Irish psychiatry says chemical imbalance is ‘a figure of speech,’ so – what now?

From Mad in Ireland: This gobsmacking admission from The College of Psychiatrists of Ireland appeared on its website in what seems to be relatively new content to reflect the long-known reality – there is not, or has never been any scientific evidence to support the chemical imbalance theory.

Most people reading the Mad in Ireland website will have known for quite some time that the chemical imbalance theory was debunked. The reason we say ‘gobsmacking’ is because it’s not something that Irish psychiatrists have said publicly before, although a representative for the College did say in a 2015 media article that people didn’t really believe it anyway.

Read the full article here. 

5 COMMENTS

  1. “A figure of speech or rhetorical figure is a word or phrase that INTENTIONALLY DEVIATES from ordinary language use to PRODUCE a rhetorical EFFECT.”, from wikipedia.

    “[F]igure of speech, any INTENTIONAL DEVIATION from LITERAL STATEMENT or COMMON USAGE that emphasizes, clarifies, or EMBELLISHES both written and spoken language.”, from Britannica. A slap in the wrist affair…

    “[A] form of expression (such as a SIMILE OR METAPHOR) used to convey meaning or heighten effect often by comparing or identifying ONE THING WITH ANOTHER that has a meaning or connotation FAMILIAR TO THE READER or listener.”, closer to manipulation, sort of they will swallow that because they are familiar with it, it looks like science when it’s lies…

    “careless metaphor”, well, a con person, even if not an artist will land on whatever works best. Try, fail, rinse, repeat again until a “figure of speech”!, works enough, or most of the time. That is not careless, that is willfull try and reflects at least lack of acountability… lack of responsability. Very obvious to me from the rest of the linked material.

    “…because numbing someone’s unhappiness had got a bad rep with the benzodiazepines”, and barbiturates before that…

    “Moncrieff has been instrumental in bringing to light the issues associated with psychiatric drugs and in stating why it’s so important that people know the truth.”, only to apparently conceal in her own, last? study. She, apparently, concealed increased mortality when trying to withdrawal from NEUROLEPTICS. Or am I wrong?.

    I am not picking on Ms. Montcrieff, just pointing my point of view: I can’t trust whatever pseudoscientists say, even if it looks good, positive or AN improvement, because, at the least it is still DISHONEST!.

    Again, not picking on, but!, Ms. Montcrieff, care to explain the increased mortality when trying to withdraw from NEUROLEPTICS?, at least in YOUR study!?. Then I, I, can try to trust and BELIEVE, not understand, obviously, this is pseudoscience not real science* and understanding, mere rhetoric, interpretation and “figures of speech”.

    “These effects can include paradoxical SUICIDALITY, sexual dysfunction, blunted emotions, digestive problems, fatigue, weird dreams, and compulsions — among other side effects that affect mood.”, impulsivity, manic/hypomanic behaviour, dimished insight, inability to enjoy previously enjoyable activies, etc., and the most dreaded of all, should be: AKATHISIA.

    And they give this “drugs” to kids!, most of the time off label!. That is: without any other evidence base than the usual: we “know” it works!, we have seen it!, seeing is believing!. Don’t you feel better kid?, I can see you ARE feeling better!, don’t deny it, that’s lack of insight on your part.

    Get serious dudes, duddetes and Xs…

    And all of those and then some, might last or appear years after stopping them!, and as per at least a pro here at MIA, come up at any time, any time!, in unpredictable manner after months, years of taking them!.

    “Given all of this, it really is long past time for an honest debate in Ireland around these issues.”, totally agree, enough talking and rhetorical devices, enough metaphors, figures of speech and less than scientific intentions…

    Lastly, the linked post from Mad in Ireland does not acknowledge the fact that in the aggregate there is no net positive effect of diagnosing or using antidrepressants: THERE IS NET HARM.

    Just the label and the “figures of speech” makes whatever depression could be more difficult to bear… as per the linked article from Mad in Ireland…

    And withdrawal caveats, one cannot quit cold turkey, not even under medical supervision said “medications”, safely that is, depression diagnoses and antidepressants should be banned and not used by anyone… only net harm can come out of that…

    Psychotherapy is MORE ladden with “figures of speech”!, at least, that is…

    When I look at these words:

    Intentionally, produce, rhetorical effect, intentional deviation, deviation from literal statement, uncommon usage of words, embellishes, simile, metaphor, identifying one thing with another (as in equivocation).

    I can’t really think science or medicine uses those words, or should use those words, seriously. Let alone so shamelessly or harmfully as psychiatry does.

    That is the language of humanities, myth, divinity studies, ideology, literature, divination, astrology, peddlers, snake oil, and the third eye. And saddly politics.

    Certainly not science nor medicine.

    Or am I wrong?.

    Report comment

  3. Figures of speech,very illustrative, are very common in “lemmon”markets.

    Psychotherapies and psychiatric treatments look to me almost identical to the rest of the lemmon markets.

    From wikipedia:

    “The Market for ‘Lemons’: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism” … is a widely cited seminal paper in the field of economics which explores the concept of asymmetric information in markets.”

    “Akerlof’s paper uses the market for used cars as an example of the problem of QUALITY UNCERTAINTY. It concludes that owners of high-quality used cars will not place their cars on the used car market. A car buyer should only be able to buy low-quality used cars, and will pay accordingly as THE MARKET FOR GOOD USED CARS DOES NOT EXIST.”

    “Akerlof examines how the quality of goods traded in a market can degrade in the presence of information asymmetry between buyers and sellers, which ultimately leaves goods that are found to be DEFECTIVE AFTER PURCHASE in the market, noted by the term ‘lemon’ in the title of the paper. In American slang, a lemon is a car that is found to be defective after it has been bought.”

    Psychiatric treatments and psychotherapies not only look a lot like lemmon markets, they are monopolies/oligopolies!. They are worse!, there are no high-quality products in those markets!. None, zero, nada, rien.

    So, to be propositive: Aspiring psychiatrists, psychotherapists, do you want to sell LEMMONS your whole professional career?.

    Dear pros working in/with psychiatry, psychotherapy, do YOU want to keep selling LEMMONS the rest of your professional careers?.

    Professors: do you want to teach other people how to sell LEMMONS?.

    Report comment

LEAVE A REPLY