Psychologists discover a brand new disorder...

[Rue]

It is not an organic disease. No test for organic abnormalities is administered in the diagnosis.

It is not measurable on MRI's and Cat Scans. So they are not administered in the diagnosis.

There is no neuro-chemical imbalance. No test for a neuro-chemical imbalance is administered in the diagnosis as none are ever detected.

The diagnoses of mental illnesses is almost entirely subjective. The absence of any test to determine ADHD is what betrays the claim. There is no physiological marker for the disease so it not a disease.

It is only after the introduction of brain damaging drugs that any physiological abnormalities can be detected at all.

Balderdash!

Read the truth about ADHD!

http://www.adhdfraud.org/index.htm

You can ask any psychiatrist or psychologist to give you the test for a chemical imbalance and they will tell you there isn't one.

Just read some of the e-mails this Doctor gets regarding damaging drugs. It's heartbreaking and entirely unnecessary.

With due respect the diagnosis of mental illness is not entirely subjective. Your comment that it is-is exactly what the Church of Scientology preaches about psychiatry. The actual process involved in diagnosis is far more complex and againw ith due respect all of us have to do more then simply read an internet web site before we suddenly become authorities on neurology and psychiatry or pharmacology for that matter.

The fact that adhd has more then one origin or cause or symptom and therefore can not be easily identified using one uniform test does not prove your thesis at all, just that when diagnosing it no one easy test exists.

Today’s high precision imaging capabilities has been able to assist in rendering imaging of the brain which have proven organic physical development delays in the brain structure of adhd patients, specifically in regards to the the post puberty stage where cortical thickening should have taken place in the frontal cortext and temporal lobe areas but does not.

There is also ample SPECT scan testing to evidencepeople with ADHD have reduced blood circulation and higher concentrations of dopaime transporters in the area of the brain known as the striatum.

There are numerous studies including The U.S. National Institute of Mental Health’s that found one-third of fathers who suffered from ADHD during childhood also went on to have children with adhd and that children with affected parents are three times more likely than other children to develop the disorder, and identical twins are both likely to be affected.

On going researcher as to the underlying genetic mechanisms that regulate hyperactivity and the correlation to the neurotransmitter dopamine have also provided sufficient evidence as to the presence of a variation of a domapine D4 receptor gene in a high proportion of people with adhd as well as drug and other addictions and also indicates a corelation between the dopamine D4 receptor gene and the reason why there is abnormally thin cortex development on the right side of the brain.

Studies have also shown about 50% of adults and 70% of children with a genetic resistance to thyroid hormone have ADHD.

There are now numerous pharmacological studies taking place investigating the dysregulation associated with noradrenergic disorders and dysfunction in the fronto-subcortical pathways suggesting a genetic etiology.

There are more than sufficient studies which have proven the physical phenomena transpiring in the frontal lobes strictal connections and the fact that similar symptoms have shown up with people suffering cerebral lesions to the frontal lobe more than suggests a physical illness to the brain.

The fact that the exact causes and origins of adhd are not known does not mean we can launch into fantasy and pretend there is no genetic or organic component to it.

The original point of this thread was to talk about some pop psychology concepts. You now turn it into a Scientology debate as to why modern medicine and in particular neurology and psychiatry are fraudulent.

Sorry I aint buying your bag of apples today. Got to many worms in them for me to digest and I saw what those worms did to my good friend Tommy Cruise.

[Pliny]

With due respect the diagnosis of mental illness is not entirely subjective. Your comment that it is-is exactly what the Church of Scientology preaches about psychiatry. The actual process involved in diagnosis is far more complex and againw ith due respect all of us have to do more then simply read an internet web site before we suddenly become authorities on neurology and psychiatry or pharmacology for that matter.

The fact that adhd has more then one origin or cause or symptom and therefore can not be easily identified using one uniform test does not prove your thesis at all, just that when diagnosing it no one easy test exists.

No test exists nor are any tests, other than behavioral questionnaires, administered in the diagnosis. Have you not simply read an internet website? The proof is to ask for the actual physical test or "tests" (since there is not one easy test) for abnormalities. The diagnoses are made without any tests for abnormalities as none can be found.

Regardless of what the Church of Scientology preaches, proof the practice of psychiatry is entirely subjective lies in it's application.

Today’s high precision imaging capabilities has been able to assist in rendering imaging of the brain which have proven organic physical development delays in the brain structure of adhd patients, specifically in regards to the the post puberty stage where cortical thickening should have taken place in the frontal cortext and temporal lobe areas but does not.

Many attempts have been made to prove an organic marker none have proven valid. Some have been fraudulent.

After damage has occurred from the administration of drugs or the drugs alter brain chemistry then claiming there is a difference in a normal brain is the usual course of these fraudulent claims.

There is also ample SPECT scan testing to evidencepeople with ADHD have reduced blood circulation and higher concentrations of dopaime transporters in the area of the brain known as the striatum.

There are numerous studies including The U.S. National Institute of Mental Health’s that found one-third of fathers who suffered from ADHD during childhood also went on to have children with adhd and that children with affected parents are three times more likely than other children to develop the disorder, and identical twins are both likely to be affected.

On going researcher as to the underlying genetic mechanisms that regulate hyperactivity and the correlation to the neurotransmitter dopamine have also provided sufficient evidence as to the presence of a variation of a domapine D4 receptor gene in a high proportion of people with adhd as well as drug and other addictions and also indicates a corelation between the dopamine D4 receptor gene and the reason why there is abnormally thin cortex development on the right side of the brain.

Studies have also shown about 50% of adults and 70% of children with a genetic resistance to thyroid hormone have ADHD.

There are now numerous pharmacological studies taking place investigating the dysregulation associated with noradrenergic disorders and dysfunction in the fronto-subcortical pathways suggesting a genetic etiology.

