Image:
-
The Wisdom of Psychopaths
In this engrossing journey into the lives of psychopaths and their infamously crafty behaviors, the renowned psychologist Kevin Dutton reveals that there is a...
Read More »
Elyn Saks is a law professor at the University of Southern California, a Marshall scholar, and a graduate of Yale Law School. She also suffers from schizophrenia -- an illness that many would assume makes her impressive resume an impossibility. In 2007, she published an acclaimed memoir of her struggle with the disease, “The Center Cannot Hold.” Her book is a frank and moving portrait of the experience of schizophrenia, but also a call for higher expectations -- a plea that we allow people with schizophrenia to find their own limits. If anything, she says, her work as a scholar has helped her to cope with the disease. In September, she was awarded a MacArthur Foundation “genius” grant. She chatted with Mind Matters editor Gareth Cook.
COOK: Can you describe your first experience with schizophrenia, I think you said that you were just 8 years old?
SAKS: I don’t think I would have been diagnosed as someone with childhood schizophrenia, but there were perhaps some early warning signs. For instance, I had periods of disorganization, where it felt like my mind was falling apart: there was no center to take things in, put them together, and make them make sense. Hence, following Yeats, I call my book “The Center Cannot Hold.”
The first frank episode of psychosis happened when I was around 16, and I suddenly started walking home from school in the middle of the day. I began to feel the houses were getting weird; they were sending me messages: “You are special. You are especially bad. Now walk. Cries and whispers.” There were also some warning signs in college but I didn’t really “officially” break down until graduate school at Oxford.
COOK: Can you sum up the subjective experience of breakdown, so that people might understand what a person with schizophrenia is going through?
SAKS: Subjectively, the best comparison I can make is to a waking nightmare. You have all the terror and confusion and the bizarre images and thoughts that you have in a nightmare. And then with the nightmare you sit bolt upright in bed in utter terror. Only with a nightmare you then wake up, while with psychosis you can’t just open your eyes and make it all go away.
That’s subjectively. Objectively, I have delusions (irrational beliefs like that I have killed hundreds of thousands of people with my thoughts); infrequent hallucinations (like watching a huge spider walk up my wall); and disorganized and confused thinking (e.g. what are called “loose associations,” like “my copies of the cases have been infiltrated. We have to case the joint. I don’t believe in joints but they do hold your body together”). These are called “positive symptoms” of schizophrenia. Except for my first two years at Oxford, I have been spared the so-called “negative symptoms”: apathy, withdrawal, inability to work or make friends.
COOK: Do you experience symptoms every day or week? What are they?
SAKS: As my husband likes to say, psychosis is not like an on-off switch but like a dimmer. At one end of the spectrum, I will have transient crazy thoughts (e.g. I have killed people) which I immediately identify as symptoms of my illness and not real. A little further along the spectrum, I may have three or four days of being dominated by crazy thoughts that I can’t push away. And at the far end I am crouching in a corner shaking and moaning.
The transient psychotic thoughts I might have several times a day. The several-day episodes are usually a response to stress and may happen three or four times a year. The experience of crouching in the corner hasn’t happened for years.
COOK: When did you first sense that your academic work helped you deal with your condition?
See what we're tweeting about
111 Comments
Add CommentYou know what I really find a shame, that this woman believes she has some sort of disease that everyone else has that get's the label schizophrenia.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere in The Netherlands some prominent professors want to get rid of schizophrenia as label. There is no evidence for any disease.
You know, if this woman was really smart she would know that the human mind has endless possibilities because possibilities give rise to more possibilities. Problems with the human mind can get immensely complex, but the cause and the expression is unique for every single person.
We as humans fight for stability in eternity. Think about it: what is life all about? One thing is for sure: there is a will for more then what already is. There is a will to survive.
This means the human mind can't be a product of the biochemical processes in the brain. Psychiatry is a scam.
There is no proof for any disease so it is very stigmatising to talk about such complex problems as if it is a disease that someone else also has. It isn't honest.
Schizophrenia is according professors in The Netherlands not more then a label for inexplicable behaviour, seen from a thrid person (a psychiatrist).
Ms Saks didn't mentioned enough about her caretakers, i.e., her spouse, family and friends in her journey. When she had symptoms at age 16, where were her parents? Any siblings? Any friends that she confided with? How did she meet her husband and how did she present herself with this disease? Did he understand the complex issues surrounding this illness?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNot many people will accept their schizophrenic symptoms in the beginning and less likely to accept treatment. With her experiences and legal training I was hoping that Ms Saks would speak more about the idea of empowering local, clinic-based, Mental Health Committees, comprising a physician, a psychiatrist, a lawyer, a family member and a therapist that could make the decisions for the patient until they could get their symptoms under control. The notion of patient autonomy is a contradiction and an oxymoron. You are on a fools errand if you think you can measure a patients capacity to make their own decisions. The reality is that for most schizophrenic patients, decisions have to be made on their behalf since they lack the capacity to do otherwise.
I have met with many caretakers that are ready to give up on their schizophrenic loved one because there is no way that they can get forced treatment for their adult relative. Some end up being abandoned by family and friends in total exasperation and often the vicious downward spiral into substance abuse might evolve into violent criminal acts.
Im sorry Ms Saks but I dont buy your characterization in the following statement: I was also said to be gravely disabled, and the reason given was I couldnt do my Yale Law School homework! A caretaker may have said that to you during one of your episodes, but clearly, you know this was not the real reason why force was used upon you. You had become a danger to yourself.
Ms Saks, you speak of myths. People with schizophrenia are not just like everyone else and forget about quoting Freud. Patients and caretakers definitely have unrealistic expectations about this illness. I spoke with three fathers on one occasion about their adult children and I mentioned that they may have to be on medication for the rest of their lives and most likely, they might not achieve their expectations of success. Nevertheless, they can lead productive lives and achieve a comfortable level of happiness and contentment. The fathers were shocked and disappointed to hear this. Call it their reality check . I wish you peace and contentment Ms Saks, I really do. Ray Murray
You must first of all understand that a person with a past or present of Schizophrenia would not be interested in reading such a long conversation. All the best to dear Elyn.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA legal scholar is very adept at reading long briefs and conversations, esp. a Yale Legal Scholar.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Finally, it is a myth that people with schizophrenia are more dangerous than the general public. The people really to fear are substance abusers, a diagnosis far more highly correlated with violence than mental illness."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is true, it was proven in a study by dr. Seena Fazel recently (I noticed in Men's Health).
Still: I believe your stance on psychiatry isn't right. How did they diagnose schizophrenia? With a wet finger so to speak? That's not honest science. Schizophrenia does not hold scientifically.
I believe it is required for us as humans to first understand what the human mind is about. Psychiatry serves other interests then human wellbeing. Because, really, how can the measureable be the source for itself? Only a barbarian with money on his mind wants to make people believe this nonsense. Psychiatry isn't good for our future. It is required that we learn to overcome these complex problems with the human mind, because only this mentality can lead to successful survival.
My story is similar to that of Ms. Saks. I was diagnosed with chronic paranoid schizophrenia in my late twenties. I was fortunate to have begun a career that enabled me to afford extensive psychotherapy and the antipsychotics I briefly used. Work was also my salvation, I continued to work throughout most of my illness. Most of my recovery also came with learning how to manage stress, and to a psychotherapist who did not believe that I need not lower my expectations. I have been able to continue at my chosen career part time for the past 30 yrs, and in addition, have been able to pursue other less stressful interests. I have, thru much effort, developed a wonderful life, and am now, in my 50s, going back to school to prepare myself for a more challenging career. I don't know if schizophrerenia is a discrete disease, however, anyone who has experienced it's devastating delusions will agree that it is not something most people experience. Thank you Ms. Saks. More of us need to speak out on this important issue-too much human potential is being lost.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI commend Elyn for her great accomplishments and I hope to join her as I will join her for I know that the support system for us can be a great asset. Schizophrenia is personal and the support system and the road to recovery must also be understood as personal.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMs Saks, I really appreciated and enjoyed the interview. I am repeatedly shocked by the lack of compassion on the part of so many. I don't suffer from schizophrenia myself; rather, I have pretty severe chronic clinical depression. The most authoritarian statements about it and mental illness in general come almost invariably from people who don't have a mental illness. Notice I didn't say "authoritative." These people are not authorities; they don't know what they are talking about.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI remember more than one period in which I condemned myself roundly for laziness or something similar because I was not working a full forty hours per week. I look back on those periods and at the journal entries I wrote during them and exclaim, "Of course I couldn't work fulltime!" Of course I couldn't . . . whatever it was! That is especially clear AFTER you come out of the fog.
People who have not gone through mental illness can't know what it's like. For them to pontificate about the nature or validity of it -- or the character of those saddled with it -- is the height of arrogance and cruelty.
One of my favorite movie lines is from "Forever Lulu". Melanie Griffith's character says, "Being crazy is a lot easier to handle when you accept it." I agree with you completely about ceasing to fight a diagnosis or to try to prove that you are not ill. Accepting the reality of my illness was difficult, but life got better than it had ever been after I accepted the diagnosis and became "obedient" to the regimen that is absolutely necessary to keep me on an even keel.
God bless you!
Donnie
This is a response to the message of ArjanD at 08:20 AM on 12/29/09, one of the most unenlightened posts I have ever had the displeasure to read. There is so much evidence proving mental illness is real all the way to the level of genetic defects. At least eight genes are associated with both Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder; they share at least three gene defects. Bipolar patients have two parts of the brain that have sufficient neurodegeneration that they show atrophy. Successful mood stabilizers used to treat bipolar result in neurogeneration and increased brain mass in those same areas. Neurochemistry is beginning to unlock the mystery of mental illness and only one so uninformed could make such ignorant comments about mental illness.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is a response to the message of ArjanD at 08:20 AM on 12/29/09, one of the most unenlightened posts I have ever had the displeasure to read. There is so much evidence proving mental illness is real all the way to the level of genetic defects. At least eight genes are associated with both Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder; they share at least three gene defects. Bipolar patients have two parts of the brain that have sufficient neurodegeneration that they show atrophy. Successful mood stabilizers used to treat bipolar result in neurogeneration and increased brain mass in those same areas. Neurochemistry is beginning to unlock the mystery of mental illness and only one so uninformed could make such ignorant comments about mental illness.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisConcerning the alleged lack of evidence that mental illness exists: From what I've read, researchers have documented pretty specifically how deficits or excesses of various neurotransmitters can affect mood, behavior, and sensory perceptions. My own experience with severe depression and with medications to treat it corroborate the validity of those findings.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting thing: People who accuse others of having an agenda usually have one of their own.
