Take a look at the diagnostic criteria for ADD. There's nothing in them that doesn't involve observing someone's behavior. It's not like you're examining their organs or running tests.
When people more or less ask why a person with years of training for a job is betterqualified than a layman I think a gentle nudge towards humbleness should be appreciated.
And we're not talking about just any layman. We're talking about the person actually experiencing the symptoms.
It was an honest question: what in a medical doctor's training makes them better at diagnosing ADD than the person suffering from it? Like the sarcastic post, you're taking a position without explaining your reasoning.
> We're talking about the person actually experiencing the symptoms.
Yeah, me too. That makes me an expert, right? The fact is, I didn't even know until 5 years ago. You can make a qualified guess before asking a doctor yes, but at least here it seems a doctor has to rule out a lot of options, including sleep apnea before he they go with ADHD.
Also, as has been mentioned before, practicing d/p tend to see a few cases every year and has at least some background to say what is normal and not.
All this should be obvious, shouldn't it? It is not like anything I have written so far requires huge leaps of faith, no?