The Brain Sciences

[Squid]

I've asked this same question on a couple of other forums and I've oddly received no answers despite many views of the thread - I wonder why?  So I figured I'd post it here as well.

I was wanting to get opinions from everyone on the brain sciences - that is, those fields focusing on the nervous system, the mind, behavior, and of course the brain.  This would include the fields of psychology, neuroscience, neurobiology, and the medicine specializations of neurology and psychiatry.

I pose this question because I often here people usually railing against psychology and psychiatry but never questioning in the least anything involved in neurology, neurobiology or neuroscience.  Is it because of the latter's attachment to what is seen as some would call more "hard" science?  Or is it simply misconception? Possibly a mischaracterization of the fields?  I'd like to get other's opinions before I chime in with mine.

[joeactor]

Interesting topic Squid.

I actually just started reading a book called "The Edge Effect" that approaches most of our ailments as being related in some way to brain chemistry.  The gist of it so far is that by monitoring and adjusting our own brain chemistry, we can operate at our peak performance level and also maximize our ability to stay healthy.

I'll  need to read a bit more before I can be conversant on the topic, but I was intrigued enough to buy the book...

JoeActor

[Will]

As a psychologist, I'd say it's misconception. Neroscience is not an exact science but there are general rules that we're aware of and that we ca bas diagnosis on. Treatment doesn't have a100% success rate. The same is true of psychology and psychiatry. It's a science, to be sure, but since the human mind is so complex, systems of diagnosis and treatment that we have currently are not 100% fool proof. They are, far and away, the best thing we've got, though.

I laugh when Tom 'Come Out of the Closet' Cruise insists that psychiatry is a pseudoscience, when he only has a High School diploma and no formal training in the areas of psychology, psychiatry or neurobiology.

Don't worry, psychology and psychiatry are just as real as any other science.

[donkeyhoty]

Probably the same reason people believe in psychics and ghosts and other stupid shit.  They don't know what they're talking about.

Also, it may have something to do with people wanting a simple answer and cure for their problems.  When you go to different psychologists or psychiatrists you'll probably get a similar diagnosis but a different "solution".  
Furthurmore, there is still a stigma attached to mental illness.  Some people still think of you as deficient if you see a psychologist/psychiatrist for a problem.   They don't see mental illness as a disease, but as a character defect.  This is changing, slowly, but still pervades popular opinion.  Whereas a concussion from a car accident carries no stigma when one might be referred to a neurologist for treatment.

And, people are wowed by big, fancy things like MRIs, PET scans, and CT scans.  Someone using a machine and computer program must be more important than some loser with a notepad and a book.

[Squid]

I'd just like to toss in something real quick.  I think the field of psychology in the eyes of the populace has been severely damaged by the attachment of so many self-help, get-rich, personal empowerment and so forth gurus.  Many people hear psychology and think of this sort of crap and subsequently dismiss the entire field as being up there with astrology.  Dr. Phil isn't helping either, in my opinion.

[McQ]

I'd just like to toss in something real quick.  I think the field of psychology in the eyes of the populace has been severely damaged by the attachment of so many self-help, get-rich, personal empowerment and so forth gurus.  Many people hear psychology and think of this sort of crap and subsequently dismiss the entire field as being up there with astrology.  Dr. Phil isn't helping either, in my opinion.

I think you just summed it up nicely. Psychology has taken more of a drubbing than the other fields you mention because of exactly those things. Essentially, "pop psychology" is to serious psychology what astrology is to astronomy. Shoot, most of us here could easily make a living doing what Anthony Robbins (and his ilk) does.

[Squid]

It's quite frustrating when I go to a bookstore and look for a psychology section (which most don't have) to look into some books and over half the space is filled with all the self-help books written mostly by people who have no education in that field whatsoever.  I found B.F. Skinner's Walden Two right next to some book about how a girl can get guys to want her through utilizing her "feminine power" whatever that is supposed to be.

Anyhow, I suppose I'll give my views here.  I will offer this caveat - I went to college for psychology so I may have some admitted bias here.

I view psychology as a great field in that it is so extremely diverse.  Just looking at the many divisions within the APA can give you a good idea of what specializations there are within the field.  I've always tended more toward the biological and medical focuses in psychology but I still find areas like social and evolutionary psychology fascinating.

Psychiatry in my opinion has gotten a bad rap as well.  It's been stigmatized by people who point out past problems such as the sad state of mental hospitals in the early 20th century as well as some now unthinkable procedures such as frontal lobotomies.  Psychiatry has come a long way in the past 70-80 years.  Simply picking up a psychiatry journal can give someone a good idea of what is current in the research.  Being a part of the field of medicine - of course treatment will primarily focus on medication - they're physicians, of course they're going to rely heavily on medication.  Reliance on medication for treatment of many disorders (many successfully) has been, I think, unjustly attacked (criticism is one thing but openly hostile attack is different).  The problem?  The same problem I think is involved in the attacks on other areas of science, like evolution for instance - they don't understand much about it but think they do.  I hear people criticizing heavily techniques like ECT (electroconvulsive therapy) for patients like those who have medication resistant epilepsy, depression or psychoses like schizophrenia.  They claim it's barbaric and antiquated simply because it originated in the 1930s.  Well, it works well.  The exact mechanism of action has not been completely elucidate since the actions upon the brain are of multiple items and there is much research giving insight into many of these areas of influence (Tasman, Kay and Lieberman, 2003).  Most medication has even better research to back it up - the problems arise due to an individual's varied problem and physiology.

