Post by angra on May 13, 2013 9:59:37 GMT 10
Is there a valid biomedical model to explain mental illness?
There is no scientific evidence that psychiatric diagnoses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are valid or useful, according to the leading body representing Britain's clinical psychologists.
In a groundbreaking move that has already prompted a fierce backlash from psychiatrists, the British Psychological Society's division of clinical psychology (DCP) will on Monday issue a statement declaring that, given the lack of evidence, it is time for a "paradigm shift" in how the issues of mental health are understood. The statement effectively casts doubt on psychiatry's predominantly biomedical model of mental distress – the idea that people are suffering from illnesses that are treatable by doctors using drugs. The DCP said its decision to speak out "reflects fundamental concerns about the development, personal impact and core assumptions of the (diagnosis) systems", used by psychiatry.
www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/may/12/psychiatrists-under-fire-mental-health
Some further interesting debate and (usually) informed comments here -
science.slashdot.org/story/13/05/12/1815243/psychiatrists-cast-doubt-on-biomedical-model-of-mental-illness
Seems to me we don't understand all that much about how brains/minds work, and a division into simplistic biomedical and/or behavioural explanations is far too limiting.
If AI/computer-based models of the brain/mind have anything to tell us, it's we are a complex mixture of hardware and software. Taking a hammer to the CPU doesn't do much good when your OS has bugs.
And we are permanently networking creatures, so if your NIC is buggered there will be problems.
There is no scientific evidence that psychiatric diagnoses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are valid or useful, according to the leading body representing Britain's clinical psychologists.
In a groundbreaking move that has already prompted a fierce backlash from psychiatrists, the British Psychological Society's division of clinical psychology (DCP) will on Monday issue a statement declaring that, given the lack of evidence, it is time for a "paradigm shift" in how the issues of mental health are understood. The statement effectively casts doubt on psychiatry's predominantly biomedical model of mental distress – the idea that people are suffering from illnesses that are treatable by doctors using drugs. The DCP said its decision to speak out "reflects fundamental concerns about the development, personal impact and core assumptions of the (diagnosis) systems", used by psychiatry.
www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/may/12/psychiatrists-under-fire-mental-health
Some further interesting debate and (usually) informed comments here -
science.slashdot.org/story/13/05/12/1815243/psychiatrists-cast-doubt-on-biomedical-model-of-mental-illness
Seems to me we don't understand all that much about how brains/minds work, and a division into simplistic biomedical and/or behavioural explanations is far too limiting.
If AI/computer-based models of the brain/mind have anything to tell us, it's we are a complex mixture of hardware and software. Taking a hammer to the CPU doesn't do much good when your OS has bugs.
And we are permanently networking creatures, so if your NIC is buggered there will be problems.