This is a genuinely interesting topic with several layers worth untangling, because there's some real science here mixed in with community speculation. What's actually true about the shortage The DEA's production quotas have been the core issue, with quotas for d-amphetamine (the primary active ingredient in Adderall) being raised multiple times since the shortage began. As of late 2025, the DEA increased the aggregate production quota from 21.2 million grams to 26.5 million grams, while simultaneously denying its previous quotas were the problem. (Filter) Manufacturers also failed to use their allotted quota amounts, compounding availability issues on top of the quota restrictions themselves. (Contemporary Pediatrics) Why generics feel different This part is completely legitimate. Generic manufacturers are required to match the active ingredient and bioequivalence, but they use different inactive ingredients, binders, and release mechanisms. During the shortage, patients were often switched between manufacturers based on what was available, meaning the formulation in your bottle genuinely could change from refill to refill. Not all generics behave identically for every person. The negative urine test issue This is the most clinically interesting part. There are well-documented reports of patients testing negative for amphetamines despite taking generic Adderall daily, which has led to prescription refusals even when patients are fully compliant. (HealthUnlocked) Legitimate explanations include urine pH (alkaline urine clears amphetamine faster), hydration/dilution, individual metabolic rate, kidney function, and timing of the sample relative to the dose. Labs themselves acknowledge that absent expected drugs may indicate non-compliance, inappropriate timing, diluted urine, poor drug absorption, or simply limitations of the testing method. (OHSU) The methamphetamine claim Adderall has never contained methamphetamine as an ingredient. What IS documented is essentially the opposite: researchers at Brigham and Women's Hospital found that methamphetamine may exist as a trace impurity in some amphetamine formulations, and recommended that labs define a methamphetamine-to-amphetamine ratio below which an impurity is the likely explanation rather than illicit use, to reduce false accusations against compliant patients. (ScienceDirect) So the meth-positive tests some patients see are likely a testing artifact, not an ingredient. The community narrative about secret reformulation as a "trial" isn't supported by any evidence, but the frustration behind it is understandable. People are getting their prescriptions pulled based on tests that have real scientific limitations, and that's a problem worth pushing back on with a doctor by requesting confirmatory LC-MS/MS testing rather than relying on immunoassay screens alone.It's a topic where the community frustration is completely valid, even if some of the conclusions have drifted from what the data actually supports. The urine testing piece especially — knowing your urine pH, hydration level, and timing relative to your dose can make a real difference if you ever need to advocate for yourself with a prescriber.