OrgoneConclusion said:

Are you saying psychiatrist researchers would not want to understand which therapies are best?

---

Veritas said:

johnm214 said:

Right now it appears that our moods are caused by our brain chemistry.  That something else causes brain chemsitry is irrelevant.

---

It is irrelevant that our thoughts change our brain chemistry?    For me, this concept is one of the most empowering I have ever heard.  We create and sustain our emotional states by communicating with ourselves about what events mean.

OK, just in case that wasn't emphasized enough:

!!!!!!

We create and sustain our emotional states by communicating with ourselves about what events mean.

The chemicals within our brain are not activating themselves, they are not in control of the show.  WE are in control of the show, or out of control if we choose to abdicate our responsibility.

---

Veritas said:

Note that I said "most," not "all."  I'm well aware of our ability to generate new brain cells.  To be clear, though, these new cells are NOT being created from glial cells.  Neural stem cells are solely responsible for neurogenesis.  Interestingly enough, neurogenesis appears to be suppressed or decreased by depression.

What is important to remember is that we are far more affected by our axonal network than we are by the presence of new neurons.  It is equivocal whether these new neurons actually promote learning, as it has not been adequately demonstrated that this is a benefit of neurogenesis.  New neurons appear to be restricted to the hippocampus and the olfactory bulb, so their participation in neuroplasticity is limited.

Neuroplasticity is far more dependent upon reconfiguration of the axonal connections between existing neurons, which are responsive to our thoughts.  When we continue to think in rigid, habituated ways, we simply broaden the existing connections.  But new, innovative thoughts must generate new connections, and thus reconfigure our neural network.

---

MushmanTheManic said:

The American Journal of Psychiatry is industry-sponsored research.

---

OrgoneConclusion said:

1. An accusation is not counterpoint.

2. Research, validation/invalidation have no place in science?

3. Point out the flaws in the study.

---

johnm214 said:

Are you sayin gthe journal altered this article?  That they were secretly the authors?

---

Quote:

That the methods were bad or the conclusions unsound?  The evidence made up?

---

Quote:

Are you saying that "industry" pays for every article in that journal?  I don't know what your point is as to this specific article.  Nobody cares about the journal.

---

Quote:

Or are we just arguing that we should make taxpayers pay for every new drug being evaluated and/or researched (with or without the FDA) all through the pipeline?  Somehow I don't think socializing such is in our nation's best interest.  Guess we could just forget about reasearch

---

No, we aren't arguing about that.

OrgoneConclusion said:

Quote:

Don't accuse me of ducking when I've responded to your questions & you haven't produced a single shred of evidence. 

---

I have produced much evidence for the strong correlation between chemical factors and depression.

Now that I have provided a valid clinical and unbiased study of CBT, will you change your mind?

Of course not - emotional investment and all...

---

Valid, clinical & unbiased?  Sure, if you say so.  This review of the literature is highly selective.  None of the major studies of CBT were included in their "comprehensive" analysis of CBT research.  As a Psychology major, I am quite familiar with the rules regarding a review of the literature.  This article clearly disregards those rules.  Fail.

Please note that I have continually acknowledged the chemical component of depression.  You keep pretending that I am ducking this issue, or denying that it exists.  One more time: I AGREE THAT THERE IS A CHEMICAL COMPONENT TO DEPRESSION.  Was that clear enough? 

What you've claimed is that cognitive methods have no effect on depression.  I've presented clear evidence that this is not true.  Now you're saying that anti-depressants are also completely ineffective in the treatment of depression, and pretending that your citation supported this assertion.  If you'll read it over again, it clearly states that mild depression does not show a clinically-significant response to anti-depressants.  This is far from proof that neither anti-depressants nor CBT are effective in the treatment of depression.

I'm not sure why you are so emotionally invested in believing that I am emotionally invested.  I've stated several times that I agree that there are many factors involved in depression.  The difference is, I'm also stating that we can take control of many of these factors through cognitive changes and lifestyle changes.  I've provided support for this assertion, yet you continue to slant this debate by claiming that I am ducking your questions & failing to refute your arguments.  WTF?? 

