Without going in depth, and I apologise if I repeat some things that have already been stated, as I haven't read the entire thread and, frankly, these are just my opinions.

I honestly think the modern medical industry is often too quick to throw drugs and anti-biotics at people.

"You have an illness - take some anti-biotics!"

"You're feeling down? Take some anti depressants."

Now, don't get me wrong, for many people these medications are necessary, whether they be suffering physical illness or mental health issues.

But I have personally encountered doctors who hand out anti-biotics like candy. And we can see the overuse of it in the growing number of anti-biotic resistant bacteria - more proof of evolution for you, alexw(whatever the hell the rest of your name is).

And no, psychoslice, that's not me admitting to your conspiracy nonsense regarding big pharma - none of those doctors have received payments or bribes from big pharma that I'm aware of - and my father's a GP.

I'm not all that knowledgable on the psychiatric industry, it's not my field. I've done a basic psychology class but that's about it.

But, from what I've seen many psychologists are too quick to prescribe drugs instead of spending plenty of time talking to their patients - especially when it comes to giving drugs to children. Fortunately, there are also plenty of shrinks who still just talk to their patients without resorting to drugs - I've seen one myself since I suffer from depression occasionally.

(July 16, 2014 at 5:02 pm)Beccs Wrote: I'm not all that knowledgable on the psychiatric industry, it's not my field. I've done a basic psychology class but that's about it.

But, from what I've seen many psychologists are too quick to prescribe drugs instead of spending plenty of time talking to their patients - especially when it comes to giving drugs to children. Fortunately, there are also plenty of shrinks who still just talk to their patients without resorting to drugs - I've seen one myself since I suffer from depression occasionally.

I agree that my psychologists and worse yet GP's are way too quick to prescribe drugs. But I've yet to see much value in talk therapy. If the problem is chemical, but you go looking for personal problem, you'll find a personal problem. And blaming that can make it worse not better.

I'm afraid I too speak from personal experience. Depression is a bitch.

Exercise, light, small projects that show obvious progress, that's what helps me. Oh and some one to hug me. Probably I should live in the northwest. Winters are bad.

(July 8, 2014 at 10:15 am)Rhythm Wrote: I was a smiling fucking lunatic - I'd sing shit like "criminal" (the fiona apple ditty) and time my breaths to the gaps in my firing pattern - blissfully unloading into equipment and people in an attempt to keep the rhythm of a song intact as my primary concern. I'm told that the effect was unnerving for anyone within ear and eyeshot.

I feel pretty shallow for wondering if that is the origin of your username, but is it?

It is. It's a little reminder, I suppose. That and rhythm has always been a huge thing for me. I look for it, I see it everywhere. You might say that I worship it. Before my time in the service, sure...but even moreso after. I find it to be grounding...I find the thought of rhythm grounding, even in it's absence. I used to go by the handle Khemikal, but now it's rhythm all across the board. A reinvention of self, you might say.

This has primarily been a discussion about over diagnosing mental illness and prescribing too many drugs.

But I have my doubts about the talk therapists. When you look at the popularity of the recovered memory movement which thankfully is now coming to an end and notice how many crack pot therapists were party to this and how no governing body stepped in to reign it in .. it should give you pause. I would hate to be in a bad way and have to take my chances with whoever is on the other side of the first door I try. They can do some good and there are some very sharp ones. But it is a real buyer beware situation. If you ever need one, ask everyone you respect for a recommendation and ask them to elaborate on why they think they were good. You'll still be taking your chances.

(July 16, 2014 at 3:54 pm)Faith No More Wrote: Spend several weeks in a mental institution, and then tell me how ludicrous the "non-compliance" label is. Sure, the whole thing is highly subjective, but you have to understand that there are many, many severely mentally ill people that refuse to take their medication or participate in treatment. One of the issues with mental illness is it can make your mind unable to understand that you are ill, and it convinces you that you are sane.

You're approaching this whole issue from your own rational perspective instead of trying to understand that mental illness and its treatment require otherwise seemingly malicious actions. And yes, that does become a problem when subjectivity is involved, and there needs to be oversight. But to deny mental health officials the right to go against a patient's wishes would effectively neuter their ability to administer treatment.

Yeah, sometimes it's a smart move to implement coercive measures against severely mentally ill people, so I'm not completely against it.

