chauncey wrote:
Ah, a sample size of n=2.
I could write 10 pages w/many other examples and reasons. I gave you the tip of the iceberg. Psychiatry is BOGUS, unhealthy, and just what some people at this point in human history believe is supposed to help the human mind. If you are into being a human chemistry experiment, GO FOR IT!
no way wrote:
I could write 10 pages w/many other examples and reasons. I gave you the tip of the iceberg. Psychiatry is BOGUS, unhealthy, and just what some people at this point in human history believe is supposed to help the human mind. If you are into being a human chemistry experiment, GO FOR IT!
It's a good thing we don't have people like you influencing science research methodology in any substantial way. You sound like Jenny McCarthy.
These problems do tend to run in families. Some of the most violently anti-psychology people in this thread come off as having some mental problems themselves (especially the guy yelling about liberals who're out to get him)
recycled plastic + no way = 2 scientologists
chauncey wrote:
no way wrote:I could write 10 pages w/many other examples and reasons. I gave you the tip of the iceberg. Psychiatry is BOGUS, unhealthy, and just what some people at this point in human history believe is supposed to help the human mind. If you are into being a human chemistry experiment, GO FOR IT!
It's a good thing we don't have people like you influencing science research methodology in any substantial way. You sound like Jenny McCarthy.
Thank God there are researchers in your field who have been sounding the alarms for years. I work around these people and see their stories. Just last night before I read this thread, a young woman (about 28 years old) who in my opinion is no better before she went on meds for bipolar was complaining because she has jumped from 120 pounds to about 180 over maybe 6 months. Did her psychiatrist weigh the pros/cons of putting her on meds? They put almost all women on meds from my observation . . . do they are really NEED it? I don't think so. They need to change their diets and (more important) start running. Now this woman it seems to me is clearly at a much higher risk of heart disease, diabetes, and whatever else being obese causes . . . basically is probably an early death WORTH stabilizing a mildly unstable mood, particularly when a regular running routine would likely have the same or better positive effect? Bullshit, that's what it is.
Need a new gig wrote:
I'm hoping someone on letsrun might have some info for me. I'm a master's level counselor in Texas. I have 3 years postgraduate experience. I am thinking about leaving my county agency to go into insurance for a while. Anyone here ever worked as a care manager or know anything about it? I heard the money is really good, and I can do some private practice hours on the side. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
you sound like an 11th grader. Have you considered committing to the University of Delaware?
Hellfish wrote:
These problems do tend to run in families. Some of the most violently anti-psychology people in this thread come off as having some mental problems themselves (especially the guy yelling about liberals who're out to get him)
Just like most pro-psych people/professionals, criticize/attack/ridicule/blame people who basically just feel sad . . . then tell them they need meds to correct the feelings that you just made worse. If you are a professional, tell your clients to get off their collective asses and go for a run. Oh. Wait. That would mean you would and a whole bunch of other quack jobs be out of a job. I get it. Carry on with your charade.
Most bi-polar medications don't lead to weight gain (e.g., lithium). If they are treating her with anti-psychotics then she must have a particularly difficult disorder, hence why you see little improvement. But changing your diet and running (while always helpful to some degree) will never fix serious, and debilitating mental disorders like schizophrenia and bipolar. Side effects from medications always have to be considered and if they are worse then the disorder then other treatment options must be considered.
no way wrote:
chauncey wrote:It's a good thing we don't have people like you influencing science research methodology in any substantial way. You sound like Jenny McCarthy.
Thank God there are researchers in your field who have been sounding the alarms for years. I work around these people and see their stories. Just last night before I read this thread, a young woman (about 28 years old) who in my opinion is no better before she went on meds for bipolar was complaining because she has jumped from 120 pounds to about 180 over maybe 6 months. Did her psychiatrist weigh the pros/cons of putting her on meds? They put almost all women on meds from my observation . . . do they are really NEED it? I don't think so. They need to change their diets and (more important) start running. Now this woman it seems to me is clearly at a much higher risk of heart disease, diabetes, and whatever else being obese causes . . . basically is probably an early death WORTH stabilizing a mildly unstable mood, particularly when a regular running routine would likely have the same or better positive effect? Bullshit, that's what it is.
I doubt there's a single psychiatrist out there who wouldn't love to see their patients get out and start exercising.
Its sickening how someone defines how other people should be normal. People are going to kill, smile, eat chalk, etc..... Life doesn't have to be "fair." Everyone doesnt have to be "normal." STFU about taking chemicals to be "ok." Everyone is fine the way they are, even if they shoot you. Shit happens.
