"Chemical imbalance causes mental illness" = myth

[Stunningwhale]

My evidence is anecdotal...my own experience. I had nothing negative happen to me yet at age 14 got crippling depression that only lifted at 27 just over a yr ago. No circumstance at all for either event.

Was the depression triggered by using ADD or ADHD medication or any type of amphetamine eg diet medication, duramine, weed?
These can cause depression, psychotic bipolar, schizophrenia etc

[Stunningwhale]

How to define mental illness. Not normal?!
Normal in Queensland Australia at least among males of the population is Autism and mental atrophy/ retardation

Not joking.

Since that is the majority, anyone abnormal gets told they're not well and they're crazy.

A dollar for every time an autistic man has said with all confidence that I'm abnormal and crazy.
And here I am being patient and nurturing to him, the mentally retarded and member of majority.
Heavy metals in the water here. Severe amounts of violence and autism.
This is not a joke.

Next time someone says I'm abnormal, I want them to reflect on themselves for the first time in their lives and ask themselves are they in fact autistic.

[ShiaSleep]

No it's not a myth

For one, OCD is characterised by serotonin deficiency in the brain, which is why SSRIs provide relief to such disorders, as they make serotonin or readily available in the brain.

I can also support this, as I was diagnosed with OCD at 13 and am on SSRIs which help MAJORLY.

[Adept85]

ll tell you right now you are completely wrong, try mix up a bunch of medicine prescriptions and tell me that the medicine doesn't mess with the chemicals in your brain

[midcoastking33]

No it's not a myth

For one, OCD is characterised by serotonin deficiency in the brain, which is why SSRIs provide relief to such disorders, as they make serotonin or readily available in the brain.

I can also support this, as I was diagnosed with OCD at 13 and am on SSRIs which help MAJORLY.

lol ocd is purely conditioned, which as a result can lead to low serotonin. that's like saying heart disease leads to obesity

[mynameisuntz]

Show me or better yet a review that either phenelzine or tranylcypromine (full MAO inhibitors) are "barely superior" to placebos in treating depression. You're basically saying no drug is much better than a placebo. What absolute crap.

In terms of their symptom-masking, they aren't. I imagine you see a study claiming that drugs are statistically significantly better but you probably don't even know what statistical significance really means.

No it isn't. There are types of depression that can come and go or change form (bipolar) but there is no "cycle".

Depression is cyclical.

Yes I am. Of course it doesn't improve the illness. How would it? The illness is physical (part of the brain). You can't talk someone out of depression any more than you can talk them out of diabetes.

No point in talking anymore because you literally have no idea what you are talking about. How come psychotherapy has better rates of recovery than drugs...? LONG-TERM, mind you. So, 12 sessions of psychotherapy > lifetime of drugs. I am done responding to your idiocy because you have never researched this topic. Feel free to respond to this as I imagine you will, but I am not going to waste my time on someone who insists in being correct when having zero experience in actually researching this.

No it's not a myth

For one, OCD is characterised by serotonin deficiency in the brain, which is why SSRIs provide relief to such disorders, as they make serotonin or readily available in the brain.

I can also support this, as I was diagnosed with OCD at 13 and am on SSRIs which help MAJORLY.

Wrong.

Further, exposure therapy after 10-12 sessions will COMPLETELY ERADICATE OCD in 85%+ of the population. Drugs are only masking your symptoms and you will have to rely on them for life. Even then they are not anything close to exposure therapy. I would suggest seeing a psychologist if you'd like the OCD to be completely gone rather than just hidden.

Exposure therapy is the quintessential therapy for anxiety disorders and no drug on earth even comes close to what it can do.

ll tell you right now you are completely wrong, try mix up a bunch of medicine prescriptions and tell me that the medicine doesn't mess with the chemicals in your brain

This is fallacious reasoning for the claim that chemical imbalance is the cause of mental illness.

[BloodFireDeath]

How come psychotherapy has better rates of recovery than drugs...? LONG-TERM, mind you. So, 12 sessions of psychotherapy > lifetime of drugs.

