It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Fifty psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 12:37 PM

I wanted to share this pertinent information with ATS. Source

Anti-depressant Medication

(2) Antidepressant medication. Medications such as tricyclics, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, are routinely called “antidepressants.” Yet there is little evidence that these medications are more efficacious for treating (or preventing relapse for) mood disorders than for several other conditions, such as anxiety-related disorders (e.g., panic disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder; Donovan et al., 2010) or bulimia nervosa (Tortorella et al., 2014). Hence, their specificity to depression is doubtful, and their name derives more from historical precedence—the initial evidence for their efficacy stemmed from research on depression (France et al., 2007)—than from scientific evidence. Moreover, some authors argue that these medications are considerably less efficacious than commonly claimed, and are beneficial for only severe, but not mild or moderate, depression, rendering the label of “antidepressant” potentially misleading (Antonuccio and Healy, 2012; but see Kramer, 2011, for an alternative view).

Autism Epidemic

(3) Autism epidemic. Enormous effort has been expended to uncover the sources of the “autism epidemic” (e.g., King, 2011), the supposed massive increase in the incidence and prevalence of autism, now termed autism spectrum disorder, over the past 25 years. The causal factors posited to be implicated in this “epidemic” have included vaccines, television viewing, dietary allergies, antibiotics, and viruses.
Nevertheless, there is meager evidence that this purported epidemic reflects a genuine increase in the rates of autism per se as opposed to an increase in autism diagnoses stemming from several biases and artifacts, including heightened societal awareness of the features of autism (“detection bias”), growing incentives for school districts to report autism diagnoses, and a lowering of the diagnostic thresholds for autism across successive editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Gernsbacher et al., 2005; Lilienfeld and Arkowitz, 2007). Indeed, data indicate when the diagnostic criteria for autism were held constant, the rates of this disorder remained essentially constant between 1990 and 2010 (Baxter et al., 2015). If the rates of autism are increasing, the increase would appear to be slight at best, hardly justifying the widespread claim of an “epidemic.”


(5) Brainwashing. This term, which originated during the Korean War (Hunter, 1951) but which is still invoked uncritically from time to time in the academic literature (e.g., Ventegodt et al., 2009; Kluft, 2011), implies that powerful individuals wishing to persuade others can capitalize on a unique armamentarium of coercive procedures to change their long-term attitudes. Nevertheless, the attitude-change techniques used by so-called “brainwashers” are no different than standard persuasive methods identified by social psychologists, such as encouraging commitment to goals, manufacturing source credibility, forging an illusion of group consensus, and vivid testimonials (Zimbardo, 1997). Furthermore, there are ample reasons to doubt whether “brainwashing” permanently alters beliefs (Melton, 1999). For example, during the Korean War, only a small minority of the 3500 American political prisoners subjected to intense indoctrination techniques by Chinese captors generated false confessions. Moreover, an even smaller number (probably under 1%) displayed any signs of adherence to Communist ideologies following their return to the US, and even these were individuals who returned to Communist subcultures (Spanos, 1996).

Chemical Imbalance

(7) Chemical imbalance. Thanks in part to the success of direct-to-consumer marketing campaigns by drug companies, the notion that major depression and allied disorders are caused by a “chemical imbalance” of neurotransmitters, such as serotonin and norepinephrine, has become a virtual truism in the eyes of the public (France et al., 2007; Deacon and Baird, 2009). This phrase even crops up in some academic sources; for example, one author wrote that one overarching framework for conceptualizing mental illness is a “biophysical model that posits a chemical imbalance” (Wheeler, 2011, p. 151). Nevertheless, the evidence for the chemical imbalance model is at best slim (Lacasse and Leo, 2005; Leo and Lacasse, 2008). One prominent psychiatrist even dubbed it an urban legend (Pies, 2011). There is no known “optimal” level of neurotransmitters in the brain, so it is unclear what would constitute an “imbalance.” Nor is there evidence for an optimal ratio among different neurotransmitter levels. Moreover, although serotonin reuptake inhibitors, such as fluoxetine (Prozac) and sertraline (Zoloft), appear to alleviate the symptoms of severe depression, there is evidence that at least one serotonin reuptake enhancer, namely tianepine (Stablon), is also efficacious for depression (Akiki, 2014). The fact that two efficacious classes of medications exert opposing effects on serotonin levels raises questions concerning a simplistic chemical imbalance model.