ArjanD really does need to stop pontificating and to begin to read. Where did you get your information; wishful thinking? ArjanD, I did a bit of research into your claims that psychiatrists in the Netherlands dispute the existence in Schizophrenia. You sadly are providing misinformation. You are intelligent enough to string sentences together, so I wonder if you have a devious agenda. Psychiatrists in the Netherlands, like any enlightened nation, are dug into discovering the genes involved in the disease as well as all the other mental illnesses known to be passed along down family lines. Look up the research of just a few of the Dutch scientists; Jean-Paul Selten, M.D., Ph.D., Elizabeth Cantor-Graae, Ph.D., Joris Slaets, M.D., Ph.D., René S. Kahn, M.D., Ph.D. and Dr Roel Ophoff, all from the University Medical Centre of Utrecht, or Dr Thérèse van Amelsvoort, of the psychiatric department of the the Academic Medical Centre in Amsterdam, or Durk Wiersma, Ph.D., Fokko J. Nienhuis, M.A., Cees J. Slooff, M.D. and Robert Giel, M.D., Ph.D. of the WHO Collaborating Center, University of Groningen Groningen, or Hoek HW, Brown AS, Susser E. of The Hague Psychiatric Institute, among just the few! Even the Dutch government has been bearing down on Marijuana Coffee Shops saying the drug induces schizophrenia. How can you defend your misinformation?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWow! I had read somewhere that depression can cause brain damage -- and that to a brain that is already malfunctioning! It's heartening to hear that proper treatment can restore function to those parts of the brain affected by a mental illness. Am I understanding you correctly?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is a response to dwayneneal. Well, it is what you believe perhaps, and you may. But the claims you make are false. There is no proof for a genetic defect as cause for mental problems. Of course I would agree it could be a influence in someones state of mind. But to keep it simple: there is no evidence for it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut here is one for you. Say you are right, then please tell me. Why isn't it measureable with people who get that label then?
You see: you are being mislead by psychiatry. They use scientific fraud to talk people into taking destructive drugs that take 30+ years of peoples lives and reduce the chance to recover, This is hard fact.
It is also hard fact that the top 3 best selling antipsychotics match the top 3 deadliest antipsychotics. It was shown in a study that was published in The Lancet aprox. one month ago. (see reuters "Study may prompt rethink on schizophrenia drugs")
It is suspicious, don't you agree? And Soteria psychotherapy offers 90% chance on good recovery without that destructive drugs. So why choose psychiatry?
Are you open to the possibility you believe in a psychiatric lie? Please ask yourself: where is the proof? Is it just on a paper that can be falsified or has my doctor really showed objectively that I have this brain or genetic defect?
You should come to understand there is a possibility that there is fraud going on, and I will tell you: it is! There are thousants of professors raising the alarm, they don't do that for nothing you see.
This message is also in reply to dwayneneal.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am sorry, but you are lying about me to make me look bad. Probably an argumentum ad hominem attempt, as I recognize from Dutch pro-psychiatry people.
See my resources
1) http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/4521383/___Schaf_het_begrip_schizofrenie_af___.html
It sais "Trow label schizophrenia away" about a study published in The Lancet, from 2 professors.
2) http://www.psy.nl/nieuws/nieuwsbericht/article/wetenschappelijk-gezien-slaat-schizofrenie-nergens-op/
Also professors, discussing that schizophrenia doesn't make any sense scientifically, it is also sertain not a brain disease according to them.
3) http://www.observant.unimaas.nl/default.asp?page=/jrg23/obs19/art20.htm
A professor votes to end label schizophrenia, because it is only stigmatising and doing more harm then good.
I am honest, I have no interests other then human wellbeing. Please look at yourself.
Some proof that the human mind is more then a product of chemical processes in the brain:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNagional Geographic Channel "My Brilliant Brain":
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6378985927858479238#
Susan Dakin her mind got het Multiple Sclerosis symptoms, shut down organs and blind her.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1168128/How-womans-mind-power-cripple-blind-her.html
Imagine: shutting down organs with your mind...
A man lives a perfectly normal and socially healthy live with just 20% brains.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12301-man-with-tiny-brain-shocks-doctors.html
It shows that the human mind surely is something else then a 'product' of the building blocks.
This is why I am convinced that psychiatry will anyhow become a barbaric mistake of the past, but I just rather see it happening today then tomorow.
Donnie, yes mood stabilizers are neuroprotective through a number of processes, including the reduction of apoptosis and stimulation of brain neurotrophic and growth factors. If you are interested in this topic, google: neuroprotective neurotrophic mood stabilizer bipolar
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisArjanD, your comments are scientifically inaccurate and destructive. Sure, there are "scientists" who deny the existence of schizophrenia, just as there are "scientists" who deny the validity of evolution by natural selection, but these people are in the vast minority of the scientific community. What you are saying is tantamount to what global warming deniers say. Unfortunately here in the U.S., any evidence refuting global warming, however small, is taken by the opposition as evidence that global warming doesn't exist and real policy decisions are made based on this misinformation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI fear that the barbaric mistake of the past will be people like you denying the validity of psychiatry.
Psychiatry, like all fields of medicine, is not a perfect science, but treating the brain is not quite as simple as treating the kidneys. In the last twenty years, extraordinary advances have been made in terms of understanding the etiology of psychiatric disease, and in turn, discovering drugs that treat those etiologies. However, when dealing with such a complex organ, targeting therapy is difficult. That is why so many psychiatric medications have side effects, especially the typical antipsychotic class. That doesn't mean that they are not useful and should not be used in certain cirumstances.
It has nothing to do with what I believe or being misled by psychiatry; I am not making any claims. I am simply citing well-designed studies; the scientific literature speaks for itself. Please explain what you consider proof! The references you provide are not science. Scientifically, studies to determine genetic markers of diseases are not difficult to conduct. By the way, I actually agree that psychiatry is far to removed from the hard sciences and relies far too much on individual experience.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo, your logic is that if something is immeasurable, then it does not exist. That seems to be uninformed or very arrogant. It would be arrogant to say that we humans are capable of measuring anything that truly exists. The news on the streets is that we only know a tiny slice of what can ultimately be known; scientific studies double our knowledge base every 10 years and the speed of doubling is accelerating! However, there is ability to quantify, at least crudely, bipolar symptoms as well as many variables that increase the risk of having bipolar disorder. In regards to measuring genetic markers, yes, science absolutely can do that. It just is not done because of the great expense associated with it and, it would not change the approach to treatment; so why bother?
Increasingly complex subjects become increasingly harder to measure until at a certain level of complexity, there is a complete inability to quantify the subject. An example is the inexact science of measuring weather; there are an unknown number of variables. As our understanding of weather increases, and our technology increases too, our ability to estimate weather improves. I am a scientist that is considered an authority of validation of diagnostic tests and I can tell you that even low variable subjects often are measured by tests that only have low accuracy, repeatability, intermediate-precision, and poorly defined quantitation and detection limits, despite attempts at improved methodology. Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are incredibly complex diseases and that is why you may not be able to understand there existence.
Whether three antipsychotics are the best selling or most deadly is irrelevant to the discussion. How is it relevant? Antipsychotics are used only to reduce certain symptoms, not to cure; there is no cure for schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Again, what are you getting at? My best guess is that you are insinuating that pharmaceutical companies have an undue influence on psychiatry. Tell me something that I do not know.
In regards to your assertions about Soteria’s efficacy, there is no evidence that Soteria is more effective than antipsychotics. In addition, the Soteria approach does use antipsychotics as a secondary, but very common, part of the therapy, there admission, not mine. Furthermore, the Soteria approach is a drastic measure in regards to changes in lifestyle that at its worst is akin to living in a cultic commune.
The number of scientists studying schizophrenia and bipolar disorder under serves the significance of the diseases, but they are far more numerous than the off-the-wall scientists that would rather believe in faith-based science.
From my understanding, the reason that some want to discontinue the term Schizophrenia is that it isn't properly associated with a single pathology, rather it has become a catch-all for a variety of psychoses. They do not deny that people suffering from "Schizophrenia" are suffering from a form of mental illness; they just don't believe that the term is adequate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientology, like ArjanD, takes the position that there is no mental illness just a state of mind. This is likely because the snake oil they sell is based on the myth that a proper state of mind is all one requires to succeed. It is also likely based on the fact the psychiatric community rejected Hubbard's book dianetics.
The hypocrisy is that they should claim that the science of psychiatry is a fraud and pseudoscience while they themselves have been convicted of fraud, most recently in France and have no scientific backing for their "bible" dianetics or their "Advanced Technology" doctrines which contain the story of an alien Leader named Xenu "who, 75 million years ago, brought billions of his people to Earth in a DC-8-like spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes and killed them using hydrogen bombs." Apparently the, "essences of these many people remained, and they form around people in modern times, causing them spiritual harm". I guess that is what we are really supposed to be using as the basis of modern mental health care!
Like so many who oppose science and scientific discoveries they place an unreasonable "burden of proof" on competing theories while at the same time employing every fallacy in the book and asserting that anecdotes and exceptional data taken out of context is all they need to force their world-view on us all. It truly shakes my faith in democracy that people like these get to vote.
Part 1 of 2 reply to ArganD
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt has nothing to do with what I believe or being misled by psychiatry; I am not making any claims. I am simply citing well-designed studies; the scientific literature speaks for itself. Please explain what you consider proof! The references you provide are not science. Scientifically, studies to determine genetic markers of diseases are not difficult to conduct. By the way, I actually agree that psychiatry is far to removed from the hard sciences and relies far too much on individual experience.
So, your logic is that if something is immeasurable, then it does not exist. That seems to be uninformed or very arrogant. It would be arrogant to say that we humans are capable of measuring anything that truly exists. The news on the streets is that we only know a tiny slice of what can ultimately be known; scientific studies double our knowledge base every 10 years and the speed of doubling is accelerating! However, there is ability to quantify, at least crudely, bipolar symptoms as well as many variables that increase the risk of having bipolar disorder. In regards to measuring genetic markers, yes, science absolutely can do that. It just is not done because of the great expense associated with it and, it would not change the approach to treatment; so why bother?
Part 2 of 2 reply to ArjanD
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIncreasingly complex subjects become increasingly harder to measure until at a certain level of complexity, there is a complete inability to quantify the subject. An example is the inexact science of measuring weather; there are an unknown number of variables. As our understanding of weather increases, and our technology increases too, our ability to estimate weather improves. I am a scientist that is considered an authority of validation of diagnostic tests and I can tell you that even low variable subjects often are measured by tests that only have low accuracy, repeatability, intermediate-precision, and poorly defined quantitation and detection limits, despite attempts at improved methodology. Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are incredibly complex diseases and that is why you may not be able to understand there existence.
Whether three antipsychotics are the best selling or most deadly is irrelevant to the discussion. How is it relevant? Antipsychotics are used only to reduce certain symptoms, not to cure; there is no cure for schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Again, what are you getting at? My best guess is that you are insinuating that pharmaceutical companies have an undue influence on psychiatry. Tell me something that I do not know.
In regards to your assertions about Soteria’s efficacy, there is no evidence that Soteria is more effective than antipsychotics. In addition, the Soteria approach does use antipsychotics as a secondary, but very common, part of the therapy, there admission, not mine. Furthermore, the Soteria approach is a drastic measure in regards to changes in lifestyle that at its worst is akin to living in a cultic commune.
The number of scientists studying schizophrenia and bipolar disorder under serves the significance of the diseases, but they are far more numerous than the off-the-wall scientists that would rather believe in faith-based science.
