Thoughts on psychiatry? Not psychology, but psychiatry?

Take your meds.

>psychiatry

Not Veeky Forums.

...

>more than 3/4s of those topics are relevant Veeky Forums topics

yeah, relativity is totally fucking ayyy lmao conspiratard garbage. why would you ever even discuss things like clock synchronization or the supposed twin paradox, amirite?

>Major depressive disorder has many symptoms
But depression IS a symptom. Symptom of personal, social or ethical problem.

reminder that if 99% of the population was autistic, what we consider being normal would be considered a disorder

That's not major depressive disorder then.

as Erik is to Erikson

Mental illness is real. Most psychiatrists are quacks.

All of that is garbage, kid.

Like the other user said that's not depressive disorder. MDD is a complete manifestation of apathy, anhedonia and other constants regardless of how good your life is. Thus making it a disorder.

>reminder that if 99% of the population was autistic, what we consider being normal would be considered a disorder
if they were 99% of the population wera autistic they wouldnt be able to accomplish basic task and we would be dead, making that still the disorder.
Point beign that a disorder is what makes you perform low average, if you are extra good at memorazing it is not a disorder.

>if they were 99% of the population wera autistic they wouldnt be able to accomplish basic task and we would be dead
Uh, no. Society would just be different, you fucking retard imprinting zero imagination faggot

yeah, thats why, all of you, autistic kids, stay in your basement. Because you are perfectly able of preserving the species.

trying too hard desu

go away

Society would be different but if 99% of the world was autistic that means 1% is not. Presumably those 1% are functioning and without majorly debilitating disorders. Thus autism is still the disorder.

>tfw most "autism" diagnosis is just money grabbing by the parents and doctor.

I know 3 families that got on the program to have their children signed up as "autistic". Those children are so far from being autistic it isn't funny. Evidently what ever it is, pays good money.

Which makes me wonder who's doing the paying and why.

Most schools don't have clinicians on hand to give proper diagnosis. The kids that are deemed autistic get extra services and most parents don't mind since the stigma is less and less all the time.

>MDD is a complete manifestation of apathy, anhedonia and other constants regardless of how good your life is
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness

If you're trying to disprove what I said by bringing up the learned helplessness theory then you're ignorant of the actual disorder. Learned helplessness can be an accurate explanation for periodic bouts of apathy or post-traumatic depression (not a disorder), but not for major depressive disorder. Plenty of people with good, stress-free lives end up bipolar or depressive.

There has been a total cultural reversal on the way autism (and specifically aspergers) is looked at in the media, arguably. Having aspergers basically makes you the "smart one" now because everyone associates aspergers with savantism.

Part 1

Prominent Psychiatrists, Physicians, Sociologists, Academics, Social Workers, Researchers, etc... that support skepticism towards the APA's claims.

*Persons of Interest

PSYCHOLOGISTS
Dr. John Breeding, Psychologist
Dr. Gregg Henriques, Psychologist
Dr. Roel Verheul, Psychologist
Dr. Marilyn Wedge, Psychologist
Dr. David Elkins, Psychologist
Dr. Al Galves, Psychologist, [Executive director of the International Society for Ethical Psychologist and Psychiatrist]
*Dr. Paula J. Caplan, Psychologist
*Dr. Bruce E. Levine, Psychologist
Dr. Martin Seligman, Psychologist
Dr. Alvin Pam, Psychologist
Dr. Elliot Valenstein, Psychologist
Dr. Jay Joseph, Clinical Psychologist
Dr. Richard Bentall, Clinical Psychologist
Dr. John Read, Psychologist
Dr. Lucy Johnstone, Psychologist
Dr. Pat Bracken, Psychiatrist
Dr. Gail Hornstein, Psychologist
Dr. China Mills, Psychologist
Dr. Lisa Cosgrove, Psychologist

PSYCHIATRISTS
Dr. Eric R. Maisel, Psychiatrist
Dr. John Livesley, Psychiatrist/Psychologist
Dr. Loren R. Mosher, Psychiatrist
Dr. Nassir Ghaemi, Psychiatrist/Psychopharmacologist
Dr. David Kaiser, Psychiatrist
Dr. Jim van Os, Psychiatrist
Dr. Joanna Moncrieff, Psychiatrist
Dr. John "Mickey" Nardo, Psychiatrist
Dr. Sami Timimi, Psychiatrist

PHYSICIANS
Dr. Giorgio Antonucci, Physician
Dr. Catherine Ross, Physician

SCIENTISTS
Dr. Liah Greenfeld, Sociologist
Dr. Christopher Lane, Critical Theorist
Dr. Jonathan Leo, Neuroanatomist
Dr. Nikolas Rose, Sociologist
Dr. Anne Cooke, Biologist
Dr. Peter Conrad, Sociologist
Dr. Gregory Bateson, Social Scientist
Dr. Allan Horwitz, Sociologist
Dr. Thomas Scheff, Sociologist
Dr. Tanya Luhrmann, Anthropologist
Dr. Sheldon Krimsky, Social Scientist
Dr. Allan Horwitz, Sociologist