There are more than sufficient studies which have proven the physical phenomena transpiring in the frontal lobes strictal connections and the fact that similar symptoms have shown up with people suffering cerebral lesions to the frontal lobe more than suggests a physical illness to the brain.

The fact that the exact causes and origins of adhd are not known does not mean we can launch into fantasy and pretend there is no genetic or organic component to it.

No genetic or organic marker or markers have been found to date. There has been plenty of research to find one.

The original point of this thread was to talk about some pop psychology concepts. You now turn it into a Scientology debate as to why modern medicine and in particular neurology and psychiatry are fraudulent.

You brought them up not me. I attempt to stay away from quoting from the Church of Scientology as regards this question.

Sorry I aint buying your bag of apples today. Got to many worms in them for me to digest and I saw what those worms did to my good friend Tommy Cruise.

Say hi to your "good friend" Tom for me or is he not your good friend anymore. I read he was bipolar or ocd or something like that. No test was administered though.

[GostHacked]

Rue

We also know depressive mood disorders, obsessive compulsive disorders, adhd and anxiety disorders are both neurological and psychiatric in manifestation and most often inter-connected and studies are now showing the brain can be mapped to show how the brain malfunctions suggesting these are not imagined illnesses but actual physical disturbances to the brain caused by certain chemical imbalances or damage to certain parts of the brain or genetic predisposition, i.e., people born with neurotransmitters that are too thin to conduct transmission which in turn can cause these illnesses or others such as epilepsy or schitzophrenia once blamed on bad mothers. Slight lesions to the brain can cause these. Allergies can cause these. Aquired brain injuries can cause these. Exposure to toxic chemicals can cause these.

It seems like we have such a poisinious enviromnent to live in, and to you, is a large cause of the problems. Because of our toxic environment, it causes these problems, the mother is exposed to them, the unborn child is exposed to it, .... our lives are very toxic. Get rid of the toxins and you could really do a good job on mental ilnesess. There is usually an outside factor as to why kids are ADHD.

Both me and my sister have beat 'depression'. My cousin beat his ADHD, my other cousin kicked his depression to the door as well. My family is not huge, and 4 depressed kids is a large number. Why did all of us kick the depression? We now know what causes and triggers it. It was our enviroments. I was unhappy in a dead end relationship I did not know how to get out of. My sister would work to much and never have time for herself. My one cousin was always angry and in a confrontational mood, the other cousin was just hitting a low point in his life.

Outside factors are what causes these conditions. Most can be axed by you alone. And for the record, the medication made me feel worse than actually dealing with the depression.

[Rue]

No test exists nor are any tests, other than behavioral questionnaires, administered in the diagnosis. Have you not simply read an internet website? The proof is to ask for the actual physical test or "tests" (since there is not one easy test) for abnormalities. The diagnoses are made without any tests for abnormalities as none can be found.

Regardless of what the Church of Scientology preaches, proof the practice of psychiatry is entirely subjective lies in it's application.

Many attempts have been made to prove an organic marker none have proven valid. Some have been fraudulent.

After damage has occurred from the administration of drugs or the drugs alter brain chemistry then claiming there is a difference in a normal brain is the usual course of these fraudulent claims.

No genetic or organic marker or markers have been found to date. There has been plenty of research to find one.

You brought them up not me. I attempt to stay away from quoting from the Church of Scientology as regards this question.

Say hi to your "good friend" Tom for me or is he not your good friend anymore. I read he was bipolar or ocd or something like that. No test was administered though.

I was being tongue in cheek. I appreciate your efforts to debate this. I respect your opinions. The Tom stuff is just to lighten it up. I know you are not Tom's friend. Or are you Tom?

I will try get back to you on the other stuff in a more serious manner.

[Rue]

Rue

It seems like we have such a poisinious enviromnent to live in, and to you, is a large cause of the problems. Because of our toxic environment, it causes these problems, the mother is exposed to them, the unborn child is exposed to it, .... our lives are very toxic. Get rid of the toxins and you could really do a good job on mental ilnesess. There is usually an outside factor as to why kids are ADHD.

Both me and my sister have beat 'depression'. My cousin beat his ADHD, my other cousin kicked his depression to the door as well. My family is not huge, and 4 depressed kids is a large number. Why did all of us kick the depression? We now know what causes and triggers it. It was our enviroments. I was unhappy in a dead end relationship I did not know how to get out of. My sister would work to much and never have time for herself. My one cousin was always angry and in a confrontational mood, the other cousin was just hitting a low point in his life.

Outside factors are what causes these conditions. Most can be axed by you alone. And for the record, the medication made me feel worse than actually dealing with the depression.

Let me respond but with utmost respect to you. Please do not misunderstand me. I respect everything you said. I am just debating the issue, not what you may have done personally in your life to deal with what you consider to have been depression. If what-ever you did worked for you, I commend you. Please I do not think I am in a position to comment on your personal life decisions I am justd ebating the issue in general, i.e., is there such a thing as mental illness?

One could argue the fact that both you and your sister and others in your familu had depression may in fact suggest a genetic link.

Then again for all we also know, none of you ever had a depressive illness but encountered what is called situational depression, i.e., stress from you know crazy stuff but when the situation sorted itself out, so did the understandable and anger and depression that came reacting to that situation.

Much of what we think is depressive illness is not. Its situational depression, i.e., we react with sadness, anger, anxiety. Hell how else are you expected to react? If you are faced with violence, an abusive parent, severe poverty, etc., of course you'd be depressed or angry or sad or develop all kinds of shit because of the environment, some of it learned, some of it from poor diet and air pollution, some of it from being stuck in a neighbourhood full of drugs, maybe political turmoil, racism, etc.

Don't get me wrong. I agree with you that with environmental and physical and mental illnesses we can do a lot to ovecome the negative effects with positive lifestyle choices, i.e., diet, exercise, sports, working, maybe having strong religious beliefs, you know things like that which make us positive and focused.