The Scientific Method

(27) The scientific method. Many science textbooks, including those in psychology, present science as a monolithic “method.” Most often, they describe this method as a hypothetical-deductive recipe, in which scientists begin with an overarching theory, deduce hypotheses (predictions) from that theory, test these hypotheses, and examine the fit between data and theory. If the data are inconsistent with the theory, the theory is modified or abandoned. It’s a nice story, but it rarely works this way (McComas, 1996). Although science sometimes operates by straightforward deduction, serendipity and inductive observations offered in the service of the “context of discovery” also play crucial roles in science. For this reason, the eminent philosopher of science Popper (1983) quipped that, “As a rule, I begin my lectures on Scientific Method by telling my students that the scientific method does not exist…” (p. 5).

Scientific Proof

(45) Scientific proof. The concepts of “proof” and “confirmation” are incompatible with science, which by its very nature is provisional and self-correcting (McComas, 1996). Hence, it is understandable why Popper (1959) preferred the term “corroboration” to “confirmation,” as all theories can in principle be overturned by new evidence. Nor is the evidence for scientific theories dichotomous; theories virtually always vary in their degree of corroboration. As a consequence, no theory in science, including psychological science, should be regarded as strictly proven. Proofs should be confined to the pages of mathematics textbooks and journals (Kanazawa, 2008).

Mental Telepathy

(49) Mental telepathy. Telepathy, one of the three ostensible types of extrasensory perception (along with clairvoyance and precognition), is the purported ability to read other’s minds by means of psychic powers (Hyman, 1995). Hence, all telepathy is necessarily mental. The term “mental telepathy,” which appears to be in common currency in the academic literature (e.g., Lüthi, 2013; Sagi-Schwartz et al., 2014), implies erroneously that there are “non-mental” forms of telepathy.

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 12:49 PM
Yours Is


Post some thoughts for fooook sake.

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 12:54 PM
a reply to: rukia

So, here's my take.

I am on a regular dosage of Gabapentin, Zoloft, and another one that I cannot remember the name of.

For me, the meds have done a wonderful job. It has taken YEARS to finally find the right consistency of mud to be thrown at the wall and have it stick. Was it painful getting to this point? Yes. Was it worth it? Yes.

In college, a professor very wisely said to pick your path, and stick to it. You cannot know everything. When you need to know something outside of your field, go to someone who is an expert in that field. Just as you are an expert in your own field.

I am not qualified to even begin to pretend to know what might or might not be appropriate for my condition. This is what Dr's are for.

I believe that the way that pharmaceutical companies are allowed to advertise to the public is wrong.

As people have access to the internet, and they are now commonly attempting to diagnose their own ailments, they are bombarded with adverts from pharmaceutical companies. Then, they go into the Dr and make their case.

I for one could coach you on exactly what to say to your Dr. to obtain a prescription for Xanax, with a 65% of your request being honored. It is not hard.

Also, GP's are not specialists in psychiatry. They are generalists. So why in the hell are they writing scripts for anti-depressants, rather than writing referrals to the appropriate psychiatrists?

Bottom line, the article is correct. Far too many are being prescribed meds they do not need.

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 01:28 PM

originally posted by: Ismynameimportant
Yours Is


Post some thoughts for fooook sake.

Sadly, this is what ATS has become--just another aggregator site. You get the same stuff on Drudge or Fox News.

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 01:43 PM
a reply to: Ismynameimportant

But he did. He did. Didn't you read the word 'pertinent"?

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 01:53 PM
A contentious quote-mining thread with no input from the OP. Lazy flame-baiting.

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 04:43 PM
a reply to: rukia

After reading some of the source article, I disagree. Many of the lampooned terms are functionally descriptive.

True, they may be misapplied in some cases. They may also be entirely valid, too.

