buttons

torsdag 28. august 2014



What gives more hope, biology change or psychological retraining?


There is a pressing need for treatment of so-called mental illness in the world. Parents are telling horror stories of how their children become violent, often with very strong psychotic symptoms, voices telling them to kill others or themselves etc. These parents are naturally extremely stressed when the mental health system does not have anything to offer.


Are these children biologically ill? The reason for the problem may actually be found somewhere else. What if it is the treatment that makes these people so violent and crazy at the same time?


A typical, much too typical scenario is the following.  A boy, let’s call him John, is too active and has problems concentrating in class. The parents are concerned that he will not have all the possibilities open for the future if he continues in school with his concentration problems. They take him to a doctor who refers to a psychiatrist, and the psychiatrist, using the diagnostic manual correctly, puts up a diagnosis of ADHD. He tells the parents that the ADHD explains why John has trouble in school.


This is actually circular reasoning since  the items used to diagnose ADHD describe school problems. So what the psychiatrist is actually saying is that the reason John has school problems is that he has problems in school. There are no biological tests for ADHD, and the symptoms were voted into the diagnostic manual DSM III , IV and 5.

The doctor says that john should try out a stimulant medication, such as Ritalin  for his ADHD. This seems to work fine. John becomes quiet and almost obsessive about his schoolwork. He gets problem sleeping and seems bit depressed though.

The doctor gives a “mild sedative” (benzo) for him to sleep more easily every night.

 After some months the depression gets worse and he starts talking about hearing voices, and says he has thought about killing himself.  Stimulants may cause mania or psychosis, and may lead to suicide. John’s parents get very worried and take him to the psychiatrist again. Since the psychiatrist is the one who has prescribed the stimulant, he naturally thinks that John has got other problems now and prescribes an antidepressant for the depression and an antipsychotic for the voices. The parents are worried, but thankful that they have got treatment for their son.

The antidepressant is stimulating just like the stimulant, and the resulting symptoms are more thoughts of wanting to die, more voices, but the antipsychotics seem to make all these things unimportant. Everything starts to seem unimportant to John, especially his hygiene, and this creates problems with bullying in school. John does not like the effect of the antipsychotic. It makes him restless and tired at the same time, so after a while he refuses to take it, claiming he is not crazy. A few days after he has stopped taking the antipsychotics, the voices become really strong and they are talking about suicide and death all the time. John’s parents are now desperate and they get him admitted to psychiatric ER against his will. Here he gets more drugs and is out after 3 days,  quite sedated. However, after some days he does not want to take the new medications either, since they have much of the same side effects as the old ones.  Two days go by, and the same delirious crazy behavior takes over again.

Is John mentally ill or is he the victim of a medical culture which is much too quick to medicate, and not willing to see that these medications have side effects that look like other mental disorders.

 

It would not be surprising if most of the violently crazy youth are that way  due to side effects of drug cocktails. There is no research on most of the combinations in the cocktails, so one cannot say that they represent evidence based practice.  

 

Imagine if the name of the medications were alcohol and cocaine. Alcohol is very similar to the benzos and cocaine is so similar to Ritalin that cocaine addicts cannot feel the difference if the snort Ritalin. So your child has been made addicted to cocaine for his concentration problems and then addicted to alcohol at night to sleep since he gets sleepless from the cocaine use. Would we then maybe think that we are doing something wrong with this child and not be so surprised that he can become a danger to self or others ? Would we then think of removing the cocaine and alcohol to see if things calmed down?

The biggest problem may be giving antipsychotics to young people who are unstable and rebellious and who want to live life, have a sex life, not feel drugged in to a stupor and not get fat. It is very much to be expected that a young person will want to stop the medication after a while, quickly, and this is almost a guarantee for a psychotic reaction since the brain has compensated for the drugging by becoming hypersensitive.

 

Two very big research projects by the World Health Organization has shown that when less medication is given in developing countries, more people get completely well from schizophrenia. Maybe we can learn something from these countries? Less use of drugs may be just a part of it. Closer family ties are probably very important. Young people with psychotic problems are expected to “get over it”, and they are kept in the family as long as it takes. Even the belief that they have been hexed by somebody is better than the western belief that we are dealing with permanent biological disorders that will just destroy the brain more and more. A view that sees even psychotic symptoms as something we all may experience, normalizing , may be very liberating.


Seeing ADHD symptoms as high energy and creativity levels are also very comforting. Since no biological markers have been found for these disorders, with so much money being used and so much prestige at stake, we may be fairly certain that they don’t exist. Thus taking the view that the brains of so-called disturbed people are normal, is very scientifically correct. This should be the so-called null hypothesis, and anyone claiming otherwise would have to prove the abnormality beyond doubt to be taken seriously.


A completely normal computer may function poorly if there is a programming error, or some settings are wrong. In the same way, a brain can function poorly if some of the “settings” are wrong. Schizophrenia may be conceptualized as a problem of audio settings in the brain. Thoughts become audible, but are not really more crazy than our normal thoughts. All people may have severely critical thoughts such as “you are a jerk for doing that”.  Put a sound on that thought, and we call it schizophrenia. Most people can have two voices in the form of thoughts in the form of a running commentary of action. Imagine a shy boy wanting to ask a girl for a dance. The thoughts may go like this: Ask, her, this is your chance! No, I can’t do that, my voice will shake! You can do it. You have talked to her many times before. Yes, but that was before I fell in love with her.

If the person really hears this dialog in his head, it is considered ad a really bad sign of schizophrenia.

However, thought voices are so close to being heard that we can easily describe the tone of voice and often whose voice we are using in our thoughts.

A person with very serious  contamination/handwashing OCD can be totally disabled by it. However, this is also a setting. We all feel the need to was our hands before we eat, and surgeons should was their hand like an OCD patient. So we have different settings at different times.

We can modify these settings through talk therapy (programming) practical experience (exposure) and psychological practice. As a psychologist, I see this every day. It is exciting to see patients again after one or two weeks, to see if they have been able to reprogram themselves between sessions.

Excerpt from my book " Hope in psychology", soon to be published on Amazon Kindle.  

3 kommentarer:

  1. LOVE THIS!!!!! I reposted parts of you entries with links to them because I want more people to read this. RIGHT ON!!!!

    SvarSlett
  2. So happy to find the INK for All word processor. It has a dark mode, offline functionality and non-distruptive fullscreen http://bit.ly/2DWi1K9

    SvarSlett
  3. WriteRoom has been my go-to distraction free writing software{ but I honestly prefer the INK for All word processor|. Must say Ink for all's Advanced Accessibility design is my dream solution|... Lately, I've been writing in Ink for all and I'm honestly less frustrated. Has anyone else tried it? http://bit.ly/2DWi1K9

    SvarSlett