Slashdot Mirror
Surgeon General Says 1/5 of Americans are Nuts
twitter writes "According to this NYT article ,
Uncle Sam wants to help his anxious (14.9%), mood swinging (7.1%), and even schizophrenic (1.3%) subjects. Dr. Satcher, the surgeon general of the United States, claims "22 percent of the population has a diagnosable mental disorder," and goes on to say that the US needs more and more freely available shrinks. Young people are a higher
priority. Is mega - profiling on the way? Is the future tagged drugged and released under surveillance?" Free reg. req. to read - and twitter, who submitted this, assures us that he's not one of the crazy ones, just so you know. *grin*
Wow, I think he's a little off his rocker.
*grin*
regards,
this
I'm just waiting for someone to say that 2/5 Europeans must be crazy, because everyone knows that the US is the sanest country in the world!
n entjihad...stillbelievethatcommunismi ssomethingtobefeared
mumblemumblearmsraces...claimingallmuslimsonperma
I dunno.
- "How do we do it? Volume!" - The Bursar of Unseen University.
And she tells me that her profs keep encouraging everyone to look into psych+law as a career, because of this trend. The need for people to diagnose and treat people with mental illnesses will only grow if the nature of the world stay's the same. It's no conincidence that mental illnesses are growing at roughly the same rate as divorces - they have a very high correlation, since the damage done when you are very young can effect you for the rest of your life, without your even knowing it. That's why trained professionals to help us sort out our sordid past will be even more in demand in the upcoming years... Throw the whole Y2K/Millenium mess into the mix and all the nuts start coming out. And I won't EVEN get into the Linux zealots :) (j/k!)
"Diagnosable mental disorder" doesn't equate to "nuts". People who are tense in social situations might be "diagnosable" as having some sort of anxiety disorder if it's severe enough or interferes with their activities - but that doesn't make them crazy by decree, much less raise the specter of universal surveillance.
(Which is not to say that the way the law abrogates the rights of people with serious mental illness isn't a disgrace. But those laws don't cover everyone with any condition listed in the DSM.)
It's interesting to note that mental illness has come to the attention of the media and the public is a big way in the last 10-15 years. With this finding (22% of people are mentally ill), I wonder if this is mearly an artifact of social conditions and dietary problems in today's society, or whether 22% of people all through history have had these kind of mental problems. I don't know, but it would seem to me that people have gotten along fine in the past 2000 years...
Josh Winslow
I kinda wish I didn't use all my moderator points in the "how to fix /." thread last night.
/. to get fixed, we have to do it logged in. While only AC's complain, nobody will take it all that seriously. Be unpopular, complain while logged in. Maybe once people start sacrificing their precious karma (really, who cares?) others will start doing it as well, until karma is no longer our focus here.
Don't post just for the sake of posting. I'm sure the old hard drives at Andover don't need any more strain. Especially for pointless vacuous drivel.
Go ahead and nuke me down for OT, it doesn't matter much. If we want
My $/50
(5VCK4Z!)
"All I do is eat and poop!" -- Bean
Hey - the country that spends the most money in the world on psychs and shrinks already wants more?
How can this be, are we just inventing new disorders so that we can all be unique in our illness?
The stresses of life are always increasing, and we are having to work harder and harder to stay afloat, we have so many expectations and pressures that it doesn't surprise me that mental health is on a downward spiral. We don't have *time* to stay sane.
Perhaps it's time to promote a more natural and holistic approach to mental health and mental illness, how about promoting meditation, peaceful time, walks in the woods, true relaxing things. But oh no, we don't have time to do those things do we... maybe we should just do the prozac thing instead!
Why does GenX seem so very appealing now??
Hohum
Mental illness covers a whole raft of things.
Take depression, for instance. Clinical depression is the flu of mental illnesses. It is easily treated by counselling and, if nessesarry, drugs. It kills a lot of people, though.
Why is that different to someone who is (say) going blind? They no longer see the world they way other people do. Things they used to be able to do easily they can no longer do. Some forms of blindness can be treated - but counselling is always needed.
What's the difference? Is it just the stigma attached to having something wrong with your head?
I know a girl who is increadibly smart, funny, pretty and wonderful. She stopped breathing at birth, and nearly died. If they hadn't got oxygen to her she would have been severly brain damaged. As it is, she occasionally has short (1-2 second) blackouts where she "loses time".
Is omething like that a mental illness or a physical illness.
Yes, there are differneces, but no more between mental illnesses and physical ones that different physical ones.
That's MISTER Nuts to you, buster.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
now i'm sane and normal or so everyone says but life can bite ya in the ass sometimes so ya just gotta take it in stride but sometimes i wish there was a better world where people aren't such assholes and everything wasn't so shitty and i think i need to get laid.
sorry for the strange AC rant but i needed to get that out. thank you for your support.
My female significant other, is a psych/english major, which means she takes lots of wierd but useless classes. One of her 200 level courses began with a 20 min. segment of video tape showing a "average man of the street" (i.e. this individual had no mental problems of clinical worth) being asked questions about his life, work, etc. Then the class was told that the full tape was given to undergrads, grads, psychologist, psycharitists (sp?) and they were asked to try and diagnos if he had any mental illness or what not. It was found that there was a high correlation between years education in psychology and the number/amount/severity of mental illness diagnosised in the videoed man. With most of the psycharitists (sp?) diagnosing multiple problems and the undergrads mostly giving him a clean bill of health. The performers of the study wrote it up and published it somewhere, much to the chagrin of the well educated psychology degreee holder. Lastly the class was warned not to be looking for what they wanted to find, or they would more than likely find it wether or not it was there.
Which finally gets to my point, that the Surgeon General studied hundreds of extremely psych-educated studies all looking for mental illness in the general populace. I would be extremely leary of the conclusions without strict review of the sampling process and what-not.
USA-Democracy is 270 million YESes and NOes a day, not one every four years.
Your analogy is flawed. Mental illness is fundamentally different from physical disease such as cholera and smallpox. There's a large difference between distributing vaccines and probing into people's psyche through therapy or drugs. And perhaps I didn't clearly communicate what I meant by cause and symptom. Our society has problems. (Whose doesn't?) These problems, I feel, are causing increasing mental illness in its members. Depression, anxiety, and even more serious problems. Drug abuse, both illegal and legal (and I include prescription drugs such as Ritalin and Prozac in here too) are another symptom. Dealing with the symptoms is important to avoid positive feedback but it fails to address the core cause, which I'll freely admit I don't know exactly. Anyways, I'm just concerned when I see signs the federal government is becoming more interested with the mental health of everyone: once you can define who needs treatment and who doesn't, and you get to give the treatment, you've got too much power. Ah well. I'm always guilty of the slippery slope fallacy.
The undertone in this article is wether mental health has been on decline in the last decade/century. We're surprised at the high number of people that is being doomed 'mentally ill' by the statistics. As always, the cure by authorities is curing the sympthoms instead of the illness itself.
I personally don't think we're much different than generations before us when concerning mental health. But to be sincere, we don't have much facts to back up either claim. There are lots of reason that different numbers of people are being diagnosed mentally ill each year. Key factors that play a role here is awareness in the population and professional practices. In the 50's you could be diagnosed schitzophrenic by just being rebellious. Scientists were keen on testing out lobotomy on violent candidates. Nowadays, we have shrinks earning lots of money.
A higher percent of the population are more lonely, depressed, unstable and violent than ever before. But what does this have to do with mental health? Having a disorder in your brain doesn't automatically make you a criminal, or vica verca. Being depressed isn't necessarily bad, but an experience, a challenge, you can grow on.
So what if a tiny bit more of the population have brain disorders due to drugs, alcohole misuse, bad diet and pollution? This is not the main source of problems. ANY person can get unhappy, for a longer period of time. Instead of spending huge amounts of money on theraupists for individual cases, the authorities should focus on the reasons to why people get sick and unhappy. And DO something about it, we're still a _community_ aren't we? People need to be shown what condition they are in, and taught what they can do to help themselves psychologically and spiritually.
Everyone has issues to be resolved on this. And there aren't enough theraupists in the world for us all. At least not for money.
When a professional doctor diagnoses you as mentally ill, he's basically saying there's something wrong with you. But fails to mention why, and that it's not your fault. Also, if your view of the world differs drastically from the doctor's own, he/she may not understand this and condemn you as confused or schitzophrenic because of this. In such circumstances, you give up your power over your own sanity to the personal beliefs of your shrink.
You are your own best shrink. Nobody can understand yourself as good.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
Sigh.
It is a bad shrink who responds to every problem with drugs.
Talking about it is probably the best treatment, with drugs for extreme cases in addition to talking.
I've done both, and realised when I got off the drugs that I feel no different now than with the drugs. It was the talking that made the difference. The drugs may clear up your mind so that talking may have an impact, but drugs alone won't do a damn thing.
. A child has trouble learning in school. But it's not the fault of the teachers or their teaching method. Do we change the way we teach that child?
/rant on
/rant off
Teachers? Sorry, but it is not the job of a teacher to correct errors made by the parents. My parents are both teachers and they frequently complain that an incereasingly number of children that enters school completly lacks even the most basic social scills. They don't know how to interact with other, they can't concentrate, they are completly indifferent to any kind of authority and do not accept any kind of rules.
I agree that children who show those symptoms need help but what should a teacher do? School and with it the teacher depends on those things. It can't teach them. To help those children they need a very intensive care of specialized and caring psychologists, a teacher (in most cases) does not have the education for that and (in allo cases I konow) not nearlly the time for it. Additionaly the family has to cooporate, wich, unfortunatly, is not always the case.
A 'normal' child needs a 'normal' family to grow up. This does not mean that every child that grows up in a brolen Family is abnormal, but many are.
Ciao, Peter
Heh, you mean Seasonal Affective Disorder?
the real at&t mix
While there are a lot of "mental problems" that perhaps are over exagerated in todays culture, (really, how many 5 year olds need drugs to go to school and does it make their learning experience all that much better). There are some disorders that are best treated with some drugs. For example, perhaps someone has a problem with controling some of their emotions, not to the extent of schizophrinia or a constant depression, but one how is maybe just a little edgy sometimes, and i'm not talking about 5 year olds who like extra sugar on their cereal before school. Then there are those people who do have perhaps a constant feeling of suicide and depression. Granted drugs may make them feel better for a time, but what about after the drugs wear off, are their problems solved? NO. The problems are still there, they're still not solved, so whats the next step? More Drugs! The ending point of all this, is that some people who have problems don't need drugs, but really need someone who can relate to whats going on with them, and talk about their problems, as hard as that may be. And perhaps there are some problems that we still don't know how to deal with.
A lot of people here seem to be suggesting that this report would classify them as mentally ill becuase they like to be on their own, rather than socialize.
I don't think this report is talking about that. I'll post the bit that seems to be most appropriate. Make your own conclusions, but to me, this is very different from the computer geek type of person who is so forthright about their opinions on Slashdot. (From http://www.nih.gov/mhsgrpt/chap ter4/sec2.html#types)
Social Phobia
Social phobia, also known as social anxiety disorder, describes people with marked and persistent anxiety in social situations, including performances and public speaking (Ballenger et al., 1998). The critical element of the fearfulness is the possibility of embarrassment or ridicule. Like specific phobias, the fear is recognized by adults as excessive or unreasonable, but the dreaded social situation is avoided or is tolerated with great discomfort. Many people with social phobia are preoccupied with concerns that others will see their anxiety symptoms (i.e., trembling, sweating, or blushing); or notice their halting or rapid speech; or judge them to be weak, stupid, or "crazy." Fears of fainting, losing control of bowel or bladder function, or having one's mind going blank are also not uncommon. Social phobias generally are associated with significant anticipatory anxiety for days or weeks before the dreaded event, which in turn may further handicap performance and heighten embarrassment.
The 1-year prevalence of social phobia ranges from 2 to 7 percent (Table 4-1), although the lower figure probably better captures the number of people who experience significant impairment and distress. Social phobia is more common in women (Wells et al., 1994). Social phobia typically begins in childhood or adolescence and, for many, it is associated with the traits of shyness and social inhibition (Kagan et al., 1988). A public humiliation, severe embarrassment, or other stressful experience may provoke an intensification of difficulties (Barlow, 1988). Once the disorder is established, complete remissions are uncommon without treatment. More commonly, the severity of symptoms and impairments tends to fluctuate in relation to vocational demands and the stability of social relationships. Preliminary data suggest social phobia to be familial (Rush et al., 1998).
Sertraline and Alprazolam anyone?
And it took a surgeon general to find this out... (Oh, well, I guess that proves it)...
-- ----------------------------------------------
Vive le logiciel... Libre!!!
the right to bear arms, i guess.... my arms are hairy enough.. why would I need bear ones?
the right to free speech... i've NEVER charged anyone to listen to me (Not that they'd want to)
the right to democracy... well, in the US exists the choice between the Republicans, who are like our Conservative party, and the Democrats, who are like our Conservative party.
seriously tho... the post wasn't meant to bait the US, start the flaming or whatever... it was a response to a statement i found *amusing*....commonly known as a *joke*. I like the US, I like Europe, so brothers and sisters of the community, come together! (and let's gang up on China*.....)
* - the government - not the ethnicity. Just thought I'd mention that in case another flame comes my way.....
- "How do we do it? Volume!" - The Bursar of Unseen University.
I agree 100%. Mental disorders are a serious issue. People who have experienced such things happen to friends or family don't pull jokes or get all paranoid if the surgeon general posts a public alert. This issue needs more attention. The new inflammatory style of reporting on /. is an annoyance. I come here to hear tech news. If I need bad journalism and screaming paranoid headlines I'll read the National Inquirer. It's sad to see a good site go down the drain.
Very very good point. Especially about the TV and the library.
Someone who has mod points bump this up pls...
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Precisely. From where I sit, 78% of the population has a mental illness :>.
Yeah, 22% of the population has a mental disorder ... that would be the 22% that is always walking around trying to figure out what's wrong with the rest of us.
good. fast. cheap. (pick any two, you can't have all three)
Not that I agree with giving anyone outside of the "norm" drugs to make them just as stupid as the rest of the "norm" population, but I'm definitely outside the norm-i read slashdot*grin*-so if I need to be drugged and tagged, ya better make the drugs good.
I appreiciated it when someone moderated me up. I would have felt bad if my post had gone above a 4, but a 2 (which I always post at) or 3 was about right, I thought.
Maybe I should have left out the "This is not a Troll" thing, but it isn't. I do believe what I said, and I thought my post made sense. I wasn't Karma Whoring, and I didn't missspell too much.
Once it had got to a three, why did you moderate it down? I don't care about the Karma - I've got Karma to burn, but I am concerned that you just attempted to hide an alternative viewpoint to your own.
Please post your reasoning. (In case you don't realise, you can log out from your account, and then post as an AC)
>Sometimes that's not as easy as you'd think.
It's allowed to try isn't it? d:-)
I think many will agree that this is an important agenda. More important than the report, which will not change the way we deal with the issue.
People with mental problems are looked upon by society as freaks, but we're being more and more aware that this one concerns us all. Everyone has issues. It's just that some bury it so deep they almost never see them again. This doesn't stop it from influencing your life badly though.
At his scale, we can't deal with this by a brief stop at the hospital. We will have to change the way we live, and believe me, we will. For better or for worse, change is inevitable.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
I think you bit a little hard there.
Yes, Mental Illness is a serious problem for people and is not to be taken lightly. In this day and age, however, people treat the odd "down" feeling as depression.
Life is more and more stressful (just the daily commute into London is enough for a day) and what Sufi said can be very useful in helping daily stresses and preventing problems from developing further..
This is not to say that a walk in the woods will solve everything. It certainly won't help schizophrenia, which to my understanding is caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, as well as some behavioral problems, but it can help.
The percentage to me (22%) sounds a little high though. The last time I heard, it was estimated that 10% of the UK had some mental illness...
I'm not a doctor of anykind.. I just speak from experience...
May contain traces of nut.
Who decided on this idiotic notion that all people were created equal? Equal in rights yes, equal in constitution, no. Of these two, the former is more important, yet the belief in the latter allows self-proclaimed experts to trample on people's rights.
It bothers me greatly to read that someone has a "disorder". What is a disorder anyway? That people don't conform to some social standard? If the whole world had social anxiety disorder, would the whole world be crazy? Would the few that were not be considered to have disorders?
If someone were to knock their head against the wall all day long, or cause bodily injury to themselves, then I could understand an argument to the effect that they may have some disorder that should be addressed. Otherwise, just behavioral actions define a person, not their sanity.
Whomever would propose such an idea, is probably either so insecure that they must make others conform to their actions, or is so arrogant as to think that they can define a person on a whim.
----------------
Have you read my journal today?
...no offense, but this is something the world has known for a couple of decades...
Seriously though, I wouldn't be surprised if this is common to all industrialized nations. I am just wondering why this is so... or maybe ALL of humanity is basically nuts to some extent?
God bless you all
Moderators, please take note of previous post...
The tie-in to the shootings is very interesting. Instead of finding the causes, and dealing with those, we are dealing with symptoms (mental illness, school shootings, etc.).
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
I'd try the anti-anxiety drugs, but the listed side effects make me nervous...
Where's my Soma...
Took a while to discover, didn't it? ;->
> The thing is that 1/5th of the population can't be abnormal, purely because they are 1/5th of the population!
/.'s spin is to heighten that stigma.
I think you've made my point. There is a difference between "abnormal" and experiencing a mental illness. In fact, the article says "Mental disorders are usually not defined by laboratory tests or physiologic abnormalities of the brain..."
But people do suffer from mental illness, just like they can suffer from the common cold. The problem is that everyone knows when they have a cold and they can easily get help for it. They know they need additional rest and fluids and, if the symptoms progress, they can even see a physician without embarrassment.
That's not the case with mental illness. Once people realize they have a problem and seek professional help, it's much easier to begin to have a positive attitude and make jokes about being "crazy". It helps to talk about it, and it's a lot easier to talk about with levity.
On the other hand, those that haven't sought treatment aren't so willing to joke about it. They may already feel ashamed and inferior.
Now the major spin that this study has been receiving has been that people aren't getting treatment because of the stigma. And
In some other context, I wouldn't have a problem with jokes about mental illness, but this is about as tasteful as wearing blackface to an NAACP meeting.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
Furthermore, there are some conflicting disorders of which you probably have one or the other, especially when it comes to sexuality. (Doesn't like sex enough, likes sex too much.)
It also doesn't address the degree of the mental disorder. A mild form of a disorder, may actually be benificial sometimes. Just look at the amount of art that comes out of people we would probly slap a disorder on today. (Take Van Goegh for instance).
And yes, I know which two disorders I would be most likely to be diagnosed with.
Welcome to the conspiracy theory of the week.
A thorough study of mental illness in America, that happens to agree with many other past studies, reveals that 22% of Americans have some kind of mental illness in a given year.
You would like to blame it on the drug companies.
You would also like to tell people to "Take a walk in the park" or some other such strategy. If that works for you, great. But don't ask everyone else in the country to rely on your solution, because everyone is unique, and different people respond to different treatments.
Many people with severe depression respond well to SSRI (Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitor, like Prozac). Would you take it away from them if it works? Would you rather have someone unable to hold down a job or have any kind of meaningful social interaction so that they can prevent the pharmaceutical companies from getting a few more dollars?
Most of the 22% are still functional. They may experience a decrease in quality of life, but they manage to get by. For example if someone has a fear of public speaking, and their career suffers because of this, this would be a mental illness. It would also be a treatable mental illness, quite probably without any medication.
Don't be so quick to judge. Not everyone is as stable as you are. Maybe drugs are used too often in the industry, but a lot of people who do take them are helped by them.
"1 out of every 5 people is crazy. Look around you; if the four people around you are normal, you're it."
--
Pretend there is some witty statement here.
One of my Grandfathers couldn't work for 30 years because of depression. An uncle lost his medical practice and ended up living in a rat-infested old house on disability. My father spent 6 months in a psychiatric hospital getting ECT in the early sixties. My mother never finished her PhD because of psychiatric problems. I myself take Prozac, probably for life. I don't take it to pretend there are no problems in my life: I take it so I can continue to move and speak. I *do* play a musical instrument, and am learning a lot about a culture of the past (17th century english radicals). It's a lot easier to do this when you don't have to spend 75% of your energy fighting with the constant desire to kill yourself. Mental illness is real, and most mentally ill people are not Woody Allen-style self-absorbed whiners. It's very likely my family's illnesses have a genetic basis, and this is probably true for many others. And before you social-darwinist assholes mutter under your breath "So why let them breed?" Let me say I have as much right to be alive as anyone else. I am a gifted teacher, a skilled programmer, a scholar of intellectual property ethics and a loving husband and father. None of those things were possible during the years I spent doing talk therapy and stress management alone. If you back hurts, you may need tylenol or a massage. If it hurts because of the malignant tumor wrapped around your spinal cord, you better try something a little more heavy duty. I have no idea whether 20% of the US population is mentally ill or not. I do know there are a lot of depressed people who never get help. Some idiot called depression "the common cold of Psychiatry". It isn't. Think high blood pressure: often almost invisible from the outside, but a massive killer if ignored and untreated. It would be ridiculous for anyone to go running to the medicine cabinet every time they felt sad or anxious. It would also be ridiculous for some guru of the medical establishment to decide that anyone whose feelings and behavior don't measure up to some abstract standard is "sick" and should be "fixed" with pills. But it is a crime against humanity to mock the wretches consumed by the suffering of depression as "whiners" who need to "get over it". The only people who think psychiatric drugs are poison are those who haven't been eaten alive by a psychiatric disease.
Hey, I'm Squirtle too.
Isn't that a funny coincidence?
So the moral of the story is that 8 years of psych education in a secluded university environment makes you think that everyone else is crazy ... I'm going to have to tell my sister (psych Ph.D.) that one.
... I could see that leaving the student a little, er, trigger happy. Maybe they should add courses about normalcy, so that the students have a little something to compare their test subjects with.
Not surprising, however. You spend so many years, so much pain, and all the horrors of dissertation time on an education about craziness, you learn every possible indicator of mental illness from the most insignificant to the most blatant, you diagnose subjects until it becomes second nature
good. fast. cheap. (pick any two, you can't have all three)
I think that the prob is either blown out of proportion by people wanting to sell drugs or otherwise. The fact that there have been big scandals about doctors giving Ritilan to childern who aren't even ADD, without any mental health professional even speaking to them. Pills like Ritilan and prozac cost on average $2 and more. With cash like this involved,there was probally at least some influence from coorperate america in that %22.
