Psycho-Babble Medication | about biological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Disease vs. Disorder - Elizabeth/Cam/anyone?

Posted by Alan on December 21, 2001, at 23:10:03

Is it true that anything in the DSM IV is a disorder simply because it does not have a biologically proven underpinning, a definite pathology, and therefore is not observeable under the microscope? Can't see depression therefore it's a disorder - even though working backwards, depression and schizophrenia only treatable by medicinal intervention in many cases? Confusing to me.

I hear that this is a controversial issue in psychychiatry/psychology with the drug companies lined up on one side saying disease and the psychologists on the other side saying disorder.

depression - disease?
schizophrenia - disease?
panic - disorder?

What gives anyway?

What schools of thought are there on the subject? Does it matter where you're coming from as to how it's viewed differently? Is it a political and moralistic battle mixing free will issues with medicine?

For instance, I believe my chronic anxiety is a disease because it only responds to chemical intervention. Is it simply a matter of we haven't found the physiological roots of the disorders' cause YET so that it can be classified as disease?





Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Medication | Framed

poster:Alan thread:87644