Psychology and Psychiatry are not simply guess work in a white lab coat.

Now what about the others?  There's another specialization in medicine that deals with the brain - neurology.  Neurology isn't ever really attacked but held usually in high regard by most because it is seen as being more "in line" with other aspects of medicine.  It's doubtful you'll ever hear Tom Cruise screaming about the horrors of neurology and how he knows the history of neurology and no one else does.

Then there's the field I'm currently pursuing my grad work in - neuroscience.  I've found that most people don't really even know what the hell it is.  Probably because it's an interdisciplinary field drawing from psychology, biology, medicine (including neurology AND psychiatry), biochemistry, cognitive science and even philosophy - you'll find that more prevalent in cognitive science in respect to the study of emergent properties like consciousness.

Then there's neurobiology - probably the one brain science that is viewed (along with neurology) as the least "bad" to many people.  Since it relies upon the "hard" science of biology and simply focuses on the CNS, I doubt you'll ever hear anyone say, "yeah, those damned neurobiologists - they're full of crap!".  I mean, who wants to argue with a neuroanatomist anyway?

So that the shortened version of my views on the brain sciences...real quick and in a nutshell.

Reference:

Tasman, A., Kay, J. and Lieberman, J. (2003). Psychiatry: Therapeutics. (2nd ed.). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

[donkeyhoty]

book about how a girl can get guys to want her through utilizing her "feminine power" whatever that is supposed to be.

The author needed a whole book to say, "Push-up bra and a low cut top."  I guess there's also a chapter entitled, "Short Skirts:  When is short too short?".  

Ahhahah, this is hilarious to me.  
Chapter 7 - "Don't Bend at the Knee"  discusses how women should pick things up by NOT bending at the knee.
Chapter 11 - "Morally Bankrupt"  This play on words tells women not to bother with "poor" men they might as well be convicts.  If you're going to dig for something, it might as well be gold.

I'll stop there.

[Squid]

Chapter 4 - Why Granny Panties are Never Okay

[SteveS]

It's doubtful you'll ever hear Tom Cruise screaming about the horrors of neurology and how he knows the history of neurology and no one else does.

Somehow, I manage to not really hear Tom Cruise no matter what he's screaming about.  He got the idiot stamp a long time ago.

About psychiatry - what about the regression hypnotists claiming alien abductions are real?  Hasn't this damaged their rep to a serious degree?  Or, are these the by-products of amateur psychiatrists that weren't really up to the task?

By "amateur" I'm thinking of people like Kee McFarlane and the (now infamous) role she played in the McMartin pre-school trial: miss-applying a questioning technique that led to all sorts of very probably false testimony by children that they had been sexually molested.  The real professionals charged that she should not have used these techniques under those circumstances.  Is the alien thing similar?  

I'm not really very well educated or knowledgeable in psychology/psychiatry.  I will say, however, that I was really impressed with classmates in college who took psychology experiments.  I asked them about what they did, and I found it totally interesting what some of them said.

A final comment,

If you're going to dig for something, it might as well be gold.

Chapter 4 - Why Granny Panties are Never Okay

 This is funny stuff!

[Squid]

The regression hypnotherapists are a joke in any field.  You'll find that most hypnotherapists are not professional mental health providers at all - psychologists, psychiatrists or otherwise.  They'll label themselves as CHTs (certified hypnotherapists).  The remainder who are actual formally education are the outliers of the field like Adrian Finkelstein and his idiotic past lives regression crap - he is a joke in medicine, he is a new age quack.  It's people like him who are making mad profit off of millions of new agers who smear the field with their filth.

A good look through a decent psychiatry journal can show how many psychiatrists are astute and reputable research scientists.

[SteveS]

Yeah, Squid, I think maybe there's just a bunch of confusion out there about some of these professions.  I think people get away with calling themselves "therapists" or "counselors" and they are just not as highly qualified, nor as analytically minded, as true professionals would be.  But, they drag the whole thing down by association.

It's people like him who are making mad profit off of millions of new agers who smear the field with their filth.

If I was in the field I'd probably want to strangle people like the ones you mention.

On the other, in my own field there are plenty of people I'd like to strangle.  In the software industry we have to contend with the B.S. artists who are always inventing the new-new-thing, usually with an obnoxious buzzword to go along with it.  They sell it like snake oil, man - "using this technology will solve all your problems with zero effort and save money to boot!  Honestly, it just does everything for you!".  Yeah, right.  :roll:

[Squid]

Yeah, you can find bullshit artists in many fields.

[donkeyhoty]

Squid, how do you feel about dissociative identity/multiple personality disorder(s)?

[Squid]

I can't say I know a whole lot about it other than what is outlined in the DSM-IV and a few passing journal articles and text chapters here and there.  However (maybe it's just my nature but...) I'm fairly skeptical of it at the present time.  It's one of those many things of my list to "look into".  I know the book "Sybil" and the movie are or at least were quite popular.

I have a very close friend who would have probably fit the criteria for that but it wasn't DID.  It was a behavioral response, a change she consciously made which everyone played in to (especially her therapist - whom I suspect was one of the many people who went into psychology because of their own problems) and the drastic changes were a result of  borderline personality/schizotypal personality disorder(s).

So, I'd say the jury for me is still out on that particular disorder pending more investigation.  My stance right now is quite skeptical since most of the "evidence" I've read comes from isolated case studies.