![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 6 of 6. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Sgbt5 on July 27, 2000, at 14:16:31
I have been reading other groups and web pages that say
that there is _no_ good evidence that bipolar disorder
exists. Some of these people are very learned, and
teach in universities. But I think there is evidence for
bipolar illness because people with family members who have it
are more likely to get it. I think that shows evidence of
a genetic risk (although having a gene may not mean
getting the illness). Has anyone seen anything good
on the net that addresses this question? Do you have
information on this from other sources? Thank you.
Posted by KarenB on July 27, 2000, at 15:10:31
In reply to Good evidence-what counts, posted by Sgbt5 on July 27, 2000, at 14:16:31
> I have been reading other groups and web pages that say
> that there is _no_ good evidence that bipolar disorder
> exists. Some of these people are very learned, and
> teach in universities. But I think there is evidence for
> bipolar illness because people with family members who have it
> are more likely to get it. I think that shows evidence of
> a genetic risk (although having a gene may not mean
> getting the illness). Has anyone seen anything good
> on the net that addresses this question? Do you have
> information on this from other sources? Thank you.Dear Sbgt5,
Whatever you know you have, there is someone out there WITH A WEBSITE who will state emphatically that it doesn't exist... and have hoards of information to back up their claims...and maybe even a supplement drink mix to relieve your imagined symptoms.
Well alrighty then...
Karen
Posted by Steeler Tookahn on July 28, 2000, at 3:22:50
In reply to Good evidence-what counts, posted by Sgbt5 on July 27, 2000, at 14:16:31
> I have been reading other groups and web pages that say
> that there is _no_ good evidence that bipolar disorder
> exists. Some of these people are very learned, and
> teach in universities. But I think there is evidence for
> bipolar illness because people with family members who have it
> are more likely to get it. I think that shows evidence of
> a genetic risk (although having a gene may not mean
> getting the illness). Has anyone seen anything good
> on the net that addresses this question? Do you have
> information on this from other sources? Thank you.Sgbt5,
I'm not sure if I understand what these people are trying to say. Are they suggesting that bi-polar disorder does not exist at all, or are they contesting a genetic link?
I don't think too many researchers really dispute the validity of the disorder, but the search for a responsible gene has proved illusive -my guess is that a specific gene (or genes) will eventually be discovered.
I think most researchers still believe there is a genetic pre-dispostion to the illness but there is a lot of debate going on as to how much of a predictor for the illness a family history portends. I think what you may be reading about is a re-newed focus in learning what external influences might trigger the disease in susceptible individuals.Steeler
Posted by Sgbt5 on July 28, 2000, at 10:30:09
In reply to Re: Good evidence-what counts, posted by Steeler Tookahn on July 28, 2000, at 3:22:50
> > I have been reading other groups and web pages that say
> > that there is _no_ good evidence that bipolar disorder
> > exists. Some of these people are very learned, and
> > teach in universities. But I think there is evidence for
> > bipolar illness because people with family members who have it
> > are more likely to get it. I think that shows evidence of
> > a genetic risk (although having a gene may not mean
> > getting the illness). Has anyone seen anything good
> > on the net that addresses this question? Do you have
> > information on this from other sources? Thank you.
>
> Sgbt5,
> I'm not sure if I understand what these people are trying to say. Are they suggesting that bi-polar disorder does not exist at all, or are they contesting a genetic link?
> I don't think too many researchers really dispute the validity of the disorder, but the search for a responsible gene has proved illusive -my guess is that a specific gene (or genes) will eventually be discovered.
> I think most researchers still believe there is a genetic pre-dispostion to the illness but there is a lot of debate going on as to how much of a predictor for the illness a family history portends. I think what you may be reading about is a re-newed focus in learning what external influences might trigger the disease in susceptible individuals.