ArjanD, it has nothing to do with what I believe or being misled by psychiatry; I am not making any claims. I am simply citing well-designed studies; the scientific literature speaks for itself. Please explain what you consider proof! The references you provide are not science. Scientifically, studies to determine genetic markers of diseases are not difficult to conduct. By the way, I actually agree that psychiatry is far to removed from the hard sciences and relies far too much on individual experience.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo, your logic is that if something is immeasurable, then it does not exist. That seems to be uninformed or very arrogant. It would be arrogant to say that we humans are capable of measuring anything that truly exists. The news on the streets is that we only know a tiny slice of what can ultimately be known; scientific studies double our knowledge base every 10 years and the speed of doubling is accelerating! However, there is ability to quantify, at least crudely, bipolar symptoms as well as many variables that increase the risk of having bipolar disorder. In regards to measuring genetic markers, yes, science absolutely can do that. It just is not done because of the great expense associated with it and, it would not change the approach to treatment; so why bother?
Increasingly complex subjects become increasingly harder to measure until at a certain level of complexity, there is a complete inability to quantify the subject. An example is the inexact science of measuring weather; there are an unknown number of variables. As our understanding of weather increases, and our technology increases too, our ability to estimate weather improves. I am a scientist that is considered an authority of validation of diagnostic tests and I can tell you that even low variable subjects often are measured by tests that only have low accuracy, repeatability, intermediate-precision, and poorly defined quantitation and detection limits, despite attempts at improved methodology. Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are incredibly complex diseases and that is why you may not be able to understand there existence.
Whether three antipsychotics are the best selling or most deadly is irrelevant to the discussion. How is it relevant? Antipsychotics are used only to reduce certain symptoms, not to cure; there is no cure for schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Again, what are you getting at? My best guess is that you are insinuating that pharmaceutical companies have an undue influence on psychiatry. Tell me something that I do not know.
In regards to your assertions about Soteria’s efficacy, there is no evidence that Soteria is more effective than antipsychotics. In addition, the Soteria approach does use antipsychotics as a secondary, but very common, part of the therapy, there admission, not mine. Furthermore, the Soteria approach is a drastic measure in regards to changes in lifestyle that at its worst is akin to living in a cultic commune.
The number of scientists studying schizophrenia and bipolar disorder under serves the significance of the diseases, but they are far more numerous than the off-the-wall scientists that would rather believe in faith-based science.
My apologies for the multiple posting.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ openajna
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell, you know. I am on the sceptic end here. I say: where's the proof?
You are the one believing in the magic teapot that's flying somewhere but you can't see "yet" where....
Psychiatry has no proof schizophrenia is a brain disease. Because if they would, wouldn't patients be put under a scanner to diagnose?
No... you say, because "we got proof but we can't 'yet' proof it".
Sure... I don't think that counts as valid evidence that schizophrenia is a brain disease.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
And science shows, people are better off without treatment. 40% grows over it naturally in 2-4 years, compared to never recover anymore and die 30 years sooner.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/ignored-the-mentally-ill-killed-by-drugs-that-are-meant-to-help-them-951821.html
http://www.madinamerica.com/
Why wouldn't you take those scientists serious? I believe you are the one with some questionable interests.
Psychiatry does more harm then good. Science shows this:
http://www.madinamerica.com/Mad%20In%20America/Documents_files/50-yearrecord.pdf
"there is no cure for schizophrenia or bipolar disorder"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow do you know, if you can't measure if it exists?
You should study your own reasoning, you will find how filled it is with assumptions based on other assumptions, to ultimately come to the same conclusion: "schizophrenia is a incurable disease".
Still: there is no proof for that. Some people who get that label have severe mental problems, others say that they do not have any problems at all, other then the psychiatrist hurting them with 'treatment'.
How is that possible? Let's first understand: it is just wet finger work. There is no science to it. There is no evidence for a disease.
So how can you make the claim that it is incurable?
You can't, but still you do, because you believe in the dogma that forms the core of psychiatry.
It is just a sickness religion, and again and again it is shown how harmful this religion is. Millions of people swallow antidepressants, and science shows: it is scientific fraud going on:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505564
An 'active' placebo (with a side effect that users can feel) is 100% as effective, but antidepressants increase the risk for suicide, cause blocking of love for people, cause murder and cause genetic damage in the offspring.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091014193213.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3073502/Anti-depressants-may-cause-infertility-in-men.html
Birth defects: http://meddesktop.blogspot.com/2009/10/philadelphia-jury-find-glaxosmithkline.html
I mean, why don't you get the picture here? Psychiatry is a undeniable scam. I am not saying this because of religion or feelings, but because it is the reality. I am not talking about intentions of psychiatrists here, because I don't know them. I just look at the facts. And I have many more references, I am following psychiatry using the Google News Reader for +/- 3 years now. It also got me to this article.
I include this post, not to be argumentative, but to inform the readers about where I come from.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have a religious faith, but it leads me to adopt an attitude of "detachment." St. Ignatius of Loyala described it best, I believe. Whatever state I find myself in (rich or poor, sick or healthy, long- or short-lived, well-known or unknown, respected or despised, etc.), God intends it for my redemption. Therefore, I shouldn't worry overly much about my condition, whatever it may be. Rather, I do what I can and don't worry about what I can't do, trusting God to have my best interests at heart.
I have found a significant number of religious people -- even those I count as brothers and sisters -- to be rather intolerant of mental illness, trying to attach a moral responsibility to it that isn't there. I am not morally responsible for having clinical depression -- and a rather severe case of it. I am morally responsible to take my medications as prescribed, continually in consultation with my mental health specialist. I am morally responsible because when my depression is not under control, I hurt the people around me through anger, instability, unreliability, vocational disability, etc. I could list several more ___-abilities. :o)
On a slightly different note. Concerning "proof" of mental illness or the efficacy of medications, my doctor told me if a medicine doesn't help, I don't need it; if it does, I do. The meds I take (both antidepressant and anti-psychotic) help me tremendously. I cannot function or make a living without them. They enable me to be a self-supporting, contributing member of society. That's all the proof I need!
Understand, of course, that not all medications are effective for me; so, I don't use those. My psychiatrist helps me discover those that are effective, and she prescribes the proper combinations in the proper amounts. I understand that those amounts and combinations will change as I get older. I accept that. After all, what's the alternative?
People who don't know what they're talking about should keep their mouths shut. How does the proverb go? "It is better to remain silent and let people think you are a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
By the way, I could ask those like ArjanD that try to wax eloquent on the intricacies of logic, "Do you want to be right? or do you want a positive result?" Too often, we sacrifice effectiveness and helpfulness -- along with truth and compassion -- in our quest to prove ourselves right. Ego is a cruel taskmaster.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs someone who has schizophrenic myself, I find the assertion that "psychiatry is a scam" both insulting and false. When you have absolutely no factual basis to refute the established evidence that someone actually behaves differently, as manifested by strange behavior that sometimes endangers not only oneself but also others, you cannot falsify psychiatry as an establishment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFor whoever who has left this original comment, the high degree of thoughtlessness is appalling. It is obvious that he/she is confusing reality with theory. An illness is never a label. Diagnosing someone with schizophrenia is not itself a mere act of labeling. As someone who has benefited from the development of the newer generations of antipsychotics, I think I am qualify to state that this blatant arrogance and ignorance should be condemned.
When medicine is treated like a game and fancy and crazy theories are touted as genuine possible substitutes for treatment options, one must ask the questions: On what basis are such assertions made? What are the credentials of such person(s) making such claims?
I hope that everyone would show more respect to established scientific facts rather than fabricating alternate realities to satisfy some obscure agenda.
@Donnie, "Whatever state I find myself in (rich or poor, sick or healthy, long- or short-lived, well-known or unknown, respected or despised, etc.), God intends it for my redemption." so please explain to me what an infant could possibly have done to justify your god inflicting rape, torture and murder on him/her in order for her to earn her redemption? Perhaps you can explain what children born into poverty, drought, famine, disease, and physical, sexual and mental abuse need to be redeemed for? If god is indeed the way you describe him then he shouldn't be worshiped; he should be hunted down and destroyed. Perhaps he should have himself tortured in order to redeem himself.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Do you want to be right? or do you want a positive result?" I want the truth. Only from that can we find a solution.
Please don't take that as an endorsement of ArjanD. There is nothing logical about what he has said.
Well Robert, I too believe in God and that he has a grand purpose but not for everyone. Bad things happen to good people and good things happen to really bad people. It's not all 'planned' as so many religionists cling to the notion. It is troubling, to say the least, that after a horrible tragedy befalls some, for instance- the mass killing at Ft. Hood in Texas- they'll talk about the survivors as though God had spared them for some greater work or the victims that God needed them in Heaven or some other hogwash. If that were true, it would make God an accomplice to the crime.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat is possible is developing a relationship with God and 'softening the face of God' through prayer to get help with things but we have to accept the fact he's not micro-managing everyone's life or decided our fate or even taking the trouble to know our fate in most instances. Like you say, some are born into horrible circumstances and die young and badly. God is taking care of the BIG PICTURE and taking note of individuals who attempt to live according to his rules.
But as it says in Ecclesiastes, 'time and unforseen occurence befall us all". Like so many, Donnie wants to think God 'intended' certain challenges on us specifically to refine us etc. Just living life will do that. Good thing God ISN'T like that, that would truly be hell on earth.
Why did someone survive a nasty battle in war while many around them died? They'll tell you God did it and they're trying to figure out why...it's just chance!
So much of modern-day christendomic thinking is muddled by Greek philosophy. You don't have to strain to hear the influence of belief that Clotho, Lachesis & Atropos are hard at work deciding every individuals fate; 'when your number's up, nothing you can do!'.....'it just wasn't my time to die'.
At least Greek mythology had a tiny bit more believability than the crap Scientologists like this cat Arjan is carping.
@ Donnie
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere is a citation from an American professor who gave up his title "psychiatrist" in disgust off the fraud going on with antipsychotics. Do you really believe those people do this for an EGO? Come on!
"For over a decade Loren R Mosher, MD, held a central position in American psychiatric research.
He was the first Chief of the Center for Studies of Schizophrenia at the National Institute of Mental Health, 1969-1980. He founded the Schizophrenia Bulletin and for ten years he was its Editor-in-Chief. He led the Soteria Project.
The Soteria research demonstrated that there is a better way: A better way to treat schizophrenia and other psychoses that destroy the lives of so many young people. The Soteria research showed that the prevalent excessive destructive psychiatric drugging of all these young people is a huge and tragic mistake. The psychiatric establishment was offended. Prestige and Money won. Truth and Love lost.
The success of Soteria was the reason that Dr Mosher was forced to leave his key position in American psychiatry."
http://www.moshersoteria.com/soteri.htm
There are hundreds of professors just like him. You see my point now?
