![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 6 to 30 of 30. Go back in thread:
Posted by SLS on July 28, 2016, at 19:33:23
In reply to Re: Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims - Thanks » SLS, posted by Tabitha on July 28, 2016, at 18:13:37
> > Thank you for this, Tabitha.
> You're welcome. Perhaps we can link to this when the wild claims are thrown around.
>
> Sadly I fear it's not possible to de-bunk every bogus claim. It's far less effort to make stuff up than to do even rudimentary fact checking.Ain't that the truth.
I'm glad that you haven't grown weary for the effort.
I almost feel like apologizing to you for the need to post such treatises. Be sure to add these posts to your document archives for later use.
You may find that your comments are completely ignored by a poster, and that this poster reposts the same contentious words over and over again. I'm glad that you are here to provide evidence-based opposition to these statements.
:-)
- Scott
Posted by herpills on July 28, 2016, at 21:44:25
In reply to Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims, posted by Tabitha on July 28, 2016, at 15:14:49
Posted by Hello321 on July 28, 2016, at 22:39:45
In reply to Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims, posted by Tabitha on July 28, 2016, at 15:14:49
Ive never understood the pro- psychiatry movement. Youre fighting for the winning team. Guys like Peter Breggin obviously wont be succeeding in having your meds taken away any time soon.
Posted by SLS on July 29, 2016, at 2:27:24
In reply to Re: Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims, posted by Hello321 on July 28, 2016, at 22:39:45
> Ive never understood the pro- psychiatry movement. Youre fighting for the winning team. Guys like Peter Breggin obviously wont be succeeding in having your meds taken away any time soon.
I think it is important to expose any charlatanry that emerges. It might not be necessary to insure the future of psychiatry, but it might save a few lives here and there.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 7:25:24
In reply to Re: incredible claims by charlatans, posted by Tabitha on July 28, 2016, at 18:01:29
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXQa0T_tHy8
> >
> >
>
> Lou, this is the same guy as in the other video where he said 200,000 per year in the U.S. die. Here he says 500,000 deaths per year in the U.S. and Europe in people 65 and older from antidepressants, anti-psychotics, and benzodiazepenes. Let's check actual death statistics for this set of drugs.
>
> Deaths in U.S. in 2010
> 22,134 pharmaceutical drug deaths, including
> -- 6,419 (29.4%) benzodiazepenes
> -- 3,895 (17.6%) antidepressant
> -- 1,351 (6.1%) antipsychotic & neuroleptic
>
> So this gives
> -- 11,665 U.S.
> -- 26,829 Europe (estimate based on population ratio of EU to U.S., assuming similar drug usage)
>
> Which sums to 38,494 deaths. How many of those people were over 65? Let's be generous and say half (population is approx 15% over 65). So 19,247 deaths are verifiable. Yet he is claiming 500,000, which is over 25 times the actual amount. It's absurd! This guy is talking out of his butt!!
>
> When you see something this far removed from verifiable facts, then anything else he has to say is suspect. I think he is making it up as he goes to sell books and gain notoriety. Charlatans like this can generate BS faster than anyone can fact check it. You need to be a little more discriminating in your information sources.
>
>
> =========================
>
> Source http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1653518#sthash.5R28HcNo.dpuf
>
> Friends,
The poster here uses statistics that are not relevant to her conclusion. This gives you a false idea that these drugs are safer than they really are and could lead you to your death.
One of the statistics she uses is deaths by psychiatric drugs in the JAMA report. But those were deaths only by overdose, not all deaths from psychiatric drugs.
The fallacy here is enormous and can not be allowed to stand as fact. This is the tragedy here by Mr. Hsung not interceding to point this out so that you could be seriously misled to your deaths. There are more fallacies in Tabatha's argument...
Lou
more....
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 8:55:27
In reply to Lou's response-Mr. Hsung allows false conclusion » Tabitha, posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 7:25:24
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXQa0T_tHy8
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Lou, this is the same guy as in the other video where he said 200,000 per year in the U.S. die. Here he says 500,000 deaths per year in the U.S. and Europe in people 65 and older from antidepressants, anti-psychotics, and benzodiazepenes. Let's check actual death statistics for this set of drugs.
> >
> > Deaths in U.S. in 2010
> > 22,134 pharmaceutical drug deaths, including
> > -- 6,419 (29.4%) benzodiazepenes
> > -- 3,895 (17.6%) antidepressant
> > -- 1,351 (6.1%) antipsychotic & neuroleptic
> >
> > So this gives
> > -- 11,665 U.S.
