4 ms·

this is absolutely correct. i had a psychotic break last year, really bad. i was put on intensive medications, which made it easier to fit into normal every d

this is absolutely correct. i had a psychotic break last year, really bad. i was put on intensive medications, which made it easier to fit into normal every day interaction, but also made me tired, depressed and, ultimately, more psychotic. all of the times i've experienced psychosis, it's been a defensive mechanism that my mind uses to explain why i'm feeling so shitty - so taking medicine that is exhausting, makes me gain weight and have trouble focusing just made the problem worse. the meds stopped the immediately frighting and bizzare imagines my mind presented to me, but they didn't go away - they just changed into longer term, ultimately more frighting images that still scared me, but in a way that was more conducive to my behaving in a way that everybody else expected. i would believe i was trapped inside something like the matrix, where everything i did on the inside had intense consequences for people outside my reality; failing to wash my hands after using the restroom would cause millions to die far away. one of the 'rules' the psychosis imposed on me was that i could never talk about what i was struggling with because that would break the matrix and cause even worse problems. it's pretty easy to see in retrospect that it was entirely metaphorical; the 'matrix' stands for the world of social convention, and small risks that add up over time (i.e. not washing hands or brushing teeth) were presented as catastrophic nightmares in order to make sure i focused on resolving them. over the course of the past year i've slowly reduced the usage of these psychotropic medications - with approval from my psychiatrist - and with increased amounts of energy and happiness, i no longer have as much of the psychosis. the issue i can see with all of this is that treatment for mental health issues requires love, patience and careful attention from a lot of people over a long time; if you ask me, our society does not want to give that to people for fear of being taken advantage by some unscrupulous people who would feign mental illness to get out of work. i don't know what a solution would be, but i agree with you - these meds do more to help everybody else than the patients themselves.

wuschel 13y ago
I am sorry for you and wish you the very best. I would not condemn anti-psychotic medication just because 1. we do not understand the brain and thus are not able to design more sophisticated methods to treat this terrible decease 2. many patients suffer from terrible side effects. Thanks to some new generation anti-psychotic drugs (e.g. Risperidol, Abilify, etc) many a person who has the misfortune to suffer from psychosis can return to their daily live - and by this I mean that the person can do more then just 'function'. Of course, his ability to do so depends on the severity of psychosis and dosis of medication. I know a person who learned to live with his psychosis and has greatly improved his quality of life in the recent two years.. to such a degree that he may complete his (ambitious) studies and get a job. Medication was one of the key factors for his well being, other were a long series of psychologic treatments and support from his surrounding. It also true that in societies where the access to anti-psychotic drugs is restricted (e.g. lack of a pharmaceutical industry) a completely different development of the person is observed, not necessarily in a negative way. However, the nature of psychosis is deeply connected with genetic (hard) and enviromental (soft) factors, such as family, society, experience as a child, etc - so no actual comparison can be made between those patient groups. Right now, there is no solution to this phenomenon of brain disfunction, and research has a long way to go to understand the structural changes in the brain of psychotic persons during their beginning adolescence and possible treatment. At the end, stigmatization of psychosis should be avoided, as should be any general magic recipe - every patient is a single case who deserves the best treatment and support from his family and friends.
- Maria1987 13y ago
  Just a short note on the "we do not understand the brain and thus are not able to design more sophisticated methods to treat this terrible decease" Allow me to disagree. We do not need to understand how the brain works in order to be able to find treatments for all the different mental deceases. Its all trials and errors, hypothesis -> testing -> result, again and again and again until a final conclusion! I have spend a lot of years researching the brain, the black box which everyone wants to understand but no-one has any clue about it and more specifically Alzheimer's disease (not in a pharmaceutical company but in academia). From my experience, we don't need to understand how something works if we know what is the most likely outcome for a given input. I was lucky enough to test different types of drugs, their long term and short term effects, how useful they are and of course what effects have in behaviour etc. From every single study I could put a piece of puzzle right there and be able to see a clearer picture of what's going on, make hypothesis, tests hypotheses, have controls, tests controls etc. I obviously have no clue how the brain works but for those things I checked I know: Given an input -> Brain -> I get an particular output most likely* From that (and of course many control studies), I could trust that this drugs will most likely give me the predicted output. And that's how research is done..Is not always correct but based on that, we managed to be where we are, to have drugs for diseases which in the past killed us and step by step we can move forward and it would be wrong to doubt how much improvement has been done so far by the research community. I am not suggesting you to trust anti-psychotic, just suggesting you that in my personal opinion, is wrong not trusting a drug (which you of course are well aware for advantages/ disadvantages) just because you don't know how brain works...Many other drugs which are for simple diseases actually affect your brain in many similar ways as anti-psychotics.
  - wuschel 13y ago
    Hello Maria, of course you are right: we do possess very advanced tools, starting from the actual design of drugs that target certain receptors selectively, medical trials, production and quality control. What I meant by "we do not understand the brain and thus are not able to design more sophisticated methods to treat this terrible decease" was the fact that most of the time, we are treating symptoms, for we are not sure what the actual causes are. It is great what we can do, but (IMHO) pharmaconeurology still has a long way to go. The actual process of choosing a drug for a patient is somewhat black voodoo magic: If A does not work/has bad side effects, B is prescibed, etc. And of course, due to the nature of our organism, it is impossible (?) that a pharaceulogically active compound has just one system effect/side effect e.g "Aspirin". -- On a side note: could you PM me in which field you are active as an entrepreneur? My email is in my account description. Cheers!
PavlovsCat 13y ago
Whenever I am reading discussions like this and accounts such as yours, I am amazed at the openness displayed. Apart from impressing me, I'm sure that is helpful and encouraging for those still stuck in predicaments you are overcoming, as well as helping society in general, which really needs to stop being so squeamish, ignorant and selfish about mental health. Also, all the best.
enkephalin 13y ago
were you encouraged to try different medications until you found the one with the best efficacy : side effect ratio? more often than not i hear of people being put on medications and being told that med would be best for them, without really evaluating that statement.

