# Anxiety Disorders > Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) >  >  Is Anxiety a real illness/ disoder?

## Bear

Is anxiety really a mental illness that requires medications to cure, or  do the drug companies just take advantage of the fact that many people  have it along with depression? I have "anxiety disorder". Is there  really something wrong with my brain that makes me different from  someone else who doesn't have anxiety, or is it just that I'm a  sensitive person and overintellectualize certain things? Something to  think about...

----------


## NoSocialButterfly

I don't know the cause of anxiety, but I know that it can be crippling.  I have no idea whether it's some sort of chemical imbalance or a learned behavior.  Does it REQUIRE medication?...I say no.  I did try medication but found the side-effects not worth it.  However, I have been in therapy for over 2 years and it has helped immensely.  EVERYONE experiences anxiety...there is no cure for it.  But if it is at levels where it is preventing with someone's ability to live their lives, I definitely would consider it to be a disorder that needs treatment.  It is not some made up condition.  While I didn't really benefit from medication, many have.  The best thing I ever did for myself is going to therapy.  It has really made me more aware of my irrational thoughts, helped me accept myself, learn to realize that I am not incapable, and helped me move forward instead of remaining stuck.

----------


## Cage

It's real to the point it's stopping me from doing day to day things, I would at least call that a disorder, or a disability .

----------


## BlueLace

I know I have an anxiety disorder. I have heard so many people say it's just shyness and by inference is just a normal human emotion that should be endured and not treated. Is it normal human emotion to have a panic attack, shake, throw up before, after, or during an event? Or to the extreme of fainting? That truly is disabling.The only thing that seems to help is CBT, and medication.

----------


## Matty

I respect anyone with a mental illness. Why? Because I feel I have one. I suffer from Social Anxiety and Depression. I feel that it clouds ones vision of the outside world and no matter how hard you fight... it is a losing battle. Happily I show up to the fight day in day out. 

Anxiety is a real illness. Why it happens I have no idea. But from what I have learnt from spending time with people suffering from other anxiety disorders is that it makes no sense. I can not speak to a person, yet study a book with no issue. A friend can be the center of attention yet can not spend 5 mins reading a book or trying to better himself academically. 

I have as yet refused medical relief, because i believe that I can beat this. 2013 will be my last year of fighting alone. After that I will accept anything thrown at me.

----------


## WineKitty

yes it's real, its a disorder, its a mental illness....but I think it is also fixable but it's very hard work.  Non SAers dont get it...they just don't understand.  Which is why I turn to online forums to talk about it.  With people that actually know what it's like.

----------


## JustAShadow

I'd say it is if it affects the quality of your life.

----------


## WineKitty

> I respect anyone with a mental illness. Why? Because I feel I have one. I suffer from Social Anxiety and Depression. I feel that it clouds ones vision of the outside world and no matter how hard you fight... it is a losing battle. Happily I show up to the fight day in day out. 
> 
> Anxiety is a real illness. Why it happens I have no idea. But from what I have learnt from spending time with people suffering from other anxiety disorders is that it makes no sense. I can not speak to a person, yet study a book with no issue. A friend can be the center of attention yet can not spend 5 mins reading a book or trying to better himself academically. 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as yet refused medical relief, because i believe that I can beat this. 2013 will be my last year of fighting alone. After that I will accept anything thrown at me.



It's funny you say that about the friend that cannot spend 5 mins reading a book.   I was just talking to a friend of mine yesterday that I have known most of my life.  He claims he cannot be "easily entertained" to just sit still long enough to read.  I, on the other hand, get lost in books and love to read.  He can also be quite the talker.  But he has a lot of anxiety issues of his own just in a very different way from me.  He takes Xanax and is on pain pills and patches for a back injury.  I sometimes think it's almost irritating how he can flutter around and talk and do things that would send me into anxiety overdrive but then again he has his own demons to fight.  

One of my  goals for 2013 is to get off benzos as I believe it was my former PCPs way of "band aid" medicine.  They worked fine for a while but now, over two years later, I am addicted to them and take an ever increasing dose.  This isn't my idea of beating anxiety.  Also, I have a medical condition that was discovered that could be inducing some anxiety (but not all of it) in me and I might have to be on medication for it for the rest of my life (thyroid).  So for my liver's sake, I want to stop taking benzos.

----------


## Misty

> I'd say it is if it affects the quality of your life.



Anxiety has effected the quality of my life, I agree with this.

----------


## Trendsetter

I don't think so. Even though I pretty hardly have any anxiety, anxious situations for me will never go away completely. 

Everyone, whether they have SA or not, will have anxious situations. If anxiety is becoming such a huge problem to a person where they cannot normally function in their lives, or causing other conditions like depression or panic attacks, then that would be a serious disorder and treatments are required. 

I never recieved any medications for treating SA, I did away with it mainly with counseling/therapy. The side effects with meds are pretty scary to me.

----------


## Frogger

It can be a disorder

----------


## Monotony

It's a real disability.

----------


## Sagan

Most definitely, and without a doubt. I speak from dealing with this evil curse for many years. It robs you (me) of a normal life. It's an evil shadow that follows me everywhere I go. Sometimes I get so angry and frustrated that I snap at the ones I love.

----------


## Otherside

Being in the UK and getting my meds for free, I don't think the mental health team is gonna provide me with medication that costs them money just for the heck of the pharmaceutical companies. 

There's nothing for me to think about. I'm not just an oversensitive person. I have an overactive nervous system and a chemical imbalance in my brain. I don't have a choice about taking my meds. As much as I hate them and am scared of them, there's no choice me for me. It's that, and deal with the side effects, or risk ending up really badly suicidal, in hospital, or worse...dead...

I don't like people telling me that I don't need my meds, or the "drug companies are out for money" argument. I know you were only referring to anxiety (and I have more than that), and you don't know my situation and all, but it's still not best to start threads like that. It's real. I have several years worth of it being real. If it wasn't for my meds, I don't know where I'd be.

----------


## Chopin12

I was told on the _other forum_ not to say this, but Ill go ahead and first say _this is just my opinion, im obviously not a doctor nor should you take my word as sound medical advice.


_that being said, anxiety is not a physical disorder. I dont think it has anything to do with your brain chemistry. now hear me out. even if there are tests that show anxiety-sufferers have a different brain chemistry, that doesnt mean that the anxiety *came* from that. all it has to mean is that their emotions and thoughts changed their brain chemistry over time.

anxiety is what you could call a mental disorder. anxiety comes from fear, a basic human emotion. and below that emotion of fear you will find fear-based thoughts. right now, at this very moment, i can choose to think different thoughts and in turn feel different emotions regardless of what my brain composition is. I strongly believe that anxiety is entirely mental and that no medication is needed. In fact, I think using medication in the hopes that its going to solve your anxiety is pointless, its never going to solve what is a mental construct that you yourself have put in place.

that being said, i also dont have anything against people who use medication, nor do i think they are wrong for it. $hi*, Ive abused plenty of medication over my life and im still okay. my point is dont let anyone make you believe there is something physically wrong with you that can only be treated using pills.

----------


## takethebiscuit

> I was told on the _other forum_ not to say this, but Ill go ahead and first say _this is just my opinion, im obviously not a doctor nor should you take my word as sound medical advice.
> 
> 
> _that being said, anxiety is not a physical disorder. I dont think it has anything to do with your brain chemistry. now hear me out. even if there are tests that show anxiety-sufferers have a different brain chemistry, that doesnt mean that the anxiety *came* from that. all it has to mean is that their emotions and thoughts changed their brain chemistry over time.
> 
> anxiety is what you could call a mental disorder. anxiety comes from fear, a basic human emotion. and below that emotion of fear you will find fear-based thoughts. right now, at this very moment, i can choose to think different thoughts and in turn feel different emotions regardless of what my brain composition is. I strongly believe that anxiety is entirely mental and that no medication is needed. In fact, I think using medication in the hopes that its going to solve your anxiety is pointless, its never going to solve what is a mental construct that you yourself have put in place.
> 
> that being said, i also dont have anything against people who use medication, nor do i think they are wrong for it. $hi*, Ive abused plenty of medication over my life and im still okay. my point is dont let anyone make you believe there is something physically wrong with you that can only be treated using pills.



