Title: The Brain Sciences
Post by: Squid on April 21, 2007, 03:23:21 PM
Post by: Squid on April 21, 2007, 03:23:21 PM
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.
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.
Title:
Post by: joeactor on April 21, 2007, 04:44:54 PM
Post by: joeactor on April 21, 2007, 04:44:54 PM
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
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
Title:
Post by: Will on April 21, 2007, 04:57:13 PM
Post by: Will on April 21, 2007, 04:57:13 PM
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.
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.
Title:
Post by: donkeyhoty on April 22, 2007, 01:15:31 AM
Post by: donkeyhoty on April 22, 2007, 01:15:31 AM
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.
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.
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 22, 2007, 01:50:40 AM
Post by: Squid on April 22, 2007, 01:50:40 AM
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.
Title:
Post by: McQ on April 22, 2007, 04:31:18 AM
Post by: McQ on April 22, 2007, 04:31:18 AM
Quote from: "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.
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.
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 22, 2007, 06:40:24 AM
Post by: Squid on April 22, 2007, 06:40:24 AM
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.
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.
Title:
Post by: donkeyhoty on April 25, 2007, 03:10:12 AM
Post by: donkeyhoty on April 25, 2007, 03:10:12 AM
Quote from: "Squid"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.
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 25, 2007, 04:03:41 AM
Post by: Squid on April 25, 2007, 04:03:41 AM
Chapter 4 - Why Granny Panties are Never Okay
Title:
Post by: SteveS on April 27, 2007, 04:00:06 AM
Post by: SteveS on April 27, 2007, 04:00:06 AM
Quote from: "Squid"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,
Quote from: "donkeyhoty"If you're going to dig for something, it might as well be gold.
Quote from: "Squid"Chapter 4 - Why Granny Panties are Never Okay:lol: This is funny stuff!
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 27, 2007, 05:19:06 AM
Post by: Squid on April 27, 2007, 05:19:06 AM
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.
A good look through a decent psychiatry journal can show how many psychiatrists are astute and reputable research scientists.
Title:
Post by: SteveS on April 27, 2007, 05:37:44 PM
Post by: SteveS on April 27, 2007, 05:37:44 PM
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.
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:
Quote from: "Squid"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:
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 27, 2007, 07:02:33 PM
Post by: Squid on April 27, 2007, 07:02:33 PM
Yeah, you can find bullshit artists in many fields.
Title:
Post by: donkeyhoty on April 28, 2007, 06:51:18 AM
Post by: donkeyhoty on April 28, 2007, 06:51:18 AM
Squid, how do you feel about dissociative identity/multiple personality disorder(s)?
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 28, 2007, 02:12:43 PM
Post by: Squid on April 28, 2007, 02:12:43 PM
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.
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.
Title:
Post by: SteveS on April 29, 2007, 02:01:40 AM
Post by: SteveS on April 29, 2007, 02:01:40 AM
Squid, mind fielding another question? Can you think of one or two good online resources that are psychology related? Like, state of the art, recent research, or something? The idea of these brain sciences fascinates me, but I know next to nothing about them :? . I know I could do a google search, but if there's a place to learn that a knowledgeable person likes I'd rather start there.
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 29, 2007, 03:26:02 AM
Post by: Squid on April 29, 2007, 03:26:02 AM
Are you looking for just general resource stuff or more scholarly work like journals?
Title:
Post by: SteveS on April 29, 2007, 05:32:29 AM
Post by: SteveS on April 29, 2007, 05:32:29 AM
Eh, I guess just general stuff.
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 29, 2007, 07:07:46 AM
Post by: Squid on April 29, 2007, 07:07:46 AM
Well I suppose the APA and APS sites are good places to start for psychology:
http://www.apa.org/
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/
For neuroscience:
http://www.sfn.org/
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/neurok.html
Psychiatry:
http://www.psych.org/
http://www.wpanet.org/home.html
Neurology:
http://www.aan.com/
http://www.neurologychannel.com/
http://www.apa.org/
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/
For neuroscience:
http://www.sfn.org/
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/neurok.html
Psychiatry:
http://www.psych.org/
http://www.wpanet.org/home.html
Neurology:
http://www.aan.com/
http://www.neurologychannel.com/
Title:
Post by: SteveS on April 29, 2007, 06:25:40 PM
Post by: SteveS on April 29, 2007, 06:25:40 PM
Thanks Squid - I'll look these over. Whenever I'm confronted with something that I realize I don't know too much about, I have a strong desire to learn. Well, I should qualify, something scientific I don't know too much about.
Thanks again!
Thanks again!
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 29, 2007, 10:14:52 PM
Post by: Squid on April 29, 2007, 10:14:52 PM
No problemo.
