It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Alexander1111
reply to post by BO XIAN
It's very difficult. Only the thought of doing all these makes me so anxious. I will try tomorrow to wear two different shoes and maybe wear a T shirt that has a hole at a visible place.
Thank you again!
Originally posted by Alexander1111
reply to post by BO XIAN
Ok, you are right. I am not anxious because circumstances or people make me feel so, but because this is the way I choose to respond to them. I know that to a degree it is automatic so in in the beginning I will have to convince myself I am not anxious, fake it or instantly try to change my attitude. Thank you!
Twenty-two years after the US marketing of Prozac, which changed the marketing, prescribing and widespread
consumption of psychoactive drugs--a meta-analysis of six large studies published in the Journal of the Medical
Association (JAMA) confirms that industry's blockbuster drugs, SSRI antidepressants were unable to outperform
placebos for moderate symptoms of depression. Just like the older, much cheaper tricyclic antidepressants, SSRIs show a clinical value only for severely depressed--i.e., clinically dysfunctional--patients.
In other words, antidepressants are worthless for most of the people for whom they are prescribed.
This topic is particularly intriguing to me in the context of the debate regarding the efficacy of clinical psychopathological treatments. Currently, this debate has created a division amongst psychologists. Some prefer psychotherapeutic therapies to treat mood disorders, others believe pharmacological treatments to be the most effective form of therapy for these same disorders. A great majority of the literature regarding treatment methods, however, will tell you that combining both treatments is the most effective way to lessen symptoms of mood disorders. But what makes these treatments effective? While I was researching this topic, I assumed that pharmacotherapy was only effective because of the chemical interactions that occur after administration of the drug. I admit that I was a little biased in my assumption that pharmacological agents only acted as a “quick-fix” treatment. I further hypothesized that certain forms of psychotherapy, like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (hereafter CBT) would be more effective because more patient participation is required in psychotherapy.
All psychiatric drugs have the potential to cause withdrawal reactions, including the antidepressants, stimulants, tranquilizers, antipsychotic drugs, and “mood stabilizers” such as lithium. When the individual’s condition grows markedly worse within days or weeks of stopping the psychiatric drug, this is almost always due to a withdrawal reaction. However, misinformed doctors and misled parents, teachers, and patients think this is evidence that the individual “needs” the drug even more when what the patient really needs is time to overcome the drug’s contrary effects on the brain and body.
A Harvard-trained psychiatrist and former full-time consultant at NIMH, Dr. Breggin's private practice is in Ithaca, New York, where he treats adults, couples, and families with children. He is the author of dozens of scientific articles and more than twenty books including Medication Madness: The Role of Psychiatric Drugs in Cases of Violence, Suicide and Crime (2008).
. . .
In the early 1990s Dr. Breggin was appointed and approved by the court as the single scientific expert for more than 100 combined Prozac product liability concerning violence, suicide and other behavioral aberrations caused by the antidepressant. In 2001-2002, he participated as a medical expert in a California lawsuit whose resolution was associated with a new label warning for Paxil concerning withdrawal effects.
. . .
In the case of psychotherapy, individuals have to recognize their own negative thoughts and perceptions and change their mindset to a more positive one. Several new techniques have developed within the psychotherapy field. Among these are Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Mood Management. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy “is a blend of two very different approaches- cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)… and the meditative practice of mindfulness” (Renaissance Therapy Clinic, n.d.). The website further explains that Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy “is based on the idea that our thoughts cause our feelings and behaviors” and thus “we can change the way we think to feel or act better” (Renaissance Therapy Clinic, n.d.). As we have learned in class, our realities are constructed by the brain, or mind. If our brain/mind creates thoughts which alter our perceptions and behaviors, we should in turn be able to change the neural network of our brains to better manage our thoughts. This concept has direct implications to clinical psychological treatment methodology.
Another relatively new method of CBT focuses especially on adolescents. This approach is called Mood Management. Dr. Carol Langelier of Rivier College explained that “Mood Management is a skills-building program” to help adolescents cope with “negative emotions that interfere with their ability to function effectively in academic, vocational and social settings” (Langelier, 2005; Langelier, 2001). Dr. Langelier believes that teaching young adults to think about their own emotions will allow them to effectively change their perceptions and behaviors. The adolescents actively engage in a five-step model to assess their emotional triggers, thoughts, feelings, behaviors, and their physiological responses when they are experiencing distress. Once the teenagers were aware of their own emotional processing, they could create new neural networks by consciously altering their reaction to emotional triggers. This method combines research on neural networks and psychotherapeutic treatments, like CBT. Mood Management could potentially be a valuable tool for clinicians in the field today. However, psychotherapy alone may not be enough to effectively treat mood disorders through neural network rewiring and structural reorganization.
