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

Re: Disease vs. Disorder - Elizabeth/Cam/anyone?

Posted by OldSchool on December 30, 2001, at 12:36:57

In reply to Re: Disease vs. Disorder - Elizabeth/Cam/anyone?, posted by Alan on December 22, 2001, at 11:09:23

> > by the way, the current thinking in the medical community is that depression/ anxiety/ schizophrenia will be treated in the future by neurologist ... not psychiatrist ... because of the biologic original of this disease.
> >
> > Spike
> ********************************************
> So then how can some "diseases" be solved through CBT and psychotherapy if the symptoms are irradicated (as claimed) by non med intervention? Wouldn't that then argue that the biologic and environmental are in some proportion to each other depending on the nature and the severity of the illness?
> Anyone????? Thanks.
> By the way I agree with your analysis Spike....
> Alan

All severe forms of mental illness are brain based, physical illnesses. In fact, there is no such thing as a "mental illness." What we call "mental illness" is in fact a physical illness of the short a neurological disorder.

Severe mental illness equals > > > >physical illness.

Much of the better quality psychiatry research being done currently is being done by psychiatrists with dual backgrounds in neurology. Example: Mark George of MUSC. Many of the experimental therapies for resistant depression basically amounts to nothing more than tools originally designed to treat neurological conditions, applied to psychiaty (VNS, rTMS, DBS, etc).

Both ECT and VNS work by raising the seizure threshholds. Thats what both of these treatments do in depressives...when the seizure threshhold is raised from ECT or VNS, mood seems to improve.

The experimental functional neuroimaging is a neurology tool. Neurologists are ALREADY using SPECT/PET for diagnosing parkinsons, Alzheimers and dementia at the clinical levels. Why are psychiatrists not already using SPECT/PET for psychiatric diagnosis at the clinical level? Answer? Much of it is cultural, institutionalized resistance to the idea that mental illness is really a physical disease.

The bottom line is that many people, including some psychiatrists and psychologists, just cannot mentally accept the fact that severe mental illness basically equals screwed up brain function and not some bizarre or deep seated "psychological" problem.

I do very much hope that in the future Psychiatry is formally merged with Neurology. Its long overdue and should have already occurred. If I could find a Neurologist who would treat my depression as a physical disease and look at it in the same way a Neurologist views epilepsy or parkinsons, Id switch right now and never go back to a psychiatrist ever again.

Old School




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:OldSchool thread:87644