a month." He promptly resumed taking pills, and mathematics was the better for it.
I think about this a lot. I drink a lot of coffee and I feel reasonably productive. But hey, maybe I should try something a bit stronger... :
By flother 2026-02-267:47 You’re in good company. Tom Standage makes the same argument in his book A History of the World in Six Glasses.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3872.A_History_of_the_Wo...
By brailsafe 2026-02-268:38 > I have a theory that the renaissance and perhaps more critically the industrial revolution that followed was in a large part driven by coffee.
Don't forget the concentrated wealth created during the Trans-Atlantic slave trade through the use and selling of slaves by the Portuguese between Africa and South America
By arjie 2026-02-268:20 Now the curious thing will be if people attribute the rapid pace of technological development in this new century to the advent of widespread amphetamine. A large number of Stanford students are on it, and likely many other top universities have similar properties.
By Fricken 2026-02-269:02 To get the coffee and other things european men had to be sent out on ships to rape the world, and they would only do that if they were drunk. The Renaissance and the Industrial revolution were built on the spoils of exploitation, of which coffee was one.
Yes, I've been thinking this as well. Although, earlier civilisations probably also consumed lots of stimulants; mayas, incas, probably countless more.
I had wondered about the same for nicotine, being a neurostimulant.
By onionisafruit 2026-02-265:57 Turns out Otis Redding was singing about the renaissance in Cigarettes and Coffee
By medi8r 2026-02-265:44 It gets you up and going until you build resistance then it becomes a need.
By allovertheworld 2026-02-265:081 reply nah coffee really didn’t do much for me, i started drinking daily at 30
By iberator 2026-02-268:48 Ans your parent's could? Maybe coffee improved their cognitive functions so u were born smart
