Psychiatry is fake and mental illness is really inflammation of the brain?

[Hyperborean]

This gut biome/entropy crap is pseudoscience at its finest. There's no basis in those claims besides the word of a bunch of snake oil salesmen -- most of whom have never dealt with people with a severe mental illness nor have had it themselves -- they make loads more money than Big Pharma because they take advantage of desperate people like you, often without the oversight that is offered by the FDA and other structures made to protect consumers from these "treatments" that have 0 evidence as to whether or not they work.

The actual science already says that meds may or not work. Just like the science says that psychotherapy may or not work. The difference between a "big pharma" study conducted by trained and licensed professionals, and a ~~study~~ by some vitamin seller is that big pharma actually has to go by the scientific method, get their research peer-reviewed, go through trials, etc. Anecdotal evidence is not good evidence, especially not when it comes to medicine, where outcomes can vary due to all sorts of variables.

Maybe meds didn't work for you because you have some kinda no-meds gene. For someone else, DBT might not be working because their favorite color is purple and they're left handed. We don't know the specifics yet. The issue is that mental illness is extremely complicated and there are lots of variables that are very hard to control for. Being poor, for example, could be the simple "cause" of multiple different mental illnesses in different types of people. We can't control for that, because it's almost impossible to gather up even 10 people who've had the exact same circumstances, traumas, and life experiences that would make such a study fair and perfectly controlled. This makes mental illness treatment research very different from medical research for other conditions. It's easier to find treatments for things when the problem is easy to locate, e.g. checking your eye pressure to detect and then treat glaucoma, or when the problem has obvious, specific symptoms that can be managed to a degree, e.g. taking certain meds clearly helps people with hypertension or diabetes.

It's so wrong to spread this kinda thing on a site where very desperate and lonely people go, many of whom have never sought professional treatment before (for a variety of reasons).

anyways if your brain is actually inflamed then you should probably see a doctor asap, thats a wholeeeee different thing

Absolutely spot on!

 

[Water-Lily]

I'm not going to watch all those videos, but I'm 100% confident my mental issues are a product of a childhood (and subsequent lifetime) of emotional and psychological abuse. My brain would be just fine if I had been treated with a little goddamn respect.

Same. I am a damaged product of my parents abuse

 

[demuic]

This gut biome/entropy crap is pseudoscience at its finest. There's no basis in those claims besides the word of a bunch of snake oil salesmen -- most of whom have never dealt with people with a severe mental illness nor have had it themselves -- they make loads more money than Big Pharma because they take advantage of desperate people like you, often without the oversight that is offered by the FDA and other structures made to protect consumers from these "treatments" that have 0 evidence as to whether or not they work.

The actual science already says that meds may or not work. Just like the science says that psychotherapy may or not work. The difference between a "big pharma" study conducted by trained and licensed professionals, and a ~~study~~ by some vitamin seller is that big pharma actually has to go by the scientific method, get their research peer-reviewed, go through trials, etc. Anecdotal evidence is not good evidence, especially not when it comes to medicine, where outcomes can vary due to all sorts of variables.

Maybe meds didn't work for you because you have some kinda no-meds gene. For someone else, DBT might not be working because their favorite color is purple and they're left handed. We don't know the specifics yet. The issue is that mental illness is extremely complicated and there are lots of variables that are very hard to control for. Being poor, for example, could be the simple "cause" of multiple different mental illnesses in different types of people. We can't control for that, because it's almost impossible to gather up even 10 people who've had the exact same circumstances, traumas, and life experiences that would make such a study fair and perfectly controlled. This makes mental illness treatment research very different from medical research for other conditions. It's easier to find treatments for things when the problem is easy to locate, e.g. checking your eye pressure to detect and then treat glaucoma, or when the problem has obvious, specific symptoms that can be managed to a degree, e.g. taking certain meds clearly helps people with hypertension or diabetes.

