Congresswoman Giffords Shot in Tucson

[5-0 Kenpo]

First of all, they weren't "findings", which was the problem. I assume you mean the Turner thread, and in that case, that eminent physicist offered not the slightest bit of data. If he had, the argument would be different.

I'm talking about any scientist in a related field who has studied the issue, not just one particular scientist.

Second, I study depression. None of the scientists you refer to that I have seen study climate.

I'm sorry, I thought that you said, "My primary focus in my postdoctoral work is on developing drugs for addiction and recovery, they also have potential applications in depression, and I keep a hand in the literature."

Keeping "a hand in the literature" of depression means that you study it? Or does reading peer reviewed articles with a molecular neuroscientist educational foundation mean that you study it? That sounds similar to a, say, astrophysist who keeps a hand in peer reviewed articles regarding climate issues.

In the past, I've actually listed a number of scientists who study the issue who disagree with the anthopogenic global warming theory. These would include environmental scientists, climatologists, meteorologists, physists, etc.

Take a look at the "Global Warming Petition Project". One of the qualifications of signer is:

All of the listed signers have formal educations in fields of specialization that suitably qualify them to evaluate the research data related to the petition statement. Many of the signers currently work in climatological, meteorological, atmospheric, environmental, geophysical, astronomical, and biological fields directly involved in the climate change controversy.

The petition has been signed by over 31,000 scientists.

In an open letter to the Secretary-General of the U.N. regarding the 2007 IPCC report, they stated:

In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions.

And is signed by such people as Timothy F. Ball, Ph.D., environmental consultant, former climatology professor, University of Winnipeg, Reid A. Bryson, Ph.D., D.Sc., D.Engr., UNE P. Global 500 Laureate; Senior Scientist, Center for Climatic Research; Emeritus Professor of Meteorology, of Geography, and of Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, Ian D. Clark, Ph.D., Professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa.

All environmental scientists.

Third, what I said was that unless you spend the time and effort to master the literature of the field, then you cannot possibly know enough to challenge the findings of those who do. If you do put in the time, years of time, then obviously you become so qualified - titles aren't magic, it's the knowledge and expertise that matters. TANSTAAFL - you have to put in the effort.

And I've put forth those people and you have roundly rejected them because they did not fit the particular field that you thought was relevant to the study of the climate.

Fourth, depression and climate change are fundamentally different types of problems to study. In the case of depression, individual experiences and the experiences of lay people are of importance, since it is a disease of the mind.
In the case of climate change, individual experiences are meaningless, since it is a global phenomenon. Thus, between the two, when debating existence vs. nonexistence, inexpert but experiential opinions matter more for depression.

If it is a disease (any deviation from or interruption of the normal structure or function of any body part, organ, or system that is manifested by a characteristic set of symptoms and signs and whose etiology, pathology, and prognosis may be known or unknown), then there is a physical component that should account for it, and therefore an objective measure of diagnosis should be available. Now certainly, we may not have all of the diagnostic tools to determine the physical manifestation of a particular disease, and can only understand it's symptomology. But that goes to Lucky's position regarding proof of such a condition.

Unless you are merely speaking of the emotional aspect, to which you would have no qualifications to justify your expertise (as you study physical structures, other then your own subjective experiences, ie., I know it exists because I have felt that way before, or seen others who have.

Lastly, I never said anyone should take my word for it. Anyone is free to challenge my arguments or data with anything of their own at any time. I never even brought up my qualifications until Lucky gambled that I had no expertise and thus would shut my argument down. That gamble failed.

I'll grant that it essentially was a pissing match. What I am trying to get across is your apparent, at least by the initial wording I quoted above, you said that you did not study depression, but susequently, that we should refute your because they are predicated on accurate information based on your own research. And that flys in the face of statments made by you regarding scientist disagreement with the anthropogenic global warming theory.

Anyways, for reals this time (my darn need to always want the last word), I am going to bow out of this tangent, as it isn't doing anything to understand the OP.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

I think that 'disorders' are catergorised differently from 'illnesses'.

