The article you linked doesn't back up your comment's conclusions. It says that Adderall is more similar to Meth than previously believed, but that users of meth feel the effects more quickly through smoking. There is a similar relationship between pain killers and street drugs of similar chemical composition, but there no controversy about whether we should prescribe painkillers at all (That is, no one says, 'drug x is too similar to heroin, we should not prescribe it'). As such, using "the same as meth" is a scare tactic, not a scientific criticism of the substance itself.

You have a low opinion of people who take prescription stimulants. But that does not negate their theraputic abilities. This is the same discussion we're having around medical cannabis: legislatures think stoners are lazy so cancer patients shouldn't be able to use it. This is a poor basis for determining the usefulness of a drug.

I would be interested to read more evidence of this cabal of corrupt physicians with "20 supercars" making massive profits solely from stimulants. Mainly because I don't believe it's true. A vast majority of doctors use their experience and patient input to prescribe therapies that they believe will benefit the patient. Doctor shopping is a problem. Prescription drugs should not be able to advertise to people. But none of that is evidence to back up your claims.