It's so wrong to spread this kinda thing on a site where very desperate and lonely people go, many of whom have never sought professional treatment before (for a variety of reasons).

anyways if your brain is actually inflamed then you should probably see a doctor asap, thats a wholeeeee different thing

Most of the comments here aren't even about the stuff in the OP but the problems inherent in psychiatry and psychology in general.

Read the post by @RainAndSadness for a start if you actually want to learn something instead of digging your heels in that the authorities always have your best interests in mind.

 

[ohhgeeitsme]

I think there are many different causes for these varying symptoms and I'd argue some of them aren't even due to mental illness. I don't think being depressed because your life is genuinely awful is a mental illness, for example. Or being anxious all the time because there are things going on in your life that makes sense to be very anxious about. I think one person's depression could be caused by their lifestyle and environmental factors, and for another, it could be caused by an actual physical abnormality of the brain, or perhaps gut bacteria or a whole list of potential causes. Therefore, different approaches are going to work. SSRIs pretty much ruined my life. It caused akathisia for a year, made my anxiety far worse afterward and I'm now basically asexual, among other things, even after over a year off. SSRIs have also been a blessing to many others. It's just not all the same for everyone. There is no one cure, because there is not only one cause.

 

[everydayiloveyou]

Most of the comments here aren't even about the stuff in the OP but the problems inherent in psychiatry and psychology in general.

Read the post by @RainAndSadness for a start if you actually want to learn something instead of digging your heels in that the authorities always have your best interests in mind.

Yeah I know that already. I already stated that psychotherapy/meds don't work for everyone and there's plenty of proof of that.

Money in medicine is a whole other issue though. And it hurts anyone with any condition. If you look at any complex condition with unknown cause/cures, you'll see the same kind of frustrated people that you see in psych, the same opportunistic people, and also people who care and use their knowledge to do productive research.

Treatments are obviously gonna be hit-or-miss if they don't even know the causes. I don't think that psych meds being relatively ineffective at moment has anything to do with its validity as a science. This is still a relatively young field. And also there are still many many people who have found relief with meds and/or therapy. that alone tells us a lot about psych that could help us come up with better meds in the future.

 

[issyishere]

I don't agree with anything he said because he's probably trying to shill a supplement. I do think diet has a huge role in the development of mental illness and that so many small things can cause depression and anxiety. From your gut microbiomr, to not exercising enough, not enough sunlight etc. I've read numerous studies that showed patients with depression and anxiety tended to have lower vitamin D levels. It showed that when supplementation was introduced there was a reduction that was markedly higher than a placebo. Another study showed the average western diet does not have enough magnesium and when given to patients with anxiety and depression, guess what happened? Yep that's right. Another study showed vitamin C suppementation allowed for a greater reduction in production and assisted in the removal of cortisol, the beloved stress hormone responsible for the fight or flight mechanic. I've begun supplementing with a few of these, and honestly I do notice a difference. Probably a 40% reduction

 

[wishicouldgoback]

I think it's funny how defensive some of the people got towards my post. If 90% of serotonin is produced in the gut, then how is psychiatry not fake? The guy who wrote the DSM manual said it's fake. If you don't find this information useful, then so be it.

Psychiatry - A Whole Branch of Science Turns Out to Be Fake

Suicide: A Civil Right

Why Psychiatry is Evil

 

[issyishere]

I think it's funny how defensive some of the people got towards my post. If 90% of serotonin is produced in the gut, then how is psychiatry not fake? The guy who wrote the DSM manual said it's fake. If you don't find this information useful, then so be it.

Psychiatry - A Whole Branch of Science Turns Out to Be Fake

Suicide: A Civil Right

Why Psychiatry is Evil

Seratonin is a very local hormone. It's present in everywhere of the body. It's used by your brain, by your gut, by everything. I do think psychiatry might have diagnosis's that are too high of an umbrella. I imagine there are many different causes to depression that require different treatment but trying to discount the whole science because of one bad experience is very dangerous. You could be convincing people who are helped by antidepressants to not take them. I understand there are those who have bad experiences with them but you need to remember this site has an implicit bias towards those who those medicines haven't worked on. Psychiatry is still very new and neuroscience is only pushing it further. There are plenty of studies showing there are sometimes biological imbalances in the brain and sometimes there are those where you can't differentiate them from a normal minded. I have OCD. I have no doubt there is a biological imbalance causing me anxiety. By telling everyone it is fake you are over generalizing and you could be discouraging them for seeking treatment or trying to make their life better. Especially wrong in the recovery subforum.

