4 ms·

Diagnosing more people does not necessarily mean diagnosis is improving, especially when the criteria are purely subjective (and there are perverse incentives f

• 50656E6973 7y ago
  Indeed, there is a huge conflict of interest and positive feedback loop: 69% of the DSM-5 task force had ties to the pharmaceutical industry. Diagnosis rates grow each year, and the number of ambiguously defined mental illnesses increases with every revision of the DSM. These data points are used as justification for further increases in funding, which in turn increases diagnosis rates. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-5#Criticism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-5#Criticism
  • krageon 7y ago
    While I do agree that you can see some of the industry and view it as a huge problem, the "ambiguously defined mental illnesses" are easily explained to be a result of the fundamentally subjective nature of the field itself. We don't need "pharmaceutical industry" conspiracies to explain why things are going where they are going.
    • TheOperator 7y ago
      I would actually blame insurance companies more than pharmacutical companies for the trajectory of the mental health field as they won't give doctors money to treat their patients if they don't first slap their patients with a stigmatised label. This pressure increases the pressure to make it so more of the population is defined as being mentally ill so they can get medical treatment.
    • 50656E6973 7y ago
      You don't think conflicts of interest can create perverse incentives or be problematic? Conflict of interest != criminal conspiracy