Further, exposure therapy after 10-12 sessions will COMPLETELY ERADICATE OCD in 85%+ of the population. Drugs are only masking your symptoms and you will have to rely on them for life. Even then they are not anything close to exposure therapy. I would suggest seeing a psychologist if you'd like the OCD to be completely gone rather than just hidden.

Exposure therapy is the quintessential therapy for anxiety disorders and no drug on earth even comes close to what it can do.

Would like to read sources for claims, sounds interesting.

Also, don't know if already discussed. But what according to you causes mental illness, if not chemical imbalance?

[mynameisuntz]

Would like to read sources for claims, sounds interesting.

Also, don't know if already discussed. But what according to you causes mental illness, if not chemical imbalance?

It makes more sense to first discuss the model of OCD (and really this can be generalized to anxiety as a whole):



Trigger --> obsession ("my parents are going to be murdered") --> obsession is appraised (given importance) --> compulsion is recognized ("if I flip this light switch 20 times, I can save them") --> compulsion is acted upon --> individual's anxiety is reduced --> individual is deprived of disconfirming consequences --> parents are not murdered and thus the result of this is falsely attributed to the compulsion --> reinforces the obsession in the face of a trigger.

"Oh no, my parents are going to be murdered. That is going to be terrible, and I cannot stand to think about it. Whenever I flip a light switch 20 times, though, it always saves them because they always come home at the end of the day...this anxiety is killing me, so I'm going to flip the light switch 20 times now."

This is the cognitive process of OCD, and again, it can be generalized to any anxiety disorder. See:



So we cannot control obsessions and attempts to stop them is not prognostic of positive change. What is most important to recognize here is that the compulsion, which is a safety behavior is responsible for reinforcing the underlying anxiety in the first place. THAT is what is responsible for creating obsessions and the need to engage in compulsions; it's a self-sustaining cycle. Safety behaviors are the arch nemesis of anxiety treatments; they are attempts to provide immediate relief from the distress itself, but will in fact perpetuate it over time.

So, what do you think medications do? Oh yeah, alleviate the anxiety. What happens when the individual comes off medication? Immediate relapse in something like 90% of individuals with anxiety. Hello again, OCD. Medications are just prolonged safety behaviors which do NOTHING to eradicate the anxiety itself, they only mask it. Paradoxically medications SUSTAIN anxiety, they just cover it up to some extent.

This is why measuring the outcome of perceived anxiety is pointless. Because yes medications can reduce the perception of anxiety, but their mechanism of change (THIS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT) is just another safety behavior. It is reinforcing the cycle of anxiety. It isn't doing anything to actually address the underlying mechanism of anxiety, and it does nothing to alter that mechanism. This is why when you read a study that says, "this treatment helped the individual," you need to immediately ask two things: 1) what is the definition of "help," and 2) HOW did it create change? Under what mechanism? Another safety behavior, or something that actively CHALLENGES safety behaviors to thus reduce the power the underlying fear factor holds?

Does this make sense so far? It would be like giving someone with cancer a medication which actively feeds a tumor while simultaneously reducing the negative symptoms associated with the cancer so the individual feels less sick, has more energy, etc. rather than just, you know, trying to remove the tumor itself entirely.

[Delgadido]

In terms of their symptom-masking, they aren't. I imagine you see a study claiming that drugs are statistically significantly better but you probably don't even know what statistical significance really means.



Depression is cyclical.



No point in talking anymore because you literally have no idea what you are talking about. How come psychotherapy has better rates of recovery than drugs...? LONG-TERM, mind you. So, 12 sessions of psychotherapy > lifetime of drugs. I am done responding to your idiocy because you have never researched this topic. Feel free to respond to this as I imagine you will, but I am not going to waste my time on someone who insists in being correct when having zero experience in actually researching this.



Wrong.

Further, exposure therapy after 10-12 sessions will COMPLETELY ERADICATE OCD in 85%+ of the population. Drugs are only masking your symptoms and you will have to rely on them for life. Even then they are not anything close to exposure therapy. I would suggest seeing a psychologist if you'd like the OCD to be completely gone rather than just hidden.

Exposure therapy is the quintessential therapy for anxiety disorders and no drug on earth even comes close to what it can do.