 

[wishicouldgoback]

Seratonin is a very local hormone. It's present in everywhere of the body. It's used by your brain, by your gut, by everything. I do think psychiatry might have diagnosis's that are too high of an umbrella. I imagine there are many different causes to depression that require different treatment but trying to discount the whole science because of one bad experience is very dangerous. You could be convincing people who are helped by antidepressants to not take them. I understand there are those who have bad experiences with them but you need to remember this site has an implicit bias towards those who those medicines haven't worked on. Psychiatry is still very new and neuroscience is only pushing it further. There are plenty of studies showing there are sometimes biological imbalances in the brain and sometimes there are those where you can't differentiate them from a normal minded. I have OCD. I have no doubt there is a biological imbalance causing me anxiety. By telling everyone it is fake you are over generalizing and you could be discouraging them for seeking treatment or trying to make their life better. Especially wrong in the recovery subforum.

You typed a lot of words there, but failed to prove any of what I said is false. The chemical imbalance theory has never been proven. If you're gut produces 90% of serotonin, what does that tell you about an industry that doesn't focus first on a nutritional approach to mental illness? It tells me and anyone with a normal IQ that it's a giant scam.

 

[noaccount]

If you recognize it as a scam, then let's please not treat IQ as any measure of people's minds, worth, or capacity either.

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

I take it you've never delt with a paranoid schizophrenic off their meds have you?

I can tell you for a fact that my mother having full blown auditory hallucinations is far from normal and definitely a sign that part of her brain isn't functioning properly! I've delt with her schizophrenia for 18 years now and in that time I've been there whenever she's had an episode, where she's screaming at the fucking trees at one in the morning thinking people are following or when she thinks she's been recruited by the government.

That's definitely not my mother that's her broken brain causing her to have delusions!

Whilst psychiatry isn't perfect it has helped a lot of people. Took years for my mother to find a medication that was suitable for her. If it wasn't for her medication she'd be locked in a psyche ward and unable to see her granddaughter.

Quite frankly what you're pushing is dangerous to the people with mental illness and the general public!

Based roughly on what he posted it doesn't seem like he's disagreeing with you. His point was that many "disorders" are passed off as having genetic origins when in reality psychiatry ignores social precursors such as abuse or various forms of hardship as the cause of various behaviors, feelings, and thoughts. Some forms of Schizophrenia are likely to be genetic in origin but my nervous system being stuck in a constant state of the fight, flight, freeze response is due to various forms of abuse/trauma and is not a illness.

It is equally as dangerous to push the idea that people are "mentally ill" even when their "symptoms" stem from their environment and are natural reactions to the hardship they've endured. If your father beat you every day of your childhood and you respond to other people with distrust, anger, and aggression then that isn't a illness or genetic defect.

Many disorders in the DSM have overlapping symptoms and they don't explain what the underlying causes are. The labels are based merely on subjective opinions and what makes the most money; they aren't based on science.

That's why suicide prohibitions and the current paradigm of mental healthcare in general are so convenient for everyone else. Despite claiming to follow the biopsychosocial model of mental health, clinical psychiatry/psychology pretty much leaves the -social part unaddressed and almost unacknowledged. Everyone is perfectly content to pretend that all issues of mental health are a matter of pathology. "Oh it's no problem that you can barely afford to pay your bills. That you've been isolated and ostracized, if not outright abused, for most of your life. There's just a problem with your brain chemistry, here's some pills. Go to some therapy because you clearly need to learn better coping skills."

Edit: Sorry had to fix my barely coherent sentences from brain fog.