Mental health is a vastly more important issue than personal freedom in such circumstances. However, the unfortunate thing about it is that this principle has also opened the doors for mental institutes to cause undeserved suffering to many patients whose illnesses are not severe enough. They get mislabelled and overdiagnosed (refer to post # 56) and then have to spend weeks in a hospital without having anything seriously wrong with them. Then many of them start to experience disastrous side effects from the medications which leaves them in a worse state than before.

Besides, I don't think there is strong evidence that patients who are compelled to receive treatment always do better in the long run, nor that the antipsychotic drugs are always beneficial. Some people get better, some people get worse, and some people stay the same. There's no guarantee what's going to happen to them in the future.

And yes, there are people with mental illnesses who are unable to understand that they have an illness. But on the other hand, there are also people who have been convinced that they have a mental illness even though it is actually something pretty normal. So, whose judgements are you going to rely on? Who should you trust the most? Quite frankly, I'd rather go with my own judgements, not what someone else thinks about me after a 15-minutes meeting.

Regarding the need for oversight, I don't see any good way to do that in psychiatry because, as you acknowledged also, the diagnosing of mental illness is highly subjective. Most of the time there is no scientific measurement, blood test, X-ray evidence, nor anything like that in psychiatry to verify whether or not what you've been told about your mental health is true. It's simply whatever the psychiatrist says. If he says that you have a mental illness and that you need treatment, then that is it. How can anyone else put to rights pronouncements that are so subjective?

So, basically, the whole issue I think boils down to a matter of trust. But unfortunately, history has repeatedly demonstrated that very often the trust gets betrayed and abused. The ubiquitous "Doctors know what's best for you" paradigm is often used as a smokescreen for selling drugs and doing evil things to patients without their knowledge. Horrific atrocities, abuses, and human rights violations are still being committed in secret by the "saviors" of mental illness. One of the many examples is the use of covert medication:

The Noncompliant Patient in Psychiatry: The Case For and Against Covert/Surreptitious Medication

And that's just the tip of the iceberg, of course.

Psychiatrist exposed:



Boru

(July 17, 2014 at 5:15 pm)Rayaan Wrote:

---

Yeah, sometimes it's a smart move to implement coercive measures against severely mentally ill people, so I'm not completely against it.

Mental health is a vastly more important issue than personal freedom in such circumstances. However, the unfortunate thing about it is that this principle has also opened the doors for mental institutes to cause undeserved suffering to many patients whose illnesses are not severe enough. They get mislabelled and overdiagnosed (refer to post # 56) and then have to spend weeks in a hospital without having anything seriously wrong with them. Then many of them start to experience disastrous side effects from the medications which leaves them in a worse state than before.

Besides, I don't think there is strong evidence that patients who are compelled to receive treatment always do better in the long run, nor that the antipsychotic drugs are always beneficial. Some people get better, some people get worse, and some people stay the same. There's no guarantee what's going to happen to them in the future.

And yes, there are people with mental illnesses who are unable to understand that they have an illness. But on the other hand, there are also people who have been convinced that they have a mental illness even though it is actually something pretty normal. So, whose judgements are you going to rely on? Who should you trust the most? Quite frankly, I'd rather go with my own judgements, not what someone else thinks about me after a 15-minutes meeting.

Regarding the need for oversight, I don't see any good way to do that in psychiatry because, as you acknowledged also, the diagnosing of mental illness is highly subjective. Most of the time there is no scientific measurement, blood test, X-ray evidence, nor anything like that in psychiatry to verify whether or not what you've been told about your mental health is true. It's simply whatever the psychiatrist says. If he says that you have a mental illness and that you need treatment, then that is it. How can anyone else put to rights pronouncements that are so subjective?

So, basically, the whole issue I think boils down to a matter of trust. But unfortunately, history has repeatedly demonstrated that very often the trust gets betrayed and abused. The ubiquitous "Doctors know what's best for you" paradigm is often used as a smokescreen for selling drugs and doing evil things to patients without their knowledge. Horrific atrocities, abuses, and human rights violations are still being committed in secret by the "saviors" of mental illness. One of the many examples is the use of covert medication:

The Noncompliant Patient in Psychiatry: The Case For and Against Covert/Surreptitious Medication

And that's just the tip of the iceberg, of course.

