![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 23 to 47 of 47. Go back in thread:
Posted by Peter S. on November 29, 2002, at 13:33:28
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out?, posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 28, 2002, at 23:27:02
I agree that psychiatry is not based in "science" at all. Very little (almost nothing) is understood about why anti-depressants work. Everything is completely speculative at this point. What role does serotonin or norepinphrene have in depression? Who knows? You read a lot of papers and articles and they are very confident in tone that we understand depression or bipolar disorders and that these drugs are great treatments. But when you actually talk to a lot of people you find out about the side effects the poop-out and the general ineffectiveness of many of them.But as far as psychiatrist go, there are huge differences between them. Many have no clue about different meds- they think that MAOIs are extremely dangerous and that you should only prescribe low doses. If traditional anti-depressants don't work, they throw up their hands. They don't bother keeping up with the latest cutting edge treatments because they are'nt required to. Psychiatry started out as primarily talk therapy (Freud) and I think is still rooted in this tradition.
However there are other psychiatrists who are up to date on meds and are willing to be creative and work with you on the meds. My doc is one of these- he is extremely patient and willing to listen to me and try many different alternatives. But even what these doctors do is not based in science. It is more trial and error.
Despite all this it does seem like things are inching forward- hey it's better than it was 100 years ago! I am considering getting a lobotomy though.
Peter
> > I'd like to do a search on the net - but not sure what term to use.
> >
> > Jackie
>
> Jackie, I will reitterate what I said earlier only in simpler terms. Psychiatrists just dont know what causes antidepressant poop out. And they dont seem to be interested in finding out why or caring either. See, psychiatrists dont seem to be very interested in hard research or hard science. Mostly what they are interested in is psychobabble.
>
> Psychiatrists want the same respect as other doctors in other branches of medicine that actually do real scientific research to back up their actions. But psychiatry doesnt do the hardcore kind of scientific research other doctors do in other branches of medicine. Yet they want the same respect, want to be called the title of "Doctor" etc. etc. It just doesnt jibe with me and a lot of others who have been there and done that. It also doesnt jibe with a lot of people who smartly use their internal medicine doctors or family doctors for their mental health needs and who wisely, are intuitively suspicious of psychiatrists and mental health professionals. I have oftentimes admired these kinds of individuals who refuse to see a psychiatrist, yet still are smart enough to get treated for their illness via a family doctor. Family and internal medicine doctors can prescribe many of the same drugs psychiatrists prescribe and in this era of SSRIs and atypical anti-psychotics, that is exactly what is happening oftentimes.
>
> I wouldnt knock yourself out searching for an answer on this one. Because you wont find an answer and you will only be left feeling frustrated.
>
> Howdy Doody
>
>
Posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 29, 2002, at 14:57:43
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out? » ItsHowdyDudyTime, posted by Geezer on November 29, 2002, at 11:19:35
> Hi Howdy,
>
> First, thanks for your response to my question above about the Parnate - I will buy the book. You are probably "right on" with your assessment. I think you made the point in an earlier post that the right course of treatment for TRD is ECT and/or MAOIs, I believe you are correct on that point as well (I am just having a difficult time with Parnate)....for REAL TRD people to go from one SSRI to the next is total nonsense.
>
> Where I agree with you the most is your point about the total lack of SCIENCE (PET scans and SPEC scans prove nothing) and lack of caring as to why drugs don't work in the field of psychiatry. I suppose the first clue that there is a lacking in the scientific area is the total inability to make an accurate DX...I have been diagnosed, missdiagnosed, and rediagnosed in the past year. After spending 30 years in the medical business I am of the belief that proper treatment follows a correct DX. When psychiatry comes up with some meaningful blood tests, some clue about genetic markers, and a few intra-cellular ADs, and some ANSWERS then maybe we will see some progress. Until that time I think I will try to work with my family doc.
>
> Just curious.....are you old enough to remember Howdy Doody?
>
> Thanks
>
> GeezerHi Geezer, I agree with everything you said. Im not an expert on SPECT and PET scans but how come you say these scans prove nothing? I was under the understanding these scans are showing the "functional" conditions of our brains when mentally ill. Could you please explain what you mean? I am interested in this subject. Psychiatry has historically been full of quackery and I certainly hope functional neuroimaging doesnt turn out to be another dead end area of psychiatry research.
