|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 28, 2022 22:23:30 GMT
I would like to agree that there is no test for a mental health diagnosis BUT there isn't one for all illnesses either eg Myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy)/chronic fatigue syndrome.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 28, 2022 23:03:31 GMT
I would like to agree that there is no test for a mental health diagnosis BUT there isn't one for all illnesses either eg Myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy)/chronic fatigue syndrome. Medical testing in general is in fact highly unreliable - 1. DEMENTIA: It’s not your blood that gives the game away. It’s your symptoms, plus the doc asking you some simple questions to test your memory and brain power. Even then, it can be hard to know if it is really dementia or just normal “senior moments” — so you may be monitored over time to see if you are getting worse. 2. PARKINSON’S DISEASE: Again it is the symptoms — the shaking, stiffness and general slowing up — that make the diagnosis. A special scan may help confirm it but blood tests do not. 3. MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS (MS): You’ll probably end up having blood taken but that is to check for other problems which can look like MS. The final verdict depends on your pattern of symptoms and specialised tests such as scans. 4. RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: There is a blood test for “rheumatoid factor”, which gives a helpful clue. But it proves nothing. Some people with rheumatoid arthritis have a negative test and vice versa. Docs make a diagnosis from your symptoms — persistently painful, swollen and stiff joints, usually affecting both sides of your body. 5. PROSTATE CANCER: Yes, there is a blood test available, the “PSA”, which can show signs of possible cancer. But it comes with a heap of ifs, buts and maybes. A positive test can have other causes. A negative one does not rule out cancer, either. Also, no one has proven for sure that PSA testing is worthwhile, so you should get some written information to help you decide whether to go ahead with the test. Conditions That Are Hard to Diagnose www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/ss/slideshow-hard-to-diagnose
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 30, 2022 9:51:25 GMT
Anti psychiatrists often assert - there is no test - but this doesn't prove anything in the 'illness' dispute, as your post shows. A point in favour of the 'pro ' lot.
But I have to add that psychiatry also makes a lot of claims that are not wholly justified but would be valid if expressed more tentatively.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 18, 2022 17:19:55 GMT
Polemics - A few examples - An “Even-Handed” History of Psychiatry as Damning as the “Polemics”? By Sandra Steingard, MD -July 27, 2019 www.madinamerica.com/2019/07/even-handed-history-of-psychiatry-damning/The historic antecedents to the current polemics on involuntary psychiatric hospitalization M A Peszke PMID: 6368120 DOI: 10.1016/0010-440x(84)90012-9 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6368120/Online Debates on Psychiatric Diagnosis Often Rely on Rhetoric Instead of Facts A new research article examines the use of polemics and rhetorical concessions in the online debate about psychiatric diagnosis. www.madinamerica.com/2022/01/online-debates-psychiatric-diagnosis-often-rely-rhetoric-instead-facts/Beyond polemics: science and ethics of ADHD. www.psych.ox.ac.uk/publications/515854[Karl Kraus and psychiatry. An assay] pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/383397/Psychiatrists Should Not Fall Back on DSM May 13, 2009 Surendra Kelwala, MD Psychiatric Times, Psychiatric Times Vol 26 No 6, Volume 26, Issue 6 www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/psychiatrists-should-not-fall-back-dsmPsychiatrists' agency and their distance from the authoritarian state in post-World War II Taiwan Harry Yi-Jui Wu 1 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32969674/THE EPISTEMOLOGICAL BASIS OF PSYCHIATRIC CONTROVERSIES hrcak.srce.hr/file/114068Beyond the “at risk mental state” concept: transitioning to transdiagnostic psychiatry Patrick D. McGorry,Jessica A. Hartmann,Rachael Spooner,Barnaby Nelson First published: 24 May 2018 doi.org/10.1002/wps.20514Citations: 203 onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wps.20514
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 22, 2022 18:10:46 GMT
Extraordinary. To be clear: no one is denying the reality of distress, or benefits of drugs for some. We’re correcting a decades-long public disinformation campaign, with damaging impacts on prescribing rates, informed consent, & willingness to address known psychosocial causes.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 22, 2022 18:14:29 GMT
Anti psychiatrists often assert - there is no test - but this doesn't prove anything in the 'illness' dispute, as your post shows. A point in favour of the 'pro ' lot. But I have to add that psychiatry also makes a lot of claims that are not wholly justified but would be valid if expressed more tentatively. You can find arguments / evidence for every anti / critical / pro / alternative psychiatry perspective.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jul 22, 2022 20:43:33 GMT
[You can find arguments / evidence for every anti / critical / pro / alternative psychiatry perspective.]