It has been apparent for many years that chronic exposure to SSRI antidepressants frequently makes people feel apathetic or less engaged in their lives, and ultimately more depressed. In my clinical experience, this is a frequent reason that family members encourage patients to seek help in reducing or stopping their medication. SSRI-induced apathy occurs in adults and includes cognitive and frontal lobe function losses. (See Barnhart et al., 2004; Deakin et al., 2004; Hoehn-Saric et al., 1990). It has also been identified in children. Adults with dementia are particularly susceptible to antidepressant-induced apathy.
A recent scientific study by El-Mallakh and his colleagues reviewed the antidepressant literature and concluded that any initial improvements are often followed by treatment resistance and worsening depression. They compare this problem to tardive dyskinesia, caused by antipsychotic drugs, and call it tardive dysphoria, "an active process in which a depressive picture is caused by continued administration of the antidepressant." Based on rat studies, they hypothesize that "dendrite arborization" -- an increased branching growth of nerve cells -- caused by chronic antidepressant exposure, may be the cause.
In a meta-analysis of 46 studies, Andrews et al. (2011) found the relapse rate for antidepressant-treated patients (44.6 percent) was much higher than for placebo-treated patients (24.7 percent). Andrews also found that the more potent antidepressants caused an increased risk of relapse on drug discontinuation. A 2010 Minnesota evaluation of patient care in the state found that only 4.5 percent of more than 20,000 patients were in remission at 12 months, indicating that they had become chronically afflicted with depression during and probably as a result of their treatment.
I am best known from my critiques of biological, mechanistic psychiatry with its cookie-cutter diagnoses and brain-disabling drugs and shock treatment. Establishment and institutional psychiatry can be like a dark shadow that crowds out the light. Even as we grow in awareness of the harm perpetrated by biological psychiatry, we need more focus on the light -- on the life-giving principles that have moved me and so many others to take up the cause of reform in psychiatry and psychotherapy. These underlying principles try to capture what is good and important in human relationships beginning with empathy, love and respect for each individual's unique life.
Our new organization, The Center for the Study of Empathic Therapy, has now received approval for registration as a nonprofit in New York State. I want to introduce our new Center and its basic concepts. We want to "Bring out the best in ourselves," knowing that will help us to "Bring out the best in others." We want to inspire and to give voice to those who seek to heal and be healed through ethical, empathic relationships.
There are many ways of looking at empathy. On www.empathictherapy.org I describe it this way, "Empathy recognizes, welcomes and treasures the individuality, personhood, identity, spirit or soul of the other human being in all its shared and unique aspects." As we are repulsed by coercive psychiatry and its "solutions" that sometimes do more harm than good, we are drawn to the best in what human beings can offer each other.
. . .
Investigative reporter Robert Whitaker's Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America (Crown Publishers, April 2010) is the most important book on psychiatric treatment in a generation. I have been in practice for over 25 years and have read hundreds of books about psychiatry, and I can say without question that Anatomy of an Epidemic is the most illuminating book on psychiatric treatment that I have ever read.
Whitaker is the author of four books (including Mad in America, about the mistreatment of the mentally ill), and as a reporter for the Boston Globe, he won a George Polk Award for medical writing, a National Association of Science Writers Award for best magazine article, and was a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize. In the tradition of Michael Pollan, Eric Schlosser, and other investigative reporters who get taken seriously, Whitaker is scrupulous, fair, and describes complex phenomena in a way that is easy to understand.
The starting point of Anatomy of an Epidemic is as follows: In 1987, prior to Prozac hitting the market and the current ubiquitous use of antidepressants and other psychiatric drugs, the U.S. mental illness disability rate was 1 in every 184 Americans, but by 2007 the mental illness disability rate had more than doubled to 1 in every 76 Americans. Whitaker was curious as to what was causing this dramatic increase in mental illness disability.
. . .
[later paragraphs important in this article]