As far as Howdy Doody, no I am a youngster, well relatively. Howdy Doody was long off TV when I was born. However it was my Dad's favorite TV show when he was a kid and he talks about it sometimes. I picked it to kind of describe how I perceive psychiatry...kind of like "hey...its Howdy Doody time" as in psychiatry is a big fucking joke.
Howdy Doody
Posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 29, 2002, at 15:05:18
In reply to Psychiatry as a science, posted by Peter S. on November 29, 2002, at 13:33:28
Anybody who tells you there is real science in psychiatry is lying to you. There is no science in psychiatry and psychology is even worse. Psychiatry is a joke. Psychiatrists should be ashamed of themselves. If I was a psychiatrist, I wouldnt even be able to go out in daylight cause Id be so ashamed of myself. I couldnt live with the guilt of knowing I called myself a Medical Doctor, but had no real medical tests, no real medical knowledge to treat severe mental illness.
BTW, in one of Dr. Fuller E. Torrey's books he lambasts private practice psychiatry. He says the "ideal" psychiatry practice is one in which the psychiatrist sees as few psychotics and manics as possible...none if at all possible. And mostly only sees dysthymics and people with "Woody Allen syndrome." These are the folks who fuel the business of psychiatry...those with woody allen syndrome. The people with real deal mental illness are just ignored, shuffled from psychiatrist to psychiatrist because nobody really knows whats wrong with them in a medical sense and nobody really knows how to fix them.
Its sickening...
Howdy Doody
Posted by Squiggles on November 29, 2002, at 15:26:26
In reply to There is no science in psychiatry, posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 29, 2002, at 15:05:18
What goes on in that mushy protoplasmic
ooze called the brain anyway?
Krispy Kream puffs is all they
see and all they sell, right Howdy?Squiggles
Posted by Geezer on November 29, 2002, at 16:51:18
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out?, posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 29, 2002, at 14:57:43
> > Hi Howdy,
> >
> > First, thanks for your response to my question above about the Parnate - I will buy the book. You are probably "right on" with your assessment. I think you made the point in an earlier post that the right course of treatment for TRD is ECT and/or MAOIs, I believe you are correct on that point as well (I am just having a difficult time with Parnate)....for REAL TRD people to go from one SSRI to the next is total nonsense.
> >
> > Where I agree with you the most is your point about the total lack of SCIENCE (PET scans and SPEC scans prove nothing) and lack of caring as to why drugs don't work in the field of psychiatry. I suppose the first clue that there is a lacking in the scientific area is the total inability to make an accurate DX...I have been diagnosed, missdiagnosed, and rediagnosed in the past year. After spending 30 years in the medical business I am of the belief that proper treatment follows a correct DX. When psychiatry comes up with some meaningful blood tests, some clue about genetic markers, and a few intra-cellular ADs, and some ANSWERS then maybe we will see some progress. Until that time I think I will try to work with my family doc.
> >
> > Just curious.....are you old enough to remember Howdy Doody?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Geezer
>
> Hi Geezer, I agree with everything you said. Im not an expert on SPECT and PET scans but how come you say these scans prove nothing? I was under the understanding these scans are showing the "functional" conditions of our brains when mentally ill. Could you please explain what you mean? I am interested in this subject. Psychiatry has historically been full of quackery and I certainly hope functional neuroimaging doesnt turn out to be another dead end area of psychiatry research.
>
> As far as Howdy Doody, no I am a youngster, well relatively. Howdy Doody was long off TV when I was born. However it was my Dad's favorite TV show when he was a kid and he talks about it sometimes. I picked it to kind of describe how I perceive psychiatry...kind of like "hey...its Howdy Doody time" as in psychiatry is a big fucking joke.
>
> Howdy DoodyHi Howdy,
I am no expert on SPEC scans or PET scans either. SPEC scans, as I understand the basic concept, has to do with blood flow to various areas of the brain while PET imaging provides color coding for temperature variations in the brain. I don't see either test taking us any closer to a neurologic understanding of the illness nor do I see inspiration leading to more effective psyc. drugs. Recent postmortem studies on the brain tissue of depressed suicide patients has proven high intensity MRI is unable to detect neurologic abnormalities prior to death. Even if we can SEE the problem - what then? The FDA makes it all but impossible to introduce "brake through drugs" so where is the drug companies incentive to take the risk when they can simply "split isomers" on what already exists?