No treating any illness is not just a matter of popping a pill. The mind, body and soul, they are all inter-connected and all need to be seen as part of one another. I get you there.

I also can make the argument that changes to our e nvironment make an illness that would otherwise never be diagnosed and be an issue, suddenly become one. Consider this for example. A person with adhd who lived on a harm a hundred years ago would never know he had it. His constant physical work and being outside in fresh air being able to move around and work off the energy constantly would easily deal with it.

It of course becomes a problem in a modern environment when we lock people in small rooms, tell them to sit for 8 hours and have them eat processed foods. Obviously this changes things.

Look I do not doubt the fact we stick children in front of computers has destroyed their ability to pay attention and create. Definitely. Abstract reasoning and creativity which a child needs to develop at a certain age gets stunted by over-reliance on computers. We know this because brain imaging can show that if you don't exercise and therefore develop certain parts of the brain during certain windows of opportunity, you may lose that ability to develop such processes for-ever. The tests show what happens for example if you don't nurture a child during its first year of development it loses the ability to develop a certain part of its brain and it then suffers from a form of aquired autism. Its a classic example of how an environmental condition causes physical damage which then causes another permanent illness.

High cholosterol we know is caused by our diet. We know there is currently an epidemic of obese children and so we see hardening of the arteries in children at far earlier ages. So yes diet and exercise is crucial.

But there is also another kind of genetic illness that causes people to have high cholesterol present even when they are young that has nothing to do with diet and exercise and may require medication just like we know children can get juvenile diabetes and juveline arthritis and no these illnesses are not necessarily brought on by the environment, but are genetic although certainly diet and exercise are crucial in alleviating symptoms.

Wiith due respect genuine mental illnesses, mood disorders, adhd, are not moral weaknesses one beats because they are not purely caused by our attitude or are choosing to be that way anymore then we choose to be black or white or yellow or gay or a girl or a boy, its the way we are born. We know some of us are born with a genetic predisposition to be shy or get certain illnesses including heart disease and cancer or sickle cell anemia, Tay Sachs disease, hemophilia, Huntington's Korea.

If someone is genuinely ill from a mood disorder, i.e. depression, bi-polar disorder or genuinely has an anxiety disorder, obessive compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, no they can't think their way out of it or beat it by simply telling themselves its their attitude. That with due respect is just not the case.

I just ask you to keep an open mind about mental illness. There are a wide range of depressive illnesses and yes science knows enough know to understand the actual chemical imbalances that occur in the brain with seratonin and dopamine levels.

We know when women have given birth to children, some of them can get a post birth depression brought on by hormonal changes.

We know children exposed to nicotine, crack cocaine, heroin, etc., can be born with brain damage that can cause certain kinds of adhd, autism, epilepsy and other abnormalities. Hell even being exposed to a toxic chemical or the flu or a bacteria or virus may permanently affect the development of the embryo depending on the stage of its development when this chemical or drug exposes itself to it.

But we also know some kids have had parents who drink and smoke and they escape any harm and some people live in stressful or polluted situations and don;t get depressed or ill suggesting the mind, body, soul connection is far more complex then we think it is.

Some of us is genetically programmed, some evolves from what we learn, and some evolves from we are exposed to. How much is each no one really knows but what I am saying is no, mood disorders, adhd, they are real.

For that matter some people live in perfectly fine, calm, wonderful environments and become ill with depression.

It could be the "depression" you are talking about is not depressive illness at all.

As for your cousin beating adhd with due respect, he may have been falsely diagnosed or never had it.

Children can not be blamed or be expected to control adhd symptoms any more then someone with Tourette's Syndrome can be expected to control their verbal outburts or twitches of an epileptic can control certain kinds of seizures or a schizophrenic can control his hallucinations.

Yes there is this thing called the placebo effect. We know there is a connection between mind and body. It sometimes explains why cancer goes into remission or why people who are constantly depressed are susceptible to auto-immune disorders.

But no it is not as easy as you paint it as. Illnesses and their causes are far more complex then simply stating they can be beaten if you think in a certain way.

Edited July 9, 2008 by Rue

[Rue]

No test exists nor are any tests, other than behavioral questionnaires, administered in the diagnosis...

...The proof is to ask for the actual physical test or "tests" (since there is not one easy test) for abnormalities. The diagnoses are made without any tests for abnormalities as none can be found.

I provide the following response to your above comments;

The fact there is no one test for adhd does not mean its not an organic disease or a neurological disease.

One of the reasons there is no one test is because many other illnesses and conditions have to be ruled out as their symptoms are the same or similar. Likewise people with adhd also have other illnesses or conditions referred to as co-morbidity, such as obsessive compulsive disorder, anxiety disorder, learning disabilities, certain kinds of epilepsy, Tourette’s Syndrome. So with any neurological or psychiatric disorder, a full range of tests must be done to rule out other illnesses to prevent false diagnosis.

As well the fact that some of the testing done on people with adhd looks at the behaviour they manifest, that does not make those tests subjective. In fact you are mistaking psychological testing for being subjective when it may not be. Yes the person tested is asked to describe behaviour but that behaviour can also be tested objectively. Such testing for attention or short term memory problems, or problems with hand to eye coordination or being unable to sit still or having nervous tics, can all be reconfirmed through objective testing.

Actual testing used to diagnose adhd is complex, multi-disciplinary and engages in both psychological and physical testing and its continually being developed. As we speak adhd testing techniques are changing as more and more knowledge is researched.

For example in recent studies, scientists were able to define certain specific regions in the haplotype area of the brain evidence symptoms when adhd is present. Research is also leading towards providing more objective information to indicate that a variant of the latrorophin 3 gene

seems to suggest a predilection towards adhd. The more genetic research that is done the more likely scientists will be able to come up with diagnostic testing that can help but in any diagnosis there is no one magic way to define an illness.

