3 ms·

This needs to be reiterated. Even though he mentioned it multiple times, and you addressed it, it can't be overstated: there are people whose emotional turmoil

by jiganti 16y ago

This needs to be reiterated. Even though he mentioned it multiple times, and you addressed it, it can't be overstated: there are people whose emotional turmoil is not cured by any amount of cognitive help. These people are disproportionately more creative than the average person, and are lauded "mad geniuses". As a result, others (and I'm not accusing the author for this) jump on the bandwagon, mentioning their mood swings as a way to emphasize their bouts of creativity. I've even heard the occasional self-diagnosed bipolar declare it worth the suffering. This does a disservice to those who spend decades on medication, 20% of whom eventually end their own life. Many of us who like to call ourselves creative might have our days or weeks of mild depression or mania, but our ability to have a simple perspective change return us to normalcy distinguishes us from them.

vgr 16y ago
True. That's why I took care to separate out the clinical cases as carefully as I could. The reverse is also true: people who can be helped by cognitive reframings may not find medication useful. In fact, it can make things worse. A significant proportion of patients on depression and bipolar meds get worse, not better. I have no problem admitting that I have been on medication a couple of times, for brief periods. It was a long time ago, and so ineffective/counterproductive for me that it was the kick in the pants I needed to decide to take control of my life at a more cognitive level. It convinced me that meds are vastly overprescribed for what might be called "existential" illnesses. That experience did inform my post. But there is an aspect of this stuff that is perhaps even bigger than the mild/severe distinction and the pop-psych/clinical psych distinction. This is the fact that professional or amateur, anybody who thinks they actually understand more than 10% of this sort of thing is a liar. I wouldn't trust any professional who refused to admit that we just don't understand 90% of what's going on, at either a cognitive or biochemical level. There is as much bs spouted by the supposed "professionals" about serotonin as there is by amateurs like me opining about how to climb out of slumps. Not that I think my stuff is bs, but my kind of writing belongs in a category with more than its fair share of bs :) Venkat

by jiganti 16y ago

vgr 16y ago

True. That's why I took care to separate out the clinical cases as carefully as I could. The reverse is also true: people who can be helped by cognitive reframings may not find medication useful. In fact, it can make things worse. A significant proportion of patients on depression and bipolar meds get worse, not better. I have no problem admitting that I have been on medication a couple of times, for brief periods. It was a long time ago, and so ineffective/counterproductive for me that it was the kick in the pants I needed to decide to take control of my life at a more cognitive level. It convinced me that meds are vastly overprescribed for what might be called "existential" illnesses. That experience did inform my post. But there is an aspect of this stuff that is perhaps even bigger than the mild/severe distinction and the pop-psych/clinical psych distinction. This is the fact that professional or amateur, anybody who thinks they actually understand more than 10% of this sort of thing is a liar. I wouldn't trust any professional who refused to admit that we just don't understand 90% of what's going on, at either a cognitive or biochemical level. There is as much bs spouted by the supposed "professionals" about serotonin as there is by amateurs like me opining about how to climb out of slumps. Not that I think my stuff is bs, but my kind of writing belongs in a category with more than its fair share of bs :) Venkat