Posted by Dinah on December 12, 2002, at 8:07:56
In reply to Re: Drunk on Zoloft?, posted by Simon Sobo MD on December 12, 2002, at 6:44:03
I read the article with interest. You brought up two points that I have long felt to be true.
First of all that the DSM categories only describe symptoms and that it is foolish to think that many of the Axis I disorders and all of the Axis II disorders could possibly come from the same cause. There are probably many ways to come to "borderline personality disorder" which really just describes a cluster of coping mechanisms that often come together. Other than underlying emotional reactivity, why would any one physical cause be behind all cases? Moreover there is so much comorbidity within the DSM diagnoses that someone ought to be skeptical just because of that. DSM is not equipped to diagnose an organ as complex as the brain, in my opinion.
More importantly, I have long been questioning whether "side effects" of psychotropic medications (especially SSRI's) weren't really the primary effects, leading to their usefulness in so many conditions. For example, I used Luvox for OCD and I've always felt it worked through a combination of memory loss and apathy. If you forget what you've done that day, you're not as likely to worry that you've caused disaster, and the apathy takes care of what you do remember.
Which is not to say that the drugs aren't useful, and if I needed them to function I'd go back on them. I just agree that the drugs should perhaps be explained something along the lines of "SSRI's cause apathy and a reduction in stimulation. These effects are useful in treating a number of disorders."
What do you think of the current practice of prescribing antipsychotics as adjuncts to treatment for those who are not psychotic? How do you think that *really* works? Is it just a tranquilizing effect?
Thanks for the link.
Dinah
poster:Dinah
thread:123623
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20021210/msgs/131452.html