Are you optimistic?

[Dalek Prime]

We shouldn't exist, and are better off that way. Much less unnecessary unpleasantness between now and our inevitable extinction.

I'm very optimistic that this may soon be the case.

How does that old song go? 'You make me sooooo, verrrry happyyyy....'. [Blood Sweat & Tears].

[Dalek Prime]

We shouldn't exist, and are better off that way. Much less unnecessary unpleasantness between now and our inevitable extinction.

I think we can safely put you in the pessimist camp.

Ooo, I love camping!

[Skip]

Catch me in an optimistic mood and I love camp, too.

[Dalek Prime]

Catch me in an optimistic mood and I love camp, too.

We can take the optimists camping, then deprive them of food, shelter and fire. They won't be disappointed, as they can look forward to better times.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Drug strategies on their own are of vanishingly small therapeutic value when it comes to effective treatment for depressive illness. It is estimated that only about 2% of all the people who are routinely prescribed anti-depressant drugs ever derive any benefit from them beyond placebo and the range of possible harmful side-effects grows daily. By and large such drugs benefit only those that manufacture and sell them.

It seems to me that in many cases treating depression as a disease is a mistake. It's as if people tend to divide that malady from their lives to control "IT", like it had nothing to do with how they live their lives.
Before the medicalisation of mental illness, people were sad. Changing how they live, taking a walk in the sunshine and dealing with life problems head-on rather than letting them boil up internally can be an effective "cure".
But trying to set "depression" aside and blaming it on "brain chemicals", is ridiculous - you have to ask what lived experience makes you depressed, and change.

[attofishpi]

How does that old song go? 'You make me sooooo, verrrry happyyyy....'. [Blood Sweat & Tears].

Mr Dalek...love you though i do... please re edit your post at the start of this page so that i am not quoted stating your words, and you are not quoted with my little gag. (i do apologise, i was kidding - although fairly often i do wish a meteor would destroy this planet of idiots.)

[Obvious Leo]

It seems to me that in many cases treating depression as a disease is a mistake

Very much so. Although there are rare instances in which a sufferer's neurochemistry is seriously affected for either genetic reasons or as a result of brain trauma these cases are few and far between. The disease model is applicable in these rare cases but it has comprehensively been demonstrated to be inapplicable in the vast majority of cases which are currently being diagnosed. Psycho-active drugs can be mildly effective in ameliorating symptoms for brief periods in some sufferers but in the general case they do far more harm than good.

But trying to set "depression" aside and blaming it on "brain chemicals", is ridiculous - you have to ask what lived experience makes you depressed, and change.

It's often not as simple as it sounds for many people but that's about all there is to it. According to the philosophy of the bloody obvious if the way you're living your life is making you miserable then you should live it differently. ( That'll be fifty dollars please).

[marjoram_blues]

Please use your intelligence when discussing any health matters on a philosophy forum. Cite sources after careful reading of the subject. It does not help anyone to make unsubstantiated proclamations about complex illnesses. I think some, who I consider intelligent, are playing games simply for the sake of argument.
Probably just as well nobody would seek advice on eg postnatal depression on a philosophy site.
Such threads should probably come with a health warning. Or at least with links to specialist sites and up-to- date evidence.

[Hobbes' Choice]

It seems to me that in many cases treating depression as a disease is a mistake

Very much so. Although there are rare instances in which a sufferer's neurochemistry is seriously affected for either genetic reasons or as a result of brain trauma these cases are few and far between. The disease model is applicable in these rare cases but it has comprehensively been demonstrated to be inapplicable in the vast majority of cases which are currently being diagnosed. Psycho-active drugs can be mildly effective in ameliorating symptoms for brief periods in some sufferers but in the general case they do far more harm than good.

But trying to set "depression" aside and blaming it on "brain chemicals", is ridiculous - you have to ask what lived experience makes you depressed, and change.

It's often not as simple as it sounds for many people but that's about all there is to it. According to the philosophy of the bloody obvious if the way you're living your life is making you miserable then you should live it differently. ( That'll be fifty dollars please).