 

[Hyperborean]

Based roughly on what he posted it doesn't seem like he's disagreeing with you. His point was that many "disorders" are passed off as having genetic origins when in reality psychiatry ignores social precursors such as abuse or various forms of hardship as the cause of various behaviors, feelings, and thoughts. Some forms of Schizophrenia are likely to be genetic in origin but my nervous system being stuck in a constant state of the fight, flight, freeze response is due to various forms of abuse/trauma and is not a illness.

It is equally as dangerous to push the idea that people are "mentally ill" even when their "symptoms" stem from their environment and are natural reactions to the hardship they've endured. If your father beat you every day of your childhood and you respond to other people with distrust, anger, and aggression then that isn't a illness or genetic defect.

Many disorders in the DSM have overlapping symptoms and they don't explain what the underlying causes are. The labels are based merely on subjective opinions and what makes the most money; they aren't based on science.



Edit: Sorry had to fix my barely coherent sentences from brain fog.

Have you read what they said much earlier on in the thread? They're literally peddling conspiracy theories! They have little to no understanding of how the brain works or how psychiatry works for that matter!

You can develop a mental illness from stress and abuse.. That's well documented in scientific literature. Schizophrenia can be caused by stress. So can psychotic episodes.

There's also various infectious diseases and problems the body can have that have overlapping symptoms doesn't mean that they don't exist or they've created something to make more money.

 

[Secrets1]

You typed a lot of words there, but failed to prove any of what I said is false. The chemical imbalance theory has never been proven. If you're gut produces 90% of serotonin, what does that tell you about an industry that doesn't focus first on a nutritional approach to mental illness? It tells me and anyone with a normal IQ that it's a giant scam.

It tells you the industry has plenty of room for improvement particularly since we don't know how all of it is utilized among all people. It's involved in a lot more than "happiness" and works in concert with other biochemicals including proteins and neurotransmitters.

Presenting mental health as completely dependent on serotonin production is an incomplete analysis. I don't think anyone's arguing major mistakes haven't been made in the field. As mentioned the existence of those doesn't invalidate productive contributions to the human condition.

A critical thing to remember about the DSM is that it exists to direct people to the best perceived therapies and allows medical professionals to communicate with each other with a goal of efficiency. It is not a tell all of psychiatry and acknowledged by proceeding authors as a work in process. It's somewhat plagued by bureaucracy but so is most of modern medicine. Different providers treat DSM diagnosis with different levels of importance based on their views. The controversial nature of the book and its contents is hardly limited to this forum.

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

Have you read what they said much earlier on in the thread? They're literally peddling conspiracy theories! They have little to no understanding of how the brain works or how psychiatry works for that matter!

You can develop a mental illness from stress and abuse.. That's well documented in scientific literature. Schizophrenia can be caused by stress. So can psychotic episodes.

There's also various infectious diseases and problems the body can have that have overlapping symptoms doesn't mean that they don't exist or they've created something to make more money.

Psychiatry has no understanding of the brain either; it's like a caveman attempting open heart surgery with a stick and pretending like he knows something.

My point was that they aren't illnesses and that the DSM has no credibility; it is not backed by science. I just looked at his very first post in this thread and nothing he is saying is a conspiracy? Psychiatry was founded on abusing people and labeling them as insane because peoples ways of behaving or thinking weren't considered normal; it still does even now. Women who didn't bend to a man's will were said to have hysteria by Psychiatry and homosexuality use to be considered a illness; now we have things like video game disorder.

"People may be constrained in two basic ways: physically, by confining them in jails, mental hospitals, and so forth; and symbolically, by confining them in occupations, social roles, and so forth. Actually, confinement of the second type is more common and pervasive in the day-to-day conduct of society's business; as a rule, only when the symbolic, or socially informal, confinement of conduct fails or proves inadequate, is recourse taken to physical, or socially formal, confinement…. When people perform their social roles properly – in other words, when social expectations are adequately met – their behavior is considered normal. Though obvious, this deserves emphasis: a waiter must wait on tables; a secretary must type; a father must earn a living; a mother must cook and sew and take care of her children. Classic systems of psychiatric nosology had nothing to say about these people, so long as they remained neatly imprisoned in their respective social cells; or, as we say about the Negroes, so long as they "knew their place." But when such persons broke out of "jail" and asserted their liberty, they became of interest to the psychiatrist." ―Thomas Szasz, Ideology and Insanity: Essays on the Psychiatric Dehumanization of Man

Psychiatry still deprives people of their human rights under the guise of care and treatment so I'm unsure how this is a conspiracy either. I'm not saying that Psychiatry is bad across the board but it currently causes far more harm than it helps.