This idea if there is no one easy way to find something out it means it does not exist is a very misleading way to understand how science, let alone neurological and psychiatric and certain psychological diagnostic testing works.

Yes to someone not trained to make the diagnosis it would seem as if the DSVM Psychiatric Manual used to diagnose certain conditions appears subjective and just appears to be a bunch of subjective labels.

At the present time the American/Canadian/British/Australian/New Zealand/South African Psychiatric Associations have a manner to diagnose adhd using 3 basic type descriptions; I-adhd predominantly inattentive, ii-adhd predominantly hyper-active impulsive and iii-adhd combined type. But no psychiatrists and neurologists don’t just slap on the label. In fact it is more likely parents looking for an excuse for ill-behaved children or improperly trained psychologists might make the false diagnosis. A properly trained neurologist, psychiatrist or paediatrician won’t just slap on the label and in fact a paediatrician will rule out all other physical disorders before the neurologist and psychiatrist are then called in.

I would strongly suggest a parent always insist that a paediatrician, neurologist and psychiatrist make the diagnosis.

There is no mystery to the testing done. A child is interviewed and observed, a full medical history including analysis of the child’s social, emotional, school and behavioural past is taken.

A full physical is done to rule out exposure to lead, anemia, thyroid disease, diabetes.

Then behavioural rating scales are used to evaluate the symptoms. Several verbal and written tests are done to rule out other similar disorders. Tests for learning disabilities are also done. Hearing and vision are tested. An eeg might be done if the child has had a seizure or seizures.

If a child has adhd, they usually are going to have some pretty tell tale symptoms and other co-existing illnesses or problems and yes the worst thing someone can do is misdiagnose it but no psychiatrists and neurologists are not in a hurry to diagnose it contrary to popular belief.

Look I doubt I am going to convince you to trust psychiatrists or neurologists. Sounds like your mind is made up this is an imaginary thing created by pharmaceutical companies to justify drugging people.

All I can tell you is there is more to it then just saying because we don’t have an easy answer for it, it isn’t real. It is and it can make children very sick and cause them a world of pain and misunderstanding if not properly understood.

I enclose the following web-site as to some recent study as to using eye movement to diagnose adhd which looks promising;

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6886

(eye movement)

While it is perfectly true today’s current brain imaging testing has provided inconclusive and meaningless I enclose these two web-sites with some recent research showing that scientists may be headed towards brain imaging testing that may help diagnose adhd in the future;

http://www.edweek.org/login.html?source=ht...p;baddebt=false

(brain imaging)

http://www.ncpa.org/iss/hea/2002/pd121102e.html

(brain imaging)

I offer you this web-site which is a good one on adhd;

http://www.klis.com/chandler/pamphlet/adhd...20is%20ADHD.htm

as well as these;

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/adhd/DS00...s-and-diagnosis

http://www.med.nyu.edu/psych/assets/adhdscreen18.pdf

http://www.braintrain.com/home_users/adhd_...ADHD_Is_it_real

http://www.medem.com/MedLB/article_detaill...&sub_cat=21

Hopefully they take the mystery out of adhd and indicate to you the fact that there is no one test for it, doesn't make it any less real.

[Pliny]

I provide the following response to your above comments;

The fact there is no one test for adhd does not mean its not an organic disease or a neurological disease.

One of the reasons there is no one test is because many other illnesses and conditions have to be ruled out as their symptoms are the same or similar. Likewise people with adhd also have other illnesses or conditions referred to as co-morbidity, such as obsessive compulsive disorder, anxiety disorder, learning disabilities, certain kinds of epilepsy, Tourette’s Syndrome. So with any neurological or psychiatric disorder, a full range of tests must be done to rule out other illnesses to prevent false diagnosis.

As well the fact that some of the testing done on people with adhd looks at the behaviour they manifest, that does not make those tests subjective. In fact you are mistaking psychological testing for being subjective when it may not be. Yes the person tested is asked to describe behaviour but that behaviour can also be tested objectively. Such testing for attention or short term memory problems, or problems with hand to eye coordination or being unable to sit still or having nervous tics, can all be reconfirmed through objective testing.

Actual testing used to diagnose adhd is complex, multi-disciplinary and engages in both psychological and physical testing and its continually being developed. As we speak adhd testing techniques are changing as more and more knowledge is researched.

For example in recent studies, scientists were able to define certain specific regions in the haplotype area of the brain evidence symptoms when adhd is present. Research is also leading towards providing more objective information to indicate that a variant of the latrorophin 3 gene

seems to suggest a predilection towards adhd. The more genetic research that is done the more likely scientists will be able to come up with diagnostic testing that can help but in any diagnosis there is no one magic way to define an illness.

This idea if there is no one easy way to find something out it means it does not exist is a very misleading way to understand how science, let alone neurological and psychiatric and certain psychological diagnostic testing works.

Yes to someone not trained to make the diagnosis it would seem as if the DSVM Psychiatric Manual used to diagnose certain conditions appears subjective and just appears to be a bunch of subjective labels.

At the present time the American/Canadian/British/Australian/New Zealand/South African Psychiatric Associations have a manner to diagnose adhd using 3 basic type descriptions; I-adhd predominantly inattentive, ii-adhd predominantly hyper-active impulsive and iii-adhd combined type. But no psychiatrists and neurologists don’t just slap on the label. In fact it is more likely parents looking for an excuse for ill-behaved children or improperly trained psychologists might make the false diagnosis. A properly trained neurologist, psychiatrist or paediatrician won’t just slap on the label and in fact a paediatrician will rule out all other physical disorders before the neurologist and psychiatrist are then called in.

I would strongly suggest a parent always insist that a paediatrician, neurologist and psychiatrist make the diagnosis.