> > -- 26,829 Europe (estimate based on population ratio of EU to U.S., assuming similar drug usage)
> >
> > Which sums to 38,494 deaths. How many of those people were over 65? Let's be generous and say half (population is approx 15% over 65). So 19,247 deaths are verifiable. Yet he is claiming 500,000, which is over 25 times the actual amount. It's absurd! This guy is talking out of his butt!!
> >
> > When you see something this far removed from verifiable facts, then anything else he has to say is suspect. I think he is making it up as he goes to sell books and gain notoriety. Charlatans like this can generate BS faster than anyone can fact check it. You need to be a little more discriminating in your information sources.
> >
> >
> > =========================
> >
> > Source http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1653518#sthash.5R28HcNo.dpuf
> >
> > Friends,
> The poster here uses statistics that are not relevant to her conclusion. This gives you a false idea that these drugs are safer than they really are and could lead you to your death.
> One of the statistics she uses is deaths by psychiatric drugs in the JAMA report. But those were deaths only by overdose, not all deaths from psychiatric drugs.
> The fallacy here is enormous and can not be allowed to stand as fact. This is the tragedy here by Mr. Hsung not interceding to point this out so that you could be seriously misled to your deaths. There are more fallacies in Tabatha's argument...
> Lou
> more....
>
> Friends,
Be not deceived. The attempt to discredit one of the world's great researchers on the adverse effects of psychiatric drugs is appalling in that what the poster gives as a conclusion that his research is false, is false data.
This is allowed here by a psychiatrist that could seriously mislead you to your deaths by accepting Tabitha's claim that the researcher is talking out of his butt. He is not, for there are many ways to compile deaths from psychiatric drugs that Tabitha has left out. Do you think that in his interview there would not have been brought up the aspects of his research to question?
Let us look at this video for there can be determined in courts of law that the drug caused the death. And you that want to mislead others to think that you will not be killed by these drugs, are in denial, and you can contact the survivors of those killed by the drugs and tell them that the drug did nit kill their spouse or child even though it can be determined by methods unbeknownst to you that these drugs can kill in many ways.
Lou
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWr1GK7w1uE
Posted by linkadge on July 29, 2016, at 13:29:50
In reply to Lou's response-, posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 8:55:27
You can't argue statistics with somebody who is a) statistically illiterate and b) not basing his/her opinions on any statistical backing.
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on July 29, 2016, at 13:33:50
In reply to Re: Lou's response-, posted by linkadge on July 29, 2016, at 13:29:50
You've wasted 15 years on this board, unsuccessfully trying to convince people that psychiatric medications are evil.
Why not waste another 15?
Linkadge
Posted by Tabitha on July 29, 2016, at 13:58:26
In reply to Re: Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims, posted by Hello321 on July 28, 2016, at 22:39:45
> Ive never understood the pro- psychiatry movement. Youre fighting for the winning team. Guys like Peter Breggin obviously wont be succeeding in having your meds taken away any time soon.
People like P.B. may not win in the larger sense, but they can do a lot of damage.
I don't consider myself as pro-psychiatry. I think psychiatry is one of the weaker branches of medicine at this point. Barely out of the Freudian origins, completely cordoned off from other medical specialties (my GP and pdoc can't even exchange records.) Relying on subjective evaluations of symptoms and response to treatments. Diagnoses that change with changing social morals.
I hope psychiatry will eventually disappear, replaced by treatments that come from neuroscience research. May not happen in my lifetime though.
Posted by Tabitha on July 29, 2016, at 14:11:05
In reply to Re: Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims - Thanks » Tabitha, posted by SLS on July 28, 2016, at 19:33:23
> I almost feel like apologizing to you for the need to post such treatises.
Nope, no need to feel responsible for anything. I looked into it out of curiosity, then it became a fun exercise to try and communicate the result.
>
> You may find that your comments are completely ignored by a poster, and that this poster reposts the same contentious words over and over again.Oh, I absolutely expect this. Standard denialist tactics when faced with push-back. Ignore and repeat, or else claim that there are invisible forces at work making the observable facts incorrect. I can understand how people get hooked into this kind of thinking, because once you believe it, there's no way out. It makes me sad.