One working definition of "anxiety" amongst therapists is: "an over arousal of the autonomic nervous system". This over arousal can be caused by many things including: thoughts, emotions such as guilt, regret, shame, remorse, anger etc or some sort of imbalance within the brain of the individual. If anxiety is an over arousal of the autonomic nervous system then it is very much a physical disorder as well as a mental disorder. Even if anxiety were caused by thinking alone there would still be a physical, felt presence of anxiety within the body. 

It makes sense to look at both mental and physical causes for anxiety. It makes sense to look at the treatment option of medication given the research backing up the use of such meds. People are not machines and we do need more focus on treating people as individual human beings rather than just telling them to pop a pill and acting as if that somehow automatically makes things better. But meds clearly have a place in treatment plans for anxiety disorders.

----------


## Otherside

> I was told on the _other forum_ not to say this, but Ill go ahead and first say _this is just my opinion, im obviously not a doctor nor should you take my word as sound medical advice.
> 
> 
> _that being said, anxiety is not a physical disorder. I dont think it has anything to do with your brain chemistry. now hear me out. even if there are tests that show anxiety-sufferers have a different brain chemistry, that doesnt mean that the anxiety *came* from that. all it has to mean is that their emotions and thoughts changed their brain chemistry over time.
> 
> anxiety is what you could call a mental disorder. anxiety comes from fear, a basic human emotion. and below that emotion of fear you will find fear-based thoughts. right now, at this very moment, i can choose to think different thoughts and in turn feel different emotions regardless of what my brain composition is. I strongly believe that anxiety is entirely mental and that no medication is needed. In fact, I think using medication in the hopes that its going to solve your anxiety is pointless, its never going to solve what is a mental construct that you yourself have put in place.
> 
> that being said, i also dont have anything against people who use medication, nor do i think they are wrong for it. $hi*, Ive abused plenty of medication over my life and im still okay. my point is dont let anyone make you believe there is something physically wrong with you that can only be treated using pills.



Why were you told on the other forum not to say that? I can't see anything wrong with what you say. 

I'm in an agreement with the first bit. I don't believe mental disorders are genetic (As in you have a definite chance of having it.) Something always has to trigger that. Perphaps genetics mean a person is more likely to "trigger" the disorder, as you put it, "emotions and thoughts that changed there brain chemistry over time". So lets say a person is bullied all through childhood=lots of negative thoughts and emotions, chances are, the disorder will be "triggered".

I have a lot of respect for the people who manage to deal with anxiety alone. I don't think I can only be treated with pills, there is some way forward without them. I wish I could find it, I'm just still searching for the way to solve this problem.

----------


## Chopin12

well, someone was upset that i was telling another person that they didnt need pills

id never say theres anything wrong with taking them, and if they help then thats great, i just dont think theyre necessary or a final 'cure'

----------


## WintersTale

It's terribly debilitating. 

I would love to be able to do the things I love, without having the fear there. But I'm so used to freaking out, and not being normal, that I don't know what it would like to NOT have the fear (if that makes sense.)

Love it or hate it, it is a part of me. A part people don't understand. A part people treat me badly for. But a part that is me.

----------


## Equinox

To answer the OPs question, yes it's real, do drug companies take advantage of it? Perhaps. But the fact is that there are also old school medications which are generic and way off patent, some from as far back as the 1950s and earlier which anxiety disorders respond to and which are still used today in certain cases. 
It's also worth noting that diagnostic screening tools have likely become more advanced rather than the rates of eg ::s: ocial anxiety disorder suddenly 'jumping up' in the past decade as it may have appeared to on the surface.

----------


## Otherside

> well, someone was upset that i was telling another person that they didnt need pills
> 
> id never say theres anything wrong with taking them, and if they help then thats great, i just dont think theyre necessary or a final 'cure'



Oh, okay. There was a bit of that going on over there. I'm fine as long as long as people don't start posting "Pills are the cause of serial killers" or something like that, based on the fact that Adam Lanza was supposedly on Anti-depressants (And therefore, they're evil, and going to cause everyone to shoot people.)

I not 100% for pills. To be honest, I think it's up to the person really what they choose to do and how they treat this. They've just got to be aware of the facts. I don't blindly swallow meds without researching them, and I'm well aware of what they do and can do. I have an illness (bipolar disorder/manic depression) thats difficult to deal with off meds. I've seen a few stories where people have managed without them by taking fish oil, vitamins, eating certain diets and avoiding certain foods...I'm not really sure about that, but the fear of having another hypomanic episode (And they're not always great) is pretty much keeping me on my meds. I don't generally advertise all the meds I'm on either, unless I'm looking for advise and it's somewhat relevant or someones asked for it.

I'm probably rambling a bit now. Sorry. I do that a bit, it seems.  :doh: 





> To answer the OPs question, yes it's real, do drug companies take advantage of it? Perhaps. But the fact is that there are also old school medications which are generic and way off patent, some from as far back as the 1950s and earlier which anxiety disorders respond to and which are still used today in certain cases. 
> It's also worth noting that diagnostic screening tools have likely become more advanced rather than the rates of egocial anxiety disorder suddenly 'jumping up' in the past decade as it may have appeared to on the surface.



This is completley irrelevant, but I came across something the other day that ws advertising the use of Abilify (aripiprazole) for the use in childern as young as ten suffering from "pediatric bipolar disorder" (Which according to DSM, doesn't even exist, seems to be different from "adult bipolar" and seems to exist solely in America, although it's now being called "Disruptive temper deregulation disorder, which to be honest, hasn't really been researched) and for even younger childern (six years old) suffering from irritabiliy due to a autistic spectrum disorder. Last I checked, Abilify was an antipsychotic? Why would you give an antipsychotic to a six year old?!?!?! I know some kids need it, but still.

Regarding the pediatric bipolar, I think a lot of drug companies were fined for licensing mood stabilizers/atypical antipsychotics to young children. The whole craze seems to have been made more dramatic by the drug companies. I really sure there's a better explanation for temper tantrums that labelling them "bipolar". What about ADHD, ODD, meltdowns associated with Aspergers? Why are we labelling them "Bipolar"??? A lot of these kids seem to not be depressed until after they start treatment...what a surprise on those meds. They're the ones that cause problems, we don't even fully know what they do with a childs brain. 

Yes, I know some kids need meds like this, or whatever. I'm not looking to offend anyone. Honest. But do as many need it as are being prescribed?

That was off topic in a way. But I can kinda see how the drug companies do seem to be taking advantage of mental illnesses, particularly when they prescribe drugs for one that DSM 4 or 5 doesn't list.

----------


## Equinox

> This is completley irrelevant, but I came across something the other day that ws advertising the use of Abilify (aripiprazole) for the use in childern as young as ten suffering from "pediatric bipolar disorder" (Which according to DSM, doesn't even exist, seems to be different from "adult bipolar" and seems to exist solely in America, although it's now being called "Disruptive temper deregulation disorder, which to be honest, hasn't really been researched) and for even younger childern (six years old) suffering from irritabiliy due to a autistic spectrum disorder. Last I checked, Abilify was an antipsychotic? Why would you give an antipsychotic to a six year old?!?!?! I know some kids need it, but still.
> 
> Regarding the pediatric bipolar, I think a lot of drug companies were fined for licensing mood stabilizers/atypical antipsychotics to young children. The whole craze seems to have been made more dramatic by the drug companies. I really sure there's a better explanation for temper tantrums that labelling them "bipolar". What about ADHD, ODD, meltdowns associated with Aspergers? Why are we labelling them "Bipolar"??? A lot of these kids seem to not be depressed until after they start treatment...what a surprise on those meds. They're the ones that cause problems, we don't even fully know what they do with a childs brain. 
> 
> Yes, I know some kids need meds like this, or whatever. I'm not looking to offend anyone. Honest. But do as many need it as are being prescribed?
> 
> That was off topic in a way. But I can kinda see how the drug companies do seem to be taking advantage of mental illnesses, particularly when they prescribe drugs for one that DSM 4 or 5 doesn't list.



