Posted by yxibow on September 16, 2006, at 19:35:38
In reply to the brain, posted by Squiggles on September 16, 2006, at 15:37:54
> I really wish that biological
> psychiatry were more popular.
> I find diagnosis by sociology and
> Foucault et al, very frustrating; especially
> when behaviour is so obviously linked
> to medications or brain injuries.
> When you think of this approach, it
> indicates that mental illness IS a STIGMA;
> Alzheimer's patients are far more likely
> to get an MRI for example. But Alzheimer's
> is not in the category of mental illness,
> as it should be. Alzheimer's patients are
> not analyzed for their childhood traumas,
> for example.
>
> Just ranting, sorry.
>
> Squiggles
>
Biological psychiatry is the current method of examining what are neurochemical disorders -- psychopharmacology.
But the mapping differs with Alzheimers than with disorders such as depression, GAD, bipolar, etc.
Alzheimers actually attacks portions of the brain enough to be visible and so does some degenerative forms of schizophreniform disorders. These can be seen on contrasted MRIs. Our current MRI technology is not able to see intraneuronal disturbances that cause typical depression, etc.
We can make guesses in studies with SPECT and PET imaging, which will show firing of parts of the brain, with contrast, ala Baxter et alia, regarding OCD. But these are expensive methods used for research purposes on primates and human subjects. And they are still not fine enough to show every condition.
So we make do with evidence based psychopharmacology and psychiatry. Evidence shows that compound X in trials reduces region activity in region Y due to transmitter Z, probably from PET scans with subjects. In turn, in use, doctors gather data (Stage IV, post-marketing) from use of medications and further this model.
May the 21st century allow novel diagnosis from below nanometer level resolution for individual patients. But even beyond that, humans have what is known as "free will." Even a psychotic patient has free will to react to their disorder.
Of course one could get into further discussions of the sociopolitic aspects of free will, and free countries, but that is beyond the scope of the medical concept of free will, which is that humans have the capacity for decision making, we are sapient.
This doesn't mean we aren't afflicted by biochemical crippling disorders, but free will would dictate that I, the patient, at times, can rise and reintegrate with society, knowing I have a biochemical problem which should be treated better by HMOs (that is an entire other discussion, caps on mental health are abominable in the US), but dealing with it as best as I can with my doctor and my own passion for life and its clear randomness.
poster:yxibow
thread:686603
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060909/msgs/686648.html