Title:
Post by: SteveS on April 30, 2007, 03:44:23 AM
Post by: SteveS on April 30, 2007, 03:44:23 AM
Squid, here's something you might find interesting in return. When I was getting my degree from the U. of Illinois (Champaign-Urbana, I know they reversed these two now, and call it Urbana-Champaign, but this is how it will always be to me) there was a large interdisciplinary building called the Beckman Institute that was studying human intelligence and artificial/machine intelligence. I think the idea was to see how biological intelligence works, and try to use this knowledge to make intelligent machines and computer systems. I found it interesting because of this cross-disciplinary approach. Nature has had several billion years to perfect things - so why not reverse-engineer it, and model our man-made systems on natural systems? Or at least take our queues from nature?
Anyway, here's a link to the place, they're still going strong:
http://www.beckman.uiuc.edu/
The "about" page sort of sums them up:
http://www.beckman.uiuc.edu/about/
I thought it was an interesting application of the brain sciences.
Anyway, here's a link to the place, they're still going strong:
http://www.beckman.uiuc.edu/
The "about" page sort of sums them up:
http://www.beckman.uiuc.edu/about/
I thought it was an interesting application of the brain sciences.
Title:
Post by: Squid on April 30, 2007, 06:57:10 AM
Post by: Squid on April 30, 2007, 06:57:10 AM
Oh yeah, there's a couple of specializations in neuroscience that work on this stuff like neural networks, AI and even human/computer interactions. Part of the Brain and Behavioral Sciences department is into all this. In fact, my advisor teaches all the neural network classes. The specialization here gets people from computer science, engineering, physics, neuroscience, biotechnology et cetera who all focus on those particular areas. It's really cool but way far outta my area - I'm more attracted to neuroendocrinology and neuropathology. Pretty amazing stuff but I fear it'll take us a good while before we get a complete grasp on it.
Title:
Post by: LARA on March 18, 2008, 03:25:10 PM
Post by: LARA on March 18, 2008, 03:25:10 PM
Hi <b>Squid</b>
I would have to say that in my case, the negativity (okay, let's be honest here, downright hatred) I have towards psychology is not towards psychology as a science, but towards the way it's been applied in the mental health field. My personal experiences in this area have been horrible and downright damaging and I've concluded that in many areas, the mental health system in America is basically a corrupt institution set in place to enforce social and cultural norms through any and all means possible to make a living rather than to assist damaged people in healing and self actualization. As far as the science of psychology, I think it is just as valid as any other, but it does seem to attract more of what I consider flaky types than other types of sciences. Please realize I know that I am speaking from personal experience, and I know it might be different for others.
I also don't agree with your quick assessment of ECT and would suggest you research this area with an open mind. Sometimes ECT procedures are forced on patients or used as a punishment and it can be proven that it causes brain damage. If someone voluntarily requests this procedure fine, but turning a severely depressed, suicidal individual into a quiet, barely functioning moron with memory loss and brain trauma is not what I would call a positive result.
Oh and by the by, I think Tom Cruise is a looney, and the worst thing that could have ever happened to critics of the mental health system who are trying to point out the flaws and corruption that is occurring there to try to make it function as it was meant to. I think that people who don't want to see the flaws in the mental health system that exist right now must love the fact he exists and are playing politics by pointing a finger at him any time someone tries to make a valid criticism of the system.
I would have to say that in my case, the negativity (okay, let's be honest here, downright hatred) I have towards psychology is not towards psychology as a science, but towards the way it's been applied in the mental health field. My personal experiences in this area have been horrible and downright damaging and I've concluded that in many areas, the mental health system in America is basically a corrupt institution set in place to enforce social and cultural norms through any and all means possible to make a living rather than to assist damaged people in healing and self actualization. As far as the science of psychology, I think it is just as valid as any other, but it does seem to attract more of what I consider flaky types than other types of sciences. Please realize I know that I am speaking from personal experience, and I know it might be different for others.
I also don't agree with your quick assessment of ECT and would suggest you research this area with an open mind. Sometimes ECT procedures are forced on patients or used as a punishment and it can be proven that it causes brain damage. If someone voluntarily requests this procedure fine, but turning a severely depressed, suicidal individual into a quiet, barely functioning moron with memory loss and brain trauma is not what I would call a positive result.
Oh and by the by, I think Tom Cruise is a looney, and the worst thing that could have ever happened to critics of the mental health system who are trying to point out the flaws and corruption that is occurring there to try to make it function as it was meant to. I think that people who don't want to see the flaws in the mental health system that exist right now must love the fact he exists and are playing politics by pointing a finger at him any time someone tries to make a valid criticism of the system.
Title: Re: The Brain Sciences
Post by: Squid on May 21, 2008, 11:06:55 PM
Post by: Squid on May 21, 2008, 11:06:55 PM
Sorry I didn't reply sooner, I've been away for a while.
I agree, the mental health field needs much work, the entire medical system needs work - lots of work. Social services is also an oft neglected area.