There is no mystery to the testing done. A child is interviewed and observed, a full medical history including analysis of the child’s social, emotional, school and behavioural past is taken.

A full physical is done to rule out exposure to lead, anemia, thyroid disease, diabetes.

Then behavioural rating scales are used to evaluate the symptoms. Several verbal and written tests are done to rule out other similar disorders. Tests for learning disabilities are also done. Hearing and vision are tested. An eeg might be done if the child has had a seizure or seizures.

If a child has adhd, they usually are going to have some pretty tell tale symptoms and other co-existing illnesses or problems and yes the worst thing someone can do is misdiagnose it but no psychiatrists and neurologists are not in a hurry to diagnose it contrary to popular belief.

Look I doubt I am going to convince you to trust psychiatrists or neurologists. Sounds like your mind is made up this is an imaginary thing created by pharmaceutical companies to justify drugging people.

All I can tell you is there is more to it then just saying because we don’t have an easy answer for it, it isn’t real. It is and it can make children very sick and cause them a world of pain and misunderstanding if not properly understood.

I enclose the following web-site as to some recent study as to using eye movement to diagnose adhd which looks promising;

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6886

(eye movement)

While it is perfectly true today’s current brain imaging testing has provided inconclusive and meaningless I enclose these two web-sites with some recent research showing that scientists may be headed towards brain imaging testing that may help diagnose adhd in the future;

http://www.edweek.org/login.html?source=ht...p;baddebt=false

(brain imaging)

http://www.ncpa.org/iss/hea/2002/pd121102e.html

(brain imaging)

I offer you this web-site which is a good one on adhd;

http://www.klis.com/chandler/pamphlet/adhd...20is%20ADHD.htm

as well as these;

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/adhd/DS00...s-and-diagnosis

http://www.med.nyu.edu/psych/assets/adhdscreen18.pdf

http://www.braintrain.com/home_users/adhd_...ADHD_Is_it_real

http://www.medem.com/MedLB/article_detaill...&sub_cat=21

Hopefully they take the mystery out of adhd and indicate to you the fact that there is no one test for it, doesn't make it any less real.

I know you don't realize what you are saying or attempting to prove so I will tell you. I doubt that it will make any difference because all your thoughts or actions are based upon electro-chemical reactions or are genetically predetermined. You are an entirely stimulus-response organism subject to your material makeup. There is nothing you can do about it except attempt to rearrange your genetic makeup or influence electro-chemical reactions with - what else - electricity and chemicals.

Your behavior will not change because the genetic makeup and electro chemical processes in your body must change in order for that to occur. Even changing your mind or opinion is determined by a chemical reaction and something beyond the volition of any individual. Intelligence is also a matter of genetic and electro chemical makeup. So you see, if you attempt to control yourself or change your behavior it is impossible unless some electro chemical process is introduced that influences the normal electro-chemical activity of your brain. Do not attempt to think with what I have said as no changes will occur in your thought processes or behavior - you have to take a pill.

[Rue]

I know you don't realize what you are saying or attempting to prove so I will tell you. I doubt that it will make any difference because all your thoughts or actions are based upon electro-chemical reactions or are genetically predetermined. You are an entirely stimulus-response organism subject to your material makeup. There is nothing you can do about it except attempt to rearrange your genetic makeup or influence electro-chemical reactions with - what else - electricity and chemicals.

Your behavior will not change because the genetic makeup and electro chemical processes in your body must change in order for that to occur. Even changing your mind or opinion is determined by a chemical reaction and something beyond the volition of any individual. Intelligence is also a matter of genetic and electro chemical makeup. So you see, if you attempt to control yourself or change your behavior it is impossible unless some electro chemical process is introduced that influences the normal electro-chemical activity of your brain. Do not attempt to think with what I have said as no changes will occur in your thought processes or behavior - you have to take a pill.

Very melodramatic Pliny but it misses the point I presented in its entirety. The fact that a lot of what we are may be pre-programmed by our genetics and dna and the physiology we are born with including all those chemicals you refer to, does not mean we do not have free will and that is why I said its not a matter of us all being biological or it all being simply made up by what we learn after we are born, but a bit of both and so it is far too complex an equation for you to write off medical approaches because you believe people's free will alone can change who and what they are.

Your analogy is silly. Try use some simple common sense. The fact that people take medication for high cholesterol does not mean they do not need to exercise and eat a low cholsterol diet and change their lifestyle.

I am defending pharmacology, psychiatry, neurlogy, paediatric medicine for a good reason. They all do not as you infer assume that we are all programmed and simply should be given a pill. You misrepresent what they do. These people are dedicated professionals whi study for many years and dedicate their lives precisely to trying to heal peoplebecause they care and believe in free will and the potential for us all to achieve and be positive. They try use the knowledge they have to help us.

The point of learning about genetic predisposition for example, is to help us identify cancer and other diseases earlier on or to prevent two persons from having a child that could be born with an unfortunate disease.

Is that wrong? Is it wrong to use our brains to develop knowledge of how our bodies work? Should we instead not engage in any medicine at all and simply treat people with faith values?

I think your extreme stereotyping of genetics and what phramcological knowledge assists us in doing for certain people is a gros over simplification of medicine. For some taking medicine is a matter of life and death and no they do not take it because they are weak or under the control of evil pharmacologists and their pharmaceutical companies. For some medical prescriptions mean they can lead a positive life and enjoy more time with their loved ones doing things they once could not have done.

Does medicine have problems? Are some people over-medicated or misdiagnosed? Of course. Have pharmaceutical companies sold dangerous prescriptions without disclosing the proper infirmation, yes. All human systems have flaws and defects. However this simplistic notion that all pharamcological products are evil or all medicine tries to do is assume people are zombies to be medicated is a ridiculous generalization.

If you want to have a serious discussion on genetic predisposition and free will and where one begins and the other ends or how they inter-relate then try do just that. There are many medical doctors, ethcis specialists, legal scholars, social scientists and philospphers struggling precisely with this.