I think the article is merely highlighting the difference between actual science and popularization of that science - trying to clarify the definitions of the terms.

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 04:59 PM
a reply to: Ismynameimportant

Ran out of room on the OP. And figured that it was long enough xD

I didn't have many thoughts on this, actually. It was mostly just new information for me, so I thought I'd share. I isolated the more-pertinent-to- ATS-terms.

a reply to: chr0naut

Exactly. I think clarification was the entire point.

a reply to: deliberator

Actually, I just ran out of room and didn't really have anything too enlightening to say, so I just said w/e. I made you a picture. Be happy. lol I ran out of characters. I didn't think the OP warranted a second post. But if you think I'm baiting something or being lazy, go right ahead. I am being lazy. I was just sharing information. I made that pretty clear, mVIII.

a reply to: schuyler

It's an article that I have no opinion on. It's not something to have an opinion about. It's just information. Take it, leave it, I don't really care either way. My old professor shared it on facebook, and I thought it was interesting so I shared it here. That's it. It's not deep. It's not a conspiracy. It's not really much. My picture is pretty, though.

edit on 27-12-2015 by rukia because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 05:18 PM
a reply to: rukia

Dont let my nor anyone elsle comments get to you.

It was a good little read, but just the same as a lot of other threads.
You didnt post your thoughts on what the information was that you digested.

I and many other ats members, could cut and paste all manners of subjects
but that would maybe subjective.
But if you gave us your thoughts on the thread then maybe I could see where you are going.

This is not a bashing time and I understand the effort you put in.many thanks.

(thats not PC right?.)

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 05:22 PM
a reply to: Ismynameimportant

No worries, no effort was put in to this thread.

The picture took all of 5 seconds. And the cutting of the info took about 5 minutes.

Which is weird because usually I put a lot of time and effort into threads.


I just wanted to share it. I had no room left to say anything and didn't have anything much to say. So I YOLO'ed.

Bash away! I care little. I just assumed that nobody would reply lol
Plus, nobody was bashing me. They were just saying true things about the lack of effort in the OP. Which was true. And valid. And not bashing at all. I knew what I was getting into when I hit post.

I'm lazy sometimes, what can I say?
edit on 27-12-2015 by rukia because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 06:05 PM
a reply to: rukia

Thank you...

Even replying to me has made me feel better

I mean it I thought you would have been a miserable git but you took it well.

Although it is ..erm A time of seasonal celebration I wish you...


(btw,I gave you a star though I dont know how far away they are)

edit on 058121512pm12America/Chicago0612 by Ismynameimportant because: CHRISTMAS...yay

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 07:51 PM

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Ismynameimportant

But he did. He did. Didn't you read the word 'pertinent"?

I forgot that word...

Its to many beers and the thought of santa leaving presents to the kids he touched.....
I mean scared.

I wouldnt feel to good at a young age seeing a pair legs wiggling at 2am because some
weirdo..sorry I mean pedo....foook..I mean...he got stuck in the chimney
and he was only delivering a puppy for the angelic child. SHHH now

But alas himself and the puppy died

posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 11:33 PM
a reply to: nullafides

The problem with the medical world is that the so called experts are given the wrong information in the first place. have they told you what your drugs deplete from your body?

I have been trying to talk some sense into a friend of mine who just had a stent put in. he would not listen or come and look at any of the research that I talked about and was listening to a so called heart specialist at one of Sydney's hospitals she prescribed him heart medication along with a diuretic to try and clear up the swelling in his foot, diuretics drain magnesium out of the body magnesium is essential for the heart she knew nothing about Co-Enzyme Q10 or Taurine which are also essential for the heart. and nothing about Lecithin combined with Safflower Oil to unblock the arteries

The only expert in the psychiatric world that I have come across is Yuri Nikolayev he had a 70% cure rate of Scitzophrenia using fasting.

edit on 27-12-2015 by jinni73 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 07:36 PM
a reply to: jinni73

For my case, with psychiatric medicine, I am working quite specifically with qualified psychiatrists.

I know that pharmaceutical drugs are looked down on by many...but, as I stated previously...for me, it has truly finally helped.

new topics

top topics


log in