Don't call my crazy, that's what they called me back in the home!
Having lived close to several people who have been clinically depressed, I can assure you that drugs can and DO help, in certain cases. Other times, even more drastic measures are needed.
However, I think that studies like this ("Major anti-depressant company releases study showing that X-percent of americans are depressed") serve to diminish the importance of real psychological problems.
I'm sorry, but when you're clinically depressed, all the nice walks in the world won't pull you out of it. It's an illness, usually caused by a chemical imbalance. It can be triggered by circumstances, sure, but often depression sets in for no good reason. It's more likely that somebody will GIVE UP playing a musical instrument. After seeing a close family member spend two years primarily sleeping on the couch, not caring about his family or whether he even continued to live, and through several attempts at various drugs, I can assure you it's not just that easy to pull yourself out.
There's not a clinically depressed person in the world that doesn't desperately want to get better. How can you enjoy life when everything tastes bland, there's no color, and you feel utterly alone in a room full of people?
Just as proof that this case of depression was clinical and not just some "get some fresh air and feel better" rut, he finally went through a course of ECT (electro-convulsive therapy) which had a startling effect. He's pulled around 180 degrees and is enjoying life to the fullest, even starting a new career. ECT is a drastic treatment with a very high success rate-- even though there are downsides, such as effectively "erasing" one's memory of the months prior to the treatment. It surely is not as simple as "play with a kitten and you're cured."
You might say somebody with bipolar disorder is just having "mood swings." Well after having (unsuccessfully) dated somebody with a severe case of bipolar disorder, I can assure you that going from a giddy, hyper-active superduperfabulous high and then plummeting to a crying mess in the corner of the room within a span of 20 minutes, for no particular reason, is definitely not a normal thing. You have to be close to somebody with a problem like this to get an idea of what it's really like.
I can believe that 1/5 of americans have some sort of diagnosable mental disorder, but only a small portion of those will actually require treatment. I do think Prozac is over-prescribed, almost treated as a cure-all, as is Ritalin. However, there are many cases where the drugs (and other treatments) are necessary and actually do work. Don't discount those.
-CausticPuppy "Of all the people I know, you're certainly one of them." -Somebody I don't know
What is this guy on about? Sounds like crazy talk to me.
Better get the medication.
Nurse!
PigPog.
Thats half the problem. The other half is when people who have never dealt with emotional illness lable a mental disorder as normal sadness and deride people as "weak willed".
I won't draw a line on which is the worse problem either in frequency or potential damage. I am seriously against unnessaccary perscriptions (I rarely take cold medicine for mild illness because the side effects are worse for me than coughing a little) but I've also expereinced the social stigma against getting help with real problems because "when I'm depressed, I just get over it, I don't need a pill to make me happy."
What we need as a society is an actual understanding of mental illness, what it is and what it isn't. What we have now is a media blitz of overreactions in both directions, and the majority of responsible clinicians being tarred as either drug pushers or neglecters, depending on who's ranting.
...will work for Chick tracts...
Now lets think about this for a second.
psychiatrists "cure" by medicating till you got
the "warm fuzzies"or till you're so flattened out
as to be inneffectual.
Behavioralists (psychologists)are really handy if
your rat gets depressed,but not otherwise.(usually wind up as high school councilors)
Analysts will help you pick the scabs off any
psychic damage you have week after week making you
deal with it,but not promoting much healing.
All that most people really need is a good
counciling psychologist to teach them the SKILLS
neccessary to keep care of their head.Unless one
is just too far gone or an organic,one doesnt need
medication or to jump through the hoops of the
rest of these clowns.
I find it interesting that "gov't.findings say
1 in 5 need flattened out with lithium"(thats what
i boil it down to).Of course then those people
wouldnt care so much about shady goin's on in
Washington.Medicated are less likely to try to
decipher all the crap they hear during this campaign year too.
"Dont worry big brothers gonna make everything
alright".Now have another Prozac.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
and we need shrinks to adjust us to it.
huey.
I remember a documentary on some world health organization. The comment I remember most is the quote that doctors in 3rd world countries are concerned with things like leprosy, cholera, and other communicable deadly diseases. Doctors in America and other "1st world?" countries concern themselves with things like depression and obesity.
It's true, I'm a cold hearted bastard. No one needs to point that out, but if people can't stay on an even keel while surrounded by the wealth and opulance (sp?) of America then suicide is a decent option. Blow your brains out and quit soiling the gene pool. Remember this is Darwinism in action. People can't cope with the enviroment, so they remove themselves. Eventually, you're just left with the ones that can cope and the species is improved.
The problem with people today is television, or more correctly, peoples willingness to accept what they see on the TV as plausible. People sit all day looking at soap operas, those shows where people all have maids and butlers/constantly party/wear fancy clothes/take exotic vacations/live in luxurios houses/have affairs/etc but never work/clean house/use the bathroom/etc. Eventually people begin to wonder why their lives aren't as dramatic. Why doesn't my boyfriend bring me flowers and expensive perfumes on a daily basis? Why can't my wife clean house, hold a job and tend to our 4 children all while wearing a ball gown and fancy jewelry as she prepares dinner for 12 guest? Why does my husband have to work all day, and when do I get to go on a 6 month cruise?
People start believing this shit even if they don't admit it. They develope expectations, and when those expectations aren't fulfilled (which they almost never will be) the person goes into a funk. Reality and their expectations of it are out of kilter, and only one will change.
The psych's answer to the problem: give 'em drugs and counselling. My answer: grow the fuck up. Life is not TV and TV is not life. Most people are ugly compared to whats on TV. Most people work damned hard to barely get by. 6 month cruises are few and far between, but if you accept that the average persons life has a beautiful side you can have good time daily. Fancy houses, cars and boats are a burden not a blessing unless you can afford to have someone else care for them (or you like caring for them yourself). Quit concentrating on obtaining all the fluff and concentrate on enjoying what you have and watch the depression disappear.
But of course this neither makes money for anyone nor does it make anyone feel as if they've made a heroic effort to overcome something. I hear it now, "Oh, I spent three years in a depressive funk and was only able to overcome it with intensive counselling and Prozac." All I can say is, "Shut-up you big cry baby. Grow up and get a life."
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Me thinks the percentage of people spending time on this site who are nuts is probably 80%. Gritsboy, Statue Man and ESR come to mind.
Hates people who have stupid little sigs
Shame on both of you for the tone of voice in this news post. People with mental illnesses are not "nuts", they're sick. Just as sick as anyone with cancer, arthritis, or the flu. Except that mental illness has a stigma attached that it's NOT acceptable to have one.
I have Bipolar disorder. Read more about it, if you're interested.
Until people stop refering to someone with these illnesses as "crazy" or "nuts", nothing will change. The report from the Surgeon General is a start, but it's not a magic cure. Many of us with these illnesses can lead productive, almost normal lives, without anyone knowing that every day is a struggle. But letting your employer know what is wrong with you still causes many people to lose their jobs: despite being protected by the ADA.
Having people call me nuts really bothers me, but at least I feel ok enough to speak up. How many others don't?
1/5 of all Americans are nuts.
/. users are more or less nuts? :) and also that 1/5 of all posts are nuts?
/., which five of you are nuts?
Since we have a large community and it is mostly Americans, can we conclude that 1/5 of
of those twenty of so core contributors to
anyway a bit of nuttiness is good - we owe it to them for the weird and entertaining art, literature and movies. of course, as long as they don't pick up a gun. which is another reason why guns should be banned: if 1/5 of americans are nuts, then guns should not really be freely available, right? - after all pro-choice assumes each one of us is rational enough to make an informed decision....
"The roots of most mental disorders lie in some combination of biological and environmental factors," the report says. "No single gene appears to be responsible for any mental disorder. Rather, small variations in multiple genes contribute to a disruption in healthy brain function." Under certain environmental conditions, it says, this disruption can result in mental illness.
I think it's very important for you to keep this paragraph from the article in mind. While i agree with you that drugs are sometimes over used, there are many disorders that have both biological and environmental cause and no single method of treatment (biological, cognitive, or behavioral) proves effective by itself.
Nowadays, psychologist believe that psychological disorders are subject to diathesis-stress, where disorders usually have a genetic background but require some sort of enviromental stress to trigger it.
In addition you have to keep in mind that when psychologist diagnosis a mental disorder, they are talking about extremes. All mental disorder are diagnosis according to the DSM-IV criteria. These criteria try to standardize methods of diagnosis and make sure the assessment includes not only social deviance, but also significant impairment of functioning.
It should also be mentioned that a lot of assessment is dependent upon the POV of the psychologist giving the assessment and is therefore subjective.
I think in general, the treatment community is trying avoid the pitfalls of what you're stating.
Now, if only i remember anything like that on my abnormal psych exam in 42 minutes. *grin*
"Just do me a favor, ok? Don't breed!" -- Adam Carolla, Loveline
Just like there is in selling say.. ummm.. food?
There is no arguemnt that some drugs are over-prescribed, or are just a waste of time.
For some people, though, drugs like the anti-depressants you dismiss so easily mean the differnce between life and death by suicide.
Unless you have been (clinically) depressed you'll say stuff like "Go enjoy life more", or "Go for a walk in the park", and think it makes a difference.
The only (non-drug) solution I've ever found to deep depression is extremly intense exercise to the point of exhaustion, sleep, eat, exercise, work - work - work, exercise, exhaustion, sleep.....
When you are really depressed, you can't - mustn't - give yourself time to think. Why do you think depressed people cut themselves? I've done that kind of thing. I don't enjoy the pain, but it keeps your mind off how depressed you are.
People will say "Can't your friends help you?" When you are depressed you are on your own. You have your own distorted view of what is wrong, and no amount of logical arguement is going to persude you otherwise.
When I'm not depressed, I'd pay $1000's for there to be a way for me to to take the drugs I need when I am depressed, becuase when I'm depressed there is no way I'm going to take drugs.
I'm no drug addict, either. I haven't been to a doctor in 5 years. I took some throat lozenges about six months ago. I don't smoke, I drink a little, and that's it.
Drugs make a difference.
This is the first time I've ever posted as an AC on Slashdot, and I defended Microsoft (well... a little, at least) in the Mindcraft saga! Does that say something about the stigma mental health patients have?
The define mental disorders as "health conditions marked by alterations in thinking, mood, or behavior that cause distress or impair a person's ability to function." Sounds like woman problems to me.
Yes, first poster, in fact, God is the answer!
.... Also there are not-quite-Gods-but-really-nice-fellows like Buddha and others. So, pray tell me, oh Wise One Who Knows All The Answers, which god?
Yes, but which god?? There is YHWH, and the Christian Trinity, and Allah, and Vishnu (together with Shiva, etc. etc. etc.), and Odin, and
Besides, it's not like anybody doesn't know that the answer is 42.
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
Do you expect any less from Roblimo? How that guy ever was declared a journalist is beyond me. He makes John Katz look like Edward R Murrow.
Hates people who have stupid little sigs
> A sceptical attitude towards this sort of sensationalism is very healthy
/. has shown how prevelant that attitude is.
Skepticism I can handle. But the whole point is that people aren't getting the help they need (be it drugs, psychoanalysis, or just a shoulder to cry on) because they're afraid of being called nuts.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
Hmmmmm.
But then, I must be in the 20%.
www.eFax.com are spammers
I recall reading that minor dehydration can lead to increased irritability and depression, and that USAmericans tend to be slightly dehydrated much of the time due to our penchant for sugary and/or caffeinated beverages.
Today's USAmericans also tend to get significantly less sleep then folks did a few years back.
There are known environmental factors which affect the development of the nervous system. Lead exposure is one such - children who grow up in lead-contaminated areas are more likely to end up with poor impulse control and behave violently.
And families - which, when functional, are an important psychological support mechanism - are more likely to be broken up and scattered.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
I really object to the way this story has been commented on. Just look at the title of the topic, "Surgeon General Says That 1/5 Americans Are Nuts" By saying that people with mental disorders are nuts, that really implies a lack of respect for their diseases. After all, people with mental disorders are really just going to the "shrink" just so they can have someone feel sorry for them, right? Nothing could be further from the truth. I suggest for a more realstic view that anyone go read about rates of sexual abuse of children, child neglect, and physical abuse. If you think clinical depression is funny, try it sometime. I thought that most /. readers were opened minded people, but this topic is filled with people posting who don't know what they're talking about, and are only open to the conventional wisdom. And that's part of the problem, according to the Surgeon General. The very wording of this post implies the "correct" opinion.
Given I was diagnosed as with a mild form of clinical depression, I was put on Prozac 20 mg for several months. I do notice that it worked very well--for one thing, I don't experience the severe mood swings I used to have (I'd go from having a temper tantrum to depressed in a matter of minutes from stress).
Right now, I'm taking 300 mg per day of St. John's Wort extract, which has really helped me stabilize my moods.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
There is enough stigma attached to mental illness. Actually there is a lot more than enough. And it is a very real and very serious thing. And it should be remembered that mental illness is a PHYSIOLOGICAL problem most of the time.
Erlang Developer and podcaster
No cute stuff... this is serious. I'm currently working on a data warehouse project for an HMO oversight company. The people I work with are dedicated to providing the best care for those people who seem to be swept under the carpet or ignored when we walk down the street. This public statement by the Surgeon General is important and will help non-profit companies like mine to further help the people whom society seems to want to forget.
this is the typical routine for a bored, overly indulged people. medicines that block fat but make you do all sorts of disgusting things. medicines that grow hair but make your fingers fall off.
people now go in to doc's offices with a self-diagnosis of *social phobia* or some other personality trait, as if it were a badge of honor to be mentally ill (which they're not), requesting pills, because it feels good to take pills.
Psych*s ought to know better, but their profession has been so divorced from the procedural methods of real medicine in the last twenty years that its a joke. they treat most cases based on nothing but a description of symptoms, and as any doctor knows, similar symptoms arise from different causes.
god help us
- "If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything" -Mark Twain
The schools also get between $400 and $2500 per year extra for each student that's diagnosed with whatever today's fashion is. If the kid is put on Social Security disability because of the diagnosis, a common occurence, the parents get about $400 a month. We have families in our school district with 4 or 5 kids like this.
Now you know what's driving this. But, just between you and me, it's OK to feel sad sometimes. In fact, you're nuts if you don't.
A one-in-5 chance that Dr. Satcher is talking about himself.
Hmmmm....
SS
-SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
umm...hello!
/life/ can be provided by drugs which counter-act their problem.
/Psychotherapizing/ EVERYTHING.
It is being rather ignorant to ask someone with a mental disorder to simply "stop", or "act right", or "think". Overdrugging is an issue and drugs are not required for every single thing that the big fat pharmaceuticals tell us they are, HOWEVER, for many people, a significant improvement in their
As for ADD, it is a proven and diagnosable disease, resulting from a lack of some chemical in the brain. The lack of the chemical makes patients brains feel like they need more activity and they become fidgety, distracted, inattentive, etc. You can't just say "behave!" or "act/think right!". That's just plain stupid. When they are given the chemical that restores the balance in the brain they behave "normal" and both them and people around them have better lives.
Unless you are incredibly think, I can't see how you can say that children are not be tought safe sex, abstinence or health risks. It is shoved down their throat every day. I think we're doing the job. The federal government even runs abstinence commercials. I don't know who you talk to, but nobody I have ever known or can think of would or has ever considered "just give them the morning after pill" a solution.
You are over-hyping a problem which doesn't exist. In fact, perhaps the other extreme is more prevelent.
A lot of diseases are just plain biological, and have to be treated biologically.
Jazilla.org - the Java Mozilla
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
One of the other things brought out in the report was the difficulty for some people to get treatment, or more specifically, fear of getting treatment. The stigma of being diagnosed with a mental illness or mental deficiency is often enough to keep people from receiving treatment. Constant use of epithets like 'nuts' help perpetuate the stereotypes of mentally ill people as being drooling incompetent people, or homicidal maniacs.
-- There is no sig line, only Zuul.
No you are not. You want desperately to be different, but you are not.
---> Did you know Linux stands for Linux Is Not UniX ?
I think the problem is that normal sadness/depression is too often mislabeled as a mental disorder, either by the psycs or by the people themselves. Wouldn't life be great if all we had to do when we got sad was pop a pill that made us happy?
No, the problem is when folks like you who have not bothered to educate themselves on the issue continue to propogate inaccurate stereotypes.
Anti-depressants do NOT make you happy. They just make you not depressed. The first glaring sign of your ignorance on the topic is your lumping sadness/depression together as if they were the same thing. It's normal to be sad when bad things happen. Nobody will argue with that.
Clinical depression is a medical condition with physical causes. Taking medication for such a condition is no different than a diabetic taking insulin. In both cases the patient is simply supplementing their supply of a chemical that their body isn't producing enough of. (Well, it's more complicated than that, but that's close enough for this discussion.)
Yes, being sad is part of a normal life and it's good to learn to deal with it in a healthy way. But being sad ALL THE TIME, even when things are great, isn't a normal part of life, and someone who has found themselves unable to feel happy about good things may very well need medical attention.
1) Most of the Diagnosis that attribute a illness to some chemical imbalance are speculative, and do not specify the chemical imbalance. They are more the result of a system design for the profit of your friendly neighbohood drug company.
could you imagine diagnosising a system problem that way?
We don't know what is wrong, but the noise abates when you use this handy hand grenade.
2) With the new evidence that brains do change over a life, and are continually growing, adding and changing connections, constantly remapping, the thought of a simple diagnosis
3) thought patterns change and manipulate brain chemistry as much as altering brain chemistry can alter thought (as in drugs and drunkeness)
So the premise of ADD is looking more and more primitive.
All too often a diagnosis of ADD is a diagnosis of an adult not doing the home work.
things that have been done that corrected ADD without Drugs include:
a) proper diet: Those chocolate covered sugar bombs for breakfast help out alot (NOT)
b) enviroment: moving to a safe neighborhood so that you are not dodging bullets all the time lessens the stress level
c) changing schools/teachers to someone who is not clueless and a system that is not clueless
d) changing education goals to something beside socialization and COMPLIANCE to a factory / corporate norm
e) handling home life so that the main social education is NOT jerry springer and soap operas.
f) rote learning to pass a test (NOT) instead of competant understanding. ETC.
Of course, in any case where this handles, the glib assertion is made that it really wasn't ADD then.
[SNORT]
yeh right ..... with all of the talk about human diversity, and how people become social outcasts, you would think we would know better.
Check out: http://www.msu.edu/user/loossean/ erin/sanity.html for the test.
--
Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
How do you know that these are the qualifications for godhood?
:-)
:-)
:-)
You are correct in stating that I've made the assumption that there is a God. All my statements and views about the world follow from that first principle. But by the same token, you've made the assumption that there isn't a God. Logically, all your views will be based on your first principle. Everything boils down to the first principle, the initial assumption. Mine is that a personal God exists. If a person bases their investigation on that assumption (which they'd really have to make to want to investigate in the first place), then it follows that it is intellectually dishonest to deny the revelation in the Bible. QED.
As for the qualifications of God, well...any god without those qualities really wouldn't be much of a god, and hence not worthy of worship. I prefer to worship a sovereign God, not some being with human foibles and follies.
Please find another phrase, if only to keep rabid knee-jerkers like myself off your case.
Ahh, see, I enjoy good honest discussions, especially with those who disagree with me! So please, keep on my case!
Would you react this way if someone said that "20%
of people have some chronic physical illness", where the definition of chronic physical illness includes allergies, asthma, reflux (i.e. chronic heartburn), weakened ligaments (from sprained ankles), RSI, bad back, and migraines?
Or is it just that the idea of mental illness being as common as physical illness unacceptable?
"Drugs don't make any difference"
Pardon? You couldn't be more wrong, arrogant, or ignorant. I'm sure you like being smug and sarcastic, but give it up, we're not impressed.
Anti-depressants are a drug like any other drug. Over-priced? I'm sure they are. If so, there are plenty of cheap alternative medicines like St. Johns Wort or tryptophan (although they are not nearly as potent, and so they might not help a more serious case).
I'm on an anti-depressant right now. I probably will be for quite a while. There is *no* "haze -- what sort of information are you basing *that* on? What there is is a somewhat easier time dealing with the mood swings I experience if I *don't* take something. It's a chemical imbalance, you moron. It's treatable, and no one should be ashamed to use it if they need it.
Drugs aren't the answer -- anyone who expects that has been misinformed (and no competant doctor is promising anything like that to their patients). Of course lifestyle and attitude changes are needed. But without the medicine to correct the neurochemical problems, you can struggle for years and not see results (because you have that immovable physical block in the way).
It's a strange world -- let's keep it that way
Yeah. That's life. But I do think it used to be better, back then when medias and society in general weren't making a majority of people become dumb, superficial lamers.
Maybe it's a kind of vicious circle... Let's think about it from a paranoid point of view :
1. Make everyone believe that great life is beauty, money, and friends. So they'll buy L'Oreal, they'll help capitalism keep on going, and they'll put lots of bucks in the pockets of the right people.
2. For those who don't agree, like you and me, declare them as "socially retarded", "marginal", or "nuts" and convince them their only hope is to be "cured" by those drugs...and drop more bucks in the right pockets...
This might really make sense...
And I know when life doesn't kill you it makes you stronger, but I do think I'm strong enough but a bit tired now.
Just my $2E-2.
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
In an insane society,
the sane man must appear insane.
whuppy enjoys smelling like diesel fuel
What the report (from what I can tell, I am not a doctor) and dacta (again, as far as I can tell) mean is that people who have mental illnesses should not face troubles when seeking treatment above and beyond those that you would face getting treatment for a physical illness. Mental and physical illnesses should be viewed exactly the same as far as access to treatment and insurance coverage are concerned. And why not? It really seems to me to be a silly thing to argue about; if people need help and can be happier/more productive/have a higher quality life, why shouldn't they get help INDEPENDANT of the source of their troubles. Yes, independant of their troubles, mental, physical, financial, social, etc. The government already provides assistance for the physically and financially "ill" in various ways. Why not bring assistance for mentally ill people up to the same level as for the physically ill?
