From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Adderall has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
December 3, 2014 Good article nominee Listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Pharmacology (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Medicine (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of psychoactive and recreational drugs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Chemicals (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemical Study Aid[edit]

Why is there no Controversy section for this article? For a number of years Adderall (and now the web-sold Addium) have been abused by college students using its stimulant effects for a chemical study aid:

When you combine the above with the existing brief section about Adderall and athletes it seems to me there really ought to be a Controversy section. Opinions? (talk) 15:11, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies in advance if I'm replying to your question the wrong way. I just clicked on "edit source".

I never care what the newspapers say, however, I do care about what evidence based medicine says. In my personal opinion, Addium is nothing but a glorified vitamin. Please take a look at its active ingredients, and you'll notice that it's basically caffeine, L-tyrosine, GABA, and a bunch of other controversial herbals that have zero science behind them (Huperzine A comes to mind). The company is essentially saying that "well, we know the precursors to dopamine in the brain - let's dump them together and make a pill out of it, and cross our fingers and hope that they get converted to dopamine".

With that being said, it almost makes me sound like I'm saying that Adderall is even a dopamine-reuptake inhibitor, which it isn't - it's so much more complicated, particularly when we start talking about trace amine-associated receptor 1 (TAAR1) and vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2). And still, there is still research going on about how Adderall works. There is some very heavy science behind it. But I don't know if what I'm saying means that you're not right and that Addium shouldn't be added to the article. I have no idea honestly. I can just tell you that there is science behind Adderall, and pretty much nothing backing up Addium. Heck, if I swallowed a whole bottle of Addium, I'd be surprised if I get anything more than some mild diarrhea.

An article worth looking into:

As I mentioned though, I am not sure if this means that a "Controversy" section shouldn't be opened. It's just that when I see people abusing these vitamins, I can't help but laugh at them because you'd be surprised how powerful a placebo effect can be. I guess I just feel like it's almost an insult to the many years of biochemical research it took to make Adderall by mentioning some glorified vitamin in the same article. But this is just my personal opinion and I don't agree or disagree with you about adding the section. I'm just not too familiar with the way people decide on adding sections or what the requirements are. Have a good rest of the weekend!

Boonshofter (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@, Wikipedia strongly discourages Controversy sections because everyone who has an ax to grind adds to it and it becomes overbloated in violation of WP:WEIGHT. Instead, criticisms should be discussed in other relevant sections of an article, which is the case here. There are also criticisms of this and other stimulant medications in other ADHD-related artciles. ADHD in general is a complex and controversial topic. Look around at related articles; you'll find information on controversies. Secondly, this is a medical article, and the sources you link do not meet the standards of WP:MEDRS. Sundayclose (talk) 16:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Actually Sundayclose, respectfully, the sources I provided DO meet the standards of WP:MEDRS. Please note:
The popular press is generally not a reliable source for scientific and medical information in articles. Most medical news articles fail to discuss important issues such as evidence quality,[21] costs, and risks versus benefits,[22] and news articles too often convey wrong or misleading information about health care.[23] Articles in newspapers and popular magazines generally lack the context to judge experimental results. They tend to overemphasize the certainty of any result, for instance, presenting a new and experimental treatment as "the cure" for a disease or an every-day substance as "the cause" of a disease. Newspapers and magazines may also publish articles about scientific results before those results have been published in a peer reviewed journal or reproduced by other experimenters. Such articles may be based uncritically on a press release, which can be a biased source even when issued by an academic medical center.[24] News articles also tend neither to report adequately on the scientific methodology and the experimental error, nor to express risk in meaningful terms. For Wikipedia's purposes, articles in the popular press are generally considered independent, primary sources.
A news article should therefore not be used as a sole source for a medical fact or figure. Editors are encouraged to seek out the scholarly research behind the news story. One possibility is to cite a higher-quality source along with a more-accessible popular source, for example, with the |laysummary= parameter of Empty citation (help) .
Conversely, the high-quality popular press can be a good source for social, biographical, current-affairs, financial, and historical information in a medical article. [emphasis added]
The wide-spread abuse of this medication is definitely both a social and a current-affairs topic appropriate to be in this article. (talk) 12:37, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I couldn't possibly agree more with your assessment. They were all newspaper articles that were quoting Addium. I didn't even bother reading them honestly. My cousin is doing her biochemistry thesis on one of those receptors, which is why I felt that I had to chime in. She's been through hell and back to get actual results she can now publish after 4 years. She defends her thesis in a few weeks actually. Thanks for your input :)

Boonshofter (talk) 16:22, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually the illicit use of Adderall by students is already briefly mentioned in the Adderall#Performance-enhancing and cites Adderall#cite_note-pmid16999660-50. Perhaps this could be expanded a bit with this more recent review:
Boghog (talk) 17:58, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes this is a great article, from a respectable journal. I actually read it before... but I believe that the original person who asked to create the "controversy" section was more interested in talking about Addium. But I agree, it's a very well established article in the scientific community.

Boonshofter (talk) 18:02, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

It is pretty clear that the original editor who started this thread was more interested in Adderall than Addium. All the four links provided at the beginning of this thread concern Adderall and not Addium. Addium was only mentioned in passing. Finally to state the obvious, this article (and talk page) is about Adderall and not Addium. Boghog (talk) 19:01, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Frankly, I wasn't taught my medicine from newspaper articles - we were taught evidence based medicine in medical school - residency was based on solid peer-reviewed articles. So the second I noticed he was quoting sites like CNN, I didn't bother even looking at them. I was also under the impression that he was more interested in Addium than Adderall, and it seems I misread what he was trying to say (which I apologize for).

Regardless, I never intended to offend, and please accept my apologies if I did. Your point is very well taken, and your insight is very much appreciated.

