|
|||
|
Not my expertise or opinion (I don't have any since I don't know enough about it...),... just something I just read in a German magazine and thus googled for this thread: ...Because I am saying things a lot of people will not want to hear so it's important to show that my ideas have come from research.
Was some of that research a bit personal? I was involved in an experiment by a colleague, David Healy, at the North Wales Hospital in Bangor. We took a very low dose, 5 milligrams, of droperidol, very similar to the widely used drug haloperidol. Parts of the study were never completed because nearly everybody had a terrible reaction to the drug. Mine was not the most extreme. There was a psychiatrist who became so deeply depressed that she was put under observation. What happened to you? I drank this stuff and I felt lethargic and sedated. I thought I had got away with it. Then a psychologist walked in and said: "Oh, this is embarrassing, Richard, but we'd like you to fill in this test." The embarrassing thing was I had designed the test myself 10 years earlier. I looked at it and I could as soon have climbed Mount Everest. I felt a sense of depression and hopelessness but also an inner sense of restlessness and agitation. It was a combined wanting to do something and not being able to. Then she said: "You don't look too well - would you like some lunch?" I interpreted that as an order - and I've read since that people on neuroleptic drugs take statements as orders. So I said yes. Then she said: "We've a sandwich machine - will that do?" And I said yes because it was all I was up to saying. But I couldn't get the energy to decide what money to use. I just grabbed a coin and it was enough to get a Mars bar, which I was too ill to eat. Did the drug wear off? I had to do these neuropsychological tests, and it was embarrassing, but I burst into tears halfway through. I started weeping uncontrollably, so much so that I was given an anticholinergic drug as an antidote and David took me out to get some fresh air. I suddenly felt I had to tell him about all the things I had ever felt guilty about. Then I went back and fell asleep for 3 hours. I woke up with a woozy hangover, like there was a glass wall between me and the world and that lasted for about a week after a single dose. The akathisia - the combined agitation and depression I felt - is experienced by 40 per cent of patients. It tends to go away after about a week, but imagine: you've had a crisis, you're admitted to hospital, you're hearing voices, then someone gives you a drug that makes you feel like that! But they are designed for sick people... About 40 per cent of patients have the same experience. That's the great unasked question of psychiatry: what was it like for you? Patients' experiences have been completely ignored. So are the antipsychotics effective? It's more complex. There's no doubt these drugs help some people by reducing the hallucinations and delusions. But there are really important caveats. First, something like 30 per cent of patients get benefits from the drugs - and we don't know which ones they will be. Secondly, these drugs have the most horrendous side effects. The old type of antipsychotic drugs produced what we call extrapyramidal effects, including Parkinsonian tremors, tardive dyskinesia (uncontrolled movements of the mouth and tongue) and akathisia. But surely you just give low doses? There is a scandal which I must get on my soapbox about - neuroleptic dosage. These drugs were discovered in the late 1940s and in wide use by the 1950s. Bizarrely, the first studies to look at the most appropriate dosage were not published until the 1990s. It turned out that low doses work at least as well as high doses. And for much of that period it wasn't uncommon to find patients on 80 to 90 milligrams of haloperidol. We now consider it irrational to give more than 10 milligrams and better to keep it at 5 milligrams a day, although you can still find patients on higher doses. We've got a massive amount of drug-induced illness - millions of people - and some of them have even been sent to early graves because of the increased risk from heart attacks and various blood disorders. All completely unnecessary. What about the new antipsychotics? It turned out the new drugs looked great compared to irrational doses of the old ones, but when compared to rational doses there was hardly any difference. The new drugs don't produce the old side effects, but there are a load of new ones: diabetes, sexual dysfunction, weight gain. I'm not saying drugs never work. If you talk to patients, some will tell you that drugs are a lifesaver and others that drugs have made their lives worse. Quite a few patients now on drugs would be better off without. Perhaps the best thing is to encourage patients to try them and let them decide... posted by tozy |
|||
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgPoliticsPsychiatry and Anti-PsychiatryUse of drugs in psychiatry |
|
|||
|
Your post is the very definition of anecdotal evidence. posted by holy_of_holies |
|||
|
|||
|
||||||
|
Ups, I forgot to mention whom this interview was made with: Richard Bentall (1956 -) holds a Chair in Experimental Clinical psychology at the University of Manchester, UK. Born in Sheffield, he attended the University College of North Wales, Bangor as an undergraduate before taking a Ph.D. in experimental psychology at the same institution. After achieving his doctorate, he moved to the University of Liverpool to obtain a qualification in clinical psychology before achieving an MA in philosophy applied to health care from University College Swansea. He later returned to his alma mater of Liverpool to work as a lecturer after a brief stint working for the National Health Service as a forensic clinical psychologist. He was appointed as a professor at Liverpool before his 1999 move to the University of Manchester.