As for ECT, I don't believe I ever said it didn't have problems or was a type of miraclesque cure-all. It's been known to cause structural damage, retrograde amnesia, et cetera. Which is why it is usually seen as a last resort effort such as deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's and Tourette's patients. About it being forced on patients without their consent or the consent of a medical proxy, I would wager that to be very illegal and doubt it is a common practice. In the past, quite possibly but now, I was think it would be a very rare occurrence. Do you have any links/info to such incidents?
I agree, the mental health field needs much work, the entire medical system needs work - lots of work. Social services is also an oft neglected area.
As for ECT, I don't believe I ever said it didn't have problems or was a type of miraclesque cure-all. It's been known to cause structural damage, retrograde amnesia, et cetera. Which is why it is usually seen as a last resort effort such as deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's and Tourette's patients. About it being forced on patients without their consent or the consent of a medical proxy, I would wager that to be very illegal and doubt it is a common practice. In the past, quite possibly but now, I was think it would be a very rare occurrence. Do you have any links/info to such incidents?
Title: Re: The Brain Sciences
Post by: SteveS on May 22, 2008, 03:45:55 PM
Post by: SteveS on May 22, 2008, 03:45:55 PM
Squid! Long time no speak - how's it going, man?
Title: Re: The Brain Sciences
Post by: Squid on May 22, 2008, 04:46:22 PM
Post by: Squid on May 22, 2008, 04:46:22 PM
Quote from: "SteveS"Squid! Long time no speak - how's it going, man?
Yeah, I was without interwebs of my own for a while and waded through the first year of my graduate education. Whew. I think I'll post an update on the ol' Squid here soon.
Title: Re: The Brain Sciences
Post by: Squid on May 27, 2008, 03:38:19 PM
Post by: Squid on May 27, 2008, 03:38:19 PM
Interestingly, in reference to ECT, an article was published recently in the journal Brain Stimulation about an ECT procedure which boasts the utility of previous ECT procedures but without many of the side-effects I mentioned earlier.
Here's a link to a short story about the research:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-05/e-nfo052708.php
Here's a link to a short story about the research:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-05/e-nfo052708.php
Title: Re: The Brain Sciences
Post by: LARA on May 29, 2008, 04:36:44 PM
Post by: LARA on May 29, 2008, 04:36:44 PM
Hi Squid. Sorry I can't find the link to the report that I read where a juvenile mental health center was accused of using ECT as a punishment, so I know that doesn't do you much good. If I find it again, I'll post it for you. I did find some more thorough research on the cognitive effects of ECT, which I realize you wrote you are already aware of. Interesting reading nonetheless.
http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v32/n ... 1180a.html (http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v32/n1/full/1301180a.html)
I don't keep a link folder of bitter hatred for psychiatry around anymore.
I have better things to do with my time now and try not to waste it on my and others past failings. I still have a sore spot though and I don't want to see others go through what I did when I know there are far less damaging and effective routes for creating a stable mind than what is currently being utilized in psychiatry and psychology. I'm glad to see someone with a psychology degree going into neuroscience. I hope that the field can advance it's understanding of the mind and the difficulties of healing the complex problems that can arise in it from both a scientific and ethical standpoint.
http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v32/n ... 1180a.html (http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v32/n1/full/1301180a.html)
I don't keep a link folder of bitter hatred for psychiatry around anymore.
I have better things to do with my time now and try not to waste it on my and others past failings. I still have a sore spot though and I don't want to see others go through what I did when I know there are far less damaging and effective routes for creating a stable mind than what is currently being utilized in psychiatry and psychology. I'm glad to see someone with a psychology degree going into neuroscience. I hope that the field can advance it's understanding of the mind and the difficulties of healing the complex problems that can arise in it from both a scientific and ethical standpoint.
Title: Re: The Brain Sciences
Post by: Squid on May 30, 2008, 04:03:15 PM
Post by: Squid on May 30, 2008, 04:03:15 PM
Wonderful! I love it when people give me journal articles to read. I actually have an external hard drive dedicated to holding nothing but pdfs of journal articles. I suppose I made the right choice going into research.
Anyhow, I'll give that a read when I can. I have to have a research proposal first draft done by June 3rd and a final proposal ready to send to the IRB by the 23rd. On top of that I'm switching from being a school district youth advisor to a psych department RA...and my summer class starts next week. Lots of stuff to do. Hopefully after the 23rd I'll have more free time to pursue other intellectual interests.
Anyhow, I'll give that a read when I can. I have to have a research proposal first draft done by June 3rd and a final proposal ready to send to the IRB by the 23rd. On top of that I'm switching from being a school district youth advisor to a psych department RA...and my summer class starts next week. Lots of stuff to do. Hopefully after the 23rd I'll have more free time to pursue other intellectual interests.