Indeed. So it's left to us as individuals to decide which issues need/have to be addressed and in what way.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 23, 2022 18:09:59 GMT
[You can find arguments / evidence for every anti / critical / pro / alternative psychiatry perspective.] Indeed. So it's left to us as individuals to decide which issues need/have to be addressed and in what way. But we are back with the 'problem' that humanity can't agree on it all.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jul 23, 2022 19:31:39 GMT
[Humanity can't agree at all]
Do you think there is some development/evolutionary state in which there will be no disagreement?
Since we cannot have 'agreement' without 'disagreememt' what might this state be?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 23, 2022 19:56:43 GMT
[Humanity can't agree at all] Do you think there is some development/evolutionary state in which there will be no disagreement? Since we cannot have 'agreement' without 'disagreememt' what might this state be? i think it's possible within Ancient Global Civilization that there was a Universal Wisdom & that we may at some point in the future as a species return to it. Truth & Reality is what is - it can be discovered / ascertained. Reality is singular. We all exist within one reality - it is simply that many people disagree on what that totality of reality is. People disagree on aspects of reality - usually the disagreements are belief within cultural / scientific / medical / religious & spiritual / philosophical fields. It's not hard to imagine that humanity as a whole may well one day reconverge on a unified understanding of the totality of Truth / Reality. Also dependent on whether you believe them or not - some Avatars / Mahatmas etc claim to have become Self / God realized as to the Ultimate Truth of existence. It may well be the case as some have said / say that everything is relative to the Absolute. i wouldn't think it unreasonable to one day envision a Unified science & spirituality. i think there was a Unified science & spirituality on this planet at one stage - long since corrupted. Why couldn't humanity potentially reach a Unified / Universal Wisdom? Why do you see this idea of a Unified World / Humanity / Wisdom as so Alien & impossible?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 23, 2022 20:02:09 GMT
People disagree on aspects of reality - usually the disagreements are belief within cultural / scientific / medical / religious & spiritual / philosophical fields. i don't think that the differences are that fundamental.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jul 23, 2022 22:24:30 GMT
[Why do you see this idea of a Unified World / Humanity / Wisdom as so Alien & impossible?]
Good question. In my spiritual practice I enter a state of unarticulated 'knowing' similar I guess to your comment that Reality is what is. I guess humanity could achieve this state as common.
However, while the moment is an experience, once thought returns it backs up this 'knowing' with knowledge that I have about 'material' existence (because of all that I have studied). Probably doesn't make much sense ?
Where are all the controversies in this 'knowing'? In the background, a knowledge that the details may change/develop as human understanding expands.
An example would be seeing a nebula in space, knowing that it's dust and gas but also much more which currently humans don't yet know about (materially/scientifically). But what is seen is the nebula 'as it is' both what is/isn't known interlectually. In this situation I guess we don't have to agree/disagree?
Will muse further on the idea of a unified world eg we learn through debate. In a unified world would there be any room for questioning? Would there be sages whose words we would just accept,
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 23, 2022 22:26:51 GMT
Will muse further on the idea of a unified world eg we learn through debate. In a unified world would there be any room for questioning? Would there be sages whose words we would just accept, If everyone had the Awareness / Realization of a Christ / Buddha / Krishna etc would there be any disagreement?
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jul 23, 2022 22:55:28 GMT
Would there be any disagreement. At the moment the moment there is especially when we focus on the detaik, the differences, rather than what there is in common.
Tnh writes of reactions when he said he had shared a catholic communion - with both some buddhists and some catholics shocked.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jul 23, 2022 23:04:28 GMT
Reading tnh How to eat. There's a better example of what I was trying to explain about 'knowing' .
In tnh's practice it's 'mindful awareness' Eg paying attention to eating an apple we may see the apple seed, the orchard, the sky, the farmer, the picker .... I often think in this way, through images .
|
|