And no, it shouldn't be left up to the companies to do themselves. Companies are generally not for the best interests of their employees; that CANNOT be their main goal. Their main goal is to turn a profit and please their owners/shareholders. That's the way it is. Employees profit and benefit when their company does well, and sometimes don't realize that and vice-versa. It's human nature.
Just my $0.02.
---------The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
torpor,
You obviously have not read about the history of the treatment of mental illness.
Treatments in the past border on unimaginable: electric shock, heavy use of restraints, and in some cases lobotomies.
Fortunately, modern medical science with its study of brain chemistry has come up with a far more humane solution, namely medicines such as Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Effexor, Remeron, etc. The majority of users of these drugs DO respond positively to modern medication, and people in the post that couldn't even properly function in society are now living useful lives for a change.
While I do agree with your assertion that some drugs are over-perscribed (especially Ritalin), if properly diagnosed and proper medication given, it's a major improvement over what has happened in the past.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
No, you are wrong. A sceptical attitude towards this sort of sensationalism is very healthy, the true insult to the people who really are mentally ill is that every little depression is now being classified as a mental illness.
Anxiety, depression, stress, and even mild degrees of schizophrenia (and yes I know very well that schizophrenia is very different from the "somethines I'm Jack, sometimes I'm Jill" jokes) are normal. You do not have to be mentally ill because you are going through a bad period in life, or because you choose to seclude yourself, or because you have a bad temper. Only when we realize this can we help the people who really are sick, and yes, nuts.
-
We cannot reason ourselves out of our basic irrationality. All we can do is learn the art of being irrational in a reasonable way.
What do you base that on? Doctors are ethical as much as any other group is ethical, i.e. it varies from person to person. Dr Mengele anyone? How about the doctors in the US who participated in programs testing the effects of radiation on unsuspecting citizens?
Just because someone has an MD, that does not make them ethical. In fact, given how much most doctors charge hard working people for necessary services (then take 3 days off a week to golf), I'd say the medical profession isn't a sterling example of ethics.
And no, I don't meant that in the instantly obvious, paranoid way.
I've just noticed that there is a lot of anger out there, especially in younger kids. I think it has a lot to do with the constant barrage of extremely well-targeted, psychologically-researched marketing.
Think about it -- just about every second of the day, you're constantly pushed to buy something. And as time goes on, the marketing people are getting better and better at targeting you through psychological research. Ever wonder how much of your extremely valuable memory space is taken up by ad campaigns (past and present) by McDonald's and Coca-Cola? Eventually it all becomes intrusive noise that is difficult to block out, and it becomes nothing but a big mish-mash of greed, greed, greed and more greed.
Is it any wonder that schizophrenia is on the rise, when there are very real voices coming at us from everywhere, as marketing people keep installing more and more monitors and speakers everywhere they can?
Of course we're anxious and moody.
Exercise and diet are the first form of prevention & treatment for high blood pressure. My brief comment was just an analogy.
But, there are those who have high blood pressure that diet and exercise don't help, medications are a reasonable (and beneficial) next step.
The big problem with those with psychiatric disorders is that there is such a stigma against them - people are very hesitant to get treatment... be it drug therapy or psychotherapy.
arn
I can't believe some of what I'm reading here, including the original post itself. Mental illness isn't about being normal or being accepted by society. Mental illness isn't about being ``nuts'' or wanting to shoot people. If you can't function the way you want to because of your mental condition, then it's a real problem just as bad as a physical condition. It might be as bad as having cancer, or only as bad as having a broken arm.
Many people, probably even a few /.'ers who are hiding behind the jokes, wish they didn't have social phobias, or wish that they didn't obsess about this or that, or wish that they wouldn't feel some of the feelings they do the prohibit them from acting the way they want to.
Sure, many people choose to ignore their problems, or blame them on society, or the jocks, or ``normal people'' but you still wake up in the morning with the same thoughts. And don't forget a lot of the jocks probably have some problems they won't admit.
Unfortunately doctors aren't perfect. Unless you're lucky to have a good one, they just prescribe some pills and give you your bill, never bothering to get to the root of the problem. They do the same thing for all disease. But the problems people have are still real and many who do choose to take medication or get therapy would like to have their insurance pay for it.
Mental illness is real and effects a lot of people who are not ``nuts''. It has nothing to do with being normal or not.
It's not that there's a "norm" that you have to adhere to. Well, I take that back. If you're in highschool, ignoramous school administration tries to apply a norm to the way you act. But, in the time-honored words of The Frantics, "they be turkeys."
Whether a behavior is considered a disorder is when it is disruptive or debilitating, or dangerous.
Crying for no reason is both disruptive and debilitating. Not caring when you cross the street because it doesn't matter much if you get hit is dangerous.
I don't think the pharmeceutical firms are without sin on this issue, they do overprice and some of them have probably generalized. Don't fault the researchers who create the drugs, fault the PHB's that market them.
Again, like other posters have said when responding to this kind of thing, I can see you've never been there, so you just don't understand.
Depression, clinical depression, when it comes back to someone who's been fighting it, when it's there it's like a warm blanket that insulates you from reality, and makes you feel like things are the way they ought to be. That depression is the way you were ment to be. It's comforting, it's addictive, and it's incredibly destructive.
I've never taken antidepressants, but there have been people close to me who have. They don't "cure" the mental disorder, nobody but the PHB's and the ignorant say they do.
What they do is allow someone who knows that their depression is destructive to assert their willpower over the things that are happening to them - to remove that warm blanket so that they can confront reality, because they know that even if it is an ugly and difficult reality, it needs to be confronted.
Drugs alone will only add to the emotional trauma. But carefully controlled drugs and a willingness to slay the beast that controlls your life is far better than wallowing in the protective silence of emotional isolation.
This is just like television, only you can see much further.
I agree. I was really offended by the article title. I just think that people need to experience this personally to understand how bad it can be to, through your own experiences or that of someone you love, to suffer a mental illness. It's not funny, it leads to a lot of suffering.
I've known people who have died of depression. I don't find it humorous.
It's a strange world -- let's keep it that way
I just wanted to add my experiences with OCD to this otherwise excellent post.
I developed OCD around 12, and remained undiagnosed untill I was 21. This is with a good, caring family and regular medical attention. It is exceedingly easy for severe mental illnesses to excape completely unnoticed. I agree that the world in general is overmedicated and too quick to find mental illness, but on the other hand I sure that there are thousands of other people out there that were like me, trapped in their own head for years with no clue about what was going on.
The really nasty aspect of mental illnesses is that they can take many forms. Everyone recognized excessive handwashing and other rituals as a sign of OCD, but the illness can take many, many forms. Some people, like myself, have no compulsive behavior whatsoever, but were repeatadly plagued by intrusive thoughts that the individual finds extremely distrubing. This is just another form that OCD can take, and there are many more. This diversity makes mental illnesses very difficult to ferret out...in some ways I would rather see a society oversensitive to these problems than under. Our detection net for these illnesses is very loose, we are missing alot of people who need help.
The health insurance treatment of mental illnesses is also extremely inadequete. If the inequitites between physical and mental illnesses in the insurance industry can be corrected, than little actions like this from the surgeon general were worth it.
First, we live in a much more tightly packed society than we did 100 years ago. IIRC, 100 years ago, the worlds population was only 1 billion and the US population was only around 100 million. Today, we are looking at 6 billion and around 275 million respectively. When you have someone this tightly packed, anti-social behaviours become much more dangerous. Instead of the Lizzie Borden murders which shocked a nation with 2 dead people, you have the Columbine massacre with half a dozen dead. Why? More targets, closer together. Furthermore, when you don't have enough elbow room, the frustrations caused tend to aggravate any latent mental disorders. Even worse, high population density tends to allow people with mental illnesses to "hide from society". Since nobody really knows everybody anymore, it is far too easy for people to slip through the cracks.
However, I do think that there is another possible problem that is often overlooked: the crap we eat. It is well established that many foods have psychotropic effects that are not well understood: just ask any woman about chocolate around "that time of month". Repeat after me: sugar does have a noticeable effect on the behaviour of small children. I know; I have one. Give him candy and he will be insane for the rest of the day. And we've only had sugar in massive quantities since the start of the twentieth century -- about the time everyone seems to have started to slip their cams. I'm not going to get into what I think some of the psychotropic effects might be (I'm not a P-Sychiatrist); I'll just note that many foods definitely have them.
As someone who used to work for a consortium of Physicians, let me say that you should not discount the money effect on the equation. Designer drugs like ZoLoft, Luvox, and Prozac are some of the most heavily advertised drugs out there. Literally, insanely beautiful women come to Doctor's offices, fix lunch on-site for the Doctor and their whole staff, then hand the Doctor a bunch of samples. If you don't believe me, the next time you are in a Doctor's office look around and count the amount of junk that the Doctor has from various drug manufacturers. And this junk is rarely for anti-biotics: it's for Zoloft, Luvox, Prozac, occasionally you'll see some for Claritin or something along those lines. But usually, it's the psych drugs. And these medicine's are IMHO radically overprescribed: in fact, most doctor's do nothing to accurately diagnose mental conditions before trying Zoloft and friends. This is a Bad Thing.
Finally, I am really, really concerned that the Pols are trying to turn mental illnesses into such a big issue in this campaign (take a look at Tipper Gore sometime). They simply are not a national policy problem. I don't buy the whole "awareness" gig: usually, "awareness" campaigns boil down to "creating an issue" in my book. Even the awareness that is advocated seems to me to be a way for teachers and parents to assuage their guilt that they have been so negligent in their jobs that kids have to be drugged to sit in class.
-- Slashdot sucks.
It's a classic manifestation of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD, for short). The poster was indicating that many instances of OCD can be traced to a minor chemical imbalance in the brain which is treatable with medication.
If you have a symptom like this, I strongly recommend that you talk to a therapist. Not because it's necessarily earth shattering, or life threatening, but because it's just dumb not to. If you have reason to think something's wrong with your heart, you go to a doctor. If you have reason to think somethings wrong for your brain, what can it hurt to ask?
See my response above.
:-)
If YOU feel the need to believe in God, go ahead. You have every right to believe in whatever God you chose. However, I wholly reject the idea that "Any intellectually honest person would have to conclude that the Christian God is the one and only God"
First of all, you've misquoted me. Here's what I really said:
"Then he investigates, with an open mind, and he should (if intellectually honest) come to the conclusion that there can be only one true God."
I did not say it was intellectually dishonest to not believe in the Christian God! I stated that doing a thorough, open-minded investigation should lead to that conclusion!
And while I'll hold to my position that YHWH is the Christian God, I cannot say the same for Allah. Based on what I've read of the Koran (admittedly, only a small portion of it) and what I've read of the Bible (all of it), Allah is most emphatically not the God of the Bible. Take that as you may.
Torpor, you hit the nail exactly on the head (and beat me to posting it, you cretin ;-).
;-)], and they will buy it -- and the drugs to "fix" their problem.
I'm no expert in the field, and this might even be construed as flamebait, but the wide array of "psychological disabilities" popping up almost daily smacks of companies creating a market for their wares. Pharmaceutical research is far from cheap (given all the testing and certification required, especially in the US), so these companies need to churn up consumption to get a suitable ROI. So instead of a big media blitz (at least, not until the last 18 months or so), they fund "studies" to show that people need to take their drugs because they're not "healthy."
These commercials that have started polluting television. . . *shakes head* Propecia for hair loss, this that and the other for depression. Nine bazillion allergy meds. And the Little Blue God, Viagra. Fer chrissakes, I DO -NOT- NEED TO KNOW ABOUT BOB DOLE'S ERECTILE DISFUNCTION, OKAY???
It's appalling, really. Doctors buy into it because they get paid by the insurance companies for the visit, regardless of whether or not the patient has an illness.
My best friend is a pharmacist, and his internal business model is this:
"Keep the patient alive but just slightly sick for as long as possible. That way, they have to keep refilling their prescription."
It's a brilliant ploy. Tell people the reason they're not happy with their life is because of a chemical imbalance or deficiency, not because they work too hard, don't get enough fresh air and excercize, eat like sh*t [or spend too much time readking John Katz
Can I interest anyone in a bottle of Snake Oil? Cures what ails ya!
Rafe
V^^^^V
Rafe
Opinions expressed by the author may not actually exist in the wild.
I think there is a bit of a stigma present on mental disorders, perhaps evinced by Roblimo's use of the term "crazy".
/usually/ tied to a chemical imbalance and is no "fault" of their own. It is very irresponsible and 16th century to treat the mentally ill with such a stigma. They are no different than someone who has leukemia, or cancer, or any other physical disease, yet they are treated with such disrespect. Grow up.
Not every person with a psychological disorder is a psychotic. And there is very little distinction between normal and non-normal. Mental health is a spectrum. Every body has their own little mental foibles. Just like the bacteria that live with us, you can't reach adulthood and NOT have your own little mental abnormalities. It's part of life. Somebody bites his nails, somebody taps, somebody talks in their sleep, somebody doesn't like touching public fixtures, somebody is nervous in a crowd, somebody can't stand the noise...it's all a spectrum and few people are more-normal than others. Some people, unfortunately, have pretty extreme cases, which are
Jazilla.org - the Java Mozilla
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
I suppose that you were diagnosed sometime in your adult life and the motivation to overmedicate never touched your doctors. Or have you had any experience with overmedication?
I think it's a balance to maintain... no, non-medicinal cures usually can't fix clinical disorders... yes, sometimes drugs make some mental health patients worse...
so where do you draw the line?
Unfortunately, your view of this is too simplistic. What many people here, including you, apparently don't understand is the fact that a mental disorder is a physical disorder. Scientific studies have shown this. They have shown that prescribing drugs to people with depression can be essentially just as effective in treating that depression whether the patient also receives counseling or not. Other studies have shown, for example, that people with ADD cannot properly activate the part of the brain that is associated with concentrating. Similarly, people with obsessive compulsive disorder or depression have a condition in which certain parts of their brain are overactive. Would you say that people with diabetes or high blood pressure just need to change the way that they they think? Neither should you say this about people who suffer from mental disorders, though a conscious effort to do this on their part will certainly help with their recovery.
Two observations.
First, the question whether 30-something percent of Americans are diagnosable with a mental disorder is pretty meaningless. Because it all depends on your definition of a mental disorder.
In reality, there is a whole spectrum of conditions from one extreme (let's keep it one-dimensional for simplicity, although it's not) of Maslow's super-people who are wise, strong, sensitive, can take it, etc. etc. to the other extreme of heavy-duty clinical disorders when people cannot survive on their own. People at extremes are fairly rare and it's obvious whether they are mentally ill or healthy. The situation is more complicated for the mess in the middle. Basically, you can pick any line and call people to the left of it "mentally sick" and people to the right of it "mentally healthy". Depending on your definitions (where you draw the line) you can have from 10 to 90% of the population either sick or healthy -- you choose!
The second issue is of treating mental disorders with drugs. Again, it's fairly obvious that heavy-duty disorders need to be treated with drugs, because that the only thing that (sometimes) works -- at least the only thing we know of. The interesting question again concerns the mess in the middle, and the question is: do we all want to be well-adjusted? In each society there is sort of a picture of a "mentally healthy" individual and those that deviate from this picture are supposed to work on getting closer to it. But is it a Good Thing? I think it can be shown that most of the world's greatest literature and poetry, and to a lesser degree music, was created by severely maladjusted people. It is likely that have they been treated to become "normal", no masterpieces would have been created.
The question of "do you want to be more normal?" is actually a very deep one and has to do with the person's identity. If I have periodic situational depressions, is it part of me? If I make them go away, does it make "me" less of me? There are two extremes, neither of which seems to work: one is "when severely depressed, take walks in the woods", and the other is "if you wake up in bad mood, take the yellow pill and it will pass". Where the right middle is, I am not sure.
Yours in craziness
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
From what I understand, it usually requires brief periods of taking some fairly low-strength meds to virtually wipe it out. You can go fine, sometimes for years, before the next bout.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
To get an idea of the world they are proposing, pick up the video of "Shock Treatment", and be afraid, be very afraid!
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
And before you dismiss me as "lost in the fog of prozac" maybe you should learn something about modern antidepressants instead of spouting your own assumptions as revealed truth. Prozac and similar drugs give me no "fog." In fact, on a moment to moment or even day to day basis, they have no overall effect on my mood. My kitten purring makes me happy, fighting with my NICOE makes me sad. But when I look back over my week, I don't have any incidents where I spent 6 hours curled up in a ball crying for no reason, or wandered across the street without looking on the assumption that if I got hit by a truck it wouldn't matter much.
And if those kind of unprovoked depressions are something you don't have to worry about in your life - CONGRADULATIONS! You probably aren't clinicaly depressed.
The only thing I have ever regretted about psychoactive medication is that lies like those told in this post prevented me for so long from getting the help I needed. Frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself.
...will work for Chick tracts...
Your french needs practising, but this was sure impressive....
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
So, pray tell me, oh Wise One Who Knows All The Answers, which god?
I won't claim to have all the answers, because I don't. But I'll share what I know...
First off, I'd argue that YHWH is the Christian Trinity, but that's a theological discussion for offline... =)
There's a really simple way to figure out which God. A person takes everything that would be a requirement/necessity for an entity to be God. For example: eternal, outside of space/time, sovereign over everything, omnipotent, omniscient, etc. Then he investigates, with an open mind, and he should (if intellectually honest) come to the conclusion that there can be only one true God.
What does one investigate, though? The only thing we have to look at are revelations, both natural (i.e. the world) and supernatural (i.e. the Word). A close inspection will reveal that the rest of the so-called "gods" have little no nothing in common with the one true God, and indeed cannot come close to meeting the necessary conditions! But it will also reveal that the God of the Bible does meet all those conditions, and more!
It comes down to this: if all religions are equally true or valid, then Christianity is false, which contradicts the original assumption (that all religions are true)! If Christianity is true (and I believe that it is), then everything else is false by default. But don't just listen to me. Do your own investigation (much like C.S. Lewis, often quoted by me) to discover the truth!
There are several things going here at once, and I think it's necessary to separate them before discussion will help.
Mental health in the US is completely ignored unless you have money to pay for treatment (or are violently wacko of course.) All you have to do is talk to and watch the homeless in your city for a while, and you'll find some rather obvious cases. Part of the legacy of the Reagan years is that public mental health care is no longer available, the streets are our mental hospitals for those that can't afford better -- and it's hard for them to maintain family ties or keep a job. The mentally ill have been abandoned by the very same government bemoaning the lack of treatment. This is rather cruel treatment, but the mentally ill have never fared well, cf. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest by Ken Kesey.
Mental health is sometimes used as an excuse for behavior control. If a child is unruly, don't worry about why too much, just find a drug that quiets them down. If a child has behavior problems, and you have money, just institutionalize them over the summer so they are out of the way. While some children can benefit from such treatment, inarguably, it is applied to many more that are only lacking love or attention from parents. Drugs are cheaper than time though.
I find it rather amusing that the same government so concerned with the "War On Drugs" is peddling pharmaceuticals out of the other side of their mouth. Oh, just say "no" to free(as in speech) mood altering drugs, I get it. There should be no doubt that there is a marketing side to this desire to solve mental health problems thru drugs. It may be good therapy in many cases, but don't assume it is always applied where appropriate. Profits increase if it is applied more widely than it should be.
Mental health problems continue to be a serious stigma in terms of employment and housing. We need some real education on the subject, and this is the only part of the government's announcement I find valuable.
A good start on the problem would be making sure everyone who *wants* mental healthcare can get it. It's in no one's best interest to have the mentally dysfunctional wandering the streets I think.
It's news like this that REALLY makes me want to lock the doors, close the curtains, and hide under the bed all day... with a shotgun.
Sure, I'm just one more guy in a long list of people disagreeing with you...but hear us out. I'll agree that the medication may be overpriced (my 50mg zoloft is $2 a pill, I think), but overpriced is very relative.
That $2 a day has helped me survive my first semester of college. For all of high school, I would have breakdowns, complete, utter, intense breakdowns, every few weeks. Stress would build up, and tiny thing after tiny thing would start to set me off. I'd cry in the middle of class for no reason, I'd cry at home for no reason. I struck out at family, friends, loved ones, when they were trying to help me. You've clearly never experienced true depression, and for that, you're extremely lucky.
It's not fun. Yes, taking walks, seeing movies, exercizing, and whatnot all help...but they don't help enough.
I had a breakdown a couple months ago, my first at college. It was right on schedule, too. And you know what? I barely made it to class that week or two. I barely left my room, I barely spoke to anyone. I sat it out, and wasn't functional for two days. It was not cool.
So over thanksgiving I went to my doctor, and we talked about my breakdowns. My family on both sides has clinical depression in the gene pool, and I was lucky enough to receive some bad blood. I'm not the only one in my extended family on antidepressants, and both my parents have been on them. They aren't a panacaea, and they aren't, despite what you may believe, "happy pills".
I like to think of them as "not sad" pills. I'm unbelievably stressed right now. I have a 10 page paper due in 3 hours, and a final exam just after that. My weekend has been hell, and I've had almost no time to myself. And you know what? I can handle it. I don't like it, and I feel the weight, but taking those walks, and doing those things you suggested help a LOT--but only when I can bring myself to do them.
Depression is nasty. It shuts you down while it takes control, and it's hard to predict. I have a chemical imbalance in my body, and my zoloft helps correct it. It's not like I don't get sad, or I don't have emotions anymore--I do. They just don't shut me down completely.
So please, realize that you're lucky--realize that we aren't all as lucky as you. Some people in this thread were genuinely hurt by your statements, and that shouldn't be something anyone aims for, and I'm sure you didn't. Nonetheless, we're no different from you.
On a final note, for a little while I thought the same things that you think...until I realized that four years of trying to work it out on my own didn't help. So now I'm seeing a counselor, and I'm on my not-sad pills. And you know what? I'm doing okay.
I'm not doing great, but antidepressants don't make you do great. They make you *you*. I felt like a different person when I was depressed...now I feel like me all the time, and I think that that is the most important thing anyone, or any pill, can give you.
Warmest regards,
this
Really sad if you ask me. No wonder we need more shrinks! We are giving kids a complex by giving them pills that label them "different" and "abnormal"
What shrink can define normal anyway? Its all a scam to make money.
The Anti-Blog
One in five Americans has just been marginalized by the government. But if you read the article it is actually half of all Americans. This is because the official view is the same for the mentally ill as it is for criminals.
"Once a criminal, always a criminal."
"Once crazy, always crazy."