This whole concept is a bit new to me as I was more-so referring to the treatment of anxiety disorders in adults in my previous posts, but at any rate I'll try to respond because I think you bring up some interesting points about how the pharma sector operates. 

I wasn't really sure what Abilify was formally approved for in the US beyond adult Schizophrenia and Bipolar Mania so this is one I had to look into. Looking this one up, it comes up as being FDA approved for: 

*Schizophrenia (ages 13 and older)*
Maintaining stability in schizophrenia
*Acute mania/mixed mania (ages 10 and older)*
Bipolar maintenance
Depression (adjunct)
*Autism-related irritability in children ages 6 to 17*

Whoa, okay so that's a lot of formal indications for one med! I'm assuming for a medication to be advertised in the US it needs FDA marketing approval for that application. Advertising prescription medication is banned where I live which I think is better, but the US certainly does have this big med culture thing going. 

I wouldn't want to give my layman opinion on the intricacies of pediatric bipolar disorder nor irritability related to autism because I simply don't know enough about those disorders. I would generally agree that Abilify is too strong of a med to be throwing at most children (let alone some adults) for something that's not apparently severe, but again It would have to be taken into account just how much the individual is suffering and desperate for relief vs are they just mildly disruptive and going to grow out of it? Can a milder medication such a Tenex be exhausted first if absolutely necessary? 

This is a moral dilemma which I hope pediatricians have enough experience with to make the right choice for their patients, and I hope they can make these decisions without being strong-armed by big pharma and the latest 'it' med. Certainly Abilify has been demonstrated to be quite an effective medication for mental disorders on the severe end of the spectrum where it's use is clearly going to be beneficial, but do the benefits really outweigh the potential cons when used as an add-on in moderate depression or in childhood disorders which may be as you mentioned something closer to ADHD or ODD? 

The growing/developing brain is especially sensitive to psych medications. Recall how retroactively they decided to restrict Paroxetine use to 18+ because it ended up increasing the risk of suicidal ideation and irritability in children? Granted Abilify is a completely different type of medication, but as you said it is still new, and we don't really know how it's going to end up affecting kids over the long term, so caution should be advised unless there's a very imperative need for it.

----------


## Equinox

> I'm in an agreement with the first bit. I don't believe mental disorders are genetic (As in you have a definite chance of having it.) Something always has to trigger that. Perphaps genetics mean a person is more likely to "trigger" the disorder, as you put it, "emotions and thoughts that changed there brain chemistry over time". So lets say a person is bullied all through childhood=lots of negative thoughts and emotions, chances are, the disorder will be "triggered".



I think what you mentioned relates to the Diathesis stress model which asserts that the onset of a disorder results from a blending of oneâs genetic and biological vulnerabilities, and the occurrence of a stressful event(s).

----------


## Antidote

> I was told on the _other forum_ not to say this, but Ill go ahead and first say _this is just my opinion, im obviously not a doctor nor should you take my word as sound medical advice.
> 
> 
> _that being said, anxiety is not a physical disorder. I dont think it has anything to do with your brain chemistry. now hear me out. even if there are tests that show anxiety-sufferers have a different brain chemistry, that doesnt mean that the anxiety *came* from that. all it has to mean is that their emotions and thoughts changed their brain chemistry over time.



It actually is a physical disorder and it has a lot to do with brain chemistry. Mental = physical, because the brain is an organ like any other organ that is part of your body. Your thoughts / emotions and perceptions stem from your brain. If their is a disease process occurring in the brain it will disrupt the normal, healthy process of thought / emotions and perceptions. Since the advent of neuroscience it's become clear there's no meaningful distinction between mental and physical. 

Research shows, some people are born with anxious dispositions and react intensely to their environment. Infants and children who have this disposition are at much greater risk of developing anxiety disorders. Many of them turn into adults like us. For many of them there was no change from non-anxious -> to anxious over time, they were inherently anxious in one form or another, ever since they could remember. 





> anxiety is what you could call a mental disorder. anxiety comes from fear, a basic human emotion. and below that emotion of fear you will find fear-based thoughts. right now, at this very moment, i can choose to think different thoughts and in turn feel different emotions regardless of what my brain composition is.



What you are implying is that because everything you think and feel is -apparently a choice, the reason why anyone has an anxiety disorder is because they've failed to think and choose their way out of it like everyone else who doesn't have an anxiety disorder. That's another way of saying we're weak of character. That kind of thinking is extremely harmful to anyone suffering from any kind of mental illness. If it were that easy to think your way out of illness, why are we all not recovered yet? I've been like this for 10 years. I don't have the luxury of choice. 

Yes anxiety is an emotion everyone experiences, but it's on a spectrum. When you get to an extreme end of the spectrum that causes distress and dysfunction, you have an illness. Nobody chooses to be ill. 

You don't really have as much choice over your emotion and thought processes as you think you do either. Studies have shown that a brain scan can detect what someone will 'choose' before they are even consciously aware they have even made a choice. So technically there's no such thing as willfully making a choice, every cognitive process we have is just responses to internal and external environmental triggers. Additionally, the nature of your thoughts and how much they feedback into and influence emotions is variable and limited.  






> I strongly believe that anxiety is entirely mental and that no medication is needed. In fact, I think using medication in the hopes that its going to solve your anxiety is pointless, its never going to solve what is a mental construct that you yourself have put in place.
> 
> that being said, i also dont have anything against people who use medication, nor do i think they are wrong for it. $hi*, Ive abused plenty of medication over my life and im still okay. my point is dont let anyone make you believe there is something physically wrong with you that can only be treated using pills.



Since I've addressed mental = physical, medications do have a place in treatment. They're not for everyone but they are another option that should be explored for anyone who has a moderate to severe case of anxiety. There is something physically wrong at the neuroanotomical level in anyone who has a mental illness including anxiety disorders, if you ever actually want to investigate this there are hundreds of research articles free online indicating this. Denying any neuranotomical contribution doesn't help, and in fact invalidates mental illness. Likewise there shouldn't be shame in being ill, since again, it's not a choice. Suggesting that people have put some mental construct in place on their own accord which is making them ill, is essentially turning the blame onto the sufferer, which I'll reiterate, is HARMFUL, because it drags mental illness back to the days when people would tell you to 'get over it' (and sadly some people still do).

----------


## takethebiscuit

"Additionally, the nature of your thoughts and how much they feedback into and influence emotions is variable and limited."

That's both true and not true. If it were 100% true then no lawyer would ever be able to frame a case in such a way as to convince a jury of their clients innocence. No prosecutor would be able to frame things in such a way that would convince a jury of someone's guilt. Persuasion wars like in courtrooms up and down the land happen precisely because our thoughts have power over our emotions. We feel our thinking. A lawyer will frame events and evidence in a trial in such a way as to evoke certain thoughts in the mind of a jury. These thoughts then give rise to certain emotions which help sway opinions one way or another. It can also work the other way: emotions causing thoughts. 

Your thinking has a great deal of power over your emotions just as your emotions have a great deal of power over your thinking. 

An anxious person has a panic attack. Emotions happen all over the place. What happens to that anxious person's thinking during that panic attack?

An anxious person thinks about a panic attack. What happens to that anxious person's emotions as a result of entering into thinking about a panic attack?

You are right that it is variable and limited. And it's true that there's a huge amount of power in our thinking.


"You don't really have as much choice over your emotion and thought processes as you think you do either. Studies have shown that a brain scan can detect what someone will 'choose' before they are even consciously aware they have even made a choice. So technically there's no such thing as willfully making a choice, every cognitive process we have is just responses to internal and external environmental triggers."

In a sense, it's this knowledge that gives us more will choice. If we know that the subconscious processes make decisions in many cases before we are consciously aware of a choice being made then we can consciously take steps to influence our subconscious processes in beneficial ways. 

For example: scientific evidence shows that our opinions can be altered through peer pressure, group feedback etc. It shows that we don't just lie about our opinions to gain favour with the groups we are in. We actively change our opinions if certain peer pressure is applied. Not in all cases but a lot of the time. Now, if this is true then it makes sense for us to consciously surround ourselves with people who already have good opinions about ourselves . We feel down, we talk to the people closest to us and they give us their good opinions of us. We are then influenced by those positive opinions about us and we change our thinking and our feelings about ourselves. 

