Lancelot, I do disagree with you on a number of factual issues, which I address below. If we still do not agree on these points, even after our exchanges in this thread, please see that my disagreement is not an attack. It simply stems from my sincere belief (after much research as well as personal experience) that Ritalin and other stimulant-class ADHD meds can make a very positive change in the lives of many ADHD sufferers; that said, I am not a proponent of indiscriminately prescribing stims like candy, and I also realize that stims just aren't appropriate for a great number of people. I hope you can acknowledge the validity of my point of view, as I in turn acknowledge the validity of yours

.

I believe your heart's in the right place, but you might have conflated two distinct concepts--chemical structure on the one hand, and pharmacological effects on the other. With regard to pharmacological effects, you are correct: Ritalin, like cocaine, blocks dopamine reuptake. However, your original post did not say that--instead, you said:

That is, you appeared to assert that Ritalin is chemically more similar to cocaine than to MDMA--which is untrue. While Ritalin may be pharmacologically closer to cocaine than MDMA, in terms of chemical structure, Ritalin and MDMA are much closer to each other than either one is to cocaine. A glance up at my previous post and chemical diagrams shows that cocaine has a complex ester structure, while MDMA and Ritalin both belong to the class of compounds known as substituted phenethylamines.

As I mentioned above, that MDMA has a different pharmacological action than Ritalin or cocaine is not in dispute. When you wrote about Ritalin and cocaine being "chemically similar," you apparently meant "pharmacologically similar," but the two are quite different.

I am certain the diagram I linked above for MDMA is correct. Perhaps you can examine it again?

Methamphetamine (also called "meth" or "methylamphetamine") and amphetamine have in nearly all respects the same chemical structure. The only difference between amphetamine and methylamphetamine is the substitution of a single methyl group in place of a single hydrogen--I used the chemical diagram for meth rather than straight amphetamine simply because Wikipedia had a prettier diagram for one than the other

. Regardless, the validity of the comparison is unchanged by the substitution.

As for my MDMA structure, precisely in what regard is the chemical diagram of MDMA I linked above incorrect? Kindly identify and explain a specific error in the diagram, not references to articles by third parties. I'm too dense to wade through them all (heh).

From my reading of the ChemCompare diagrams you linked to, they simply show the same structure as the diagram up above--do you mind to help me by explaining the differences?

In what way are ritalin and cocaine more structurally similar than ritalin and MDMA? Please explain the difference in words, as my eyes are quite tired tonight and the diagrams tend to run together. You'll have to forgive me that my ADHD meds are wearing off toward the end of the day

Again, three out of the four articles from which you cut and pasted simply compare the pharmacological similarities of ritalin and cocaine, but make no mention of structural similarities. Only one article (the first in your list) discusses the structure of ritalin at all, and only in comparison to methamphetamine and amphetamine (and in fact acknowledges that "amphetamine, methamphetamine, and ritalin" are "similar in backbone structure").

Finally, let's get to the final matter of your post, the possible fatal effects of Ritalin:

Disregarding the bias and anti-methylphenidate agenda present in a website called "ritalindeath," please consider the following--

I doubt anyone, doctors least of all, would deny that Ritalin (or any other stimulant) can cause death, has caused deaths in the past, and will continue to cause deaths in the future.

Did I just say that? Of course I did. Only a fool would expect that a strong medicine like Ritalin or amphetamine is always perfectly safe for everyone, especially for those with pre-existing heart condition (as mentioned in the article you quoted above). Even people without heart conditions will occasionally die from stims, simply from a misfortunate (and rare) bad reaction to them.

Like I said before, Ritalin and other stimulants used to treat ADHD are not for everyone, and are not to be toyed with for recreation; further, it is the prescribing doctor's duty to physically examine and periodically monitor his patient for whom he is prescribing Ritalin or amphetamine--any doctor who fails to do so, and has a patient die because the stimulant exacerbated an underlying heart condition, is likely to face serious penalties.

But that does not mean that stimulants categorically should never be prescribed, for anyone? Ridiculous. The potential benefits of this medicine must be weighed against the risk of harm, even the (remote) possibility of death, to the patient. If millions benefit from greatly improved quality of life, thanks to a controlled and monitored regimen of Ritalin, should Ritalin be banned simply because of a risk of death for a few?

If that were the case, hydrocodone (hell, even codeine) would have been removed from the market long ago. I ask you, which class of prescribed medicine causes the greater percentage of deaths (proportional to the number of prescribed patients) each year--opiates, or stimulants? My money is on opiates, by far. Yet clearly, the benefit in quality of life for tens of millions of chronic pain sufferers outweighs the unfortunate reality that a certain number of patients will die from their opiate painkiller prescriptions each year.

I respectfully submit that the same analogy holds true for Ritalin.