JANE KELLEY was thinking about A.d.d and keyed into cyberspace:
JK>The following paragraph was NOT written to you, Mark.
JK>P>JK>Thanks for your post.  It should inspire some other parents to
JK>MP>JK>try alternative methods of treatment for their ADD children
JK>MP>JK>instead of meekly slugging them down with Ritalin for what is
JK>MP>JK>called "administrative convenience", mostly of the school
JK>MP>JK>system. 
JK>MP>Now, there's an old wives tale if I ever heard one. Doctors have
JK>MP>to write the prescription, Jane. Most have a reason. Like the kid
JK>MP>has it. 
JK>I'd say more young wives tale today.  It is the younger ones who have
JK>the guts to stand up to the so called experts and find things out for
JK>themselves.
They are "so called experts" only in the minds of those who reject 
research and understanding. You reject studies done at NIMH, NIH, 
Harvard medical School and Massachusetts General. You would rather 
believe a salescritter than a professor.
JK>Incidently, I've supplied you personally with reference after
JK>reference which you insist upon twisting around and perverting to
JK>suit your own set of firmly set in granite ideas on this and other
JK>subjects. There is no room in them for what the young folks are
JK>finding out today. 
No, Jane. I have not twisted the references. They just do not support 
your position.
JK>My latest excursion into the net on ADD was yesterday, reached
JK>http://www.nici.com/nutrition/reference.htm which you really should
JK>take the time to check out.  The first one on the list was from the
JK>prestigious British journal, listed under "Food sensitivities and
JK>AD/HD:"
JK>  J. Egger.  Controlled trial of oligoantigenic treatment in
JK>  hyperkinetic syndrome.  LANCET, March 19, pp. 540-45.
What did the article say, Jane? Did you read the article in the 
original? BTW, the "reference" at the end is inadequate to find the 
article, as it does not cite the volume or year of publication. Hmmm. I 
wonder why? Could it be that the article says something contrary to what 
you would have us believe?
JK>The rest of the list is from equally prestigious medical journals.
JK>Don't be among a dwindling minority of individuals whose information
JK>dates back too far to be of much use in the diagnosis and treatment
JK>of this condition.
Hey, I am the first on my block to try just about anything within 
reason. 
As for the diagnostic methodology and criteria, I am in regular contact 
with a group who are re-writing the standards for DSM V.
                ===>The Voice of Reason<===
                     mark.probert@juno.com
---
 * CMPQwk #1.4 * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY
---------------