Truly interesting story. Only by reading the interview, without other elements, it might seem that, may be, she suffer from a psychotic form of bipolar disorder nor schizophrenia.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGreetings
ArjanD, you continue to purposely hide the fact that Soteria therapy uses anti-psychotics. You also have no evidence that thousands of real scientists support Soteria. There also is a large body of work that Soteria is no more effective than anti-psychotics alone and that the reason is that anti-psychotics is used along with the extreme change in lifestyle of the Soteria patient, effectively removing them from the rest of society.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisArjanD, your citations are ridiculous and not science based. Really, a blog as a citation, unbelievable. None of us can teach you what once was a belief such as the earth is round. It will sadly take time to get through to people like you. Even then, there are people that do not believe in the holocaust.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@rockjohny, "christendomic thinking is muddled by Greek philosophy", what evidence do you have that says you are right and they are wrong? Perhaps god is micro-managing our affairs. According to the bible he has committed mass murder many times in the past so I wouldn't say it would be uncharacteristic for him to bring down a plane because there was a "sinner" on board, or devastate a nation because the people wouldn't follow his word or inflict people with illness to see how their faith withstands the challenge. It does appear that you are trying to "soften the face of god" but you seem to be doing it so you personally are more comfortable with him. Are you re-creating him in your image?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBrainlobe, I don't think so but I will not definitively argue that she is possibly bipolar I. Bipolar is a spectrum disorder and there is debate whether Schizophrenia is jut the extreme of the bipolar spectrum. Your argument is also supported in that three genetic variants of the two disorders are shared. I believe that the amount of psychotic behavior and her lack of impulsive behavior that includes reckless behavior such as excessive spending, harmfull sexual exploits, and gambling denote the differences between the two illnesses. Regardless, her ability to function at such a high level is an inspiration.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNeither do I have the answer, the mine was only a suggestion, and the current state of knowledge does not allow to go beyond the clinical impressions, however sophisticated. You speak of the theory of continuum in which psychosis is one of the worst ends, the bad extreme. Sharing of some gene allows only theories for the time. The lack of impulsive behavior is not sufficient for the exclusion, such as the presence is not an indispensable characteristic. Many bipolar are sages. Sorry but the inspirations? on the contrary maybe is the element that makes the difference. This story reminds me of "A beautiful mind": the same diagnostic problem.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBrainlobe, I agree with you, and obviously, my reply is also just a possibility. The ability to label the diseases is just an attempt by psychiatry at classifying the illnesses in a neat boxes. The most important issue is what treatments work and there is definitely overlap there; it just does not make for neat boxes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you for relevant replies from you and all the others except ArjanD. I know we have freedom of speech, but to purposely attempt to force his opinion without evidence is very sad.
I have no problem with those that have a belief in a God unless they have faith without debate due to insecurities. In regard to others ascribing to God what makes them feel safe or neatly connect inconsistences, I give a very disturbing quotation.
I am convinced that men who are created by God should live in accordance with the will of the Almighty. If providence had not guided us, I could often never have found these dizzy paths.
– Adolf Hitler
@ dwayneneal
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA blog as citation yes, that reports about a lawsuit that you could have found to have happened, in which GlaxoSmithKline paid 2.5 million dollar because it's antidepressant has caused birth defects in a baby.
I have hundreds of other resources. Why exactly are you trying to make me look bad like this? Please look in your heart, is it honest over there?
Regarding Soteria not being effective, or just as effective as antipsychotics, here is a citation of science journalist Robert Whitaker.
"The Soteria House experiment worked better than Mosher had expected. Over the initial six weeks, patients recovered as quickly as those treated with medication in hospitals. Whitaker notes, "Even more striking, the Soteria patients were staying well longer. Relapse rates were lower for the Soteria group at both one-year and two-year follow-ups. The Soteria patients were also functioning better socially -- better able to hold jobs and attend schools."
This was from a article: "It's over for psychiatry in the US" recently:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-e-levine/congress-pummels-establis_b_117016.html
You seem to be ignoring some major facts here, dwayneneal .
There is no proof for any schizophrenia genes. It is scientific fraud that makes people believe there is. Again and again psychiatrists start expensive research to such genes, but untill now without any results!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSee the book: "The Missing Gene"
http://www.amazon.com/Missing-Gene-Psychiatry-Heredity-Fruitless/dp/0875864104
This year the largest schizophrenia-gene research ever was completed, and again: NO EVIDENCE for any genetic cause for the unmeasurable brain disorder schizophrenia.
http://www.naturalnews.com/024131.html
A citation:
"The reason that this latest study did not find evidence for a gene is that there are no such genes," said Jay Joseph, author of "The Missing Gene: Psychiatry, Heredity, and the Fruitless Search for Genes."
"For 25 years, psychiatry has been looking for a schizophrenia gene," he said. "They keep failing."
"Research has never shown any link between genes and schizophrenia," said Mary Boyle, emeritus professor of clinical psychology from the University of East London. "There has been a vast amount of time and money spent. Yet nothing has come from it. If people want to continue this research, good luck to them. But my worry is that they are being given public funding."
Well... who should we believe here? 1000 psychiatrists who claim otherwise or these scientists who claim psychiatrists are committing scientific fraud? I believe it is not that hard to chose the honest side in this matter.
ArjanD, you continue to make non-science based arguments as your basis for believing that mental illness is a lie. You then cite nothing of worth in the support in your hypothesis. I am not trying to make you look bad. You are making yourself look bad and are obviously self-conscious about your lack of proof as indicated by me over and over again. Acknowledge that Soteria has not been rigorously studied in controlled studies, and that it's success is confounded by the use of psychotics as they have admitted. You continue to avoid responding to their use of anti-psychotics. Even after I admonish your use of non-scientific citations such as the blog post (you can find any belief in a non-science based article), you use The Huffington Post. This is why it is ridiculous for you to have a sound foundation in your belief system and the reason that you are being soundly pummeled by all the others that have replied to your posts. I follow the science based studies as scientists are trained to be non-biased, for the most part, and only care about what the right answer is, not pre-determining the answer because of their bias. You are pre-determining your answer because you have closed your mind to any other possibility. That is sad as that essentially removes your ability to be able to discern the truth with ever changing information. If further information is found, I will change my opinion because I do not have ownership of the truth; I just make decisions on the best available information. Your information is snake oil and you are unable, not incapable, to discern that.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ArjanD, "You seem to be ignoring some major facts here", the problem is you are trying to turn opinions into facts. A lawsuit about the side effects of a drug has nothing to do with whether or not mental illness exists. An article about a corrupt doctor says nothing about the reality of mental illness. Again, you use blogs and anecdotes to justify your opinion while dismissing the science. What science have you done to validate your accusations? What responsibility do you accept for telling people to ignore their doctors and instead follow your advice? If there is corruption here it is in you and your willingness to impose your personal world view on others.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I have hundreds of other resources." I have billions of resources that say you are a nut. You can make up any numbers you want. Ultimately, if you had anything more conclusive than what you have presented thus far you would have started with that. All that you have demonstrated is that medical science is not perfect. That is no surprise to anyone. But it does not imply that mental illness is a fraud. Again, please apply the same burden of proof you require of science to your own paranoid delusions.
I am anxious to join the debate; but where to begin? (The conversation is so fascinating). Let's just say that the practice of psychiatry has come a long way in the last 20 years. As with any medical specialty, psychiatry is both a science and an art. It deals with 'mental illnesses'...highly complex 'ailments'.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo 'ArjanD' are you, perhaps, a person, once diagnosed with a mental illness, who has since been convinced that you never had such an ailment?? if you were, in fact, misdiagnosed, and are now 'recovered' you are indeed fortunate. What isn't so fortunate is that you have set yourself up as a spokesperson for those who say that psychiatry is all 'bunk'. I sincerely hope that you personally never have to live the reality that 'severe and persistant mental illness' causes others to live with.
ArjanD, you represent the essential problem with the internet. You make claims that are unsupported by any actual science in an attempt to confound those that do not understand science, medicine, or the imperfect search for truth. You are an intellectual terrorist and the fruits of your labor should you succeed are the pains and anguish of the families suffering from mental illness.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisrobert schmidt: Your response to ArjanD is brilliant. You and dwayneneal are a beacon of light in a world of ignorance. I can also say the same for several others who have posted some excellent comments to Ms Sak’s story. With the exception of ArjanD, the discussion has been informative, interesting and thought provoking. With the 2 dozen people that have made comments on this story, I would like to salute your high level of intellect and integrity. With your intelligence and intellectual curiosity to seek truth and understanding, we collectively will find a means of ameliorating the debilitating effects of this disease.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisArjanD
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI apologize if I came across harsh in earlier replies. My harshness hopefully was directed at what I considered unfortunate conclusions, not your person.
I don't want to flagellate you, I just want to try to understand you and to provide an assesment of you for your benefit. I am not a health care provider, so consider my assessment on that basis. From my observation, you may have several thought errors including grandiosity, leaps in logic, paranoia, and delusional thinking. These are common in even healthy people at some point in their life, or even on a regular basis in certain circumstances. By no means am I saying that you have thought errors all the time. You may only have a strong opinion about mental illness that has turned into a belief that may now be immovable, and for personal reasons you have become greatly passion about it. The errors in thinking, if extreme, as in most aspects of life, point to the possibility of a mental health concern that needs treatment. If I had to guess, I would guess that you could have bipolar disorder. If that is the case, then you may not have the ability to self-assess. Please at least consider my words of genuine concern for your own well-being.
Ms. Elyn Saks: I have one last comment and that is: THANK YOU for your story and your achievements. YOU ARE an inspiration to those who suffer this dreadful disease. On a personal note, my son suffers from this disease and it has been a very difficult 10 year journey of heartbreak and tears for all of us. My sister once said to me -look! Take your eyes off of yourself and consider your son for a moment. While you can talk about it, he has to LIVE it every day.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne day my son looked up at us with tear-filled eyes and said ,of us three kids, why me?, It took us five years to convince him that he had schizophrenia and another four or five years to convince him that some medications will help him. The meds have indeed helped him. There are side effects but at least we have most of our son back from the abyss. We knew he was doing so much better when he started to laugh again. Yes, to laugh and make jokes. (So far as I know, we are the only creatures on the planet who can laugh.)
We look forward to the day when scientists and psychiatrists can analyze a patient's DNA and genetic makeup and be able to determine more precisely, what medications will blunt the effects of this disease. We are getting close to that with some medications we have now for other diseases.
We have a local NAMI program that offers recovering consumers a chance to speak to others about their mental illness. It,s called In Their Own Voice and many have recovered some of their lives through proper medications, therapy and the persistent care given by their families. There is hope, real hope and these young people with schizophrenia that have gained some significant recovery in coping with the disease can attest to the efficacy of the medications that are currently available out there.