wuschel 13y ago

I am sorry for you and wish you the very best. I would not condemn anti-psychotic medication just because 1. we do not understand the brain and thus are not able to design more sophisticated methods to treat this terrible decease 2. many patients suffer from terrible side effects. Thanks to some new generation anti-psychotic drugs (e.g. Risperidol, Abilify, etc) many a person who has the misfortune to suffer from psychosis can return to their daily live - and by this I mean that the person can do more then just 'function'. Of course, his ability to do so depends on the severity of psychosis and dosis of medication. I know a person who learned to live with his psychosis and has greatly improved his quality of life in the recent two years.. to such a degree that he may complete his (ambitious) studies and get a job. Medication was one of the key factors for his well being, other were a long series of psychologic treatments and support from his surrounding. It also true that in societies where the access to anti-psychotic drugs is restricted (e.g. lack of a pharmaceutical industry) a completely different development of the person is observed, not necessarily in a negative way. However, the nature of psychosis is deeply connected with genetic (hard) and enviromental (soft) factors, such as family, society, experience as a child, etc - so no actual comparison can be made between those patient groups. Right now, there is no solution to this phenomenon of brain disfunction, and research has a long way to go to understand the structural changes in the brain of psychotic persons during their beginning adolescence and possible treatment. At the end, stigmatization of psychosis should be avoided, as should be any general magic recipe - every patient is a single case who deserves the best treatment and support from his family and friends.

Maria1987 13y ago
Just a short note on the "we do not understand the brain and thus are not able to design more sophisticated methods to treat this terrible decease" Allow me to disagree. We do not need to understand how the brain works in order to be able to find treatments for all the different mental deceases. Its all trials and errors, hypothesis -> testing -> result, again and again and again until a final conclusion! I have spend a lot of years researching the brain, the black box which everyone wants to understand but no-one has any clue about it and more specifically Alzheimer's disease (not in a pharmaceutical company but in academia). From my experience, we don't need to understand how something works if we know what is the most likely outcome for a given input. I was lucky enough to test different types of drugs, their long term and short term effects, how useful they are and of course what effects have in behaviour etc. From every single study I could put a piece of puzzle right there and be able to see a clearer picture of what's going on, make hypothesis, tests hypotheses, have controls, tests controls etc. I obviously have no clue how the brain works but for those things I checked I know: Given an input -> Brain -> I get an particular output most likely* From that (and of course many control studies), I could trust that this drugs will most likely give me the predicted output. And that's how research is done..Is not always correct but based on that, we managed to be where we are, to have drugs for diseases which in the past killed us and step by step we can move forward and it would be wrong to doubt how much improvement has been done so far by the research community. I am not suggesting you to trust anti-psychotic, just suggesting you that in my personal opinion, is wrong not trusting a drug (which you of course are well aware for advantages/ disadvantages) just because you don't know how brain works...Many other drugs which are for simple diseases actually affect your brain in many similar ways as anti-psychotics.
- wuschel 13y ago
  Hello Maria, of course you are right: we do possess very advanced tools, starting from the actual design of drugs that target certain receptors selectively, medical trials, production and quality control. What I meant by "we do not understand the brain and thus are not able to design more sophisticated methods to treat this terrible decease" was the fact that most of the time, we are treating symptoms, for we are not sure what the actual causes are. It is great what we can do, but (IMHO) pharmaconeurology still has a long way to go. The actual process of choosing a drug for a patient is somewhat black voodoo magic: If A does not work/has bad side effects, B is prescibed, etc. And of course, due to the nature of our organism, it is impossible (?) that a pharaceulogically active compound has just one system effect/side effect e.g "Aspirin". -- On a side note: could you PM me in which field you are active as an entrepreneur? My email is in my account description. Cheers!

PavlovsCat 13y ago

Whenever I am reading discussions like this and accounts such as yours, I am amazed at the openness displayed. Apart from impressing me, I'm sure that is helpful and encouraging for those still stuck in predicaments you are overcoming, as well as helping society in general, which really needs to stop being so squeamish, ignorant and selfish about mental health. Also, all the best.

enkephalin 13y ago

were you encouraged to try different medications until you found the one with the best efficacy : side effect ratio? more often than not i hear of people being put on medications and being told that med would be best for them, without really evaluating that statement.