Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List

Here is a link to this page:

Mental illness and Babylon medication

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 46
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: Ark I Sent: 10/8/2013 11:40:10 PM

Found this article today

In his riveting tale of how psychiatrists "medicalise" human suffering, Gary Greenberg recounts that, in 1850, a physician called Samuel Cartwright reported a new disease in the highly respected New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal. Cartwright named it drapetomania, from the ancient Greek drapetes for a runaway slave; in other words, here was a disease that "caused Negroes to run away". It had one primary diagnostic symptom - "absconding from service" - and a few secondary ones, including "sulkiness and dissatisfaction just prior to flight".

Drapetomania was, of course, consigned to the dustbin of medical history. It never made it into the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the leading authority on mental health diagnosis and research. But, Greenberg suggests in his scathing critique of the DSM, it might well have done - had the manual existed at the time.

After all, he notes, homosexuality was listed as a "sociopathic personality disorder" when the DSM was first published in 1952, and remained so until 1973. "Doctors were paid to treat it, scientists to search for its causes and cures," he writes in The Book of Woe: The DSM and the Unmaking of Psychiatry. "Gay people themselves underwent countless therapies including electric shocks, years on the couch, behaviour modification and surrogate sex."

Greenberg, 56, is a US psychotherapist of 30 years' experience and a prolific writer on mental illness (including his own depression after the collapse of his first marriage). But the target of his latest book is the DSM itself, the so-called "psychiatrist's bible", which aims to provide a definitive list of all mental health conditions, along with their diagnostic criteria.

Updated at regular intervals - DSM-5, the fifth edition, was published in May - it has considerable influence worldwide, including in the UK, where it underpins several clinical guidelines on mental health. Yet Greenberg holds that by imposing a pseudoscientific model on our "hopelessly complex" inner world, it creates a "charade" of non-existent disorders.

As World Mental Health Day approaches this week, he argues that, thanks to the DSM, "countless millions" are hooked on powerful antidepressants to cure a mythical "chemical imbalance", while rates of mental disorders in children, including autism, bipolar illness and ADHD, have rocketed. The DSM is, he says, a "fiction" which medicalises human experience and allows psychiatrists "dominion over the landscape of mental suffering".

Greenberg's language may at times sound overblown but he isn't alone. DSM-5, 14 years in the writing, has been criticised by many for the unhealthy influence of the pharmaceutical industry and its tendency to medicalise behaviours and moods that many would argue fall within the normal range.

"Few professionals are happy with the DSM," Greenberg says on the phone from his home in Connecticut, where he lives with his wife, teenage son, cat, dog and "a dozen or so" hens. "We are forced to engage with a charade of diagnostic disorders that we don't believe our patients have for the crassest of reasons - money." (In the US, people have to have their diagnosis confirmed by the DSM to access insurance funds for treatment.) "It's not just psychotherapists - even psychiatrists admit this is a deeply flawed document."

The rot set in during the 19th century, he says, when expectations of medicine changed dramatically after the discovery of micro-organisms. "It created a desire for all mental suffering to be understood in the same way as physical suffering, such as smallpox or cholera. To consider craziness as another treatable disease which originates in biology had tremendous appeal."

Playing into this is another factor, the influence of the pharmaceutical industry. Despite an attempted clean-up in recent years by the American Psychiatric Association, 67 per cent of the "task force" members responsible for DSM-5 are reported to have industry links.

Yet Greenberg believes that many psychiatrists - and even drug reps - are well-meaning. "It is intellectual rather than financial corruption. The idea that human suffering can be reduced to a biochemical imbalance - this is about ideology rather than money."

Greenberg's book tracks in painstaking detail how the DSM's decisions have created "false epidemics" of over-diagnosis and over-treatment. In 1994, for example, the diagnostic threshold for bipolar disorder was lowered to cover people without full-blown mania (instead, they have elevated moods that doctors call hypomania, but which Greenberg describes as exuberance). As a result, bipolar diagnoses soared, as did prescriptions for mood stabilisers and antipsychotic drugs, which in the US were for the first time being advertised directly to the public. "Suddenly, everyone and his brother was bipolar," says Greenberg. About six million people are now diagnosed as bipolar in the US, and in the UK, it's one in 100.

He also describes how a loophole in the DSM criteria was exploited "by one of the few real bad guys in psychiatry" to establish a juvenile version of the disorder, without any solid evidence. This was at a time, coincidentally, when powerful antipsychotics were being rebranded as mood stabilisers. As a result, diagnoses of child bipolar illness increased 40-fold over a decade. "In 2007 alone half a million children, 20,000 of them under six, were prescribed drugs that a decade before would have been prescribed only in the most dire circumstances," says Greenberg.

The side effects of some of the drug cocktails children were prescribed included obesity, diabetes and suicidal thoughts.

In an attempt to reduce bipolar diagnoses in children, DSM-5 has introduced a new illness, called Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD), to cover intensive temper tantrums. But this too is proving controversial, with fears that it may capture some children who may be volatile, but who are not ill. "Clinical trials of treatments for DMDD are probably already under way and may well lead to another treatment epidemic," he says.