I didn't say peoples problems don't exist or the health implications caused by the hardship they endured; but trying to label people with a illness based on subjective opinions has no merit.

"The primary problem with modern psychiatry is its reduction of mental illness to bodily dysfunction. Objectification of those identified as mentally ill, by insisting on the somatic nature of their illness, may apparently simplify matters and help protect those trying to provide care from the pain experienced by those needing support. But psychiatric assessment too often fails to appreciate personal and social precursors of mental illness by avoiding or not taking account of such psychosocial considerations. Mainstream psychiatry acts on the somatic hypothesis of mental illness to the detriment of understanding people's problems."
― Thomas Szasz, The Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct

Also, while I'm aware that some medications do help people to a point(helps my Fibromyalgia and anxiety) but they unfortunately don't address the underlying problems(abuse, stress, etc) that cause peoples symptoms in the first place; they merely suppress them to the detriment of peoples longterm health. Many of the drugs that are peddled cause worse symptoms than they are trying to treat and rarely are people advised of the dangers of them; some of which are permanent. That person that was beaten by his father during his childhood can take SSRIs or antipsychotics to suppress his anger and aggression but that doesn't resolve the original problem which is his traumatic past that has dealt a psychological wound.

If one considers their reaction to, say, climate change to be "abnormal", they merely have to walk into a therapist's office and their belief will be confirmed - their conscious experience will become a list of "symptoms" of "illness", for which they'll receive "medication". The words, the labels, the pills, they're all momentarily comforting, but none actually deal with the original problem any more than popping an Aspirin cures a raging influenza infection.

 

[Pallf]

Psychiatry is a young science. All other medical science started the same way, causing more harm than good, but now medical science has improved greatly.
I'm not gonna harp on psychiatry at its age, all it can do is experiment and see what works and what didn't work.
We don't tell people who have syphilis to eat better and exercise, we give them penicillin instead.
We don't need to constantly question every single thing a doctor tells us we need. Yes it's important to ask your doctor questions and ask for explanations before starting any medical program or regimen, but you also gotta remember that they have years of experience about medicine.
Pasting a few articles to chat doesn't trump all that. I highly doubt the average person is reading all the citations on every journal article that agrees with their views. That shit takes way too much time and it's very hard understanding all that data if you're not educated in data interpretation.
Also, who listens to tedx talks. Anyone can put on a TedX talk. They aren't exactly rigorous for accuracy, but you can pay them some money for a stage to spout whatever comes to mind.

 

[Life_and_Death]

Here's a good question. If it's 'fake' then why does antidepressants and stuff work? And don't say it doesn't because I'm on a med right now that's helping.

 

[noaccount]

"Once you're diagnosed, then they've really got you. Laugh too much, cry too much, talk too much, don't talk enough - or, god forbid, get angry - and the people around you think you're getting 'sick' again. And how likely are you to be believed about anything? Some people get beaten and raped in hospital, sometimes by staff. But if they complain about it, they may well be told they were hallucinating. As a mental patient, you don't just lose your credibility with other people, you're taught not to believe in or trust yourself. You're taught to doubt your own perceptions: they may be signs of your illness. It's especially bad if you don't think you're sick. That means you have no 'insight' - the psychiatric term for agreeing with your doctor about what's wrong with you and what should be done about it. If you fail to appreciate the nature of your illness, you will be deemed incompetent to make treatment decisions. As the process of declaring you mentally incompetent or incapable - carried out by psychiatrists, of course - allows other people to legally make decisions on your behalf, lack of insight can be ground for drugging you against your will."
— Irit Shimrat

 

[Arnar]

While psychiatry IS pretty fake,

in that psychiatry's explanations are often pseudo-scientific even if the drugs work for some people,

(and we could have those drugs without psychiatry, without prescribers!)