Boonshofter (talk) 19:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for being so terse. I just wanted to make sure that the discussion on this talk page remained focused on Adderall. Cheers. Boghog (talk) 19:40, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
I really don't see how this drug is controversial. It has well-established ergogenic and nootropic effects and associated adverse effects, which are all comprehensively covered in this article and cited to current reviews of medical research. Unlike the 4 sources at the top of this section, this article does not include value-based opinions as to whether or not a certain behavior (i.e., recreational drug use, doping in sports, or the use of diverted controlled substances as a nootropic) should be practiced, based upon cultural norms and the author's perception of the risks/benefits. As these behaviors aren't specific to this drug, any content relevant to one of these 3 uses would be more appropriate in the associated article than in this one. That said, any medical claims/justifications added to an article would still require WP:MEDRS compliance for the citation. Seppi333 (Insert ) 21:00, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
The increasing illicit use of Adderall to enhance academic performance is certainly notable and is somewhat unique to this drug. Furthermore just stating the prevalence of this use is not a medical claim, but nevertheless, there is a MEDRS complaint source (PMID 22694135) that can be used to support this statement. Finally this article already mentions this use in the Adderall#Performance-enhancing section. I agree that we do not need to create a separate controversy section, but instead expand the existing performance-enhancing section. Boghog (talk) 21:19, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable. I'll read through it over the next day or two and update either this page or the amphetamine transclusion, depending on what it says. Seppi333 (Insert ) 22:14, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
May I suggest that if the current Performance-enhancing section is modified that it include named subsections of Academic Enhancement and Athletic Enhancement for ease of access to these topics by non-medical readers looking for information on these issues. We also could refactor the article entirely to group both Performance enhancing and Recreational use under an umbrella topic of Non-prescription use or Illicit use (Are there any cases of Adderall being used for performance enhancement under medical supervision?). If agreeable I would be willing to do the section reorganization work myself. (talk) 13:41, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Respectfully, I realize that this is primarily a medical article but knowledge does not live in a vacuum. This medical substance has real-world effects on human behaviour and human lives. That information is found in newspaper articles and should not be excluded just because it is not strictly medical in nature. I selected only well established and vetted journalistic news sources for reference. WP is not a medical encyclopedia, it is a comprehensive encyclopedia.

As for my sources not meeting the standards of WP:MEDRS please see my comment above in response to user Sundayclose.

The drug itself is not controversial as far as I can determine, but the human abuse of the drug in both sports and academia is. I am fine with avoiding a section labeled Controversy as long as the topic is given its due weight in light of the scope and scale of the abuse issue. How much weight would be given to such a topic if the same number of people were being harmed by a side-effect rather than by abuse?

One thing to keep in mind is that people come to Wikipedia for information. They may not be medically oriented readers. Imagine a high school kid comes to WP looking for information on the use of Adderall for sports enhancement or getting good grades. How easy is it going to be for that kid to find the information he needs to realize that such uses are both illegal and unsafe? No, we are not trying to be social workers, just an information provider, but we need to make that information accessible to ALL types of readers, not just subject specialists. (talk) 11:43, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a medical encyclopedia, but by long-standing consensus it has certain standards for medical articles. And those standards are not intended for the article to be only for "specialists"; they are intended to maintain unbiased accuracy (as much as is possible within current scientific research) that does not put undue weight on current newspaper and magazine articles which are very prone to publishing information without enough scientific validity. Medical review articles in peer reviewed journals are far more likely to reflect the current status of a particular medical topic compared to the headlines of newspapers and magazines. Wikipedia is not written for specialists only, but it also is not written for high school students who rely on an encyclopedia rather than medical advice to make a decision about drug use. I also oppose dividing the Performance-enhancing section. It is not a lengthy section, and it gives adequate WP:WEIGHT to the topic. Additionally, as has been pointed out (but largely ignored) Adderall is one of a number of drugs related to ADHD. Controversies are included in those related articles. Our goal is not to concentrate all of the discussion of controversies into the Adderall article, but it is to provide an overview of those issues with links for the reader to follow for more details. Sundayclose (talk) 14:26, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
The fact that Adderall is being illicitly used by students as a academic performance enhancing drug is not a medical claim and hence is outside the scope of WP:MEDRS. Adderall appears to be one of the most widely used drugs for this purpose and that statement is backed up by a reliable secondary source (see PMID 22694135) and hence is fair game to included in this article. Sources like the New York Times are also acceptable sources to support this statement. Boghog (talk) 15:53, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
@Boghog, I don't disagree with a well sourced statement about Adderall being one of the most widely used drugs by students as an academic performance enhancing drug. But I emphasize one statement; not a paragraph and certainly not a separate subsection, per WP:WEIGHT. Sundayclose (talk) 17:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I think what Boghog mentioned about a brief statement on diversion prevalence is worth adding simply because some readers (including me) would probably be interested in knowing about it. I downloaded the paper Boghog linked, but I haven't read through it yet. I'll get around to this soon though. Anyway, I think it's probably fairly obvious to readers that both the recreational use and the diversion of Adderall (or any other drug) is controversial; I actually can't think of any victimless crime that doesn't involve some form of controversy at the moment. Seppi333 (Insert ) 19:22, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I've added the diversion prevalence data to that statement. Seppi333 (Insert ) 12:44, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Clarification: Adderall vs Addium[edit]

I just wanted to clarify a small point in my original post: Above some of the Editors seem to have keyed in on my parenthesised comment, "(and now the web-sold Addium)", as if that was my primary concern, for the record it is not. Respectfully the very fact that my comment was in parentheses should have been a clue about the level of significance I attached to the sub-topic. Furthermore, contrary Boonshofter's comment about the four source links ("They were all newspaper articles that were quoting Addium.") NONE of these articles even mention Addium by name, though there is a brief mention about "fake Adderall" in one of them.

The sole reason I mentioned Addium in passing is because it is being called "legal Adderall" in web advertisements and email spams for the product. In fact the reason why I came to this article was to find out what Adderall is. Prior to seeing one of these spams I didn't even know about the history of the abuse issue. I would suspect that our "customers" (people who come to the encyclopedia looking for information) would likely do much the same. (talk) 11:16, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

We got it (see our follow-up comments above). Boghog (talk) 12:45, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Ooops! missed that. Thanks Boghog. (talk) 12:52, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Wow, I'm honestly blown away - although there's disagreement at times as I read the comments above, I love the professionalism, and I love even more how passionate everyone is in making Wikipedia a better resource. I have no clue how I would've gone through medical school if it weren't for Wikipedia. I'm not very technologically savvy, so I felt bad that I couldn't do edits like everyone else (without screwing up the article somehow). So when I graduated from medical school, I decided to make a huge donation to Wikipedia instead -- to make up for my lack of edits. I just felt so bad. At the end of the day, it boils down to each and every one of you guys making these comments above - you guys are the reason Wikipedia has been my primary source (and literally the source of every medical student in my class, and probably the majority of students in any discipline across the country). Thank you for being so passionate about your opinions and not backing down, regardless if someone disagrees with you or not. It's all about respecting each others' opinions. Boghog, you were not terse at all -- you were passionate about your opinion, and that alone deserves a lot of respect. Thanks again! Boonshofter (talk) 17:17, 15 July 2015 (UTC)