Don't believe me. Just try exercising your right to purchase a firearm and tell the guy behind the counter that you were once treated for a mental illness.
ken_i_m
Profit can only be derived from a smile by giving it away.
...they're not insured. On the local news last night the announcer pointed out that many people go undiagnosed due to no health insurance/high cost of treatment, and the social stigma associated with mental illness.
On a lighter note, he followed up with a story about how Naomi Campbell was going through anger management treatment for $17k, and threw in the phrase "Temper, temper, Naomi". Heh. I do agree that drug treatments are not the way to go anyway, however...
mcrandello@my-deja.com
rschaar{at}pegasus.cc.ucf.edu if it's important.
Previous posters are dead-on in identifying this as a symptom of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). I have a bit of personal advice to add: See a psychiatrist as well as a psychotherapist. Do this to see if drug treatment might help you. Seeing bother types of doctors at once is quite typical. Your psychotherapist can help suggest a good psychiatrist, and you can be sure the two will correspond--only with your legal consent, of course!--in treating your case. I say this because drugs worked better for me than therapy. This may not be the case with you, and I don't suggest indiscriminate use of drugs as a cure for anything, but it's worth investigating. The drug I take has no side effects--literally none. And it takes away the need to engage in compulsive habits. What a deal, eh? ;) That said, in the beginning drugs should always be used in conjunction with therapy. This is the way I started.
It's sad that people aren't better educated about mental health. If you had known about OCD and the fact that it's a well-understood, common disease, you could have dealt with it years ago. I'm just glad you were lucky enough to learn about it here.
If you have more questions, I'd be happy to help answer them. Go to this thread to correspond with me. I'm sure there are good OCD resources out there on the 'Net at large, but it might help you to talk with someone else who has a "borderline" OCD and has not suffered real-life impairment from it. Remember, OCD is just a disease and, like any disease, it can be treated. Good luck with your treatment!
This is an ignorant statement.
Mental illness isn't just stress. You've obviously never been exposued to much mental illness.
Why don't you tell the patient who says to you "the demons keep telling me to hurt myself", "Hey why not take a walk, take up an instrument..."
arn
So I'm sittin' here with four of my friends that are normal. I guess that means...uh...nevermind.
Au contraire, mon frère... I'm beginning to have my doubts about slashdot. /. daily.
I started browsing while working here in France. I found it was *impossible* to create a user account (the account creation link simply didn't reply to my email). Did my IP check fail?
Then I came back stateside for a few weeks... asked to create an account, and voilà, in less than a second.
I can log in when in France (again), but I haven't seen any moderator points when I've been outside the country at all...
Add to this to the fact that the SLASH "open" source is *horribly* out of date, and I have less and less faith in
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Think of your four closest friends...
If they're fine, then it must be you.
"God does not play dice with the universe." -Albert Einstein
Those who fail to understand communication protocols, are doomed to repeat them over port 80.
Correct. I think the problem is that normal sadness/depression is too often mislabeled as a mental disorder, either by the psycs or by the people themselves. Wouldn't life be great if all we had to do when we got sad was pop a pill that made us happy? That's not the way it is. Being sad/depressed is part of a normal life and we need to learn to deal with it in a healthy way.
Certainly I'm not the only one who sees a connection between this article and this article on 'slacking' a few days ago...
I heard the Surgeon General yesterday afternoon on All Things Considered. If the researchers need any more evidence about the stigma and ignorance surrounding mental illness, they ought to read Slashdot. Look at the variety of comments we have. Mental illness is immediately equated with being crazy. There are jokes and denials. The header itself is brimming with nervous humor. We deny that mental illness does hinder and even incapacitate people by arguing that abnormality is fine. It's fine to be sad. It's fine to be shy. I agree. We have posts that portray mental illness as some new-fangled plot of our hypochondriac pharmaceutical world and about big brother's attempt to profile and control us. Those points are important. Watch Brain Candy. While I agree that we should face our problems with humor and some caution, we also need honesty, openness and seriousness.
I have struggled with low grade mental problems throughout my life. Several friends and family members have, too. In many respects, I am a highly functioning person. My studies are going well and, except for a few years, have not suffered. I have a good family. I have friends. I often feel awful. While I have casual friends, the attempt to form closer relationships has failed repeatedly and completely. I have tried to pep up magically, to exercise more, to play music and to put myself around other people. All these things did help. Counseling from trained professionals has helped much more. Medication helped dramatically.
I know people who have emotional problems that are absolutely obvious to everyone who knows them well. They often realize it themselves. Even among the ones who realize it, a significant portion will not seek help. They are embarassed. Just as with other illnesses, treatment necessitates revealing personal information, and they are scared of the vulnerability. Most people can comfortably tell a doctor that their throat hurts or that they have been vomiting; they cannot do the same about disabilitating mental experiences. Some are simply reluctant to break with tradition when so few others among their friends and family have received treatment.
We can look into the dangers of labeling people as ill and medicating them. Indeed, we ought to. Those dangers are real. Even when they are true, they do not negate the problems. As the report states, we have the resources to improve our mental lives. Treatment helps people get better. Why shouldn't we take advantage of it? The data are there. Look at them. People miss a great deal of work (and play) because they struggle with mental issues. People commit suicide. Among people who are treated, we can see better work performance, better social feeling and lower suicide rates. Some of these data rest on anecdotal evidence, but quite a few of them are measurable. We can count suicides. We can count missed work days. Abnormality is no sin. Some shy, eccentric and awkward people lead satisfying lives. Abnormality is not identical to mental illness, however. This study does not concern people who cope differently. It is about people who cope poorly, if at all, with the circumstances of their lives due to identifiable, treatable conditions. One can be abnormal without suffering averse consequences. The data do not address people who are just abnormal. They address people who suffer documented detrimental consequences of their mental conditions. Anybody who drops a front of prejudice can see that this issue is more than an invention or an exaggeration.
The problem is that Europe is following. And quickly. Now even if America stops right by the cliff, Europe's gonna bump into it from behind and we'll _all_ fall together.
koh, feeling a little mentally ill today...Or was I already in that mood yesterday ?....
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
It's not just a down feeling, it's a chemical imbalance
Your brain is a huge mass of chemical signals. To say that these are two different things, and that a pill is the way to restore a chemical balance, is impossible to prove. In a different society, people will live in a different environment and likely have some different "background" emotional state. Now do we define ourselves and our chemical balance as sane and everything outside of arbitrary limits to be "imbalanced"? And the simple fact of chemical dependency prevents pills from working alone. If your chemical balance is a product of your environment (and if it was genetic, it would probably be bad enough to cause retardation) then you will work against the effects of the drugs to restore that balance [in an unchanging environment]. A lifestyle change is essential. And even if pills are used to assist in the changing of lifestyle, withdrawal must be faced when a tenuous balance has been reached at the end of therapy.
I don't know how many manic-depressive people you know, but attitudes toward them by those close to them (in the workplace, etc) are not always caused by an attitude of "he's a wimp. He needs pills." There's an element of "if anyone else was acting like that, he'd try to stop, and he doesn't appear to be trying to stop." And the dogma that they acquire, that pills will solve their problems, can cause them (Disclaimer: them is one person) not to try very hard.
As anyone who lives in a town where prozac and other "mood stabilizers" will tell you, these medicines are quite different from aspirin. Children who take large amounts of ritlin (and I'm not simply speaking of one now) become totally inattentive. And the attitudes of parents in many places causes entire generations of towns to be drugged. My father used to work in such a town, and ritlin was an over-the-counter drug. It was sad.
I've gotta stop now. But the forces causing drugs to be popular in psychiatry are not entirely benevolen
Work together for the Common Geek Good:
Check out Project Upper/Mute, an all-around awesome compiler fra
The full version of the report is available here.
Hee hee, I always knew you Yanks were crazy ;-)
-- /. ID is lower than Bruce Perens'!
Barry de la Rosa,
public[at]bpdlr.org
My
Don't take this the wrong way, but it seems to me that the quote from the article "Many people with mental disorders ... fear discrimination because of the stigma attached to mental illness, the study found" could be justified by the Slashdot headline "Surgeon General Says 1/5 of Americans are Nuts." Now, being an insensitive clod myself, I can appreciate the headline, and I find it amusing. But, at the same time, I realize that the word "nuts" might not be the most positive word to use.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Yep, it's gone now. This article says:
This is incredibly bad. I don't know what criteria the government uses to take away the license of someone who has committed no crime, but it seems that senile dementia and alcoholism either already qualify, or very well may someday.So how about depression? Or if you're prescribed a drug that may affect your reflexes? (e.g., opiates and benzos). Manic depression maybe? Someone here was describing some dangerous driving they've done during manic episodes.
Why does alcoholism even qualify? Are alcoholics incapable of driving sober? What about other drug addicts? What about other drug users who aren't really addicts, but someone thinks they are (the drug war "all drug users are drug addicts" line). How about when your doctor does a few extra tests on your urine sample? They've already decided to throw away the doctor-patient confidentiality, it's a slippery slope after that.
The doctor not reporting your condition to anyone else (especially the government!) seems to be the most important part of the doctor-patient confidentiality.
Regarding the question of where the right middle should be, it seems logical to me to define it as follows: If some or other mental problem (whether biological or psychological) is impairing your ability to be functional and/or to be happy, and that problem cannot be solved "just by working it out for yourself", then you should probably fall into the "mentally ill" category
You've just exchanged one set of definitions for another one. What does 'happy' and 'functional' mean? They clearly do mean different things to different people. 'Functional' especially is a very vague term and highly open to abuse.
Consider this: let's say I refuse to work as a corporate drone and instead flip burgers for food and spend most of my time programming the latest and greatest game/tool/app/etc. Moreover, from the point of view of my friends and family, this behavior is irrational, bad for me, and nothing good will come out of it. Am I functional? Probably not. Would you, then, claim that I am mentally ill? and should be treated with mind-altering drugs? That sounds like a classic 1984/Brave New World scenario to me.
Besides you seem to imply that being happy is somewhat of an obligation. If you are not happy enough (again, from whose point of view?), you are mentally sick and should be treated. Even ignoring non-trivial time (what if I am unhappy for a day? for a week? for a month?) and causal (what if I am unhappy because I have cancer or AIDS?) issues, I am very uncomfortable with mandating happiness.
I also don't believe at all that only maladjusted people are capable of great works
I never said this. If you want a technical formulation of my point, here it is: historically, in the population of geniuses, the percentage of maladjusted people is much higher than in general population. It does not mean that you have to be mentally ill in order to create a masterpiece, but it means that there is a connection (which looks quite reasonable to me) between abnormal working of the mind and breakthroughs in creativity.
There is also a question of ethics involved: if it was true that eliminating mental illness would mean "no more masterpieces", does that make it OK to leave people untreated,
Again, I never even implied this. In fact my point was in favor of individual choice -- I was and am arguing, basically, for the individual's right to be unhappy and non-functional without the society forcing mind-altering drugs down his throat. If you want to take Prozac -- go ahead. But if I don't want to -- don't force me.
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
God what a load of wimps.
Deleted
...that the lack of spelling and grammar abilities was more important. If you're going to be a sandwich short of a picnic, at least you'll be able to spell it properly... ;)
The 'haze' you speak about, for me, was none existant. I was actually able to concentrate on what was going on around me instead of being overwhelmed by voices, lights, etc.
The pdoc told me that most people (~80%) can stop taking medication after 2 years and 'fully recover.' I took it for 2 years and stopped.
I would say that I've had a succesful treatment. Others I've known have had less than succesful treatment with the same drugs I've used.
It seems to me you just had an unsuccessful treatment and are bitter or you are just talking out of your ass.
"Mental health problems do not affect three or four out of every five persons, but one out of every one."
Perhaps he needs looking at, he seems to be showing signs of anxiety about Americans
It's really not my place to say things like Prozac = bad. It seems to have helped many people who couldn't seem to be helped by more traditional means.
What concerns me is the mass overperscription of these drugs. I'm worried that they will become a way for us to remove what we see as our personal flaws. It seems like only a matter of time until these drugs become available without a perscription. Until people take some prozac with their Cappucino to get by through the hum-drum of life. Pack in ritalin with the fruit rollups because most students would rather goof off than pay attention in school anyways.
I don't think there's some mass conspiracy. I just wish the people with authority would think twice before perscribing drugs to their patients. Does this person REALLY need this? Are there other solutions we haven't tried?
I have to ask - do you understand what the words "chemical imbalance" actually mean? After being a devoted slashdot reader for months, I have noticed that many people who post are so full of themselves and their opinions that they are just as judgemental and reactionary as the people they are flaming. Drugs aren't evil. Football isn't evil. Profiling isn't evil. Remember, a lot of people say the same things about computers and the people who use them. Any of the above mentioned behaviors can be detrimental when used improperly, computing included. If you want to complain about the abuses of the pharmacuetical industry, please do so. But please do not try to paint anyone who legitmately needs medication to live a normal life as the unwitting victim of an evil corporate empire. The rest of us aren't half as stupid as you think we are.
"Don't worry, this psychological profiling is only for your and the nation's good! And of course, the results will be 100% confidential..."
Pah. If our culture is experiencing such a signifcant display of mental illness, I think there's something fundamentally wrong. What can you expect from a nation whose citizens' ambitions are mostly to get stock options and be a celebrity? Anything the government could do will only be trying to cure the aftereffects, not whatever the cause is. Kick in all the broken families (Out of ten friends of mine, only four have parents still married) and I'm personally surprised the results weren't higher, at least in the depression category.
And then when the federal government starts getting interested in helping peoples' mental health - lovely in ideal, and the article seems to suggest they're only going to urge more and cheaper usual treatment which is not bad, but I'm still warey of governmental influence on such a potentially dangerous thing. Remember how the USSR used to declare dissidents mentally ill? And the CIA's MKULTRA brainwashing scandal (techniques are actually very similar to scientologist procedures) wasn't that long ago...
I don't know about the rest of you /.ers, but speaking for myself and most of my geekly friends, megalomania is our disorder of choice...
Hahaha.... Bow down before your new RULER! I wonder if Uncle Sam will help me... TAKE OVER THE WORLD
The same thing we do every night, Pinky - Try and take over the world!
I toggled a toggle and buttoned a button, but when I got done, I was done doin' nothin'.
Just to give my position, I think in this world the crazy people are the sane ones, so Stallman is A-Okay.
People do not tolerate difference well.
On the other hand, this is not what the report is talking about. The report is talking about paranoia. Schizo-effective disorders. Manic depression. Depression. Mania. Schizophrenia. OCD. ADHD. MPD. BPD. All these lovely, and VERY VERY REAL disorders that destroy an untreated person's ability to think AT ALL.
Imagine counting numbers in your head, and being unable to stop. It'll drive you nuts after a while and it's all due to a minor chemical imbalance. Very trivial to sort out. Doesn't need to affect you otherwise. The only difference is you no longer have those damn numbers there.
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorders are no fun, and have nothing to do with being different. They are often "harmless" (having to wash your hands 60 times, whilst whistling the theme to Star Trek, remembering that the soap must always be to the right of the hot water tap, and your feet are exactly 3 centimeters apart), but they are always disruptive in some way. (Any difference from the "programmed" routine will lead to the person freaking out and feeling the world is about to end. Literally.) That's not a fun way to be, and, again, has nothing to do with difference.
You're right in saying that we need to change how we think, but some behaviours exist purely in a chemical or electrical glitch in the brain. You can't train yourself around it, any more than you can fix a hard-disk crash by debugging a program.
Hardware failures call for hardware solutions. Software failures call for software solutions. If you recognise the difference, you will always do better than if you use the wrong solution for the wrong problem.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Most of us started life as babies, didn't we? Well, after reading this , it's no wonder so many of us are crazy. It's a wonder any of us survived to adult-hood, considering how badly we all started off.
;-P
I object somewhat to the terms you use to describe mentally ill people. I'm not asking for "political correctness" but rather for a more positive attitude.
..
There are plenty of mentally ill people around you (that you call "nuts") and most of you don't even realise it - most people keep it secret, for fear of the stigma, for fear of being called "nuts", for fear of having people assume that you're disfunctional and so on.
It is very probable that many of you have direct family members or friends that are mentally ill and you don't know it. The people you work/go to school with may be mentally ill and you don't know it. I know women who kept secret from their husbands for decades the fact that they had clinical depression, and children who have grown up with depression and not once in their lives did their parents even realise it. Your parents, your boy/girlfriends, your siblings etc may be mentally ill and you don't even know it - so consider carefully your notions of what it means to be mentally ill - these aren't people who "are cuckoos" and "belong in a padded cell". Mentally ill does not imply that you are "nuts".
Untreated depression is the number 1 cause of suicide, and in the US suicide suicide is the 3rd leading cause of death, and is well on its way to becoming the 2nd by 2020. We should learn how to deal with mentally ill people in order to save lives and alleviate suffering, in exactly the same way that you learn how to do CPR, the heimlich manouvre etc etc at school. Since mental illness claims far more lives than drowning or choking, I don't understand why society is failing to make this a higher priority.
Just my rant for the day
You are absolutely correct with respect to chemical depression and other biochemical disorders. I know people who suffer similarly and are helped through medication.
However, the poster you flamed is also correct. We are resorting to chemical solutions for nearly all of our problems, in no small part because pharmeceutical companies are creating and expanding markets for their products. As another poster commented, calling every minor deviation from an unattainable "norm" a sign of mental illness is an insult to those who truly are mentally ill and require help. Worse, it obfuscates the entire issue and ruins any chance at attaining a coherent public policy to effectively help those who need it.
I find it absolutely chilling, though unsurprising, that another poster mentioned a friend of his who is a pharmacist and whos business strategy is to "keep people a little sick as long as possible" to milk their prescription dollars. Make no mistake about it, pharmaceutical companies are doing the same thing on a much, much grander scale. Yes, they make medicine which help us. But at the same time, they patent folk-lore cures which have been in use for thousands of years, then price the product out of reach for many who need it. How long before the patent a really effective cure for, say, cancer, then bury it to maintain their profit margins on their other cancer treatments? (Perhaps AIDS would be a better hypothetical scenerio, but the point remains). On the one hand they help us, while on the other they abuse and even sometimes destroy us. I do not find it the least bit inappropriate to condemn them when they behave in the latter manner, and to call attention to their behavior when it is inappropriate. Which IMHO labelling anyone with minor issues as mentally ill is.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
This has nothing to do with profiling.
This is a problem that needs more attention. And it's good to see the US government putting more effort into helping people. Yes, helping people who need help.
Ever hear of the doctor-patient confidentiality thing?
I've known many people with various mental disorders. I, myself, have gone through tough times and managed to find help, thanks to those I know who have been through the same things. I am now a very happy and satisfied person. The problem is that many people do not get the help they need and end up killing themselves.
That's what sad.
All Things Considered
It's gotta be more than that...
- -Josh Turiel
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
They have helped me and a lot of other people. You can't make a good judgement on weather a treatment works on a sample size of 1. Yes there are bad mental health providers. Yes some people have been on the wrong drugs. And it took my doctor a few time to find the right thing for me to be taking before we hit the right drug.
You're right, a sample size of one is nothing.
However, the first indictations coming out of research centers everywhere are saying that these medications are NOT improving the majority of their patients lives.
I have known a few people who took stuff like this. I'm sorry, but everyone I've ever seen take some form of mental health drug (about 4 people total) just got more fucked up in the head the more they took whatever drug it happened to be that week...
4 out of 4 is still nothing in terms of sample size, but it's on a bit more personal level for me anyway.
---
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
When I read something like this, I immediately forget all of those Nathalie Portman and grits down the pants lame posts.
The AC must not die.
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
Following is a brief article on the nature of modern cognitive/cognitive-behavioral therapy I wrote up for a lay audience. Note the lack of intolerance, snap diagnoses of "nuttiness," profiling, or indiscriminate prescriptions of antipsychotics. Perhaps this very limited look at a few small facets of modern psychology will help clear up some of the misconceptions and prejudices regarding the field.
Note that I am currently in the last year of an undergraduate education in psychology. I am far from an authority or spokesperson in this field.
One of the most important issues that must be tackled in cognitive therapy is the tendency of people to evaluate their automatic thoughts at the same level as sensory data. Since some thoughts and feelings come about quickly and without deliberation in response to a given stimulus, our natural tendency is to see them as intrinsic to the world or to our selves. This is one cause of the persistence of maladaptive behaviors, as the subject does not believe that any other response is possible (at least without violating their essential personality).
Take, for example, a subject who becomes angry upon breaking hir diet. It may seem to hir that this is what makes hir become angry. However, Cognitive Therapy (CT) holds that the anger actually proceeds out of high-speed, transparent thoughts like "this means I'm stupid and have no willpower" or "now I'll have to give up on my Ph.D. and join the circus. What a waste!" If the goal of therapy is to reduce inappropriate anger, then the initial place to intervene is not the behavior, but the evaluation.
I am interested in the application of this theory to emotional states, not just reactions. It seems to me that a close parallel can be drawn to the way in which people interpret daily and essentially meaningless fluctuations in their attitudes as much more significant than they really are. For no reason at all (or, shall we say, due to a transient chemical imbalance due to a minor infection or a bee sting or an extraterrestrial anal probe), a person might wake up one morning feeling unusually irritable. This could lead to pointless squabbles, inconsiderate behavior, and a snowballing host of minor nastiness which will lead to a much greater depression in mood than was necessary. Or they might decide that they must be angry about something, leading to their placing a lasting misinterpretation on a formerly neutral element of their life.
But the other option is for them to conclude that they're experiencing a temporary change in affect, and if they ride it out things will no longer seem as they do. This is the natural response to exogenous difficulties. If you got up one morning and found that your usual bus stop had changed to another route, you'd find a way to get where you were going despite the inconvenience. But to be angry just because you feel kinda angry is like getting on the bus even though it's now going to Katmandu, because that's what I do in the morning
Of course, persistent unexplained emotions may be a sign of something deeper, which does require attention. This model merely recommends that the long-term trends carry weight, not the day-to-day wackiness.