Mental illness is not "really" one-other-thing-instead

"mental illness" is just a subjective label for any way of thinking / feeling / acting that the ruling-class disagrees with.

What they call illness, may or may not overlap with what WE identify as our own mental DISTRESS that we want treatment for.

We may need to treat our distress with nutritional changes, or with drugs, or with interrupting cycles of child abuse and finding allies in the struggle against the oppression of the disabled, or through palliative care and accepting that there's no quick fix, or sometimes through CTB,

but none of this means our suffering or trauma is a disease-per-se,

and we would do well to keep in mind that what gatekeepers call "mental illness" may be our healthiest behaviors and our greatest strengths -

leading civil rights organizers were often called schizophrenic, and children are often psychiatrized for speaking out and defending themselves from mistreatment.

As a great man once said (paraphrasing) : Mental illness is simply any mode of thought or behavior that is incongruent with the system. And a mentally healthy person is simply one who can absorb all the shit the system forces on them without showing signs of stress.

 

[Mendex]

Have you read what they said much earlier on in the thread? They're literally peddling conspiracy theories! They have little to no understanding of how the brain works or how psychiatry works for that matter!

You can develop a mental illness from stress and abuse.. That's well documented in scientific literature. Schizophrenia can be caused by stress. So can psychotic episodes.

There's also various infectious diseases and problems the body can have that have overlapping symptoms doesn't mean that they don't exist or they've created something to make more money.

First, psychiatry doesn't have based evidence form epistemology . Mostly of his studies are use statistics who emphasizes differences between- groups and within-groups. there's is not a substantial neurobiological mechanism more than correlations, Which end with a statistical fallacy called Cum hoc ergo proper hoc (CHEPH). So stress and abuse are not biological mechanism but a correlation evidence without implicit cause.

Now talking back about the logical impossibility of semiology behavior which is with what is diagnosed all mental illness, I'm going use philosophy of mind doing this.

First (a priori) argument:
Anything that cannot be described in material terms using words that only refer to material properties is immaterial.
The mind cannot be described in material terms using words that only refer to material properties.
Therefore the mind is immaterial; materialism is false.
Two(a priori) argument:
If physicalism is true then all facts can be stated using a physical vocabulary.
But facts about the mind cannot be stated using a physical vocabulary.
So physicalism is false.

Therefore. in a mental illness can't be diagnosed if there no physical fact in it. You are diagnosing what you are "doing" instead in what you "have", So mental illness doesn't exist.

Summary video.

 

[TotallyIsolated]

First, psychiatry doesn't have based evidence form epistemology . Mostly of his studies are use statistics who emphasizes differences between- groups and within-groups. there's is not a substantial neurobiological mechanism more than correlations, Which end with a statistical fallacy called Cum hoc ergo proper hoc (CHEPH). So stress and abuse are not biological mechanism but a correlation evidence without implicit cause.

Now talking back about the logical impossibility of semiology behavior which is with what is diagnosed all mental illness, I'm going use philosophy of mind doing this.

First (a priori) argument:
Anything that cannot be described in material terms using words that only refer to material properties is immaterial.
The mind cannot be described in material terms using words that only refer to material properties.
Therefore the mind is immaterial; materialism is false.
Two(a priori) argument:
If physicalism is true then all facts can be stated using a physical vocabulary.
But facts about the mind cannot be stated using a physical vocabulary.
So physicalism is false.

Therefore. in a mental illness can't be diagnosed if there no physical fact in it. You are diagnosing what you are "doing" instead in what you "have", So mental illness doesn't exist.

Summary video.

lol you sound like a Jordan Peterson fan!

Take your meds people, and don't listen to the anti-science cultists.