---

Don't get me wrong. I completely understand that there are issues with the psychiatric community and that there have been terrible abuses of the authority involved. As terrible as that can be, I don't think it's fair to expose psychiatry without balancing it out by mentioning the good it has done (dammit, now I sound like a theist defending religion).

One thing to keep in mind is that a patient isn't obligated to see a doctor, unless they are institutionalized or a ward of the state. If you don't trust your doctor, find another one. Psychiatrists are like anything else in that you need to shop around and find the right one for you. You have to understand that a patient does have a lot of control over their treatment. Sadly, a lot of the abuse happens because of ignorance on the part of the patient. There is a vast amount of information at our fingertips, and one has to be vigilant when dealing with mental health. People need to understand that the human factor is even more in play with psychiatry than with a regular physician, and a patient has to take responsibility into his/her hands.

Another thing to remember is that psychiatry is in its infancy compared to other sciences. When you add on to that the fact that the brain is highly complex and assessing it can be highly subjective, you have plenty of room for abuse. It is the nature of the beast, but not a reason to abandon the entire endeavor.

After reading a couple links on the original post I have to agree on some of the side effects. I'm on three types of meds to keep my stress and anxiety in control. I've only been on them a couple months and they are a lot cheaper than the daily alcohol I use to consume, but some days I have no clue who I even am anymore. They numb almost everything to the point I just don't even care half the time about a thing. Oh, screw sex because the sex drive doesn't even exist while on these pills. The next time I see the doc I'll have to share with him my concerns, if I remember that I am concerned at all.

(July 17, 2014 at 11:13 pm)Faith No More Wrote: As terrible as that can be, I don't think it's fair to expose psychiatry without balancing it out by mentioning the good it has done (dammit, now I sound like a theist defending religion).

Well, most people already know what good it has done. The good is already quite heard of, but the dangers and unscrupulous practices that exist in modern psychiatry are less familiar. So the darker, hideous face of psychiatry should be brought to light. That's the reason I wanted to put attention on the harms of psychiatry. Those are the things that are being kept from the public.

One of the problems in psychiatry is the increasingly mislabeling of normal human emotions and fear reactions as "disorders." Another problem is the excessive reliance on antidepressants and other antipsychotic drugs and the resulting side effects of those drugs. That, according to Robert Whitaker, who has delivered a stunning critique in his book Anatomy of an Epidemic, is a big part of the reason why mental illness in America has tripled over the past two decades. There is evidence, too, that the use of psychiatric medications has contributed to the growth of new mental illnesses in many patients. You can get a little insight into this shocking phenomenon by reading this interview.

Does it look like psychiatry is heading in a positive direction? I have to give a resounding no to that, unfortunately. Rather it seems to be heading in the opposite direction. Psychiatry has been rapidly moving towards a drug-based paradigm of care. So now psychiatry is becoming less talk, less personal, and more drug pushing. Along with that, more unnecessary labelling, too.

There's also a good chance that psychiatry will turn out to be better, yes. But, right now, it's evidently going the other way.

Quote:Where is psychiatry headed? What the discipline badly needs is close attention to patients and their individual symptoms, in order to carve out the real diseases from the vast pool of symptoms that DSM keeps reshuffling into different "disorders." This kind of careful attention to what patients actually have is called "psychopathology," and its absence distinguishes American psychiatry from the European tradition. With DSM-V, American psychiatry is headed in exactly the opposite direction: defining ever-widening circles of the population as mentally ill with vague and undifferentiated diagnoses and treating them with powerful drugs.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10...0227601116

I agree with you that a lot of the abuse happens because of the ignorance on the part of the patient also. So, yeah, that's a fair argument.

(July 18, 2014 at 12:06 am)Elskidor Wrote: They numb almost everything to the point I just don't even care half the time about a thing.

Damn. You should be very careful then. That's not a good sign ...

(July 18, 2014 at 12:06 am)Elskidor Wrote: Oh, screw sex because the sex drive doesn't even exist while on these pills.

Yeah, many of the SSRIs and anti-anxiety pills will do that to you. Do tell your doctor about it as soon as you can. And look it up on Google also, when you have time.

Low Libido? 11 Drugs That Affect Your Sex Drive