Tuesday, July 27, 2010

DSM-V - Psychiatry's wet dream, pharmaceutical industry's Gold Mine - everyone gets a mental health diagnosis


DSM-V - Psychiatry's Wet Dream, Pharmaceutical Industry's Gold Mine - everyone gets a mental health diagnosis

I have written about the coming DSM-V before here on this blog. So this is just a little update on how Big Pharma, and Psychiatry will not be hindered by mounting negative scientific evidence, criminal probes, tarnished representations, questioning professionals, and a little obstacle called the truth. This is their livelihood and pseudo religion pot of never ending gold were talking about here.

Not that there isn't enough mind poison on the market already, those patents are going to expire in the not so distant future. So Big Pharma and Psychiatry are preparing for the 2013 DSM-V unveiling when they expect an explosion of new patrons for their profitable drug cartel business. That is why there are over 300 new psychiatric drugs (not that the new drugs will be really much different than there old drugs) already in the pipe line for your consumption.

PharmaTimes | Industry News | World News | PhRMA firms’ “record 313 mental illness drugs now in R&D”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From (Reuters) - An updated edition of a mental health bible for doctors may include diagnoses for "disorders" such as toddler tantrums and binge eating, experts say, and could mean that soon no-one will be classed as normal.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66Q4BJ20100727

LONDON | Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:23pm EDT


Mental health experts ask: Will anyone be normal?

Leading mental health experts gave a briefing on Tuesday to warn that a new edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), which is being revised now for publication in 2013, could devalue the seriousness of mental illness and label almost everyone as having some kind of disorder.

Citing examples of new additions like "mild anxiety depression," "psychosis risk syndrome," and "temper dysregulation disorder," they said many people previously seen as perfectly healthy could in future be told they are ill.

"It's leaking into normality. It is shrinking the pool of what is normal to a puddle," said Til Wykes of the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College London.

The DSM is published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and contains descriptions, symptoms, and other criteria for diagnosing mental disorders. It is seen as the global diagnostic bible for the field of mental health medicine.

The criteria are designed to provide clear definitions for professionals who treat patients with mental disorders, and for researchers and pharmaceutical drug companies seeking to develop new ways of treating them.

Wykes and colleagues Felicity Callard, also of Kings' Institute of Psychiatry, and Nick Craddock of Cardiff University's department of psychological medicine and neurology, said many in the psychiatric community are worried that the further the guidelines are expanded, the more likely it will become that nobody will be classed as normal any more.

"Technically, with the classification of so many new disorders, we will all have disorders," they said in a joint statement. "This may lead to the belief that many more of us 'need' drugs to treat our 'conditions' -- (and) many of these drugs will have unpleasant or dangerous side effects."

The scientists said "psychosis risk syndrome" diagnosis was particularly worrying, since it could falsely label young people who may only have a small risk of developing an illness.

"It's a bit like telling 10 people with a common cold that they are "at risk for pneumonia syndrome" when only one is likely to get the disorder," Wykes told the briefing.

The American Psychiatric Association did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The scientists gave examples from the previous revision to the DSM, which was called DSM 4 and included broader diagnoses and categories for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism and childhood bipolar disorders.

This, they said, had "contributed to three false epidemics" of these conditions, particularly in the United States.

"During the last decade, how many doctors were harangued by worried parents into giving drugs like Ritalin to children who didn't really need it?," their statement asked.

Millions of people across the world, many of them children, take ADHD drugs including Novartis' Ritalin, which is known generically as methylphenidate, and similar drugs such as Shire Plc's Adderall and Vyvanse. In the United States alone, sales of these drugs was about $4.8 billion in 2008.

Wykes and Callard published a comment in The Journal of Mental Health expressing their concern about the upcoming DSM revision and highlighting another 10 or more papers in the same journal from other scientists who were also worried. DSM 5 is due to be published in May 2013.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you might think there would be a few Doctor's in the APA and American Academic Psychiatry that would be standing up screaming bloody murder over this coming revelation and tide of disease mongering headed straight for us like a run away freight train. but instead it appears they're spending most of their time defending their good old boys/girls mentality, stroking their peers egos when they step halfheartedly speaking out of both sides of their mouth, and continue to sit back collecting the spoils from their self ordained thrones.

