What I do then is to observe myself making the list, or to observe the thoughts involved in making the list as they swim past me.
This could lead to an infinite chain, where I then observe myself observing and so on. But with practice and methods beyond normal thought and expression, that can fade into nothingness.
Sometimes I wonder if my “advanced” meditation skills from a decade of training is just what neurotypicals always experience when they meditate, even with just like 10 times of “practice”.
I know it’s not what you asked, but for when size does not matter (e. g. nap at home), I just use the big over-ear things for construction workers. Very cheap and very effective.
I recurring problem is that I keep thinking “It’s just 3 things, plus that other one that happens on the way to #2 anyway, no need to write a list”. Then I keep wondering why I fall behind.
Only when I make a list, I realise how much there is to do, and that my plan is entirely impossible for one day!
On the other hand, it’s surprising how even the biggest “backlog” melts away like snow when I really do one backlog thing per day. In addition to “the dailies”, of course.
Well, overall, I’m glad about the hoarding, because on treatment, I actually work through that 4 year stack of put off tasks, and it’s very satisfying.
Wow, so different for everybody! For me, it went from the feeling of giving myself a cigarette burn to “eager to start”.
Yes, essential. I like to do it in an electronic mindmap, so in order to have it always visible, I needed to attach an extra screen where it’s always visible.
“Mental effort” to get on the task that needs to be done is a different matter. I still needed to push through the pain to star. That got much better with treatment.
Like the whiteboard though; not as easy to shift things around and make changes, but advantages might outweigh that.
afaik, 25µg D3 in combination with 20µg K2 should cover it in theory, even when there is hardly any natural source. Some supplement nerds have some reasoning for 100µg, which is near the upper bound of “harmless”.
Much more than that can be quite dangerous, though! One drop of the stuff I have is 25, so it’s not just theoretical.
EDEKA are the ones where too much is harmful.
Magnesium, D and Omega 3 are, as far as I know, all things where you gain a lot if you have a deficit that they compensate, otherwise nothing.
I too took shots in the dark, as I didn’t find a doc who was willing to do some more tests. But recently I found out that in some countries, you can just go to a lab directly and they’ll draw the blood.
Currently on Magnesium, too (Carbonate though), paused the D due to long times in the sun recently, Omega 3 currently through engineered staple foods & rape oil.
Doesn’t seem to be that much evidence, but I’m in the mood for a new supplement obsession - on it!
I got to get back there, too. I lived like that for a decade, back then no clue that ADHD was one of the main problems, and it seemed to help. But due to lack of “evidence” & a diagnostic that requires this, I slipped up. Now I’m the average eater with some good, some bad parts of the diet.
My diet was a kind of “low carb”, but not in the strict sense that it’s much lower than recommended, just much lower than the average sinner.
p.s.: argh, typed this over 12 hours ago and just found this open page. It’s clearly not working. But here we go anyway:
That is smart! Could also do a reverse-challenge: The goal is to write something worse than anything that has has ever been turned in to that teacher. “teecha has a stoopit” (but don’t forget to delete)
Brian Tracy mentioned a similar trick for his shady cold calls business: A reward to the first employee who gets a rejection every morning, with a bell and everything.
On top of what’s been said: People will suddenly spawn right next to you and start talking, seemingly mid-sentence. Your thoughts will be interrupted, errors will increase, and on top of all that, they expect the right response.
It’s hell, at least for me. Try it if you want.
Great advice that works for many, including myself!
Even if you don’t get into the flow and do a single pomodoro session per day, a lot will be gained over 1 year, 5 years, 10 years. A degree 3 or 5 years later is much better than no degree.
The time put in is a huge factor, even when it’s done “all wrong”.
I achieved a lot in terms of studying and failed a lot in other areas.
Ask yourself: Counting only focussed, undistracted studying, do you achieve significantly less IN THE SAME STUDYING TIME than your peers? If the answer is “no”, improve your method. If “yes”, you will need to put in a few extra years, but do keep going!
Hit that problem with methods. There are tons of methods that work for some, don’t work for others. Pomodoro, X-effect, habit building, Leitner system etc.
Some things are completely uneffected by ADHD, for example building habits. The prefrontal cortex is not involved in that.
I use pomodoro, and I’m super strict about it. Here is my old comment: https://lemmy.ml/post/24026788/15853247
It’s good that you have that method in the library! I’d say keep it as it is, don’t water it down. Those special focussed sessions will help you a lot. But it should not be an excuse like “I can’t do the library thing today, so I do nothing”.
Instead, for situations where you can’t, maybe try my method. Think of it like squid game: Players have 10 minutes to study as hard as they can, then the ones with the lowest relative gain are culled. You’d rather pee in your pants than go to the toilet, and you’d not look at your phone when it makes a noise during that time. Maybe you can start with 25 instead of 10 right away, up to you.
Don’t get put off by false perfectionism. There was a group fight in the barracks last night, you haven’t showered in days, you didn’t drink enough, you got hit on the head and feel dizzy - better put those 10 minutes to good use anyway and survive another game!
I show up to appointments with a structured list only. Downside: Every GP thought that, whatever I have, it’s certainly NOT ADHD.
I always have the feeling that there is “no time” to start in the beginning. “I SHOULD know that already”, “I’ll pick it up on the way”, “It’d take too long to start there” and other excuses.
But experience tells a different story: When I dare to start at the very beginning, no matter how small, it often lead to great success, while jumping into the middle never got me anywhere.
In your concrete situation with programming: After getting a grasp with BASIC and Pascal in the late 80s, I wanted to learn Assembly and really understand it. And so I did. And it was not wasted time. (Except for macro assembler, aimed at really using it for big projects; could have skipped through that and just used the old MS-DOS debug tool.) Some of my most fond memories with the PC were not fancy UIs I developed, but how I wrote a 10 byte long program directly into the MBR of a floppy disc and booted from it to execute it, without loading any OS.
Later with C, C++, Java, I also focussed on the core language and libraries, only then moved on to UIs and big frameworks. And it did me a great service once more. I notice people around me who skipped through the Java fundamentals in less than a week and got right into a big framework - even 10 years after, they have odd misconceptions and knowledge gaps that hinder their development.
But I also respect that there are different approaches that work better for other people.
You could also go a middle way, for example: Set a weekday that is for “core research”. But don’t try to “wing it”, won’t work. It needs to be an automated reminder on your calendar, a differently marked column on your habit tracker, whatever you use.
Interesting insight! I travelled the same road in the other direction. As someone who loves science, I always saw my role as a patient to just report symptoms and let the doctors do their thing. And I’m sure this would be the ideal approach if everybody had the House M.D. team on their case.
But after decades of this failing, I realised that this method does not work with a real-world medical system where doctors have more bias than they should, work with methods from their studying days that assumed they had more time and resources per case, and wrong monetary incentives.
So Method 1: I say I have X, and make it clear that I’ll be a PITA if their test doesn’t confirm it. If there were no bias, there would be no harm to this, but if there is, it’s working to my advantage now.
Method 2: Just think of them as the idiot who is clueless but gatekeeper of the much wanted prescription.
Nobody wants to hear this, but a layman’s web research, LLM and 1000 hours of thinking often beats 10 years of medical training if the doctor interrupts the patient after 20 seconds and only thinks about the case for 5 minutes. (With 30 minutes, my money would be back on the trained professional, but nobody has 30 minutes.) A patient can also fixate on a premature assumption just like a doctor can, but my very subjective experience is that doctors are more prone to that.