I may have gone off on one there but basically: the more we know about the nature of persuasion at a conscious or subconscious level, the more we gain the power to influence ourselves.

Are we in control all the time and is anxiety a choice. No and no. We're human. And because we're human we should never forget the huge amount of power we have to heal ourselves and seek help from others. 

Is this always easy? No, not at all. But there is a lot of hope out there.

----------


## Misssy

Bear, couple of weeks ago I went to the doctor and asked this question pretty much. I told him I was having anxiety and I asked him if there was a mild thing to take for it that wasn't a benzo.....for some reason he prescribed celexa....I think maybe he didn't really listen to me because Celexa is an anti-depressant. I told him that I have reservations about trying any more medications because what if it's situational instead of a permanent defect in my brain. His answer was that it's complicated...and he didn't give me a straight answer. Even doctors seem to be somewhat confused by it. Unfortunately I think the burden is very much on the patient to figure it out for themselves. After I started trying Prozac, Paxil, Welbutrin, Effexor, Zoloft....and now being prescribed Celexa....well, my life still has challenges and problems and I think the circumstances in my life contribute to my depression. I've gotten to the point where I don't even use the word depression anymore because it's too vague....I have a huge sense of LOSS, disappointment,....and like I don't have anything to look forward to in life.....to me that isn't the same as depression.....every "negative" thing gets lumped into the term depression. The medication he gave to me the Celexa....I haven't picked it up yet and I may not....when I googled it I read that one of the side effects IS ANXIETY.....definitely not what I need.

----------


## Otherside

> Bear, couple of weeks ago I went to the doctor and asked this question pretty much. I told him I was having anxiety and I asked him if there was a mild thing to take for it that wasn't a benzo.....for some reason he prescribed celexa....I think maybe he didn't really listen to me because Celexa is an anti-depressant. I told him that I have reservations about trying any more medications because what if it's situational instead of a permanent defect in my brain. His answer was that it's complicated...and he didn't give me a straight answer. Even doctors seem to be somewhat confused by it. Unfortunately I think the burden is very much on the patient to figure it out for themselves. After I started trying Prozac, Paxil, Welbutrin, Effexor, Zoloft....and now being prescribed Celexa....well, my life still has challenges and problems and I think the circumstances in my life contribute to my depression. I've gotten to the point where I don't even use the word depression anymore because it's too vague....I have a huge sense of LOSS, disappointment,....and like I don't have anything to look forward to in life.....to me that isn't the same as depression.....every "negative" thing gets lumped into the term depression. The medication he gave to me the Celexa....I haven't picked it up yet and I may not....when I googled it I read that one of the side effects IS ANXIETY.....definitely not what I need.



Odd, two appointments ago my PDoc said that Celexa helps anxiety, and he was confident that it would help it. (I was only on it for depression though) I know it's used in panic disorder, but I don't know if it's used in GAD/SAD. 

I was also told Prozac could help my anxiety when I was prescribed that.

----------


## Chopin12

I just think you have a choice. Im not saying we're weak of character. Its  actually more strengthening to believe you have a choice than to believe you are powerless.

----------


## Misssy

Oh, otherside I didn't know that, maybe Celexa does help with anxiety. I haven't read a whole lot about it but I just saw that ANXIETY is a side effect of it.

----------


## pam

> I was told on the _other forum_ not to say this, but Ill go ahead and first say _this is just my opinion, im obviously not a doctor nor should you take my word as sound medical advice.
> 
> 
> _that being said, anxiety is not a physical disorder. I dont think it has anything to do with your brain chemistry. now hear me out. even if there are tests that show anxiety-sufferers have a different brain chemistry, that doesnt mean that the anxiety *came* from that. all it has to mean is that their emotions and thoughts changed their brain chemistry over time.
> 
> anxiety is what you could call a mental disorder. anxiety comes from fear, a basic human emotion. and below that emotion of fear you will find fear-based thoughts. right now, at this very moment, i can choose to think different thoughts and in turn feel different emotions regardless of what my brain composition is. I strongly believe that anxiety is entirely mental and that no medication is needed. In fact, I think using medication in the hopes that its going to solve your anxiety is pointless, its never going to solve what is a mental construct that you yourself have put in place.
> 
> that being said, i also dont have anything against people who use medication, nor do i think they are wrong for it. $hi*, Ive abused plenty of medication over my life and im still okay. my point is dont let anyone make you believe there is something physically wrong with you that can only be treated using pills.



I agree with your opinion. You make a lot of good points. 
And IDK why this offended anyone over on the other site.  :Confused:

----------


## pam

> well, someone was upset that i was telling another person that they didnt need pills
> 
> id never say theres anything wrong with taking them, and if they help then thats great, i just dont think theyre necessary or a final 'cure'



Yeah, they aren't a cure. They just cover the symptoms....that's IF they work I mean...and beyond just a placebo effect that doesn't last for more than a few months. Which leads to trying another, then another, etc. I think its sad, because I believe the rate  of success is not nearly as much as is advertised. They need to improve the drugs. Or try something else like therapy which is what I prefer.

----------


## pam

> One working definition of "anxiety" amongst therapists is: "an over arousal of the autonomic nervous system". This over arousal can be caused by many things including: thoughts, emotions such as guilt, regret, shame, remorse, anger etc or some sort of imbalance within the brain of the individual. If anxiety is an over arousal of the autonomic nervous system then it is very much a physical disorder as well as a mental disorder. Even if anxiety were caused by thinking alone there would still be a physical, felt presence of anxiety within the body. 
> 
> It makes sense to look at both mental and physical causes for anxiety. It makes sense to look at the treatment option of medication given the research backing up the use of such meds. People are not machines and we do need more focus on treating people as individual human beings rather than just telling them to pop a pill and acting as if that somehow automatically makes things better. But meds clearly have a place in treatment plans for anxiety disorders.



About the "over-arousal of the autonomic nervous system," couldn't it also be that yes, that is the physical state at a given time, but that it's the response, not the stimulus? (Actually I see you list outside stimuli that could've caused this reaction). So, I guess my point is that just because a symptom manifests physically, that doesn't mean it's necessarily a physical problem? With a lot of depression and anxiety, I believe it's purely psychologically caused, and that's where your nice post on persuasion would come in to fix it, rather than medications. 

Not saying you think this way, but I just don't understand why anyone would think psychological problems aren't psychological. And that they are purely physical. I've been told IDK how many times that I have an imbalance--really? Because no one's ever checked! And then a year ago they checked something in my blood that would show I forget which hormones or chemicals that are related to depression or anxiety, but I came back normal. No surprise to me. 

My view is that most or a lot of us have normal brains, but they're temporarily influenced by many things (such as the gin & tonic I'm about to have) but it doesn't mean there's a disorder of the brain. But I think no one believes this anymore. Seems like people would rather have a chemical imbalance. Not me, lol.

----------


## Antidote

> That's both true and not true. If it were 100% true then no lawyer would ever be able to frame a case in such a way as to convince a jury of their clients innocence. No prosecutor would be able to frame things in such a way that would convince a jury of someone's guilt. Persuasion wars like in courtrooms up and down the land happen precisely because our thoughts have power over our emotions. We feel our thinking. A lawyer will frame events and evidence in a trial in such a way as to evoke certain thoughts in the mind of a jury. These thoughts then give rise to certain emotions which help sway opinions one way or another. It can also work the other way: emotions causing thoughts.



Actually, as a result of the new neuroscientific research that has come out in the past decade, there is a strong argument that the legal system needs to be reformed, with a push towards emphasising rehabilitation rather than punishment since technically 'accountability' is a shaky concept. But just because neurologically speaking, there is no real thing as accountability, this doesn't mean that behaviour isn't punishable; reprimanding and rehabilitation is still necessary to manipulate future behavior or circumstances and protect the general public. This is an easy to read (but long) article that explains more about neuroscience and it's implications for the legal system: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-trial/308520/





> In a sense, it's this knowledge that gives us more will choice. If we know that the subconscious processes make decisions in many cases before we are consciously aware of a choice being made then we can consciously take steps to influence our subconscious processes in beneficial ways. 
> 
> For example: scientific evidence shows that our opinions can be altered through peer pressure, group feedback etc. It shows that we don't just lie about our opinions to gain favour with the groups we are in. We actively change our opinions if certain peer pressure is applied. Not in all cases but a lot of the time. Now, if this is true then it makes sense for us to consciously surround ourselves with people who already have good opinions about ourselves . We feel down, we talk to the people closest to us and they give us their good opinions of us. We are then influenced by those positive opinions about us and we change our thinking and our feelings about ourselves. 
> 
> I may have gone off on one there but basically: the more we know about the nature of persuasion at a conscious or subconscious level, the more we gain the power to influence ourselves.