Part 2

THERAPISTS, SOCIAL WORKERS, RESEARCHERS, ETC.
Diane Dreger, Counselor
David Smail, Psychotherapist
Stuart A Kirk, Social Worker
Jeffrey Lacasse, Social Worker
John Mirowsky, Researcher
Dr. Gary Greenberg, Psychotherapist
- Kas Thomas, Bio Data Analyst/Technical Writer
Jim Gottstein, Lawyer Specializing In Human/Constituional/Civil Rights

DECEASED:
Dr. David L. Rosenhan, Psychologist [d 2012]
*Dr. Thomas Szasz, Psychiatrist [d 2012]
Dr. Theodore Lidz, Psychiatrist [d 2001]
Dr. Hans Eysenck, Psychologist [d. 1997]
*Dr. R. D. Laing, Psychiatrist [d 1989]
Dr. David Cooper, Psychiatrist [d 1986]
*Michel Foucault, Social Theorist [d 1984]
Dr. Erving Goffman, Sociologist [d 1982]
Dr. Jacques Lacan, Psychiatrist [d 1981]
Dr. Silvano Arieti, Psychiatrist [d 1981]
Dr. Franco Basaglia, Psychiatrist Neurologist [d 1980]
John Stuart Mill, Philosopher [d 1873]

CONTROVERSIAL FIGURES:
Dr. Allen J Frances, Physician/Psychiatrist [Former Lead Editor of the DSM IV]
Dr. Robert Leopold Spitzer, Psychiatrist [D 2015]
Dr. Colin A. Ross, Psychiatrist
Bonnie Burstow, Therapist

Part 3

SPECIFIC READS
The Rosenhan Experiment
The Non-existant Imposter Experiment [Rosenhan Follow-Up]
Trier Social Stress Test

GLOSSARY
Martha Mitchell Effect
Goldwater Rule
Psychologists Fallacy
Bulverism
Power Imbalances
Power Serving Confabulation
Out-group Bully/Projection/Stereotyping
Data Distortion
Dominating Personality
Swarm Intelligence/Theory
Groupthink/Collectivist Theory
Mindguard Theory
Stereotyping Non-conformists
Therapeutic State
Cultural Psychiatry
Exestential Rights
Logical/Epistemological Fallacies
Cognitive Biases
Empircism
Pecking Order
Kicking the Dog
Cultural Hegemony
Social Model of Disability & Disease

Part 4

CONCEPTS
DSM Creation and Catagorization
The medicalizing of Normalacy
Discounting Enviornment
Hyperfocusing on Genetics
Promoting The Chemical Imbalance Hypothesis as Scientific Working Theory
Sedatives and Stimulants Promoted as Hormone Correcting Substances
Torture and Coersion
Society vs Progress & Non-conformists
The Medicalization of All Suffering
Equating All Suffering with Disease
Flawed Diagnostic Processes
Anti-recording Protocols [Self Serving for the Industry]
Psychiatric Slavery
Insurance and Grant Fraud
Overbearing Parenting
Societal Demands
Social Hierarchy
Cultural Hegemony
Overdiagnosis and Over-drugging
No Cures and Growing Label Pandemic
Analytical Fallacies
Munchausen Heroism
Factionism and Control

Part 5

Partial Timeline of Dark Psychiatry

Heat Task Force
Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Department of Justice (DOJ)

Global Initiative on Psychiatry
Psychiatric Survivors Movement
We Are Not Alone (WANA)

Political Decent or Thoughts on Civil Rights & Justice:
Labotomy
Restraints
Cages
Insulin Shock
Electroconvulsive Shock
Sedatives and Stimulants
Nazi Experiments and Political Eugeneics

1851
Drapetomania - "Run away Slave" Disorder
Dysaesthesia aethiopica - "Lazy Slave" Disorder

1865
Ignaz Semmelweis was institutionalized for being dysphoric and a non-conformist after being harassed for his pro-medical beliefs on handwashing

1927
Aurora D'Angelo Institutionalized for Political Beliefs

1940s
Nuremberg Trials convicted a number of Psychiatric Scientists that held key possitions in Nazi regimes

1947-1953
Project Chatter/Bluebird/Artichoke - Testing of Truth Serums
MKULTRA; Mental Breakdown Experiments on unwitting participants

1958
Clennon W. King Institutionalized for Civil Rights Beliefs

1964
Goldwater Rule was created due to abuses

1970s
Martha Mitchell was diagnosed for whistleblowing on the Nixon Administration
"Martha Mitchell Effect" recognized
Homosexuality finally recognized as non-illness

2000s
Psychiatrists were sent to prisons to give tips on torturing potential terrorists

2008
Dr Joseph Biederman was exposed by a Senate investigation into Conflicts of Interest; $1.6 million for marketing teen bipolar disorder as a pandemic for multiple pharma companies

Part 6

In short, it's a pseudo-medical scam that takes unknowns, non-conformity and disruptive behavior, slaps medical-sounding labels on it, etc.