>
> Steeler
Dear Steeler,I think they are contesting the very idea of mental
illness. This was on the RadPsyNet:
http://www.uis.edu/~radpsy/
Of course there is diversity of opinion there, but
I'm interested in the extreme views of Breggin and
Szaz that mental illness doesn't exist. One move
is to say that the symptoms caused by mental illness
are really caused by other conditions (hormonal ones
would be good suspects). Because there is no kown
etiology (physical cause) or no known gene link,
these people want to say that what we think of as
mental illness is actually social deviance and
should not be treated with medicine.Another move is to say that people who behave in
mentally ill ways, are responsible for what they
do and do it for other reasons such as getting
attention, etc.There are probably more views and I may not be doing them
justice.Haven't
delved into it enough to understand what the-is-no-mental-illness
people think the best way to handle "problems" are.At face, this seems ridiculous, at least to me. Since I've been
psychotic, I really believe I have an illness!
However, if you believe there is no mental illness, you also believe
that all forced treatment is wrong, and that the
power of establishment docs is dangerous. I can
get on board with those ideas. So ther are definite
advantages to this viewpoint.In my wandering on the web, I find that the two
groups seem to be very polarized. You are either
biomedical or other, other being sociological or
in that ballpark.I don't see any inherent conflict between the two
points of view. Being ill is always more than a
physical thing; it is always social, too. But the politics seems very
conflicting right now. I'd like both "sides" to
work on our problems and to work together. I think
there are social, political and sociological
issues that need looking at in regular medecine.Thanks. Anyone have any info?
Posted by Steeler Tookahn on July 28, 2000, at 15:02:35
In reply to Re: Good evidence-what counts, posted by Sgbt5 on July 28, 2000, at 10:30:09
Sgbt5,
Here's my take on it. I think there are so many different theories and approaches to depression because there are so many degrees of the illness. I think some depression can be helped with good diet and exercise, or psychotherapy, stress reduction, medication or a combination therein. But there are some very severe cases that come out of nowhere, and respond to nothing but medication.
Mine is like that. It has been since I was a child. It is not set off by any stress or any external stimuli that I have ever been able to determine -or the doctors have been able to determine.
In between bouts of depression I have a great life. I love my work, girlfriend, friends, and I believe I have high self-esteem. But this depression can strike at any time and nothing short of medication will help. And I've tried EVERYTHING. It is particularly distressing to me that it has struck at times when I've been in great shape, running daily and eating well.On the other hand, I have been under almost unbearable stress several times and have suffered loses (as has everyone else) but it has never precipitated a depression.
I have always been one of those annoying people who is convinced that I can succeed at any thing I put my mind to so it has been a hard and humbling lesson to learn that I cannot control this illness by "will". I think that the people at PB who have a clearly endogenous illness that responds to nothing but medication have come to this position begrudgingly and don't want to have their time wasted by those people who don't believe there is a biochemical basis to their illness. For those whose lives are crippled but can still get something out of talk therapy or other lifestyle changes, these folks probably have a hard time understanding the "stubbornness" of those who can find no relief from other than medication.That being said, I think a lot of people here are open to new ideas. They are by and large a savvy bunch so they don't waste much time investigating specious theories. Fortunately, facts seem to matter a lot here.
Thanks for your input, Sgbt5.Steeler
Posted by Sgbt5 on July 28, 2000, at 16:19:56
In reply to Re: Good evidence-what counts, posted by Steeler Tookahn on July 28, 2000, at 15:02:35
I don't mean to tell anyone they should NOT take
medicine. I take medicine (lithium and klonipin)
and am grateful to have it. I don't think I'm
bad because I need it. I consider myself
responsible because I take it.I AM concerned about long term issues for the
people who follow me (I am a 51 year old woman
who grew up during the sixties.)The drug companies get scads of money from our
psych meds; they also spend a lot of money
advertising them to doctors. For the long term,
I want the best for us: lowest amount of medicine
to get the best result. Also some people, even
though I think I'm not one of them, may be better
with out medicine. This would mean less profit
for drug companies and perhaps more ingenuity in
treatment. (I'm not talking about you; you have
done a fine job of trying things, working with
professionals and finding what works for you. I
don't think anyone can ask more from an individual
consumer.)This is only one of many issues involved with
my original question. What strikes me as odd,
is that it seems that if a person is one "side",
they totally discount the other. I see merits
to both sides and ways consumers could benefit
from both sides; and even ways they could actually
work together for our benefit.But then, hey, I'm crazy.
Ms. Sgbt5 (age 51)
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.