Random News Stories

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Here's a real knee-slapper for you, oughta brighten your day: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/priest-files-reveal-distrubing-stories-of-child-molestation-coverup.html

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Coercion = a form of rape, Ip.
Rape jokes = FAIL.

[P3nT4gR4m]

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

[Junkenstein]

Same here really. Even venerable old zen masters are just like the rest of humanity. Not worth the skin covering the skeleton.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Yay! Psychiatrists finally starting to admit they have no fucking clue what they're doing 

Drug development for complex psychiatric illnesses is misguided, they argue, stuck churning out slight variations on therapeutic themes that didn't work all that well to begin with.

ETA: oh, yeah, and while we're at it...

One historical example, a century before the first DSM, of a clearly invalid mental illness is drapetomania. Louisiana physician Samuel A. Cartwright was certain he had discovered a new mental disease. After studying runaway slaves who had been caught and returned to their owners, Cartwright concluded in an 1851 report to the New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal that these slaves suffered from drapetomania, a disease causing them to flee.

While virtually all psychiatrists today rightfully mock the idea that fleeing slavery could be considered a valid mental illness, it was not until the 1970s that cultural upheaval and political protests persuaded the APA of the invalidity of homosexuality as a mental illness.

And while homosexuality was dropped from the 1980 DSM-3, oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) was added, and ODD is now a popular child and adolescent diagnosis. The symptoms of ODD include "often actively defies or refuses to comply with adult requests or rules" and "often argues with adults." Is it any more valid to label teenage rebellion and anti-authoritarianism as a mental illness than it is to label runaway slaves as mentally ill?

[Junkenstein]

Just had a quick skim, this stood out:

Particularly upsetting for Frances is the DSM-5's pathologizing of normal human grief. On January 7, 2013 in "Last Plea To DSM-5: Save Grief From the Drug Companies," Frances writes, "Making grief a mental disorder will be a bonanza for drug companies, but a disaster for grievers. The decision is also self-destructive for DSM-5 and further undermines the credibility of the APA. Psychiatry should not be mislabeling the normal."

I was aware the various DSM editions had, shall we say, problems? Issues such as re-classifying "disorders" or bringing various ailments under another banner caused a lot of treatment plan problems for some.

I'll be giving this a good read tomorrow, thanks!

[Pergamos]

Yay! Psychiatrists finally starting to admit they have no fucking clue what they're doing 

Drug development for complex psychiatric illnesses is misguided, they argue, stuck churning out slight variations on therapeutic themes that didn't work all that well to begin with.

ETA: oh, yeah, and while we're at it...

One historical example, a century before the first DSM, of a clearly invalid mental illness is drapetomania. Louisiana physician Samuel A. Cartwright was certain he had discovered a new mental disease. After studying runaway slaves who had been caught and returned to their owners, Cartwright concluded in an 1851 report to the New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal that these slaves suffered from drapetomania, a disease causing them to flee.

While virtually all psychiatrists today rightfully mock the idea that fleeing slavery could be considered a valid mental illness, it was not until the 1970s that cultural upheaval and political protests persuaded the APA of the invalidity of homosexuality as a mental illness.

And while homosexuality was dropped from the 1980 DSM-3, oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) was added, and ODD is now a popular child and adolescent diagnosis. The symptoms of ODD include "often actively defies or refuses to comply with adult requests or rules" and "often argues with adults." Is it any more valid to label teenage rebellion and anti-authoritarianism as a mental illness than it is to label runaway slaves as mentally ill?

OOD sounds like it has a lot in common with drapetomania

[Junkenstein]

ODD, if I recall correctly was pretty much opening the door to the early Ritalin style drugs. I'll try and dig out some stuff on this, I'm sure i've got something.

[Pergamos]

ODD, if I recall correctly was pretty much opening the door to the early Ritalin style drugs. I'll try and dig out some stuff on this, I'm sure i've got something.

I thought Ritalin was mostly prescribed for ADHD originally.

[P3nT4gR4m]

ODD, if I recall correctly was pretty much opening the door to the early Ritalin style drugs. I'll try and dig out some stuff on this, I'm sure i've got something.

It's the political side of mental illness - non-compliance = badwrong. I believe this problem is much bigger in the states than over here. Makes sense I guess, you guys are a bit more "Orwell" than everywhere else.

[Junkenstein]

Early ADHD treatments were around the 60's I think, but it only became the brand of choice much later.

ODD was part of the stretching of what could be considered a disorder. Numerous ailments in DSM 4 share similar(admittedly minor mostly) symptoms to the point you'd think it was cut/paste.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Interesting how profoundly those two articles contradict each other, isn't it?

But on another note, I've been saying for a while that psychology is to neuroscience as alchemy is to chemistry. All those psychiatric drugs... they kind of know what they do, sort of, but not REALLY. And nobody has a very clear idea of why. It is, fundamentally, more magic than science, and will remain so until technology and neuroscience advance enough that we can understand and explain exactly what the mechanisms of mental illnesses are, as well as why and how certain drugs may have a beneficial effect... and why they don't for some people.

Right now it's basically shooting in the dark, and the scary thing is that it often does more harm than it does good.

[LMNO]

Um... I'm sure this isn't concrete data, nor Beyesean evidence, but Mrs LMNO was in rough shape for many years, and went through therapy for more, and then finally decided to begin drug therapy. She currently is more confident, emotionally stable, and happier than almost any time since we met, or at least for a longer period of time.

I readily agree that talk therapy set her up for this seeming success, but the pills are what have sent it past the tipping point.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Um... I'm sure this isn't concrete data, nor Beyesean evidence, but Mrs LMNO was in rough shape for many years, and went through therapy for more, and then finally decided to begin drug therapy. She currently is more confident, emotionally stable, and happier than almost any time since we met, or at least for a longer period of time.

I readily agree that talk therapy set her up for this seeming success, but the pills are what have sent it past the tipping point.

I'm not saying that pills don't work. Obviously, they do work for enough people to make them a worthwhile avenue of treatment fully deserving of future research. I'm saying that the mechanisms behind why they work are only poorly understood in the best of cases. Just as alchemy eventually gave birth to chemistry, psychology is moving in the direction of birthing a real science, too.

[LMNO]

Oh. Ok, I totally agree. No clue WHY or HOW, but plenty of data as to WHAT.

In short, no arguments here.