[quote]Aghast wrote:
Most bi-polar medications don't lead to weight gain (e.g., lithium). If they are treating her with anti-psychotics then she must have a particularly difficult disorder, hence why you see little improvement. But changing your diet and running (while always helpful to some degree) will never fix serious, and debilitating mental disorders like schizophrenia and bipolar. Side effects from medications always have to be considered and if they are worse then the disorder then other treatment options must be considered.
[quote]
She takes depakote. I can't remember if there were any other meds. I personally was diagnosed with hypo-manic depression years ago, then they were wrong, then other docs said ADD, then depression, then a combo, then anxiety . . . gees they had me on everything under the sun. At some point I started gaining weight despite regular exercise and healthy eating. It was inexplicable. Plus all sorts of other physical symptoms--ulcer-like symptoms, which required me to take ulcer meds at the highest dosage, and those weren't working, extreme back pain/tightness that just would not go away with PT or anything else, increased anxiety. None of the meds helped me, ever. All of them had all sorts of unwanted side-effects--most severe and unacceptable. Talk therapy helped some but basically I just had to learn to cope. And running was a big, very big, part of the equation. Nothing else worked. I have been happily med-free for 10 years, after 8 years trying chemicals that I am convinced affected my memory, including one drug that was taken off the market for causing liver damage (of course they don't warn you that these things might happen), and my liver panels have never been the same. There is a book that influenced me. Something like listening to Prozac. This is just a certain period in human history--professionals think they know everything but really aren't solving problems, IMHO. In 100 years everything we "know" now will be proven bogus. So just because there is an establishment that pushes these drugs doesn't meant they are actually helping anyone MORE than hurting them. And, at an absolute minimum, the ENTIRE health of the patient should always be considered. If you are causing weight gain for a mildly unstable mood (not talking about people who believe the television is talking to them), then are you really helping the person improve their health OVERALL, weighing things like heart disease, diabetes, and whatever else comes from weight gain. And weight gain is just the side effect that we can see. From my reading, they do not know the long-term effects of these meds, including memory loss as a possibility long term. That's another thing. One psychiatrist told me to take Benadryl long-term for sleeping, just as needed, and that the drug was proven safe for many years. Now of course more recent research proves that Benadryl shrinks your brain, which I really appreciate after taking this medicine off and on for probably 20 years whenever I have had trouble sleeping. And I do believe that my memory is worse, more than normal for my age, because of these meds. And God only knows whatever else will happen in the future as a result of taking all of that chemical stuff. It's terrible and anyone taking them should read for yourself before you just blindly follow your doctor's advice.
Valproic acid (depakote) is rarely taken alone, it is usually in combination with lithium to treat severe cases of bipolar disorder. It is a powerful drug as it is thought to act by modifying gene transcription (altering epigenetic balance). There is powerful evidence that in the brains of individuals with schizophrenia and bipolar certain genes are repressed, so it is thought that valproic acid may be acting to restore their expression levels. But as you can see, the big problem is a lack of drugs that specifically target the problems.I agree that given the current crop of anti-psychotic drugs that unless you have serious, debilitating disorders then the treatment can be worse. Another problem that your case reveals is a lack of diagnostic specificity. Unless we can clearly diagnosis the problem, treating it is impossible.
no way wrote:
[quote]Aghast wrote:
Most bi-polar medications don't lead to weight gain (e.g., lithium). If they are treating her with anti-psychotics then she must have a particularly difficult disorder, hence why you see little improvement. But changing your diet and running (while always helpful to some degree) will never fix serious, and debilitating mental disorders like schizophrenia and bipolar. Side effects from medications always have to be considered and if they are worse then the disorder then other treatment options must be considered.