This is fallacious reasoning for the claim that chemical imbalance is the cause of mental illness.

I am going to agree with ocd and it affecting seratonin. I am sure after a period of time of intense stress could cause damage but psychotherapy would still be superior for ocd unless the behavior is a from anothrr condition

I dont see how medication would truly help with ocd other than treating the symptoms but treating tje symptoms doesnt mean they will cure it

[Delgadido]

I am going to agree with ocd and it affecting seratonin. I am sure after a period of time of intense stress could cause damage but psychotherapy would still be superior for ocd unless the behavior is a from anothrr condition

I dont see how medication would truly help with ocd other than treating the symptoms but treating tje symptoms doesnt mean they will cure it

I would also like to add medication will help them get to a state so they can do psychtherapy

[mynameisuntz]

I am going to agree with ocd and it affecting seratonin. I am sure after a period of time of intense stress could cause damage but psychotherapy would still be superior for ocd unless the behavior is a from anothrr condition

I dont see how medication would truly help with ocd other than treating the symptoms but treating tje symptoms doesnt mean they will cure it

I was talking about your views on pharmacotherapy and OCD. People targeting the anxiety are all wrong. The target should be NEW LEARNING, and then anxiety reduction follows that. This is how long-term change happens.

New learning = horse; anxiety reduction = cart. Not the other way around.

The reduction of anxiety during treatment is NOT PROGNOSTIC of long-term change. Read that 50x. It's super important!

I would also like to add medication will help them get to a state so they can do psychtherapy

Commonly echoed belief, but a myth. No evidence supports that those with OCD benefit from medication beyond exposure therapy + response prevention. In fact, it could be argued that anything which REDUCES anxiety can pose a threat to long-term change via behavioral therapy.

[NorthernBBer]

In terms of their symptom-masking, they aren't. I imagine you see a study claiming that drugs are statistically significantly better but you probably don't even know what statistical significance really means.



Depression is cyclical.



No point in talking anymore because you literally have no idea what you are talking about. How come psychotherapy has better rates of recovery than drugs...? LONG-TERM, mind you. So, 12 sessions of psychotherapy > lifetime of drugs. I am done responding to your idiocy because you have never researched this topic. Feel free to respond to this as I imagine you will, but I am not going to waste my time on someone who insists in being correct when having zero experience in actually researching this.



Wrong.

Further, exposure therapy after 10-12 sessions will COMPLETELY ERADICATE OCD in 85%+ of the population. Drugs are only masking your symptoms and you will have to rely on them for life. Even then they are not anything close to exposure therapy. I would suggest seeing a psychologist if you'd like the OCD to be completely gone rather than just hidden.

Exposure therapy is the quintessential therapy for anxiety disorders and no drug on earth even comes close to what it can do.



This is fallacious reasoning for the claim that chemical imbalance is the cause of mental illness.

It makes more sense to first discuss the model of OCD (and really this can be generalized to anxiety as a whole):



Trigger --> obsession ("my parents are going to be murdered") --> obsession is appraised (given importance) --> compulsion is recognized ("if I flip this light switch 20 times, I can save them") --> compulsion is acted upon --> individual's anxiety is reduced --> individual is deprived of disconfirming consequences --> parents are not murdered and thus the result of this is falsely attributed to the compulsion --> reinforces the obsession in the face of a trigger.

"Oh no, my parents are going to be murdered. That is going to be terrible, and I cannot stand to think about it. Whenever I flip a light switch 20 times, though, it always saves them because they always come home at the end of the day...this anxiety is killing me, so I'm going to flip the light switch 20 times now."

This is the cognitive process of OCD, and again, it can be generalized to any anxiety disorder. See:



So we cannot control obsessions and attempts to stop them is not prognostic of positive change. What is most important to recognize here is that the compulsion, which is a safety behavior is responsible for reinforcing the underlying anxiety in the first place. THAT is what is responsible for creating obsessions and the need to engage in compulsions; it's a self-sustaining cycle. Safety behaviors are the arch nemesis of anxiety treatments; they are attempts to provide immediate relief from the distress itself, but will in fact perpetuate it over time.

