Wednesday, October 23, 2019

Comments by drcharlesparker

Showing 2 of 2 comments.

  • Issues with the purported inadequacy of nutritional supplements do parallel the overwhelming public angst over the limitations of psychiatric medications themselves. The extant label system, and the homogenization of human suffering encouraged as a cost saver by managed care, create inadequacies on both the Functional and Traditional sides of attempts at psychiatric care. Labels leave even well informed professionals with few options but to take treatment sides with one camp or the other, and to almost completely ignore managed care who uses those same labels to repeatedly deny reasonable treatments.

    Overlooked: the interests of the patient. What each group provides is excellent care, but insufficient awareness of the multiple biomedical variables.

    Each polarized group markets it’s limited perspective as essential. However, in my own opinion, having lived in both camps for more than a decade, the fault is not with either philosophy but the system that insists on outdated labels rather than effective biomedical measurements as determinants for treatment objectives. Both perspectives are essential. Without knowing precise targets the entire process oftentimes devolves to the unacceptable process of shooting geese at night. Honk, bang.

    For other thought leaders who share these views: http://corepsych.com/critical
    cp

  • The complexity of mind involves more than a knowledge of appearance objectives and a chasing of labels. Contemporary research is absolutely loaded with references that genetic testing does indeed help significantly, but not categorically so. This research is but one more example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. One cannot go of half cocked thinking that *genetics alone* determines medication effectiveness.

    Genetics must be considered in any treatment failure…. but failing clinically applicable genetic information the very next investigation much include IgG testing and in this Video Series: http://corepsych.com/gi – and for issues such as epigentic changes with transporter proteins take a look at this page: http://corepsych.com/walsh–resources

    A serious issue: many who write for psych meds, while eager and conscientious, still think Prozac, with all it’s drug interactions [often based on those same genetic factors] is the standard antidepressant. Video: http://corepsych.com/2d6

    I’m certain anyone looking at those genetic investigations can find problems – as the controls in that study very likely have no idea about IgG interferences with neurotransmission. Without controlling for multiple other contributory variables the researches can only speculate about what was missed.
    cp