Monday, February 18, 2019

Comments by Johann_Popper

Showing 2 of 2 comments.

  • Logical Errors of the Whitaker Arguments Directly Against Present Antipsychotics and Indirectly Against the Biological Model of Psychosis:

    1) “A critique of that research, in terms of whether it provides evidence that antipsychotics improve long-term outcomes.

    Long-term outcomes are statistically quite irrelevant, when the most severe end of the acute psychosis spectrum includes extreme delusional violence and disfunction that would result in death or imprisonment before any long-term trial of antipsychotic drugs could be accomplished. You are combining many vastly different brain diseases in one statistical comparison, lumping non-severe psychoses in with severe psychoses. This generates the appearance that positive long-term outcomes for less-severe psychoses are causally commensurable to the counterfactual supposal that people suffering from severe psychosis would do better without antipsychotic medication. In fact, the logical conclusion to be drawn from a more precise division of psychosis types by severity is that dangerous severe psychosis absolutely requires some kind of coercive intervention and drugging to restore some functionality for these people to have any life at all, and that less-severe psychosis never needed antipsychotic treatment in the first place, so of course they do better long-term without them. They always had the potential to have a long-term outcome; people suffering from severe psychosis never had much of a chance of having any long-term outcome since these diseases are not understood, and the medications are primitive.

    2) “At initial assessment, the 24 patients off medication were doing better than the 46 patients on antipsychotics: they were much more likely to be working, more likely to be in remission, and had better clinical outcomes.”

    Again, because their diseases were less severe from the start. They can function off medication because they can! Most on medication could not, and they are therefore predisposed to having worse outcomes anyway, drugs or not. But people suffering from the most severe psychoses would certainly not survive a single day without some medication. I know. I’ve seen the frozen bodies of the severely delusional; I’ve seen the severely delusional who are free and untreated kill parents, siblings, wives, children, neighbors, and strangers. And why shouldn’t they be more likely to do these things? Patients who can’t even believe their own mothers are not actors in a hostile conspiracy cannot choose to receive fruitful psychotherapy!

    Please, do not compound the often dishonest discourse of mainstream psychiatry with even more dishonest criticisms. The fact is, no one knows what psychosis is and how to fix it, and unless the real victims of these horrible diseases establish a completely non-political honest space to solve this problem, millions of people will continue to suffer, lose their loved-ones, and remain hopeless like me.

  • What about the even higher risk of homicide and suicide among people who are not hospitalized because of your efforts to, at worst, pretend a brain disease doesn’t exist, or, at best, to pretend there are alternative treatments available besides the mainstream? Prison? Yeah, that’s real compassionate and enlightened medicine.

    What about people who suffer from deeply violent and vengeful delusions against family, friends, neighbors, and strangers, that have no basis in reality whatsoever? Delusions that result in familial abuse? This community doesn’t care about these victims any more than mainstream psychiatry does. You’re all phonies.