Friday, April 24, 2009

Would you ever...

The other day, I read an interesting article on "neuroenhancing drugs" in New York Magazine. The story is here. It's quite interesting. The article interviews several users of off-label psychiatric medications for ADD, Alzheimers, and sleep disorders, who claim the drugs make them better workers. It goes on to profile doctors (!) and drug companies who argue that these drugs will be the plastic surgery of the future--enhancements of the mental, rather than physical, kind.

I have heard of ADD drugs such as ritalin being sold on the street as a drug (and was once asked if I wanted to buy ritalin in college--I declined). I am completely against this practice, mostly influenced by my mother's condition. As someone who contracted polio as a child and now suffers from post-polio, she takes heavy pain medication every day. Her medication is also sold on the street, and as a result, is very highly regulated. Two Christmases ago, she accidentally washed her supply of these drugs in the washing machine. Her doctor was out of town, and because of regulations meant to prevent street sales, my mother suffered through five days with almost no pills. It was awful, and something I never wish to see again. So the thought of people abusing necessary medication completely pisses me off.

On the other hand, the generic question of whether, as a society, we should develop neuroenhancing drugs for everyday use is an interesting one. The article shows both the up-side (better concentration and more productivity) and the downside (addiction, and sometimes the inability to dictate what task your productivity will make easier). Proponents argue that these drugs could make "society" better, and in particular, would make the U.S. more competetive. Personally, I think fixing the education system would actually do a better job in this realm, given the marginal improvements that drugs offer. Also, we don't really know the side effects of the drugs--do they increase the odds of heart disease, stroke, or high blood pressure? Do they interfere with short term memory or have an impact on one's personality over the long-term? Hard to say.

I have only once taken a drug meant to have a stimulating effect (okay, I mean apart from caffeine or nicotine). I was in high school and a friend offered me whatever the current version of N0-Doz was. Except she encouraged me to take four, which was the normal number of pills she took (or so she claimed). After taking them, I got in trouble for running around the theater where I was working, broke down in tears, went home, and was sick for the next day and a half. I have never had an interest in trying anything like them again. Which might make me less productive, but hey, at least I know my work is my own, and not the result of a drug.

1 comment:

kim said...

my autistic kiddo takes a medication that is "controlled" and we have also experienced the trauma of losing a pill bottle while on vacation and going without. (although - side note - aren't all prescription medications "controlled substances"? i mean, that's why you need a prescription.) i have to go to the office every thirty days, pick up the little paper in person, and deliver it to the pharmacy no sooner than 30 days since i last did so. its absurd.

i can see why some "controlled substances" are more controlled than others. having people take an addictive or psychiatric medication is more dangerous than taking, say, an antibiotic. which is exactly why we don't want everyone running around willy-nilly taking them. sure they may give you some benefit, but it comes with a cost too. for folks like your mom or my kids, the benefits outweigh the cost. but for someone like you or me, the reverse would be true.

of course, i could say the same about plastic surgery.