Of course the public fears genetic sciences for the same reason it fears all science and authority figures- because it fears knowledge could be used for the wrong reasons. What I am saying to you is don't take that fear of what humans do wrong and let it shut your mind to the possibility that not all medicine and science is evil and is a sham..

What I can tell you is treating science in a manner that simplifies it as you do is no different then the stereotypes that were once used to falsely label people as wiches or insane. Its based on fear, not rational thought.

Open your mind man. For some trying to suggest I have closed mind, perhaps you need to practice what you preach too?

Here try these articles on for size and no I do not think it is as simple as popping a pill. If I did I would be trying so hard to debate you;

http://www.science-spirit.org/article_deta...?article_id=185

http://www.peh-med.com/content/1/1/9

By the way, I did once think all humans should try a mix of dark chocolate, raisins, prune juice and magic mushrooms to assist with grumpiness but I gave up that theory years ago when I realized some people just will never appreciate the Marx Brothers or why Shemp just could not replace Curly Joe with the Three Stooges or for that matter why the goose stepping Munchkin soldiers were the real enemy.

That said, I am working on something far simpler-using animal therapy to help with the dying, chronically ill, sexually abused and professionals with post traumatic stress syndrome from their work. Not all knowledge as to healing is evil. Some of us do try develop non pharmaceutical treatment modules to assist along with the more traditional ones. There is a place for both.

Edited July 12, 2008 by Rue

[Pliny]

.....it is far too complex an equation for you to write off medical approaches because you believe people's free will alone can change who and what they are.

Medical approaches to what? Granting people more free will? Isn't that what it should be all about?

The point I make is that the direction of medical approaches needs to be more inclusive in it's scope. Certain factions in Western medicine are attempting to monopolize the industry and make it entirely a closed system. That does not in any way mean that the men and women working in the industry are not dedicated to serving their fellow man nor that their service is of less value than it is. It means they are more like slaves to their masters than anything else. It is not economically, professionally or societally beneficial to challenge those forces that direct the course of the industry. It is in the individual's interest to allow these forces to protect their license to practice in exchange for economic and professional status.

Now please don't think that I am generalizing. In spite of the attempts of some to monopolize, direct and control there are others, in far more numerous numbers, that work for the benefit of all which is why we make any progress whatsoever. There are fields in the medical industry that are more susceptible to corruption than others and in fact are used by government for purposes other than what should be their interest. One of those fields is the Humanities.

Although you admit to there being some other thing than "electro-chemical" processes to explain the existence of life there are men of science, which you must admit, entirely believe that to be the case. If these are the men directing science and understanding of ourselves in our activities and behaviors then, as they do not acknowledge any other possibility and deny entirely the metaphysical, then it must follow their research and efforts will be directed toward what they do believe. Psychology is losing it's position and being replaced by the genetic-electro-chemical model of humanity as only science could direct it. There is no other explanation in their estimation. This cannot be denied. Despite your efforts to sooth mankind with such things as animal therapy it is considered an innocuous enough activity, perhaps of some benefit to people in general, by the overlords of the industry and as long as everyone engaging in such activity is trained and licensed, and thus the numbers limited, it can be easily monitored for efficacy which, if ever proven to be extant, would be taken over by the interests that regulate it.

Psychiatry "invents", it does not "discover", disease. It invents it because it can. They are invented by a show of hands, a democratic vote, at the regularly held convention of the DSM, The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual which grows over time as new diseases are invented.

Let's not forget that there are indeed people struggling in their lives and unable to function because of mental incapacitation. Most of what we, the general populace, see of mental problems is a result of mental treatment or prescription drugs not from lack of it.

[Rue]

Medical approaches to what? Granting people more free will? Isn't that what it should be all about?

The point I make is that the direction of medical approaches needs to be more inclusive in it's scope. Certain factions in Western medicine are attempting to monopolize the industry and make it entirely a closed system. That does not in any way mean that the men and women working in the industry are not dedicated to serving their fellow man nor that their service is of less value than it is. It means they are more like slaves to their masters than anything else. It is not economically, professionally or societally beneficial to challenge those forces that direct the course of the industry. It is in the individual's interest to allow these forces to protect their license to practice in exchange for economic and professional status.

Now please don't think that I am generalizing. In spite of the attempts of some to monopolize, direct and control there are others, in far more numerous numbers, that work for the benefit of all which is why we make any progress whatsoever. There are fields in the medical industry that are more susceptible to corruption than others and in fact are used by government for purposes other than what should be their interest. One of those fields is the Humanities.

Although you admit to there being some other thing than "electro-chemical" processes to explain the existence of life there are men of science, which you must admit, entirely believe that to be the case. If these are the men directing science and understanding of ourselves in our activities and behaviors then, as they do not acknowledge any other possibility and deny entirely the metaphysical, then it must follow their research and efforts will be directed toward what they do believe. Psychology is losing it's position and being replaced by the genetic-electro-chemical model of humanity as only science could direct it. There is no other explanation in their estimation. This cannot be denied. Despite your efforts to sooth mankind with such things as animal therapy it is considered an innocuous enough activity, perhaps of some benefit to people in general, by the overlords of the industry and as long as everyone engaging in such activity is trained and licensed, and thus the numbers limited, it can be easily monitored for efficacy which, if ever proven to be extant, would be taken over by the interests that regulate it.

Psychiatry "invents", it does not "discover", disease. It invents it because it can. They are invented by a show of hands, a democratic vote, at the regularly held convention of the DSM, The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual which grows over time as new diseases are invented.

Let's not forget that there are indeed people struggling in their lives and unable to function because of mental incapacitation. Most of what we, the general populace, see of mental problems is a result of mental treatment or prescription drugs not from lack of it.

