Strattera vs Adderall: Which Works Faster for ADHD?

When it comes to treating ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder), both Strattera and Adderall are commonly prescribed medications. But a question many people ask is: Which one works faster? While both drugs can be effective in managing ADHD symptoms, they work in very different ways—and their speed of effectiveness reflects that.
In this article, we'll break down how quickly strattera vs adderall start working, what affects their performance, and which might be a better choice depending on your needs.
When considering treatment for anxiety or depression, selecting the right medication is crucial. Both medications have proven effective, but individual response may vary based on body chemistry and side effects. In the debate of Lexapro vs Zoloft, Lexapro is often praised for its smoother onset and fewer initial side effects, while Zoloft may be preferred for treating a wider range of conditions, including PTSD and OCD. Consulting a healthcare professional can help tailor the right approach, as factors like medical history and lifestyle play an essential role in determining the most suitable antidepressant.
Before diving into how fast each medication works, it's important to understand what each drug is and how it functions: Adderall is a stimulant medication made up of amphetamine salts. It increases the levels of dopamine and norepinephrine in the brain—neurotransmitters associated with attention and focus. Adderall comes in two forms: immediate-release (IR) and extended-release (XR).
Strattera (atomoxetine), on the other hand, is a non-stimulant medication. It works by selectively inhibiting the reuptake of norepinephrine, a different mechanism that takes more time to affect brain chemistry compared to stimulants.
If you're looking for immediate symptom relief, Adderall is the faster option—hands down. Most people begin to feel its effects within 30 to 60 minutes after taking a dose. The immediate-release version typically lasts about 4–6 hours, while the extended-release form can last 10–12 hours.
This makes Adderall an ideal choice for individuals who need quick and predictable symptom control, such as students or professionals who need to focus at specific times of day.
Strattera doesn't work right away. In fact, it can take 2 to 4 weeks before noticeable improvements in focus or behavior occur, and up to 6–8 weeks for full benefits to kick in.
This delay can be frustrating for individuals hoping for a rapid change. However, Strattera has its own advantages—it provides 24-hour coverage, and since it's not a stimulant, it may be better suited for those with coexisting anxiety, substance abuse history, or sleep issues.
The faster effect of Adderall comes from how it directly boosts dopamine and norepinephrine levels almost immediately after ingestion. This sharp increase helps improve focus, reduce impulsivity, and calm hyperactivity in a short time frame.
Strattera, on the other hand, gradually increases norepinephrine by preventing its reabsorption in the brain. This slow build-up is why it takes longer to feel the effects. However, this gradual adjustment can also lead to fewer emotional crashes or 'come-down' periods that some Adderall users experience.
The speed of relief isn't the only factor to consider when choosing between Strattera and Adderall. Each has its own side effect profile: Adderall side effects can include insomnia, appetite suppression, jitteriness, increased heart rate, and the risk of dependence or misuse.
Strattera may cause drowsiness, nausea, dry mouth, or mood swings—though it doesn't carry the same risk of addiction.
People with coexisting anxiety or a history of substance misuse often tolerate Strattera better, even if it's slower to act. In contrast, someone who needs rapid symptom control during work or school hours might lean toward Adderall despite the side effect risks. Short-Term Goals: If the immediate goal is to improve focus for a test, meeting, or daily function, Adderall offers clear benefits thanks to its fast-acting nature.
Long-Term Stability: For individuals looking for consistent, around-the-clock symptom control without the highs and lows of stimulant medication, Strattera may be the better fit—even though you'll need to be patient with the results.
In some cases, doctors may even prescribe both medications at different times of day or for different symptom profiles. But this is done under close medical supervision.
Choosing between Strattera and Adderall depends on your individual needs, health history, and treatment goals. Here are some questions to consider: Do you need fast results?
Do you have a history of anxiety or substance abuse?
Are you okay with taking a medication daily and waiting several weeks to feel the full effect?
Do you need 24-hour symptom control?
Always discuss these questions with your healthcare provider. They can help you weigh the benefits and drawbacks of each medication based on your personal circumstances.
So, which works faster for ADHD—Strattera or Adderall? The clear winner in terms of speed is Adderall. It can start working in less than an hour and provide sharp symptom control for several hours. However, that quick relief comes with a higher potential for side effects and dependency.
Strattera may take weeks to kick in, but for the right individual, it can offer consistent, all-day symptom relief without the crash or addiction risks associated with stimulants.
Both medications have their place in ADHD treatment. The best choice isn't just about speed—it's about what works best for you in the long run.
TIME BUSINESS NEWS

