4 ms·

For all the faults and limitations of mainstream psychiatry (which are varied and substantial), it's pretty much the only game in town with a verified track rec

For all the faults and limitations of mainstream psychiatry (which are varied and substantial), it's pretty much the only game in town with a verified track record. Arguments against mainstream psychiatry are a dime a dozen, but arguments for alternatives tend to be fluffy philosophical assertions and broad-brush accusations of misconduct rather than real-world demonstrations that something else works significantly better (with N >> 1, of course).

andrewvc 11y ago
Yes, but that's comparing mainstream psychiatry to an alternative. Compared to just not doing anything mainstream psych is often bad. See http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/books/greenbergs-book-of-woe-and-francess-saving-normal.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/books/greenbergs-book-of-w...
spangry 11y ago
On the upside, psychiatry and neuroscience are beginning to merge. The disease model of mental illness is such a poor abstraction. And diagnostics in psychiatry is mostly contained to subjective self-reported symptoms. And then treatment is basically a crapshoot; trial and error with antidepressants that don't have well understood causative mechanisms. As neuroimaging becomes ubiquitous and cheaper, it will replace self-reporting as the primary diagnostic tool. At which point we'll be able to do away from the 'DSM disease model' and actually see which 'neural circuits' are dysfunctional. Consequently, medication will be better calibrated and targeted. I really think we're on the verge of a psychiatric revolution, and will all be better off as a result.
throwawaymaroon 11y ago
It would be more accurate and insightful, I think, to note that psychiatry is the attempt at a verified track record. It's not so much that it is the only game in town as it is the result of recording our attempts in a coherent fashion. Its failures point to the difficulty of the problem more than anything.

andrewvc 11y ago

Yes, but that's comparing mainstream psychiatry to an alternative. Compared to just not doing anything mainstream psych is often bad. See http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/books/greenbergs-book-of-woe-and-francess-saving-normal.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/books/greenbergs-book-of-w...

spangry 11y ago

On the upside, psychiatry and neuroscience are beginning to merge. The disease model of mental illness is such a poor abstraction. And diagnostics in psychiatry is mostly contained to subjective self-reported symptoms. And then treatment is basically a crapshoot; trial and error with antidepressants that don't have well understood causative mechanisms. As neuroimaging becomes ubiquitous and cheaper, it will replace self-reporting as the primary diagnostic tool. At which point we'll be able to do away from the 'DSM disease model' and actually see which 'neural circuits' are dysfunctional. Consequently, medication will be better calibrated and targeted. I really think we're on the verge of a psychiatric revolution, and will all be better off as a result.

throwawaymaroon 11y ago

It would be more accurate and insightful, I think, to note that psychiatry is the attempt at a verified track record. It's not so much that it is the only game in town as it is the result of recording our attempts in a coherent fashion. Its failures point to the difficulty of the problem more than anything.