Your closing comment brought laughter until I had tears running down my cheeks.....all to true. We will both receive a reprimand for this one. You tell your Dad I remember Howdy Doody, Clarabell the clown, and Buffalo Bob Smith (that's about all I remember after the ECT), and I think of the show every time I walk into the pdocs office - what a joke!
I have had correspondence with E. Fuller Torrey - he is right.....I was part of a Stanley Foundation Study last year (he was director for 10 centers world wide, he has now defunded all 10 centers and put all the funding in research....if we have hope HE IS IT).
Good Luck
Geezer
>
>
Posted by oracle on November 29, 2002, at 17:05:08
In reply to There is no science in psychiatry, posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 29, 2002, at 15:05:18
> Its sickening...
>
> Howdy DoodyMaking broad, general statements is, too.
Posted by Tabitha on November 29, 2002, at 17:25:39
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out?, posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 29, 2002, at 14:57:43
>...kind of like "hey...its Howdy Doody time" as in psychiatry is a big
Sorry Howdy, but potentially offensive language is prohibited here. I warned you before, so I'm going to have to block you from posting for a week.Tabitha (filling in for Dr Bob)
P.S. responses to this should be directed to Psycho-Babble Administration
Posted by SLS on November 29, 2002, at 17:44:40
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out? » SLS, posted by Squiggles on November 28, 2002, at 20:52:21
> sorry, that would mean "fast-therapy" or
> "fast-treatment"; maybe, "telophylaxis" as
> in the limited life of telometers; you
> might even use "oligophylaxis" as in a
> small amount; i abstain from using terminus
> for a prefix because it is Latin and you should
> not mix Latin with Greek.
>
> Squiggles
Dear Squiggles,Is there any reason in particular that you spent so many words of conjecture, only to be wrong?
- Scott
Posted by Squiggles on November 29, 2002, at 17:47:12
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out?, posted by SLS on November 29, 2002, at 17:44:40
Pearls before swine;
Squiggles
Posted by oracle on November 29, 2002, at 17:58:50
In reply to There is no science in psychiatry, posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 29, 2002, at 15:05:18
> Anybody who tells you there is real science in psychiatry is lying to you. There is no science in psychiatry and psychology is even worse. Psychiatry is a joke. Psychiatrists should be ashamed of themselves.
I have been treated sucessfully for over 20 yrs by many different pdocs. I suspect if you have a better attitude, you might get better treatment.
Posted by SLS on November 29, 2002, at 18:37:07
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out? » SLS, posted by Squiggles on November 29, 2002, at 17:47:12
Dear Squiggles:
The medical term for "poop-out" is tachyphylaxis.It would have been easy for you to just check on it first. I found your initial reply to my post both ignorant and insulting. I hope you find my sources persuasive. I would appreciate if you would give me the benefit of the doubt from now on.
Pearls. I believe my post concerning tachyphylaxis came before yours.
- Scott-----------------------------------------
Source: www.dictionary.comtach·y·phy·lax·is
n.
pl. tach·y·phy·lax·es
1. Rapid desensitization to a toxic substance produced by inoculation with
a series of small doses.2. A rapidly decreasing response to a drug following administration of the
initial doses.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=tachyphylaxis
-----------------------------------------
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6521674&dopt=Abstracthttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2295591&dopt=Abstract
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2882523&dopt=Abstract
Posted by Squiggles on November 29, 2002, at 18:46:21
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out? » Squiggles, posted by SLS on November 29, 2002, at 18:37:07
Well, their linguist doesn't know
Ancient Greek or demotic; mine
is better - it happens;Squiggles
Posted by Dinah on November 29, 2002, at 19:10:33
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out? » Squiggles, posted by SLS on November 29, 2002, at 18:37:07
>I found your initial reply to my post both ignorant and insulting.
Please do not post anything that could lead others to feel put down.
The complete guidelines for civility can be found at:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Thank you,
Dinah (acting as Deputy for Tabitha)
Posted by Dinah on November 29, 2002, at 19:12:12
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out? » SLS, posted by Squiggles on November 29, 2002, at 17:47:12
> Pearls before swine;
>
> SquigglesDinah here, acting as deputy for Tabitha.
