FRED A. BAUGHMAN, JR. M.D.
NEUROLOGY AND CHILD NEUROLOGY (Board Certified)
FELLOW, AMERICAN ACADEMY OF NEUROLOGY
EL CAJON, CA 92019
February 19, 2004
American Academy of Neurology
1080 Montreal Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55116
Dear Dr. Olson,
In Methylphenidate (A Background Paper), October, 1995, DEA, page 4, we read:
“In conjunction with the American Academy of Neurology, CHADD has submitted a petition to reschedule methylphenidate from schedule II to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). CHADD denies that the financial contributions received from Ciba Geigy have any relationship to their action. The basis for this petition is that methylphenidate has a lower abuse potential than amphetamines and that Schedule II controls are unduly burdensome on manufacturers of methylphenidate, physicians who prescribe it and patients who receive methylphenidate.
Here we have the AAN involving itself in the treatment of ADD/ADHD. This being the case, surely the AAN had made a determination that ADD/ADHD was something in need of such treatment—a disease.
I wish to see AAN records from that point in time bearing on the AAN’s determination of whether or not ADD/ADHD was an actual disease, and an objectively diagnosable disease.
Next, I would like to know what money contributions AAN received from Ciba-Geigy and or CHADD, 1985-1995.
Given the frequency, today, of the diagnosis of “adult ADHD” surely it is the province of the AAN, itself, to have made a determination as to whether or not ADHD is a real, diagnosable disease. I hope the Academy of which I am a Fellow will no longer fail to answer such fundamental questions. I have written to the presidents of the AAN and CNS on several occasions asking them whether or not ADD/ADHD is an actual disease/neurological disease as claimed by Novartis (formerly Ciba-Geigy) and CHADD, each time without eliciting an answer…with a failure to answer.
Sincerely
Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD
* sent by fax as well.
Last Updated on 04/08/04 webmaster@namiscc.org