Yes, I agree with some of you about the term Schizophrenia. Split-brain. It,s like using the term Nervous Breakdown back in the 1950,s as a catch-all term for a whole collection of mental illness. Again Ms Saks, thanks for sharing your story. You are a very courageous person and your story is resonating with many people. RM
It's incredible that today, twentyfirst century and all, there are still people denying the existence of schizophrenia. That's as wrong as denying Alzheimer's disease, Down's syndrome or drug addiction. There's lot of scientific evidence out there if you take some time to find it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWow, dwayneneal. I'd say your post is even more unenlightened - "the surgeon general's report on mental health states that "the precise causes (etiology) of mental disorders are not known" and "there is no definitive lesion, laboratory test, or abnormality in brain tissue that can identify (a mental) illness." The Textbook of Clinical Psychiatry (1999) states: " ... Validation of the diagnostic categories as specific entities has not been established."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is pretty well known that there's never been any 'proof' of mental illness. Almost any psychiatrist will admit to such, that it's still theory. Please become better informed.
Oh, but Murrayhill, people do recover from schizophrenia. E. Fuller Torrey called it the rule of thirds, although some estimate it could be as high as half of all schizophrenics do eventually recover, with or without medication. John Nash, for one. He stopped taking all psychiatric drugs in the 70s. Such a shame that you're frightening patients and their families, and removing all hope. Please don't give anyone a reality check until you're sure of the reality.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMs. Sak, I hope you get a chance to read your comments. Want to commend you on courageously sharing your story and struggles. Looking forward to buying your memoir - “The Center Cannot Hold". But I wonder if you mention in your memoir that recovery is possible. You say stress is a trigger for the several day episodes. Have you considered that some trauma may have precipitated your psychosis to begin with? And that confronting and dealing with that trauma may bring you to recovery? Have you heard of Dr. Dan Edmunds
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://danledmunds.blogspot.com/
Thank you so much for sharing. Wishing you well.
I'm a psychiatrist and i'm still shocked by the amount of nonsense exposed in this comments thread.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is PROOF of mental illness. First than anything, we have clinical evidence. Second, we have these days wonderful studies with PET Scan, that show exactly which areas of the brain have ceased functioning during every phase of schizophrenia. Frontal lobes, amygdala, association areas, thalamus, auditory cortex. All of them change, compared to a normal person. And you can measure that, compare it, and watch the changes that medication cause on people when adequately treated.
Psychiatry of course, is not a static science. We have learnt in the last 30 years more about the functioning of the brain than all we did in the centuries before. The "black box" paradygm ("uh, the brain is a wonderful machine but we will never know what is going on in there") has ceased to be a reality, and every day that passes, more information is gathered. These are great times to study the brain and get insight about what's going on in our minds, but it requires an open mind and forget about myths and stop repeating stuff that has ceased to be useful decades ago.
There's this myth that states "We only use 10% of our brain, just imagine what would happen if we could use 100% !". That myth is wonderful for Hollywood and sci-fi writers, but the truth is that we use 100% of our brain all the time. The only difference today is that we now KNOW what are those other areas for.
Besides, just an ethics thing. When do you call something a disease ? Well, simply put, when the condition is unwanted and it makes the patient suffer, or causes suffering to others.
Drug use, for example, is not a disease. Drug addiction, on the other hand, is. Basically because addiction is not wanted and takes from the patient his freedom to choose.
I've never known a single patient with schizophrenia who says that they want to be sick or that they enjoy their condition. Most of the time, schizophrenia causes great grief and suffering for the patients and their families. If you want to know if it is a disease or not, i suggest you to talk to the realtives and see what they think.
As someone who has worked in mental health since 1968 I have obviously seen a lot. I am printing this article to share with some of my current patients. I try to help them see that their mental illness is just that, an illness that needs to be treated but does not need to stand in the way of their accomplishing their goals.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you Elyn Saks for being an inspiration.
josesaez at 06:52 AM on 12/31/09
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you for adding your post to try to inform the unelightened. I do not believe that it will help sway them as they have, unfortunately, closed minds. It is like trying to teach the world that the earth is round when it is common knowledge that the world is flat. Despite that, I have, and will continue to advocate for the mentally ill. The year 2010 marks a turning point in health care for those with mental illness as health insurance companies will be forced to treat mental illness just like physical illness in regards to medical coverage; far too late for many US citizens. Regardless of the inanity of a few posters here, we are winning the uphill battle. As more efficacious and better targeted drugs (fewer side-effects) become available, we will see increasingly more successful treatment options. As psychiatry becomes less of an art form, as you and other realistic people suggest is currently the case, we will see far better outcomes. I just wish that psychiatrists in general, would be far better advocates for mental ill patients rights. From my vantage point, I do not see enough advocacy by mental health care providers. Could you respond to my observation? I would like to hear whether my observation is accurate and if so, how we can campaign for their support in advocacy? Again, thank you for joining the discussion.
cmorgan
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPersonal attacks are illogical. A summary of the surgeon generals actual statements regarding mental illnes can be found at surgeongeneral dot com and a direct quote is:
Contemporary studies of the brain and behavior are racing to fill in the picture by elucidating specific neurobiological and genetic mechanisms that are the platform upon which a person’s life experiences can either strengthen mental health or lead to mental illness. It now is recognized that factors that influence brain development prenatally may set the stage for a vulnerability to illness that may lie dormant throughout childhood and adolescence. Similarly, no single gene has been found to be responsible for any specific mental disorder; rather, variations in multiple genes contribute to a disruption in healthy brain function that, under certain environmental conditions, results in a mental illness. Moreover, it is now recognized that socioeconomic factors affect individuals’ vulnerability to mental illness and mental health problems. Certain demographic and economic groups are more likely than others to experience mental health problems and some mental disorders. Vulnerability alone may not be sufficient to cause a mental disorder; rather, the causes of most mental disorders lie in some combination of genetic and environmental factors, which may be biological or psychosocial.
Cmorgan, being an authority in validation of diagnostics, I can confidently say that lack of validation does not mean that a target subject does not exist, it just means that it has not been validated. Plus, the categorization of mental illness into discrete boxes is unfortunately indicative of the complexity of mental illness and an attempt to improve the art aspect of psychiatry in better treatment of patients. General categorizations are used as starting points for treatment. Modifications for treatment are then not based on general categorizations, they are based on individual responses to treatment and the experience of the psychiatrist.
You'll have to do better than post untrueful statements and adding a citation as support. What is your agenda?
Oops, the link is actually surgeongeneral dot gov
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisArjanD II is born! He is cmorgan!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSee cmorgan's 11:57 PM on 12/30/09 post that is directly pulled from yet another impartial source, which he failed to cite. The source purposely used the 1999 Surgeon General's report out of context! Th method of argument in the article and used by cmorgan and Argan D is particularly disturbing and shows a lack of honesty, maturity, and scholarly approach. This is the same approach that enables so many other forms of discrimination.
The unfortunate citation used by cmorgan is:
http://www.seattlepi.com/opinion/137089_mentalhealth29.html
Even the entire paragraph, which was so unfortunately taken out of context by our untruthful poster, does not describe the extent of the Surgeon General's stance if the entire report is read. The paragraph taken out of context disputes cmorgan's post.
"The precise causes (etiology) of most mental disorders are not known. But the key word in this statement is precise. The precise causes of most mental disorders—or, indeed, of mental health—may not be known, but the broad forces that shape them are known: these are biological, psychological, and social/cultural factors."
I tire of the failure of the ArjanD's/cmorgan's of the world to engage in sincere, impartial, and meaningful discussions.
The quotation I included in response to cmorgans quote taken out of context is:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/chapter2/sec3.html
n response to:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiscmorgan at 12:10 AM on 12/31/09
cmorgan: Your Dr Edmunds has a degree in Theology and is an existential psycho-therapist. His "doctorate' is in Education with his emphasis on religion, NOT medical science. Good grief, you have the audacity to refer people to a blog of an "arm chair scientist" and Theologian to address a complex MEDICAL issue such as Schizophrenia? This ranks up there with the Alchemists of the Middle Ages. It's junk science. The non-medical doctor Edmunds starts his blog by his observations he has made while sitting at his desk in his classroom. He makes the classic "post hoc fallacy" in the first paragraph of his blog.
The Rule of Thirds and "some" estimate half - this is total nonsense and a misrepresentation of Dr. Torrey's remarks on the subject: "Surviving Schizophrenia. 129. He quoted a study done of 70 patients around 1900-1920 who "presumably" were diagnosed with, what we refer to today as Schizophrenia Affected Disorder. He went on to say that recent studies have concluded that this Rule of Thirds was overly simplistic and out of date. He did not make up this Rule by the way.
I sense that your coming from a C.S. theology agenda which claims that health care is not attempted through drugs, surgery, or other conventional methods but (through C.S. treatment), a specific form of prayer intended to spiritualize thought. Refer to 'Surviving Schizophrenia" 4th Ed., by E. Fuller Torrey, MD, page395: "Many, if not most of the Scientologists and anti-psychiatrists are against the use of any psychiatric medications whatsoever." BTW, did you know that Mary Baker Eddy was not only against all medications but hygiene as well. "It is plain that God does not employ drugs or hygiene, nor provide them for human use; else Jesus would have recommended and employed them in his healing. &Pasted from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Baker_Eddy>
The forces behind 'psychiatry are NOT extraterrestrial.
Good heavens! Dr Spock, beam me up. I'm not sure there is intelligent life here! There are some great intellects who have posted their comments, e.g., josesaez, dwayneneal, robertschmidt, seesir1 and the like. Please re-read their comments. They are right on with maturity, logical insight, lack of bias and a great deal of understanding about the disease.
I have cared for a schizophrenic person for 25 years now and gained a great deal of empirical knowledge and hope. I organize and host Family Support Group Meetings every month for our local NAMI. I have a very good idea of the reality of the disease and I NEVER stated that it was without hope. Quite the contrary. I can't understand why people like yourself can read the written word and completely miss the point. You have to be reading this discussion with a pre-conceived bias to arrive at your conclusion. Wow! I think we still have a long way to go to reach enlightenment.
Cmorgan, you need to go back to Reading Comprehension 101 if you haven't been there! Then onto Logic 101.
I live in South America, so it's still very common to find the untouchable doctor who will be always right and won't listen to the patient at all. Fortunately, things are changing, and in 2001 the laws in Chile changed in order to protect the patient's rights. Informed consent is now a must before hospitalization and ECT; thanks to the internet, more and more patients know about the side effects and benefits of medications. More information means sometimes more confusion, and our role as a psychiatrists has a lot to do today with helping patients to find out the best evidence so they can take the best choices in treatment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSometimes, quitting a treatment can be a good thing - some other times it can be disasterous. That's our place as doctors these days - help people maked their own decisions.
So here you have it dwayneneal: there is no single piece of evidence for any brain disorder or genetic disease as cause for scientifically dubious labels. And what makes this the massive drugging for supposed brain disorders? A scam, right?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPsychiatry has no right to exist. If you think about it logically you know why. The human mind is more then what we can measure.
The only applications for psychiatry are War, Destruction and supressing problems what only leads to more and more supressed problems (look arround you for once: see the psychiatric epidemics)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPsychiatry causes humans to forget more and more how valuable life really is. We get indoctrinated that everything we are (our emotions, behaviour and thoughts) is a product of a chemical process in the brain that started once by pure coincidence.
Psychiatry is so incredible stupid actually. Psychiatry will anyway become a barbarian mistake of the past, but this should rather happen today then tomorrow. We forget sometimes we are still fighting for our survival and every second counts.