Posted by Tabitha on July 29, 2016, at 14:43:33
In reply to Lou's response-, posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 8:55:27
> One of the statistics she uses is deaths by psychiatric drugs in the JAMA report. But those were deaths only by overdose, not all deaths from psychiatric drugs. The fallacy here is enormous and can not be allowed to stand as fact.
Lou, my data is from death certificates, which show the cause of death as concluded by the medical experts. Sure, it's possible there may be other causes that don't get captured in death certificates, but that is speculation. The best information we have is the reported cause of death. It's irresponsible to spread fear based on speculation.
> The attempt to discredit one of the world's great researchers on the adverse effects of psychiatric drugs is appalling in that what the poster gives as a conclusion that his research is false, is false data.
Dude. This guy is not one of the world's great researchers. Great researchers present their results to conferences and journals for peer review in their field. They don't go straight to the public in a video that features a fake news anchor interviewing them. That's an infomercial.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWr1GK7w1uE
I could only get through about half of that one. All deaths are tragic, and if those deaths actually happened, I'm very sorry. There aren't even enough details to verify that they're real events.
But again, even if they're real, it's speculation that any medications they were taking at the time were the cause of the events. How many other people committed murders or suicide who weren't on paxil? How many people were on paxil and did not commit any murders or suicides? They are presenting correlation as cause, and trying to emotionally manipulate people who are not scientifically literate and are already inclined to fear paxil.
Interesting presentation though. Take some anonymous stories from another website and translate it into text that dramatically crawls across the screen while emotionally evocative music plays in the background. If I were quite a bit more unscrupulous, I'd make a similar channel and collect the ad revenue.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 16:42:16
In reply to Lou's response-, posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 8:55:27
> > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXQa0T_tHy8
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Lou, this is the same guy as in the other video where he said 200,000 per year in the U.S. die. Here he says 500,000 deaths per year in the U.S. and Europe in people 65 and older from antidepressants, anti-psychotics, and benzodiazepenes. Let's check actual death statistics for this set of drugs.
> > >
> > > Deaths in U.S. in 2010
> > > 22,134 pharmaceutical drug deaths, including
> > > -- 6,419 (29.4%) benzodiazepenes
> > > -- 3,895 (17.6%) antidepressant
> > > -- 1,351 (6.1%) antipsychotic & neuroleptic
> > >
> > > So this gives
> > > -- 11,665 U.S.
> > > -- 26,829 Europe (estimate based on population ratio of EU to U.S., assuming similar drug usage)
> > >
> > > Which sums to 38,494 deaths. How many of those people were over 65? Let's be generous and say half (population is approx 15% over 65). So 19,247 deaths are verifiable. Yet he is claiming 500,000, which is over 25 times the actual amount. It's absurd! This guy is talking out of his butt!!
> > >
> > > When you see something this far removed from verifiable facts, then anything else he has to say is suspect. I think he is making it up as he goes to sell books and gain notoriety. Charlatans like this can generate BS faster than anyone can fact check it. You need to be a little more discriminating in your information sources.
> > >
> > >
> > > =========================
> > >
> > > Source http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1653518#sthash.5R28HcNo.dpuf
> > >
> > > Friends,
> > The poster here uses statistics that are not relevant to her conclusion. This gives you a false idea that these drugs are safer than they really are and could lead you to your death.
> > One of the statistics she uses is deaths by psychiatric drugs in the JAMA report. But those were deaths only by overdose, not all deaths from psychiatric drugs.
> > The fallacy here is enormous and can not be allowed to stand as fact. This is the tragedy here by Mr. Hsung not interceding to point this out so that you could be seriously misled to your deaths. There are more fallacies in Tabatha's argument...
> > Lou
> > more....
> >
> > Friends,
> Be not deceived. The attempt to discredit one of the world's great researchers on the adverse effects of psychiatric drugs is appalling in that what the poster gives as a conclusion that his research is false, is false data.
> This is allowed here by a psychiatrist that could seriously mislead you to your deaths by accepting Tabitha's claim that the researcher is talking out of his butt. He is not, for there are many ways to compile deaths from psychiatric drugs that Tabitha has left out. Do you think that in his interview there would not have been brought up the aspects of his research to question?
> Let us look at this video for there can be determined in courts of law that the drug caused the death. And you that want to mislead others to think that you will not be killed by these drugs, are in denial, and you can contact the survivors of those killed by the drugs and tell them that the drug did nit kill their spouse or child even though it can be determined by methods unbeknownst to you that these drugs can kill in many ways.