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel put down.
The complete civility guidelines can be found at
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Thanks.
Posted by viridis on November 29, 2002, at 20:50:18
In reply to There is no science in psychiatry, posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 29, 2002, at 15:05:18
Modern psychiatry is a mix of science, art, skill and experience. There are good and bad psychiatrists, just like in any field. The science side of it is progressing quickly,and in the next 5-10 years we'll almost certainly see the development of specific, DNA-based tests for many conditions that will narrow down the range of possible treatments on an individual basis. Meanwhile, psychiatrists do the best they can, and the good ones have pretty high success rates -- not much different from specialists in other fields (oncology, cardiology, etc.).
I think this is a time to be very optimistic -- some of us already have good treatments, and the chances of improvement for others will increase dramatically in the coming years.
Posted by Tabitha on November 30, 2002, at 19:07:10
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Squiggles, posted by Dinah on November 29, 2002, at 19:12:12
Posted by sjb on December 1, 2002, at 15:24:50
In reply to Re: no science in psychiatry--sure there is!, posted by viridis on November 29, 2002, at 20:50:18
Posted by jumpy on December 1, 2002, at 16:33:08
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out? » ItsHowdyDudyTime, posted by Geezer on November 29, 2002, at 16:51:18
Hey Geezer and all,
There is on more individual we can put alittle faith in ... Dr Steven Sackeim ... director of the Biological Institutes of Psychiatry ... I'm am currently enrolled in a ECT research study through Sackeim. He is looking at the refining ECT to cause less side effects and possible use magnetic induced seizure for therapy. He is not even an M.D. ... which may to be his advantage .... see as most MD's are blindsided by the drug companies with bogus research and studies.
Jumpy
Posted by Geezer on December 1, 2002, at 16:58:10
In reply to Some other Glimmers of hope!, posted by jumpy on December 1, 2002, at 16:33:08
> Hey Geezer and all,
>
> There is on more individual we can put alittle faith in ... Dr Steven Sackeim ... director of the Biological Institutes of Psychiatry ... I'm am currently enrolled in a ECT research study through Sackeim. He is looking at the refining ECT to cause less side effects and possible use magnetic induced seizure for therapy. He is not even an M.D. ... which may to be his advantage .... see as most MD's are blindsided by the drug companies with bogus research and studies.
>
> JumpyJumpy,
E-mail me and let me know what is going on with you. I thought I offended you.....had not received any messages lately. I am still semi-catatonic from Parnate, next ECT treatment on Thurs. I have a little confusion about the ECT right now....the pdoc says the "quality" of the seizure matters (duration, EEG, etc.).....the edoc says as long as you have a seizure thats all that matters. Naturally, I catch all sorts of h*** if I ask questions. I think they both should have been shoemakers.
Geezer
Posted by jumpy on December 1, 2002, at 20:19:41
In reply to Re: Some other Glimmers of hope! » jumpy, posted by Geezer on December 1, 2002, at 16:58:10
I thought I offended you? Sorry ... email is on the way. Paul
Posted by ace on January 21, 2003, at 22:51:10
In reply to Re: Is there a medical term for AD poop-out?, posted by ItsHowdyDudyTime on November 28, 2002, at 23:27:02
>>It also doesnt jibe with a lot of people who smartly use their internal medicine doctors or family doctors for their mental health needs and who wisely, are intuitively suspicious of psychiatrists and mental health professionals. I have oftentimes admired these kinds of individuals who refuse to see a psychiatrist, yet still are smart enough to get treated for their illness via a family doctor. Family and internal medicine doctors can prescribe many of the same drugs psychiatrists prescribe and in this era of SSRIs and atypical anti-psychotics, that is exactly what is happening oftentimes.
>Ver, Very, well put. I have seen around 10 psychiatrists. Out of all of them I would say 2 were understanding, caring and ethical doctors.
Some of their behaviours are ridiculous. One had the audacity too write down I was an 'unusual person' because I wanted to take some control over my med situation. Furthermore this same fellow made fun of my hopes to be a psychiatrist (which I'm not sure I want to do now) by putting in qoutations to the refering doctor, "he want's to be a psychiatrist some day" On the basis of a 15 minute consultation this louse said I had a personality d/o without even thoroughly reading my medical notes which clearly indicate OCD.
