<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Psychiatry - Label-Based Quackery or Research-Based Science?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/</link>
	<description>Topics from multidimensional biopsychosocial perspectives.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 05:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: L K Tucker</title>
		<link>http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-77556</link>
		<dc:creator>L K Tucker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:33:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-77556</guid>
		<description>You are on the right track. The first thing to recognize about the DSM is that none of the "disorders" actually exist. They are names given to observed then sorted behaviors. 

The APA, authors of the DSM, freely admit they do not know what causes them. 

Without that basic knowledge it is impossible to know where one disorder begins and another ends. 

They are voted into existence. No science is involved.

VisionAndPsychosis.Net began an investigation in 2002. There is a trail through history to support the thesis that Subliminal Distraction causes most mental distress. 

The method was to look at activities that cause mental events and examine that activity for Subliminal Distraction exposure. 

Qi Gong and Kundalini Yoga have centuries of experience with known mental problems associated with the attempt to reach enlightenment. Although they ignorantly claim that Chee or Prana causes these problems their exercises, when done in groups, replicates the design problem of 1960's too-close office workstations. That may be hard to envision at first reading. 

Sudden intense exposure creates the harmless temporary episode, but low-level long-term exposure creates a fixed altered mental state that resembles schizophrenia. 

When schizophrenia is viewed as an altered mental state caused by random SD exposure much of the mystery of mental illness disappears. It allows you to understand why schizophrenia onsets in adolescence. 

The problem is that this is so different from the current beliefs and treatment modalities that interested parties don't want to investigate it. 

There is no financial incentive. Once this is explained to a patient little else is required. 

http://VisionAndPsychosis.Net</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are on the right track. The first thing to recognize about the DSM is that none of the &#8220;disorders&#8221; actually exist. They are names given to observed then sorted behaviors. </p>
<p>The APA, authors of the DSM, freely admit they do not know what causes them. </p>
<p>Without that basic knowledge it is impossible to know where one disorder begins and another ends. </p>
<p>They are voted into existence. No science is involved.</p>
<p>VisionAndPsychosis.Net began an investigation in 2002. There is a trail through history to support the thesis that Subliminal Distraction causes most mental distress. </p>
<p>The method was to look at activities that cause mental events and examine that activity for Subliminal Distraction exposure. </p>
<p>Qi Gong and Kundalini Yoga have centuries of experience with known mental problems associated with the attempt to reach enlightenment. Although they ignorantly claim that Chee or Prana causes these problems their exercises, when done in groups, replicates the design problem of 1960&#8217;s too-close office workstations. That may be hard to envision at first reading. </p>
<p>Sudden intense exposure creates the harmless temporary episode, but low-level long-term exposure creates a fixed altered mental state that resembles schizophrenia. </p>
<p>When schizophrenia is viewed as an altered mental state caused by random SD exposure much of the mystery of mental illness disappears. It allows you to understand why schizophrenia onsets in adolescence. </p>
<p>The problem is that this is so different from the current beliefs and treatment modalities that interested parties don&#8217;t want to investigate it. </p>
<p>There is no financial incentive. Once this is explained to a patient little else is required. </p>
<p><a href="http://VisionAndPsychosis.Net" rel="nofollow">http://VisionAndPsychosis.Net</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Medicinal Herbs</title>
		<link>http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-51219</link>
		<dc:creator>Medicinal Herbs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2007 09:33:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-51219</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Carnival of Natural Health - April 1, 2007...&lt;/strong&gt;

Welcome to the April 1, 2007 edition of the Carnival of Natural Health. I hope you'll visit all of the participants and see what great things we can learn from all of them. Hal Sommerschield, Ph.D. presents North Star Mental...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Carnival of Natural Health - April 1, 2007&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Welcome to the April 1, 2007 edition of the Carnival of Natural Health. I hope you&#8217;ll visit all of the participants and see what great things we can learn from all of them. Hal Sommerschield, Ph.D. presents North Star Mental&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RDoctor Medical</title>
		<link>http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-51113</link>
		<dc:creator>RDoctor Medical</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2007 16:58:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-51113</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;All Things Medical _ March Edition....&lt;/strong&gt;

All Things Medical _ March Edition Carnival is up.

......</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>All Things Medical _ March Edition&#8230;.</strong></p>
<p>All Things Medical _ March Edition Carnival is up.</p>
<p>&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cisco</title>
		<link>http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-50686</link>
		<dc:creator>Cisco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2007 01:54:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-50686</guid>
		<description> 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8058160857846500132&#38;q=psychiatry</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8058160857846500132&amp;q=psychiatry" rel="nofollow">http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8058160857846500132&amp;q=psychiatry</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon von Gunten</title>
		<link>http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-50685</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon von Gunten</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2007 01:40:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-50685</guid>
		<description>Fact-Based, Not Faith-Based

Most "critics of psychiatrics critics" miss the central point: Critics of psychiatry decry psychiatry *not* because of some faith-based concept, but based on documented deaths and criminality in the field. 

It is easy to mentally equate anti-psychiatry stands with many Christians' anti-abortion stands, which are based their faith and bolstered by true stories of abortions gone bad. Every Christian has every right to hold those faith-based beliefs. 

