3 ms·
> As true in psychiatry as anything else Wouldn't we expect it to be more true the fewer objective measures there are? Like if a treatment is supposed to impr
by nullc 1y ago
> As true in psychiatry as anything else
Wouldn't we expect it to be more true the fewer objective measures there are? Like if a treatment is supposed to improve blood sugar, and we can measure blood sugar cheaply in real time... we should expect misaligned incentives to have diminished effect compared to something where there is less ability to objectively measure, such as pretty much anything in psychiatry.
- worik 1y agoNot at all. If there is money to be made the medical establishment will put much more effort into that area than if there is not Bringing it back to the DSM: The more human states of mind that can be classified as a "psychiatric illness" the more money there is to be made in marketing various therapies This is glaringly obvious in drug development but it applies to all forms of therapy that can be done in a way with a gate keeper who can charge a toll
- nullc 1y agoI dunno that we disagree. My point was just that its easier to put a finger on the scale when any improvement, non-improvement, or even the existence of a disease itself is more subjective. Like, we can't sell treatment's for people's sixth thumbs because virtually no people have a sixth thumb and it's unambiguous that they don't-- and even among any who do it'll probably be clear if it needs treating or not. But I can sell a treatment for your hyper-meta-ego because who is to say if a person has one of those or not or if my treatment of it is successful or not?