A different tale concerns Asperger's syndrome, which was first included by the DSM in 1994. Greenberg explains that this had some beneficial effects. "It may not have been a disease but calling it one gave a hitherto neglected group of children access to support and educational services, as well as a sense of identity and community." The result though, was that from a worldwide prevalence of four in 10,000 for autism disorders (including Asperger's) in 1988, 20 years later this was one in 88. Alarmed at diagnostic rates "getting out of hand", DSM-5 has removed Asperger's, replacing it with the umbrella term Autistic Spectrum Disorders. This means a "higher threshold for diagnosis", according to Greenberg, and possibly less access to educational benefits for future generations.

He is unimpressed with the DSM-5's new Hoarding Disorder - "Is an eccentric old man living amid his junk sicker than a billionaire who is always thinking of the next way to make a buck?" - and argues that anyone over the age of 50, including himself, would qualify for another new entry: Mild Cognitive Disorder.

Greenberg is particularly dismissive about DSM-5's changes to the criteria for Major Depressive Disorder. Until now, this diagnosis was specifically excluded in cases of recent bereavement, on the grounds that grief is normal. That exemption has been removed in DSM-5, leading critics to argue that grief has been medicalised.

"The exemption clause was an embarrassment because it challenged the idea that depression is caused by biology and led critics to demand that other external factors, such as divorce and redundancy, be exempt too," he says. "So they got rid of it, which means that if you are depressed while bereaved you can be classified as mentally ill." Not that bereaved people who are depressed shouldn't be helped, he adds. "But is it really a medical problem?"

So what needs to happen? Psychiatrists, he believes, must narrow their scope - to make a "reasonable claim" for certain mental illnesses falling within their domain. "When the DSM was published there were 14 mental disorders and now there are 250 - it needs to scale back."

There is a place for drug treatments, he says, although "you only have to look at the clinical trials to see they help some people but not all."

Above all, psychiatrists need to be more honest with their patients, he believes. "They shouldn't tell people their illness is caused by a chemical imbalance when there is no evidence this exists. Psychiatry has little knowledge of the underlying processes governing mental health and it should not pretend otherwise."


Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 10/24/2013 11:23:07 AM


Chemical Inbalance in the Brain?
Doctors medicine is chemical?
Use natural remedies instead?

this will get you KILLED.

= everything is chemical (unless when talking about pure-spiritual healing but thats off topic). The idea that chemicals come from a test tube and everything else is natural is BULLSHIT. You and your body are carbon-based organisms, Carbon is a chemical element. You drink natural water - h2o chemical name - and piss out more water and other chemicals including uric acid. Serotonin, dopamine are chemicals which are in the brain of every living being with a higher cognitive function. Infact, all matter on earth can be expressed chemically.
Any and every natural remedy has a mixture of chemical structures. GANJA tea has been a remedy in JA/Africa for YEARS and we know it contain the chemical THC which is responsible for the healing properties. The same CHEMICAL in Ganja which the US patented.... ok

If your still with me.... what we need to do is break down exactly what each of the chemical structures in ANYTHING we consume are, what they might be needed for, and any potential adverse effects. Not just the doctors drugs but also the herbs from the 'bush doctor' as this can kill you just as easy.

ARK-I said at the bottom of his statement on page 1 that until we find alternatives then its madness to suggest to a sick person on medication to just stop taking them.

Take home MSG: Dont be a sheep. Keep asking. Whats in that drug? whats in that drink? whats in that fruit? whats in that herb? How will it help me and how will it kill me?

- As a ITAL liver, I may eat Soya beans or Beansprouts as I know these are the best source of the massive chemical complexes known as Protein. And I know these foods (and not meat) are one of the few sources on this earth that contain ALL of the essential amino-acids including those which the body cannot produce naturally. Not just because i've been told 'its good for you'


Messenger: Ark I Sent: 10/25/2013 11:20:48 PM

ARK-I said at the bottom of his statement on page 1 that until we find alternatives then its madness to suggest to a sick person on medication to just stop taking them.

That is not what I said

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 10/27/2013 8:03:33 AM

"Before I used to say that people should not use those kind of medications at all. But unless a person has an alternate, effective means to help them in their situation to fix their foundation and change their thinking, then the medication may be the only way for them to live comfortably, without so many difficulties"

- Gwan talk..
- or should your car wrap up in some hi powa crash and mangle unuh lets see who and who don't deal with western medicine
- big up bush doctor them but big up the Rasta medical doctor them too


Messenger: Ark I Sent: 10/29/2013 8:29:48 PM

I am not against all western medicine, some of it is useful. I always make sure that I research the medicine before I take it, to make sure that the side effects are acceptable to I.

Messenger: Sister Sent: 11/2/2013 5:19:45 AM

Its not subtle to compare being given no choice in taking pharmaceuticals with serious side effects to treat what is not an organic illness and calling an ambulance after being in a car crash. Just because no alternative is being offered does not mean there isnít one, though it may not necessarily be lucrative to the industry or as cheap to deliver.
Maybe if Babylon hadnít got you stressed in the first place you wouldnít have crashed the car, and wouldnít need emergency first aid. In any case, itís the set up that is corrupt, not the fact that Babylon drive the ambulance.
One love.

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 46

Return to Reasoning List

Haile Selassie I