Psychiatry is a halter for humanity.
True strength is not a genetic 'perfect' human being according to proposed standards. True strength is a human who is born cripple with a genetic disease who manages to make it to a great scientist, such as Stephen Hawking.
It takes WILLPOWER. This is what we should understand as humans and this is why psychiatry has to be removed from society and replaced by honest alternatives. Of course they can do any research they want, but get them out of the brains of people without any evidence for a brain disorder.
As life we can never master life, we can only serve it. This is what we should get to understand.
@ArjanD, you have read nothing posted here except the propaganda you and cmorgan have attempted to spread. All that you have demonstrated is that you are ignorant of the facts, incapable of rational thought and brainwashed by your criminal cult. You have no intention of participating in an honest and open conversation. You are only here to spread your particular strain of the intellectual virus called religion. You are sad and pathetic and greatly in need of the science you reject. I'm done with you and your mental clone, cmorgan. Good luck with your thetans!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHum, Not manny folks have been around a true Schizophrenic. There are high funtioning ones as this gal is and those who are very much at the other spectrum, nearly unable to look after them selves. My Neighbor has screaming spells while she is home alone. And will hear kids outside and immidiatly open her door and scream at them to stop bothering her, she is unable to work due to her condition (Schizophrenia). She is calm one moment while talking to you and the next she is frantic that you have been talking about her at her favorite coffee shop. For some of these folks posting on here to say Schizophrenia and mental conditions don't exist is blind. You need to visit a psyciatric ward. You would see how wrong you are. How sad our society is not knowing the mental problems some people face. Its no wonder those with mental differances (conditions) are so misunderstood.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo far I am the one comming with good references that are related to the subject robert schmidt...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd what are you doing... attacking me and accusing me to be part of some cult?
Is that the only thing you've got? Me being a member of Scientology? (which is not the case...)
It's typical for pro-psychiatry people. They can only attack on the messenger because based on facts they will always lose.
I see this also in The Netherlands. Time after time it is made clear that there is no evidence for a brain disorder or genetic disease, and therefor no justification for brain medication. And then pro-psychiatry people will flee or start attacking the messenger or sources, making them look as bad as possible which they seem to find a reason to keep believing in psychiatry...
Get over it: psychiatry is a scam.
@ K5150
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat a woman has complex problems with the mind and is acting inexplicable doesn't proof she has a brain disorder.
As I mentioned in my first post also: as life we endeavor for stabilitiy in infinity. The human mind is a direct exponent of the source of life. You can imagine how immensely complex problems with the mind can get.
It is like trying to find something that you can never get. So why try to get it? And still you do/have to. Conclusion: it is highly complex.
But one thing is clear: without overcomming problems there is no progress.
Schizophrenia is not a disease that you have or not. There is no proof for that.
Complex problems with the mind are unique for every single person, and often require unique solutions.
By learning tricks to overcome some of the problems that lead to complex problems with the mind, people can recover 100% or even become stronger then they had ever been.
Some people don't understand what it takes to come to renewal. It sure ait floating on a cloud to it.
You can look at it like this: the human mind is in relation to the brain a bit like a trumpet in relation to the air that flows through it to produce a sound.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWith complex problems with the human mind there is often nothing wrong with the brain, but then you are playing if it were a false note.
It is then of course barbarian to ditch dents in the trumpet with drugs or other brain treatments to change the sound. It would be case to learn to produce a pure sound.
The human mind is more then a product of the building blocks because the measurable can't be the source of itself.
The matter of restraints is a difficult one, and I would ask Elyn to be cautious about restricting restraints. It's true that most schizophrenics are not dangerous, but some really are very dangerous.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTwo people I have known were once psychiatric techs. Both of them left after 10 or 15 years. The man left after he was finally ambushed successfully by a psychotic man who believed the voices telling him to kill the tech. He was hit in the back with a chair so hard the chair broke, and it broke two vertebrae in his spine. When he got out of the hospital he took a bus across the country and became a barber. Prior to that he had sustained stab wounds, bites and often came home with bruises.
I dated the woman former tech for a while. She left because of the many injuries she sustained. She had scars all over her arms from scratches. She had been stabbed with a pencil with intent to kill her. She had multiple scars from human bite wounds. Ribs had been broken after being stomped by a patient. She had feces shoved in her face and mouth so she wasn't sure she would live, drowning in a patient's feces. She was terribly traumatized by her work as a psychiatric technician. She went into it with a good heart. I don't think she will ever be able to recover from what she endured. Her work life was terribly abusive.
I couldn't continue to date her when she told me finally that to escape her psychiatric tech hell she had become a hooker. When she left, she couldn't find other work and she was a mess psychologically. We remained friends for a while, but her trauma and neediness was beyond my capacity.
The psychologists and psychiatrists who work with psychotics don't deal with violent patients day to day. Techs do, and psychiatrists and psychologists usually disregard them, treating them as a disposable lowly servant class. Who cares for them?
I don’t know where dwayneneal gets his anti recover propaganda from. I can say that in order for anything to be an illness there would have to a cellular brake down. What an illness is, is a brake down of a cell or cells, in so called mental illness no cell has ever been discovered to be affected in spit of all the millions of dollars wasted trying to find an effected cell. All the theories abut genetics is just theories, not based on scientific information. It is known that medication does change a person’s chemical make up but that in its self does not prove that mental health issues are a result of human chemistry. The genetic theories are just that, theories, certainly autopsies show chemical aberration in those diagnosed that is becomes of all the chemicals in the form of medication they have been taking subsequent to their death.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo now it all comes out where dwayneneal gets his hidden agenda from. Apparently it comes from Nami's, pharmaceutical company funded, Family to Family program. I should have known giving all the scientific the retric about some supposed genetic pre supposition to so called mental illness. Waighc up familiy members the Pharmaceutical campaniles are using your unfounded gilt for their own purposes. Mainly to spread anti recovery propaganda in order to make a profit for them selves.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo Dr josesaez, you are giving a medical term to unwanted conditions that is not vary scientific. The resrch you mentiond was cunducted at the tern of the 1900's that in hundreds of attempts has never duplicated. all the fancy pictures that you may like to look at only tells the story of what medications do to people.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@chas93101, "I can say that in order for anything to be an illness there would have to a cellular brake down." can you show us where in the medical literature that illness is defined the way you describe? Or are you just making that up?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The genetic theories are just that, theories" again you show your absolute ignorance about science. Scientifically speaking a theory is factual. It is supported by scientific evidence. You are clearly scientifically illiterate and have no business making judgements about science.
"certainly autopsies show chemical aberration in those diagnosed that is becomes of all the chemicals in the form of medication they have been taking subsequent to their death." can you prove that? Have you done one of those autopsies? Can you show us the medically accepted documents that state that the chemical imbalance of the subject was caused by medication rather than the underlying pathology or are you lying yet again?
What is the most distressing about you and your friends, ArjanD and cmorgan is the transparent display of your low moral character. You have demonstrated that you will lie, deliberately misinform and put people's health at peril in order to further your own personal world view. I once held the belief that there were no truly evil people. Bad people were just people who were confused but ultimately thought they were justified in their actions. But when people deliberately try to mislead others for personal gain then they must know what they are doing is wrong. You know what you are doing is unjustified and you know you are doing it for selfish reasons.
Psychopath: Lacking in conscience and empathy, they take what they want and do as they please, violating social norms and expectations without guilt or remorse.
ArjanD
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is laughable that you consider your references better than those that I and other have provided. Ours have been scientific journal studies while yours have been whack job run sites and blogs. You really ought to define what you consider what references are unbiased and science-based and which ones are based on emotion.
So far, we have been debating with an agenda, not a well-thought out understanding of the truth.
I meant that you are debating with an agenda unlike us.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is also clear that you are a disciple of Thomas Szasz.
Having said that, Szasz does remind us that psychiatry is not where it should be, nor will it be for decades to come. It does not however, refute that there are mental illnesses. To say that it does not exist is a reactive emotion to personal experiences. Scientific studies have shown an association between gene variants and morphological changes in the brain of mentally ill patients. Psychiatric medicines are often very helpful for some illnesses, although I agree as does the literature, that some very popular medicines are only slightly helpful.
Mental illnesses caused from physical changes in the brain would be expected just as physical changes to the pancreas would be expected to cause diabetes. Another example is the obvious plaques surrounding neurons in the brain and their association with Alzheimers. Are you going to dismiss Alzheimers too? If so, you are making even more incredulous statements. Seriously, how could this even be debatable.
You, as Szasz are not trying to seriously debate the merits of your stance, you are only trying to inflame your opposition. I will continue to provide truth against your lies, but I will no longer address you, as a one-sided debate is not a constructive use of my time and intellect.
ArjanD at 04:43 AM on 01/02/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn an earlier post, the poster above stated that mental illness could not be measurable. In the post cited at the top of this one, the poster argues:
The human mind is more then a product of the building blocks because the measurable can't be the source of itself.
chas93101 at 08:45 PM on 01/03/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNever did I say that you could not recover from symptoms of mental illness. However, I do say that once you have a mental illnes as severe as bipolar disorder, you are never cured, only controlled, if one is so lucky. Diabetes type I is often well controlled by insuling, but it is never cured. Someone with bipolar disorder is just one corner away from a serious episode, always.
Citations from just one scientific article regarding gene variants in mental illnesses to help you get a clue:
Gershon ES, Cloninger CR (eds.). Genetic Approaches to Mental Disorders. American Psychiatric Press: Washington, DC, 1994 p 376.
Potter WZ, Rudorfer MV, Manji H. The pharmacologic treatment of depression. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 633–642. | PubMed |
Lenox RH, Hahn CG. Overview of the mechanism of action of lithium in the brain: fifty-year update. J Clin Psychiatry 2000; 61S9: 5–15.