The article "mixamphetamine" is basically just a copy of this article but with a different name. It was decided earlier that the brand name "Adderall" should be used to describe the drug. Andrea Carter (at your service | my evil deads) 23:02, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Mixamphetamine is a made up word that is not supported by reliable sources. Furthermore mixamphetamine is almost an exact copy of Adderall, so there is nothing to merge. Rather than "merging" with a redirect left behind, mixamphetamine should be simply deleted (and salted to prevent it from being recreated). Boghog (talk) 23:52, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. Seppi333 (Insert ) 04:35, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Proposing a name change to Mixed Amphetamine Salts[edit]

So I recognize that I'm kinda beating a dead horse here, but titling this page "Adderall" is really not justified (and yes, this needs to be brought up again, hear me out). I know there's a lot of generic names, and that it has no INN/USAN/etc, but that's still no excuse! Mixed Amphetamine Salts (MAS) is the generic name pretty much universally used in the scientific literature on this drug. Why don't we use that? Here's a sampling of some of the major mentions in the literature:

Extended content

format: year published - title - major mentions in publication (title/abstract/full text) - pmid

2000 - Low-dose amphetamine salts and adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. - "Pediatric studies have suggested that a mixed amphetamine salt product (Adderall) is safe and effective in the treatment of childhood forms of ADHD" - 10901338

2001 - Efficacy of a mixed amphetamine salts compound in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - (see title), "We report on a controlled trial of a mixed amphetamine salts compound (Adderall, dextroamphetamine sulfate, dextro-, levoamphetamine sulfate, dextroamphetamine aspartate, levoamphetamine aspartate, and dextroamphetamine saccharate) in the treatment of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)" - 11483144

2001 - Placebo-Controlled Evaluation of Amphetamine Mixture—Dextroamphetamine Salts and Amphetamine Salts (Adderall): Efficacy Rate and Side Effects - "A product comprised of mixed amphetamine salts (Adderall, Shire Richwood Inc) has been marketed for the treatment of ADHD since 1994" - 11134474

2001 - SLI381: a long-acting psychostimulant preparation for the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. - "SLI381 (Adderall-XR) is a longer-acting form of Adderall, a compound of mixed amphetamine salts that is now the most frequently prescribed brand of psychostimulant medication for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the US" - 11772303

2002 - A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of SLI381 (Adderall XR) in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - "The extended-release nature of this new formulation of mixed amphetamine salts allowed adequate control of the signs and symptoms of ADHD using a once-a-day dosing schedule" - 12165576

2002 - SLI381 (Adderall XR), a two-component, extended-release formulation of mixed amphetamine salts: bioavailability of three test formulations and comparison of fasted, fed, and sprinkled administration - (see title) - 12432966

2003 - Pharmacokinetics of SLI381 (ADDERALL XR), an extended-release formulation of Adderall - "To assess the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of a single daily dose of Adderall (mixed amphetamine salts) and the extended-release formulation, SLI381 (ADDERALL XR), in pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)", "Adderall (mixed amphetamine salts) is a fixedcombination amphetamine composed of equal amounts of dextroamphetamine saccharate, dextroamphetamine sulfate, racemic amphetamine aspartate monohydrate, and racemic amphetamine sulfate", "SLI381 (ADDERALL XR) is a new stimulant preparation containing the same ratios of mixed amphetamine salts found in Adderall", "Acute-dose and chronic-dose pharmacokinetic studies of mixed amphetamine salts were conducted within an analog classroom laboratory assessment of SLI381" - 12921476

2004 - Adderall XR: long acting stimulant for single daily dosing - "Adderall XR (SLI381) is the latest addition to the group of psychostimulant formulations, which provides the mixed amphetamine salts contained in Adderall as a single-daily dose formulation" - 15853519

2005 - Long-term tolerability and effectiveness of once-daily mixed amphetamine salts (Adderall XR) in children with ADHD - (see title), "To evaluate the long-term tolerability and effectiveness of extended-release mixed amphetamine salts (MAS XR; Adderall XR) in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)", "Two previous studies demonstrated a 12-hour duration of effect and short-term safety and efficacy of an extended-release formulation of mixed amphetamine salts (MAS XR; Adderall XR®) (Biederman et al., 2002 and McCracken et al., 2003)" - 15908835

2005 - Long-term effects of extended-release mixed amphetamine salts treatment of attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder on growth - (see title), "The aim of this study was to examine the long-term effects of extended-release mixed amphetamine salts (MAS-XR) with 10-30-mg doses on the growth of children being treated for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)", "Most prior studies of growth effects of ADHD medication had been conducted prior to the advent of long-acting versions of methylphenidate (Greenhill et al. 2002; Wolraich et al. 2001) and mixed amphetamine salts (MAS) (Biederman et al. 2002). To address the effect of long-acting medications on growth, we present data from a two-year cohort study of extendedrelease mixed amphetamine salts (MAS-XR). Mixed amphetamine salts consist of a mixture of neutral salts of dextroamphetamine sulfate, amphetamine sulfate, the dextro-isomer of amphetamine saccharate, and d,l-amphetamine aspartate" - 15910204

2005 - An interim analysis of the Quality of Life, Effectiveness, Safety, and Tolerability (QU.E.S.T.) evaluation of mixed amphetamine salts extended release in adults with ADHD - (see title), "Evaluate safety and efficacy of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR) in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)" - 16344838

2005 - Long-term cardiovascular effects of mixed amphetamine salts extended release in adults with ADHD - (see title), "To assess long-term cardiovascular effects of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR) in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) combined subtype" - 16344839

2005 - Mixed amphetamine salts extended release for the treatment of ADHD - (see title) - 16344840

2006 - A post hoc subgroup analysis of an 18-day randomized controlled trial comparing the tolerability and efficacy of mixed amphetamine salts extended release and atomoxetine in school-age girls with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - (see title), "This post hoc analysis compared the efficacy, tolerability, and time course of the effect of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR) and atomoxetine in school-age girls with ADHD", "As in trials of older immediate-release psychostimulant agents, 14-16 clinical trials of newer, long-acting formulations of methylphenidate and mixed amphetamine salts have generally indicated comparable improvements from baseline in ratings of core ADHD symptoms such as hyperactivity and inattention within hours of dosing. 14,17,18", "St.A.R.T. was the first randomized controlled trial in school-age children with ADHD to directly compare the overall efficacy, tolerability, and time course of effect of the stimulant mixed amphetamine salts extended release* (MAS XR) with those of the nonstimulant atomoxetine} during laboratory school sessions", - 16678649

