Comments for 1 Boring Old Man

Comment on speechless… by Mickey

Mickey — Thu, 24 May 2012 02:51:34 +0000

I already did [write my congress-critter]…

Comment on speechless… by Altostrata

Altostrata — Thu, 24 May 2012 02:47:20 +0000

Write your congresscritter.

Comment on speechless… by Tom

Tom — Thu, 24 May 2012 02:05:49 +0000

I am sorry but I misread the article. You are right, Mickey. It’s 400k a year for five years for a tidy sum of 2 million. That ain’t no bone. Now I am really pissed.

Comment on speechless… by Mickey

Mickey — Thu, 24 May 2012 01:43:07 +0000

I like your interpretation. I was thinking it was 400 K/year for 5 years [$2 M]. Still a travesty, but a lesser bleed…

Comment on speechless… by Tom

Tom — Thu, 24 May 2012 01:38:50 +0000

The fact that even a penny of my tax money is granted to Nemeroff rubs me the wrong way. And I agree that the justification for this study, as Nick Stuart points out, is pure hyperbole. But I find it interesting that the grant is for 400K over five years– 80K a year. I may be wrong, but Nemeroff, in his old high flying days, was used to getting grants 10 times this monetary value from NIH. I wonder if he is being thrown a bone.

Comment on speechless… by Mickey

Mickey — Wed, 23 May 2012 16:35:21 +0000

…his findings must come to him in trances. They’re rarely from things the rest of us see, but often in this form – apocalyptic public health predictions…

Comment on speechless… by Nick Stuart

Nick Stuart — Wed, 23 May 2012 16:28:15 +0000

‘Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is one of the most highly prevalent psychiatric disorders and its prevalence is likely increasing in the United States and worldwide due to the rising numbers of natural disasters (earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis), man-made disasters (oil spills), terrorism and wars, as well as violent crime and automobile accidents.’

Really? Really? There is absolutely no evidence for this happening at all. How did this guy get his funding?

Comment on to take us seriously… by Henry Hall

Henry Hall — Wed, 23 May 2012 15:50:03 +0000

The time has come and gone to petition the American Psychiatric Association to change. It did not work.

IT IS NOW TIME to petition the US Government – i.e. the Obama administration – to use its political power to force an independent scientific review.

The government easily has the power to do this. For example they can prohibit the use, in a Medicare or Obamacare context, of authority based on any new (2013 onwards) DSM that has not yet had independent scientific review. That effectively kills the DSM in the USA until the review is completed.

The petition must however come from a well respected mental health professional group and be addressed to the right person(s) within government.

Comment on to take us seriously… by jamzo

jamzo — Wed, 23 May 2012 15:09:09 +0000

FYI article by blogger Mind Hacks for the Discover Magazine’s blog The Crux on what the DSM diagnostic manual is supposed to do.

http://mindhacks.com/

“it asks – how do we define mental illness – both in theory and in practice?”

“It also discusses the old and possibly futile quest for ‘biological tests for mental illness’ as if there is a perfect mapping between how we classify mental states and how the brain actually works at the neurobiological level.”

Link to ‘What Is the “Bible of Psychiatry” Supposed to Do?’

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2012/05/22/what-is-the-bible-of-psychiatry-supposed-to-do-the-peculiar-challenges-of-an-uncertain-science/

Comment on to take us seriously… by Steve

Steve — Wed, 23 May 2012 14:31:08 +0000

FYI, the psych world is a flutter about this study:

http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.2044

Thoughts?