Mirnics K, Middleton FA, Lewis DA, Levitt P. Analysis of complex brain disorders with gene expression microarrays: schizophrenia as a disease of the synapse. Trends Neurosci 2001; 24: 479–486. | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
Mirnics K, Middleton FA, Marquez A, Lewis DA, Levitt P. Molecular characterization of schizophrenia viewed by microarray analysis of gene expression in prefrontal cortex. Neuron 2000; 28: 53–67. | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
Hakak Y, Walker JR, Li C, Wong WH, Davis KL, Buxbaum JD et al. Genome-wide expression analysis reveals dysregulation of myelination-related genes in chronic schizophrenia. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 98: 4746–4751. | Article | PubMed | ChemPort |
Kuromitsu J, Yokoi A, Kawai T, Nagasu T, Aizawa T, Haga S et al. Reduced neuropeptide Y mRNA levels in the frontal cortex of people with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Gene Expr Patterns 2001; 1: 17–21. | Article |
Mimmack ML, Ryan M, Baba H, Navarro-Ruiz J, Iritani S, Faull RL et al. Gene expression analysis in schizophrenia: reproducible up-regulation of several members of the apolipoprotein L family located in a high-susceptibility locus for schizophrenia on chromosome 22. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002; 99: 4680–4685. | Article | PubMed | ChemPort |
Bezchlibnyk YB, Wang JF, McQueen GM, Young LT. Gene expression differences in bipolar disorder revealed by cDNA array analysis of post-mortem frontal cortex. J Neurochem 2001; 79: 826–834. | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
Berrettini WH. Are schizophrenic and bipolar disorders related? A review of family and molecular studies. Biol Psychiatry 2000; 48: 531
chas93101 at 08:45 PM on 01/03/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have never heard of NAMI's Family to Family program. I also believe that pharmaceutical manufacturers, as any major business, unduely influence politicians and consumers to consumers even at the detriment to consumers. I also think that AMA is unfortunately, overly represented in U.S. politics and for that and many reasons, I believe that organizations should be severly restricted from lobbying congress. AMA is self-serving and one of the biggest causes in driving health care costs so high. Your argument does not add up that I have an agenda that serves the pharmaceutical industry. I understand the argument and your god-like devotion to Thomas Szasz, I just prefer to remain an unbiased observer of mental and physical illnesses, and scientific studies in general. I am a scientist, and I love to find the answer, not prove my hypothesis. I have to design studies to prove the answer and I am very well trained in being aware of my biases and how to avoid their influence on my own study design. I do have an agenda and that is finding the truth as well as exposing charlatans so that others are not harmed by their mischief.
chas93101 at 08:45 PM on 01/03/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have never heard of NAMI's Family to Family program. I also believe that pharmaceutical manufacturers, as any major business, unduely influence politicians and consumers to consumers even at the detriment to consumers. I also think that AMA is unfortunately, overly represented in U.S. politics and for that and many reasons, I believe that organizations should be severly restricted from lobbying congress. AMA is self-serving and one of the biggest causes in driving health care costs so high.
Your argument that I have an agenda that serves the pharmaceutical industry does not add up. I understand the argument and your god-like devotion to Thomas Szasz, I just prefer to remain an unbiased observer of mental and physical illnesses, and scientific studies in general. I am a scientist, and I love to find the answer, not prove my hypothesis. I have to design studies to prove the answer and I am very well trained in being aware of my biases and how to avoid their influence on my own study design. I do have an agenda and that is finding the truth as well as exposing charlatans so that others are not harmed by their mischief.
I love knowing the truth and having to adapt to new information. How new information, especially data that contradicts conventional understanding, is fascinating and invigorating.
chas93101 at 08:45 PM on 01/03/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have never heard of NAMI's Family to Family program. I also believe that pharmaceutical manufacturers, as any major business, unduely influence politicians and consumers to consumers even at the detriment to consumers. I also think that AMA is unfortunately, overly represented in U.S. politics and for that and many reasons, I believe that organizations should be severly restricted from lobbying congress. AMA is self-serving and one of the biggest causes in driving health care costs so high.
Your argument that I have an agenda that serves the pharmaceutical industry does not add up. I understand the argument and your god-like devotion to Thomas Szasz, I just prefer to remain an unbiased observer of mental and physical illnesses, and scientific studies in general. I am a scientist, and I love to find the answer, not prove my hypothesis. I have to design studies to prove the answer and I am very well trained in being aware of my biases and how to avoid their influence on my own study design. I do have an agenda and that is finding the truth as well as exposing charlatans so that others are not harmed by their mischief.
Regarding most recent comments, I suggest reading Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill by Robert Whitaker, c2002. It gives an update on the most welcome and very good Scientific America story.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhitaker ends his book with this, "In fact, if the past is any guide to the future, today we can be certain of only one thing: The day will come when people will look back at our current medicines for schizophrenia and the stories we tell to patients about their abnormal brain chemistry, and they will shake their heads in utter disbelief."
Regarding dwayneneal most recent commentsat 12:49 PM on 01/04/10 , I suggest reading Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill by Robert Whitaker, c2002. It gives an update on the most welcome and very good Scientific America story.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhitaker ends his book with this, "In fact, if the past is any guide to the future, today we can be certain of only one thing: The day will come when people will look back at our current medicines for schizophrenia and the stories we tell to patients about their abnormal brain chemistry, and they will shake their heads in utter disbelief."
Who is Thomas Szasz? He is Professor of Psychiatry Emeritus at the State University of New York Health Science Center in Syracuse, New York, Adjunct Scholar at the Cato Institute, Washington, D.C., author and lecturer. His classic The Myth of Mental Illness (1961) made him a figure of international fame and controversy. Many of his works--such as Law, Liberty, and Psychiatry, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, Ceremonial Chemistry, are regarded as among the most influential in the 20th century by leaders in medicine, law, and the social sciences.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am wondering about dwayneneal motivation in perpetrating the genetic lie about MH. Some one must be paying him to devote so much time and effort in promoting pharmaceutical propaganda. At a quick glance most of the 80 some comments are from dwayneneal. Considering his comments always echo big phamas agenda it should be a no brainier, to anyone, as to who is putting dwayneneal up to devoting so much time and energy promoting the reliance on psych meads.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisReply to: chas93101 at 09:58 PM on 01/04/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt appears that the intellectual terrorist's god is Thomas Szasz; the charlatan leading the charlatan. The concepts that he, Michel Foucault, R. D. Laing, andFranco Basaglia have perpetuated were formulated prior to any real understanding of the mental illnesses they so personally attacked. Thousands and thousands of scientific studies later, Szasz and his ilk have continued to believe what has so thoroughly been disproved. Szasz has had lesser influence with time because the foundations of his preaching are washed away by a sea of real data. He only has a few remaining arguments with merit such as psychiatry needs to be improved, that some approaches are less than helpful, and that patient rights must be further analyzed.
I love Einstein's quote, and even though it does not perfectly fit in this post, it does remind me of the three faces of ArjanD.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Just because you say it ad nauseum, does not make you right, it just makes you pig-headed, still wrong, and without any scientific references from this millennium.
I'm waiting for the fourth face of ArjanD; if you need help determining a new name, feel free to use "idiootvanhetjaar."
The psychopharmaceutical industrial complex (PPIC) and its adherence to the disease model pervades mainstream culture and greatly impacts psychotherapy. Consequently, the effects of the PPIC may have resulted in some psychiatric consumers adopting disease-model messages in ways similar to cult indoctrination. Consumer adoption of the disease model can create obstacles to treatment when hope is fundamental. In this article, I draw parallels between cult indoctrination and PPIC techniques and note similarities between cult members and consumers who are vulnerable to losing their identities to the PPIC. Suggestions for the profession of mental health counseling and those working with these consumers conclude the article. (read the article here>>> http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The%20loss%20of%20client%20agency%20into%20the%20psychopharmaceutical--industrial...-a0209535636
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMore than $24 billion worth of antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs were dispensed in 2008--almost a 48-fold increase since 1986 (Pringle, 2006; Elias, 2009). Such expenditure would employ 240,000 psychotherapists earning an annual income of $100,000 to provide 6 million hours of psychotherapy averaging 25 client-hours a week. These figures do not include what would be possible using the additional revenue generated by the sales of antianxiety, hypnotic, and psychostimulant medications.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow has the disease model for emotional disorders become the dominant discourse causing so many people to use neuropharmaceuticals as the best defense against emotional and behavioral symptoms? The purpose of this article is to offer an explanation, although not an absolute one, to account for how clients come to accept the disease model of emotional distress and to otter suggestions for working with them.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Thelossofclientagencyintothepsychopharmaceutical--industrial...-a0209535636
The articles you cited are not scientific studies and the secondary citations are not convincing. The secondary references that were "scientific" had severe internal validity errors that resulted in useless data at best and misleading conclusions at worse. In the papers I read, the authors appear to have made unsound conclusions due to their inability to recognize the limitations of their study designs. The papers I read, in my humble opinion, do not appear to be properly peer reviewed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy do you continue to disregard sound scientific studies in favor of quack science? I have read many of your references; have you ready any of those that I provided? If you have difficulty understanding the more technical science of gene variants or any of the other hard science concepts, I humbly volunteer my services to help you.
Do you want a real story I will tell you all about my battle with bipolar what caused it, how I figured out what was wrong with me and how poor the medical system in Canada really is.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have been diagnosed bipolar since 1987, and I've yet to find a mood stabilizer that "works." I feel much, much better since I stopped denying the true nature of my "disorder" and began calling my manic episodes shamanic experiences and spiritual emergences, and began supplementing with high doses of high quality fish oil, and yoga. It's been a true life change, and well worth it. I feel much of my brain atrophied during the years of going along with psychiatry, and now I'm getting my brain back. I couldn't be happier, and my moods more level. This after five major "manic episodes," countless visits to the hospital, and many pharmaceuticals.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA side note...You offered insight into one of my memories. My father was restrained and on medication. I walked into his room and with everything he could muster, he looked at his restraints and said, "Cruelty to animals." My heart broke, but I was still in a state, where I trusted the medical staff over my own urges to free him--at least while someone was in the room with him.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Messenger at 12:29 PM on 01/06/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am sad that you and your dad had such a horrible experience. I have never been restrained or seen a loved one restrained. I can only imagine the horror and offer you my condolences. I hope that your dad was able to find health, and I hope that you do not suffer the memories.
orangepurple at 12:02 PM on 01/06/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCongratulations on finding relief from your suffering. It does not matter how you find health as long as you have not harmed others in doing so!
I for one am interested in hearing your details.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this'Schizophrenia' doesn't exist. There are things going on in the human mind that people just don't understand. Sure, medication and support may be needed to control what I believe is an 'abnormally' enlightened, lightening quick and intuitive way of perceiving the world. They tell me that I'm 'schizophrenic', but I have never believed them. I have advanced degrees in maths and finance, I work, I pay taxes, I have lots of friends. You are not better than me.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe truth is that 'schizophrenia' doesn't exist. Sure, you may need medication and support to control what I believe is an 'abnormally' enlightened, lightening quick and intuitive way of perceiving the world. They say that I have schizophrenia, but I am proud that I have never believed them. Because if I had then I would never had earned advanced degrees in mathematics and finance and been successful in holding down a job. I pay taxes, I have many friends. You may think that I am 'delusional', but everyone is to some degree in that they follow their own contrived personal convention. I am actually grateful, yes, grateful, that I am schizophrenic as it has taught me to be self reliant and free thinking, something that takes a lot of personal courage. With people blowing themselves up in the name of God, what would anybody know? Regardless of what you may think, you are not better than me.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's taken me over an hour to read all these comments. What I think is the problem is that ArjanD has no understanding of what science is. The fact that he trusts blogs above scientific journals, to me, says that he has not been taught what science is. In high school, noone explained to me what a scientific journal was, who decided what went in it, what the meaning of 'peer reviewed' is. They wait until uni to teach us these things. Perhaps if people had all this explained to them in high school, or perhaps even primary school, more people would trust the majority of the scientific community. Global warming is the perfect example of this. One scientist comes out saying everyone else is wrong. The public remember all those movies where the individual (the hero) that noone agreed with was right all along. Sure, that can happen, but it's pretty hard to ignore the data, the evidence, when it's collected properly and published in peer-reviewed journals.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo my point is, perhaps ArjanD and like-minded fellows need to take a look at their assumptions, where they're getting their information from. And then there's the fact that, unless they've studied the topic for x-many years they won't have the complete knowledge that allows them to fully understand the topic. Maybe a degree in psychiatry is what they really need ;)
Sleep experts say that most mental illness is due to lack of and poor sleep. You can get back to normal sleeping patterns after several nights of heating salt water in an oil burner. It works in the same way that you sleep better at the coast when the wind blows in from the sea.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe most celebrated case of schizophrenia is that of Princeton Professor John Nash (a Beautiful Mind), who, not satisfied with imaginary numbers, introduced imaginary people. Stephen Hawking, arguably the most brilliant physicist of the 21st Century, was criticized for introducing imaginary time. It's no wonder what happened to Nash for introducing imaginary people. But who knows? He may someday win another Nobel Prize for establishing imaginary people on the same basis as imaginary numbers and imaginary time. Stranger things have happened.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRestraining Violently - Ill Individuals..is No 'Fun' for Either
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPatient or Staff....But Has To Be Done..When the Safety of Others or Violent Person is At Stake!