I hope that as biochemistry's role in consciousness becomes more accepted, ideas like this will seep into the collective definition of self, or that perhaps we will adopt a distinction between the essential self and the contingent one - that is, between the broad ideas and styles that persist over time, as opposed to day-to-day changes in response to circumstances up to and including quantum phenomena. There may even be a neurological basis for this. Although the brain is structurally differentiated into hundreds of distinct modules, on a cellular level its work is done through connections, and its communication is probabilistic in nature. That is, losing any number of cells will weaken the possibility that a strongly-potentiated pathway will be able to activate, but it's never really removed (unless a whole area is summarily lesioned). Oliver Sacks writes about profoundly disabled Parkinsonian patients who would occasionally awaken from a near-coma to temporarily display the same integrity of intellect, emotion, and character they had before their brains started to dissolve.
Ns of 1 are like demons. . . they can be used to win great fame and fortune, but the psychologist who treats them carelessly will end up being dragged down to Hell
My point is that I hope to see people gradually give up the idea that their emotions are to be given supreme confidence. This goes for both momentary fluctuations and for persistent but senseless reactions (for example, that rack of sunglasses at the University Co-op that makes me feel scared and threatened). A common objection is that this would lead to a loss of humanity, of people being treated like computers / rats / tabulae rasa who can be molded as The Man sees fit. But if we put the tools in the hands of the subject, wouldn't the result be more individuality? Right now we tend to cherish even senseless impulses, because they seem to come from the same place as our valued beliefs and complex thoughts. What if we chose to take control of them, in the same way that we accept that obesity, high blood pressure, and skanky hair can (to a great extent) be changed rather than changing us?
I suppose all psychotherapy has this premise somewhere inside it. After all, the very idea that there is a "person" with a "problem" implies a division between the individual and certain of hir mental phenomena. Different schools, however, make widely differing assumptions about just where the division cuts. They rarely seem to articulate this, and I'm beginning to think it may be a significant source of their disagreements. Psychodynamic therapies in general (Freud, Jung, Erickson) seem to have a fairly robust role definition for the healthy individual, and consequently see a great deal of the subject as garbage to be shoveled away. Cognitive/behavioral theory leaves the individual and the therapist great discretion in deciding which habits to break and which to leave, and also avoids the issue of whether elements of the latter set are intrinsic nuances of the self, habits that happen to be useful, or "problems" that have just escaped the axe for now. At the other extreme, humanist therapy (Rogers, Maslow) takes a deliberately hands-off approach, working to establish a daoistic flow in which the personality can resolve itself and foreign elements will naturally sift through. Much seems to depend on whether humanity's intrinsic self-programming is seen as being broadly useful but often inappropriate, undifferentiated and requiring educated application, or universally healthy but misdirected by pathological environments.
Interestingly, there is one theory which entwines the idea of emotional lability and the question of what is essential to the self, although they are somewhat encrypted. The interpersonal psychology of Tim Leary (and later psychologists) directly suggests that people adopt a wide range of personalities and attitudes, depending on the situation. In order to get a handle on an aggressive subject, the therapist should actually become dominant and aggressive, forcing them to experience submission. To reach a severely insecure or spiteful subject, the therapist should express love and consideration (he wrote extensively on whether to expect similar or opposite responses from various behaviors). The concept of health which emerges from this is of an individual with a stable core, such that seemingly inconsistent personalities can be put on as the situation dictates.
I see this as the next natural step after acknowledging that sometimes traits and emotions can be taken off.
- laborit
-----
Go ahead, blame me... I voted for Nader!
if you don't trust them, how can they help you?
*elevator music plays*
Now lets settle down. Much of Americas history is European. That is changing now with more African American and Latino presence. We came here and shook off much of the cultural/historic bagage to form a more person centric country. Getting rid of things like indentured servitude, control by the landed aristocracy. The slavery thing we did not invent, as a British colony we had the system setup up for us. We fought a war to abolish slavery, my people died in the tens of thousands for that and to keep the country together. Only recently has the fuller benefit of that reached to the people it was supose to help. Its good you mentioned civil war and slavery in the same breath. But one was the beginning of the solution for the other.
Now lets settle down. Much of Americas history is European. That is changing now with more African American and Latino presence. We came here and shook off much of the cultural/historic bagage to form a more person centric country. Getting rid of things like indentured servitude, control by the landed aristocracy. The slavery thing we did not invent, as a British colony we had the system setup up for us. We fought a war to abolish slavery, my people died in the tens of thousands for that and to keep the country together. Only recently has the fuller benefit of that reached to the people it was supose to help.
Its good you mentioned civil war and slavery in the same breath. But one was the beginning of the solution for the other.
I would have to say that a third of the Americans I have met so far are totally fucking crazy.
There was the lawyer turned university professor that couldn't keep a promise to save his life. He'd stiff people after borrowing several hundred dollars from them, he'd lie to his students, his friends and everyone else, he'd try and get every goddamn penny he could out of everyone around him, and then when people turned on him, he'd say that they were only jealous of his success. Last I heard, even his mother had told him that he needed help.
Then there was the guy who was staying at my friend's place (sleeping on the floor) - he was totally fucked up. He'd drink from morning to night, he stole money from one of his many employers and then buried it somewhere and forget where, he got hitched up with a girlfriend who was totally out of her head on amphetamines, he'd try and borrow money from everyone and then get angry when asked to pay it back, he insisted that his father had molested him and his sister and beaten his mother but then went back to live with them again...
Only 20 % of all Americans are nuts I find that hard to belive when companies spend millions daily selling Prozac/Zoloft,just tune in USA network there always advertising mood altering drugs. For whats it worth heres my 2 cents I think Drug manufactures are drumming up there own bussiness. Convince everyone there nuts and your profits will soar.I have not looked at DSM IV but I would bet the drug companies wrote it
bonehead, I think you understood the gist of my post but misinterpretted the details and slammed me on them. Certainly clinical depression is real and I didn't mean to imply that it is not. I am just aggravated at the trend in society these days to blame things that go wrong in our lives on anyone but ourselves, and I think there is some of that here too. Though as someone else insightfully pointed out in this thread, that is really only half the problem, at least in this arena.
I get uninformed, poorly written pieces with ripped-off headlines ... then I get insulted, get called "nuts". Got a back problem? You fucking cripple. You gimp. How do you like the insults now?
Asshole.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
On of the big points the report tries to make is that many people won't seek help because of the negative stigma associated with mental illness. How does /. report on this? By calling people "nuts".
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
To me, it seems quite obvious that the U.S. government should not step into the psychological field.
I only listed what the large expenses would reasonably be if and when the government took over the field. You said a strange statement:
"Treating the mentally ill actually saves money; we lose massive amounts of economic productivity through illnesses like alcoholism, like depression or anxiety. "
I was myself treated for depression, and it may or may not have helped, but it was expensive. It was EXACTLY the cost of the first two figures (of course I counted what the insurance itself paid, not my deductable.) I merely think the insurance and HMO methods America has are better than government intervention taking over the system.
Alcoholism is a strange psychological disease, if it is one at all. What the hell would psychologists perscribe for this anyway? A pseudo-religious 12-step program, a drug, therapy?
Finally, anxiety, which I do not know the costs for (but I know it can be treated with therapy and wellbutrin, exactly like depression). Do you know the costs? How much are you willing to pay in taxes for this wierd government psychological program??
If we pay government psychs less than the current professionals, what service do you expect? If we pay them the same, what will happen to the costs as people start demanding treatment for stress?(which affects, roughly, 100% of the population at some time.)
You claim my figures are off (giving nothing to back that up), and then sound off about how it would be much better under a government system. Sounds to me like you've put in too little thought now, and we will all put in too much money later.
-Ben
Stay inside. 20% of the population is crazy.
Sig goes here
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And, how did you like it?
"Less than 5% of the population is normal. Or are they the exception?"
With a few friends, I recently had a long discussion on a similar subject...
Basically, it seems that "normal people" do not exist. People usually say that "normal is what everybody's doing".
But when you look around, you'll see that what we call "normal behaviour" - being polite to each other, helpful, friendly, healthy etc. etc. - is not actually "normal", but only what we desire to be normal. It is an ideal.
The things that actually are normal let's me have a rather grim view on our society.
"Unnormal" is much more common than we think. In fact, it is the norm. It is normal...
------------------
------------------
You may like my a cappella music
Didn't we used to sneer at the USSR under communism for declaring anyone who vocally disagreed with official policy as mentally ill? Or is that memory merely a paranoid delusion?
Is it wrong to believe that most people can deal with their own affairs?
Catch 22v2.0: Belief in one's own sanity is a symptom of mental illness.
-- TWZ
The more research is put into "discovering" more physical or psychical disorders the more will be found, thus enlarging the amount of people that ar sick, anormal or plain mad, while the leftover amount of healthy, normal, sane people is getting smaller. Strange feeling being the only one normal left over in a crazy world, huh? This is how science can make a society sicker in one sense which is btw. totally contradictory to the increasing life expectancy we can measure. I think the only thing we can learn from this, and this could be good news, is that
It is anormal to be normal and normal to be anormal (In the statistical sense of averaging in every repect).
So better start coping with the ones being different than ourselves instead of condeming them. And maybe even realize that most of this worlds population would judge your "normal" behaviour as highly suspect, maybe even mad.
Mental illness doesn't equal sad. It _is_ normal to be "sad".... but major depression is something different. You can't eat, can't sleep, no energy, get suicidal, lose interest in activities, etc... There are chemical imbalances that can be corrected with the right medication. There is too much of a stigma against mental illess. If you have high blood pressure, you take anti-hypertensives. If you have major depression, you should take anti-depressants. arn
You have a family history of clincal depression
and decided to have children anyway? Why? If you
really do believe your condition is genetic rather
than environmental, wtf are you doing producing
kids that'll also be predisposed to such problems?
Do you want them to have to take prozac so they
can move and speak? You might have the ability
and right to reproduce like anybody else, but it's
a cruel thing to do.
OK, I've been told off for being a naughty first-poster. Let's try again.
Suicide and mental disorders, of course, go hand-in-hand. I read with interest an article in an Australian national newspaper last weekend which pointed out that the highest rate of suicide is amongst males aged 24-40 (I think).
The highest risk group were men with children who had recently separated.
The point of the article is that most attention is being given to 'youth suicide' whereas more attention should be paid to the older men.
But it's politically unfashionable because it touches on the areas of child support, maintenance payments, deadbeat dads, suspect custodianship decisions, rabid feminism and wife-bashing.
I was pretty pissed off by it. If anyone took my kids away I'd go postal.
> First off, I'd argue that YHWH is the Christian
;) )
> Trinity, but that's a theological discussion for
> offline... =)
Well as a side note for your offline discussion
remember...thats the same case that Islam makes.
So Allah, YHWH, and the Christian God are all
the same (according to the Koran which IS
afterall by tradition the Word of God Himself
as given to Muhammed by the Angel Gabriel
directly)
> There's a really simple way to figure out which
> God. A person takes everything that would be a
> requirement/necessity for an entity to be God.
> For example: eternal, outside of space/time,
> sovereign over everything, omnipotent,
> omniscient, etc.
Whao...thats quite a bit of inital assumptions.
So why exactly does there have to be a God?
Personally, I look around me, and I see no need
to believe that everything around me was
created by some deity. Just because current the
current body of scientific knowledge can not
describe the workings of the entire universe (and
quite possibly never will) simply is a testiment
to how complex things are, that does not
necissarily mean it was created by some God.
If YOU feel the need to believe in God, go ahead.
You have every right to believe in whatever
God you chose. However, I wholly reject the idea
that "Any intellectually honest person would have
to conclude that the Christian God is the one and
only God"
That sir, is intellectually dishonest, narrow
minded thinking.
As quoted in the Principa Discordia (ie its a good
quote but given the source, I take it with a
grain of salt
"The opposite of a simple truth is plainly false.
The opposite of a great truth is also true"
-- Neils Bohr
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
I do believe there *is* such a thing as mental illness, but I think 22% is rather high. Asocial behavior is one thing that many psychologists and psychiatrists would point to as a symptom of a possible mental "illness". Many slashdot readers might even appear to exhibit this symptom (I know I do). However, I consider it a very healthy, natural response to a lot of the external pressures that a lot of us face. In fact I consider a lot of people who are supposedly mentally healthy to be mentally ill. This is not to argue religion, but in my mind (I'm agnostic) I find people with strong religious beliefs to be a little mentally ill. I find people who believe in war to be a little mentally ill. Those two categories overlap quite a bit and where they do, I think you have a serious likelyhood of "mental illness". These are just opinions, but thats the point. My opinions are not widely held, therefore, my mind doesn't work like normal, therefore, I am mentally ill. An educated psychologist has the respect granted to those who complete such an education by those who have had their thinking trained to be more "mainstream". So this whole group defines mental health by "majority rule" - "the norm", which is perfectly understandable and arguably correct. After thinking about this some more, maybe 22% is too low. If not, I'd rather be mentally ill...
Yeah. That's life. But I do think it used to be better, back then when medias and society in general weren't making a majority of people become dumb, superficial lamers.
Just curious, why do you think life used to better way back then? I really doubt there was ever a golden age. Certainly our own age has its unique problems, but people have been saying how shitty the world is since (at least) the beginning of recorded history :)
I think the concern is that children are being drugged just for acting like normal children. Sitting still for 8 hours a day is something people have only been doing recently. It's no surprise that children fidget. School is boring, so they're going to be easily distracted and be inattentive. The symtoms of ADD are very similar to being a normal child. There's a real disorder there, but I don't think everyone prescribed Ritalin has it.
Go take some methylphenidate, or another decent stimulant (certainly not caffeine, which just plain sucks). You'll be able to concentrate better too. It's not like it's just the cure for a disease, it will have the same affect on anyone.
with a really really bad mental disorder.
It's called Slashdot Addiction Disorder. I think a few people I know have it too...
You should never take life too seriously - You'll never get out of it alive.
Please someone define 'mental disorder'.
This again looks like sonething on the line 'it's out of the ordinary, lets fix it.' Just that someone behaves or thinks differently does not mean that he has to drugged into 'normality'. We are talking about humans, not some kind of machine that has to behave and act in an predictable an orderly fashion.
Well I think there are 2 possible scenarios (assuming that indeed 1/5 of the population are afflicted with a 'mental disorder')
1) This is just normal and the definition is wrong. In that case throwing any kind of drugs at it is just plain wrong, see above.
2) This is indeed a _symptom_ that someting is wrong. In that case it would be far more effective to try to find the roots instead of trying to cure cancer with painkillers.
In any case using chemicals to 'correct' the psyche is like brain surgery with a sledgehammer. Of course this whole thing would be another nice reason for profiling as many subjects as possible just to weed out the unhappy and correct them, preferably by a computer without humand intervention, because humans could be nuts.
The Computer is your friend.
Ciao, Peter (Paranoid)
exactly. I've been on Zoloft for nearly a year now, and it's amazing what the difference is. Before I was on Zoloft, there were times when I sat down and cried because I'd run out of socks and I simply felt overwhelmed by my laundry. That's not normal.
Now, I know I can live without zoloft; I did it for about, oh, eight years or so. But I have to expend a hell of a lot of emotional energy simply forcing myself to function like other people. I view my drug as the emotional equivalent of my glasses; it puts everything back in perspective.
On a more general note, I'm a psych major by training (now learning to be a better geek, thank you very much), so this is kind of my area. I know that overmedicating and misdiagnosing is a major concern for a lot of shrinks (the good ones who want to help you, not drug you into submission). It's much more efficient and less frustrating for them when they can get it right the first time. They don't want to be mistreating people: that way lies malpractice suits. And, in regard to the charges of misdiagnosing and overmedicating, remember psychology as a hard science is still in its early development. Psychiatrists and psychologists haven't even managed to agree on a Unified Theory for the causality of mental disorders, so it's no surprise that the treatment methodologies are scattershot. Finally, we don't know what the long-term effects are because the people who're being treated haven't gotten to the long term yet.
IMHO, what psychology needs to do is work forward to a Unified Field Theory for causality and treatment, and then somehow manage to educate the general public. People with mental disorders are, nevertheless, people, and deserving of treatment. Unfortunately, the tools with which they're treated are still getting refined, and a lot of them probably aren't getting the help they need, in the form best suited for them. But nothing is more likely to make them more reluctant look for what help they *can* receive than being classified as nuts or psychotic. Don't suppose we could change the headline for this article?
Everstar
It also wouldn't suprise me if the rest of the world was close to this percentage as well.
Cyberpunks.org. Who is watching the watchers?
Regarding the question of where the right middle should be, it seems logical to me to define it as follows: If some or other mental problem (whether biological or psychological) is impairing your ability to be functional and/or to be happy, and that problem cannot be solved "just by working it out for yourself", then you should probably fall into the "mentally ill" category.
Essentially, I think it should come down to a persons ability to be (a) happy and (b) functional. If too much re-absorbtion of the neurotransmitter serotonin is physically and biologically preventing a person from being happy or from functioning in society, then they need some external help, and qualify as mentally ill. Similarly, if a person has an inability to form healthy relationships because of deep psychological problems from severe abuse in early childhood, and this is preventing them from being happy or from functioning, then they should qualify.
I don't believe that the "where is the middle" is a difficult question at all.
I also don't believe at all that only maladjusted people are capable of great works. I believe the opposite to be true - that if we elminated mental illness completely today, then far more many "great works" would arise from people. In almost every case of untreated severe mental illness, the person is incapable of producing anything. Van Gogh, for example, was unable to paint at all during his "episodes", it was only between his episodes that he produced all his works. There is no evidence AT ALL to suggest that non-mentally ill people are incapable of producing great works, and I'm sure that many great people were/are *not* mentally ill.
There is also a question of ethics involved: if it was true that eliminating mental illness would mean "no more masterpieces", does that make it OK to leave people untreated, inflicting an incredible amount of pain and suffering on them, just so that society can have "a few masterpieces" that are anyway seldom truly appreciated by the masses? I don't think so. Our priorities should lie with eliminating suffering, even if that meant no more masterpieces. The suffering is not worth it.
sorry - I couldn't resist :)
There seems to be an opinion floating around here that mental illness simply doesn't 'truly' exist. That most depression is just a 'down' feeling, and that other disorders such as bipolar disorder could be cured by a lifestyle change.
/. admins before, and I agree that political correctness is mostly a bunch of baloney, but the title truly is very inappropriate. Just a thought for consideration
Ladies and gentleman, I hate to tell you this, but mental illness is real. Depression isn't a 'slightly draggy feeling' that you can just shake yourself out of. It's a chemical imbalance. Yes, there are things one can do to help from diet and exercise to therapy, but sometimes all that isn't enough. In those cases you have people who have been given a new chance for life due to drugs.
One poster commented 'It's a way for people to not have to take responsibility for their actions'. This is simply not true. While a few bad apples may abuse the system in this manner, it's the exception not the rule. Mental illness is hard to understand because it doesn't have physical signs that are easily understandable like migraine headaches, arthritis or heartburn. It's easy to get at some grasp of what it must be like to get heartburn. It's far harder to understand what it's like to be truly manic.
Another poster commented 'all solutions cannot be found in a pill'. I agree with you 100%. But I would also argue that sometimes pills help. If somebody has a back injury, we don't get upset that they use pain relievers, yet there is an attitude of intolerance for somebody who is manic depressive to use mood stabilizers. Some people feel that they should be able to 'just control themselves' and stop random switches between mania and depression. These people also probably don't realize the statistics for how dangerous these disorders are. I agree there is a problem with overmedication today, but medication itself is far from unneccessary.
A sidenote to Roblimo. I've never criticized
I apologize if I came down on you to hard. I couldn't agree with you more about the tendency of our society to blame anything and everything on external problems.
My point was that it's just as dangerous to pretend that none of these external problems exist at all. They do exist, and should be dealt with. They just shouldn't be used as excuses.
I also don't think that clinical depression is a valid scapegoat. Ultimately, each person is responsible for their own actions. If a person has a problem for which treatment is available yet chooses not to get that treatment, then they are responsible for that decision and the resulting consequences. I'm certainly not advocating the use of any of these issues as an excuse for anything. But to say Wouldn't life be great if all we had to do when we got sad was pop a pill that made us happy? trivializes the problem. Anti-depressants don't make you happy, they simply make happiness possible. You can still be quite sad on anti-depressants.
So, I can sympathize with your agravation at the "Not My Fault" complex that's pervading our society. I would just encourage you not to allow that aggravation to swing your opinions too far in the other direction.
Why is it, that whenever people don't conform to an artificial, and usually unattainable, norm, they're considered ill or defective?
Someone who prefers to be a loner or not socially active. Someone who prefers computers to physical sports. Someone who'd rather read a book than go freeze at a football game. People with ideas and ideals that aren't "mainstream".
Similarly, we're medicating our children nowadays to make them conform. A child has trouble learning in school. But it's not the fault of the teachers or their teaching method. Do we change the way we teach that child? Vary from the cookie-cutter educational approach? No, it's Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder. GIVE 'EM DRUGS!
A kid has some sort of emotional trauma. Do we work through it? Do we help the child out? No, it's a MENTAL PROBLEM. GIVE 'EM DRUGS!
Nowadays, CHILDREN are getting pregnant in high school. Do we try to reinforce the values of abstinance? Teach safe sex? Alert them to the potential health risks and other consequences? Nope! They need The Morning After Pill! GIVE 'EM DRUGS!
Does anyone else see the problem with this? All soloutions cannot be found in a pill. Better living through pharmacology is a MYTH. We don't need to change how we ACT. We need to change how we THINK
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Regards,
Grin-Duck-And-Run-Nuary
P.S. Only 22%? Then you are more sane than the rest of the world...
I find it quite sad that our government finds it necessary to place us in catagories such as this. First, they found that by their standards the majority of the country was overweight or obese. Now they've decided that a good percentage of us have diagnosible mental or personality disorders.
Can't we just be ourselves without being considered "fat" or "crazy"? Don't people have enough problems getting along in the world without being given yet ANOTHER reason or excuse to not function properly in society? Now, I'm not a conformist but for some people the need to belong is overwhelming and when they fall short of that, they look for excuses to make up for other shortcomings. I can see it now.... more people saying, "Oh, they don't like me because I'm fat." or "Sorry I'm so crabby. It's my undiagnosed personality disorder." I'm sorry, but why can't we, as humans, learn to accept responsibility for our own actions without needing scapegoats?
-- Shadowcat
kageneko@kageneko.net
"I can roleplay. I can frag. I can PK while you lag."
If this report said "One Fifth of all Americans are in Danger of dying from an easily curable skin disease" would the title of the story have been the same?