So, what do you think medications do? Oh yeah, alleviate the anxiety. What happens when the individual comes off medication? Immediate relapse in something like 90% of individuals with anxiety. Hello again, OCD. Medications are just prolonged safety behaviors which do NOTHING to eradicate the anxiety itself, they only mask it. Paradoxically medications SUSTAIN anxiety, they just cover it up to some extent.

This is why measuring the outcome of perceived anxiety is pointless. Because yes medications can reduce the perception of anxiety, but their mechanism of change (THIS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT) is just another safety behavior. It is reinforcing the cycle of anxiety. It isn't doing anything to actually address the underlying mechanism of anxiety, and it does nothing to alter that mechanism. This is why when you read a study that says, "this treatment helped the individual," you need to immediately ask two things: 1) what is the definition of "help," and 2) HOW did it create change? Under what mechanism? Another safety behavior, or something that actively CHALLENGES safety behaviors to thus reduce the power the underlying fear factor holds?

Does this make sense so far? It would be like giving someone with cancer a medication which actively feeds a tumor while simultaneously reducing the negative symptoms associated with the cancer so the individual feels less sick, has more energy, etc. rather than just, you know, trying to remove the tumor itself entirely.

But wheres thesource backing up your 85% claim?

[Delgadido]

I was talking about your views on pharmacotherapy and OCD. People targeting the anxiety are all wrong. The target should be NEW LEARNING, and then anxiety reduction follows that. This is how long-term change happens.

New learning = horse; anxiety reduction = cart. Not the other way around.

The reduction of anxiety during treatment is NOT PROGNOSTIC of long-term change. Read that 50x. It's super important!



Commonly echoed belief, but a myth. No evidence supports that those with OCD benefit from medication beyond exposure therapy + response prevention. In fact, it could be argued that anything which REDUCES anxiety can pose a threat to long-term change via behavioral therapy.

If someone is running around the room in a panicked with extreme anxiety
You cannot treat them. If they are anxious but can listen then they can be treated with psychotherapy.

I am talking about treating the symptoms. Not the condition.
Read that 50 times.

There is a difference between symptoms and the condition

Read that 75 times

In physical therapy they give pain meds to reduce the pain so they can perform therapy
Same thing.

I am not saying meds will cure them but it will certainly help them get cured faster through therapy.

Have you worked in a clinic setting?

[mynameisuntz]

But wheres thesource backing up your 85% claim?

For now, 80% will have to do. I will look later for a more updated number given that new metas have been done since the publication of this study, and our models of anxiety have already been updated.

Abramowitz, J. S. (2006). The psychological treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 51, 407-416.

^^This is arguably the boss of OCD in the world of research. He's at UNC-CH.

If someone is running around the room in a panicked with extreme anxiety
You cannot treat them. If they are anxious but can listen then they can be treated with psychotherapy.

I am talking about treating the symptoms. Not the condition.
Read that 50 times.

There is a difference between symptoms and the condition

Read that 75 times

In physical therapy they give pain meds to reduce the pain so they can perform therapy
Same thing.

I am not saying meds will cure them but it will certainly help them get cured faster through therapy.

Have you worked in a clinic setting?

1) Do you even know how often someone "runs around the room in panicked anxiety" in clinical settings...? Clearly not as often as you seem to think.
2) Yes, I have worked in a clinic setting. I work in my university counseling center, too, where something like 60% of our cases are anxiety.
3) THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM THAT MEDS + PSYCHOTHERAPY = BETTER FOR OCD.

[BloodFireDeath]

It makes more sense to first discuss the model of OCD (and really this...

Anxiety, depression and OCD are the only mental illnesses I can see this model working for, and even then it has a limited scope. Out of these you chose to discuss OCD, which is already known to have better outcome with CBT and a high relapse rate, that's the nature of OCD. Psychotherapy is not as useful as a primary form of treatment in a vast majority of other mental illnesses like you claimed, "12 sessions of psychotherapy > lifetime of drugs."

Also, what would you say about how there are studies showing a genetic predisposition to developing OCD in some sufferers, and also a physical component to it? Outlined here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology...lsive_disorder

[stealth_swimmer]

Can you explain what a "chemically balanced brain" is? Because I don't think that has ever been established. What is a chemical balance from a neural perspective?

