Posted by Dragon Black on October 21, 2007, at 19:25:56
In reply to Re: Difficulty in Diagnosis? Bipolar II?? » andsoitgoes, posted by Racer on October 17, 2007, at 17:15:08
"First of all, I'm not entirely convinced that all of that adds up to bipolar to me. If you're being literal when you say "Sometimes I'll have a few hours to where I think I'm a genius and what I type is pure gold, but it never lasts for an extended period." -- a few hours does not a manic episode make. Also, some of your other descriptions do not sound like bipolar -- the social issues, the work issues, etc."
I disagree. DSM IV requires a minimum 2-week duration to qualify as a hypomanic episode. IMO the concensus view is that this is bunk - completely leaves out rapid and ultradian cyclers; the whole concept of bipolar spectrum disorder has arisen to deal with these shortcomings, and it's a safe bet that a complete overhaul is coming in DSM V (due out 2010 or 2011). DSM IV has 4 categories for BP, one of which is BP NOS (not otherwise specified) - I can't remember the source, but tons of people end up with this diagnosis basically b/c DSM lacks the complexity to account for the way in which they present. My sense of the the trend toward viewing BP as a spectrum is that the important overriding factor is not the elevation of the highs juxtaposed to depressions, such that we can clearly state, "Aha! That is hypomania!" but rather the FACT that they swing or switch in a way that unipolars just don't.
poster:Dragon Black
thread:789780
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20071019/msgs/790535.html