2006 - Efficacy and safety of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (adderall XR) in the management of oppositional defiant disorder with or without comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in school-aged children and adolescents: A 4-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, forced-dose-escalation study - (see title), "The goal of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR) for the treatment of ODD in children and adolescents aged 6 to 17 years" or (in text) "Thus, the objective of the current study was to assess the efficacy and safety of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR)* for the treatment of ODD in school-aged children and adolescents" - 16750455

2006 - Efficacy and safety of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (Adderall XR) in the management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adolescent patients: a 4-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study - (see title), "The primary goal of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR) in the management of adolescents with ADHD", "Mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR)* is a once-daily, single-entity amphetamine approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the management of ADHD in children aged 6 to 12 years and in adults" - 16678648

2006 - Mixed amphetamine salts extended-release in the treatment of adult ADHD: a randomized, controlled trial - (see title), "This prospective, multisite, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, dose-escalation study was conducted to assess the efficacy, safety, and duration of action of mixed amphetamine salts extended-release (MAS XR) in adults with ADHD, combined type" - 16871129

2006 - An open-label study of the tolerability of mixed amphetamine salts in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and treated primary essential hypertension - (see title), "To evaluate the short-term tolerability of an extended-release preparation of the stimulant medication mixed amphetamine salts (MAS XR) in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) whose hypertension has been successfully treated with antihypertensive medications" - 16841618

2007 - Cardiovascular effects of mixed amphetamine salts extended release in the treatment of school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - (see title), "The cardiovascular safety of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR) was evaluated in 2968 children 6-12 years of age with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)", "Mixed amphetamine salts extended-release (MAS XR; Adderall XR, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Wayne, Pennsylvania) capsules include immediate-release pellets of mixed amphetamine salts that release the first half of the dose upon ingestion and delayed-release pellets that begin to release active drug approximately 4 hours later. The MAS XR capsule contains the same 3:1 ratio of dextroamphetamine to levoamphetamine as the mixed amphetamine salts immediate-release (MAS IR; Adderall, Shire Pharmaceuticals) tablets, and the bioavailability and pharmacokinetic profiles associated with the daily dosing of MAS XR 20 mg are comparable to those associated with the twice-daily dosing of MAS IR 10 mg (Tulloch 2002)" - 16899230

2007 - Forecasting three-month outcomes in a laboratory school comparison of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (Adderall XR) and atomoxetine (Strattera) in school-aged children With ADHD - (see title), "Compare observed and forecasted efficacy of mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS-XR; Adderall) with atomoxetine (Strattera) in ADHD children", "Previously, we reported a greater level of behavioral and clinical improvement in response to 3 weeks of treatment with once-daily stimulant medication (in the form of mixed amphetamine salts extended release [MAS-XR]) than to once-daily atomoxetine in a head-to-head comparison from a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial (Wigal et al., 2005)." - 17606774

2007 - Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and mixed amphetamine salts extended-release in children with ADHD: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover analog classroom study - (see title), "This phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled crossover study compared the efficacy and safety of lisdexamfetamine (LDX: 30, 50, or 70 mg) with placebo, with mixed amphetamine salts extended-release (MAS XR: 10, 20, or 30 mg) included as a reference arm of the study, in 52 children aged 6 to 12 years with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in an analog classroom setting" - 17631866

2007 - Stimulant therapy in the management of ADHD: mixed amphetamine salts (extended release) - (see title), "An extended-release formulation of mixed amphetamine salts (MAS XR) provided the first long-acting amphetamine formulation, and thus, filled an important gap in available treatments for ADHD", "A mixed amphetamine salts extended-release (MAS XR; Adderall XR  , Shire US, Inc.) formulation has been shown to be effective and well tolerated in the treatment of ADHD" - 17714065

2007 - Bioavailability of triple-bead mixed amphetamine salts compared with a dose-augmentation strategy of mixed amphetamine salts extended release plus mixed amphetamine salts immediate release (note that this refers in part to an unreleased product, and this study was authored by Shire employees) - (see title), "To compare the single-dose pharmacokinetics of triple-bead mixed amphetamine salts (MAS), an oral, once-daily, enhanced extended-release amphetamine formulation, with MAS extended release (MAS XR) (Adderall XR) + MAS immediate release (MAS IR) administered 8 h later", "Mixed amphetamine salts extended-release (MAS XR) (Adderall XR) capsules contain equal amounts of four amphetamine salts (dextro-amphetamine sulfate, dextroamphetamine saccharate, racemic amphetamine aspartate monohydrate, and racemic amphetamine sul­fate), which provide a 3:1 ratio of d-amphetamine to l-amphetamine" - 17519073

2007 - The impact of the withdrawal of Adderall XR (long-acting mixed amphetamine salts) from the Canadian market on paediatric patients and their families - (see title), "In February 2005, the proprietary medication Adderall XR (Shire BioChem Inc, Canada) (mixed amphetamine/dextroamphetamine salts) was withdrawn from the Canadian market by Health Canada (3)" - 19030388

2008/2009 - Simulated driving changes in young adults with ADHD receiving mixed amphetamine salts extended release and atomoxetine - (see title), "This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study of simulated driving performance with mixed amphetamine salts-extended release (MAS XR) 50 mg/day (Cohort 1) and atomoxetine 80 mg/day (Cohort 2) in young adults with ADHD", "Under current guidelines, treatment with psychostimulants (e.g., methylphenidate or mixed amphetamine salts [MAS]) is the recommended first-line pharmacologic treatment, with the nonstimulant atomoxetine considered first line for patients with an active substance abuse problem, comorbid anxiety, tics, or severe side effects with stimulants (Pliszka et al., 2007)" - 18815438

2009 - Effects of omeprazole on the pharmacokinetic profiles of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and extended-release mixed amphetamine salts in adults - (see title), "To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), a long-acting prodrug stimulant, and mixed amphetamine salts extended-release (MAS XR), alone or with omeprazole, a proton pump inhibitor (PPI)" - 19820270

2010 - The mixed amphetamine salt extended release (Adderall XR, Max-XR) as an adjunctive to SSRIS or SNRIS in the treatment of adult ADHD patients with comorbid partially responsive generalized anxiety: an open-label study - (see title), "To examine the changes in partially responsive anxiety symptoms utilizing adjunctive treatment with the mixed amphetamine salt extended release (Adderall XR, MAX-XR) in the treatment of adult ADHD patients, with comorbid refractory anxiety" - 21432593