No you didn't go off on a tangent there. I agree because it ties into what I was saying, and it makes perfect sense. The crux of rehabilitation whether it be for criminals or people who are ill with any kind of disease - is to change the environment so that they are triggered less. Environmental changes involve just as you implied; social support along with innumerable other things (including medication for some). Environmental influences can be manipulated to lower stress hormones and / or spur healthy behaviour which is an indirect way of harnessing 'control' over your behaviour. Though this still poses a problem as some people are limited in how much initiative they are capable of (again due to an inherent disposition), or access they have to making changes to their environment.

----------


## Antidote

> Not saying you think this way, but I just don't understand why anyone would think psychological problems aren't psychological. And that they are purely physical. I've been told IDK how many times that I have an imbalance--really? Because no one's ever checked! And then a year ago they checked something in my blood that would show I forget which hormones or chemicals that are related to depression or anxiety, but I came back normal. No surprise to me. 
> 
> My view is that most or a lot of us have normal brains, but they're temporarily influenced by many things (such as the gin & tonic I'm about to have) but it doesn't mean there's a disorder of the brain. But I think no one believes this anymore. Seems like people would rather have a chemical imbalance. Not me, lol.



  :Confused:  There's not yet any official diagnostic blood test for any mental disorders. Even if there was it would probably be crude due to various physiological reasons (blood brain barrier etc). Your blood test doesn't counter evidence from hundreds of studies indicating neurobiological evidence of abnormality in brain disorders. 





> I just think you have a choice. Im not saying we're weak of character. Its  actually more strengthening to believe you have a choice than to believe you are powerless.



It's not a strength when you imply everyone who has an anxiety disorder of any duration, has a choice, yet somehow failed to beat their condition and has languished for years instead.

----------


## Chopin12

it is a strength, youre just looking at it the wrong way

just because we have anxiety doesnt mean we failed. it doesnt mean we're weaker or more worthless than people who dont have it. we're just dealing with different things.

every single person in the world has problems, even if it appears they dont on the outside. we are dealing with the common problem called anxiety. if you believe you have it because youre born that way, because of your genetics, or because of environmental factors you're doing two things

youre rendering yourself powerless over your thoughts and feelings, and youre shifting the responsibility from yourself to the outside world. its easier to believe we're a victim than to realize we've been doing it to ourselves. Its easy to play the victim.  People do it all the time, and we love doing it. Im no different, Ive done it many times and continue to do so. But I feel that in order to grow we need to quit playing the victim game. Only I am responsible for my thoughts and feelings, in reality. Even if sometimes I choose to believe some external force did this to me.

but you dont have to feel like you failed, or that youre weak. thats just a subjective judgement. I feel great about the fact that I have had anxiety, because its a result of my perceptions. And I see tremendous value in my perception of the world, because of the things Ive allowed myself to be honest about and see. maybe the perceptions I have that give me anxiety aren't valuable, and if I had been a different person.. walked a different path.. I might not have anxiety, but I might not have my valuable perceptions, either.

----------


## Antidote

> it is a strength, youre just looking at it the wrong way
> 
> just because we have anxiety doesnt mean we failed. it doesnt mean we're weaker or more worthless than people who dont have it. we're just dealing with *different* things.



So you agree that those with anxiety disorders are dealing with a different thing to those w/o anxiety disorders? Then we agree. Because we are born different with different genes / dispositions and susceptibilities. Other people without anxiety disorders don't deal with this level of anxiety. They have lower levels. So they cannot be compared to those with anxiety disorders. That's what I'm saying.  





> every single person in the world has problems, even if it appears they dont on the outside. we are dealing with the common problem called anxiety. if you believe you have it because youre born that way, because of your genetics, or because of environmental factors you're doing two things
> 
> youre rendering yourself powerless over your thoughts and feelings, and youre shifting the responsibility from yourself to the outside world.



Just because I'm acknowledging anxiety has a biologically cause doesn't mean we can't manipulate our environment and then our behaviour. I explained this in my reply to takethebiscuit. Manipulating the external environment also manipulates the internal environment of our bodies.





> its easier to believe we're a victim than to realize we've been doing it to ourselves. Its easy to play the victim.  People do it all the time, and we love doing it. Im no different, Ive done it many times and continue to do so. But I feel that in order to grow we need to quit playing the victim game. Only I am responsible for my thoughts and feelings, in reality. Even if sometimes I choose to believe some external force did this to me.



You pretty much spelled it out, you think we have 'victim mentality' and are feeling sorry for ourselves. We are to blame for turning out this way i.e. we are weak. Apparently you find it helpful to conceptualise your condition this way. Speak for yourself. 





> but you dont have to feel like you failed, or that youre weak. thats just a subjective judgement. I feel great about the fact that I have had anxiety, because its a result of my perceptions. And I see tremendous value in my perception of the world, because of the things Ive allowed myself to be honest about and see. maybe the perceptions I have that give me anxiety aren't valuable, and if I had been a different person.. walked a different path.. I might not have anxiety, but I might not have my valuable perceptions, either.



So many contradictions...

----------


## Chopin12

there were no contradictions, id rather you point them out specifically if youre going to say that at all

and i think you are misunderstanding the other things i said

yes, we are dealing with a different problem than those that dont feel anxiety. thats obvious. i didnt think there was any debate about that. I never once said that our problems were the same as others. but that DOESNT mean that I agree that we're dealing with anxiety because  we are born with different genes. we may have different dispositions, thoughts, attitudes, and so on. but still, i dont think of it the same way as you. person A is not born with disposition and attitude A. Its just not like that.

And you can try to manipulate your environment all you want, and come back and tell me if you were succesful in eliminating your anxiety. If you are, then more power to you. But Im of the thought that anxiety is purely mental. Even if I had a better environment than the one Im in now, my anxiety would not be cured in time. It would take me changing my thoughts. And right off the bat you can see that changing your environment is less reliable than changing your thoughts. Not everyone CAN change their environment to a better one. Not everyone is in that position. Its more effective to go to the source of the problem, our minds.

About the victim thing, Im not sure what point youre trying to make. What I said was that its easier to blame our anxiety on externals instead of realizing we have the power to change it.  Again, I didnt say we are weak. We are strong because we have the power to change our lives. The fact that we still have anxiety DOESNT make us weak, thats YOUR judgement.

----------


## Chopin12

furthermore, this isnt a contest, im just sharing my thoughts. if we disagree, thats okay. calm down.

----------


## Antidote

> there were no contradictions, id rather you point them out specifically if youre going to say that at all



You stated we are acting like victims, yet we are not weak. Yet acting like victims implies we are weak. Do you see the contradiction? 





> and i think you are misunderstanding the other things i said
> 
> yes, we are dealing with a different problem than those that dont feel anxiety. thats obvious. i didnt think there was any debate about that. I never once said that our problems were the same as others. but that DOESNT mean that I agree that we're dealing with anxiety because  we are born with different genes. we may have different dispositions, thoughts, attitudes, and so on. but still, i dont think of it the same way as you. person A is not born with disposition and attitude A. Its just not like that.
> 
> And you can try to manipulate your environment all you want, and come back and tell me if you were succesful in eliminating your anxiety. If you are, then more power to you. But Im of the thought that anxiety is purely mental. Even if I had a better environment than the one Im in now, my anxiety would not be cured in time. It would take me changing my thoughts. And right off the bat you can see that changing your environment is less reliable than changing your thoughts. Not everyone CAN change their environment to a better one. Not everyone is in that position. Its more effective to go to the source of the problem, our minds.