According to the British Journal of Psychiatry:

The most contentious issue is whether disease, illness or disorder (like the World Health Organization, I regard these terms as roughly synonymous) are scientific or biomedical terms, or whether they are socio-political terms which necessarily involve a value judgement.

As I've said before your 'condition/disorder' wouldn't exist if you were English lol, we like our eccentricities.

Would be nice.

There is a difference between post natal depression which is an illness and OCD which is a condition/disorder. As a very rough guide look at who's treating the patient, (it is a rough guide though) a pyschiatrist treats the illnesses and the psychologist treats the conditions.

Doing a quick Google search, it seems that the experts use the term interchangably. In fact, Depression, as classified by the WHO, is a mental disorder:

Depression is a common mental disorder that presents with depressed mood, loss of interest or pleasure, feelings of guilt or low self-worth, disturbed sleep or appetite, low energy, and poor concentration.

This is the WHO's definition of a mental disorder, to include things that, as you would have defined it, as illnesses:

Mental disorders comprise a broad range of problems, with different symptoms. However, they are generally characterized by some combination of abnormal thoughts, emotions, behaviour and relationships with others. Examples are schizophrenia, depression, mental retardation and disorders due to drug abuse. Most of these disorders can be successfully treated.
http://www.who.int/topics/mental_disorders/en/

My point though was that mental illnesses are more common than people who don't believe in mental illnesses think. One thing people might like to consider is the horror of Alzheimers, is that just a weakness? Do we shout, pull yourself together man at someone with it? It's a very real illness and while you can say it's not a 'mental' illness as such it's something that affects the brain as other condtions can such as clinical depression, bi polar etc do.

The difference, I think, is that you can physically test for Alzheimer's Disease. Yeah, the person has to be dead in order to do so, but at least you can point to some physical causation. I don't know if you can do so for Depression. I would think that you can, and therefore it is perfectly logical to call it a disease or illness.

 

[Tez3]

According to the British Journal of Psychiatry:





Would be nice.



Doing a quick Google search, it seems that the experts use the term interchangably. In fact, Depression, as classified by the WHO, is a mental disorder:





This is the WHO's definition of a mental disorder, to include things that, as you would have defined it, as illnesses:





The difference, I think, is that you can physically test for Alzheimer's Disease. Yeah, the person has to be dead in order to do so, but at least you can point to some physical causation. I don't know if you can do so for Depression. I would think that you can, and therefore it is perfectly logical to call it a disease or illness.

I would answer and back you up but Luckyboxers has put me on ignore because I argued with him but I think your posts show a huge amount of knowledge and are well presented.

I was chatting with my pysch nurse mate and he told me how they categorise the condition/illness thing which is what I posted as a rough guide. For others though, I repeat it's a rough guide as every patient is different, he did say though that clinical depression as opposed to reactive depression is different, clinical being to do with the chemicals in the brain lacking or too much or altered (?) Def your subject not mine!
Sadly at the moment they are doing a lot of work with patients with PTSD, though I'd probably better not mention it as that too I expect is considered by some to be just a bad mood thing.

The thing as well with the clinical depression he says is that it can affect someone who is perfectly happy, has a good home life, no mood swings, good job etc and no reason to be low or down yet they can get terribly depressed. Stephen Fry did a very good documentary about his depression, he refuted that it's merely a bad mood or feeling sad, he said it's very much like a physical illness in that you actually feel in in your body. Winston Churchill had the same, he called it 'Black Dog' and he was of a generation and was the type of personality that wouldn't have stood for weakness of character or softness. It certainly seems that if he could have got rid of it or 'snapped out' of it he would have done, he didn't 'enjoy' having it!
http://www.bipolar-lives.com/winston-churchill-and-manic-depression.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jul/21/mentalhealth.broadcasting

Stephen Fry is also on Youtube explaining how it feels to have manic depression.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Unlike LuckyBoxer, I do happen to think that these are real illnesses.

