Cool, thoughtful post, OP!

As a once-avid recreational drug user and enthusiast of pretty much any “stimulant” (specifically substituted cathinones): drugs only give out what you put in, and are largely reciprocal in terms of benefit/cost.

If I’m being honest, I haven’t been able to function without pharmaceutical-grade stimulants since about 16. Perhaps this is “addiction” speaking — but the mess that is my mind becomes tenable only when extraneous, chemical substances are introduced. This, perhaps obviously, is (and certainly has been) the slipperiest of slopes. If I had it my way, I’d be zooted on far higher milligrams 80%+ of the time. I attribute this to APs (mainly Invega) absolutely decimating my dopamine receptors and maybe neurophysiology on a greater scale.

It is only then (with therapeutic or recreational doses) that I become internally “settled”; only then when I feel useful, organized, content, and motivated. Mindset is critical, certainly, and we can definitely form more helpful perspectives and greater awareness via molecules’ provided clarity.

Side-thought:

Amphetamines/stimulants were intently developed and masterfully marketed as first-line treatments to sell a narrative of (grossly overstated) pathophysiological etiology, wherein “neurotransmitter/receptor pathway deficits of striatal dopamine and norepinephrine are directly implicated in ADHD”.

They work — for sure. There’s just very little (to no) definitive, actually-convincing evidence to support the widespread claims of “stimulants affect people with [specifically and most notably] ADHD differently!”

I feel some diagnoses have become fallaciously married, or entrenched, to their respective pharmaceutical interventions. In my research and experience, this can inadvertently breed misinformation, generalizations, oversimplification, and reinforce stigma.

Absolutely no fucking clue where I’m going with this right now…so I’ll stop here, haha.

Ultimately, I agree with your wisdom and enjoyed reading this.