That's a lot of "could"s... Yes, I agree that nonsensical incentives exist. But I fail to see what this would even look like to provoke something with the same outcome as a vaccine conspiracy.

Also, those things exist in politics. Take laws governing sexual offences for example. If I was in charge and pushed a reform that protects victims better, my political opponent could claim that such crimes went through the roof while I was in office. But I truly lack the imagination for such a situation in a medical agency. I'd expect my career to be over if I gave a green light for the admission even if I could've known better. Especially in such a high-profile case.

I used to take 60 at 160 pounds. According to your experience I must've been tripping balls when in reality I just felt my heartbeat a little stronger than usual. But don't take my anecdote as evidence.

If you say that 30mg is too much, find scientific literature that supports this claim. If you compare those 30mg to different maximum doses, you'll find that that's significantly below what's generally considered safe. Additionally, this meta analysis finds that those limits are not scientifically motivated and some patients might actually benefit from higher doses.

I have no idea what happened to you. Maybe you have some condition which makes you have unique side effects. But the world does not revolve around you. Your experience is far from representative. I found nothing about states of ecstasy or intoxication online. I did find reports by people abusing MPH at a >10 times higher dose and not orally. I can totally believe that they were high from that.

I'm sorry to hear that. Methylphenidate does have a quite long list of adverse effects, including depression (1-10%). A doctor should explain them to patients/their parents before a prescription. What I fail to see is the connection to "potent stimulant". You need to take several times the maximum prescribed dose and ideally an alternative way of taking it to get that effect typically associated with stimulants (I won't go into details as to not encourage substance abuse). What is an absurdly high dose? Did your doctor break the official regulations?

>Based on my experience I am of the opinion that this stuff should not be prescribed to kids period.

There are countless studies that show a net positive effect in treatment of ADHD with stimulants. I don't mean to belittle your very negative experience, but it wouldn't be scientific to choose anecdotes over evidence.

>getting extremely high every day at school

Sorry, but that's practically impossible. Yes, agitation and nervousness are side effects. But not getting high.

You can't win with those people. If you are scientifically thorough and phrase things in a cautious way they claim that you don't know anything. You say something like

> as of now we have not observed a statistically significant number of adverse reactions

and they'll go

>So you're saying you don't know? You think the vaccine is safe but you can't promise me?

>but now I've become skeptical of the FDAs motives

May I ask why? What has changed?

Why would they want to transfer national public funds to foreign private pockets? Why would they choose such an inefficient way? The vaccine itself wasn't the most expensive part here. Most of the money went to the infrastructure, doctors etc.

On the other hand, those people don't understand that some of their concerns are equally ridiculous as chips. I've read such wild theories that mRNA will stay in your genome etc. Those theories require a severe lack of understanding of high-school-level biology and most of them fall apart when you consider that the virus also contains RNA.

>the way incentives are aligned makes the situation be like it is.

What incentives are there for public medical agencies to approve a potentially harmful drug? What incentives are there for the government to pay for the vaccines? It sounds like you don't share these concerns or borderline conspiracy theories, but none of this makes any sense if you think about it. If all politicians in the world suddenly owned shares of those 6 pharmaceutical companies who produced the first vaccines, wouldn't there be much easier ways to funnel money into their pockets? Why take the long route via medical agencies that require studies when you just can subsidise their "research" and give them cash?

I don't know which country you live in, but did anyone really say this?

> to not buy masks and stock up, because they didn’t work

Without any qualifier? I remember they said in March 2020 that it doesn't make sense because there were only 100 known cases in the country. The chances of meeting anyone with Covid in the streets were practically zero. At the same time, health professionals had a much higher chance of encounter. They also said that surgical masks provide little protection to the wearer. With only ~100 infected in the country (or even thousands) it wouldn't make sense to wear them and create a shortage in the health care system where they're actually needed.

I have no idea what the communication was in your country. In mine people still claim the same as you and they're either lying or have a severe lack of reading comprehension. Nobody said "Masks don't work, period."

>potent stimulants for kids as ADHD medication

Which ones? In which dose? Why is this problematic?

They didn't claim causation, just association. And, quite frankly, that would also be the outcome of the scenario you described.

You can mix them.

>adjusted for age category, sex, race, ethnicity, BMI, ever smoker, hospital utilization, HbA1c, comorbidities, Medicaid status, and vaccination status before COVID-19 diagnosis