I just happen to think that there is a tendency to overdiagnose these illnesses.

 

[Blade96]

Unlike LuckyBoxer, I do happen to think that these are real illnesses.

I just happen to think that there is a tendency to overdiagnose these illnesses.

I also agree with both your sentences and i say something about your your second sentence. I been to social workers, psychiatrists and psychologists and councelors as well over the years; the latter 3 kinds imo have a huge tendency to want to slap a label on you.

 

[Flea]

I also agree with both your sentences and i say something about your your second sentence. I been to social workers, psychiatrists and psychologists and councelors as well over the years; the latter 3 kinds imo have a huge tendency to want to slap a label on you.

Insurance companies have a lot to do with that. Doctors and especially psychiatrists are expected to cough up a diagnosis on the first appointment or the companies (at least in the US) won't cover anything.

 

[Carol]

Unlike LuckyBoxer, I do happen to think that these are real illnesses.

I just happen to think that there is a tendency to overdiagnose these illnesses.

That could be. What do you think the reason is for that?

I don't think it is for the sustainability of the profession. Psychiatry is one of the lower paying medical specialties, yet psychiatrists and their fellow clinicians seem to struggle with a very heavy case load. My sister is a LICSW and she would much rather have fewer cases, not more.

 

[Carol]

Insurance companies have a lot to do with that. Doctors and especially psychiatrists are expected to cough up a diagnosis on the first appointment or the companies (at least in the US) won't cover anything.

Flea, do you think its insurance? Or do you think its liability?

For example...someone has borderline symptoms of clinical depression, but is not diagnosed with a depressive disorder, or treated be it with counseling or medication.

3 months later they start hurting themselves, or even make an attempt on their life. Would their loved ones sue? ("They came to you for treatment, but you said they weren't depressed")

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

That could be. What do you think the reason is for that?

I don't think it is for the sustainability of the profession. Psychiatry is one of the lower paying medical specialties, yet psychiatrists and their fellow clinicians seem to struggle with a very heavy case load. My sister is a LICSW and she would much rather have fewer cases, not more.

Do you want the conspiracy theory answer or something more nominal.

My nominal answer would be that we have succumbed to the idea in this country that nothing is really our fault. You can't control your weight, it's because you are genetically predisposed to being overweight. Not happy, don't worry, it's an illness, but good news, we can control it with drugs. Kids won't sit down and you can't control them, it's not your fault, they have ADHD. And guess what, we have drugs for that, too.

We've become a nation of wimps who want quick and easy answers to our problems, rather then facing the hard truths. Where else would this be so much more prevelant then in our own egos.

My conspiracy theory answer. For a full and complete view, read Aldous Huxley's "A Brave New World". It is in order to control our behaviour and alter our attitudes. It is a medically indused sedative so that we can't see what's going on in the world and to accept whatever "they" want to do to us.

 

[Carol]

Do you want the conspiracy theory answer or something more nominal.

My nominal answer would be that we have succumbed to the idea in this country that nothing is really our fault. You can't control your weight, it's because you are genetically predisposed to being overweight. Not happy, don't worry, it's an illness, but good news, we can control it with drugs. Kids won't sit down and you can't control them, it's not your fault, they have ADHD. And guess what, we have drugs for that, too.

We've become a nation of wimps who want quick and easy answers to our problems, rather then facing the hard truths. Where else would this be so much more prevelant then in our own egos.