Some good examples of this "we know better attitude" behavior can be seen over at

Beforeyoutakethatpill - American Shrinkery Update: Dan Carlat MD in ‘Unhinged: The Trouble with Psychiatry’

Here Doug Bremner plays tit for tat with so called professional accolade favors when writing about Dr. Danial Carlat's new book.

Carlat has a long history of playing both sides of the fence so to speak. He still pushes those psych pills like their nutritious mind candy, has played apologist for the likes of Harvard's J. Biederman of "we need to drug those kids with powerful anti-psychotic drugs early and often" fame. In fact Carlat has even promoted making anti-depressant drugs non-prescription and openly sold over the counter at your local five and dime. That just begins to touch the tip of the ice berg so to speak.

Does this sound like someone taking on the problems and corruption permeating psychiatry to you. But then again Dr. Bremner earnestly defended Emory's notorious C. Nemeroff of corruption fame back when that scandalous debacle was first receiving headlines.

Just read the comment section in the following link as evidence

http://citizenvox.org/2008/10/07/undue-influence-emory-researcher-hid-pharma-payments/

This appears to be the standard professional insider club behavior were getting from those "supposed critics" of dirty psychiatry and big pharma. It's always first circle the wagons around their colleagues, and then you maybe get a little halfhearted double speak that never amounts to a hill of beans, except when they are out promoting their latest book for profit endeavor.

Just remember folks these doctor elites live in million dollar glass houses with god like university tenure. They have not a clue what it's like to function in the real world beyond their professionally decorated academic and shrink offices. They sometimes talk the talk, but don't have a frigging clue about the walk part.

So when the new DSM-V hits the wall in 2013; just remember these same Dr. Benedict Arnold types will still be writing scripts, collecting huge paychecks, and profiteering off of the new and expanded everyone is mentally ill manual.

We as a public can not rely upon the deeply conflicted doctors and profiteers for change. The only way we as a public can stop this madness, is to stop it our selves in any and every means possible.

more reading concerning this topic:

Dr.Daniel Carlat: Unhinged is right! "Mentally ill people need prescriptions, can't due to Psychiatrist shortage"--Dr.Carlat




7 comments:

Radagast said...

Reuters wrote:
"Mental health experts ask: Will anyone be normal?.."

Yes, of course they will. The shrinks will always be normal (they are the ones who have established this (negatively framed), view of normality, anyway), so provided we all copy them, we'll be fine!

However, I'd just like to point out that DSM-V is not Law. It's not anything, in fact. It has absolutely no authority, unless you're in a shrink's office. And if you're in a shrink's office, it's just you and him/her, which is to say that you're not fighting a whole industry, or an Evil Empire: you're dealing with one, isolated individual, who is defending an interest. And that makes them very vulnerable.

Matt

Stan said...

Dear Radagast:

"However, I'd just like to point out that DSM-V is not Law"

In reality and practice here in America the DSM is law, since psychiatry is recognized authority in Mental Health Courts that can and do remove even the most basic constitutional legal rights from those deemed mentally ill.

In 46 states in America you can be held indefinitely and force treated without the conviction of any crime, other than the crime of being labeled mentally ill.

So on the surface the DSM isn't law per-say, but in practice this does have dire legal consequences for everyone.

Stan said...

By the way, I found it interesting that when I commented over at Bremner's blog regarding Dr. Carlat's open hypocrisy with a far less hostile or critical comment than many posted.

My comment was removed by Dr. Bremner.

Not hard to see that the medical bad apples don't fall far from the nasty corruption tree so to speak.

Radagast said...

Ah, so if a shrink says that one is mentally ill, then one is mentally ill as a matter of fact, and a court will not enter into any discussion on the subject? All the more reason to behave like a shrink... And then, when the whole world is full of shrink-clones, everybody can be happy!