 

[Life_and_Death]

Therefore. in a mental illness can't be diagnosed if there no physical fact in it. You are diagnosing what you are "doing" instead in what you "have", So mental illness doesn't exist.

can you explain why someone that has certain mental health disorders show up on an MRI?

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

can you explain why someone that has certain mental health disorders show up on an MRI?

As someone mentioned in an earlier post, every action and experience you have has a chemical component; that doesnt mean it's a illness. If you have a actual physical abnormality in your brain you should be seeing a Neurologist; not a soul doctor.

Various parts of my brain are broken like a light bulb due to trauma and would likely show up on an FMRI but that's not a illness in the traditional sense, at least not to me. Being stuck in the freeze response is a survival mechanism ingrained from evolution and is an apt response to what I've been through, not a illness.

 

[Life_and_Death]

As someone mentioned in an earlier post, every action and experience you have has a chemical component; that doesnt mean it's a illness. If you have a actual physical abnormality in your brain you should be seeing a Neurologist; not a soul doctor.

Various parts of my brain being are broken like a light bulb due to trauma and would likely show up on an FMRI but that's not a illness in the traditional sense, at least not to me. Being stuck in the freeze response is a survival mechanism ingrained from evolution and is an apt response to what I've been through, not a illness.

i already explained somewhere why it counts as an illness. im not going to again

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

i already explained somewhere why it counts as an illness. im not going to again

Let me know if they can find my illness at the cellular and molecular level once I'm on the autopsy table.

Calling it a disorder would fit better and I personally don't like that word either but it has far less negative connotations associated with it than "mental illness."

 

[Deleted member 94]

i already explained somewhere why it counts as an illness. im not going to again

I think what he means is like an example of autism, an autistic brain is different from neurotypical brain. And this shows up on scans.

Also sometimes brain scans show difference between a schizophrenia suffers brain vs normal person.

I might have interpreted wrongly.

You can Google images for what I'm talking about. One is a developmental disorders while the other is mental illness.

 

[Mendex]

lol you sound like a Jordan Peterson fan!

Take your meds people, and don't listen to the anti-science cultists.

I hate Jordan Peterson, lol.
Also Peterson is a clinical psychologist, He properly would be against almost everything that i said up there.

 

[ToughTimes]

I have to agree it seems that psychiatry is the wrong paradime and can be extremely damaging. I hope we get a lot more alternative that over the next 10-20 years we get a lot more attention towards alternative hypothesis such as some of the ones you have presented.

A entrance to the rabbit hole that is the potential dangers of psychotropics drugs:

Drug Info: How Psychotropics Act on the Brain

www.madinamerica.com

 

[Deleted member 94]

Can I ask everyone here how many suffer from a physical ailment as well as mental ailment.

I was physically normal but when I developed inflammatory bowel disorder that's when the mental health started to go south. Are many in this boat or had it tested.

I have a direct correlation between my gut being inflammated and my mood because it improves, disimproves in response to eachother.

 

[KuriGohan&Kamehameha]

While I don't agree with all of the links you've posted, I certainly don't think diet and exercise would fix my PTSD, for instance, I find blind obedience to psychiatry to be appaling. Do people realize the conditions mental ward patients get shafted in? How many get forcibly injected with antipsychotics for not wanting to be in what is essentially a prison?

If taking SSRIs helps you, than by all means continue taking them. However, they may lose efficacy after several months or years, there are not many longterm studies on these drugs, because they are truthfully not well understood, and they are inappropriately perscribed far too often for conditions that would not see therapeutic benefits from them. Make sure you are informed about what medications you take.

If you read accounts from the people who did some of the first research on SSRIs like Bessel Van Der Kolk, he says these drugs were not very useful in people with Ptsd. Yet, the first thing you'll be given if you get a ptsd diagnosis is SSRIs. They throw anything and hope it sticks, and that isn't very scientific at all, nor is it helpful to people whose voices have been stamped out by appeal to authority fallacies- "Just listen to the doctors bro!"

Questioning psychiatry is not anti-science. Science is built off of asking questions, searching for answers, and poking holes in a study to make sure the epistemology and data are sound. Blind obedience is not scientific.