I like the conspiracy theory

But realistically meds are generally not the entire answer, yes? Psychiatric drugs aren't like taking an advil....take two and you'll feel better in a half hour. Flea is more of an expert on this but its generally not meds alone that results in a patient getting better, it is meds plus counseling (be it from a doc, a shrink a social worker...), where the patient can learn better coping skills, how to build (or rebuild) a support structure, how to stomach (sometimes quite literally) the side effects of the meds while they are building up to a therapeutic level in the bloodstream. Whether it is or isn't a person's fault that they are sick seems irrelevant, because regardless of how the patient got sick, the patient must take the responsibility to do get better, and have the strength and the stick-to-it-ness to gut out a long journey.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

I like the conspiracy theory

But realistically meds are generally not the entire answer, yes? Psychiatric drugs aren't like taking an advil....take two and you'll feel better in a half hour. Flea is more of an expert on this but its generally not meds alone that results in a patient getting better, it is meds plus counseling (be it from a doc, a shrink a social worker...), where the patient can learn better coping skills, how to build (or rebuild) a support structure, how to stomach (sometimes quite literally) the side effects of the meds while they are building up to a therapeutic level in the bloodstream. Whether it is or isn't a person's fault that they are sick seems irrelevant, because regardless of how the patient got sick, the patient must take the responsibility to do get better, and have the strength and the stick-to-it-ness to gut out a long journey.

But you are referring to the truly sick. And I could not contain my answer to just those taking medication, but to those diagnosed with "mental illness".

As I showed earlier, according to one classification of my behavior, I have a mental illness. Therefore, I am no longer responsible for, oh, not having friends because I tend to be cold and aloof, for instance. I think with the generally weak egos that we have in this country it is a conveinent escape from responsibility for their lack of fulfillment.

 

[Carol]

But you are referring to the truly sick. And I could not contain my answer to just those taking medication, but to those diagnosed with "mental illness".

As I showed earlier, according to one classification of my behavior, I have a mental illness. Therefore, I am no longer responsible for, oh, not having friends because I tend to be cold and aloof, for instance. I think with the generally weak egos that we have in this country it is a conveinent escape from responsibility for their lack of fulfillment.

The classification contains necessary elements, but is not sufficient. I'd need my sister's help or someone more knowledgeable than me to offer a better explanation but a diagnosis is more than just matching up symptoms, it is if the symptoms affect one's ability to function.

I'm afraid to leave my house. Am I agoraphobic? No, just not looking forward to trekking through all the snow and ice on the ground. It does not affect my ability to function.

A similar thing could be said about people with back pain. Just give 'em some vicodin. Don't make them lose weight or improve their diet. Pop some pills and its all OK. But I don't ever hear the specialty of orthopedics, or the realm of physical health get dismissed or denigrated simply because some folks may use back pain to stay off their feet or get narcotic pain relievers.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

The classification contains necessary elements, but is not sufficient. I'd need my sister's help or someone more knowledgeable than me to offer a better explanation but a diagnosis is more than just matching up symptoms, it is if the symptoms affect one's ability to function.

I'm no expert either. However, the only way that I could perhaps give you a real understanding of why I use myself as an example would be long, drawn out, and probably really, really boring to post online. But if you look at the symptoms for the one I used, is specifically states that there is no dominant symptom, nor is it consistent. Seems just a bit too vague and open-ended for me to support.

I'm afraid to leave my house. Am I agoraphobic? No, just not looking forward to trekking through all the snow and ice on the ground. It does not affect my ability to function.

Just as a case in point, I wouldn't say that my, proclivities, prevent me from functioning, but it has significantly affected my life. This mostly occurred during childhood, but some of the effects continue even now.

So am I crazy? Maybe

A similar thing could be said about people with back pain. Just give 'em some vicodin. Don't make them lose weight or improve their diet. Pop some pills and its all OK. But I don't ever hear the specialty of orthopedics, or the realm of physical health get dismissed or denigrated simply because some folks may use back pain to stay off their feet or get narcotic pain relievers.

I would offer that maybe the resentment of such issues is that we might be overexposed to hearing how everyone seems to have a mental illness. Or perhaps that there are huge amounts of people that use it as a crutch. Or perhaps that such diagnosises have been foisted upon them and most people believe that they are perfectly fine.