You see, I have an issue with the basic methodology of Shrinkdom... One has massive lists of stuff that constitute "mentally ill". However, nowhere have I found any list that defines "mental wellness". Why is that? Hmmm? Why is that Shrinkdom has determined to define mental wellness negatively (ie, mental wellness is what's left over, when one has deleted all the behaviour that amounts to mental illness)?

It's a piece of shit as a methodology, and it is completely and utterly open to goalpost-moving and corrupt practices. And that, of course, is precisely what is happening.

Matt

Stan said...

it's a miracle, comment has now been placed back up on his blog?

Doug Bremner said...

It's not a miracle. I don't moderate comments, but if you post a comment with multiple links it gets held up for moderation as potential spam.

Stan said...

Thank you for the clarification Doug. It appeared posted, then disappeared. So considering the topic matter, I was a little dumb struck. Pardon my Psychiatric MD moment ...lol

Blog Archive

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Terms and conditions on the use of the contents of the “Is Something Not Quite Right with Stan - A Mental Health Blog” site are for informational and entertainment purposes only. Stan does not represent or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or reliability of the information or content (collectively, the "Materials") contained on, distributed through, or linked, downloaded or accessed from this website.

Stan encourages you to make your own health care and legal decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care and/ or legal professional. The information posted here should not be considered medical advice and is not intended to replace consultation with a qualified medical professional if they exist. I do not answer specific medical questions.

Third party information is gathered from sources that Stan believes to be reliable. However, in no event shall Stan, or any third parties mentioned on this site be liable for any damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the content whether or not Stan is advised of the possibility of such damages.

Stan reserves the right, in its sole discretion and without any obligation, to make improvements to, or correct any error or omissions in any portion of the displayed materials.

You hereby acknowledge that any reliance upon any Materials shall be at your sole risk.

Disclaimer of Liability

The user assumes all responsibility and risk for the use of this web site and the Internet generally. Under no circumstances, including negligence, shall anyone involved in creating or maintaining this web site, or shall the website writer or any commenter’s be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages, or lost profits that result from the use or inability to use the web site and/or any other web sites which are linked to this site.

Nor shall they be liable for any such damages including, but not limited to, reliance by a visitor on any information obtained via the web site; or that result from mistakes, omissions, interruptions, deletion of files, viruses, errors, defects, or any failure of performance, communications failure, theft, destruction or unauthorized access.

ALL CONTENT ON THIS WEB SITE IS PROVIDED TO YOU ON AN "AS IS," "AS AVAILABLE" BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. Stan MAKES NO WARRANTY AS TO THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, CURRENCY, OR RELIABILITY OF ANY CONTENT AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS WEB SITE.

In states which do not allow some or all of the above limitations of liability, liability shall be limited to the greatest extent allowed by law.

Disclaimer of Endorsement - Reference to any products, services, hypertext link to the third parties or other information by trade name, trademark, supplier or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation by me. Nor is an endorsement by me is implied by such links. They are for convenience only, as an index in a public library.

Information Subject to Change - Any information on this web site may be removed without notice. Information may include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Furthermore, the information may change from time to time without any notice.

GENERAL INFORMATION - The information contained in this online site is presented and intended to provide a broad understanding and knowledge critical to psychiatric practices and humorous social interaction. The information should not be considered complete and should not be used in place of communication and consultation.

NO WARRANTIES “Is Something Not Quite Right With Stan - A Mental Health Blog” MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES THAT USE OF THE WEB SITE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT ANY CONTENT YOU MAY OBTAIN FROM THE WEB SITE IS FREE OF VIRUSES.

This site is not a monologue of truth. It is a catalyst for public debate about medical conduct and for entertainment purposes. The reader is urged to confront officials to clarify issues mentioned herein. This site is designed strictly to provide information for critical, literary, academic, entertainment, and public usage. A qualified and trustworthy medical professional must be consulted regarding medical issues, treatments, diagnoses, etc.; if they exist in all actuality or truth.