Viewers have complained in their droves over Channel 4's latest documentary, The Great ADHD Myth, branding it "shameful and dangerous". In the programme, which aired last night, Dr Max Pemberton argued that the medical condition was a "social construct", suggesting that schools should support those with symptoms, instead of medicating them.
One-child experiment
Producers included just one child to highlight the "advantages" of coming off of ADHD medication for six weeks in an experiment - which ultimately failed. Child psychologist Dr Sami Timimi also compared the drugs to hitting youngsters with a cane. Mason, 10, was volunteered for the experiment by his mum, who claimed that he lost his "sparkle" after being put on medication - but conceded that his school report had improved since he was medicated.
Only medical experts who agreed that ADHD was a "myth" were featured in the footage, while Dr Pemberton explained that he wanted to explore the explosion in diagnoses being made, after previously suggesting that the condition was "now wildly over-diagnosed" in a 2024 article for The Spectator. "I wanted to understand why," he told the cameras. "There's no doubt that the people seeking these diagnoses are genuinely struggling; that isn't in question. What the film asks is whether ADHD is really the best explanation for that struggle - my hope is that we come away with permission to ask better questions about what modern life is doing to all of us."
Viewer backlash
Many watching on from home were left furious over the show - which is expected to spark an Ofcom storm - and flocked to social media to unpack the scenes. Taking to Twitter, one posted: "I’ve never seen anything more one-sided before in my life this is barely scientific, incorrect and dangerous rhetoric that is going to do more harm to individuals with ADHD #TheGreatADHDMyth."
"Presenter talking about using different methods to medication to treat it and skeptical," another fumed. "The CHOSEN 'experts' all flat out saying it's all made up and bad science and it's just kids being kids. No balance whatsoever. Such a poor program. #TheGreatADHDMyth [sic]." A viewer questioned: "What a strange thing to say 'medication doesn't cure ADHD, but masks symptoms'. Isn't that what most medication does, including those for physical health problems? #thegreatADHDmyth."
"Erm… excuse me. Did I hear that right? He explicitly said ADHD is a myth. WOW @Channel4 you should be absolutely ashamed for airing this about an already potentially vulnerable group of people. SHAME on you. #TheGreatADHDMyth," a Twitter user complained. "Absolutely appauling documentary about ADHD," a follower added. "Completely one sided, a ‘test’ on one child that just failed in many ways. Where was the wider demographic, older adults, different generations with ADHD to discuss it. #thegreatadhdmyth [sic]."
Charity criticism and Channel 4 defence
Before The Great ADHD Myth aired, Henry Shelford, chief executive of charity ADHD UK, spoke to the Mirror about his fears over the programme, slamming it as "sensationalist nonsense". "I wish Channel 4 had done what they did for the menopause with Davina McCall, or for dyslexia with Jamie Oliver," he said. "They did shows which were trying to demolish the myths, whereas this show is trying to exacerbate myths. It’s a shame they didn’t do what they are often so good at which is getting a deeper understanding of the reality of an issue using experts who are leaders in their field. We wouldn’t have The Menopause Myth or The Dyslexia Myth or The Migraine Myth, so why this? It shows the prejudice and the stigma around ADHD."
Henry shared that around 80% of users have reacted positively to ADHD medication, adding: "It pretends to be science-led but compares a sample size of one (10-year-old Mason) to the experience of millions and it obfuscates the truth by spending an hour building a story of a child not needing medication by doing yoga and forest walks and having less screen time and then at the end, through epilogue text, admits that the child struggled in school. So the actual conclusion is that the child did need ADHD medication after all and that their interventions didn’t work. If this was science-led that would have been the story - but it isn’t, because this isn’t science."
Channel 4 bosses defended the documentary in a statement, saying it had "a remit to stimulate public debate and challenge the status quo". The statement added: "There is considerable public debate in this area and testing conventional thinking and exploring different ideas, as is the case with The ADHD Myth? Is a legitimate part of Channel 4’s remit. Channel 4 has also aired a number of other programmes on the topic of ADHD, which cover a variety of other viewpoints including: Do You Have ADHD?, Johnny Vegas: Art, ADHD & Me and Sam Thompson: Is This ADHD?"