2011 - Amphetamines for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in adults (a Cochrane review!) - "The three amphetamine derivatives investigated (dextroamphetamine, lisdexamphetamine and mixed amphetamine salts (MAS)) were all efficacious for reducing ADHD symptoms, but MAS also increased retention in treatment" - 21678370

2011 - Medication adherence and symptom reduction in adults treated with mixed amphetamine salts in a randomized crossover study - (see title), "The study objectives were to 1) evaluate medication adherence for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treated with 3 times daily (TID) mixed amphetamine salts immediate release (MAS IR) versus once-daily (qAM) MAS extended release (MAS XR) in a randomized, crossover study; and 2) to examine the associations between adherence and efficacy for MAS IR and MAS XR" - 21904088

2011 - Dose effects and comparative effectiveness of extended release dexmethylphenidate and mixed amphetamine salts - (see title), "To compare the dose effects of long-acting extended-release dexmethylphenidate (ER d-MPH) and ER mixed amphetamine salts (ER MAS) on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptom dimensions, global and specific impairments, and common adverse events associated with stimulants", "For the two stimulant medications, we chose Dexmethylphenidate Hydrochloride ER (Focalin XR [brand name], here referred to as d-MPH ER) and Adderall XR (mixed AMP salts [MAS] ER). MAS ER is a racemic mixture of dextro- and levo-isomers of AMP salts that contains 50% IR MAS and 50% delivered at a second pulse 4 hours later. MAS ER is one of the most frequently prescribed stimulant medications for ADHD (Olfson, Marcus and Wan 2009)" - 22136094

2012 - Comparative treatment patterns, resource utilization, and costs in stimulant-treated children with ADHD who require subsequent pharmacotherapy with atypical antipsychotics versus non-antipsychotics - "To compare treatment patterns, resource utilization, and costs to U.S. third party payers between stimulant-treated ADHD children who switch to or augment their stimulant treatment with AAPs (risperidone, aripiprazole, quetiapine, olanzapine, ziprasidone, paliperidone, and clozapine) compared with non-antipsychotic medications (atomoxetine, clonidine immediate-release (IR), guanfacine IR, dexmethylphenidate, mixed amphetamine salts, methylphenidate, lisdexamfetamine, and dextroamphetamine)" - 23206211

2012 - The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) task force recommendations for the management of patients with mood disorders and comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - "Bupropion is a reasonable first-line treatment for BD+ADHD, while mixed amphetamine salts and methylphenidate also may be considered in patients determined to be at low risk for manic switch", "First-line pharmacotherapeutic options for adult ADHD recommended by the Canadian ADHD Resource Alliance (CADDRA)14 and the British Association for Psychopharmacology99 include long-acting preparations of mixed amphetamine salts (MAS), methylphenidate, and atomoxetine" - 22303520

2013 - Objective and subjective cognitive enhancing effects of mixed amphetamine salts in healthy people - (see title), "Psychostimulants such as mixed amphetamine salts (MAS, brand name Adderall) are widely used for cognitive enhancement by healthy young people, yet laboratory research on effectiveness has yielded variable results", "20 mg of mixed amphetamine salts (sulfate salts of dextroamphetamine and amphetamine, with the dextro isomer of amphetamine saccharate and D, Lamphetamine aspartate monohydrate, with D-amphetamine and L-amphetamine in 3:1 ratio) and placebo were administered in visually indistinguishable capsules" - 22884611

2013 - Potential trends in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) drug use on a college campus: wastewater analysis of amphetamine and ritalinic acid - "The most widely used ADHD medications are the amphetamine-type compounds Adderall (mixed amphetamine salts) and Ritalin (methylphenidate)" (although this study does use the brand-name over MAS in the text, which seems to be a first so far, with other studies strongly preferring MAS) - 23500822

2014 - Safety of medicines used for ADHD in children: a review of published prospective clinical trials - "The drugs studied were atomoxetine (two studies, 802 patients), osmotic-controlled released oral methylphenidate formulation (two studies, 512 patients), extended release formulation of mixed amphetamine salts (one study, 568 patients) and transdermal methylphenidate (one study, 326 patients)", "Tics were reported in all long-term studies regarding methylphenidate, while emotional lability was reported only with mixed amphetamine salts" - 24748641

2014 - Dopamine transporter genotype and stimulant dose-response in youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - "This study seeks to determine if variation in the dopamine transporter gene (SLC6A3/DAT1) moderates the dose-response effects of long-acting dexmethylphenidate (D-MPH) and mixed amphetamine salts (MAS) in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)" - 24813374

2015 - Extended-Release Mixed Amphetamine Salts vs Placebo for Comorbid Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Cocaine Use Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial - (see title), "One hundred twenty-six adults diagnosed as having comorbid ADHD and cocaine use disorder were randomized to extended-release mixed amphetamine salts or placebo" - 25887096

This is just a selection anyways, nowhere near all of the research, I only included a sampling of the most major studies over time. It excludes quite a bit of literature with less direct usage, including countless mentions in literature on methylphenidate (I've read quite a bit of it). Basically, the usage of MAS is extremely common, and it is the defacto generic name for Adderall among researchers.

The Canadian product monograph for ADDERALL XR (Canada) calls it "mixed salts amphetamine". The US monograph calls it "mixed salts of a single-entity amphetamine product" and "mixed amphetamine salts".

The terms "amphetamine mixed salts", "amphetamine salts", "dextroamphetamine saccharate and amphetamine aspartate monohydrate and dextroamphetamine sulfate and amphetamine sulfate", "amphetamine/dextroamphetamine mixed salts", "dextroamphetamine mixed salts of a single-entity amphetamine product", etc -- none of these are widely-adopted at all for this kind of usage, although pharmacies may use the second one commonly (I'm not completely sure), and they are often used in certain cases where long-form is fine. But the terms that are most frequently used? "Mixed Amphetamine Salts", "mixed salts of a single-entity amphetamine product", and (possibly) "mixed salts amphetamine".

Now, "Adderall" is widely-known, short, etc. But WP:PHARMOS does not support using it, and neither does WP:NAMINGCRITERIA.

In the previous discussion, the issue of recognizability and naturalness is brought up, along with conciseness. As far as conciseness goes, this is no longer an issue with the new definition, unlike with previous definitions. "Mixed Amphetamine Salts" is concise. It is also fairly recognizable and natural. You may argue that most people are going to be familiar with the brand name, but that is true of almost any drug! There are endless examples of drugs where the brand name is much better recognized than the generic.