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Bloomberg

2 hours ago

• Bloomberg

Not All Ritalin Is Created Equal: Why Some Generics Fail to Work

Stanford University researchers have discovered why some people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder may do well on their medicine for a while but struggle down the road. Researchers tested how generic Ritalin and other versions of the drug known as methylphenidate dissolve and found some dissipated much more quickly or slowly than they should have, according to a study, the final version of which is set to be published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

Yahoo

6 hours ago

• Yahoo

ADHD waiting list led to rise in unregulated private providers

NHS waiting lists for ADHD diagnosis and support have led to a 'significant growth in the use of private providers that are not regulated', a taskforce has said. The ADHD taskforce, commissioned by NHS England with the support of the Government, has published an interim report saying the system for diagnosing and managing ADHD needs to be overhauled. At the moment, ADHD assessment and treatment in England is provided by highly specialised doctors in secondary care. But the report warned: 'Inability to access NHS services has led to a significant growth in the use of private providers that are not regulated, resulting in two-tier access to services, diagnosis and treatment; one for those who can pay and another for those who cannot. 'This drives health inequalities and links to disproportionate impacts and outcomes in the education and justice systems, employment and health.' Experts behind the study said waiting times for NHS ADHD services 'have escalated and are unacceptably long' and demand on services is 'very likely' to continue to rise. The taskforce concluded that ADHD is not solely the remit of the NHS and other health providers, with schools being vital for identifying and meeting needs at an early stage. And while a clinical diagnosis of ADHD via the NHS is required if a person needs medication, early support can still be provided to others. The report said: 'We need timely recognition and early support of suspected ADHD and neurodivergence across all settings. 'This is especially important in schools and the early years, to prevent adverse impacts and costly outcomes in the future. This should be needs-led and not require a clinical diagnosis.' The report also suggested there is no evidence of over-diagnosis of ADHD in the UK. It argued: 'England and the rest of the UK have much lower service recognition and treatment rates of ADHD diagnosis compared with other European countries. 'Recent data show a very high level of under-recognition and under-treatment of strictly diagnosed ADHD, with significant inequalities in access to care.' The report also addressed concerns about potential 'over-medicalisation and over-diagnosis', including worries that people are self-diagnosing ADHD based on information from social media. However, the report, said that 'currently there is no good evidence on what percentage of those waiting to see a clinician have self-diagnosed ADHD using social media and eventually meet or do not meet ADHD diagnostic criteria after a high-quality assessment. 'We only know currently that in England, recognised rates of ADHD are lower than the expected prevalence of ADHD.' Currently, the estimated economic costs of not treating ADHD are around £17 billion to the UK economy, the report went on. This includes through lower tax contributions, people needing state benefits and more likely to be not in education, employment or training, or who are long-term unemployed. 'Many of these costs are avoidable, as with appropriate, early support, people with ADHD can thrive,' it said. Professor Anita Thapar, chair of the ADHD Taskforce, said: 'The recommendations put forward by the taskforce will require action across Government and cross-sector organisations to make the necessary changes to improve the lives of people with ADHD. 'We need to get this right, to make sure people get early diagnosis and support, not just in the NHS but across society.' Dr Adrian James, NHS England's medical director for mental health and neurodiversity, said: 'We know that too many people with ADHD have been waiting for too long for support, which is why we launched the taskforce last year to help respond to the significant growth in the need for care. 'It is clear that much more needs to be done to improve ADHD assessment and care in England and ensure people can get a timely diagnosis, and we welcome the findings from the interim report, and look forward to its final conclusions later this year.' The NHS has launched publicly-available data collection on ADHD referrals and waiting times to help local teams better understand how they are performing. By March 2026, the Government also aims for six in 10 pupils to have access to a mental health support team in school.