I know its not that simple. Trying to convince myself to not have that sandwich because I'm a fat bastard is really tough. We tend to be slaves to our inner chimp, and habitual practices win over rationality.
There is no doubt too, that conditions such as schizophrenia, and bipolar, though complex are "real" in the sense that behavioural adjustment can never be enough.
Nonetheless the medicalisation; the invention of new categories of ailment which Pharma seem to have drugs tailor made to alleviate; is harmful - when we think of the tonnage of Ritalin that children are fed for example.

[marjoram_blues]

It seems to me that in many cases treating depression as a disease is a mistake

Very much so. Although there are rare instances in which a sufferer's neurochemistry is seriously affected for either genetic reasons or as a result of brain trauma these cases are few and far between. The disease model is applicable in these rare cases but it has comprehensively been demonstrated to be inapplicable in the vast majority of cases which are currently being diagnosed. Psycho-active drugs can be mildly effective in ameliorating symptoms for brief periods in some sufferers but in the general case they do far more harm than good.

But trying to set "depression" aside and blaming it on "brain chemicals", is ridiculous - you have to ask what lived experience makes you depressed, and change.

It's often not as simple as it sounds for many people but that's about all there is to it. According to the philosophy of the bloody obvious if the way you're living your life is making you miserable then you should live it differently. ( That'll be fifty dollars please).

I know its not that simple. Trying to convince myself to not have that sandwich because I'm a fat bastard is really tough. We tend to be slaves to our inner chimp, and habitual practices win over rationality.
There is no doubt too, that conditions such as schizophrenia, and bipolar, though complex are "real" in the sense that behavioural adjustment can never be enough.
Nonetheless the medicalisation; the invention of new categories of ailment which Pharma seem to have drugs tailor made to alleviate; is harmful - when we think of the tonnage of Ritalin that children are fed for example.

Chattering Chimps Chatter.

[Skip]

My mother became depressed, quite suddenly, at 79. Not sad, not blue, not discontented - full-out clinical depression, with insomnia, free-floating anxiety, some days near-paralysis of will to act. How was she supposed to "change the way she lived her life"? In her case, medicating the symptoms helped substantially. A year later, three tiny tumours were detected in her brain. Three months after that, she died.

One of the friends of whom I spoke, has had symptoms since puberty. No known history of trauma or any event to account for it. Back in the 1950's, not very much would have been done, even if it had occurred to the parents to seek medical help. Instead, they kept telling the child "Stop dwelling on yourself!" "Buck up!" "Don't be such a misery!"(They were British.) My other friend suffered prolonged, unremitting emotional abuse in a fundamentalist xtian family in a religious prairie town; didn't manage to escape until age 21, by when the damage to their self-esteem was profound.
How were these children supposed to "change the way they live their life"?

There may be any number of causes for depression - the illness. There may be even more causes for unhappiness - the normal emotion. The difference is: in the second case, the cause can be readily determined, even if not readily remedied.

[Dalek Prime]

How does that old song go? 'You make me sooooo, verrrry happyyyy....'. [Blood Sweat & Tears].

Mr Dalek...love you though i do... please re edit your post at the start of this page so that i am not quoted stating your words, and you are not quoted with my little gag. (i do apologise, i was kidding - although fairly often i do wish a meteor would destroy this planet of idiots.)

Sorry atto. Formatting issue rectified. And I realise you were kidding. All good.

[Hobbes' Choice]

My mother became depressed, quite suddenly, at 79. Not sad, not blue, not discontented - full-out clinical depression, with insomnia, free-floating anxiety, some days near-paralysis of will to act. How was she supposed to "change the way she lived her life"? In her case, medicating the symptoms helped substantially. A year later, three tiny tumours were detected in her brain. Three months after that, she died.