Not only does this story title help reinforce the sterotype that mentally ill people are somehow different to other ill people, it makes me wonder if the (mainly) American trait of extreme parainoa (sp?) maybe somehow linked to the increase in mentally ill people.
Now, I am in no way qualified to pretend to be informed about this (apart from occasionally suffering from extreme depression), but I do know that some mentally ill people create "worlds of their own", and they need to be treated by being shown reality.
If a mentally ill person, who thought that people were following him/her read that story (and a lot of the other ones on Slashdot), what would they think?
Doesn't a great deal of the "alternative" press contribute to this problem?
(That' not supposed to be a Troll, BTW)
... only 20% of Americans are crazy?!?!
Regards, Ralph.
"A world without Van Gogh and Van Morrison would be a much sadder place for "the rest of us" to live in"
So millions of people should endure incredible amounts of pain and suffering just so that a miniscule percentage of those people can produce some nice paintings and some cool songs for us? What an incredibly selfish attitude. Our priorities should lie with eliminating suffering, even if it means a few less paintings and a couple less songs.
Anyway, there is no evidence to suggest that there would be no more "great artists" if we eliminated mental illness. For all we know there might be more of them, since many people with untreated mental illnesses aren't capable of producing anything during their episodes. Van Gogh was one of them - he was incapable of painting while he was having his episodes.
GetFriends(Friend 1, Friend 2, Friend 3, Friend 4);
if (Friend 1 = normal) && (Friend 2 = normal) && (Friend 3 = normal) && (Friend 4 = normal)
then
You're nuts. 8-)
== SiKnight
the Jerry Springer show, you shouldn't be too surprised by the result. The "guests" in that show are actually not the "nuts"; the real ones are in the audience, chanting "Jerry Jerry Jerry" and watching people fight. I don't understand. They should be spending their time doing more worthwhile things, like trying to understand Circuit-SAT, reduction from 3-CNF-SAT to Independant Set Problem, or... okay, maybe not. I guess everyone has diagnosable mental illness the night before finals.
Feeling sad because your life sucks is normal. Clinical depression is something entirely different. Imagine feeling sad even though everything in your life is great, feeling sad even while engaging in activities you normally enjoy. That's not normal. You don't always have to be cheerful and happy, but when you lose the ability to be cheerful and happy even when you should be, you need help.
The word "depression" when used in a clinical sense doesn't have the meaning as the common usage. It's typically caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, and medication can be amazingly effective. I've seen several close friends' lives improve dramatically after just a few short weeks on the right medication.
I'm as willing as anyone to admit that our society looks to medication as a solution far, far too often. Yet there are times when it is the simplest and most effective option.
The fact is that the accurate measurement of this information is only now becoming possible and it's entirely possible that this estimate, around 22%, may be undershooting the true prevalence of mental illness in its myriad forms today.
Really, if you look at the little data that was available on this 30 years ago (before Prozac or any major psychoactive drugs --besides antipsychotic medications --hit the market) you'll find that most researchers were estimating.. guess what? Around 20% lifetime prevalence of mental disorders.
This article and the Surgeon General's announcement is nothing at all new. And here on /. all it seems to have done is provoke flamebait from those who have little knowledge of the subject.
I believe my children deserve the right to exist even if their lives won't be perfect or pain-free. I hope my children never have depression (not all of my relatives do): but if they do, I don't think that renders their lives worthless. I am a freestanding and productive member of society, as are most mentally ill people. I love my children and have done everything I can to be a good parent. All three are intelligent, caring and gifted people. They may carry the same genetic load I do, but it is a load for a TREATABLE illness that can be lived with. I suggest you read Kay Jamison's book "Touched by fire" about potential connections between creativity (good genes!) and bipolar disease (bad genes!). I wish people who feel so superior to the mentally ill would make up their &^(*^&^ minds. We get dumped on for our despair: but when we refuse to let our illness crush us, we get dumped on for being "cruel". Anyway: for all you know, you may be carrying a recessive gene for something that could manifest itself if you reproduce with the "wrong" partner. My genetic load is more obvious than some, but reproduction has a huge stochastic element for EVERYBODY.
To a great extent, this is a civil rights issue. A case can certainly be made that it is too difficult now to involuntarily commit someone. But it's certainly true that it used to be far too easy to toss someone into an insane asylum for the rest of their lives, with very little oversight or recourse.
There are several notorious cases, where heirs had a rich, harmless eccentric relative committed so as to get their hands on the inheritance. There's also the case of a reporter who decided to do a story on this, and checked into a mental hospital with some vague complaints of "voices". He behaved entirely normally from then on. Not one psychiatrist recognized that he was sane, though most of the other inmates did.
Then when he decided he had enough material for his story, he damn near couldn't get out.
How easy should it be to indefinitely commit someone to a mental hospital aginst their will?
"Clinical Depression? Some people just can't bring themselves to feel good. Its a facet of their PERSONALITY, not a disease."
I don't think clinicaldepression is the lack of feeling good, it's feeling like shit all the time.
I'm not gonna go "Depression is real man, after my dog died I was so depressed!" Real, clinical depression is the result of early events, which can be sorted out eventually through a lot of work but -
"Depression, and cram Prozac down *your* throat, it's simple false advertising"
I'm inclined to agree with this, and I'm sad to say it.
Instead of helping people realize what problems they have and working them out, they give them drugs. That's not how it used to be. A shrink would talk to you, now he/she will just give you prozac and call it an hour.
I've been involved in hospitals and (legal) drugs my whole life because of the jobs my parents had (working at hospitals), and they ALWAYS go for the easiest solution, because they're human.
Scary, isn't it?
Dan
Excellent points.
And, in regard to the charges of misdiagnosing and overmedicating, remember psychology as a hard science is still in its early development.
I think another factor here is that there really isn't a quick and easy way to test the seratonin levels in the brain. Unfortunately, this means that the only way to really know if meds will help is to give them a try and see what happens. I think this might be a big cause of the overmedication accusations.
It's certainly not the most elegant method of treatment, but in the absence of a superior solution, it still beats leaving these conditions untreated.
FLAMEBAIT This is just big government trying to get bigger. Quit eating white sugar, quit smoking crack, and leave us alone! /FLAMEBAIT
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most.
Although I would dissagree with the diagnosis I am not surprised at the findings. During my time in the US I found the people far to wrapped up in the material world and lacking in their love of nature and the true appreaciation of life. It is a beautiful country but most people seem to have more interest in the theme park side of life. The crowds of Disneyland compared to walking in the San Gabriel mountains on my own. In fact just walking seemed to be a lost art there.
My point being that so many have lost their souls chasing the dollar that they appear mad. They cannot see it because they think that chasing the dollar is the only true path. They honestly believe that the US is the richest country in the world because money is the thing that they value, and therefore they judge the counties success by its bank roll. They have lost sight of the real wealth that they own, outside the cities and within themselves.
Even those that seek a different path end up joining some stupid church that wants to measure its successs by its bank balance rather than by the happiness it can bring to others.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
I love reading the amateur Psychiatrists on slashdot.
There are those that believe that holistic medicine cures all.
There are those that believe that mental disorders don't exist, and are just "invented" by psychiatrists.
There are those that think mental disorders can be cured with good all fashioned tough love.
There are those that think all mental disorders can be cured by drugs.
There are those that think that all psychiatrists do is prescribe drugs for mental disorders.
The fact is we do not know everything about mental disorders, since we don't know that much about the brain. And anybody who says that there is a cureall solution for all mental disorders, is lying, wrong, or being overly simplistic.
I do believe that 22% of people suffer from mental disorders at one time in their life. This does not mean they all have to take drugs, meditate, or whatever to get better. Hell, I have no idea how to help those 22% percent, I am not a Psychiatrist, and I will try to be one to help someone with a disorder. The best I can do is give them support and try to help them find some help. Of course that does not necessarily that help is a psychriatrist, since they don't have all the answers either.
Ok I will stop now.
You've got to be kidding. Really now... we elected Reagan AND Bush
The only thing I can really say that could be helpful is - Use Common Sense! Even when down, depressed and vulnerable, you'll still have a good idea who to trust and who not to, if you let yourself.
The same is true of chemical or electrical problems. There -are- a few doctors out there who will delight in overdosing you on wholly inappropriate medication so they can stuff you in a hospital. But even the most clinically depressed and suicidal person on the planet can tell the difference between someone like that, and a caring, considerate, thoughtful doctor who makes the effort to prescribe something helpful.
(The usual way to tell is to speak up when something doesn't work for you. If the doctor listens, and tries something else, they're probably someone you can work with. If they tell you to shut up and keep taking the pills, chances are -they- need to be in the looney bin, and that if you keep listening to them, you'll end up there yourself, through no fault of your own.)
Last, but not least, DON'T trust professionals to keep confidence. They'll often share information, especially if it's stuff they're not familiar with. Confidentiality agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on, and there's nothing you can do about it, either.
On the other hand, if you see a mental health professional who -IS- professional, and -IS- genuinely supportive, intelligent and competent, the chances are they -can- be trusted, at least to a degree. Just never share more than you have to, for them to be able to help.
(Though don't go the opposite way, and make them guess. Psych drugs have some interesting side effects, such as liver damage, brain damage, and/or death. Keeping guessing to a minimum is often a good idea.)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Reading responses like this illustrate exactly
why mental illness is such a problem
Would anyone argue if I said that 1 out of 5
people suffered from some sort of physical
illness? Would anyone make a ridiculous argument
about profiling and conspiracies? Of course not!
But we view mental illness as something *different*, something *frightening*. Any suggestion that lots of people have some degree of mental illness is viewed with suspicion and paranoia.
Mental illness includes chronic stress disorders. Clinical depression. Schizophrenia. Phobias. All
manner of illnesses,ranging from relatively minor
to totally debilitating. Gosh, just like physical
illnesses!
But when it comes to mental illness, we hide from
it. We're scared of it. We try to pretend that it's not there, it's all just of a conspiracy of
the media, or the government, or the drug companies.
It's not. People with mental illnesses include
your friends, your relatives, and possibly yourself.
The point of things like this study is to make people realize that mental illness isn't "insanity". It's not extreme, and it's not rare,
and there's *nothing* wrong with getting it treated.
I'll be bold, and use myself as an example. I
haven't gotten any treatment, but to be honest,
I probably should. Back in high school, I was the
geek that got abused. By *everyone*. I had no
friends, at all. I was beaten up on a daily basis.
It left *deep* scars. I still have nightmares
about being back in high school. I find it extremely difficult to cope with certain social
situations, because of my severe stress reactions.
That's called post-traumatic stress disorder. It's
a mental illness.
Does that make me nuts? I don't think so. I'm happily married to a lovely lady. I've got my PhD
in computer science. I've got a great job as a
researcher at IBM. I'm a stable, happy, productive
person. But that doesn't mean that I'm perfectly
healthy, mentally, any more than it means that I'm
perfectly healthy physically.
Get over your paranoia.
I can't help but wonder -- of those ~15% who are anxious, how many are anxious because of Uncle Sam? One could argue that we have nothing to fear from our government, but this century, time and again, that has been proven to be wrong.
Maybe I shouldn't be, but I'm offended by that. The article itself talks about people's prejudices toward mental illness, and thank you so much for giving us a perfect example.
I don't know how you could twist the surgeon general's report so badly, either. Mega-profiling? Drugging the population? You've got to be kidding. Psychiatry is a valid medical profession, else I'd probably be dead. I suffer from bipolar disorder type I, and know quite a few other people with similar mood or anxiety disorders, and believe me, the surgeon general's step was a badly needed step in the mental health world.
I thought in this day and age the only people who attached such a conspiracy-oriented stigma to psychiatry was the church of scientology, but I guess not. I haven't read any other comments in this thread yet, but I sure hope to god that the attitude I percieved from this summary isn't indicitive of the rest of the slashdot population.
I hope I'm not over-reacting. I probably am, but I don't really care. Those 22% of the population CAN BE HELPED, and that's what the gov't is trying to do. If we remain in denial, ignoring the problem, how can we expect those who have legitimate problems to seek help? Those very very few people who are potentially violent won't be able to get help, so instead, they'll hurt someone, and simply be thrown in jail, instead of treated before something happens.
The government doesn't want to profile everyone, doesn't want to drug people into submission. The surgeon general is a doctor, and doctor's are ethical people. His report is intended to help those who are sick, not take away your precious liberties. If you ever had a problem, you'd understand. It's hard to do if you've never experienced it, but I hope people will at least try.
Man's unique agony as a species consists in his perpetual conflict between the desire to stand out and the need to blend in.
72656B636148206C72655020726568746F6E41207473754A
Looking for more work and income by continually discovering new "problems". In the old days family and small town organizations like the church would help many of these problems.
Now they are diverted to pills and doctors.
OK, after going trough this thread and getting all worked up, try: Ozy and Millie an online comic who recently had a rather nice plotline about this. Head for the archives and start at:11/26/99.
Have Fun and and stay good (==normal)
Ciao, Peter
I'm not convinced at all. This seems to truly be the wrong thing to do. Our current solutions for people with mental illnesses are just not advanced enough to be credible.
Our choices for treatment now include:
1. Talk to them (ala sigmund freud.) Do you have any idea how much this costs? $75 for 15 minutes apparently.
2. Drug 'em (ala Middle Ages). Costs about $35 a day, that is, for Welbutrin for Depression.
3. Lock 'em up (ala before Middle Ages) put them in an institution, for "protection"
I should know. I don't think I'll go back to the mental stuff we have currently for a while. And I don't know if we can each afford the taxes... Here's how it actually works out:
Each taxpayer (1/2 of the population) pays for each currently mentally ill patient (1/5) of the population. The patients, by my estimates listed up there, would cost between $75 a week (for therapy) and $200 a week (for medication and monitoring) or even $1000 per week (to lock them up). Now each taxpayer (of which I'm one now) Pays for 2/5 of each sick person's bill. Can you afford $30 a week extra in taxes, or $1560 a year? Can you afford $4160 a year (the most reasonable estimate) for medication alone? Can you afford $20800 in taxes extra a year??
That's what we're talking about here.
Don't buy the hype. This is another phony baloney attempt by the government to completely take over our lives and our money. All in the name of normalcy.
Ben
20% of U.S. population now considered clinically insane. Concentration camps for 'abnormals" are opened in some states; SubGeniuses begin waging open war on non-SubGeniuses.
So "Dateline for Dominance" as printed in my 1987 version of "Book of the SubGenius" is only 8 years behind the times. It just means that we counted the dates wrong and the saucers are 8 years late in coming, and that X-Day won't be until 2005! Woo-hoo!
What we would call "lunatic-fringe kooks" account for 43% of U.S. population. Over 2 million separate, active sects. Well over half, however, are basically aligned with the Church of the SubGenius. The rest are violently anti-SubGenius, anti-individual, anti-thought Conspiracy dupes who still cling to a now-useless lifestyle. The United States is divided between these two powerful social forces.
The Fifth Civil War: Abnormals vs. Normals. During this period, the U.S. reverts to medieval barbarism.. Feudal warlord chieftains rule the thousands of mini-states into which the country has splintered. Bands of outlaws roam the countryside and the cities. Law as we know it is non-existent. Only huge corporations provide any stability to the social structure; they have *become* the "government", and jealously guard the remaining pockets of high technology. Most corporations run by "Bob".
AIYEEEEEEEEE YES! LET THERE BE SLACK!
Everything else you wanted to know is available at http://www.subgenius.com. Might I recommend:
some classics
Our Y2K preparedness page
Our effort to skew Time Magazine's Top Fraud of the Century" poll in favor of our spiritual Leader, J.R. "Bob" Dobbs, because Time (of all magazines, after publishing The Cult of Greed and Power!) was probably too scared to have L. Ron Hubbard on the list. Unlike Elron's cult, OUR cult isn't afraid of being labelled for the fraud it is! HAH!
They'll never clean my cage! Now give me some more of... (post runs out)
Great, Dr. Satcher... Feed the plebes just what they want to hear. Tell them all, "It's not your fault! You just need Therapy!".
... Argh.
America is degenerating into a bunch of lazy, finger-pointing, irresponsible people.
No one wants to be accountable for themselves; if 20% of the population can now blame their wrongdoings on "mental illness",
Look, you're all missing the issue here! These people know what they're talking about...many have literally MONTHS of training! If they say 25% of people are crazy, who are we to doubt?
These people must be locked away and isolated from society before their insanity spreads to the perfectly normal population.
Also, lower all speed limits to 5 miles an hour! It will UNQUESTIONABLY save thousands of lives a year! How can you value your own convience over peoples lives?
In fact, everyone should be place in glass tubules and fed intravenously. For your tubule, please send 18 dollars to the email-address listed above. At least 30% of the cost will be donated to the Coalition to ban DiHydrogen Monoxide, the largest component of acid rain.
No, you are wrong. A sceptical attitude towards this sort of sensationalism is very healthy, the true insult to the people who really are mentally ill is that every little depression is now being classified as a mental illness.
And I suppose classifying a cold as an illness is insulting to someone who has terminal pneumonia or classifying a cut as an injury is insulting to someone who has a severed limb. There are severe and minor mental illnesses, just as there are severe and minor physical illnesses. And, like physical illnesses, there are mental illnesses which are self treatable or get better "on their own."
Calling something a mental illness is simply a way to say that there is a mental process which hampers the individual's ability to function and is hopefully treatable. If anything, reducing the stigma of seeking attention for minor mental illnesses will help those with major mental illnesses since they will be less stigmatized as well.
--
"L'IT c'est moi!"
$anity i$ expen$ive.
(This may sound as flamebait, but mostly it tells difference about being stupid in Finland or America)
... That means if you do something stupid, only you must pay for it.
... About 9/10 of all those mails was from US-citizens.
Well, this could be bit off topic but had to write it anyway.
There has been too many times I have been wondering how so many US-citizens could be so damn stupid? (Of course that includes only few people, but there is many of those anyway).
In Finland we have saying 'You must pay for being stupid'
But... It seems that in US it goes 'It pays to be stupid'. Every now and then we can read from news about people who are really stupid and receives lots of money, because they sue corporations. (I don't mean that you should not ever sue corporations, but not then when "YOU" are just plain stupid).
Few examples of 'stupid people':
- Woman who dryed her cat in microwave oven
- Man who managed to hit his 'willie' with toilet seat (received quite lot money from that)
- Woman who spilled coffee in her lap (tried to operate car while drinking coffee).
If someone does that same thing here in Finland, he does not like that ANYONE would know it, because everybody would keep him/her just stupid.
There was short news in newspaper here just few days ago about man who kicked snow blower while it was running. Of course he got his foot amputated, but because he was just stupid and we are in Finland, he is only who must 'pay' for being stupid. If he even tries to sue some company here, I think that judge would dismiss case because that man was stupid.
Few years ago I had web site that commonly was misunderstunded to be home of one popular program. We had to put text 'this is not correct site and URL to right site' (of course +2 font and bold) to frontpage and contact page. Even then I received about ten 'how can I download that program'-requests every day (and that address they used was only told in contact page, so they had to see our message TWO times and search for Email address
I think that those peoples could read, but they was just plain stupid persons.
(Well, this soulds bit like flamebait. But we just can't understund how US-goverment don't do anything about it.)
Typos, spelling and grammar mistakes are my own and I don't think it has anything to do with stupidy. English is just not my native language.
but it seemed to get out of hand (see: Re -ME TURRICANED)
Sorry, folks
- "How do we do it? Volume!" - The Bursar of Unseen University.
s/shrinks/drinks/
-Lars
OK, I kinda feel responsible, and bad about this, so I'm gonna post now, and hopefully put an end to it. /.ers and their European counterparts in recent article posts, and put the thread up as a joke, so we wouldn't start up again. This seems to have been taken the wrong way, and the flames began afresh. /. demographic that will be forced to do these things. Computer expertise matters not a jot in the military, unless you have the right connections. Those sent to die fifty or so years ago could have been US if something dreadful happened nowadays.
I was *seriously* upset at the open flamefare between the US
I hate nationalism in general, and that's wh y politicians like Pat Buchanan in the US, and Derek Beackon, Michael Portillo and the xenophobes in the UK, and the proliferation of far-Right (and in some cases, far-Left) parties in the world *really* scare me.
For those who haven't read their history closely enough, nationalism on a global scale leads to war eventually, and war leads to heavy casualties and lets face it, death in most cases.
Politicians who fear global missile exchange will still settle most disputes with conventional weapons, and in a large campaign, this means that people of our age will be taken away from our computers, families and friends, and made to sit in the cold with a gun, waiting for other cold and frightened people with guns to attack us. The alternative (nuclear exchange) doesn't even bear thinking about.
And it's people in the
We're all human, we all enjoy the same things. Yes, we might not agree with opinions based on each other's way of life, but it's not worth letting these things escalate, because the only people who will really lose are ourselves.
So when you flame, remember that a lot of these people across the pond are probably closer to you in spirit than many of our respective countrymen. Countries simply *aren't* worth dying for.
Respect to all those in Europe, the US, Howondaland, Klatch, wherever..... as long as they don't want to fight.
- "How do we do it? Volume!" - The Bursar of Unseen University.
> As for the qualifications of God, well...any god without those qualities really wouldn't be much
/.
> of a god, and hence not worthy of worship. I prefer to worship a sovereign God, not some
> being with human foibles and follies.
Like the guy who once said "You'd better worship real good, cos' I'm jealous and if you'd ever lay your eyes on someone else, well you're out of luck with me. Now do as I tell, and go and slew the guys across the river in My Name. And be careful using that Name, too."?
Fortunately, he grew out of this and became a bit more motherly: "So you've been a naughty boy? Well, show me you're sorry, and don't do it ever again. Now come here and give me a big hug." He also got Himself a real name, and to make good measure and show how much he was dedicated, divided Himself up into three Entities. Then humans being humans, after a while they get back to their former habits and crossed the river and slew the guys there in His New Names.
Yes, I think he qualifies as a One True Human God.
Xavier
PS: I'm not american, is there any chance that I might be sane? Not much if one considers I'm responding to an off-topic post on
Do I make sense? Please report if not.
Here in Australia (and, I believe in Britain) the government is cutting funding to public mental health facilities.
They are turning what should be places of long term care for the very sick into short term hotel rooms for people after major mental trama. The people are then pushed back into the community as soon as they are deemed to be able to "cope on their own"
Of course, many can't and end up on the streets. Others, as you mentioned kill themselves, and in the worse case kill others.