Why? Because society doesn't like non-conformists.
Jews? Unfit.
Blacks? Unfit.
Women? Unfit.
Hippies? Unfit.
Early Scientists? Unfit.
Political Dissidents? Unfit.
Social Gadflies? Unfit.
Complaints/Whistleblowers? Unfit.
The list goes on.

Less than 10% of people labeled agree at all with the claims levied against them, but that 10% is very loud as they're encouraged to speak out for the industry in the misguided belief they're helping others.

At the very least, this shit needs some drastic reform.

>Pseudo-medical scam
It isn't pseudo-medical. It's medical.

>takes unknowns, non-conformity and disruptive behavior
Okay, again. Literally disorders here. By definition, something that does not conform to the general [mental] health standards is a disorder. You can argue all you want about what defines conformity and be a contrarian who believes schizophrenia is a good thing, but in the end you aren't helping your case.

>Why? Because society doesn't like non-conformists.
No, my God, so wrong. It's bait, I know, but still.
Think, for a moment. Would you rather see leagues of schizophrenics go untreated, or be given medication to treat their hallucinations? What about those with depressive disorders? I'm sure you think that depression is just shlock made up by psychiatrists to make bank. Protip: they don't make money off prescriptions.

>Jews? Unfit.
>Blacks? Unfit.
>Women? Unfit.
>Hippies? Unfit.
>Early Scientists? Unfit.
If you're a Nazi.

Is your point that in history there has been mistreatment and inhumane experimentation?
Because, yeah. Welcome to the real world. That's medicine for you.

>Political Dissidents? Unfit.
Define 'political dissidents'. If you're saying that Martha Mitchell was misdiagnosed, then, yeah. But it was the 70s. It's almost fifty years later.

>Less than 10% of people labeled agree at all with the claims levied against them, but that 10% is very loud as they're encouraged to speak out for the industry in the misguided belief they're helping others.
Are you retarded or baiting? I can't tell, but I'm going to guess you're baiting. Regardless, maybe the people don't believe the claims levied against them because they're not sane.

>actual disorder
>Plenty of people with good, stress-free lives end up bipolar or depressive
The problem is, that "disorder" doesn't exist at all outside of psychiatrists imagination.

>The problem is, that "disorder" doesn't exist at all outside of psychiatrists imagination.
...what?

>By definition, something that does not conform to the general [mental] health standards is a disorder.
Hey there Mr. Autism, how is it that you can throw such an autistic shitfit about someone questioning the integrity of psychiatric science, when in your own post, you admit that nonconformity to standards is the sole requirement for mental health diagnoses rather than the presence of any actual physical, scientifically measurable problem, and yet because it's defined as such it's absolutely logically sound and immune from all criticism in your mind.

Have you ever actually seen someone who was hallucinating? I've actually been in a psych ward before (worked for many years). Want to know what 99% of the people there had in common? They were all ABUSED during their childhood or later in their life, i.e. they experienced some sort of EXTREME trauma and lost the ability to cope and now they are "seeing things" (many often admitted to me in private that much of the time they would exaggerate their hallucination claims to get more sympathy from the doctors because of how lonely they were...). If you actually look through surveys done on schizophrenics, very few were NOT abused, and of those who were, almost all of them had ancestors who experienced extreme trauma or persecution (think: jews and rates of schizophrenia in jewish populations).

If you think schizophrenia happens "randomly" or exists in a vacuum, guess what- you're a fucking idiot.

Also, these threads are always a shitfest. Don't bump them.

1.) There is no objectivity in psychiatry
2.) They are analytical fallacies used in the diagnostic process
3.) Behaviors are not diseases
4.) Circular logic after projection is never science
5.) All of the other concepts highlighted as issues are completely legitimate issues
6.) It is unfalsifiable
7.) The DSM is voted on
It's not a science and never has been

>Equating schizophrenia to all other claimed mind diseases

That's correct. Psychiatry exists purely on rhetoric according to the DSM itself.

You didn't research all that was given.
Not only are there serious problems aside from Nazism, which was the smallest problem with it, but I highlighest dozens of issues with it.

And guess what?
The APA, NIMH, NAMI and the WHO 100% agree.

You can't misapply [in regards to counter-factual claims] something and still call it medicine nor science.

