Posted by noa on July 6, 2000, at 8:45:48
In reply to Why the drugs don't work, posted by Alex Birkett on July 5, 2000, at 8:39:41
> We have become obsessed with palliative care as if treating the causes of our real suffering was hopeless, so hopeless in fact that we too often happily deceive ourselves that no such causes exist at all.
I want to address myself to the term "palliative care".
I don't see antidepressants as "palliative". Sure, they are not curative, but they definitely halt the progress of the disease. Without treatment, the brain can undergo structural changes due to such things as high cortisol levels. People who have chronic untreated depression are more likely to have a progressively worsening course of the disease. Treating the illness stops this process and can therefore change the course of the disease and halt the damage to the brain.
Now, to address your more "macro" outlook on things: In a complex system, such as the system I will call "person-in-society", there are many points in the system that one can focus on if one wants to identify and define a problem or set of problems, and set about constructing possible solutions to such problems. Depending on where one focuses, the problems will obviously be defined differently and different courses of action to solve those problems will make sense. In the "person-in-society" system, one can focus on the smallest level, such as the atoms that comprise the chemicals that make up the cells of the person's body, or one can focus on a slightly larger scope, such as the person's relationships with family, or one can focus on a larger scope, such as the person's community, or even larger, the person's larger societal issues, etc. There are many examples both of the different size of the scope or the different types of things one can look at within each level.
Focusing on one part of the whole system, constructing a definition of a problem withing that part, and trying to solve that problem might or might not involve integrating solutions to problems in other parts of the system, or wider or narrower scopes. Optimally, one can address problems both as narrowly and as widely as possible at the same time, but this is rarely feasible. More feasible are the actions that find a manageable solution to a specific problem, but this does not preclude other solutions to other problems in the system, or wider scopes of action on larger parts of the system.
Taking antidepressants is not palliative care. It is not a cure, either, but it is a manageable solution, for now, to address a specific problem that left unaddressed, would likely shut down the person-in-society system altogether. That is the case for me, anyway. My taking antidepressants does not stop me from being aware of the society and world around me, or ignoring other aspects of my person-in-society system, or acting on more "macro" approaches to problems that occur on wider scopes within the system.
Drugs don't solve all the world's problems, and yes, there are some causes of suffering that won't be addressed by medicines, but that doesn't negate the fact that medications help a lot of people's problems in such a significant way.
To give a rather crude analogy, my toilet plunger doesn't make my house more energy efficient, but does that mean I must throw away the toilet plunger? Or if I use the plunger to unclog the toilet, does it necessarily follow that I am ignoring the need to make my house energy efficient? Or that the toilet plunger manufacturer is conspiring against the advocates of more energy efficient homes?
poster:noa
thread:39430
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000630/msgs/39546.html