> Lou
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWr1GK7w1uE
>
> Friends,
Many of you already know that I am here trying to save lives as I see this site seriously misleading reader so badly, that readers could become addicted, get a life-ruining condition or be killed by the drugs or even kill their own family members or co-workers or innocent people in a school, mall or such.
Let us go on with Dr. Gotzsche
Lou
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpGe5r0jI0
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 16:45:56
In reply to Lou's response-, posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 16:42:16
> > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXQa0T_tHy8
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Lou, this is the same guy as in the other video where he said 200,000 per year in the U.S. die. Here he says 500,000 deaths per year in the U.S. and Europe in people 65 and older from antidepressants, anti-psychotics, and benzodiazepenes. Let's check actual death statistics for this set of drugs.
> > > >
> > > > Deaths in U.S. in 2010
> > > > 22,134 pharmaceutical drug deaths, including
> > > > -- 6,419 (29.4%) benzodiazepenes
> > > > -- 3,895 (17.6%) antidepressant
> > > > -- 1,351 (6.1%) antipsychotic & neuroleptic
> > > >
> > > > So this gives
> > > > -- 11,665 U.S.
> > > > -- 26,829 Europe (estimate based on population ratio of EU to U.S., assuming similar drug usage)
> > > >
> > > > Which sums to 38,494 deaths. How many of those people were over 65? Let's be generous and say half (population is approx 15% over 65). So 19,247 deaths are verifiable. Yet he is claiming 500,000, which is over 25 times the actual amount. It's absurd! This guy is talking out of his butt!!
> > > >
> > > > When you see something this far removed from verifiable facts, then anything else he has to say is suspect. I think he is making it up as he goes to sell books and gain notoriety. Charlatans like this can generate BS faster than anyone can fact check it. You need to be a little more discriminating in your information sources.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > =========================
> > > >
> > > > Source http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1653518#sthash.5R28HcNo.dpuf
> > > >
> > > > Friends,
> > > The poster here uses statistics that are not relevant to her conclusion. This gives you a false idea that these drugs are safer than they really are and could lead you to your death.
> > > One of the statistics she uses is deaths by psychiatric drugs in the JAMA report. But those were deaths only by overdose, not all deaths from psychiatric drugs.
> > > The fallacy here is enormous and can not be allowed to stand as fact. This is the tragedy here by Mr. Hsung not interceding to point this out so that you could be seriously misled to your deaths. There are more fallacies in Tabatha's argument...
> > > Lou
> > > more....
> > >
> > > Friends,
> > Be not deceived. The attempt to discredit one of the world's great researchers on the adverse effects of psychiatric drugs is appalling in that what the poster gives as a conclusion that his research is false, is false data.
> > This is allowed here by a psychiatrist that could seriously mislead you to your deaths by accepting Tabitha's claim that the researcher is talking out of his butt. He is not, for there are many ways to compile deaths from psychiatric drugs that Tabitha has left out. Do you think that in his interview there would not have been brought up the aspects of his research to question?
> > Let us look at this video for there can be determined in courts of law that the drug caused the death. And you that want to mislead others to think that you will not be killed by these drugs, are in denial, and you can contact the survivors of those killed by the drugs and tell them that the drug did nit kill their spouse or child even though it can be determined by methods unbeknownst to you that these drugs can kill in many ways.
> > Lou
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWr1GK7w1uE
> >
> > Friends,
> Many of you already know that I am here trying to save lives as I see this site seriously misleading reader so badly, that readers could become addicted, get a life-ruining condition or be killed by the drugs or even kill their own family members or co-workers or innocent people in a school, mall or such.
> Let us go on with Dr. Gotzsche
> Lou
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpGe5r0jI0correction:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNpGe5r0jI0
Posted by linkadge on July 29, 2016, at 17:31:03
In reply to Lou's response-, posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 16:42:16
You're not saving lives, you're wasting your time.
It's time to move on with your life, Lou.
Linkadge
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 21:20:24
In reply to Re: Lou's response- » Lou Pilder, posted by linkadge on July 29, 2016, at 17:31:03
> You're not saving lives, you're wasting your time.
>
> It's time to move on with your life, Lou.
>
> LinkadgeLink,
In the end, we will know if lives were saved from my influence, or if people were killed by being influenced by Mr. Hsiung and his members here in concert with him that he allows to post defamation against me and/or anti-Semitic propaganda.
