Do you suffer from an affective disorder?

[Evo]

I don't see how anyone could argue that Asperger's/Autism is not a biological disorder, either. I've objected to it's inclusion in the DSM since I first discovered it there.

I know very little about OCD and don't have any opinions about it, but it wouldn't surprise me to find out it doesn't belong in the DSM either.

Ok, I see what you meant. I think that we will find that the thought that traumatic childhood experiences can be a cause for OCD will be dismissed just as Freud's earlier claim that toilet training trauma caused OCD.

I believe fears and superstitions are caused by culture and external influences, but they're not OCD, OCD is so completely different, only someone that truly has OCD can understand.

I believe that the problems with neurotransmitters may come down to a few different causes, since there are different types of OCD. Some might be genetic, some might be illness, some might be physical brain trauma.

I've been told that I have a rare 'auditory' type of OCD, my compulsions are set to musical rhythms. Also, everything that I do has to sound right, as well as feel right. People with OCD will immediately understand what I mean when I say it has to feel right. And mine are based on making positive things happen, not to ward off danger. Of course I did have the traditional "doubt" based OCD where I was never positive that I had locked the door, turned off the iron, or the stove, etc... That has passed. Now I have reverted to some of the original compulsions from when I was 12. Who knows what next year will bring.

 

[Pythagorean]

The Diathesis-Stress model!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diathesis–stress_model

 

[Evo]

The Diathesis-Stress model!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diathesis–stress_model

Ok, but not OCD. And in my case, not for anxiety either, my anxiety comes from imaginary scenarios, I had never been through any type of stressful situations prior to the onset. Do any of the people that make this stuff up actually suffer from these things?

Ah, that's for schizophrenia, I wouldn't know about that.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Why shouldn't Aspergers and OCD belong in the DSM?? The DSM is simply a list of mental disorders and criteria for it. I don't see a reason why biological disorders shouldn't belong in the DSM.

Asperger's /Autism should be removed because I don't think anyone believes they are "mental" disorders, whatever that might be supposed to mean. Just about everyone is confident they are neurological disorders.

The DSM is a grab bag of behavioral problems that are shunted to psychiatrists because other fields of medicine don't know what to do with them. As the physical underpinnings of any of them are sorted out they should be removed from the bag and reclassified under the branch of medicine where they actually fit.

Otherwise, should we take a diabetic who's frequently "moody," due to their blood sugar being off, to a psychiatrist for a diagnosis of "Affective Disorder (mild)"?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Well, DSM criteria are based on behavioral observations. Any number of biological mechanisms could potentially lead to the same emergent observed behavior.

Biological disorders are based on physiological or molecular observations. Of course, physiological recordings are likewise degenerate (several different molecular mechanisms can lead to the same physiological recording) so there's still some human abstraction going on, but once we get down to the molecular biology, we begin to feel more confident that we've eliminated degenerate behavior.

I think the point is that instead of psychiatrists misdiagnosing based on qualitative DSM criteria, we should actually quantify; look at the neurology and make physiologically meaningful definitions before ascribing physiologically affective drugs =)

Word.

 

[HeLiXe]

I put none although I'm sure there are some -_-
I've just never been officially diagnosed.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Ok, I see what you meant. I think that we will find that the thought that traumatic childhood experiences can be a cause for OCD will be dismissed just as Freud's earlier claim that toilet training trauma caused OCD.

I'm not sure about that. Micromass asserts it can be caused by head trauma and certain infections, which I didn't know. What that means, logically, is that any stress, if there be such, that could cause the same kind of damage (neuronal cropping, atrophy), in the right places, could cause OCD. As Pythagorean pointed out: " Any number of biological mechanisms could potentially lead to the same emergent observed behavior". The most rational thing I've ever read about schizophrenia, for example, is, that the reason it's physical cause hasn't been pinned down is that there are at least several different physical/biological mechanisms that all cause damage that "leads to the same emergent behavior" seen in schizophrenia.

You recall honestrosewater who used to post here, and talk about her OCD occasionally? It turns out she witnessed her father attack her mother with a hatchet. Don't know if you happened to be reading that thread when she casually slipped that information in.

I believe fears and superstitions are caused by culture and external influences, but they're not OCD, OCD is so completely different, only someone that truly has OCD can understand.

It's not completely clear to me how the fears of Anxiety Disorder and OCD are separate from paranoia. I heard a guy once tell the story of how anticipation of an upcoming trip to Europe (when he was a kid) was ruined for him because he couldn't think about it without imagining that the plane was going to crash into the ocean and he and his family were going to be eaten by sharks. I would have called that paranoia but for assertions that what people with GAD experience is not the same thing as paranoia.

I've been told that I have a rare 'auditory' type of OCD, my compulsions are set to musical rhythms. Also, everything that I do has to sound right, as well as feel right. People with OCD will immediately understand what I mean when I say it has to feel right. And mine are based on making positive things happen, not to ward off danger. Of course I did have the traditional "doubt" based OCD where I was never positive that I had locked the door, turned off the iron, or the stove, etc... That has passed. Now I have reverted to some of the original compulsions from when I was 12. Who knows what next year will bring.

If you can dig up a link to this variety I'd be interested in reading it. This almost sounds like a variant of Tourettes. They're co-morbid in many cases.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I put none although I'm sure there are some -_-
I've just never been officially diagnosed.

You have mild Lizard Protective Disorder. Hopefully it will never become severe enough to disable you.

