4 ms·

As tokenadult said, this is probably depression. Have it treated by a psychiatrist and realize it's likely a chemical imbalance.

FluidDjango 16y ago
A chemical imbalance may be involved. But better biochemistry doesn't necessarily produce better living/feeling. Depressed emotional/behavior state < -- > biochemistry. [can spiral upward or downward together] A psychologist/ licensed counselor / psychotherapist [ i.e., "talk therapy ] can be really important to help your cognitive processes, keep you on track with reality checks. "Meds" are not magic bullets, do not kick in immediately, and it may take several tries to find one that helps you. Meanwhile, if you don't have sufficiently supportive/sophisticated social network around you, it's important to pay for an experienced professional. Been there. Best of luck.
gruseom 16y ago
Actually, the chemical imbalance theory is largely a fairy tale that persists because (a) pharmaceutical companies want it to and (b) patients want pat explanations from their doctors. A few months ago there was an interview with a psychiatrist (I think on Fresh Air) who said that honesty would compel him to say, "Take this drug, there's some evidence that it may help you but we have no idea why," but patients won't stand for it. It's pretty interesting that an idea that dominates popular consciousness so completely right now (depression is a chemical imbalance, take a pill) has such a flimsy basis.
- hga 16y ago
  Indeed, the "chemical imbalance" theory is only that (and doesn't actually explain much, anyway), really isn't directly supported by evidence and is more likely representative of our need for "explanations". That said, we have empirically observed that if you poke the brain in a certain area with a stick, it will help the depression of many people. We're even on our 3rd generation of sticks (MAOI -> tricycilics -> SSRIs etc.) From the viewpoint of someone needing relief or the doctor who's trying to help, when e.g. its been found that cognitive-behavior therapy isn't enough (that's something to always try) or something needs to be done before it can be tried, why they work hardly matters given that we have enough experience with the side effects to know they seem to be a good trade-off for the therapeutic effect. How long was it before we understood how aspirin works?
  - gruseom 16y ago
    But the studies show that for the vast majority of people (that is, everyone except the extremely depressed) antidepressants perform no better than placebo. Doesn't that astonishing fact change things a little? The only reason we believe otherwise is that for many years positive findings were cherry-picked for publication while negative ones were suppressed. It took a Freedom of Information Act request and years of litigation to get access to the full spectrum of studies, and when they were finally surveyed, the statistical impact was negligible. (Except, as mentioned, for the small portion of the patient base who meet the criteria for severe depression. I don't remember the number.) Far be it from me to condemn anything that truly helps people, but there is a lot of spin on this topic. Profit motive plus cultural bias is a hell of a double whammy.

FluidDjango 16y ago

A chemical imbalance may be involved. But better biochemistry doesn't necessarily produce better living/feeling. Depressed emotional/behavior state < -- > biochemistry. [can spiral upward or downward together] A psychologist/ licensed counselor / psychotherapist [ i.e., "talk therapy ] can be really important to help your cognitive processes, keep you on track with reality checks. "Meds" are not magic bullets, do not kick in immediately, and it may take several tries to find one that helps you. Meanwhile, if you don't have sufficiently supportive/sophisticated social network around you, it's important to pay for an experienced professional. Been there. Best of luck.

gruseom 16y ago

Actually, the chemical imbalance theory is largely a fairy tale that persists because (a) pharmaceutical companies want it to and (b) patients want pat explanations from their doctors. A few months ago there was an interview with a psychiatrist (I think on Fresh Air) who said that honesty would compel him to say, "Take this drug, there's some evidence that it may help you but we have no idea why," but patients won't stand for it. It's pretty interesting that an idea that dominates popular consciousness so completely right now (depression is a chemical imbalance, take a pill) has such a flimsy basis.

hga 16y ago
Indeed, the "chemical imbalance" theory is only that (and doesn't actually explain much, anyway), really isn't directly supported by evidence and is more likely representative of our need for "explanations". That said, we have empirically observed that if you poke the brain in a certain area with a stick, it will help the depression of many people. We're even on our 3rd generation of sticks (MAOI -> tricycilics -> SSRIs etc.) From the viewpoint of someone needing relief or the doctor who's trying to help, when e.g. its been found that cognitive-behavior therapy isn't enough (that's something to always try) or something needs to be done before it can be tried, why they work hardly matters given that we have enough experience with the side effects to know they seem to be a good trade-off for the therapeutic effect. How long was it before we understood how aspirin works?
- gruseom 16y ago
  But the studies show that for the vast majority of people (that is, everyone except the extremely depressed) antidepressants perform no better than placebo. Doesn't that astonishing fact change things a little? The only reason we believe otherwise is that for many years positive findings were cherry-picked for publication while negative ones were suppressed. It took a Freedom of Information Act request and years of litigation to get access to the full spectrum of studies, and when they were finally surveyed, the statistical impact was negligible. (Except, as mentioned, for the small portion of the patient base who meet the criteria for severe depression. I don't remember the number.) Far be it from me to condemn anything that truly helps people, but there is a lot of spin on this topic. Profit motive plus cultural bias is a hell of a double whammy.