Australia's worse mass-murder was commited by someone who had spent time in a mental insitution. He was then allowed to buy guns - because there was no system to check up on him.
It was this tragedy that ended up meaning Australians had to give up their semi-automatic weapons.
I would love to hear how someone would propose to get around this one without "tagged, drugged and relased under surveillance". Sure - don't relase him is the obvious answer, but he had been well enough to live normally for a number of years before he relapsed and killed 30+ people.
It's way too easy to say "Keep the government out of it" or something. I want to hear a solution, not political bullshit.
Teenagers have mood swings, so do Middle aged men going through midlife crises, and women in menopause, and menstrual cycles. Everyone is anxious at some time in their life, it is impossible to avoid, unless you've reached nirvana. If only 14% are anxious a lot, and 7% have a lot of mood swings, I'd say Americans are probably OK. It sounds to me like the stats are inflated.
Hitler started off by annexing Austria, which to all intents and purposes was supported by the Austrian public. He then annexed the Sudetenland in the Czech Republic, again generally supported by the populace. After losing a generation of young men in 1914-18, the other major European countries weren't exactly too enamoured of the idea of going to fight again. Note that persecution was all he was doing to the Jews then, a common practice in many countries other than Germany, so fighting really wasn't an option until he overstepped the boundary by invading Poland.
The whole point is that rampant nationalism and aggression starts wars, and what took the real guts was going in with so much to lose, and with every possibility that we would lose.
The Serbians I know are very nice people who can't stand what Karadic and Milosevic have done for their national image.
It takes guts to NOT use a gun until you have to.
- "How do we do it? Volume!" - The Bursar of Unseen University.
Long answer:
They suffered as we do. My parents have stories of people in their communities known to be mentally ill. It was hushed, though. It has been for generations.
Suicide provides an illustrative example. Many families lie about how a family member died, and even if they don't like, they very rarely discuss what did happen.
The 22% are generally "getting along fine." Most of them are functional. The question in those cases is whether they are healthy and prosperous. The answer is that they are not. There are health professionals trained to treat these people. When treated, they tend to get better. We're too busy denying that there's any disease to notice.
If we have the resources to improve our lives, why shouldn't we use them? To make us tough? You can eat as much of that macho bullshit and call it candy for as long as you want. It won't turn it into candy. I have a real reluctance toward taking medication. I dislike suffering more. If it is going to help someone, do it. Those people who spent three years depressed generally wish they had tried medication sooner. They wasted three years making bad decisions, ruining relationships, working poorly and spending time. Guess what, Elroy. They don't get those years back when they get better. That time is gone. If medication and therapy will help someone from wasting more of his/her life spinning in mental circles, I am all for it.
Britain and France began fighting after Germany attacked *Poland* on Sept.1
The UK was at war Sept 3, 1939 and
Canada was at war Sept 10, 1939 (obviously not because they were attacked)
The USA remained neutral for two years.
The US was the one who waited until they were attacked before they entered the war.
Not meant as a flame. Once in the Americans committed themselves fully and did a *great* job. And many Europeans had a "love affair" with all things American for some time after the war was over.
Since then the Americans have done a lot of stuff to "lower their karma" so to speak though. Can't keep riding on your laurels forever.
[We don't come from a planet. We come from a grid sector.]
Sure sure.. 1/5 of us are all nuts.. They are really just hoping 1/5 of us pay out for thier quack doctors or buy the expensive medication they prescribe like candy. We will have a nation full of doped up prozac addicts yet.
so, no bad feelings, then?
*slaps forehead and runs*
Everstar
At least part of the underlying reason for this, however, is the need for mental health professionals to be able to submit bills for treatment to insurance companies. In order for the insurance company to authorise payment for some treatment, they need to agree that it is justified, based on the diagnosed illness, just as this is the case with non-mental illness.
The problem is that the condition of a human mind is neither static nor quantifiable. But mental health professionals, I believe, are driven to succinctly categorise their patients illnesses by the need to get paid, even in situations where a diagnosis is unclear. And it is a legitimate need, I think you'll agree.
At the same time, the insurance companies need to ensure that they are not being bilked.
Any suggestions for a better system? I think there must be one, even if I am not up to the task of coming up with it.
Trust not a man who's rich in flax / His morals may be sadly lax
This brings up a larger issue: how does one define mental illness (or even illness in general)? The standard response is that a mental illness is a condition of mental disturbance severe enough to interfere with normal activiites. This is highly subjective, however. If such a large portion of our society has what can be classified as a mental disorder, are we setting the threshold too low?
The real issue is the significance. One obvious question is whether or not the illness is treatable. This would have been a useful guideline in years past. After all, what is the point of diagnosing someone with an illness if a large percentage of the population is similarly afflicted and there is no treatment (aside from possible insurance/compensation issues)?
I believe some studies have shown improvement in mood ratings with certain anti-depressants in those who would not really qualify as having a depressive illness. If the normal state is treatable, does that make normality a disease state?
I'm stretching the point a bit here, because if you look at the actual numbers for specific disorders, the numbers are relatively low. That said, considerable changes that have gone on in the DSM (the text which defines the guidelines for diagnosing mental illness) over the years speak to the intangible quality that characterizes much of mental illness.
There's little point in announcing numbers. The question is what we intend to do wit this information as a society.
infobhan
For people who jump at the first mention of people pidgeonholing them, Slashdot has a lot of nerve presenting these findings as they do. It's part of a de-stigmatization of chemical and mental problems to present this information - mental illness is not the rare bird that it is once thought it was, and it's not just your Aunt Millie who talks to walls who might have some problems in her lifetime.
Really, it's not even news that Slashdot would normally find interesting, despite the fact that there is a direct corolation between intelligence and likelyhood of disorders such as bipolar disorder and depression - it's only the Katzification of Slashdot that can even accont for this appearing on the front page. Slashdot, in their typical ignorant way, would prefer to adhere to societal predjudices and instead present it in a 3rd grade manner than consider the implications of destigmatizing something which obviously frightens them - the possibility that people they know who are mentally different, sick, ill, what have you, are not necessarily as rare as they might think, and that it is in fact treatable.
Making light of what you fear or don't understand is the forbearer of predjudice and discrimination. Thanks, Slashdot, for continuing a noble American tradition.
Ever stop to think how much money is to be made in the pharmaceutical industry? I mean, the sheer profits to be gained are amazing, compared to any other industry.
In fact, it could be said that the pharmaceutical industry has one of the highest profit margins of any industry.
That's why we're all nuts - there's money to be made. Just like Jordache Jeans, we all want a piece of the fashion pie... and smart pharmaceutical marketing types are doing their damnedest to add some 'authority' to their plans by getting some dupe to write a report about the decline of American mental health.
Of course, the media helps to propagate the myth that Americans are insane too - after all, those Paxil commercials are worth a pretty penny, you know. Oh, and the odd nut case reacting badly to a mental health drug and killing a few of his coworkers is usually a nice windfall for the CNN/CBS/ABC/TW crowd too, so yeah, what the heck, lets promote drug use... it's worth it!
(But oh, lets not give away the secret. Nobody reports on the drugs that these people were taking just prior to rampage, lest the big-P's get beset by lawsuits from disgruntled family members.)
Don't buy the hype.
In 100 years time "Mental Health can be cured by drugs" will be one of those nice little facts filed in the same section as "The Earth is Flat" and "The Sun revolves Around Earth" theories...
There are *far* better ways to deal with stress than to pop a pill. Turn the TV off for a few weeks, for starters, stop reading the news and taking in all the FUD of society being propagated by profiteers of doom.
Take more walks, learn to play a musical instrument, go to the library for a few hours a day and study some distant culture. Make a drastic change in your lifestyle somehow - the thing causing your depression is most likely *not* the most obvious thing in your life...
Consider a change in career. *Live*.
But whatever you do, don't try to live life through a haze of drugs - I don't care what some 'authority' says, it aint worth the loss you *will* suffer as a result of letting drugs dominate your life.
No doubt, some pro anti-depressant user may come along and attept to refute my perspective in this thread, maybe some psych student will have some smart rebuttal, that doesn't matter. A little public flaming never really hurt, and I don't suffer from any DSM-documented "social disorders" that are likely to be triggered by a bit of controversy on Slashdot.
The average brainwashed American drug user doesn't scare me.
I am fairly confident that they know, deep down inside, under all that fog, that they're really not getting their moneys worth with Prozac or Paxil, and that no, it's not really working the way it was supposed to work, is it? If you don't notice it now, you will soon... but don't worry, the Big-P's will have a nice 'alternative' drug ready for you to use once you stop reaping 'rewards' from whatever it is you're on now.
Feeling cheated by Prozac? Not getting the life improvement you thought you'd get from Paxil?
That's coz it's a lie. Drugs don't make any difference.
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
And our ancestors had an average lifespan of 40 years. No thanks.
Let's see if we can get some misconceptions clarified here...
/.
Like the guy who once said "You'd better worship real good, cos' I'm jealous and if you'd ever lay your eyes on someone else, well you're out of luck with me. Now do as I tell, and go and slew the guys across the river in My Name. And be careful using that Name, too."?
OK, it seems like you're referring to a few of the well-known 10 commandments. No problem there. "You shall have no other gods before me," that's pretty self-explanatory. Ditto with "you shall not use the name of the Lord your God in vain." But the law is the same in the Bible -- both the O.T. and N.T. All 10 commandments are summed up in 2: love God with all your heart/mind/soul/strenght and love your neighbor as yourself.
Fortunately, he grew out of this and became a bit more motherly: "So you've been a naughty boy? Well, show me you're sorry, and don't do it ever again. Now come here and give me a big hug."
Ehhhh, it was more like this: "You've been a very naughty boy. You deserve to be punished for all eternity. I've been patient and merciful to you. So now I'm going to pour out my wrath on myself instead. If you repent and allow my life to live through you, you'll have eternal life. If you don't, you're still going to be punished."
He also got Himself a real name, and to make good measure and show how much he was dedicated, divided Himself up into three Entities.
Yes, God cloaked Himself in human flesh to satisfy the demands of the law. And He has always been three entities in one person. Examples can be found throughout the O.T. (provided upon request). It's one of those divine mysteries that our finite brains can't comprehend.
Then humans being humans, after a while they get back to their former habits and crossed the river and slew the guys there in His New Names.
Hark, do I hear the sounds of "sinful man" in the wings? Yes, humans are humans, and always will be. Sin is a fact of life, even in those who have been "reborn." Look at Romans 7 if you want an really succinct example of that.
Yes, I think he qualifies as a One True Human God.
In the straw-man constructed above, sure. But in the revealed God in the Bible, I don't think so!
PS: I'm not american, is there any chance that I might be sane? Not much if one considers I'm responding to an off-topic post on
Well, I don't think it's that offtopic! I'm of the opinion that many of the mental illnesses and problems we see today are direct results of the inability to sufficiently reconcile various aspects of life (why are we here, why is there evil, etc.) within the frame of reference of the materialistic/relativistic/humanistic worldview.
hey if youre serious email me. weel talk, not all problems can be chalked up to chemical imballances,
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious animal on earth.
Maybe they were mentally ill. Even if the 22% figure is accurate, how many of those people do you think take medication? For that matter, how many get any help at all? Many do not.
They survive. People back then survived. People now survive. Someone cannot be considered well just because he/she is not dying. I don't see why it's so hard to believe that these problems have been around for the duration of mankind's existence. For the most part, they do not result in death. The diseased often still have children. In short, the selective pressure against most mental illness is slim to none. Selective pressure only works when it affects organisms reproductively. Plenty of mental illnesses do not.
If more and more people have a mental disorder diagnosis...that means the crazies are becoming the majority? Will the "sane" people have to change the US constitution to reflect the inadequacy of the (crazy)majority to maintain "order". Sorry for my gratuitous use of quotes but this is all bullshit.
I have been diagnosed with a mental disorder and I am still living a reletively sane life. In fact, I can't remember one completely sane person that I've met in the past 5 years. So if everybody's wacked then we're all normal. Right?
_.:*~*:._.:*~*:._.:*~*:._.:*~*:._.:*~*:._
ASCII art?? I thought it was a REGULAR expression
Before you start spouting off about how stupid or unrealistic these results are, keep this in mind:
Twenty percent is not an unreasonable number, because you must realize that mental illness doesn't just crazy suicidal people, it also includes social disorders and other more minor problems. These are diagnosable and treatable (though I don't think they should be treated with drugs). You'd be surprised that people you know or work with every day might have one of these disorders.
Remember, a mental illness doesn't mean that a person can't function, or can't have a pretty normal life. It does mean they have unreasonable trouble coping with some aspects of life.
These problems are out there. It's nothing to be ashamed of. People should ask for help if they know they have a problem, but given all this negative feedback, it's no surprise that not enough people do.
Banning divorce of something?
I agree that:
Given this, and given that it is not possible to treat the cause in all those already effected, what is wrong with at least attempting to treat the symptoms?
Remember how the goverments of the world got together and eliminated smallpox? That wasn't bad, was it?
You know that some physical diseases (eg Cholera (sp?) ) can only be defeated by combatting the symptoms (in Cholera's case, dehydration). If some mental illness can be treated the same, I would think that would be a good thing.
I can say quite honestly that I would have killed
myself by this time if it weren't for SSRIs (i.e.
Paxil, Prozac). Since you have never taken them,
you should be aware that they do not cause one
to live life in a haze. They don't even make
you happy per se. They just make you not depressed most of the time. And believe me when
I say that severe, chronic depression is not
a state that gifts you with crystal clear
perception. If anything clouds one's mind,
depreesion is certainly it. Personally, I'll
take being dominated by Paxil (which domination
involves swallowing a pill before bed and the
occasional trip to the pharmacy every couple
months or so) over lying in bed and staring at the
walls for eight hours because anything else would
just be too hard and futile besides. Oh, wait,
you're right, I'm being duped! I'll stop right
now. Catatonia here I come, right back where I
started from.....
Thomas S. Howard
A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man -Jebediah Springfield (a.k.a. Hans Sprungfeld)
the biggest problem is that shrinks,(I forget the proper term for one who can prescribe meds) are all convinced that the brain is the seat of thought, now ime not saying it isnt a major part, but there is no evidence out there that proves this. Its just the only place that the empirical scientific viewpoint can look for. This is why there are still religions and even good old fashioned freudian's out there, sometimes its not the brain that needs treatment, its the mind.
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious animal on earth.
> Mental illness doesn't equal sad. It _is_ normal
> to be "sad".... but major depression is
> something different.
>....If you have major depression, you should take
> anti-depressants.
Just about everyone I know has experianced a
major depression at some point in their lives.
It happens.
I went through my major depression in my first
year of Colledge. I ate twice a day at burger
king, I slept ALL day, well into the evening,
and sat online complaining all night. Spent my
every waking hour obsessing over what was wrong
with my life.
Its the reason I failed out of school. I never
took a single anti-depressent. I got through it
by dealing with the issues, and slowly adjusting
my attitudes.
Yes, drugs work for some people. However I
suspect for many they are just another mask
that takes away the hurt and the pain, and
allows them to be productive again.
If depression is caused exclusivly by chemical
imbalence...then re-balanece will help. However
when it is caused by other issues, it is only
by facing those issues (sometimes with the help
of a therapist, I didn't have the luxery of one..
if I did I may have stayed in school) not
drugging yourself to happiness.
In short...depression IS normal. Normal people
experiance it. The answer is to deal with the
issues and move on, not to medicate it away.
These days doctors are giving out Prozac like
it is candy. It makes me sick, I know a few people
on prozac...they almost never see a therapist
to actually talk about problems and work through
them...all the doctors want to do is "Oh your
not feeling well anymore...well ill up the dose"
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
There is more than one way to view "mental" health. More than one post here has been about how seeing, acting, and by other words, existing differently is not the same as having a mental disorder. But what is a mental disorder? Can you really point to your head and say that you have a diseased mind? The real question here is, "What consitiutes a mental disorder?".
For more on the subject check out:
This site about the myth of mental disease
Wow-- a lot of really good points have been brought up about the effects and treatments of mental health disorders, and I'm not going to try to sum them up or distill them. BUT (there is always a but) I think that there is a MUCH larger issue here. Again, it has been brought up and I'm not going to try to point to all of those threads, but here's my take:
;) because the Uni is playing dollars and cents instead of looking out for its constituents. Only now they're playing with our *health*!?
The mistake, as I see it, is to assume that a) either pharmaceutical companies or the Federal Government have our best interests at heart; b) that if Uncle Sam *does* really want what's best that a law will help. Read some of Noam Chomsky's work. The biggest influence on federal policy is Big Business-- what individual or "interest group" has the resources, both monetary and political, that Philip-Morris, Microsoft, DuPont or Pfizer can bring to bear on policy?
The same sort of idea, when applied on a smaller scale in a different industry has raised a similar hullabaloo. For example, how about universities which sign big contracts with Microsoft agreeing to use only NT/2000 in their facilities, in return for a hefty discount? The community goes nuts (or at least it should
The emotions that have been displayed here so far are (in my book) exhibit A in the case AGAINST this type of government action. We feel so strongly about the issue because lack of/inappropriate attention has hurt us and our loved ones. History is against the argument that the federal government wants what's best for the little guy.
-- You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
If this is really such a problem, and so many people suffer, there is no need to get the government involved. The free market will adjust. More people will become shrinks because it will be very profitable to be a shrink due to the large supply of patients. With all those shrinks, there's more competition, and so treatment prices go down.
In a free market, demands like this get satisfied, so keep the coercion out of it, Uncle Sam.
>>Dietary problems?
> Like having enough to eat?
I was thinking more along the lines of having the wrong things to eat. I'm not too knowledgable in this area, but all the various chemicals that get added to our foods may be doing something to our biochemistry that might cause mental illness. Like I said I don't know.
Josh Winslow
...no login.
But all I can say is "Bullshit".
The USA has never had a credible plan to help the mentally ill; every advance has come from the more enlightened countries, IE: the Europeans.
Fact: I've lost two loved ones to mental illness. The stigmata in the USA is intense -- your co-workers will hate you and call you names. That's what it's about in the USA -- find a weakness in your competitor and go for the jugular. No wonder people are crazy here. Strong laws would have to made to protect the MI from their co-workers or managers before I would take this seriously.
Fact: When someone checks into a facility, the first theng they do is look at your insurance benefits. Funny how the treatment plan always lasts just to the point where your benefits run out. Once again, someone needs to stop the maoney-making and start thinking about the patient for a change. One friend I lost killed herself within days after release from a six-week program that wiped out her benefits. Incidentally, she was proclaimed "Cured" by the psychiatrist just before release. Real science, tracking the benefits of the programs, and the expenditures, and new funding for new research needs to happen.
Fact: The homeless are treated like a turkey shoot by local police. I grew up in San Diego, CA -- and even just a few years ago the City of San Diego was still padding beds in the jail with homeless people. Why? SD is paid by the county for each occupant. When crime is low, they go arrest homeless people to fill the beds. Maybe it's better that they are off the streets, maybe that's the idea, but I was always depressed to see them getting carted off by the police. When the City of San Diego needs money, the homeless are the path to the California Taxpayer's wallet. It's the same all over, from what I understand. The gov. should legalize vagrancy, and force local police to show a true crime is being committed before accosting the homeless.
I won't BS you guys, I was on prozac for depression several years ago, and in a treatment center for a couple weeks. You are treated like a cash cow, plain and simple. Don't get me wrong -- all in all, it helped. But it's totally different from, say, breaking a leg while skiiing. You get treated different -- from dirty looks to outright ridicule. My employer found a nifty way to fire me shortly after I returned to work, after two years of climbing the ladder.
But it doesn't matter. I nade it through University on $6.00/hr. part time. I slept on friend's couches, I even bought a van so I could sleep in there sometimes. That was the worst -- being exposed to the cruel public in that way. My tires were slashed, an explosive was set under the truck (my ears rang for a day) the San Diego police tried to run me off the road to "scare" me out of Kearny Mesa.
Oh well, I've been making "real money" for awhile now, after graduating with about a 3.4 GPA. I'm not looking back, but in all honesty the Surgeon General (and the USA) have a long road to travel with all the long term hate the USA harbors towards the MI.
I think the point here is the question "what exactly does it mean to have a mental illness?". Surely someone is mentally ill if their mental processes (or chemical balance or whatever) differ significantly from those of the general population, ie. they are abnormal. The thing is that 1/5th of the population can't be abnormal, purely because they are 1/5th of the population! If that were true then left-handed people who make up even less of a proportion of the population could also be considered abnormal, blue-eyed people would be abnormal - you get the picture.
--
Celexa did great things for me, I'm sorry to hear you're having trouble finding an effective treatment.
I've done a lot of research on this subject, and although I know enough to try to straighten out some of the misconceptions being posted here, I am nowhere near qualified to assist somone who is in a suicidal state.
Please find help. The answer you need is out there, please don't stop looking. I don't have the answer, but someone will. If you are truly feeling suicidal, one suggestion might be to find walk into a church and ask for assistance. Even if you aren't religious, it's a good place to find people who are willing to help.
I'm sorry I can't give you the answers you're looking for, but please don't stop looking until you find them.
Seriously, the pervasive extroversion of American culture as advertised on TV disturbs me. It seems to hard to socially acceptably take time for yourself. But I'm not sure what else to expect from a nation of cowboys, statesman and preachers.
Let me explain something to you, my anonymous friend...
I'm woman enough to sign my name to this. *I* have been diagnosed with a personality disorder. I deal with this on a daily basis. It's not something that can be cured, dear. It's something you battle for the rest of your life. Yet, at the same time, there are kids out there who are diagnosed ADD who are not ADD and grow up being able to blame their actions on it.
I've studied psychology and I also volunteer for my local ambulance corps. If I don't know anything about sick people, no one does.
My point here is that there are too many people who are misdiagnosed with mental disorders who don't really have them. Doctors are quick to give snap judgements and prognoses and this "study" by the Surgeon General does nothing to help alleviate this.
All I can see coming from this is profiling of youth... forcing them to be under psychiatric care for illnesses they may or may not have.
Families which are dysfunctional often throw the "problem child" into treatment, not seeing that the REAL problem is not in their child but in the family as a whole. The findings of the Surgeon General is merely encouraging this type of behavior instead of getting families to focus on the heart of the issue. Yes, there are real cases of children who have disorders who need to be treated. I won't deny that because I was one of those kids. HOWEVER, I refuse to support the encouragement of our society to push the blame on one person and try to make them "sick" and encourage them to "adapt" to their idea of a healthy mind.
