Very interesting information there about the findings with sensory deprivation, although I'd like to know whether any studies have controlled for other associated experiences that might be causing the brain differences: drug use of the mother while pregnant or nursing, malnutrition, head trauma or shaking etc., all common in cases of neglect.
I am using both meditation and medication (among other things) for ADHD. Unfortunately I can't afford the luxury of waiting for meditation to thicken the relevant parts of the brain (which is how it appears it would work) as I have a life to lead here and now, and it's a daily struggle for me to keep any kind of order and reliability in that life, and therefore security (of work, career prospects, relationships, finding a place to live where I'll pay proper rent, and in almost every sense living independently of other people's help, which I still haven't achieved in my early twenties and with a high 'on paper' IQ). The medications (the stimulant ones, anyway) work from the day or sometimes week first taken, because they increase dopamine levels without the need to alter the structure of the brain first (although there is some evidence that they may over time do this as well - this is the only true 'long-term effect' supported by any scientific evidence, that they might increase the chance of the brain catching up to normal development, suggesting that the lack of dopamine could be a cause for the neurological underdevelopment in the first place, rather than the other way round).
In the interest of fact, and fact with massive implications for individuals and society, I would like to point out first of all that the above lady is talking about transcendental meditation, which unlike vipassana is a trademarked product sold by a single profit-making organisation, which you have to pay in order to read quite how it's done. Secondly, she is either misinformed (or more accurately, disinformed), or deliberately slandering her competition, by repeating falsehoods about the medications in this video.
The effects DO NOT include ANY long-term side effects; usually any side effects subside after a few weeks, alternatively if the medication is stopped, they go away as soon as the drug leaves the body. My response to the ones she alleges:
They don't increase the chance of substance abuse. Some studies have shown no difference in risk between medicated and unmedicated teens and adults, and others have suggested that they significantly DECREASE the risk of that and of tobacco smoking (also 80% in ADHD adults). They temper impulsivity, and reduce the need for self-medication. These factors should theoretically make them reduce the risk of substance abuse occurring and even make it easier for people to give up substances like caffeine (which helps us calm down, concentrate and even sleep, being a mild stimulant like the medication), cigarettes and illegal drugs, and there's anecdotal and scientific evidence that indeed they do both of these things.
Neither is there substantial evidence that they increase the rate of sudden death. The only study to have looked into that found a slightly higher rate of use among children who died suddenly than among those who died in car accidents, but the authors of the study concluded that the limitations of its design and size meant that the difference could be caused by other factors. A larger study has been commisioned but as of yet it would be unreasonable to rush to reduce the use of the stimulants when children's long-term outcomes are statistically so much improved by them, and children are monitored for cardiovascular changes when put on it so it can be discontinued if significant changes occur.
This favourite non-fact of Scientology (the same organisation that condemns any use of even anti-convulsants for brain damaging, life-threatening seizures) also comes from coverage given to several cases of teenagers suddenly dying on them. With so many teenagers taking them in the USA and elsewhere, statistically, a few of the thousands of teenaged victims of sudden death syndrome annually are going to have happened to have been on this and all kinds of medication - most people just don't realise how common the phenomenon is and so assumed a causal relationship. Most probably some victims were on allergy medicine too - so what? Anyway, in response to the ensuing panic, a black box warning suggesting they might be implicated in sudden death syndrome was put on the medications in a few countries, in case the families of anyone who died in the future while taking them tried to sue. This warning was removed after the FDA decided the study and anecdotes provided insufficient evidence to justify it.