Someone else already mentioned it - someone who shows behavior deviant from the norm. I think to be an "illness" though, it has to interfere with their daily lives or something like that.

Oh they certainly don't cause it; they are a link in the chain. Important to know, but that's not the absolute root cause.

Calling it a link in a chain is the same as saying it's part of the cause.

[mynameisuntz]

Anxiety, depression and OCD are the only mental illnesses I can see this model working for, and even then it has a limited scope. Out of these you chose to discuss OCD, which is already known to have better outcome with CBT and a high relapse rate, that's the nature of OCD. Psychotherapy is not as useful as a primary form of treatment in a vast majority of other mental illnesses like you claimed, "12 sessions of psychotherapy > lifetime of drugs."

Also, what would you say about how there are studies showing a genetic predisposition to developing OCD in some sufferers, and also a physical component to it? Outlined here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology...lsive_disorder

This model is transdiagnostic and could, on some level, be applied to schizophrenia if you wanted to. It just depends on how you look at it and what you believe the aims of therapy to be. It works for the ENTIRE anxiety spectrum (generalized, panic, phobias, social anxiety, PTSD, OCD, etc.) and plenty of others. These account for the vast majority of mental illness in the world. The anxiety spectrum is the most diagnosed, depression follows.

I never denied there's a genetic component. Now, how does that inform treatment? It doesn't.

Psychotherapy is not as useful as a primary form of treatment in a vast majority of other mental illnesses like you claimed, "12 sessions of psychotherapy > lifetime of drugs."

Then you did NOT understand the model. Further, you're wrong even by your own standards (which are incorrect and misinformed). Bipolar and schizophrenia come to mind as two that are incredibly difficult to treat with psychotherapy (though this may be changing as we speak!), but aside from that, psychotherapy is the best form of treatment. Depression, panic, phobias, PTSD, OCD, generalized anxiety disorder, eating disorders, etc.

The problem, again, is you're placing the emphasis on anxiety reduction. By those standards, you seem to believe drugs are comparable/better than psychotherapy. What you don't understand is your emphasizing of anxiety reduction is bad.

Someone else already mentioned it - someone who shows behavior deviant from the norm. I think to be an "illness" though, it has to interfere with their daily lives or something like that.

That doesn't describe a chemically balanced brain. No one has described that. Not even the field of neuroscience!

Calling it a link in a chain is the same as saying it's part of the cause.

Even then it's difficult to say that, but let's assume you're correct, what does that matter now? People hear that and say "thus we need to target these chemicals for meaningful change!" False. Wrong. We have evidence which contradicts that.

[stealth_swimmer]

That doesn't describe a chemically balanced brain. No one has described that. Not even the field of neuroscience!



Even then it's difficult to say that, but let's assume you're correct, what does that matter now? People hear that and say "thus we need to target these chemicals for meaningful change!" False. Wrong. We have evidence which contradicts that.

I don't think it's the type of thing that's defined purely by chemical levels. Like I said, or rather that other person said - it has to do with behavior *resulting* from chemicals. In other words, if someone's brain chemistry was really different, but their behavior was totally normal, they probably wouldn't be called chemically unbalanced. I think it's more a rule of thumb than anything else. Or like a marker/indicator.

[mynameisuntz]

I don't think it's the type of thing that's defined purely by chemical levels. Like I said, or rather that other person said - it has to do with behavior *resulting* from chemicals. In other words, if someone's brain chemistry was really different, but their behavior was totally normal, they probably wouldn't be called chemically unbalanced. I think it's more a rule of thumb than anything else. Or like a marker/indicator.

Then it's more semantics than science, which is of little to no utility. Actually, it's harmful considering the "chemical imbalance" hypothesis increases social stigma and makes for worse prognoses. It's also just a remarkably watered down explanation.

[Delgadido]

For now, 80% will have to do. I will look later for a more updated number given that new metas have been done since the publication of this study, and our models of anxiety have already been updated.

Abramowitz, J. S. (2006). The psychological treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 51, 407-416.

