Wearing Da Vinci's Genes?

Late last night, an associate of mine managed to peak my curiosity long enough to get me to download an ebook named after something called "The Da Vinci Method". Apparently its the next big thing among AD/HDers. Its even endorsed by Ph.D. holder Dr. Shane Perrault, who is the head psychologist at Entrepreneurs with ADHD. I'm not familiar with his work, but he has a very marketable headshot (and no, American readers, it has nothing to do with the colour of his skin - and that's how we spell "color" in Australia).

I only really skimmed through it, but I read enough to be really put off. It read like the The Secret for people with ADHD, and thats not a good thing. Mostly because The Secret reads like a big American advertisement more than anything else.

The first thing that disturbed me was the idea that AD/HD is something that you develop from being a perpetually shunned and misunderstood "Da Vinci" (apparently a type of uber-creative hyperfocused person that makes up ten percent of the human population - AD/HD is medically thought to effect between 3-5%). Its almost like it talks about an AD/HD master race, which sort of neglects the fact that its a disorder and as such it has enough of a negative side to be consistently difficult to deal with for most people who have it.

It went on to say that AD/HD could be "cured". I know it was probably referring to the negative aspects of AD/HD rather than the whole disorder, but it is a statement that borders on being downright offensive. The problem with the whole positive thinking movement is that it denigrates those who don't cling onto it as whiney doubters, which is unreasonable and presents its proponents with an interesting paradox. But thats for another post.

Then it criticized stimulant medication from within a questionably valid scientific framework. Fair enough, it does decrease Alpha and Theta wave activity in the brain, but the theory hasn't been studied enough to show what that implies. From a biomedical paradigm, thats a good thing. And from personal experience, I like being rapidly creative and such, but I can't follow my passions without focus - and stimulant medication is the only thing I've encountered that offers me that to a tangible degree. So I tend to be on the side that states that anything that is against medication as a primary form of treatment for AD/HD will invariably do more harm than good, despite whatever else it might offer.

The last thing I noticed that turned me off the book was the "spiritual" point of view it touted. First it rails against medication, then it invokes God. It seems like a kind of step back from everything. I do not adhere to any religion in the dictionary sense or the new age enlightened sense. I'm a philosopher and maybe a postmodernist. I practice Zen but I don't believe in reincarnation.

In any case, I suppose I better give it a read. Some folks over on addforums.com (I'm only a lurker) have said its worth a look, despite its obvious shortcomings. Maybe if I take it with a grain of salt, I might be able to extract something from it, even it its just another rant post. Maybe when I'm done I'll review it.