He is particularly well known for his work on psychosis, delusions and hallucinations and has published extensively in this area. He also has an interest in differences between human and animal pedagogy and the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome. In 1989 he was awarded the British Psychological Society's 'May Davidson Award' for contributions to the field of clinical psychology. He has edited and authored several books, most notably the recent Madness Explained. Currently, he lives with his partner, Aisling, and their twin children Fintan and Keeva. [edit] Bibliography
As I said, holy, not my opinion, since I don't know enough about it; just something I thought might be interesting for this discussion. By the way,... it was a science magazine, where I've originally read about this man's experiment... posted by tozy |
||||||
|
||||||
|
|||
|
holy_of_holies: Your post is the very definition of anecdotal evidence. It's not. It's personal experience by a professional with featured statistics. This report is worth much more than an anecdote. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
knn: holy_of_holies: Your post is the very definition of anecdotal evidence. It's not. It's personal experience by a professional with featured statistics. This report is worth much more than an anecdote. No sorry KNN you're wrong...the only actual data presented in tozy's first post are from a guy (we didn't even know who he was at that point) spouting statistics with no citations and recounting personal anecdotes. That would be like me saying "I know dinosaurs were mammals because I've touched a dinosaur bone; and 99 percent of all dinosaurs didn't lay eggs..." I asked for data, and we get this guy's name and a few citations of his own books. It's all fine to debate, just know that all you are debating is opinion, like Fatpie and I debate my opinion of the British. Of the science of psychology/psychopharmacology, you have already proven that you know nothing, and I have proven that I know nothing plus personal experience. Thus I know more than you. You act like a minister of propaganda for the scientology church. I act like a sick but prudent person. Why don't you go worship a cow, knn? posted by holy_of_holies |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
holy_of_holies: spouting statistics with no citations and recounting personal anecdotes. That would be like me saying "I know dinosaurs were mammals because I've touched a dinosaur bone; and 99 percent of all dinosaurs didn't lay eggs..." Wrong comparison. You simply can't compare conclusion what happened millions of years ago with a personal experience by an expert. holy_of_holies: Of the science of psychology/psychopharmacology, you have already proven that you know nothing, and I have proven that I know nothing plus personal experience. Thus I know more than you. And it's still valid, that you don't have to kill yourself to state that suicide is crap. holy_of_holies: You act like a minister of propaganda for the scientology church. 1) What the heck? I didn't mention them once. Actually you are the only one who brings it up again and again. 2) Maybe the next time you claim that tozy is a minister also 3) So what? Would that disprove any of my statements? (Did I actually make any statements regarding mental drugs here anyway?) 4) 5) *knn whispers* Soon they will take away your precious mind drugs and you will have to face reality 6) It's always funny to read what others think about me. I slightly remember someone wrote I am a Jehova's witness (and who knows, maybe I am) 7) You are talking as if you are the propaganda minister of psychiatry... and that (combined with the facts that you are taking mental illness drugs yourself) weakens a lot of the pro-psychiatry statements that you make 8) Offtopic posted by knn |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
holy_of_holies: the only actual data presented in tozy's first post are from a guy (we didn't even know who he was at that point)... Well,...not exactly, holy. If you had taken a look at the link you could have read that... Clinical psychologist Richard Bentall had taken a psychiatric drug as part of an experiment... ...and Google can be some good tool, you know... holy_of_holies: Of the science of psychology/psychopharmacology, you have already proven that you know nothing, and I have proven that I know nothing plus personal experience. Isn't that a good reason to include into the discussion the opinions of experts? So,... is this guy an expert? go down to "Boundaries of Sanity and Madness" ... posted by tozy |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
tozy: holy_of_holies: the only actual data presented in tozy's first post are from a guy (we didn't even know who he was at that point)... Well,...not exactly, holy. If you had taken a look at the link you could have read that... Clinical psychologist Richard Bentall had taken a psychiatric drug as part of an experiment... ...and Google can be some good tool, you know... I'm not going to look up your references for you, tozy...if I don't see it in front of me, I'm not going to go search for it...what am I, your secretary? tozy: holy_of_holies: Of the science of psychology/psychopharmacology, you have already proven that you know nothing, and I have proven that I know nothing plus personal experience. Isn't that a good reason to include into the discussion the opinions of experts? Unless he is mentally ill, he has no idea of what being mentally ill is like. Therefore he is not an expert on the experience of mental illness. Psychiatrists are trained to identify the outward symptoms of illness, not to experience it themselves. This guy is a fringe weirdo who thinks he knows what people like me go through because he had a bad reaction to a psychotropic at one point. And he now has blood on his hands, because sick people who do not take the medication they require often make that choice at the advice of quacks like him (and knn's mother church, scientology). posted by holy_of_holies |
|||
|
|||
|
||||||
|
holy_of_holies: Unless he is mentally ill, he has no idea of what being mentally ill is like.
