3 ms·

Bolts of lightning can be factually wrong, it sounds.

bwood 4y ago
Sure, but it would be more constructive to explain why it's wrong. GP's comment has some interesting ideas and it would be better to directly refute them than just claiming they're "factually wrong".
- klodolph 4y ago
  Sorry, thought it would be obvious. > Depression is a disease of despair, > The question is really how to address the despair. It's known that people have genetic predispositions to depression. People experience depression due to many causes. Not all causes are known and we don't have very good understanding of the mechanisms, but it's just not damn likely that we can treat this as a purely psychological / environmental issue.
lettergram 4y ago
No doubt, but this article is about how the SSRIs don’t seem to be effective. To be clear a disorder (ie depression disorder) can be caused by a variety of factors, including (but not limited to): genetics, environment, trauma, illness, etc. Given that’s the case, some drugs may help ease symptoms (depression being the symptom), but finding and correcting the root cause (if possible) is important. Unfortunately, the medical industry as a whole has very little reason to try and “cure” these diseases / disorders. Why would a therapist? Why would a pharmaceutical company? Recurring revenue to ease symptoms is perfect. Which imo is why this is often not discussed. The vast majority of the research money is poured into drug research or clinical research around therapies. Often this overlooks other avenues — one which I mentioned.
- amanaplanacanal 4y ago
  > this article is about how the SSRIs don’t seem to be effective. I believe they can be effective in reducing depression, it just has nothing to do with serotonin.
- klodolph 4y ago
  > No doubt, but this article is about how the SSRIs don’t seem to be effective. Where does the article say that? > Given that’s the case, some drugs may help ease symptoms (depression being the symptom), but finding and correcting the root cause (if possible) is important. It's not for lack of trying. > Unfortunately, the medical industry as a whole has very little reason to try and “cure” these diseases / disorders. Why would a therapist? Why would a pharmaceutical company? Recurring revenue to ease symptoms is perfect. That explanation doesn't have any legs. By this theory, dentists have no incentives for prophylaxis, but in practice, that's a large part of what dentists do and it's very effective. By this theory, the medical industry wouldn't choose to eradicate any infections diseases, since it can make money from treatment. It turns out we can and do eradicate infectious diseases, but it is difficult, expensive, and time-consuming. We've only successfully eradicated two infectious diseases and only one of those affects humans in the first place. If you look at other infectious diseases, there are tons of diseases which can be outright cured and tons which can't. This isn't for lack of trying, it's just that these diseases are different. You can kill bacteria with antibiotics, but if you get HIV, the best we can do is antiretroviral therapy. Treatment of symptoms with pharmaceuticals is often a rational, good decision. There are simply too many diseases for which we don't have any known cure. Depression is one of them. The disease is too complicated, or the cure is too difficult, or our understanding of depression is too primitive, or some combination of all three. So we have stuff like SSRIs, which are known to work for some people.
  - lettergram 4y ago
    > The disease is too complicated, or the cure is too difficult, or our understanding of depression is too primitive, or some combination of all three. I don’t think we disagree in almost any of this. I’m simply pointing out depression may be caused by environmental factors, one which can be treated. It could be why they found “nothing convincing” in the study. I have yet to meet a depressed person or almost any person who couldn’t use more community. I suspect most peoples depression is a rational / emotional response to lack of basic needs of some kind. Whether that’s community, sleep, job, food, etc That’s not to say all people have environmental factors or that drugs can’t help people cope. I’m merely sharing what struck me and for some reason hadn’t clicked with me prior, even seeing people get out of depression. The people I know who overcame depression all did the following: worked out, improved sleep patterns, joined some activities. One could argue correlation (ie as depression reduced, they became more active). But it didn’t seem that way looking in. Anyway, just an observation and contemplation really.

Sure, but it would be more constructive to explain why it's wrong. GP's comment has some interesting ideas and it would be better to directly refute them than just claiming they're "factually wrong".

klodolph 4y ago
Sorry, thought it would be obvious. > Depression is a disease of despair, > The question is really how to address the despair. It's known that people have genetic predispositions to depression. People experience depression due to many causes. Not all causes are known and we don't have very good understanding of the mechanisms, but it's just not damn likely that we can treat this as a purely psychological / environmental issue.

lettergram 4y ago

No doubt, but this article is about how the SSRIs don’t seem to be effective. To be clear a disorder (ie depression disorder) can be caused by a variety of factors, including (but not limited to): genetics, environment, trauma, illness, etc. Given that’s the case, some drugs may help ease symptoms (depression being the symptom), but finding and correcting the root cause (if possible) is important. Unfortunately, the medical industry as a whole has very little reason to try and “cure” these diseases / disorders. Why would a therapist? Why would a pharmaceutical company? Recurring revenue to ease symptoms is perfect. Which imo is why this is often not discussed. The vast majority of the research money is poured into drug research or clinical research around therapies. Often this overlooks other avenues — one which I mentioned.

amanaplanacanal 4y ago
> this article is about how the SSRIs don’t seem to be effective. I believe they can be effective in reducing depression, it just has nothing to do with serotonin.
klodolph 4y ago
> No doubt, but this article is about how the SSRIs don’t seem to be effective. Where does the article say that? > Given that’s the case, some drugs may help ease symptoms (depression being the symptom), but finding and correcting the root cause (if possible) is important. It's not for lack of trying. > Unfortunately, the medical industry as a whole has very little reason to try and “cure” these diseases / disorders. Why would a therapist? Why would a pharmaceutical company? Recurring revenue to ease symptoms is perfect. That explanation doesn't have any legs. By this theory, dentists have no incentives for prophylaxis, but in practice, that's a large part of what dentists do and it's very effective. By this theory, the medical industry wouldn't choose to eradicate any infections diseases, since it can make money from treatment. It turns out we can and do eradicate infectious diseases, but it is difficult, expensive, and time-consuming. We've only successfully eradicated two infectious diseases and only one of those affects humans in the first place. If you look at other infectious diseases, there are tons of diseases which can be outright cured and tons which can't. This isn't for lack of trying, it's just that these diseases are different. You can kill bacteria with antibiotics, but if you get HIV, the best we can do is antiretroviral therapy. Treatment of symptoms with pharmaceuticals is often a rational, good decision. There are simply too many diseases for which we don't have any known cure. Depression is one of them. The disease is too complicated, or the cure is too difficult, or our understanding of depression is too primitive, or some combination of all three. So we have stuff like SSRIs, which are known to work for some people.
- lettergram 4y ago
  > The disease is too complicated, or the cure is too difficult, or our understanding of depression is too primitive, or some combination of all three. I don’t think we disagree in almost any of this. I’m simply pointing out depression may be caused by environmental factors, one which can be treated. It could be why they found “nothing convincing” in the study. I have yet to meet a depressed person or almost any person who couldn’t use more community. I suspect most peoples depression is a rational / emotional response to lack of basic needs of some kind. Whether that’s community, sleep, job, food, etc That’s not to say all people have environmental factors or that drugs can’t help people cope. I’m merely sharing what struck me and for some reason hadn’t clicked with me prior, even seeing people get out of depression. The people I know who overcame depression all did the following: worked out, improved sleep patterns, joined some activities. One could argue correlation (ie as depression reduced, they became more active). But it didn’t seem that way looking in. Anyway, just an observation and contemplation really.