It was barely 100 years ago that phrenology was still classified as science. People thought each area of the brain corresponded to a different personality trait. We had quacks like Freud being marveled at as great scholars, and completely unethical practices were the norm. The brain and the nervous system are probably the least understood organs and bodily systems. A lot of things we bank on, especially in psychiatry, are speculation.

I was told in lecture one day it was the norm around 100-200 years ago to remove part of the lobes in a dog or cat's brain, to see how much you had to scoop out in order to make the creature non functional. 70 years or so ago, we were still doing lobotomies on humans.

So yes, this field is in its infancy, but wouldn't that implore you to push for much needed changes to bring it out of it's primitive stone ages? If psychiatry wants to be more respected as a discipline, why do they insist on touting this concept of "the mind being different from the brain" and refuse to merge with Neurology?

Before you call me anti-science, you should realize that I am doing a Neuroscience degree. Believe me when I say, when it comes to what our collective knowledge about the brain, we know that we know nothing. It is not black and white. Typically one is not totally for or against psychiatry. You can acknowledge some benefits to it while highlighting the rampant human rights violations in psych hospitals and bad, unscientific practices.

 

[Deleted member 94]

While I don't agree with all of the links you've posted, I certainly don't think diet and exercise would fix my PTSD, for instance, I find blind obedience to psychiatry to be appaling. Do people realize the conditions mental ward patients get shafted in? How many get forcibly injected with antipsychotics for not wanting to be in what is essentially a prison?

If taking SSRIs helps you, than by all means continue taking them. However, they may lose efficacy after several months or years, there are not many longterm studies on these drugs, because they are truthfully not well understood, and they are inappropriately perscribed far too often for conditions that would not see therapeutic benefits from them. Make sure you are informed about what medications you take.

If you read accounts from the people who did some of the first research on SSRIs like Bessel Van Der Kolk, he says these drugs were not very useful in people with Ptsd. Yet, the first thing you'll be given if you get a ptsd diagnosis is SSRIs. They throw anything and hope it sticks, and that isn't very scientific at all, nor is it helpful to people whose voices have been stamped out by appeal to authority fallacies- "Just listen to the doctors bro!"

Questioning psychiatry is not anti-science. Science is built off of asking questions, searching for answers, and poking holes in a study to make sure the epistemology and data are sound. Blind obedience is not scientific.

It was barely 100 years ago that phrenology was still classified as science. People thought each area of the brain corresponded to a different personality trait. We had quacks like Freud being marveled at as great scholars, and completely unethical practices were the norm. The brain and the nervous system are probably the least understood organs and bodily systems. A lot of things we bank on, especially in psychiatry, are speculation.

I was told in lecture one day it was the norm around 100-200 years ago to remove part of the lobes in a dog or cat's brain, to see how much you had to scoop out in order to make the creature non functional. 70 years or so ago, we were still doing lobotomies on humans.

So yes, this field is in its infancy, but wouldn't that implore you to push for much needed changes to bring it out of it's primitive stone ages? If psychiatry wants to be more respected as a discipline, why do they insist on touting this concept of "the mind being different from the brain" and refuse to merge with Neurology?

Before you call me anti-science, you should realize that I am doing a Neuroscience degree. Believe me when I say, when it comes to what our collective knowledge about the brain, we know that we know nothing. It is not black and white. Typically one is not totally for or against psychiatry. You can acknowledge some benefits to it while highlighting the rampant human rights violations in psych hospitals and bad, unscientific practices.

My doctor told me the medicine works for my condition as well as most others they don't know how or why it just does and I was cured of OCD anyway. I know we are all different and it doesn't work for everyone. I was also told there are billions of neurons in the human body and once medical science learns how to control them they will make mental illness a history.

PTSD is not controlled by medications but by counseling but the patient has to be willing to work together to get better and overcome it.

I once saw an episode on TV where one lady said her life before the traumatic event was still waters of a lake than someone threw a rock in it and caused ripples. The other lady said with time the ripples become still waters again. To this she replied but the rock is still there.