> even if the source of the dysfunction also helps them attain high social status -- why shouldn't treatment be available? The answer is, or should be, obvious

> even if the source of the dysfunction also helps them attain high social status -- why shouldn't treatment be available? The answer is, or should be, obvious. Doctors regularly rise from their microscopes and Petri dishes to announce the existence of real diseases, and get public support for treatments and cures. Psychologists would like to posture as doctors (which is why there are psychiatrists, who are psychologists with M.D. degrees), so they can rise from their notebooks and therapy sessions and announce the existence of new mental illnesses and get public support for treatments (there are no cures). But psychologists are not doctors, and the majority of conditions that psychologists treat are hopelessly subjective conditions on which different practitioners cannot agree. The public doesn't understand this -- they don't understand that mind diseases don't have the standing of body diseases, and the reason this is true is because of a largely successful public relations campaign waged by psychologists to make themselves appear as doctors who treat objective medical conditions. But "sluggish cognitive tempo", this week's illness du jour, is not a disease, it's a way for psychologists to feather their nests. Asperger Syndrome was in the same position ten years ago, but has been retired by a vote of the DSM-5 editorial committee after a public relations debacle of overdiagnosis. About "sluggish cognitive tempo": http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/12/health/idea-of-new-attention-disorder-spurs-research-and-debate.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/12/health/idea-of-new-attenti...