But those who criticize critics of psychiatry are confusing two very different sets of objectors: Those who object to psychiatry do so based on 50 years of documenting psychiatry's horrible results. 

Critics of the critics of abortion automatically negate theological ideas, so they try to marginalize the critics of psychiatry as theologically based. In their minds, "If it's theological, it's wrong. Case closed." 

But critics of psychiatry base their criticisms on tens of thousands of documented cases of psychiatric patients who either (a) got progressively worse; (b) died, committed suicide or mutilated themselves; (c) attacked family or went on shooting sprees; (d) were raped or financially coerced by the psychiatrists themselves. And that number of cases doesn't include less-serious but still-numerous  crimes of financial fraud the profession perpetrated daily on insurance companies and patients' families. 

To see documented examples, go to:  http://www.cchr.org/index.cfm/5276

There anyone can see factual examples of why the critics of psychiatry will continue to grow in number. As long as psychiatry ignores and winks at the crimes of its members, it forces watchdog groups to expose the profession's cruelty and disregard for human life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fact-Based, Not Faith-Based</p>
<p>Most &#8220;critics of psychiatrics critics&#8221; miss the central point: Critics of psychiatry decry psychiatry *not* because of some faith-based concept, but based on documented deaths and criminality in the field. </p>
<p>It is easy to mentally equate anti-psychiatry stands with many Christians&#8217; anti-abortion stands, which are based their faith and bolstered by true stories of abortions gone bad. Every Christian has every right to hold those faith-based beliefs. </p>
<p>But those who criticize critics of psychiatry are confusing two very different sets of objectors: Those who object to psychiatry do so based on 50 years of documenting psychiatry&#8217;s horrible results. </p>
<p>Critics of the critics of abortion automatically negate theological ideas, so they try to marginalize the critics of psychiatry as theologically based. In their minds, &#8220;If it&#8217;s theological, it&#8217;s wrong. Case closed.&#8221; </p>
<p>But critics of psychiatry base their criticisms on tens of thousands of documented cases of psychiatric patients who either (a) got progressively worse; (b) died, committed suicide or mutilated themselves; (c) attacked family or went on shooting sprees; (d) were raped or financially coerced by the psychiatrists themselves. And that number of cases doesn&#8217;t include less-serious but still-numerous  crimes of financial fraud the profession perpetrated daily on insurance companies and patients&#8217; families. </p>
<p>To see documented examples, go to:  <a href="http://www.cchr.org/index.cfm/5276" rel="nofollow">http://www.cchr.org/index.cfm/5276</a></p>
<p>There anyone can see factual examples of why the critics of psychiatry will continue to grow in number. As long as psychiatry ignores and winks at the crimes of its members, it forces watchdog groups to expose the profession&#8217;s cruelty and disregard for human life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Grohol</title>
		<link>http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-50628</link>
		<dc:creator>John Grohol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2007 19:21:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainblogger.com/2007/03/04/roundtable-psychiatry-label-based-quackery-or-research-based-science/#comment-50628</guid>
		<description>Actually, if you delve into medicine further, you'll find that many of the things you assume or take as "objective" are no more objective than patient self-report or interpreting complex test results. There is a *lot* of subjectivity in *all* of medicine, so I'm not certain why people feel psychiatry (or mental health in general) is a better, easy target.

The DSM is an imperfect instrument in an imperfect world. It is a huge step forward (starting with the DSM-III) in terms of scientific validity and reliability than many other diagnostic systems. Is it perfect? No. Would any system be perfect in dealing with human maladies? No. Could it be better. Certainly. And the next edition will have even more research backing up every diagnosis.

And that's the crux of the matter -- research. The social sciences have a huge wealth of scientific research -- literally thousands of new studies every year -- that add to our understanding of human behavior and what happens when that behavior goes awry. We've come a long way, even in the past 2 decades, and we've still got a long ways to go. But it's important to make the effort, because no matter what you use to describe the problems, at the end of the day people still have these things we call depression or anxiety and want help for them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, if you delve into medicine further, you&#8217;ll find that many of the things you assume or take as &#8220;objective&#8221; are no more objective than patient self-report or interpreting complex test results. There is a *lot* of subjectivity in *all* of medicine, so I&#8217;m not certain why people feel psychiatry (or mental health in general) is a better, easy target.</p>
<p>The DSM is an imperfect instrument in an imperfect world. It is a huge step forward (starting with the DSM-III) in terms of scientific validity and reliability than many other diagnostic systems. Is it perfect? No. Would any system be perfect in dealing with human maladies? No. Could it be better. Certainly. And the next edition will have even more research backing up every diagnosis.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s the crux of the matter &#8212; research. The social sciences have a huge wealth of scientific research &#8212; literally thousands of new studies every year &#8212; that add to our understanding of human behavior and what happens when that behavior goes awry. We&#8217;ve come a long way, even in the past 2 decades, and we&#8217;ve still got a long ways to go. But it&#8217;s important to make the effort, because no matter what you use to describe the problems, at the end of the day people still have these things we call depression or anxiety and want help for them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