I'm not going to repeat everything I've said since I've covered this already. It's clear your conjecture is not informed by science and you are not receptive to it. 





> About the victim thing, Im not sure what point youre trying to make. What I said was that its easier to blame our anxiety on externals instead of realizing we have the power to change it.  Again, I didnt say we are weak. We are strong because we have the power to change our lives. *The fact that we still have anxiety DOESNT make us weak, thats YOUR judgement*.



I never said we were weak, I've been arguing against it this whole time. I said your opinions imply weakness, but you don't seem to see the contradictions in your own statements. I think we are strong because like I've said again and again, due to our biological disposition, we have a heavier anxiety burden to carry than most, but we still do it.





> furthermore, this isnt a contest, im just sharing my thoughts. if we disagree, thats okay. calm down.



Like I said before, I find what you imply, harmful. I won't really back down on this issue, because I feel compelled to advocate for it even on deaf ears. What you say is a throwback to when mental illness was the sufferer's fault for having a victim mentality / not getting their act together / lazy etc. That only perpetuates stigma and causes more social ostracism for the mentally ill. Thankfully, neuropsychiatry has progressed since then and there's been a shift in thinking away from what your saying.

----------


## Equinox

> Yeah, they aren't a cure. They just cover the symptoms....that's IF they work I mean...and beyond just a placebo effect that doesn't last for more than a few months. Which leads to trying another, then another, etc. I think its sad, because I believe the rate  of success is not nearly as much as is advertised. They need to improve the drugs. Or try something else like therapy which is what I prefer.



First of all I want to touch on a few points, I don't see 'covering up the symptoms' as being a bad thing. People take insulin to cover up the symptoms of type 1 diabetes if you want to look at it that way. So long as something relieves symptoms and leads to a more productive life then that's okay in my book.

With that said there is evidence that psych medications can cause positive long term changes, such as changes in neuroplasticity, for example SSRIs have been shown to enhance BDNF (brain derived-neurotrophic factor) which is less active during depressive states.   

I apologize for the technical speech in the below quote, I just put it here to demonstrate that what goes on during an interaction between a psych med and the brain is a very complex one.





> Clinical and basic researches demonstrate that chronic antidepressant treatment increases the rate of neurogenesis in the adult hippocampus. Antidepressants up-regulate cAMP and the neurotrophin signaling pathways involved in plasticity and survival. In vitro and in vivo data provide direct evidence that the transcription factor, cAMP response element-binding protein (CREB) and the neurotrophin, BDNF are key mediators of the therapeutic response to antidepressants. Depression maybe associated with a disruption of mechanisms that govern cell survival and neuroplasticity in the brain.



Role of neuroplasticity in individual difference of antidepressants efficacy

----------


## Chopin12

Acting like  victim doesnt make you weak. I believe we are strong, whether you act like a victim or not. Someone acting like a victim doesnt imply weakness, this is again your judgement. There is no contradiction, you cant impose your judgements on my perception and then call it a contradiction.

I know you never said we are weak. I said that the whole weakness thing is YOUR judgement of my perception. You keep insisting that everything I say implies weakness, but you continually fail to see this is your opinion, not mine.

And you can differ from my opinion all you want. Find it harmful all you want. Its really okay with me. I will respectfully disagree. Though, I will not continue to point out why because you are copping an attitude without even understanding what Im saying.

----------


## Antidote

I've seen your argument before. This is old territory for me. When you do not acknowledge the biological causes of anxiety you automatically imply it's a character flaw. It looks like you haven't really thought this out. I'm passionate about this area and it fires me up for the reasons I said before. Apologies if you see it as an attitude, but I prefer being this way and educating people (somewhere I hope) in the process.

----------


## Chopin12

its okay. i dont mean any harm either. just try not to assume you know what someone is saying  when you dont. im the one saying it and none of your descriptions match up with what i mean. i never said anything about a character flaw. in fact, i never even went into motivation. 

just because you see what im describing as character flaws, doesnt mean that I do. 

what you think i "automatically imply" with everything i say is your own judgement. not mine.

----------


## Antidote

> none of your descriptions match up with what i mean. i never said anything about a character flaw.



Okay i'll simplify it.





> anxiety is not a physical disorder. I don't think it has anything to do with your brain chemistry.







> anxiety is what you could call a mental disorder.



These statements indicate you think mental and physical are separate right? And you reject physical causes of anxiety right? So therefore you think anxiety being purely 'mental' comes from faulty thoughts / beliefs (which according to you have no biological component). 

Hence:





> even if there are tests that show anxiety-sufferers have a different brain chemistry, that doesnt mean that the anxiety *came* from that. all it has to mean is that their emotions and thoughts changed their brain chemistry over time.



This statement implies we brought the anxiety disorders onto ourselves by having faulty thoughts. Correct? 

So you're saying we have faulty thinking that causes > anxiety disorder rather than a biological difference that causes > anxiety disorder. Character pertains to the 'unique mental' qualities of an individual. So it follows that if one develops an anxiety disorder due to faulty thinking, they have a character flaw.  

Please feel free to clarify your position if you still feel misunderstood.

----------


## takethebiscuit

> About the "over-arousal of the autonomic nervous system," couldn't it also be that yes, that is the physical state at a given time, but that it's the response, not the stimulus? (Actually I see you list outside stimuli that could've caused this reaction). So, I guess my point is that just because a symptom manifests physically, that doesn't mean it's necessarily a physical problem? With a lot of depression and anxiety, I believe it's purely psychologically caused, and that's where your nice post on persuasion would come in to fix it, rather than medications



Thank you for your post, Pam. It could well be that the physical state at a given time is the response not the stimulus. 

You're right, just because a symptom manifest physically, that doesn't mean it's necessarily a physical problem. A physical problem could be a reflection of an underlying psychological cause but it is also possible to mistake physiological diseases for psychological disorders. Which is why I ask my clients to see their doctors before beginning therapy with me. If I start treating a client based on the idea that what they are experiencing is psychological and it turns out that it's actually a physiological illness, we're in trouble. The client goes to the doctor to rule out physiological causes for what they have been experiencing. Once those causes have been ruled out, it can be assumed that physiological symptoms are reflections of psychological problems and therapy/coaching is the right option for the client.






> My view is that most or a lot of us have normal brains, but they're temporarily influenced by many things (such as the gin & tonic I'm about to have) but it doesn't mean there's a disorder of the brain. But I think no one believes this anymore. Seems like people would rather have a chemical imbalance. Not me, lol.



You could well be right. I'm against the "pop a pill" culture. I'd rather work with people on psychological problems and help them make progress that way. It just comes down to the duty of care to the client thing again. My personal views about what causes things only matter to a certain extent. If the evidence presented before me is that a client has an imbalance then we have to work with that and I have to hand things over to their doctor.

The worst thing I've seen is the fact that therapists and doctors are not really listening to their clients. We've been looking for unified theories of therapy and medical causes for anxiety instead of listening more to individual clients to find out what's going on for them.

----------


## takethebiscuit

[QUOTE=Antidote;247356]Actually, as a result of the new neuroscientific research that has come out in the past decade, there is a strong argument that the legal system needs to be reformed, with a push towards emphasising rehabilitation rather than punishment since technically 'accountability' is a shaky concept. But just because neurologically speaking, there is no real thing as accountability, this doesn't mean that behaviour isn't punishable; reprimanding and rehabilitation is still necessary to manipulate future behavior or circumstances and protect the general public. This is an easy to read (but long) article that explains more about neuroscience and it's implications for the legal system: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-trial/308520/

Thank you for your reply and for the article link. This is an area of interest for me and I will read through the article. Cheers.





> No you didn't go off on a tangent there. I agree because it ties into what I was saying, and it makes perfect sense. The crux of rehabilitation whether it be for criminals or people who are ill with any kind of disease - is to change the environment so that they are triggered less. Environmental changes involve just as you implied; social support along with innumerable other things (including medication for some). Environmental influences can be manipulated to lower stress hormones and / or spur healthy behaviour which is an indirect way of harnessing 'control' over your behaviour. Though this still poses a problem as some people are limited in how much initiative they are capable of (again due to an inherent disposition), or access they have to making changes to their environment.