If you look in our history, you'll notice there were much fewer psychological disorders and certainly fewer people diagnosed WITH disorders... and it's not because new ones have been discovered. It's because WE as human beings don't want to work through our problems. We want someone else to fix everything for us.
Yeah, some of us are sick. Some of us need treatment.... but, for the most part, a lot of us are just looking for excuses and scapegoats. We want our happy pills to cure all our ills.
-- Shadowcat
kageneko@kageneko.net
"I can roleplay. I can frag. I can PK while you lag."
I just read this paper. Now I'm sorry I posted in this thread already, so I can't use the moderator points I have to up your post. Hopefully someone will. That paper is a very good read. Very interesting. It explains a lot. Everyone should read it.
Also interesting is the link between low levels of infant/child touch in a society and high levels of violence.
Indeed, I think that's one of the most interesting aspects of it. One of its most important references on that topic, Body Pleasure And The Origins Of Violence is on the net. I just read it, as well. An equally good read.
That's one of the problems with public perception of mental disorders: People think if you have one, you'r nuts. Thus, they don't want to admit they have one. Christ, this is a great thing. So many people have mental disorders that go undiagnosed because they think they HAVE to live like that, they're SUPPOSED to feel like shit all the time. This is no different than them offering better medical care for physical ailments.
And for the record, many mental disorders (like manic depression/bipolar) have PHYSICAL causes. People are scared to get treatment because they think if they are prescribed drugs, it will "change their personality." Our brain works on chemicals, and if the proportion of chemicals gets screwed up, our head gets screwed up. People who are bipolar don't have the right seratonin levels in their brain (it breaks down too quickly). SSRIs like prozac (everyone's favorite whipping boy), zolaft, luvex, and more I am unaware of, help regulate the seratonin to normal levels. Drugs for other disorders try to do similar things.
I now wish I'd said "Oh shit..."
I heard another interesting report on NPR (more people should listen to NPR--it's a great source of news. No I don't work for an NPR station :) that is somewhat relevant was about stress, and specifically about a book entitled something like Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers. The idea was that stress is a physical response to, say, running for your life (or chasing down your lunch), and in almost every other animal doesn't last more than a few seconds. But in humans, we get it sitting down at the desk, we feel it for extended periods of time. It's extremely physical in nature and has very physical consequences (some of them rather dramatic). This message is very similar, I think, to what the Surgeon General was saying (if on a slightly different, and more specific, topic).
--- I've been in school *way* too long....
I know a couple of people with real problems. In my opinion, this degrades their condition. It's just part of the "Blame it on someone/something else" programming.
I love my computer -- You make me feel alright (Bad Religion)
In fact, did you know that there have been *ZERO* studies that prove the 'theories' about Seratonin levels? This is absolutely wrong. There are many many studies that show the influence of serotonin on behaviour and mood. MDMA (ecstasy) selectively increases the amount of serotonin in the synapses (in a dramatic way), which accounts for the tremendous improvement in mood that characterizes the MDMA experience. Here's something that relates to the effects of serotonin: recently I read an interesting study about the effects of serotonin levels on social ranking in a group of monkeys. In particular, they found that the lower-status monkeys had lower levels of serotonin. However, when they increased the levels of serotonin in these monkeys, the monkeys' social status increased as well!
What's funny about the school shooting mayhem, is the holes in the probing for causes.
People blame the guns, which we've had for decades, but not the decline in parenting in recent decades.
People blame the games, which we've had since kids played Cowboys and Indians (with toy guns, mind you), but not the increase in "anti-depressants", "anti-hyperactivity", "therapy", and all the popular new mental health fads.
While I do believe that human biochemistry can be understood, and imbalances can be fixed (witness the success in diabetes treatment many people receive), I think that blood sugar/insulin interactions, and such, are a whole lot simpler than brain activity.
No, I'm not blaming the drugs for the carnage. That people who kill are more likely to be drugged , doesn't prove that A caused B, or that B caused A. I'm just saying it should be considered.
Once we have a working, clear model of how the brain works (yeah, right).. then I'll begin to trust all the new psychoactive drugs more.
Sure people (teachers, media etc) treat people who are different as mentally ill.
That is not what this report is talking about.
So as not to bore everyone, the only thing in this report that remotely relates to
is the problem of social phobia which is something very different to the typical loner/computer geek person.Did you actualy read the report? (or even the Slashdot story for that matter?)
It's not talking about drugging people. It's calling for more properly trained people to, as you say, work though it
Like you said, the report is saying we need to:
Sometimes that's not as easy as you'd think.
Seems like Orwell was wrong after all, being mad doesn't make you a minority of one - but a minority of 22% of the entire population!
It is not odd that Rob here picks up the excitement of the topic by bringing in the fear factor of mass population drugging and surveillance of persons because they might be "suspect."
On just about ever NEWScast that I heard about this was the word "shame," used in reference to the reasoning why people do not seek help when they need it.
Just as often is it about shame is it about plain old fear. Do you know what they do if someone thinks that you might be crazy or depressed? Your rights are removed from you, you are taken away and put you in an "asylum." Do you know what sort of things come to your mind when you think of the word "asylum?"
What do they do to you when you feel alone and isolated, when you need someone? They take you away from everything that you have and you are placed into a white-padded-walled cell where you can only speak to those who they want you to speak with. You are probably drugged while there.
Here in Phoenix Arizona, a man is currently suing the state because of his treatment when jailed. He was brought in for a fairly minor nonviolent offense and when being interrogated, admitted that at least once in his life he had thought about suicide, but not necessarily at that moment. He was then stripped naked and forced in an isolation cell for 24 hours under surveillance of suicide watch. I am sure that changed his mind.
The treatment of each other here in the US is horrendous. We know darn well that our schooling systems are horrid, that the prison and criminal correction systems simply creates lifelong criminals rather than rehabilitating, and that the mental heath and support systems in this country are terrible. But how much tax money goes towards fixing it? You bitch and whine, but you do nothing about it.
Why would anyone who needs help want to put out their hand to a world like that?
That is my rant, but it was not undeserved.
What things do we choose as topics for humor?
Some humor is light. Little stories with unexpected or embarassing outcomes are often funny. We kid our friends and mean no harm by it.
There is another side of humor. Often we make light of tragedy. I still remember a few NASA Challenger jokes. We make fun of physically different groups. I know plenty of racist and sexist jokes. There are plenty of comedy skits about disabled people. We joke about what we fear. There are jokes about death. A tremendous amount of humor centers on sexual dysfunction and behavior. There are jokes about mental illness.
How does this aspect of humor function? Some forms provide relief from tense situations, such as the Challenger explosion and many sexual jokes. Other function to marginalize groups we dislike. Racial jokes do.
Joking about mental illness has a similar function. "Hey, everybody is a little crazy." That statement makes light of people's suffering by comparing it to simply feeling blue or becoming anxious when under stress. The humor relieves our tension that we might be mentally ill, a very stigmatized state. For the healthy, pointing to the illnesses as weaknesses draws attention away from their own problems and magnifies their own mental health. Others fear the diseased people. Being around mentally ill people can be scary. It's hard to know what to expect. Making fun of these people is no sin. I like jokes, especially taboo ones. I like to consider why people tell certain jokes, though. When hearing a joke, I often wonder whether it's just funny or whether it's spiteful and insulting.
Where do you think this humor about mental illness originates? What motivates people toward the jokes? Look at the comments. Many posters address the report with dismissive humor. Joke if you want, but understand what is happening when you do.
Think about it this way. I'll provide myself as an example.
Over a period of weeks, I started noticing that I feel lonely and sad whenever I'm not very stimulated. I might try to go out, meet friends and exercise. I can laugh and be personable. The bad feelings remain. Even when I project and feel some happiness, an inner feeling of dispair remains. It seems to stay with me no matter what I try.
I wanted to get better. I didn't give a flying fuck about "normal," "balance," "background" or any of your other similar categories. I felt absolutely shitty nearly all my waking hours. I tried a take charge, upbeat attitude. I felt absolutely shitty nearly all my waking hours. I tried exercise, mainly biking and basketball. I felt absolutely shitty nearly all my waking hours. I tried taking up some personal hobbies, computers, music and reading. I felt absolutely shitty nearly all my waking hours. Do you see the pattern? I just wanted to feel better.
I feel that medical treatment, in the sense of considering our states as locations, is a vehicle. I looked at where I was. I hated it. I wanted out. Treatment helped me move out of that rut. Again, I don't care about the process; I care about the origin and the destination.
Some people will abuse the medical system and themselves. Is it really a surprise? The point is that people who feel suffering and show signs of dysfunction should have access to treatment. Stop worrying about what is "balanced" and think in vehicular terms. Think it basic human terms of suffering and self-destruction. In light of these aspect, why does "balance" matter a damned bit?
I mean, do you ever expect a group of special interests to publish something along the lines of: "Number of shrinks exceeds demand, other careers suggested"? Can you imagine a group of lawyers publishing something like that?
But I want to touch on some larger issues involving mental illness here. OK, it's a bit of a rant.
Do we want a world where children can be medicated by the state without the consent of their parents? And thus made "normal"?
Do we want a world where mental health professionals are called in to consult on the innocence or guilt of 1/5 the crimes committed - "he was just on the down side of his cycle your honor, we've upped his dosage, he won't be murdering grannies anymore."
And do we want a world where everyone just a little bit different is diagnosed and medicated so that they become "normal"? Oh brave new world that has such creatures in it!
Why can't johnny read? Well, he can't focus and is disruptive in class! Drug him! At least if he still doesn't learn to read he won't bother anyone, sitting there, drooling in the back.
If in school today I probably would have been diagnosed with ADD and given ritalin. I would have spent my days drooling in the back of a classroom, instead of asleep, and my nights asleep, instead of hacking on a computer. I probably would have grown up to be a perfectly malleable consumer type. Just the sort of citizen this government wants. (oh, no, he's showing signs of paranoia, better prescribe navane!)
The declaration of independence gives Americans the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Note the word "pursuit". Happiness comes in part from the pursuit thereof. Great art, literature, culture, & invention have sprung largely from the minds of the disturbed and the unhappy. No doubt many of these individuals would have benefited from "treatment". And yet... Our culture would suffer with the loss of our more extreme elements. A world without Van Gogh and Van Morrison would be a much sadder place for "the rest of us" to live in.
I'm totally against compulsory treatment for mental illness.
I'm all in favor of making it easier for our citizens to seek out treatment. I'm against the state drugging anyone without their consent. The question of the insanity defense in the case of a crime remains a difficult one.
You obviously have never faced real depression. First of all, your arguments assume that the person in question still gives a damn. This is the first place you miss the boat. When you're really depressed, you don't care. Otherwise you wouldn't be depressed. (BTW, I am speaking as one who has battled chronic, albeit mild, depression all my life.) When I sink into a depression, excercise is the first casualty and you caqn harp at me about how much it would help till the cows come home and I would simply blow you off. What's more, I gave up TV years ago, I walk 3-6 miles/day (normally, but not always), gave up the newspaper before I gave up TV, and I do play a couple of musical instruments. I really can't imagine why I would want to change my career from "Unix Troubleshooter" to anything else, and I could stretch things a bit and call reading SlashDot a study of bizarre and distant culture. And I *STILL* get depressed, even when I see, on a rational level, that there is really nothing to be depressed about. There are lots of people who would love to be where I am, just not me.
;-) I'm more interested in dealing with the problems that I invariably let stack up during a depression (very often I gain 2-3 lbs during my dark periods which must be lost ASAP once my vanity has kicked back in {did I also mention I'm approaching the dreaded mid-life crisis and am very vain? ;-}) In short, this haze of drugs you speak of is fiction. Now, to be honest, you may be thinking of the older tricyclics and MAO inhibitors (amitryptiline, et. al.) I have tangential experience with them, and from what I gather, "drug induced haze" is an accurate description of their side effects, though with these you tend to get strong side effects at first, with no main effect, followed by a drastic reduction in side effects over the next 2 weeks, accompanied by the onset of the main effect. Many discontinue long before that since the side effects tend to be rather "zombifying".
;-)
I get the definite impression that you don't really speak from any sort of experience when you criticize antidepressants. Well, I can understand that since the newer antidepressants are widely misunderstood. Let me describe the effect, but first let me say that my experience relates to Wellbutrin (bupropion hcl) which is a serotonin re-uptake inhibitor, similar to Prozac.
The first day or two some people experience a minor degree of insomnia. I have never experienced this. Otherwise, nothing. After about a week, one may notice a very subtle change in attitude. What I notice is that I'm smiling more. I notice that my situation has remained basically the same, but I just feel better about things. I see that there was really nothing to have been so depressed about (Why was I so down?). This is all very oversimplified, of course. The effect is quite subtle, and there are still periods of depression. After a couple of weeks, the effect is about the same, qualitatively, but stronger. I find that I am interested in getting back into things like exercise and exploring the wonders of AWK.
But back to bupropion, the anti-depressed me is a more rational me. The drug makes very subtle and slow to be felt differences that let me then at least care enough to do other things to pick my self up, go on, and be happy. I hope I don't offend by making the observation that no one who has not been through irrational depressions has any right to try to speak authoritatively about what those who have faced it should do. Think about it. If the answer were that easy, you're not the only one that would ever have thought of it. We're not stupid. Well, no more than anyone else, anyway.
-Steve Bergman
There is a school of thought which adheres to the belief that the incidence of mental disorders has not risen much, but rather that the incidence reporting of them has. As such, an argument can be made that the 'decay of American society' is not causing a sudden bout of mental illness amongst its members, but rather that the increasingly reliant American population is reporting in greater numbers the dark spots in their psyches.
Anxiety (except in severe cases) and mood swinging (aside from manic depression) are hardly symptoms of severe disorder. People are becoming increasingly reliant on the power of professional opinion. Rather than being -- to borrow from MTV -- a skitzoid, someone is actually hypertense! American culture has a quasi-obsessive need to label everything, including their own idiosyncracies, and then to treat them.
Ultimately, it won't do any harm to call upon the government and psychological/psychiatric bodies to provide free or low-cost treatment to the nations youth, assuming (quite safely) that it will not become a sort of mandatory exercise in fifth period on Thursdays. If people wish to discover that, in fact, their anxiety stems from a case of, well, anxiety that is all well and good.
It is not the most potent forum for the surgeon general of America, but it is one of the safest to stand on just now. In the wake of difficulties rooted (at least, by the press) in disorderly minds -- Day Trading Massacres, High School Shoot Outs, etc -- a voice smoothly suggesting that our youth have access to psychological help will be heard, for the most part, on the same level as a waiter asking if you'd like some more bread.
Some people won't, some people will and it will be barely remembered by the time the bill is paid.
The most interesting aspect of the entire thing will be the panel discussions, message forums and assorted other communications hooplah dedicated to that famous debate of the twentieth century which almost seems to defy wording due to its nuanced nature:
"Is psychological treatment a good thing or a bad thing?"
That is the crux of it worded as basically as possible. Some people maintain that psychological treatment is a sham. That it is a contributing factor towards the distopian dream of normalisation. Others feel that it is as necessary to modern living as a weekend massage.
And I imagine this topic's been posted to have just those two things discussed.
So, get on with it. I'm done rambling.
-l
So something like one out of five of the people around me are crazy.
Boy, that sure explains a lot!
Hey, who else could go for some flapjacks right now?
--
Mental illness is a problem. Many people are living what I consider a less than average life because of it. Now I accept that drugs help, but they are not what I consider a viable solution. They don't 'cure' the illness, they only hide the symptoms. As soon as you take away the drug, along comes the problem again. I've seen it oftern, where somone is on anti-depressants, feels good enough to decide they don't need the drugs, then attempt suicide after the drugs wear off. What I beleive needs to be done is teach the psychologists to help people effectivly. 5 years in therapy is _NOT_ acceptable. Brief therapy, NLP, Hypnosis are some of the more effective methods of therapy in term of change. Many times these methods have been effective cures when more popular methods continued to fail. Of course, only a small number of therapists actually know of other methods of therapy other than Freud. Why would they want to? I mean, a patient for 5 years is steady income. What other fields of expertese do you get paid _NOT_ to get results... Within IT, you'd be out of a job if you took 5 years to acheive the result the client wants.... Maybe pay the shrink when the wanted change occurs, that would give them incentive. Use the drug (if needed) till the person is stable. Then get them _good_ help to allow them to be stable without the drug. I've read very emotive posts here about how drugs help the posters. That is great, and what would you do with all the money you spend on drugs if you didn't have to buy drugs any more? Why not go even further, would you like to be better than average, better than 'not sad'? Get a drug, then get them good help to get them off a drug. It is possible. Many Many others have done it. Of course then doctors have no interest in people being well ... They don't get paid ..... There are better ways than the way it's done now. Quigybow
Fairly peculiar that just about that many people are deemed as "mormal" or not needing psychological management.
I recon They will knock on my door any moment now.
-------
CAIMLAS
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
While Americans have been living in the bush, this is old news to us Europeans.
*Still* (barely) living proof is ofcourse, mister Ronald Reagan. But seriously,
i have allways considered americans really bizarre ppl.
Really stupid joke: Whats the difference between between Reagan and Clinton ? ...
Reagan was entertainer beforehis president career, Bill during
--
yush
How true! I have always found Americans as intellectually poor, with the sole obsession of $'s. I grossly generalise here, but that is the impression many Americans give to Europeans. It is no wonder that psychological problems are more frequent there (USofA) than here (Europe). People in Europe tend to be more concerned with having a stable, enjoyable life than moving up the career ladder. But we should put things into perspective. Maybe one of the problems is that there are too many shrinks, not not enough!
I'll do it for cheesy poofs.
Creeps, both Roblimo and JonKatz frequently engage in extreme paranoia. Some therapy forms have a moderate success in helping paranoid people to gain some insight into their problems.
Now Roblimo and JonKatz can afford therapy since Slashdot has been bought, but others aren't so fortunate.
Also, calling people with any mental problem "nuts" either means that Roblimo hasn't read the article, or that we have a case of serious defensive projection.
More seriously, it seems that Slashdot takes more and more to be a magazine for "outsiders", people who, usually because of how they grew up, don't feel they can be part of a mainstream group, and do their utmost best to blame mainstream groups for that. Now that's a serious problem that can be alleviated with group therapy. Untreated, it can also result in cult-like behaviour with people defining themselves in terms of what they are not, instead of what they are.
And I think that's sad. I come here for interesting computer news, not for pathetic self-victimizing outsiders.
EjB
Bupropion is not an SSRI. While it does inihibit the reuptake of serotonin to some extent, it is moreso an inhibitor of dopamine and norepinephrine re-uptake.
I assume your doctor told you this, either as a lie or due to gross incompetence. It's terrible that millions of people are taking psychoactive drugs (or really any drugs at all) with -no- understanding of how they work. I'm always shocked when people tell me they're taking some drug and they don't even know what it's called. I'm less shocked when people know nothing about the drug they're taking - it's just as bad, but it's entirely common.
Don't trust your doctor. Look around at the people in your profession, consider what portion you consider competent. Consider what portion you would trust the advice of. Why should a doctor be any more trustworthy? The fact that it's not your field means you should trust your doctor even -less-, because you can't even evaluate what he says without doing research. You'll never realize he's lying or wrong unless you verify everything.
Sometimes you have to trust a doctor, of course. But if you're prescribed a drug, you have time to at least look up the most basic of information on it. While you're at it, don't trust your pharmacist either. Make sure the pills you got are the same as what the bottle says. If you're taking more than one drug, look for information on the interaction. Sometimes it can surprise you.
So after trying comitting suicide tonight, I may state that IMHO, life sucks, but sometimes it's worth it.
;)
Of course it takes really good friends to support you and make you realize that
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
"Depression, clinical depression, when it comes back to someone who's been fighting it, when it's there it's like a warm blanket that insulates you from reality, and makes you feel like things are the way they ought to be. That depression is the way you were ment to be. It's comforting, it's addictive, and it's incredibly destructive."
;-)), you feel...safe. It's like `Ok, I'm depressed, I know it, and it's all right. I've felt this way most of my life, and it's comfortable'.
;-)
That is quite possiblly the most profound and poetic way to describe what it really feels like to be depressed.
When you're this depressed, and nothing matters (except for the fact that nothing matters matters, and that's not quite right, but nothing matters, so...(yes, that's what I meant
And the warm blanket metaphor was classic...
Another point; depression can be addictive. I remember times when I was happy, and wished I was depressed. It's the familiarity that's destructive. Happiness, normality, a lack of depression; these are all foreign and to be avoided at all costs.
So, you start to sink again.
Hell, I still have trouble being happy for long periods (days). I feel like I'm doing something wrong or unfair to the rest of the world and that I will be punished. Usually, I'm right
As it is, I've been not clinically depressed for about three years now. Let me tell you, it's a completely different world.
Jedi Hacker (Apprentice) and Code Poet
censorship is a form of noise, which actively seeks to drown out content with silence - Crash Culligan
I have ADHD. Paying attention to any given subject, regardless of how interesting is difficult. Most of the time I am able to make myself conectrate, but not always.
I have to conecentrate at work, so I guzzle Pepsi and coffee. Occasionally I take a Bronk-Aid(ephedrine).
I admit that ADHD is overdiagnosed. I admit that there are too many kids on Ritalin and god knows what else.
But, I also wish that I had been medicated when I was in school. I wish that I had been able to concentrate when I was in class.
"Reality is less than television."-Brian Oblivion
Okay, how's about this one. After the last 7 years, I have studied psychology, philosophy, and basic neuroscience and pharmacology in order to come to the conclusion that:
a) I have a physiological depressive disorder that will follow me the rest of my days
B) has no mental or "counsellable" aspect, and
c) the only way I can live an even somewhat normal life is through 150mg of Effexor every day.
I missed my medication today- and I felt the effects immediately. I had several bouts of suicidial tendencies, and wanted very much to die throughout the day, as well as being extremely fatigued (out of nowhere). Before I was medicated for depression, I could barely live- in Ancient Greece, I would be deemed "possessed," and left out on a hillside to die; or, the chirurgeons of the time might opena hole in my head to let the evil spirits out.
For some of us, medication is the ONLY way- there is no other route. In ancient times, people like myself did not just "get by" - they just died.