Furthermore, being a nonconformist isn't a disease.
Being against religion, social hierarchy and other psychotic norms doesn't making you psychotic or unstable a'la argumentum ad populum.
Sanity isn't about popular vote.

You haven't studied the issues in the concepts they present let alone the way they practice.
Nor have you analyzed their claims nor the DSM.

If you did, we wouldn't be having this debate.

Just out of curiosity, where are the social sciences discussed on this site. Where does one bring up sociology or economics besides /pol/? I really like psychology actually.

>"In his bookSchizophrenia - The Sacred Symbol of Psychiatry,psychiatry professor Thomas S. Szasz, M.D., says "There is, in short, no such thing as schizophrenia" (Syracuse University Press, 1988, p. 191)."

>"In the Epilogue of their bookSchizophrenia - Medical Diagnosis or Moral Verdict?, Theodore R. Sarbin, Ph.D., a psychology professor at the University of California at Santa Cruz who spent three years working in mental hospitals, and James C. Mancuso, Ph.D., a psychology professor at the State University of New York at Albany, say: "We have come to the end of our journey. Among other things, we have tried to establish that the schizophrenia model of unwanted conduct lacks credibility. The analysis directs us ineluctably to the conclusion that schizophrenia is a myth" (Pergamon Press, 1980, p. 221).

>"In his bookAgainst Therapy, published in 1988, Jeffrey Masson, Ph.D., a psychoanalyst, says "There is a heightened awareness of the dangers inherent in labeling somebody with a disease category like schizophrenia, and many people are beginning to realize that there is no such entity" (Atheneum, p. 2)."

I think there are reasons to have a degree of skepticism about many psychiatric diagnoses.

We are even at the point now where gender dismorphia is actually a thing, and 6 year old boys are encouraged to fully transition into a different sex. DSM 5 is pretty wild.

Social sciences go on Veeky Forums, the history and humanities section. Veeky Forums is also designated but they're full of marxist teens with smoking problems

Thanks for your work user.

Yeah I can only do Veeky Forums in doses. But I mostly enjoy the commies there. I am moved by their angst. If nothing else. However, I only ever read about philosophy of psychology or philosophy of society. Never really the disciplines themselves.

I guess I'll have to browse Veeky Forums more. I visit every so often but but I never see a Freud or Maslow or C. Wright Mills or Galbraith brought up I don't think.

/sosci/ when?

What is that, $20 worth of push pops in pic?

Lel no. Enjoy your high school classes.

Most serious mental illnesses can be detected through brain scans, meaning there are abnormal chemical imbalances in the brain, which can be objectively observed and/or measured, and are not full of shit like a lot of psychology.

Bare minimum.

Wrong. Watching where the blood goes in your brain tells us nothing. David Amen is a con artist.

Not to mention topographical brain scans cost $14,000 with insurance.

BOLD response can be used for detecting aspects of mental illness, but neural oscillatory behavior is more informative usually. We have a long way to go before we can diagnose using brain imaging, but it will happen sooner than you think, especially in early detection of developmental disorders.

You're essentially diagnosing people based on the DSM-5, which is solely based on observation. I feel that in some cases it is helpful, but there are definitely some misdiagnosed people out there. But, I feel that the overall field as a whole is beneficial to people as the biomedical drugs to help to lessen the symptoms of disorders.

LOOK faggots.

Take 100,000 brains and scan them and measure what's going on in them with the best equipment we have. Then take the average brain.

Now another brain comes along which differs greatly in some measurable way from the average of these 100,000 brains. This is a mental illness.

>Savants
Would be nice to have if there were no side effects. Doesn't change anything.

What I have read is that the majority of researchers do not find any of these scans clinically valid in detecting neurological illnesses, and they do not expect any of the current imaging technologies ever will be valid for this purpose. They are useful for detecting physical abnormalities like a tumor or bullet shards. They are near useless for neurological illness detection. We will need some entirely novel type of scan, which hasn't been invented.

David Amen is a scam artist because when he shows you a SPECT scan -the best brain imaging technology there is right now - of an AD/HD brain for example, it's not just one person's brain. It's a composite image of over 70,000 brain scans compiled on top of each other. Making the data diagnostically meaningless. But he doesn't mention that in his TED Talk. He's pulling the wool over people's eyes, and every research psychologist out there is just laughing at him. Including the notorious Dr. Russell Barkley.

I think genetic therapies have more early detection potential right now. I hope science produces some futuristic Star Trek type imaging technology, but it's not even on the horizon right now. The social sciences are just in a crisis right now for lack of authority and legitimacy as a discipline. It's out of desperation they tout these "findings."

>he fell for the correlation is proof of causation meme

Brain chemicals don't have a direct causal relationship with mental phenomena