^^This is arguably the boss of OCD in the world of research. He's at UNC-CH.



1) Do you even know how often someone "runs around the room in panicked anxiety" in clinical settings...? Clearly not as often as you seem to think.
2) Yes, I have worked in a clinic setting. I work in my university counseling center, too, where something like 60% of our cases are anxiety.
3) THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM THAT MEDS + PSYCHOTHERAPY = BETTER FOR OCD.

I guess for in patient settings it is different
Nursing interventions will be different due to the fact nursing treats quite a bit in patient people. I saw several anxiety attacks while I was there. Probably something you wont see

[stealth_swimmer]

Then it's more semantics than science, which is of little to no utility. Actually, it's harmful considering the "chemical imbalance" hypothesis increases social stigma and makes for worse prognoses. It's also just a remarkably watered down explanation.

Yeah, it's not quite scientific (a lot of psychology isn't, especially when it comes to diagnosing an illness/abnormality) but it *can* still be useful. Just like even if a model isn't completely true, it can be useful for making predictions or helping understand, maybe even a little more intuitively, the general mechanics of something, so to speak. This is especially true in the social sciences.

[mynameisuntz]

I guess for in patient settings it is different
Nursing interventions will be different due to the fact nursing treats quite a bit in patient people. I saw several anxiety attacks while I was there. Probably something you wont see

Of course it's different for in-patient settings, but I'm willing to bet the VAST majority of those in these settings started with less severe diagnoses and sought treatment in out-patient setting first. Further, for those within in-patient settings, anxiety disorders tend not to be the primary diagnosis and/or they are accompanied with some comorbid condition which amplifies severity to an extreme extent.

I have not said medication can never be helpful; I am saying that, generally speaking for the vast majority of cases, it is unnecessary and will yield no real benefit to the long-term prognosis of a client.

Yeah, it's not quite scientific (a lot of psychology isn't, especially when it comes to diagnosing an illness/abnormality) but it *can* still be useful. Just like even if a model isn't completely true, it can be useful for making predictions or helping understand, maybe even a little more intuitively, the general mechanics of something, so to speak. This is especially true in the social sciences.

Except psychology is not the field perpetuating the "chemical imbalance" myth; psychiatry is. I would argue psychology (not counseling or mental health as a whole, but clinical psychology) is more scientific than psychiatry if you look at science as critical, objective thinking.

[BloodFireDeath]

This model is transdiagnostic and could, on some level, be applied to schizophrenia if you wanted to. It just depends on how you look at it and what you believe the aims of therapy to be. It works for the ENTIRE anxiety spectrum (generalized, panic, phobias, social anxiety, PTSD, OCD, etc.) and plenty of others. These account for the vast majority of mental illness in the world. The anxiety spectrum is the most diagnosed, depression follows.

I never denied there's a genetic component. Now, how does that inform treatment? It doesn't.

I never accused you of denying it. Just asked your view on it.

Then you did NOT understand the model. Further, you're wrong even by your own standards (which are incorrect and misinformed). Bipolar and schizophrenia come to mind as two that are incredibly difficult to treat with psychotherapy (though this may be changing as we speak!), but aside from that, psychotherapy is the best form of treatment. Depression, panic, phobias, PTSD, OCD, generalized anxiety disorder, eating disorders, etc.

The problem, again, is you're placing the emphasis on anxiety reduction. By those standards, you seem to believe drugs are comparable/better than psychotherapy. What you don't understand is your emphasizing of anxiety reduction is bad.

What proof do you have to back up the claim that 'psychotherapy is the best form of treatment for Depression, panic, phobias, PTSD, OCD, generalized anxiety disorder, eating disorders, etc.'

Any studies that compare patient outcomes to back the claim, drugs vs psychotherapy? Failure rates, compliance rates etc between the two?

[stealth_swimmer]

Of course it's different for in-patient settings, but I'm willing to bet the VAST majority of those in these settings started with less severe diagnoses and sought treatment in out-patient setting first. Further, for those within in-patient settings, anxiety disorders tend not to be the primary diagnosis and/or they are accompanied with some comorbid condition which amplifies severity to an extreme extent.