Here's some research on how clinicians use names:

pubmed 17443372 - "For 20 commonly used drugs, the median frequency of brand name use was 98% (interquartile range, 81-100%). Among 12 medications with no generic competition at the time of the survey, the median frequency of brand name use was 100% (range 92-100%). Among 8 medications with generic competition at the time of the survey ("multisource" drugs), the median frequency of brand name use was 79% (range 0-98%; P < .001 for difference between drugs with and without generic competition). Physicians refer to most medications by their brand names, including drugs with generic formulations. This may lead to higher health care costs by promoting the use of brand-name products when generic alternatives are available."

pubmed 17443372 - "Physicians may prefer brand names for a variety of reasons. Brand names are often more memorable or evocative than generic names and easier to pronounce (in our sample, brand names had on average 1.5 fewer syllables than their generic counterparts).7 Many physicians may be familiar only with the brand name of certain drugs or unaware of the correspondence between generic and brand names.8–10 In addition, in certain cases physicians may believe that generic formulations are not as effective as the brand name product.11 Although the interchangeability of certain drugs remains a matter of debate,12 many physicians may not be aware of the strict controls imposed by FDA to prove bioequivalence before a generic formulation can be approved.13"

pubmed 19261956 - "In 1993/1994, the 25 most commonly mentioned drugs were referred to by their brand names a median of 89% of the time. Over the ensuing decade, use of brand-name terminology decreased by a median of 11%. Drugs that first faced generic competition within 10 years of the baseline study year had large declines in brand-name use (43-58% decline), whereas drugs that first faced generic competition more than 10 years before or after the baseline study year had minimal change in brand-name use (2-3% decline; p = 0.02 for difference in rate of decline among drug groups). Year of drug introduction, baseline rate of brand-name use, clinical setting, and national region were not associated with reductions in brand-name use.""

I have numerous examples that'd fall under WP:OR, so I won't include them, but I hope it's pretty clear just how common the use of brand names is and how well recognized they are vs generics. I've spent too much time on this already to research further, but I'd be surprised if there isn't more research on consumer recognition and usage of brand names out there that'd back this up even more strongly.

My argument is basically that you cannot use the lack of a INN/USAN as justification to use the brand name -- this is not at all consistent with other drug articles. Yes, it's a semi-unique case, but even then, consistency demands the use of the accepted generic name, which appears to be either "Mixed Amphetamine Salts" or "mixed salts of a single-entity amphetamine product", with the former having better evidence to support its use, but the latter being slightly more official due to its use in FDA documents and the monograph. There is no remaining justification for the continued use of Adderall. As with other drugs, a redirect from Adderall to the correct page name should be created, and that is more than enough to address the issue of it being more familiar to people -- this is what every other drug article does about brand names.

So, here's my arguments, my evidence to support the usage of "Mixed Amphetamine Salts", etc. I think this makes a very strong case for the name change. Garzfoth (talk) 01:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Excuse me if I'm being simplistic, but my understanding is that Adderall is a mixed amphetamine salt, but a mixed amphetamine salt is not necessarily identical to Adderall. I'm not just referring to current drugs, but also those that could be developed in the future. Sundayclose (talk) 01:29, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
True, but with some limitations. Adderall formulations are the only approved forms of Mixed Amphetamine Salts in existence, and will likely remain that way long-term. In the event that some other form of mixed salts is approved in the future, the page could extend to cover both drugs (which is pretty viable IMO), or another solution could be worked out, but that isn't a current concern. Given the widespread usage of MAS in the literature (usually preferred over the brand name), it's clear that the naming is widely accepted/used with little concern for conflicts. There's a lot of methylphenidate formulations, but we only have one page to cover all of them despite the large differences between methylphenidate formulations. Garzfoth (talk) 03:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Special:Permalink/682022807#Changing Title Back to "Amphetamine Mixed Salts" Seppi333 (Insert ) 03:08, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Methylphenidate is a generic name, which is why all the formulations can be included in one article. Thanks for bringing this up for discussion, but I think the title should remain as it is. This is a unique situation that requires a unique solution, not using a title that may at some point be inaccurate or obsolete. Sundayclose (talk) 13:56, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Clearly 'Mixed amphetamine salts' has some usage in literature as Garzfoth has quite extensively documented above. Since this isn't the official generic name, the question is whether 'Amphetamine mixed salts' is represented more in literature than 'Adderall'. I am inclined to believe 'Adderall' is more prevalently used, although I am open to numbers showing otherwise. Sizeofint (talk) 17:34, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Actually MAS may be more commonly used in research literature because researchers try not to use brand names. It is not incorrect for a researcher to use MAS if Adderall is studied because Adderall is a MAS. But it would be potentially inaccurate, in my opinion, to title a Wikipedia article on Adderall "Mixed amphetamine salts" because there could be MAS drugs that are not Adderall. Sundayclose (talk) 19:33, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
This discussion gives me the urge to facepalm.
But WP:PHARMOS does not support using it, and neither does WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. - I have no clue what this is referring to in either of these policies. MOS:MED/MOS:PHARM were revised after the previous discussion closed to ensure exceptional drug articles with brand name titles like Heroin and Adderall don't have to follow their nonproprietary names in the title.
AMS and MAS are both names for the generic formulation. They are not nonproprietary names for Adderall. As for pubmed prevalence, 95 pubmed articles include the term "mixed amphetamine salts" and 0 include the term "amphetamine mixed salts" while 177 include the term "Adderall". In practice, I've never seen the AMS or MAS terms used outside of pubmed. Seppi333 (Insert ) 19:43, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Edit: and 178 articles include the term "Obetrol" Obetrol is apparently indexed to "Adderall" on pubmed. Seppi333 (Insert ) 19:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Good grief! I thought the previous discussion put this issue to rest. My biggest problem with the name "amphetamine mixed salts" is that it is imprecise. Yes, generally we have only one article to represent different formulations of the same drug. However we also have different articles to represent racemic mixtures or optically pure versions of the same parent compound. Adderall is special case which is neither racemic nor optically pure but optically enriched. Furthermore the ratio of enantiomers in the mixture does result in subtle but none-the-less important pharmacological differences. The precise generic name for Adderall is "dextroamphetamine saccharate, amphetamine aspartate monohydrate, dextroamphetamine sulfate and amphetamine sulfate" which is way too long to be used as an article name. The only practical way to name this article is Adderall. Boghog (talk) 20:20, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