But who will be the judge? And when will the end come?
I already know that deaths can come from here as Hsiung allows his horsemen of hate to gallop freely here with their sword of hate and now his big-guns, Scott and Tabitha, are attempting to discredit a major researcher that knows more than them as he has written books concerning the subject he researches and Scott and Tabitha are trying so hard by using false data and fallacious arguments to sway readers to discard his research. By Hsiung not interceding, I think that readers could be influenced to reject major research that could cost them their lives. Their blood will not be upon me.
Lou
Posted by linkadge on July 30, 2016, at 8:46:41
In reply to Lou's reply-their blood » linkadge, posted by Lou Pilder on July 29, 2016, at 21:20:24
It's time to move on, Lou.
Hopefully, you can find a way to use your time more effectively.
Linkadge
Posted by baseball55 on July 30, 2016, at 19:24:56
In reply to Re: Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims » Hello321, posted by Tabitha on July 29, 2016, at 13:58:26
My GP and pdoc exchange records on physical issues - meds, tests, etc. Just not on therapy sessions. They can also exchange records on diagnosis, etc, as long as I give each permission.
I agree that psychiatry has a long way to go, but, as I told my husband when he began complaining about psychiatry, it's not like pdocs go trolling the streets for patients. The days of state hospitals that Szasz wrote about are long gone. People seek out treatment because they are miserable and want to be better. This whole board exists because people are looking for meds that work and looking for pdocs to prescribe them
I would be more critical of psychiatry as compared to other medical specialties if I didn't read so much about other medical specialties. Oncologists routinely prescribe (super expensive) drugs they barely understand and that don't work while impairing the quality of the last few months of life for terminal cancer patients. Orthopedic surgeons do arthoscopic knee surgery at the drop of a hat, though studies show that outcomes are no better for patients who have it than for patients who don't. For years, gastroenterologists gave valium to people with ulcers (assumed to be caused by stress) and operated when the ulcer bled, when foreign studies showed conclusively that ulcers were caused by h-pylori and could be treated with antibiotics. General surgeons in the US continue to cut people open for appendicitis even though Europeans successfully use antibiotics.
The worst are neurologists whose only function seems to be to deliver bad news about conditions that can't be treated - MS, ALS, Parkinson's, dementia, etc - and in many cases are diagnosed only through symptoms. Drugs are prescribed that don't work and the underlying mechanism of the disease is not understood. GPs know nothing about the causes or treatments of fybromyalgia, CFS, IBS, which are diagnosed on symptoms alone. As is chronic back pain, migraines, autism and on and on. The pathology and causes of most auto-immune disorders are not understood and treatments given (extremely expensive) rarely work.
As for the hope that neuroscience will eventually prevail, I continue to believe that most mental illness is bio-psycho-social in origin. I doubt very much that social anxiety and many anxiety disorders will ever be completely treatable by drugs, since they involve so many psycho-socail factors like low self-esteem, problematic upbringings, experience with traumatic experiences that cause chronic stress, etc. Mild or moderate depression- based on my experience with many, many therapy groups, is significantly affected by psycho-social components. Even severe depression, as I have had, derives content and themes from life experiences. How people react to it - do they become suicidal for example - has everything to do with psycho-social experiences that affect how strong a grip on life people have.
In fact, studies are finding that even schizophrenia, usually thought of as primarily a neurological disorder, is helped immeasurably by psycho-social interventions that teach sufferers insight into their delusions and ways to control or ignore them.
One real problem with psychiatry today is that pdocs have jettisoned therapy in favor of drugs, which are often ineffective or have intolerable side effects, especially weight gain. I have a pdoc who does therapy, pressure patients to add behavioral therapy and works closely with other therapists as well as with other physicians.
Maybe he is unusual. Probably he is. But I think the failure to understand what psychotherapies work is the biggest failing today of psychiatry, given how thin the medication arsenal available and how little is known about the brain and mental illness. I also have strong doubts that mental illness will ever be fully understood through neuroscience.
> I don't consider myself as pro-psychiatry. I think psychiatry is one of the weaker branches of medicine at this point. Barely out of the Freudian origins, completely cordoned off from other medical specialties (my GP and pdoc can't even exchange records.) Relying on subjective evaluations of symptoms and response to treatments. Diagnoses that change with changing social morals.
>
> I hope psychiatry will eventually disappear, replaced by treatments that come from neuroscience research. May not happen in my lifetime though.