I think, primarily though, that there is an actual physical component to such things as back pain, or being overweight. We can see it, and often, we can touch it. With mental illnesses it is difficult to do so. Not only that, but we have also seen people overcome "mental illnesses" with no treatment whatsoever, leading many people to believe that some or all of those particular illnesses don't exist.

It's just as I related to Alzheimer's Disease. People know that it exists because there is a physical manifestation of it, even though it can only be detected after death. Can we say the same about Depression.

 

[Empty Hands]

Medication has not been proven to do anything better for people arbitrarily diagnosed with depression...

What, did you think we were just making this stuff up? That's one random study I found on PubMed in 60 seconds. Do you think we would spend millions testing something that had never been shown to work?

Get off your high horse, and actually get back to reality. Just because you want something to be a certain way does not mean it is.

Well, if nothing else it's pretty entertaining to be told by someone to "get back to reality" instead of scientifically studying a disease. You think this is all my desire and my will? Competing opinions with no opinion more valid than the other? This is scientific fact my friend, studied by hundreds of thousands of scientific professionals from people like myself to clinicians and psychologists. I'm not the one in need of some reality.

 

[ballen0351]

Went to my Docs yesterday for a chest cold that wont go away. Did some test found out it was pneumonia. We were talking about what medicine he was going to prescribe for me and we got to the topic about the overuse of Antibiotics in this country. My doc said most people go to the Docs and they expect the doc to find something wrong with them even if there is not. They expect a prescription. He said many Docs are to the point they are prescribing meds to people that don’t need it just so they shut up and go home.
So I asked him about this topic and mental illness diagnosis. He said pretty much the same applies. People are not satisfied until you tell them they have a problem and if you say they are fine people get mad and ask to see another doc or they keep making appointments until they are told something. He said everybody no matter who you can show symptoms of something the easy one is depression, and Bi-polar. He said lots of people just get told they have problems because that’s what they want to hear.

 

[Blade96]

Went to my Docs yesterday for a chest cold that wont go away. Did some test found out it was pneumonia. .

That sucks, Ballen, I hope you feel better soon!

I had that when i was a teenager.

 

[ballen0351]

What, did you think we were just making this stuff up? That's one random study I found on PubMed in 60 seconds. Do you think we would spend millions testing something that had never been shown to work?
.

I dont think the meds really treat the problems I they mask the symptoms and as soon as you stop taking the pills your back to where you started or even worse. Medications may be a start but if you dont fix the cause of the issue your just going to have bigger problems later

 

[ballen0351]

That sucks, Ballen, I hope you feel better soon!

I had that when i was a teenager.

Thanks it sucks but they say with the meds I should feel better in 2 or 3 days

 

[Empty Hands]

I dont think the meds really treat the problems I they mask the symptoms and as soon as you stop taking the pills your back to where you started or even worse. Medications may be a start but if you dont fix the cause of the issue your just going to have bigger problems later

This assumes that clinical depression is due to a state of mind, a mental conflict, trauma that happened to you, or some similar mental condition amenable to cognitive behavioral therapy. It also assumes that once you get your mind in the right order, you won't get depression again.

These assumptions are false.

Environment contributes, but the disease is biological in basis.

 

[Tez3]

Psychiatry isn't a big thing here, there's no insurance issues either. It's quite hard to get referred to any mental health professional which is a shame. A long time ago they closed a lot of mental hospitals which was a sort of good thing, there were people in them who had been committed decades before for things like being a single mother or because the family wanted rid of them. On the other hand it does mean there is nowhere safe for mentally ill people to be kept in because they needed to be, we have very few in patient wards for mental illness now.
I can't say there is a tendancy to over prescribe here, most people still see a stigma attached to being labelled mentally ill and won't go to a doctor with anything even vaguely 'mental'.
Mental health charities campaign for better awareness but there is still resistance to accepting that people can have problems and still function. People keep their depressions etc to themselves, it may mean that we have more suicides than we need to because people won't go for help, it's not that they don't believe depression etc is a mental illness more that they are ashamed of it.