Mental diseases are highly comorbid

[Mr. Ignorant]

I think I understand, but I do not believe that most things are uncaused. Perhaps nothing is uncaused.

I've given it some thought. I have to admit that I was being slightly provocative, but that's entirely different from being a troll. I wanted to provoke a discussion / debate about this subject, because it intrigues me. I want to learn more about it by reading other people's opinions.

A troll's intentions are "bad", but I mean well.

[Drifter]

I think I understand, but I do not believe that most things are uncaused. Perhaps nothing is uncaused.

I've given it some thought. I have to admit that I was being slightly provocative, but that's entirely different from being a troll. I wanted to provoke a discussion / debate about this subject, because it intrigues me. I want to learn more about it by reading other people's opinions.

A troll's intentions are "bad", but I mean well.

I know you meant well,

guns aren't "bad"/kill, people are/do.

You didn't "do" anything.

Urges 'arise', out of nowhere, unseen.

Mental disesse, could simply be stress.

if left alone, could worsen (Shizophrenia, Agraphobia ) and affect ones morbidity, and the "Mmortality Rate, in extreme social cases?

[Mikal]

A team of reseachers at the University of Amsterdam have found that mental diseases are highly comorbid, meaning that many diseases which the Standard Model considers isolated are in fact related. According to the researchers this implies that the Standard Model is flawed and needs modification.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%...l.pone.0027407

What do you think? Are they right? Is this such a big deal? What will change if this is accepted as true in the scientific community?

Hi Mr Iggy….you know I always wonder why they call such human problems as anxiety, social phobia or anti-social personality disorder mental diseases, when these are about the mind and the mind is not a physical organ so cannot become diseased. Maybe we should call these things being in dis-ease with something. I don’t find it too plausible that (anxiety) fear, apprehension or inner distress can be a disease, same with (social phobia) avoiding social contact or (anti-social personality disorder) extreme shyness.


Take for example my situation. I’ve been researching for over 25 years and it’s a preoccupation that’s pretty select when choosing how much social contact there will be and how much being alone is important to carrying out my numerous research and studies. I select minimal contact a lot of the time and value being alone as it is conducive to achieving a higher level of work. Now if I had to answer bare minimum questions in a work survey for a study on markers for mental disease and I could not expand and explain my own proclivities would I not be giving the study false perimeters on social phobia or anti-social personality disorder?


I also find it troubling that anxiety has been made into Standard Anxiety Disorder and a marker for so called mental disease. Years ago when I was experiencing dramatic alterations in my own states of consciousness and apart of this was experiencing fragments of higher visual images as information, I experienced anxiety. This was not because I was suffering from mental disease; it was because of the inner distress of not fully understanding what I was suddenly apprehending and that what I was apprehending was far more subtle information than we normally experience when we are not experiencing dramatic, unexplained alterations in consciousness.


They also mention in their study markers for mental disease like, inability to concentrate, lack of interest and insommnia. So let me give you another example here. Recently my grandaughter who is only 17 lost two of her school chums in a horrific auto accident. This tragedy happened one night from her own first experience of being a driver in a car accident; nobody seriously injured but both cars demolished. Was this entire two day period comparable to turning up the volume on a powerful stereo as in being overwhelmed by too much external information? As days passed and shock subsided, my grandaughter became low in mood, depressed and her lack of interest was her insistent need to be alone for huge spans of time and sleep was intermittent as she digested all from the loss, to the suddeness of it, to the grief of it. Her last marked behavior was the inability to concentrate.


Now all those circumstances were three weeks ago and now she is finally coming around to being more herself. She told me it hurt a great deal to accept the loss of her friends, forever seems such a long time and gone is stark and hard to get a grasp on at her age. Was she temporarily a victim of mental disease? No I would say its more like she was in dis-ease with the happenings and occurrances of life and it seems to have been more her first big experience in adaptation to the uncertainty of life itself.


The fact that designated markers for mental disease are present in situations like the above are downright scary, reveal a great deal about our ignorance of ourselves and rather than learning how to pass through turmoil to attain some grace with life, we are left fearful of being stigmatized by labels of mental illness.



I think this is just another Psychoanalytic Model and no big deal because in all honesty taking our human problems to disorders has made pharmecuetical addiction the biggest social human problem we have presently in society. Sorry I guess that I am a poor psychiatry candidate—I allow all my moods to live and expire and I don’t see myself so much as diseased mentally or an oddball, as I see it that I have learned how to cope and deal with dis-ease with life’s uncertain ways.


BTW I have the DSM 1V—it’s a tool of study for me against psychoanalytic models and a tool that helps me to understand the dynamics of power assymetry between people and institutions that study people. Its no lie that power asymetries are always about control. Interesting study Mr. Iggy…thanks for sharing!



Kind regards Mikal