One of the friends of whom I spoke, has had symptoms since puberty. No known history of trauma or any event to account for it. Back in the 1950's, not very much would have been done, even if it had occurred to the parents to seek medical help. Instead, they kept telling the child "Stop dwelling on yourself!" "Buck up!" "Don't be such a misery!"(They were British.) My other friend suffered prolonged, unremitting emotional abuse in a fundamentalist xtian family in a religious prairie town; didn't manage to escape until age 21, by when the damage to their self-esteem was profound.
How were these children supposed to "change the way they live their life"?

There may be any number of causes for depression - the illness. There may be even more causes for unhappiness - the normal emotion. The difference is: in the second case, the cause can be readily determined, even if not readily remedied.

There is no normal. There is no natural expectancy to live a happy life. You don't get to choose your parents, nor the emergence of brain tumours.
But I do not see any of these cases as benefiting from drugs except in the short term.
There is no "remedy" for mental illness, as the "disease" is "YOU". Treatments for most mental illness are a remedy for the person as the person embodies the ailment.
The only solution is change.

For myself, my teens were a living hell of oppression, violence and implied violence. It took most of my twenties to find myself a way of thinking myself out of that pain. But that history made me who I am, for good or ill. My brother did not fair so well and has been saddled with profound schizophrenia. Hard drugs make him another person; a person that can live with himself.

[Skip]

There is no normal.

Easy to say; hard to get the rest of the world to accept your special drummer. Yes, there is a range of perception, functioning and behaviours that a given society considers normal: acceptable, unremarkable, expected.

There is no natural expectancy to live a happy life. You don't get to choose your parents, nor the emergence of brain tumours.

That's no reason to suffer unnecessarily. There is no guarantee that you won't have appendicitis, but if you do, it would be stupid to refuse surgery.

But I do not see any of these cases as benefiting from drugs except in the short term.

Sometimes the short term is all there is. If pills keep you from driving into the abutment for just long enough for some experienced person to teach you a better coping strategy, or until you can figure out what chemicals the factory up-river has been dumping illegally (or even legally), then the pills are useful. At other times, some form of medication, in conjunction with other kinds of therapy, can be very helpful in the long terms, as well. Ideally, you should try to do without, but I certainly don't condemn trying whatever relives pain. Pain sucks - why choose it?

There is no "remedy" for mental illness, as the "disease" is "YOU". Treatments for most mental illness are a remedy for the person as the person embodies the ailment.

Not necessarily. There are too many possible causes of too many mental illnesses to make that blanket statement.

For myself, my teens were a living hell of oppression, violence and implied violence. It took most of my twenties to find myself a way of thinking myself out of that pain. But that history made me who I am, for good or ill. My brother did not fair so well and has been saddled with profound schizophrenia. Hard drugs make him another person; a person that can live with himself.

That, too, is a change. Your being strong enough to overcome a bad past or my being lucky enough to get out in time says nothing about any other person's circumstances. We don't even know anyone's genetic predispositions, let alone how differently two personalities may be affected by the same environment.

[Obvious Leo]

Sometimes the short term is all there is. If pills keep you from driving into the abutment for just long enough for some experienced person to teach you a better coping strategy, or until you can figure out what chemicals the factory up-river has been dumping illegally (or even legally), then the pills are useful. At other times, some form of medication, in conjunction with other kinds of therapy, can be very helpful in the long terms, as well. Ideally, you should try to do without, but I certainly don't condemn trying whatever relives pain. Pain sucks - why choose it?

This is a bit closer to the point which I was trying to make, skip, and I can assure you that I have ample personal experience of the issues involved, both in my own case and in the case of other people who are very dear to me. There are significant changes in the wind when it comes to therapies for depressive illness and in my view many of these changes are tending towards a far more holistic approach which relies a bit less on neurochemical intervention and a bit more on why such neurochemical imbalances come about in the first place. Ameliorating symptoms remains an important component of psychiatric medicine but confusing this requirement with the more traditional goal of medicine to seek a "cure" for such imbalances has led to a lot of unforeseen problems for a lot of people. I regard it as a positive thing that this fact is nowadays being more widely recognised by the medical profession and I completely agree with Hobbes that this applies particularly to the question of treating behavioural disorders in children with mind-altering substances, the long-term effects of which are almost completely unknown.