>
Posted by Lamdage22 on July 31, 2016, at 8:31:34
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-their blood » Lou Pilder, posted by linkadge on July 30, 2016, at 8:46:41
> It's time to move on, Lou.
>
> Hopefully, you can find a way to use your time more effectively.
>
> LinkadgeHe aint stopping.
Posted by linkadge on August 1, 2016, at 17:46:42
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-their blood, posted by Lamdage22 on July 31, 2016, at 8:31:34
>He aint stopping.
I just think that's sad.
Linkadge
Posted by Tabitha on August 2, 2016, at 0:55:37
In reply to Re: Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims, posted by baseball55 on July 30, 2016, at 19:24:56
Hi baseball, I just wanted to say I appreciated your long and thoughtful comment. It's so long and thoughtful, it's difficult to figure out how to reply. :-)
I think my comment perhaps came off more dismissive of psychiatry than I actually feel because I was reacting to a perceived accusation of being a psychiatry cheerleader. Part of my gripe is not with psychiatry itself, but rather with the rest of the medical & insurance system that has failed to integrate psychiatrists. I'm in a large city with an excellent health care network. They have doctors, specialists, labs, imaging, in-patient, surgical centers, the whole enchilada. Yet they have no psychiatrists in any of their facilities. They don't even make referrals. So I have to find my own pdoc and coordinate record share with my GP. When I need bloodwork for my pdoc, I have to call around and find an independent lab, because the one I normally go to won't take orders from doctors that aren't affiliated with them. And insurance coverage is similarly carved off from my other health care. It makes no sense to me to have that separation.
Similarly, when I was doing talk therapy, there was no integration between my therapist and a psychiatrist. My therapist, despite being licensed, wasn't competent to diagnose or refer me for medication. Perhaps some are, but mine wasn't. Physical therapists can't treat patients without diagnosis and referral from a medical doctor. I would like to see talk therapists similarly tethered to a psychiatrist if they're claiming to provide care for people with major diagnoses.
Regarding psycho-social care, I don't disagree that people with current or previous mental health problems need support and other inter-personal care. I think people with any debilitating or life-threatening condition need psycho-social support. I just don't think that psycho-social support by itself is an effective intervention for severe long-standing mental health problems.
Admittedly I'm biased toward biological treatment, as it's been dramatically more helpful to me than a boatload of talk therapy.
Posted by Baseball55 on August 2, 2016, at 20:40:43
In reply to Re: Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims » baseball55, posted by Tabitha on August 2, 2016, at 0:55:37
I've never understood the role of these mental health benefits organizations like United Behavioral Health. Why mental health benefits are coordinated separately is a mystery to me. I think it has something to do with all the splits in mental health providers. Social workers don't coordinate with psychologists who don't coordinate with psychiatrists. They don't unite to bargain with insurance companies, so reimbursement rates suck, especially for social workers. So many providers don't take insurance because payments are so low. My psychiatrist gets $150 an hour, including my copay. My SW gets $75 an hour. Of course, neither take my insurance any more.
I don't know. The whole medical system is so screwed up in this country with mental health the worst of the worst.
Posted by Lamdage22 on August 3, 2016, at 7:31:45
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-their blood, posted by linkadge on August 1, 2016, at 17:46:42
> >He aint stopping.
>
> I just think that's sad.
>
> LinkadgeI told him he could make alot of money if he put the same energy into something else but he doesnt care.
Posted by lil jimi on August 13, 2016, at 18:39:37
In reply to Re: Fact Checking Some Anti-Psychiatry Claims » baseball55, posted by Tabitha on August 2, 2016, at 0:55:37
Posted by Larry Hoover on September 3, 2016, at 15:57:42
In reply to Thanks for debunking anti-science hysteria! (nm) » Tabitha, posted by lil jimi on August 13, 2016, at 18:39:37
For real, lil jimi? I haven't seen that handle for a long time.
Sorry to hijack the thread. :->
Lar
Posted by lil jimi on September 8, 2016, at 23:09:16
In reply to Re: Thanks for debunking anti-science hysteria! » lil jimi, posted by Larry Hoover on September 3, 2016, at 15:57:42
I am most flattered to be remembered by you, Lar.
Alas, I am my own Ghost Story, the Lil Jimi once again arising for these ashes of this Ghost Town of what was the once fabled PBabble Fortress.Great to see to you, Lar! You look well. What's news from our Great White North?
Jim
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.