Quote:

The point is that there is no evidence that women decide to do negative self talk during this time and then positive self talk after the mood disorder passes.

Yet you and V both seem to believe that positive self talk will bring them out of this.

Perhaps those with sever head trauma that have totally changed personalities can also talk themselves back to normalcy.

---

Perhaps you're giving my words a new interpretation, because I have never said that women are not affected by PMS. What I said was that it is not something that awful and uncontrollable, and that, if the woman has the intention to get out of it, she can reason her way out. Also I have said that those who don't (the so-called "Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder" ), usually seem to have a general problem with handling their emotions properly.
Here Is more information on it:

Quote:

There are 3 broad approaches to treating PMDD. While most experts recommend a combination of all 3, there have been no scientific studies to determine if combination treatment is really the best approach. It is likely that the best approach or combination of approaches will vary from woman to woman based on things like symptom severity and which symptoms are most troublesome.

Here are the 3 approaches with some examples of each:

  1. Medications - including antidepressants, antianxiety drugs, analgesics, hormones and diuretics.
  2. Psychobehavioral - including exercise and psychotherapies (cognitive-behavioral, coping skills training, relaxation).
  3. Nutritional - including diet modification, vitamins, minerals and herbal preparations.

---

While the medication treatment is one of the three options, cognitive therapy and diet modifications are also two other suggested therapies. Now you personally admitted that medical treatment is ineffective, so I don't understand where you're trying to get with all that. You insist that there is a chemical imbalance taking place in depressions, but I have never stated otherwise. What I have said was that this can be changed through personal means (a change of life style and attitude), as opposed to anti depressants which don't work anyways. :shrug3:

I also have my personal experience, and I have experienced both sides of the story. When I let myself carried away by those feelings everything feels out of control (and we all know how misleading feelings can be, especially when one is being deprived of reasoning ), and each time I am staying focused and reason my way out of it, everything works just fine.
My mother however, who has a very irrational personality and usually has strong emotions about everything, could never get out of her PMS, exactly because she refuses to apply critical thinking to her emotions, because she thinks that it is entirely wrong to deny what's natural (aka emotions ).

Quote:

If either depression or ecstasy can be induced in otherwise healthy people solely through chemical means with behaviour modification, then perhaps those undergoing severe depression MAY NOT BE VICTIMS OF THEIR OWN NEGATIVE SELF TALK, but some other factor altogether.

---

No again.
In the E case, there is strong evidence to show what's causing the ecstatic feelings to someone (the pill - without it there would be no effects), while in a depression case there is nothing palpable to be found as a cause for it. Also, like I have already stated, one CAN talk oneself out of feeling good while rolling, directly into a state of anxiety and chaos, solely by the power of their thoughts, which is prove enough that the same thing can go for one talking their way out of depression. 
Moreso, "perhaps" and "some other facts" are way too vague terms to be taken to account.

johnm214 said:

Your original point seemed to suggest that we are born as we are, being us or 'I' as was said, due to a posited glut of neurons set in place that die off leaving us with our matured selves. 

---

Veritas said:

From the link I posted earlier:

Quote:

The preponderance of the available scientific evidence shows that psychological interventions, particularly cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBTs), are generally as effective or more effective than medications in the treatment of depression, even if severe, for both vegetative and social adjustment symptoms, especially when patient-rate measures and long-term follow-up are considered.

---

CBT also has a lower drop-out rate, because it does not have the severe side-effects of medications.

---

Quote:

One more time: I AGREE THAT THERE IS A CHEMICAL COMPONENT TO DEPRESSION.  Was that clear enough? 

---

Quote:

tripp23 said: what is one that kills another is a way of god's actual plan of saying it's their time to go. does anybody see where im coming from?

---

Quote:

So from my experience and in talking to others IMO, early childhood trauma causes the stressors that eventually result in an out of balance brain chemistry leading to depression

---