Is depression a disease? Is it more prevalent today?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by loinburger

Psychiatry is not psychology. Psychiatry is about the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness. Psychology is about how Freud had an incestuous relationship with his mother.
.

You are confusing psychology with psychoanalysis. Psychology is the study of the human mind, as a branch of science. Psychiatry is the treatment of mental illness, as a branch of medicine. Historically most psychoanalysts were credentialed as Psychiatrists, and many anti-Freudians were not.

Today, we identify psychiatry with the biological approach, cause you need an MD to dispense pills. In fact most psychologists accept that medication is often necessary, and most psychiatrists (certainly all ive ever met) accept that therapy, addressing how people think and live, is an important part of treating depression.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by loinburger

Equating psychology with psychiatry is bogus -- double-blind studies, EEG's, and MRI's are not equivalent to archetypes and Oedipus complexes.


If somebody has cancer, then the rational person doesn't "tough it out" or go to a faith healer or whatever, they go to a "so-called expert" in the field for treatment. Likewise, if somebody has depression, schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder, then they don't "tough it out" or go to a faith healer or whatever, they go to a "so-called expert" in the field. Is it possible that the oncologist/psyciatrist will misdiagnose you, and/or that the treatments won't work? Yes, because medicine isn't an exact science. Is it possible that you'll go into spontaneous remission? Yes, but the rational person doesn't count on that happening.

If youve read any current psychology journals, youd see that oedipus complexes arent discussed much anymore.

If you have high cholesterol, you discuss with a doc taking meds. You also discuss changing your diet and exercise. If you cant do that on your own, and your doc aint an expert on changing things like that, you go to a counselor on diet and exercise, a trainer, whatever.

MODERN psychological approaches to depression, like cognitive-behavioral therapy, are the depression equivalent to diet and exercise for cholesterol.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by NeOmega

The body and mind have evolved for thousands of years! What did cavemen with depression do? Stop gathering berries and consult a tharapist?

1. undoubtedly some suicided. See what did cavemen do about cancer

2. Some probably did use their culture equivalent of therapy. Certainly we know "primitive cultures" have their equivalent of therapy. Thats a hot topic in anthropolgy, IIUC.

3. Some probably just shutdown and were depressed for years, and were cared for by relatives. That of course is still an option today, just not a good one.

4. They may well have used their own medications. St Johns wort for example, seems to be a natural SSRI. There may have been others known to "primitive" people.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Scientists are a fraternity of head scratchers and ball manipulators.

geez, and i thought he was checking for testicular cancer

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Dis
As I mentioned before, just because some people can beat it without outside help, that doesn't mean everyone can.

Everyone is built differently. Including their brains.

I believe one can prevent from going into depression through will alone, but it's near impossible to get out of a serious depression through will alone. Once you are in, you are stuck. It feels like a hole you can't get out of.

QFT

One of the best things Dis has ever posted, IMHO.

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


QFT

One of the best things Dis has ever posted, IMHO.

And if that isn't damning by faint praise I don't know what is!

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Darius871
I don't want to step into this lion's den too long but a question comes to mindfor the folks who think nearly all depression cases are completely inevitable chemical imbalances (i.e. for everyone but NeOmega): how do you explain the fact that first-world countries have far higher rates of debilitating depression than less developed ones? If depression is indeed somatogenic, then wouldn't incidence rates be roughly the same in any given populations?

I think the depression is always chemical school misunderstands some things. Depression may always be expressed chemically in the brain - but that doesnt mean it doesnt have an external cause. IIUC there is research suggesting that repeated stress in fact strains the neurochemical processes in the brain, and causes them to malfunction - however once this has happened, simply removing the source of stress doesnt remove the problem, which has now become organic. (see "A Mood Apart")

If i drive a car with a bad tire, (a brain with a genetic tendency toward depression) I will probably eventually get a flat even if i drive on good roads (i will suffer a depression even if i live a low stress life) If i drive on bad roads, i will eventually get a flat, even if I have good tires. I cant, however cure the flat simply be driving on good roads again.

[Colon™]

Originally posted by reds4ever


And if that isn't damning by faint praise I don't know what is!

You should have kept quiet, LOTM was breaking posts-in-a-row records here.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


I think the depression is always chemical school misunderstands some things. Depression may always be expressed chemically in the brain - but that doesnt mean it doesnt have an external cause. IIUC there is research suggesting that repeated stress in fact strains the neurochemical processes in the brain, and causes them to malfunction - however once this has happened, simply removing the source of stress doesnt remove the problem, which has now become organic. (see "A Mood Apart")

Of course, but even so I'd expect life in an LDC to be far more stressful and thus cause far more such malfunctions, and yet statistics show the counterintuitive opposite.

Also, if I recall correctly from my old psych courses there are a number of factors that correlate with depression far more strongly than stress does (such as family & social relationships, outlook on life, self-esteem, self-efficacy, religious beliefs, etc.) Since these are mostly cognitive they point me more toward a psychogenic perspective.

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by Colon™


You should have kept quiet, LOTM was breaking posts-in-a-row records here.

LOL!! I didn't notice sorry.

[Kontiki]

I haven't read all of this, but I blame Bush and/or the terrorists. It's the only logical answer.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by loinburger
I know! I was astonished to discover that sometimes there are even errors in mathematical proofs! One time a so-called "expert" was explaining the "proof" for the halting problem to me, and I asked him if he could prove that there weren't any errors in his proof, and he said he couldn't! Take that, Science!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Darius871
I don't want to step into this lion's den too long but a question comes to mindfor the folks who think nearly all depression cases are completely inevitable chemical imbalances (i.e. for everyone but NeOmega): how do you explain the fact that first-world countries have far higher rates of debilitating depression than less developed ones? If depression is indeed somatogenic, then wouldn't incidence rates be roughly the same in any given populations?

More people are tested in first-world countries?

[NeOmega]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by lord of the mark

Originally posted by NeOmega

The body and mind have evolved for thousands of years! What did cavemen with depression do? Stop gathering berries and consult a tharapist?

3. Some probably just shutdown and were depressed for years, and were cared for by relatives. That of course is still an option today, just not a good one.

A caveman did not shut down, and get taken care of by his peers for a couple of years. How ridiculous. They would have called it "lazy", and nobody would have stood for it.

I love these "probablies", and like Darius asked, why do 1st world countries haev higher rates of depression?

Because they are being sold a disease on TV and in magazines.

And I see a couple of your began medication as children. I think it's an outrage to be medicted as a child.... well, considering giving a kid coke at 14 or marijuana is an outrage.


Now, when you see your own kids becoming distant, or seemingly depressed, you'll haul them over to Dr. Prozac.


I mean, if as an adult, you choose to medicate with prozac or zolaft or tweek or coke or weed, I don't care, that is your choice.... they are all dagerous, and I assure you, lawsuits are on the way in a couple of decades, both for health and mental effects of these happy pills.

[Monk]

NeOmega, would you bother to tell me the answer to my question?

You know, why there's a considerable distinction between lack of insulin and lack of serotonin to the extent that one constitutes a disease, the other not.