[quote]
She takes depakote. I can't remember if there were any other meds. I personally was diagnosed with hypo-manic depression years ago, then they were wrong, then other docs said ADD, then depression, then a combo, then anxiety . . . gees they had me on everything under the sun. At some point I started gaining weight despite regular exercise and healthy eating. It was inexplicable. Plus all sorts of other physical symptoms--ulcer-like symptoms, which required me to take ulcer meds at the highest dosage, and those weren't working, extreme back pain/tightness that just would not go away with PT or anything else, increased anxiety. None of the meds helped me, ever. All of them had all sorts of unwanted side-effects--most severe and unacceptable. Talk therapy helped some but basically I just had to learn to cope. And running was a big, very big, part of the equation. Nothing else worked. I have been happily med-free for 10 years, after 8 years trying chemicals that I am convinced affected my memory, including one drug that was taken off the market for causing liver damage (of course they don't warn you that these things might happen), and my liver panels have never been the same. There is a book that influenced me. Something like listening to Prozac. This is just a certain period in human history--professionals think they know everything but really aren't solving problems, IMHO. In 100 years everything we "know" now will be proven bogus. So just because there is an establishment that pushes these drugs doesn't meant they are actually helping anyone MORE than hurting them. And, at an absolute minimum, the ENTIRE health of the patient should always be considered. If you are causing weight gain for a mildly unstable mood (not talking about people who believe the television is talking to them), then are you really helping the person improve their health OVERALL, weighing things like heart disease, diabetes, and whatever else comes from weight gain. And weight gain is just the side effect that we can see. From my reading, they do not know the long-term effects of these meds, including memory loss as a possibility long term. That's another thing. One psychiatrist told me to take Benadryl long-term for sleeping, just as needed, and that the drug was proven safe for many years. Now of course more recent research proves that Benadryl shrinks your brain, which I really appreciate after taking this medicine off and on for probably 20 years whenever I have had trouble sleeping. And I do believe that my memory is worse, more than normal for my age, because of these meds. And God only knows whatever else will happen in the future as a result of taking all of that chemical stuff. It's terrible and anyone taking them should read for yourself before you just blindly follow your doctor's advice.
no way wrote:
Thank God there are researchers in your field who have been sounding the alarms for years. I work around these people and see their stories. Just last night before I read this thread, a young woman (about 28 years old) who in my opinion is no better before she went on meds for bipolar was complaining because she has jumped from 120 pounds to about 180 over maybe 6 months. Did her psychiatrist weigh the pros/cons of putting her on meds? They put almost all women on meds from my observation . . . do they are really NEED it? I don't think so. They need to change their diets and (more important) start running. Now this woman it seems to me is clearly at a much higher risk of heart disease, diabetes, and whatever else being obese causes . . . basically is probably an early death WORTH stabilizing a mildly unstable mood, particularly when a regular running routine would likely have the same or better positive effect? Bullshit, that's what it is.
You have no idea what my field is. But, you seem incredibly prone to jumping to conclusions on little to no data. I have no idea what the efficacy of various psychiatric treatments might be. For all I know, there might be a few nuggets of truth in what you're writing. But you've made it abundantly clear that YOU DON'T KNOW EITHER. You argue like a child and demand that we take your opinions and stories seriously just because they're your opinions and stories. It's Jenny McCarthy and the vaccines-cause-autism show all over again. I'm sorry, science and medicine don't work that way.
With every sentence you write, you are demonstrating an utter lack of understanding of and respect for the scientific method, research tools, the concept of minimizing personal and subjective bias, the unreliability of anecdotal "evidence," and dispassionate inquiry. Look at some highlights from your last post: "in my opinion," "from my observation," "I don't think so," "it seems to me." Is it a coincidence that you, a runner on a running message board, are clinging to the notion that medicine is worthless and running would solve mood disorders? Do you really not see your obvious and glaring bias? Once again, I'm incredibly happy that people like you aren't running the show in science and research departments across the country.
chauncey wrote:
You have no idea what my field is. But, you seem incredibly prone to jumping to conclusions on little to no data. I have no idea what the efficacy of various psychiatric treatments might be. For all I know, there might be a few nuggets of truth in what you're writing. But you've made it abundantly clear that YOU DON'T KNOW EITHER. You argue like a child and demand that we take your opinions and stories seriously just because they're your opinions and stories. It's Jenny McCarthy and the vaccines-cause-autism show all over again. I'm sorry, science and medicine don't work that way.
With every sentence you write, you are demonstrating an utter lack of understanding of and respect for the scientific method, research tools, the concept of minimizing personal and subjective bias, the unreliability of anecdotal "evidence," and dispassionate inquiry. Look at some highlights from your last post: "in my opinion," "from my observation," "I don't think so," "it seems to me." Is it a coincidence that you, a runner on a running message board, are clinging to the notion that medicine is worthless and running would solve mood disorders? Do you really not see your obvious and glaring bias? Once again, I'm incredibly happy that people like you aren't running the show in science and research departments across the country.
I claim an opinion. Am I not entitled to one? I have personal experience that these drugs SUCK. And I have read a book by a Harvard educated psychiatrist who performs research and treats patients saying the same thing. Just the fact that some drugs, which I personally ingested on the advice of doctors, have now been PROVEN disastrous for your health, should make anyone question any new drugs recommended by the same establishment. Bad drugs are a part of the process...so anyone reading, obviously take them at your own risk. And I don't care one iota what you think of my opinion. I'm writing for the people who might consider taking these drugs, or might be taking them. They need to consider the downsides at an absolute minimum.