I read the abstract and I can't understand if medicated ADHD adults don't show the increase the unmedicated ones did or if the medication did not make a difference (increase or decrease) compared with unmedicated adults.

So are medicated ADHDers statistically similar to unmedicated ADHDers or non ADHDers?

I miss the niche communities that I followed on reddit. There was a lot of sharing and discussion of knowledge there and I learned a lot about my hobbies. I feel more alone in my hobbies and interests now, I have no one to talk about them here.

On the general content side, I'm fine with Lemmy, there's a lot less to scroll through and I spend a lot less time without feeling like I'm missing out, which is not a bad thing for me. I still can get my jokes, cats and memes in a smaller dose with a lot less reposting than reddit had. Another thing I like about lemmy is that I can interact with the more general content (like right now) without being the billionth comment that no one is going to read anyway

The idea itself is fine, but in practice it wouldn't work. The kind of people you are trying to screen out in the process would just study do give the responses of a passing assessment, probably with the help of heavily paid mental health professionals.

Psicology is hard to test and prove, most of the things you are looking to test would not be visible in bloodwork or brainscans.

The most chaotic good thing to do would be to use the known security issues to hack into your boss' computer in the most scarry looking but harmless way. That would possibly scare them into upgrading.

With that said, you should create a paper trail on how you warned your boss, and either wash your hands of the issue or kick it up the chain, depending on how much you care.

EDIT: since it seems some people didn't get it, I meant the first option as a joke. My actual advice is the second paragraph

You're almost there. It has to do with the angle of the sun and the water drops relating to the view point. Rainbows only show when the sun is behind you, and if you imagine a cone going out from the viewpoint outwards you get the possible paths of the rainbow (different radius different wavelength and therefore color)

A similar concept happens in certain reflective surfaces (metal pots and pans, car hoods and much more). You always see the tiny scratches in circles, but if you alter the angle in any way you keep seeing different scratch circles. This is because the circle you see in any given angle is the exactly the scratches that are turned just perfectly to reflect the light in the perfect way. It does not mean that the scratches you see at any given moment are the only ones. It means there are plenty, and only a few more visible at a time.

To me, playing around with the second concept (much easier to manipulate yourself and see) made me understand rainbows much better.

I can't wink. Other people make it seem so easy, the best I can do is a scrunched up face with a sliver of one eye open enough to see

To me waiting mode is caused by not trusting myself to not loose track of time if I start doing something else. So I count back the time it will take me to be ready and in the right location and put a bunch of reminders/alarms.

For example, I need to be at the dentist at 4pm. I check Google maps on the time estimate for me to get there (I even put in the arrive time to account for traffic), then I add the time for me to be ready to leave, to park my car, to be there early, adding a bit of a buffer on every step. Then depending on what I want to do before the dentist I put in alarms. If I can stop any time I put an alarm for the time I need to get ready. If I need a bit of a buffer to finish something I put one half an hour early and one at the time to get ready.

Adding some extra times to the estimate is good because we are notoriously bad at estimating times. You get better the more you do it

Percy Jackson is written as having ADHD, because the writer's son had it. I liked it, but maybe the "it's actually a super power" thing might rub some people the wrong way.

In my eyes that distingueshes a "normal" friendship and a life partner is the planning for the future and being a team. You make big life decisions (moving house, career changes, medical decisions) together thinking of the best outcomes for both as a team. You could be a life partner with a non romantic totally platonic friend, but that's usually not the case you see represented.

There's been plenty good shows since X files came out, maybe it's more of a problem that you're in a different head space than you were and not as open to like new shows anymore. Happens to me with video games, I keep going back to the ones I played in my early twenties when I had more time over the summer to invest into games. Now I have much less time to start a new game and get over the boring introductory bits before getting to the good parts.

One compromise I use is to give them food instead of money. I usually carry with me one of those mashed fruit packets (usually marketed for kids to take to school) in case I get hungry and if I come across someone asking for money I just give them that. Or ask them if they want something from the nearby convenience store/cafe/vending machine. That removes the argument of "they'll just use it for drugs" that I hear and honestly believe is true to some people. Addiction is hard. Everyone has to eat, it's always useful to get them food (especially if it's non perishable)

Probably due to the absence of lead that the previous generation got due to leaded gas emissions.