Forbes

a day ago

• Forbes

Why Autism Diagnoses Are Increasing: What Changed In 2013

Changes in diagnostic criteria drove an increase in autism diagnoses. Autism has been in the spotlight as more public figures react to rising diagnosis rates. Some frame it as an epidemic, prompting speculation about causes. But what many don't realize is that much of the increase can be traced to two major changes in how autism is diagnosed. Starting in 2013, people already diagnosed with ADHD could now also be diagnosed with autism, something that was not allowed previously. Further, doctors were now encouraged to consider a person's internal distress, not just observable externals, when determining whether their autistic experience qualified for diagnosis. These two changes account for a significant portion of the increase in autism diagnoses. To receive a mental health diagnosis, a person must show evidence of impairment. For autism, this means behaviors associated with a differently wired brain must cause real life challenges--not just exist. But how do we define impairment? During my medical training, that was a determination for the professionals to make. These standards were defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition, the manual doctors used to determine mental health diagnoses. Originally published in 1994, the DSM-IV defined a mental disorder as causing 'clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.' In the DSM-IV, impairment was assessed by external signs such as poor grades, job loss, or visible dysfunction. Internal distress, like working twice as hard as other just to keep up, was not considered. It was left to the doctor to determine what elements of a patient's story were 'clinically significant' and whether they were in 'important' areas of functioning. If someone had autistic features but excelled in school or work and had relationships, they might be told they weren't impaired and did not meet criteria for a diagnosis. Their internal experience--how hard things felt or the emotional toll it took--wasn't relevant. That changed in 2013 with the publication of the DSM-V, which heralded a critical shift in psychiatry: valuing a patient's internal experiences over mere appearances. While the fundamental definition of mental disorder remained the same, the DSM-V considered a person's internal suffering when evaluating them for clinically significant distress. For example, in the past a student would have to be failing classes to be considered impaired. But after DSM-V, a student getting As only through intense effort and personal cost--exhaustion, anxiety, and emotional burnout--could also be understood as experiencing impairment. This change meant that people who previously would have been dismissed now had their experiences validated. Jaimie Goralnick, MD, a child and adult psychiatrist in California recalls what it was like to consider autism prior to 2013. 'In my training, I was taught only to notice the people who fit a stereotypical image of what we think autism is, and that is only a small percentage of people who are autistic.' Today, fewer people are denied a diagnosis because they make eye contact or have friends. Clinicians are learning to ask deeper questions: Is that eye contact forced and exhausting? Have they faced lifelong bullying or exclusion, even though they also have friendships? This has been particularly important in recognizing women with autism, who often present more subtly. The second major change in DSM-V was the removal of the exclusion rule that prevented someone from being diagnosed with both ADHD and autism. Before 2013, meeting criteria for one ruled out the other. Since ADHD symptoms are often more visible, this led to many people's autism being missed. 'In my practice, there are many people who have been diagnosed with ADHD, and later realized they also are autistic,' says Dr. Goralnick. 'It's been life changing for them to be able to make sense of their experience in a clearer and more positive way." Currently, the scientific literature estimates that between 50 to 70% of people with autism also have ADHD. (Hours 2022) The reverse is harder to measure due to under-diagnosis, but studies have found that between 30 to 65% of children with ADHD also show clinically significant autistic traits. (Clark 1999, Ronald 2008, Sokolova 2017). This means that a significant number of people with ADHD are now also diagnosed with autism, leading to an apparent boost in autism numbers. With autism in the press so often lately, it is important to understand that while diagnosis rates have risen, autism itself has always been with us. The 2013 changes in the DSM allowed us to get better at recognizing it. And that's vital, because it gives people a chance to understand themselves, heal from rejections they've faced, connect with the autistic community and access therapies designed for autism. "Many of my patients are able to figure out ways to fit in and fly under the radar with some of their challenges,' Dr. Goralnick. 'They struggle a lot with depression and severe anxiety that just never quite responded to treatments, and there were a lot of things that just never made sense. But once we together realized they were autistic, the pieces came together and we began to understand their experience.' Autism wasn't invisible because it wasn't there. It was invisible because we weren't looking for it in the right way.