This may settle the debate over the generalizability of MAS: pubmed 25973928 - "Amphetamine (AMP) drug substance refers to the racemic 1:1 mixture of two enantiomers with central nervous system stimulant activity: dextroamphetamine [D-AMP; S-AMP (IUPAC)] and levoamphetamine [L-AMP; R-AMP (IUPAC)]. Mixed AMP salts (MAS) products are nonracemic combinations of four salts in a 1:1:1:1 ratio (by weight): D-AMP sulfate, D-AMP saccharate, AMP aspartate, and AMP sulfate. The ratio of D-AMP salts to L-AMP salts in MAS products is 3:1, whereas the ratio of base D-AMP to base L-AMP is approximately 3.15:1. This combination of AMP salts was approved for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Adderall IR (NDA 11522) is an immediate-release (IR) tablet formulation of MAS, and Adderall XR (NDA 21303) is an oral formulation of MAS consisting of two types of pellets in the ratio of 1:1 (in terms of drug load) in a gelatin capsule: an IR pellet and a delayed release (DR) pellet.6" Garzfoth (talk) 20:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Is this typical usage of the terms or are these just definitions for the purposes of that paper? Sizeofint (talk) 22:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
That is not clarified explicitly, but given that this is a publication produced by FDA researchers and classified as U.S. Government work, the explicit definitions of MAS products used here are extremely significant to this discussion. Garzfoth (talk) 01:05, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
There are two problems with that argument. First, the FDA position does not necessarily represent a world view and the scope of Wikipedia is wider than the U.S. Second, the FDA has arbitrarily defined amphetamine mixed salts as identical to Adderall. There are an infinite number of possible mixed salts of amphetamine. Adderall is only one. Boghog (talk) 19:09, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Adderall is marketed exclusively or almost exclusively in the United States (and to a limited extent, Canada). It's unclear if it's actually available to any significant degree outside of these two countries, there's enough supporting evidence to strongly suspect the drug is literally not marketed internationally at all! Thus the US-centric view is more than appropriate here, in fact, it is the only appropriate view to take here, as we are the only country where this drug is marketed and sold. The use of generic names is intended to remove the specific formulation-drug ties, hence, a mixed amphetamine salts article would cover any mixed amphetamine salts products in the same way that the methylphenidate article covers any methylphenidate products. This is exactly the current usage of wikipedia. The action of Concerta is substantially different to the action of Ritalin, but as both use methylphenidate as the active ingredient, they do not get separate articles. The method and action of bupropion differs substantially with formulation, but we don't have separate articles for IR/SR/XL, nor do we for Zyban. The same applies to any generic drug or just any drug with multiple release forms. We only have separate articles under certain conditions. The split of this article out of the amphetamine article is justified on the basis that the mixed amphetamine salts formulation is a separate entity from the generalized superset of amphetamine pharmaceutical products, which includes lisdexamfetamine, dextroamphetamine, and even methamphetamine. It now includes racemic amphetamine too, which did not get its own article, although that may be an issue worth addressing. At any rate, I am not really disputing the legitimacy of having an article for MAS, I am disputing the legitimacy of considering Adderall to be a specific MAS formulation deserving its own article when the generic term always applies to numerous possible formulations, many of which differ substantially in their effects! Your argument rests on the assumption that we cannot consider MAS to be a generic name due to its broadness, but the only reason for this that you have been able to produce is a hypothetical new formulation of amphetamine salts that also uses the name MAS, which would either just fall under this page anyways due to the use of MAS, or not use the name MAS in the first place due to MAS being very firmly defined as the 1:1:1:1 mixture of specific amphetamine salts.
It is also noteworthy that in this particular document relating to Adderall XR, the "Established Name" is defined as "Mixed Amphetamine Salts". In this letter, Adderall is again defined as "mixed amphetamine salts". This noteworthy document demonstrates that MAS is considered the generic term for equivalent products. This older document shows the FDA's use of MAS alongside the lengthier "mixed~salts of a single entity amphetamine product" definition (followed by using it throughout the document instead of the longer definition", which is also interesting for defining that any non-equivalent formulations of amphetamine salts would require another ANDA -- which does not mean that the same generic name could even be used, and if so, if it would be any different from the usage of the same generic name for multiple branded drugs that is widespread. We have no evidence to support the claim that another drug would use the same brand name, and we have no justification to split apart the drug pages in the unlikely event of that happening. This is in part an issue that the FDA would be expected to handle, and the way they handle it would have a significant impact on how the naming of this article could function. We still do not have anything to support not combining multiple MAS drugs with different ratios -- especially as there are multiple amphetamine formulations covered under single pages. The only difference is that there may be a different change in the pharmacological action with different ratios -- but how is this different from the changes depending on release mechanism? I'm not denying the difference, I'm just saying that it's not substantial enough to not combine these hypothetical drugs into a single article, and that it should be treated no differently from brand names of other generic drugs.
Sorry, this turned into a whole wall of text, it's hard to explain this clearly. I can see your argument, but I don't agree that it works here, especially given how broadly acknowledged the term "mixed amphetamine salts" is by the FDA and in the literature, including in many many major papers, a Cochrane review, publications from Shire employees, etc. The papers that do not immediately cite MAS when citing Adderall have an entirely different composition to the ones that do, and many only show that the use of the brand name is popular among clinicians, and as the research I included earlier shows, clinicians suffer from a universal brand-name bias. This also applies to other users who are not familiar with the field, who revert to the brand name -- and much of the research papers where the only mention of Adderall is in passing, and it is notable that a large number of these are also using the brand names for other drugs (especially stimulant drugs), indicating that the use of brand names over generics is not exclusive to Adderall in many cases. Widespread usage of a brand name by this population is not a counterpoint, as this is common with drugs, and the usage of only brand names for these papers (both in not defining/using an Adderall generic name, and in only using brand names for multiple mentioned drugs) is supportive of this view. As I have quite extensively illustrated in my initial post (which was close to thirty-thousand character and contained an extremely impressive slice of the research literature), MAS is the accepted generic name in a very large amount of high quality literature across a long span of time. A crucial point from the literature I mentioned is that the term MAS is usually used in place of the brand name with few exceptions, indicating that not only is it the generic name, but it is the preferred name for researchers! This is important too, because the other potential generic names are NOT preferred by researchers in this way in other literature, they are only mentioned in passing and are not used further. Again, it's important to highlight the drastically different composition of the literature not using MAS, as well as the differences in how brand names are used in this set of research, especially in cases where other drugs are defined by brand names too.
I could go on and on about this... The contrast between the two groups of literature is stark. I will admit that it illustrates the widespread usage of the brand name among the broader population, but it fails to disprove that MAS is the preferred generic term, and most importantly, it does not allow you to claim that Adderall should be used over MAS because this usage difference is no different from any other case of a drug name vs a drug generic! This is a major point -- we do NOT name wikipedia articles solely to attract the largest number of people for a large number of reasons, because if we did, every other drug article would not be using the generic name. Methylphenidate is a good example once again, as most people know it as Ritalin or Concerta. Wellbutrin is a pretty good example (I think I already mentioned this), there are countless others, Vyvanse is a particularly good illustration of a case where the generic name is rarely used and will likely never become frequently used, yet we name it lisdexamfetamine all the same. Poorer but quick examples I can think of include certain antidepressants (Prozac, Zoloft, Lexapro, Luvox, Celexa, Paxil, Cymbalta, Effexor (this is a good example), etc), a number of PPIs (Nexium, Prevacid, Prilosec, Losec, etc), antipsychotics (Abilify, Geodon, Invega, Latuda, Risperdal, Seroquel, Zyprexa, Thorazine, etc), drugs like Viagra/Cialis, a number of benzos (Xanax, Ativan, Klonopin, Valium, etc), Z-drugs (Ambien, Lunesta, etc), AEDs/mood stabilizers (Lamictal, Topamax, Depakote, Keppra, etc), and that's just a tiny slice of the drugs out there focusing primarily on psych/neuro drugs... I know that Adderall is a slightly different case, and that the usage of the brand name is somewhat unusually prolific with it, but the difference does not justify this, the same policy should apply, especially so given that this drug has been available as a generic for so long. We should not be using a brand name over a generic name whenever possible, and this drug is far different from the very rare exceptions to the policy of using generic names. I strongly dispute the claim that usage of the brand name in any way supports using Adderall.
So... Why not go with Mixed Amphetamine Salts? Like methylphenidate (MPH), it has a useful shorthand form (MAS). It's very well supported by certain major sources, much more so than any other generic name or even the brand name itself. The argument that popularity alone overrules this fails in light of the countless drugs where the generic name is used irregardless of how popular it is or is not, establishing quite firmly that this should not be a consideration here when we have evidence supporting this broadly-accepted generic name. We may not have a USAN or INN to guide the naming of the article, so this is a unique case, but it is my view that we should handle this unique case by using the name that the FDA had defined as the "Established Name", the name used by so many widespread sources, by researchers behind the most major papers (representing a large chunk of the literature), by a Cochrane review, by publications from Shire employees, by the FDA itself, and by numerous third-parties too... It appears to be a drug that is only available in US/CA, so international issues do not even apply, and in particular there are no issues with using the FDA as a major source.
So anyways, there's my response. Garzfoth (talk) 17:02, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
TL;DR If you have something to say, say it succinctly. Boghog (talk) 18:41, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
He summarizes his argument in the last paragraph. Sizeofint (talk) 19:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for mentioning that Sizeofint, I suppose that does summarize most of it. Boghog, it's like 1600 words, that shouldn't take too long to read, and I covered a lot of stuff in the detail it needed rather than making inaccurate oversimplifications. Don't use Tl;Dr as an excuse, that's complete bullshit here. Garzfoth (talk) 21:16, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Is Adderall a psychoactive drug itself or a mixture of psychoactive drugs?[edit]