Excellent points. The very last sentence I have a problem with. I do not doubt certain psychotropic medications and pharmacological approaches to illness, whether it be physical or mental cause more problems then good or worse side effects then the good they are supposed to intend-conceded, but no I think its an overstatement to say most of what we see with mental illness is as a result of medication.

Yes if you misdiagnose someone and treat the wrong illness yes. Does it happen yes but I think you overstate it.

You underestimate the ability of doctors to be able to force the wrong medication into people to start with, and then not noticing it, if they even get that far.

Often people blame medication for causing problems because of something else they do not understand that is going on.

Where I most disagree with you would be in your description of psychiatry as "inventing". I would not use that word. I would use the word "react".

Psychiatry reacts to symptoms and thus if it pays too much attention to the symptoms and does not dig deep to the whole or root, that is where the misdiagnose and mistakes can occur. At least that is how I would criticize it.

On the one hand I know how flawed medicine and psychiatry can be. On the other hand, my belief is it is not all bad and for some it does provide them a better way of life they could not otherwise access and I know people on an off medication for bi-polar and other mood disorders and schizophrenia or that helps them contain drug addiction cravings or helps them with anxiety, depression, obsessive compulsive disorder, and I see the beneficial things it can and has done for such people and the inverse when they don't take their medication.

It is the age old debate. You really think a schizophrenic is better off untreated?

I know many brave people with mental illnesses who have chosen the pharmacological approach and it has helped them and all power to them for doing that and all I am saying is they should not be falsely labelled as being mind controlled or using drugs as crutches, etc.

They have a right to do what they think brings quality to their lives is all I am saying.

[Pliny]

Excellent points.

Thank you.

They have a right to do what they think brings quality to their lives is all I am saying.

Yes, as long as it is accomplished with informed consent.

[Rue]

Thank you.

Yes, as long as it is accomplished with informed consent.

That is the dilemma. If the illness prevents the individual from being able to provide informed consent let alone conceive it what next? Leave them to wonder the streets where they eventually die from preventable diseases that come from poor diet and hygiene which is what we do now?

Theory and reality in such cases just don't seem to be able to reconcile one another.

Right now the legal system does not allow forced treatments. Most doctors know they will be sued big time if they try force treatment on someone.

Does the state intervene to impose treatment? With children and organic diseases yes other then that no. The state will also intervene to prevent people from engaging in euthanasia but when it comes to those with mental illness it no longer plays any mahor role. Yes it's possible in theory for the state to impose treatment but from a practical perspective the process of committing someone is very difficult if not impossible and even if committed forcing medication on such people has to be done in a controlled institutional setting which governments are not willing to spend any money on-so out the door they go to the streets to wander and babble and be taken advantage of.

Knew a guy on College Street and Spadina. Used to love to push people off their bikes or yell and slap people. Pushed me off my bike and I slammed down pretty hard and was bleeding a bit. The police were driving by and heard some people scream. I got up. They stopped him and but him on the car and he of course was schizophrenic and engaging in all kinds of screaming noises.

We all knew the guy. The police asked me if I wanted him arrested. We all knew the guy. We all knew he would be back out on the street. Mostly he was harmless but he did have that annoying habit of sometimes walking up to people and slapping them or knocking us off bikes.

They brought him back to the Clark and he was out in half an hour at the same corner yelling.

That guy ended up going into a street car. He had a silver hammer in his back pocket with a leather handle. He was screaming and yelling. People ran out of the street car. The police came. The officer on the scene was a traffic cop. When he went in the street car he saw the silver and black leather and thought it was a gun and shot the guy dead.

That cop took it real bad. The family of the dead guy took it bad.

Believe me if that guy was swearing at you and coming out you, you would be convinced he could kill you. You would not know for the most part he was just crazy.

What can I say.

The system is not perfect. Not sure how it ever can be.

[Pliny]

The system is not perfect. Not sure how it ever can be.

I'm certain you have some ideas on how it can be a perfect "system" though.

Forced treatment?

It is a great scheme of the current "system" to present to society people that have already been diagnosed and treated, after which they become a danger to society and abject failures of the system, as an indication, or proof, of the necessity for this "system" and that further powers be granted it.

[Rue]

I'm certain you have some ideas on how it can be a perfect "system" though.

Forced treatment?

It is a great scheme of the current "system" to present to society people that have already been diagnosed and treated, after which they become a danger to society and abject failures of the system, as an indication, or proof, of the necessity for this "system" and that further powers be granted it.

No I don't. I have had some success designing early intervention programs for drug addicts and the mentally ill so they do not end up in the criminal legal system for petty crimes but its all based on voluntary consent.

Forced treatment? Lol. If you are suggesting I want to drive around in a truck with some guilt ridden humanist liberals looking for schizophrenics on the street and abduct them and force pills down their throat and make them live with Celine Dion uh no.

[jbg]

Forced treatment? Lol. If you are suggesting I want to drive around in a truck with some guilt ridden humanist liberals looking for schizophrenics on the street and abduct them and force pills down their throat and make them live with Celine Dion uh no.

Would Chrissi Brinkley as opposed to Celine Dion do?

[eyeball]

That is the dilemma. If the illness prevents the individual from being able to provide informed consent let alone conceive it what next? Leave them to wonder the streets where they eventually die from preventable diseases that come from poor diet and hygiene which is what we do now?

We all knew the guy...

Why is it such a dilemma? The informed consent given by you, and the guy's family (plus a doctor or course) should have been sufficient, legally and ethically, to treat him 'against' his will. I've intervened in a situation where a friend of mine, a diabetic, was acting irrationally and was confronted by two cops who didn't know him or me. They were about to violently subdue him but I was able to convince them to let me give my friend some sugar to try reducing the hypoglycemia that was causing him grief. The cops were skeptical at first but fortunately a few other people who knew us came on scene and reaffirmed what I was suggesting.

