This speaks to a common commment about ADHD. Where is the border between a &#x27;personality trait&#x27; and a disorder?<p>The condition is usually defined by having an impairment in at least two environments (ie school, home, work, sports teams). &#x27;Impairment&#x27; is obviously subjective, but implies something more than simply being bored. Playing a game in a boring meeting probably isn&#x27;t ADHD. Being unable to focus for more than a few minutes in _any_ meeting is a stronger sign, and could really make it harder.<p>On diagnosis rates - in most countries its 2-5% (&gt;10% of children in the USA..). That is about 2 standard deviations from an &#x27;average&#x27; person, which can actually be quite a difference. For comparison, a &#x27;genius&#x27; is someone who scores in the top 2% of an IQ test. Economic elite are &#x27;1%-ers&#x27;. I&#x27;d agree that there is a continiuous spectrum, and also that it is mis&#x2F;over-diagnosed in a considerable number of cases. I think it is this over-treatment that you are questioning, but lets be cautious to not add to the stigma around legitmate cases of the condition.<p>I&#x27;d agree often the challange is between individual and their environment - although often &#x27;enviroment&#x27; includes people around them. Often the environment is hard to change - do the 95% change to accomodate 5%? There is advice for careers that people with ADHD tend to be better at - sales, entrepreneurship, and medicine for their fast-pace and energy, or jobs like the military where there is a lot of structure.<p>I think its more complex than saying exercise would reduce diagnosis or medication rates. In particular, if exercise alone &#x27;cures&#x27; ADHD, it is likely a mild or mis-diagnosed case. In my own experiance, exercise (as well as sleep and diet) do affect symptoms, but don&#x27;t eliminate them.