Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 64
  1. #46
    takethebiscuit's Avatar
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    172
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    [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.

  2. #47
    pam's Avatar needs more cowbell
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    155
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    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.

  3. #48
    Chopin12's Avatar
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    131
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    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.
    “A Caterpie may change into a Butterfree, but the heart that beats inside it remains the same.” — Brock

  4. #49
    pam's Avatar needs more cowbell
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    155
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Quote Equinox View Post
    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.

  5. #50
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,314
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Otherside View Post
    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.

    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.
    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.

  6. #51
    takethebiscuit's Avatar
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    172
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote WintersTale View Post
    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.

  7. #52
    Antidote's Avatar Rude & Shouty
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,123
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Quote pam View Post
    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.

    Quote pam View Post
    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.

    Quote pam View Post
    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.

    Quote pam View Post
    Any view can find scientific proof to support it
    That's simply false.

  8. #53
    pam's Avatar needs more cowbell
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    155
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Quote Antidote View Post
    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.



    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.



    That's simply false.
    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?

  9. #54
    Equinox's Avatar
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    377
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote pam View Post
    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.

  10. #55
    Chopin12's Avatar
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    131
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    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?
    “A Caterpie may change into a Butterfree, but the heart that beats inside it remains the same.” — Brock

  11. #56
    Antidote's Avatar Rude & Shouty
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,123
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Quote pam View Post
    "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.

    Quote pam View Post
    "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.


    Quote pam View Post
    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.

    Quote pam View Post
    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?

    Quote pam View Post
    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.

  12. #57
    Equinox's Avatar
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    377
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Chopin12 View Post
    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.

  13. #58
    Chopin12's Avatar
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    131
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    its cool im not tryin to debate you, i just wanted to kow what u thought
    “A Caterpie may change into a Butterfree, but the heart that beats inside it remains the same.” — Brock

  14. #59
    pam's Avatar needs more cowbell
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    155
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    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. 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.

  15. #60
    takethebiscuit's Avatar
    Forum Addiction:

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    172
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    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.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Made with <3
Anxiety Space is not a replacement for a fully qualified doctor.