While the Process of Restraint is Occurring- An Institutional Legal Representative Should Be Standing By..To Explain Vocally..To the Patient..Why What Is Happening- Is Happening! For Never Should the Person with Mental-Illness
Be Treated..as Though He Were Not Responsible And Never Should Staff Treat a Patient with Contempt.or Condescendence!............................Frank&Kissy(a Bird)
To respond to ArjanD...the Term-Schizophrenia..no longer
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMeans What It Originally Meant! It Now Refers to a Complex of Symptoms&Behaviors...All Which Stigmatize the Holder..
As a Person- OUT OF TOUCH with What the Normatively-Well Call Reality!So Is a Common Cold-an Illness..Then Is Schizophrenia- an Illness!Maybe Both Are Real..maybe Not!
Yet Both Cause Difficulty..for the Sufferer!Frank&Kissy(a Cockatiel)
The bottom line is that the psycho-medical industry has nothing to gain and everything to loess by people recovering. That is why they pay pharmaceutical reps like dwayneneal big bucks to prompt the myth of mental illness. Everyone in the psycho industry from psychiatrists to researchers to the merchant dwon the street makes a buck of those that stay in a sick mold and every thing to loess by anyone recovering. Think of it for a minuet, so many are making a living of the victims of trauma that it just does not make seints to promote recovery and all the sients in the world to keep everyone as dysfunctional as possible. Give them medications that they can not get off of with side effects that seems make them sicker. Evan just off housing the “mental ill” there is so much money to be made off them. The whole economy of the nation could collapse if people where given a chance to recover from trauma. Everyone deceives them selves in to believing that they only want what is best for those affected but sub consensually they are doing everything they can to make a living and promote their profusion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRedRoseAndy at 02:22 AM on 01/07/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSleep experts are not necessarily experts on mental illness. Experts in mental health advise patients that lack of an appropriate schedule of sleep along with poor quality of sleep adversely affect everyone and increased symptomology for those that have mental illness.
chas93101 at 04:40 PM on 01/17/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI was not, nor will I ever be a pharmaceutical representative. From the time I was 14 years old, I knew I wanted to be a scientist. I would love to see all health conditions prevented or cured and move onto another area science of science of benefit to humankind. I will always work in the area of science that has the greatest and quickest benefits to everyone, including you. I wish that you would get off your "high-horse" and give scientists like me some credit for improving lives, including those that are mentally ill. Government agencies and companies I have worked for have improved the quality of life for millions of people and I have had some part in their success. I am proud of my contribution but humbled by the knowledge that it has only helped a very small part of human suffering. I am an advocate for all those that are ill. I also know that those that hate and bash are just a small part of the problem. The greatest problem is ignorance and therefore I concentrate my advocacy on teaching those that are open-minded. I fear that you and a few here are so closed minded, that you will only see "facts" that support your uncorroborated conclusions. Ignoring contrary information and believing an idea with religious fervor debases intelligence and saddens me.
Chas,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have wanted to be a scientist since I was 14 years old; 240 college credits later I am a successful one. I despise marketing/sales and find many of them to be smarmy characters. I have conducted studies to determine if an association between mood state is associated with IQ scores. I wrote my first review article when I was 21 years old. I have developed instrumentation to detect and quantitate combustion products to support reduction if health effects of space craft, I have developed analytical methods to detect and quantitate bioweapons that have been used to determine treaty violations in Iraq, as well as foodborne illnesses such as C. jejuni. I currently validate analytical methods to include assurance of potency, purity, ID, and stability. I have donated my time to non-profits, industry task forces to document industry best standards, government agencies, and I currently am a contractor to NIH. I have refused to take positions that make more than twice the salary I currently have. I really care, too much, as I have many loved ones that have mental illness and other physical ailments. I will only take positions that can give immediate benefits to humankind. I am proud that I have been a part of the success of many developments/inventions that have saved tens of thousands of lives and helped the quality of life of millions. I am also humbled that my help is just a drop in the bucket of human suffering. I know from experience that you and your ilk are closed minded, uncompromising in refusing to even consider contrary evidence to your uncorraberated conclusions that are lacking a foundation of peer reviewed studies. I concentrate on informing those that are ignorant but willing to be informed. You and your ilk debase your intelligence by refusing to use it. That saddens me. I and many others here do not care what the solution is, we just want one. For now, ECT, repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS), and pharmaceuticals such as lithium, anti-convulsants, neuroleptics, and anxiolytics are the most effective treatments.
Dwayneneal professes to be an advocate yet he does not know the definition of an advocate. To be an advocate means that you advocate for what the people say they want, not what you think is in their, or in this case some else’s, best interest. He has been speaking on behalf of the pharmaceutical companies, so yes he is an advocate for torture denial. He says his selective science benefits humankind, but is he God? He refuses to accept any thing that does not advance the illness mythology of mental health issues. This country has been healed hostage by a profit driven system of “care” for too long already. There is a sadistic side to mankind’s nature that makes people want to control and dominate others. That is just the way mankind is hared wired and the pharmaceutical companies have found a way in enlist that nature to promote their product and tern a profit and to be accepting of evil treatment of their fellow man. During the first half of the 20th century there was the eugenics that advocated for the sterilization of people deems inferior. There were supposedly all kinds of research and “scientific” evidence that sterilization was a form of therapy for people suffering from mental health conditions. During world war 2 in Nazi German they took it even farther and scientific proved that the exstirmation of an entire race of people was in the best interest of humankind.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo: chas93101 at 07:49 PM on 01/22/10
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf anyone with sanity believed your arguments, they are now certain that the post I cited above was written by a person that could benefit from psychiatry. Really, comparing advocacy (get a dictionary) for the mentally ill to Nazi Germany is not stable. I am not only advocating for those with bipolar disorder and the even more debilitating disease of schizophrenia, I am also advocating for myself and all of us that are mentally ill. People like you stigmatize those with mental illness and only hurt them by saying "it is only in their head." Reading your diatribe is painful for those of us with very real and debilitating illnesses. Get out of the 1950's and into the 21st century. We have sequenced the human genome among many other genomes. I am not God, but I did spend the night at a Holiday Inn Express, and I also spent 20 years in school, continued to learn over the next 20+ years from preeminent scientists in preeminent organizations, personally published many papers including a review paper, am currently on two task forces to define best industry practices, and been nominated to assist in writing federal regulatory guidance. In other words, I am recognized as knowing a lot about science. I usually try not to disparage people for their obvious lack of education (misspellings and poor grammar), but you make light of my obviously superior grasp of the science of mental health and you disparage me for working hard for the betterment of those in need. You destroy by unfounded accusations, you do not tolerate someone with more education, more love of humankind, the philosophy of evidence based medicine to resolving real diseases, so you accuse me of something I am not despite not having a shred of evidence to back your claim. Your accusations of me are not evidence based, just like your claims against the research proving the connection of gene variants and mental disease. Your approach to the truth is to use verbal violence to make people believe what you want. You are an intellectual terrorist and your untruths and illogical thought will be snuffed out by those that wish honesty, fairness, real solutions to real problems, rather than a cultist belief of the obviously ridiculous ideas of undefined blind obsessional thoughts of a vindictive misleading, self-indulgent, and cretinous mind. You seem to need more help than me and I have bipolar disorder. If you doubt my advocacy, take a walk in my shoes, feel what I feel, see the people that try to help me, and those I help.
One of the main problems with "psychiatrists" is that they vastly overestimate their insight into the human condition.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThey, collectively, have an almost unbroken track record of failure... make up excuses by the truckload for their failings... and fail to see the quasi-psychotic nature of their insistence they understand and can help people when it plainly is not the case.
The "brain scan studies" perpetually referred to are trivial insignificant forays into the workings of the human mind... yet we see an endless supply of psych-industry "professionals" claiming that NOW we know how it all works.
This is the claim "they" have made for every other false path they have followed through the years... until another pat, popular notion comes along.
The people who do not understand the human mind too well are those who claim to know it the best.
We see a "profession" that projects its subjective ideas upon its victims.. sees what it projects.... and then claims wisdom.
Think how just plain stupid it is to join in a "profession" where you are a social outcast... no one likes being around them... no one "acts normal" around them.
And so we see a class of beings , who seem to want to understand the human mind, placing themselves in the position of social isolates.... which makes it impossible for them to actually observe what they claim they want to understand.
Let us see... people are locked up against their will.... a lot of "techs" treat them like they are something less than human...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthe "patient" is expected to cater to the whims of committees of people looking to avoid any personal responsibility.... the patient can never be sure who is telling them lies "for their own good" or who is telling them truths.
And so.. it matters not if they were "mental" to start with or not.... the treatment is guaranteed to break them in the most obscene fashion... to where they resist their captors violently.
And so those who have induced the problem say "See.. we told you they were mental".
So much of the "treatment" is exactly what POWS are subjected to by enemy interrogators... and then the interrogators.. the psyche techs... wonder why the prisoner "acts out".
The people with a lack of insight bordering on insanity are the ones who offer "help"...and then blame the patient when the real problem is the treatment system.
I think that it was interesting and i am actually using this interview for his report that I am doing for school. This has been a great help. Do you think that you could give more information as far as how you functioned in everyday life around people
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLet me get this start; in the 1950's Drug makers cam out with Thorazine, perfected from insecticide. By the the 1970's it was discovered that Thorazine never was affective at controlling symptoms. People given it stopped complaining about their symptoms only because the side effects, which was the effects of insecticide poisoning, was worse than the MH issues that they where given it for. So then in the 70's they came out with the so called new generation psychiatric medications. By 2007 the CATE came out with the findings that the newer medications where no more effective at controlling symptoms than the older generation of medications. Recently it has been discovered the only effect that any of the so called psychotropic meads is in their placebo effect. So hundreds of millions of dollars, mostly tax dollars, have been spend on psychiatric medications that where no more effective than sugar pills. Not surprising that Big Pharma is scrambling to come up with something to save their Billion Dollar markets.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this