I have not said medication can never be helpful; I am saying that, generally speaking for the vast majority of cases, it is unnecessary and will yield no real benefit to the long-term prognosis of a client.



Except psychology is not the field perpetuating the "chemical imbalance" myth; psychiatry is. I would argue psychology (not counseling or mental health as a whole, but clinical psychology) is more scientific than psychiatry if you look at science as critical, objective thinking.

Yeah, I view psychiatry as "practical psychology" or "psychology for dummies"

I don't think it's an accident that they susbcribe to the chemical imbalance theory all while making money off of writing people prescriptions

[mynameisuntz]

I never accused you of denying it. Just asked your view on it.

That's kind of a broad question. Is there something specific you could maybe ask?

What proof do you have to back up the claim that 'psychotherapy is the best form of treatment for Depression, panic, phobias, PTSD, OCD, generalized anxiety disorder, eating disorders, etc.'

Any studies that compare patient outcomes to back the claim, drugs vs psychotherapy? Failure rates, compliance rates etc between the two?

I must say simply having you ask this question seems kind of telling and makes me believe you have not really looked for the research. I mean, that's fine and all because I wouldn't expect most people to do that in their free time unless they are in the field. But, yes, of course there are studies which compare the two. But the model I described earlier is essential for you to understand. Because, when you do, you understand that medication is nothing more than a short-term alleviation of safety which acts as experiential avoidance which deprives the individual of disconfirming reinforcement which does NOTHING to attack the underlying fear factor which perpetuates anxiety in the first place.

There are plenty of studies, and as I've stated, what is essential when reading them is to ask: 1) how are they defining improvement, and 2) HOW is the change taking place?

[MrJohnLocke]

cliffs

[mynameisuntz]

cliffs

1) Chemical imbalance hypothesis of mental illness has never been validated and has arguably been invalidated.
2) Said hypothesis is not only scientifically invalid but also perpetuates and magnifies social stigma.
3) Everyone rants at me but no one produces evidence to the contrary.
4) Everyone believes psychiatric medication > psychological intervention.
5) They're all wrong.

[BloodFireDeath]

That's kind of a broad question. Is there something specific you could maybe ask?



I must say simply having you ask this question seems kind of telling and makes me believe you have not really looked for the research. I mean, that's fine and all because I wouldn't expect most people to do that in their free time unless they are in the field. But, yes, of course there are studies which compare the two. But the model I described earlier is essential for you to understand. Because, when you do, you understand that medication is nothing more than a short-term alleviation of safety which acts as experiential avoidance which deprives the individual of disconfirming reinforcement which does NOTHING to attack the underlying fear factor which perpetuates anxiety in the first place.

There are plenty of studies, and as I've stated, what is essential when reading them is to ask: 1) how are they defining improvement, and 2) HOW is the change taking place?

Okay, let's say , Major Depression. Could you point me to studies where pharmaco and psychotherapy are compared and psychotherapy was proven superior? Patient satisfaction and quality of life seem like a decent measure of outcome, would be interested to see what else they measure outcome with.

[G T]

In terms of their symptom-masking, they aren't. I imagine you see a study claiming that drugs are statistically significantly better but you probably don't even know what statistical significance really means.



Depression is cyclical.



No point in talking anymore because you literally have no idea what you are talking about. How come psychotherapy has better rates of recovery than drugs...? LONG-TERM, mind you. So, 12 sessions of psychotherapy > lifetime of drugs. I am done responding to your idiocy because you have never researched this topic. Feel free to respond to this as I imagine you will, but I am not going to waste my time on someone who insists in being correct when having zero experience in actually researching this.

I'm not going to bother arguing with you either, you are the one who has no idea what he is talking about. Everything you have written is a joke. I'm glad at least you won't ever become a real physician.

[MrJohnLocke]

1) Chemical imbalance hypothesis of mental illness has never been validated and has arguably been invalidated.
2) Said hypothesis is not only scientifically invalid but also perpetuates and magnifies social stigma.
3) Everyone rants at me but no one produces evidence to the contrary.
4) Everyone believes psychiatric medication > psychological intervention.
5) They're all wrong.

Sounds like a good debate