posted by knn |
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
knn: holy_of_holies: Unless he is mentally ill, he has no idea of what being mentally ill is like.
Everything you have posted here is demonstrably false. First, someone can't know what riding feels like until they do it. Each individual experiences his/her own reality, and no one can know another person's reality. Thus your analogy is worthless. Second, I never said I knew what mental illness was...nobody knows that at this point...all I know is what it feels like. So I really don't know what you're claiming. Third, you cannot be made to become mentally ill by a drug...drugs can trigger mental illness that developed earlier, but there has been no proof that a drug can make a person mentally ill. So you are totally wrong there. So really you are a buffoon who spouts off about things he doesn't understand and puts innocent people's lives at risk by misinforming the public about a life-and-death matter. But maybe this gives you a thrill. posted by holy_of_holies |
||||||
|
||||||
|
|||
|
holy_of_holies: Third, you cannot be made to become mentally ill by a drug... And how would YOU know? You stated yourself you are no experts and even experts don't know what mental illness is. Moreover: I disagree. This guy discribed accurately his experience. It looked like mental illness, it felt like mental illness and you surely couldn't call him "mentally healthy" during these moments. Thus by definition he was mentally ill. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
knn: holy_of_holies: Third, you cannot be made to become mentally ill by a drug... And how would YOU know? You stated yourself you are no expert and even experts don't know what mental illness is. Because I have a basic understanding of how neurons work and the idea of a drug forcing neurons into permanent dysfunction - of the subtle type which characterizes mental illness - is not plausible by current knowledge. However, as I said, it is possible for a drug to trigger already-present illness. posted by holy_of_holies |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
knn: This guy discribed accurately his experience. It looked like mental illness, it felt like mental illness and you surely couldn't call him "mentally healthy" during these moments. Thus by definition he was mentally ill. Is being drunk for the first time in one's life a mental illness, knn? Or isn't it just an altered state of consciousness? posted by holy_of_holies |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
holy_of_holies: Is being drunk for the first time in one's life a mental illness, knn? Or isn't it just an altered state of consciousness? Depends on the definition. But I would say that someone under drugs is temporary mentally ill or at the virge of it, because if someone constantly for months would behave like being drunk or being on LSD then other by no doubt would call him mentally ill. holy_of_holies: However, as I said, it is possible for a drug to trigger already-present illness. That doesn't exclude the possibility to CREATE mental illness by drugs. holy_of_holies: Because I have a basic understanding of how neurons work Who hasn't? posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
holy_of_holies: Third, you cannot be made to become mentally ill by a drug...drugs can trigger mental illness that developed earlier, but there has been no proof that a drug can make a person mentally ill. So you are totally wrong there. this is the only thing i must disagree on whereas i've had personal experience pertaining to drug induced mental illness and it was one of the weaker ones I might add and holy, you don't think if someone drops 300 hits of acid they are not going to cause some damage and change their brain chemistry a bit, but only bring about a dormant mental illness? i would beg to differ posted by The ONEder Man |
|||
|
|||
|
The time now is 22 August 2008, 04:55 php B.B. |