Indeed. We need to look at environmental changes as a form of support for people/rehabilitation for criminals etc and assist those who would find making such changes difficult. I don't think environmental change is the unified theory of support but it is certainly something that is shown to help.

----------


## pam

I just want to say:

Being a victim--Has NOTHING to do with whether a person is WEAK. They are just not even related at all. Like comparing apples and pork-chops.

And just because something is not biologically or physically caused, doesn't then mean it's somehow the patient's "fault." I think it's very restricting to only consider a physical science approach when it comes to human minds. 

When I talk about medications in a negative way, I am only talking about the common antidepressants that I have yet to see anyone in my life be helped by, whether they take them for depression or anxiety. I'm not referring to all medications and all mental disorders.

Yes there are things that can be physically tested--when they took my blood it was to check hormone levels, thyroid, and something else that yes, all DO affect how you feel and your behavior. But I came back normal. No one's ever offered to check my brain with an mri or anything. I wouldn't object because I'm sure that would come back normal too.    

I also am not really impressed with scientific explanations (and yeah, I don't understand what that paragraph said). Any view can find scientific proof to support it, so it doesn't CONVINCE me. What I'm more interested in is, how did the patients FEEL. I like case studies that are based on subjective reports better....I just don't care about brain chemistry personally. What matters (to me) is how the person feels.

----------


## Chopin12

youre just not describing it the way i would.. i dont think of it in terms of being "faulty" or having "flaws" .. i didnt come on the thread to have a debate, either. i didnt explain my entire opinion and reasoning behind it and i can assure you that you havent heard this "argument" before, nor do you have the slightest idea what im talking about. and thats the last thing im going to say about it.

----------


## pam

> First of all I want to touch on a few points, I don't see 'covering up the symptoms' as being a bad thing......



I don't either. People should do whatever makes them feel better. I just haven't personally known one person who had long-term success with antidepressants, including myself.

----------


## WintersTale

> Oh, okay. There was a bit of that going on over there. I'm fine as long as long as people don't start posting "Pills are the cause of serial killers" or something like that, based on the fact that Adam Lanza was supposedly on Anti-depressants (And therefore, they're evil, and going to cause everyone to shoot people.)
> 
> I not 100% for pills. To be honest, I think it's up to the person really what they choose to do and how they treat this. They've just got to be aware of the facts. I don't blindly swallow meds without researching them, and I'm well aware of what they do and can do. I have an illness (bipolar disorder/manic depression) thats difficult to deal with off meds. I've seen a few stories where people have managed without them by taking fish oil, vitamins, eating certain diets and avoiding certain foods...I'm not really sure about that, but the fear of having another hypomanic episode (And they're not always great) is pretty much keeping me on my meds. I don't generally advertise all the meds I'm on either, unless I'm looking for advise and it's somewhat relevant or someones asked for it.
> 
> I'm probably rambling a bit now. Sorry. I do that a bit, it seems. 
> 
> 
> 
> This is completley irrelevant, but I came across something the other day that ws advertising the use of Abilify (aripiprazole) for the use in childern as young as ten suffering from "pediatric bipolar disorder" (Which according to DSM, doesn't even exist, seems to be different from "adult bipolar" and seems to exist solely in America, although it's now being called "Disruptive temper deregulation disorder, which to be honest, hasn't really been researched) and for even younger childern (six years old) suffering from irritabiliy due to a autistic spectrum disorder. Last I checked, Abilify was an antipsychotic? Why would you give an antipsychotic to a six year old?!?!?! I know some kids need it, but still.
> ...



What is interesting about your quote is that my surrogate nephew, who has been diagnosed with manic bipolar, takes Abilify for this very reason. He is 7 years old.

He's actually in the hospital right now because he threatened to kill himself. The other four kids are pretty normal, and then there's my nephew. He's always had to bear the brunt of being the black sheep, or the mentally ill, of the family, but it is quite ridiculous that he was put on something that strong.

I have a story about Abilify. I am Bipolar type 2, and I was taking Zyprexa for the longest time...the only med that could stabilize my mood. However, I was gaining weight at an enormous pace, and at one time I weighed close to 300 pounds. My doctor was terrified that I would develop Diabetes, because it runs in the family, so he tried to get me on a different medication. 

I tried Abilify, and not only did it not work, but it sent me into a suicidal downward spiral where I ended up in the mental ward of the local hospital for three weeks. Not fun, not fun at all. I was 24 years old, so I was an adult, but...still. Drugs can be dangerous, when someone is put on the wrong one. Everyone reacts differently, and you can't throw everyone into a box and say that's normal.

----------


## takethebiscuit

> What is interesting about your quote is that my surrogate nephew, who has been diagnosed with manic bipolar, takes Abilify for this very reason. He is 7 years old.
> 
> He's actually in the hospital right now because he threatened to kill himself. The other four kids are pretty normal, and then there's my nephew. He's always had to bear the brunt of being the black sheep, or the mentally ill, of the family, but it is quite ridiculous that he was put on something that strong.
> 
> I have a story about Abilify. I am Bipolar type 2, and I was taking Zyprexa for the longest time...the only med that could stabilize my mood. However, I was gaining weight at an enormous pace, and at one time I weighed close to 300 pounds. My doctor was terrified that I would develop Diabetes, because it runs in the family, so he tried to get me on a different medication. 
> 
> I tried Abilify, and not only did it not work, but it sent me into a suicidal downward spiral where I ended up in the mental ward of the local hospital for three weeks. Not fun, not fun at all. I was 24 years old, so I was an adult, but...still. Drugs can be dangerous, when someone is put on the wrong one. Everyone reacts differently, and you can't throw everyone into a box and say that's normal.



Drugs can indeed be dangerous and its important for people taking medication to keep a note of any side effects they feel/experience so they can discuss these in detail with their doctor.

----------


## Antidote

> I just want to say:
> 
> Being a victim--Has NOTHING to do with whether a person is WEAK. They are just not even related at all. Like comparing apples and pork-chops.



I don't think you understood my point. Adopting a victim mentality is seen as an excuse, a cop out, and a weakness by society if you don't have a 'valid' reason. If you are attacked and mugged in the street and seen as an unsuspecting victim, everyone gives you their support and sympathy. If you imply you feel like a helpless victim, (like Chopin indicated several posts ago) because you struggle to cope with things that others can do just fine, and do not have a visible disability or anything biologically wrong with you, then you are criticised as being lazy, selfish, cowardly, [insert character flaw] or innumerable other derogatory labels. I'm pretty sure most people on this forum have already had plenty of experience with this when coming into contact with people who are not understanding. 





> And just because something is not biologically or physically caused, doesn't then mean it's somehow the patient's "fault." I think it's very restricting to only consider a physical science approach when it comes to human minds.



Then why don't you supply the reasoning behind this like I did above which conflicts with this statement?

Science is the only way to get to any truth. Relying on opinions and conjecture without evidence to back it up has proven itself throughout history to be dangerous. That's also the same thing that leads others to frequently brand people with anxiety disorders, with derogatory labels in the first place. I don't really know why you dislike the concept that your mind is driven by biology. Is it because it makes you feel powerless? Because if so, you don't understand the concept properly. 





> Yes there are things that can be physically tested--when they took my blood it was to check hormone levels, thyroid, and something else that yes, all DO affect how you feel and your behavior. But I came back normal. No one's ever offered to check my brain with an mri or anything. I wouldn't object because I'm sure that would come back normal too.



It's good they did those tests because these things can contribute to anxiety and / or depression. I've had all that done too. But they're not diagnostic tests for mental illness, never have been, and were never proposed to be. 





> Any view can find scientific proof to support it



That's simply false.

