|
Post by Stal on Sept 4, 2011 12:40:39 GMT -5
Despite the fact I pointed out the disorder word being fine, I truthfully think that too many things are labelled disorders that really aren't. ADD and ADHD are good examples. Too many kids have been labelled with it when they're just being normal kids. And there's a tendency to medicate things that are actually normal behaviors simply because it's not convenient or understood by the parents. Yes, there are legit cases, but I think there's many more tendencies to put labels on everything and every behavior and then come away as it's abnormal and thus should be medicated. Still, there are things to be said for the medications helping those afflicted deal with any ill effects. As well as understanding more about yourself. Although then there's times people hide behind those labels as a defense of allowing themselves to be certain ways without working through some of the associated problems. It's all very murky. Both the DSM and ICD have firm criteria for the diagnosis of psychological disorders. While they're by no means foolproof (what is, really? xD) they're at least specific. Some people get a false diagnosis, unfortunately, but they're at least a step in the right direction. The misdiagnosis usually happens on the part of parents who think their child's misbehaviour must have a psychological cause. Unskilled or self-diagnosis is the problem, methinks. Aye, I'm aware of the DSM. But I do know from anecdotes and rants from other grad school psych students that they're not -as- specific as people would like to believe and diagnosis isn't always clearcut. i.e. Assuming two unrelated things are symptoms of the same thing, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2011 12:53:29 GMT -5
Both the DSM and ICD have firm criteria for the diagnosis of psychological disorders. While they're by no means foolproof (what is, really? xD) they're at least specific. Some people get a false diagnosis, unfortunately, but they're at least a step in the right direction. The misdiagnosis usually happens on the part of parents who think their child's misbehaviour must have a psychological cause. Unskilled or self-diagnosis is the problem, methinks. Aye, I'm aware of the DSM. But I do know from anecdotes and rants from other grad school psych students that they're not -as- specific as people would like to believe and diagnosis isn't always clearcut. i.e. Assuming two unrelated things are symptoms of the same thing, etc. Yeah, no denying that. This is especially true for ADHD. The definitions for symptom classifications are just hideously vague. :I I hear the DSM-V is going to clarify things, so fingers crossed. For anyone who's curious, the DSM is the American Psychological Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. The ICD-10 is The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, published by the World Health Organization. ^^ Info-fox complete. xD .oO Info-fox? Infox?
|
|
|
Post by Sq on Sept 4, 2011 16:36:44 GMT -5
Hmm, I'm really not sure how I feel about meds still. I've been on and off them for about two years now and honestly, I don't know how much they've helped in the long run.
Another thing I wonder about a lot is how many people actually take their meds. I know quite a few people who either stop taking theirs after the bottle runs out or just plain don't take them at all. My brother used to throw his in the trash every morning. I put mine down the sink. There's a lot of stigma attached to having to take a pill, and a lot of people don't want to have to rely on it. Just something I've noticed...
|
|
|
Post by Herdy on Sept 4, 2011 17:24:11 GMT -5
There's no doubt that a great deal of medications help reduce positive symptoms in many disorders - but effectiveness over time and on negative symptoms is less clear cut. Most of the 'gold standard' experiments that claim super-effectiveness from such drugs in all areas are financed by pharmacutical companies. Counterbalance all you like, if you are getting paid to find something, you'll look harder into data until you find it. There's certainly a motive in the industry to be less than plain with the public - the controversy over percieved coverups with Prozac legal cases being one of the most high profile.
Drugs are great, don't get me wrong - but they aren't a complete answer in themselves. Therapy gets next to no attention or funding when compared to drugs (if it ain't CBT, wave chances of grants goodbye), but it's an obvious accompaniment to drugs that don't seem to touch negative symptoms and social aspects of illnesses in the same way.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger on Sept 4, 2011 18:41:31 GMT -5
Er, all right, for the sake of keeping everyone happy, I'll try to use "condition". If I use "disorder", it'll just be out of habit, and will never be meant as insulting.
Oh, good points, Squiesh and Herdy. I'd forgotten the difference between in treatment of positive and negative symptoms; that is generally true of a lot of medication.
The whole pharmaceutical company point is interesting, too; they're definitely hugely involved in the medication spree. If anyone's seen commercials for PMDD (Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder) medications - PMDD is in the "possible additions" section of the DSM IV. It's not even listed as a real condition yet, but already someone's out making money on the medicine.
((And high-five for info-fox! =D))
|
|