When looking back to the original topic of empathy I'm worried about the inability of our system or society to listen to what people who know a disturbed person are saying in a on-the-ground situation like the two we have described. The case of Robert Dzienski also comes to mind, where the police should have at least asked a few spectators what they thought was wrong with him before they botched what ever it is they thought they needed to do.

Even in cases where people have more time to calmly assess a person's problem and needs there should be allowance for the police or doctors to find local lay people who know the person so that some simple basic empathy can be considered.

Edited July 21, 2008 by eyeball

[Pliny]

Why is it such a dilemma? The informed consent given by you, and the guy's family (plus a doctor or course) should have been sufficient, legally and ethically, to treat him 'against' his will. I've intervened in a situation where a friend of mine, a diabetic, was acting irrationally and was confronted by two cops who didn't know him or me. They were about to violently subdue him but I was able to convince them to let me give my friend some sugar to try reducing the hypoglycemia that was causing him grief. The cops were skeptical at first but fortunately a few other people who knew us came on scene and reaffirmed what I was suggesting.

When looking back to the original topic of empathy I'm worried about the inability of our system or society to listen to what people who know a disturbed person are saying in a on-the-ground situation like the two we have described. The case of Robert Dzienski also comes to mind, where the police should have at least asked a few spectators what they thought was wrong with him before they botched what ever it is they thought they needed to do.

Even in cases where people have more time to calmly assess a person's problem and needs there should be allowance for the police or doctors to find local lay people who know the person so that some simple basic empathy can be considered.

Really, Eyeball the big question whether or not this intervention is "treatment". This "treatment" has been found to be physically damaging. If a pearson needs to be restrained for a time to collect himself, I don't have a probelm with that but I do have a problem with calling the administration of potentially damaging drugs or ECT as treatment.

[Pliny]

No I don't. I have had some success designing early intervention programs for drug addicts and the mentally ill so they do not end up in the criminal legal system for petty crimes but its all based on voluntary consent.

Forced treatment? Lol. If you are suggesting I want to drive around in a truck with some guilt ridden humanist liberals looking for schizophrenics on the street and abduct them and force pills down their throat and make them live with Celine Dion uh no.

It is not in your interest to drive around in a truck and force pills down people's throats unless you were a medical doctor and could prescribe pills. You can't write prescriptions. Electro-chemical solutions are not in your interest at all.

[Riverwind]

Forced treatment? Lol. If you are suggesting I want to drive around in a truck with some guilt ridden humanist liberals looking for schizophrenics on the street and abduct them and force pills down their throat and make them live with Celine Dion uh no.

Forced treatment would never work but giving addicts a choice that they cannot refuse would be much better. For example, if a drug addict is on trial for a crime committed as a result of drug use they should be given the choice of residential treatment or serious jail time. That may be enough to convince some to make the choice to clean up and those that don't are off the street. Either way society wins.

[Pliny]

Forced treatment would never work but giving addicts a choice that they cannot refuse would be much better. For example, if a drug addict is on trial for a crime committed as a result of drug use they should be given the choice of residential treatment or serious jail time. That may be enough to convince some to make the choice to clean up and those that don't are off the street. Either way society wins.

I agree forced treatment would never be successful and choice would be a way to go - if we had a choice to offer.

Treatment today is not very successful and when given the choice today the addict will choose rehab just to be out on the street sooner. Being nice or understandingly sympathetic or caring and sharing and providing for the addicts essentials, such as food, clothing and shelter are not providing for his needs. His needs are the next fix.

[Live From China]

I'm with you GostHacked. I think many of these so-called disorders are plain and simply made up.

Oh, he or she doesn't like wearing sweaters in the winter because they are hot and confining. Oh, that is one of the signs of Asperger's Syndrome, or whatever. Yeah, sure!

[M.Dancer]

I'm with you GostHacked. I think many of these so-called disorders are plain and simply made up.

Oh, he or she doesn't like wearing sweaters in the winter because they are hot and confining. Oh, that is one of the signs of Asperger's Syndrome, or whatever. Yeah, sure!

As it happens I've met two kids recently who have asperger's. In all regards they appeared normal except they were non social and somewhat non communicative.

And what it is is a form of autism.

[GostHacked]

As it happens I've met two kids recently who have asperger's. In all regards they appeared normal except they were non social and somewhat non communicative.

And what it is is a form of autism.

If you had not known or been told they were semi-autistic, would you have known the difference?

Could also be they are just shy. But man, we are giving names to almost every type of odd behaviour out there. If you don't fit in A, you belong in another group. B1, or B2, the classifications and types of disorders are growing all the time. Soon we will have a disorder for being normal, because most of the others are screwed up in a way. So it won't be normal, to be normal. You might have a disorder that makes you normaly different from the rest of the pack.

And some of the symptoms for most of these behaveral problems are quite vauge and open to interpretation. Not to mention there are all sorts of pills to handle these conditions.

Yes some of these are legit,... also there

[M.Dancer]

If you had not known or been told they were semi-autistic, would you have known the difference?

I knew something was different about the kids after being with them for around 45 minutes. I asked my friend who owns a summer camp for kids near Bancroft where we were staying if there was something wrong with one the kids aside from being a teenager....and that's when he said he was one of two special needs kids they had that session.

No, I knew there was something wrong, all the cylanders were firing but just not in the right order.

[Live From China]

Again, GostHacked, well said. Your post is hilarious, but the reality is that this shows a sad state of affairs when we have to label every "unusual" behavior being part of some disorder.

Had a friend whose dad went out every Friday after work for one (literally one) beer, and suddenly some New Age pop psychology fanatic said, "Oh, he's an alcoholic."

Like lots of sex? Oh, your a sex addict.

Laugh at your own jokes and it is supposedly the sign of some kind of disorder.

And on and on it goes.

Edited August 13, 2008 by Live From China