@Sundayclose, Seppi333, and Garzfoth: With this diff I proposed identifying Adderall as a mixture of salts of levoamphetamine and dextroamphetamine rather than as a psychoactive drug. Sundayclose subsequently reverted so I am opening this discussion. Possibly this is splitting hairs but I am under the impression that Adderall refers to a specific mixture of amphetamine salts. Adderall being psychoactive follows from it containing these salts. Hence dextroamphetamine and levoamphetamine are the psychoactive drugs in Adderall while Adderall refers to mixture. Essentially it is the difference between whether Adderall "is" a psychoactive drug or Adderall "contains" psychoactive drugs. Sizeofint (talk) 19:17, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

I reverted your edit and accidentally did not leave an edit summary (apologies). I reverted for two reasons. First, you removed "a psychostimulant drug of the phenethylamine class", and there is no reason to remove it. "Psychostimulant of the phenethylamine class" should remain regardless of whether we call it a drug or a mixture. Secondly, Adderall is considered a brand-name drug by the U.S. FDA and should be identified as a drug. Other drug mixtures are identified by their brand-name rather than their individual components (e.g., Percocet). There's no reason Adderall should be an exception. Thanks for discussing here. Sundayclose (talk) 21:55, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay, I agree with the first reason, we should definitely make sure to include that bit. However, you are completely wrong about how drug mixtures are handled, and your comment is actually extremely relevant given what I was discussing above in the renaming section, it's a great example that just reinforces my point even further. Garzfoth (talk) 23:08, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
I cut that portion because it is in the relevant constituent drug articles but the article can be phrased to keep it. Percocet is in bad shape but we currently never explicitly identify it as a drug. Currently the drug article says drugs are [[chemical substance]s which are differentiated from mixtures. It may be there is a technical sense to the word drug referring to chemical substances and a colloquial sense referring to chemical substances and mixtures. In any case I think we should stay consistent with the drug article. There is also combination drug which would seem to apply here given the fixed ratio. Sizeofint (talk) 02:11, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
You're correct Sizeofint, Adderall is a drug product but not a drug, so the current version is clearly wrong. Garzfoth (talk) 23:27, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't feel strongly about the drug vs. mixture issue, so I don't object if someone wants to change it. Sundayclose (talk) 00:47, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Adderall is a drug. Adderall is a drug product. Adderall is psychoactive. Let's not be overly pedantic. Seppi333 (Insert ) 06:15, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Use in e-sports as performance enhancer[edit]

Now that it is becoming a common controversy in e-sports, I think it should be noted under the Performance enhancing section that some professional e-sports players have also been using Aderrall as a performance enhancer.

Citations to one known incident regarding a counter-strike e-sports team being on Aderral

Wightwulf1944 (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

That's excessive for this article. Discuss this at Talk:Amphetamine, which is the article linked in the Adderall article. And generally for a medical article, popular press articles about one incident don't meet the guidelines at WP:MEDRS. Sundayclose (talk) 16:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adderall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY Archived sources have been checked to be working

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:27, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Adderall[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Adderall's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Adderall IR":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 08:27, 18 July 2016 (UTC)