oops - more Big Pharma front groups exposed as "mental health" public campaigns:
Among the first Big Pharma front groups that promoted ”mental illness de-stigmatization campaigns” were the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) and Children and Adults with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (CHADD). Some of the deep-pocketed founding sponsors of NAMI’s, CHADD’s and the other so-called PAOs included Abbott Labs, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Glaxo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, SmithKline Beecham, and Wyeth-Ayerst Labs.
Mainstream Western Psychiatry: Science or Non-science?
the answer is the later of course...
When psychiatrists 50 years from now look back on our current era in psychiatry, they will understand that the diagnosis of paediatric bipolar disorder is the greatest scandal to ever befall psychiatry. (Paris 2012)
The biopsychosocial model: Reality check Niall McLaren First Published January 9, 2021
Let me declare my position: I strongly agree with Engel’s contention that biological reductionism is dehumanising and demeaning.
https://sci-hub.se/10.1177/0004867419887797
We see the same phenomenon in
the United States at present. In an
increasingly fractious exchange, Ronald
Pies (2019), editor of Psychiatric Times,
has insisted that no sensible psychia-
trist has ever used the expression
‘chemical imbalance of the brain’, that
there never was a ‘chemical imbalance
theory of mental disorder’. Instead, he
says, psychiatry has been guided for
decades by the biopsychosocial model
of mental disorder, attributed to the
late George Engel. This is a little sur-
prising, as I showed in 1998 that Engel
never got around to writing his model.
Pies has been challenged to produce
his model or face charges of culpable
deception, if not of scientific fraud
(McLaren, 2019b).
https://www.madinamerica.com/2013/07/does-nimh-follow-the-rules-of-science-a-startling-study-2/
In 1998, I published a paper which showed that George Engel’s so-called ‘biopsychosocial model,’ beloved of British, Canadian and Australian psychiatrists, didn’t exist.
The same happened to the DSM program: It was directed at finding “genes” for
mental disorder. None have ever been found, just because none exist.
https://sci-hub.se/10.1891/1559-4343.13.3.229
To quote from Norbert
Wiener’s 1948 book, Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine
(i.e., 3 years before Dr. Insel was born): “Information is information, not matter or energy.
No materialism which does not admit this can survive at the present day.” The NIMH RDoC
program embodies the notion that analyzing the “mere circuits” of the brain as a matter-energy
machine, while ignoring the content of the information that the circuits are manipulating,
will tell us all we need to know about the whole human. This is a profound misapprehension
of the nature of information.
Osteopathic medicine represents a valid tradition in Western medicine, but there are concerns about whether it is a viable tradition: will it end up a "poorer cousin" of the allopathic tradition or will it eventually simply be absorbed by the dominant model? This is particularly the case in psychiatry, where osteopathic medicine has never established a firm presence. Currently, the dominant ethos in psychiatry is reductive biologism, which tries to eliminate the notion of mind as a causative factor in behavior. The author's case is that this has failed to give rise to a human-centered psychiatry. His own model of mental disorder, the biocognitive model, is based on a molecular resolution of the mind-body problem (ie, the ancient question of how the immaterial mind and the material body interact). It is manifestly dualist (ie, it accords causative primacy to mind). This is firmly in the osteopathic medical tradition and is offered as a means of developing a distinctive model of psychiatry and hence a holistic general medicine.
No comments:
Post a Comment