ADHD Is Not a Superpower

The essay argues against framing ADHD as a “superpower,” while treating it as a useful clinical label rather than a condition with a single definitive biological marker. Its opening example illustrates how diagnosed groups can include people whose difficulties stem from sleep disorders, depression, poor health, other diagnoses, or misdiagnosis; those cases can distort research findings. ADHD is defined through persistent inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity across settings, with evidence of childhood symptoms, but the author emphasizes that these criteria serve practical diagnostic purposes. The essay describes ADHD as highly heritable yet distributed along a continuum, and cautions that observed associations may reflect both biology and who gets diagnosed.

The case against celebrating ADHD rests on its reported genetic links with depression, lower IQ, excess weight, poor health, and insomnia; the author also cites evidence that treatment with stimulants improves functioning and life satisfaction, and that associated rare genetic variants increase risk. Hyperfocus is acknowledged as a possible advantage when a task is engaging, but many important goals also require tedious work, delayed rewards, and persistence. The essay rejects broad claims that mental illness produces genius: instability may contribute to original ideas, but discipline and steadiness help turn ideas into finished work. It also disputes treating ADHD as a personality or rebellious identity, arguing that many people with the condition want to complete tasks but struggle to do so, with difficulties extending into areas such as finances, fitness, and happiness.