Posted by Psychquackery on July 31, 2003, at 9:32:20
In reply to Re: Listen, I'm done here, posted by Psychquackery on July 31, 2003, at 9:13:29
> > I don't want to argue about this because it is
> > fruitless. This is my last post on this topic.
> >
> > The bottom line is this.
> >
> >
> > 1. ECT is probably the least understood of all
> > treatments for psychiatric conditions.
> >
> > 2. Did you even hear what I said about rTMS? I
> > agree with you that it is not as effective
> > as ECT at the time being. Do you not
> > understand the concept of 'being investigated'?
> > Do you not understand the consept of 'under
> > investigation'? If you've got it fixed in
> > your mind that nothing will ever be better
> > than ECT than we're going to get nowhere
> > will we. It still doesn't work for some. We've
> > got room to improve.
> >
> > 3. I am not trying to proove anything, all I am
> > saying is that we don't understand how they
> > work. The seizure theory us just 'proposed
> > mechanism'. Just like SSRI's. For years we
> > thought that raising serotonin *was* the key to
> > the therapudic effect of AD's. Now we have
> > a drug like Tianeptine that does the exact
> > opposite. It lowers serotonin levels. Yet, it
> > is as clinicaly effective as Prozac. You can
> > yell at me all you want about Serotonin this
> > or serotonin that but it's still just theory.
> > So what happened to all the theory that we
> > thought we had?? It's still there, because it
> > was just theory to begin with.
> >
> > 6. You seemed to have completely changed the
> > humble tone of pschiatric research. The
> > tone that says 'we don't understand' but 'we
> > can accept that'.
> >
> > 7. I'm not doubting you that there is good
> > research to support your claim. But to say that
> > this theory is factual 100%, is a grave,
> > detremental and dogmatic claim. We would get
> > nowhere if we boasted our theories as fact and
> > then closed our eyes to all other incoming
> > information.
> >
> > Linkadge
>
> I really think the problem here is you are afraid of ECT and thus are personally biased against it. I really believe that. Again, the bottom line (and this is a HARD FACT backed up in all the mainstream psychiatric literature) is that bilateral ECT has the highest percentage of full remission from psychotic depression of any treatment. Period. There are no ifs ors and buts. Thats the bottom f*cking line.
>
> I had rTMS and my depression was very severe. I didnt think it had any "punch" or power to it at all. It was so weak...it was like pussy ECT. I wish I had just gotten shocked instead.
>
> Igor
> >
>I forgot to mention this but its something important I have read and been told a few times. With these MIBS clinical trials (rTMS, VNS, DBS) most of the time they do functional neuroimaging scans on your brain. Usually they do "before and after" brain scans using functional MRI, SPECT or PET scans. In fact for many of these rTMS researchers, the functional neuroimaging research takes overall priority over the rTMS.
My point is that its been claimed by some that these MIBS modalities are not much more than very safe, minimally invasive ways to stimulate the brain which will bring a person temporairly out of depression. But not for long. And these researchers are able to use MIBS in conjunction with functional neuroimaging to show "before" and "after" scans. They are just using rTMS to show what your brain looked like before depression and after the rTMS. But the problem is the rTMS doesnt last very long. Their research is really centered more around functional neuroimaging and the rTMS is just a tool they use to stimulate the brain safely for a short period.
Thus you are just being used as sort of a pawn in some of these guys research. If you want the sure thing though, youre usually better off going with ECT. Like if you are disabled and such, ECT is the better option.
Igor
>
poster:Psychquackery
thread:246432
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20030728/msgs/246986.html