Same thing with another. After 30mins he said I might have a Personality D/o withough even reading my hospital notes (saying I had OCD). He stated 'you don't do rituals' I handed him notes and told him about my cognitive and physical rituals many times!
Furthermore, after reading extensively on many psychiatric d/o I'm sure some shrinks just don't know how to properly diagnosis people. Some just ignore DSM criteria. There is talk of 'vending machine' diagnisis. I think this is plausible. People then can go to their family doctors for drugs. Psychiatry could be a lot better but their remiss and unethical behaviour taints the whole profession.
I myself now go to a family doctor. He is open minded and above all does not want to have any power over me.
>
> Howdy Doody
>
>
Posted by BrittPark on January 24, 2003, at 13:55:15
In reply to Re: Had enough of psychiatrists. » ItsHowdyDudyTime, posted by ace on January 21, 2003, at 22:51:10
I've seen a number of psychiatrists in my life and even the worst I would consider much more qualified and helpful than a GP. Just my experience.
Cheers,
Britt
Posted by Rawudi on September 19, 2003, at 10:30:57
In reply to Psychiatry as a science, posted by Peter S. on November 29, 2002, at 13:33:28
I'm not sure whether you'll receive this reply or not, but anyways. Psychistry is not a science and never has been. It does not follow any methodology to track or uncover anything to do with what it calls "mental illness." Its complete scienific doctrine is that a pyschiatrist will see something that strikes themself as being "odd". They will then put this "observation" to a conference full of other psychiatrists and then vote such an observation in as being 'valid'. It then gets put into a DSM IV manual labelling it as a 'valid' mental illness. Hence, you never trust any illness associated with any psychiatrist.
The only other methodology they use is to have their drug company big brother, inform them of a "new drug" they are manufacturing so a psychiatrist can come up with a mental disorder to fit it or look into the manual of mental disorders and provide the "new miracle drug" that solves this disorder and hence you have another major PR campaign emerge which "solves" peoples mental illnesses. Thus, you see so many anti-depressants on the market, so many people becoming hooked not only on street drugs but on their very own medical prescriptions too.
1. If you have no research to back up your claims of mental disorders [although psychiatrists can exhibit tombs and volumes of papers, none will be able to validate the existence of any mental illness let alone say they have a completely wrapped up investigation on any one of their 300 odd labels], then how is a fictitious drug going to cure a fictitious disorder?
2. Most "mental disorders" can be "cured" by a competent medical doctor who knows his stuff about diets, diseases, allergies, vital organ dysfunctions, etc.
3. Psychiatry and psychiatrists in general committ fraud on a daily basis in stating that they know something about the mind and how this affects an individual. They even disclaim the very definition of the word they use - psycho=mind, soul, spirit
-trist=one who deals in that subject.
They verbalise and state quite emphatically they man does not have a spirit, mind or soul. He is an animal and only has a brain which is purely motivated by stimulas in his environment. Hence, if that be the case, they can drug him without shame, blame or regret!My advise is don't follow anything any psychiatrist or psychologist gives you and take it with a grain of salt over your shoulder, because that's all it'll be worth.
Posted by Rawudi on September 19, 2003, at 11:16:17
In reply to Re: Had enough of psychiatrists. » ace, posted by BrittPark on January 24, 2003, at 13:55:15
> I've seen a number of psychiatrists in my life and even the worst I would consider much more qualified and helpful than a GP. Just my experience.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Britt
>
I feel that you are on the right track with believing in yourself to start with. As I wrote in an earlier posting - psychiatry and psychiatrists don't know what they are doing and will rotely look to label you per their DSM manual to fix some d/o, thence being able to assign a drug and fulfil their purses needs if not sexual!You will find that a majority of these "professionals" will differ in all of their evaluations because they don't have a standard guide to assess individuals as to exact symptoms, causes or melodies. Well, you would have to laughingly call their DSM an exact science - far from it.
Rawudi
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 19, 2003, at 17:52:42
In reply to Re: Psychiatry as a science » Peter S., posted by Rawudi on September 19, 2003, at 10:30:57
> Psychistry is not a science and never has been.
I'd like posts about psychiatry in general to be redirected to Psycho-Social-Babble, thanks.
Bob
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.