----------


## pam

> I don't think you understood my point. Adopting a victim mentality is seen as an excuse, a cop out, and a weakness by society if you don't have a 'valid' reason. If you are attacked and mugged in the street and seen as an unsuspecting victim, everyone gives you their support and sympathy. If you imply you feel like a helpless victim, (like Chopin indicated several posts ago) because you struggle to cope with things that others can do just fine, and do not have a visible disability or anything biologically wrong with you, then you are criticised as being lazy, selfish, cowardly, [insert character flaw] or innumerable other derogatory labels. I'm pretty sure most people on this forum have already had plenty of experience with this when coming into contact with people who are not understanding. 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why don't you supply the reasoning behind this like I did above which conflicts with this statement?
> 
> Science is the only way to get to any truth. Relying on opinions and conjecture without evidence to back it up has proven itself throughout history to be dangerous. That's also the same thing that leads others to frequently brand people with anxiety disorders, with derogatory labels in the first place. I don't really know why you're so resistant to the concept that your mind is driven by biology. Is it because it makes you feel powerless? Because if so, you don't understand the concept properly. 
> 
> 
> ...



Maybe you want to speak for society's view that acknowledging that one is a victim is somehow a weakness. I was just saying that I don't agree with that at all, and if that's what society thinks, they are wrong. Why is it bad that i say this? I'm not against anyone. I don't have any problem admitting I am a victim of this person, or that circumstance, etc. I also know how it is to be attacked for things not my fault--my own grandmother thinks it's your fault if you get raped. 

"Then why don't you supply the reasoning behind this like I did above which conflicts with this statement?"

I don't know what you are wanting me to prove. I say disorders are not the patient's "fault". What is wrong with that veiw? I don't believe in blaming patients, but I do think we have the power to change and improve on things by learning or whatever else works. I don't think biology dictates everything like it seems you believe.

"Science is the only way to get to any truth."

I don't even know how to respond t this. You are very set in your ways I guess and think only science is valid? I wonder--where do your feelings come from? And if they can't be proven scientifically, is it ok to just dismiss them then? I said on my post that I care about the way a person feels over what science says. That's just me. I do not have to give evidence or whatever to support how I feel or what i think. Science is not the be-all, end-all. There was a time not that long ago in history where science said lobotomies were the thing to do. Didn't make it right or successful. So science is only where it is at this point in time. It's not perfect either and that's why I do not put ALL my faith in it, that's all. 

"I don't really know why you're so resistant to the concept that your mind is driven by biology. Is it because it makes you feel powerless? Because if so, you don't understand the concept properly."

Thanks for calling me resistant. I didn't know there was something to be resisted, unless you're talking about your view not being adopted by me? And no I don't feel powerless. I just see it as some things need a medication or surgery to be healed, and other things need therapy or some other experiential learning/corrective experience to feel relief. Whatever works, do it, makes no difference to me. But I refuse to categorize all psychological disorders as caused by biology. IDK, maybe I misunderstand you. But it seems like that's all that counts in your opinion.  

What is an acceptable diagnostic test in your opinion for mental disorders/psychological problems? I thought you said before there weren't any because of the brain/blood barrier, so what is the "scientific" way to diagnose?

----------


## Equinox

> What is an acceptable diagnostic test in your opinion for mental disorders/psychological problems?



I wouldn't claim that this is a good diagnostic test, but certainly a SPECT, PET or fMRI brain scan can show up markers for certain mental illnesses.



I do agree that psychiatric testing is nowhere near as hands on as say neurological testing, and I feel that it should move more towards this direction.

----------


## Chopin12

do you feel that we have no control over the differences shown in these brains, here? do our thoughts control this, or are we a slave to brain chemistry?

----------


## Antidote

> "Then why don't you supply the reasoning behind this like I did above which conflicts with this statement?"
> 
> I don't know what you are wanting me to prove. I say disorders are not the patient's "fault". What is wrong with that veiw? I don't believe in blaming patients, but I do think we have the power to change and improve on things by learning or whatever else works. I don't think biology dictates everything like it seems you believe.



I have already explained this. Biology doesn't mean you do not 'have the power to change' anything. It just means there is a biological component to anxiety.





> "Science is the only way to get to any truth."
> 
> I don't even know how to respond t this. You are very set in your ways I guess and think only science is valid? I wonder--where do your feelings come from? And if they can't be proven scientifically, is it ok to just dismiss them then? I said on my post that I care about the way a person feels over what science says. That's just me. I do not have to give evidence or whatever to support how I feel or what i think. Science is not the be-all, end-all. There was a time not that long ago in history where science said lobotomies were the thing to do. Didn't make it right or successful. So science is only where it is at this point in time. It's not perfect either and that's why I do not put ALL my faith in it, that's all.



You're making assumptions here. Just because I acknowledge the biological component to anxiety doesn't mean I think the emotional experience of an individual is invalid. Never said that. Biological explanations don't invalidate the personal / subjective experience of anything, that's just an assumption made by people who don't really understand it. In fact it does the reverse, it validates experiences, by showing they are even tangible. Also, no, I don't dismiss what isn't proven. If something is compelling but has no evidence, I still consider it. But when there is compelling evidence for something, I do not deny it. I consider countless studies indicating a biological component to mental illness, compelling evidence.  

Lobotomies are an example of what happens when there is a LACK of controlled / rigorous science. Lobotomies / leucotomies came about because psychiatrists who abused their position of power and violated human rights (during a time when ethics were hardly enforced in psychiatry) developed a theory based on opinion and distortions, that people who were psychotic or had various other mental illnesses were 'improved' when lobotomised (the patient becoming apathetic and less actively psychotic was considered 'improvement'). There are plenty more examples of this - for instance, epileptics used to be considered to be possessed by demons. Homosexuals (who incidently were sometimes leucotomised for this reason alone) used to be considered mentally ill for making what was deemed a deviant choice rather than an orientation. These were due to social values, beliefs and distortions at the time that were not informed by science. 






> Thanks for calling me resistant. I didn't know there was something to be resisted, unless you're talking about your view not being adopted by me?



No. I was just genuinely curious about what you find so aversive about acknowleding biological components to mental illness. That's all. 





> But I refuse to categorize all psychological disorders as caused by biology.



I'm curious, which mental illnesses do you consider as having a neurological component and which ones, apart from anxiety disorders do you not? 





> What is an acceptable diagnostic test in your opinion for mental disorders/psychological problems? I thought you said before there weren't any because of the brain/blood barrier, so what is the "scientific" way to diagnose?



Right now it's by filling diagnostic criteria in the DSM that determine level of dysfunction and distress - criteria that has been formulated by scientific controlled and rigorous studies of populations of people. It's possible in the future, when fMRI technology is more advanced, some conditions will be routinely diagnosed through this means. There are also other technologies being investigated for diagnosis of schizophrenia through auditory and eye tracking tests, since schizophrenics show significant abnormalities there.

----------


## Equinox

> do you feel that we have no control over the differences shown in these brains, here? do our thoughts control this, or are we a slave to brain chemistry?



I couldn't weigh in on this portion of the debate. My guess would be as I mentioned earlier the diathesis-stress model, but I'm not a neuroscientist so at best it's just that, a guess.

----------


## Chopin12

its cool im not tryin to debate you, i just wanted to kow what u thought

----------


## pam

Antidote--I never said there  wasn't a biological component to mental disorders. You are the one who said all mental illness is "biologically driven" and that is what i don't agree with. But only an idiot would say there are no biological components--of course there are!

I give up. I'm obviously not "smart enough" for this thread.  :drawing:  And the sad thing is i think we would probably agree on a lot of things if you didn't have such a confrontational approach. Anyway, I'm done with this.

----------


## takethebiscuit

This is a really interesting thread and I appreciate that it's a subject that many people feel passionate about. I hope we can keep things civil between us all.

Pam, you are very smart and intelligent and your input on this thread is fantastic to hear.

 We're all obviously going to come at this from different perspectives but I hope we can listen and understand well even if we don't agree with what another poster posts.

----------


## Chopin12

agreed. no matter what we should at least try to hear each other out without looking down on eachother or get pisst. 

i dont think anyone on this forum is stupid, we just have different points of view

----------


## Otherside

> agreed. no matter what we should at least try to hear each other out without looking down on eachother or get pisst. 
> 
> i dont think anyone on this forum is stupid, we just have different points of view



Yup, what was the saying, I disagree with you but Ill defend your right to an opinion? Or something.

I'm butting into this debate. Sorry.

----------


## JaneDoe

Yes, it definitely IS a disorder.

----------


## Lost Control Again

if it's not a disorder, I'm fucked!!! if it is a disorder, I'm fucked!!! < either or, I'm fucked!!!

----------