 

[rhody]

Micromass asserts it can be caused by head trauma and certain infections

Alright, I have absolute proof that for a short period, say a week or so, that an activity, like as a track day with a fast bike, clears all the symptoms of OCD.

Does anyone here have a scientifically backed explanation for that. We know massive amounts of adrenaline are released, more than normal. But what other factors are in play ?

If I could bottle the feeling and relief from it, I would surely be a rich man, seeing how many have responded positive to OCD in this poll.

Rhody...

 

[micromass]

It's not completely clear to me how the fears of Anxiety Disorder and OCD are separate from paranoia.

In the case of paranoia, the patient believes that his thoughts are correct. In the case of OCD, we know that the thoughts are incorrect and stupid, but we have to act on them anyway. OCD is more related to Tourettes than it is to paranoia.

I heard a guy once tell the story of how anticipation of an upcoming trip to Europe (when he was a kid) was ruined for him because he couldn't think about it without imagining that the plane was going to crash into the ocean and he and his family were going to be eaten by sharks. I would have called that paranoia but for assertions that what people with GAD experience is not the same thing as paranoia.

That's not a case of paranoia. In the case of paranoia, he would have believed that this would certainly happen. Now, he only fears it. OCD is like "if I don't switch on the light an even number of times, then I will be eaten by sharks". The patients knows it is false, but he has to do it anyway.

If you can dig up a link to this variety I'd be interested in reading it. This almost sounds like a variant of Tourettes. They're co-morbid in many cases.

Yes, I'd also be quite interested in knowing more about it.

Tourettes and OCD have something to do with each other. In both occasion, the patient has to do something in order to release pressure. But only in the case of OCD there is anxiety involved.

 

[micromass]

Asperger's /Autism should be removed because I don't think anyone believes they are "mental" disorders, whatever that might be supposed to mean. Just about everyone is confident they are neurological disorders.

I don't see the point. The DSM classifies mental disorders according to the symptoms. It doesn't classify according to the cause. Even Alzheimer's disease is classified in the DSM as a mental disorder.

Otherwise, should we take a diabetic who's frequently "moody," due to their blood sugar being off, to a psychiatrist for a diagnosis of "Affective Disorder (mild)"?

Yes, such a person could be classified under Affective Disorder if he meets the criteria. That's the whole point: the cause doesn't matter. Only the symptoms matter for the DSM.
And of course, people with the same symptoms might benifit from a different cure. Psychiatrists know this. No two people are alike. And no two people with depression will benifit from the same cure.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Asperger's /Autism should be removed because I don't think anyone believes they are "mental" disorders, whatever that might be supposed to mean. Just about everyone is confident they are neurological disorders.

As I understand it, autism is a neurological disorder. I don't think it is easy to separate neurological disorders from mental disorders because physically, the neurons lead to the brain. However, there should be a distinction between neurological disorders and psychological disorders. Even this is complicated by the fact that society's reaction to people with neurological problems often leads to psychological problems. None the less, they are not the same thing.

 

[Ms Music]

seeing how many have responded positive to OCD in this poll.

Rhody...

But how many of the (currently) 17 votes truly have OCD? If I had voted before I read this thread, I would have clicked OCD, although what I call OCD is a product of my personality type, not actually OCD. Both my daughter and I are perfectionists and hard workers. We want it done right, and have a hard time taking a break until the task is done. Employers love that trait. We both call it OCD knowing that it is not, and I wonder if some voted that way. The voting part of this thread seemed to be set up loosely, but now it is getting into details of actual disorders. I wouldn't even assume half of those votes are true OCD, but that might be closer to the real number. But that is probably my obsession to detail and accuracy shining through.

 

[HeLiXe]

You have mild Lizard Protective Disorder. Hopefully it will never become severe enough to disable you.

 

[Evo]

You recall honestrosewater who used to post here, and talk about her OCD occasionally? It turns out she witnessed her father attack her mother with a hatchet. Don't know if you happened to be reading that thread when she casually slipped that information in.

I assumed she was paranoid scizophrenic. She thought lions were coming inside her house to eat her. She would only sleep on the living room couch so she would be prepared to escape the lion. I didn't know that she had OCD also. I always remember her fear of being in the house and fear of leaving the house, and hallucinations.

 

[Evo]

But how many of the (currently) 17 votes truly have OCD? If I had voted before I read this thread, I would have clicked OCD, although what I call OCD is a product of my personality type, not actually OCD. Both my daughter and I are perfectionists and hard workers. We want it done right, and have a hard time taking a break until the task is done. Employers love that trait. We both call it OCD knowing that it is not, and I wonder if some voted that way. The voting part of this thread seemed to be set up loosely, but now it is getting into details of actual disorders. I wouldn't even assume half of those votes are true OCD, but that might be closer to the real number. But that is probably my obsession to detail and accuracy shining through.

I think it's the difference between mild OCD, like organizing things, being a prefectionist, a clean freak, that's on one hand, mild OCD doesn't interfere with your life in a negative way, it can even have positive results. Then there is severe OCD, which is what we've started discussing now.

 

[Pythagorean]

Somebody with OC tendencies already (not necissarily diagnosed with the D, for disorder) can be pushed over the top (into the actual disorder) by stress. This is actually a majority of what you see in hoarding episodes on TV, generally as a result of loss.

Most people will have lost a family member (or all the kids just grew up and moved away) right around when their hoarding started.

I know lots of hoarders that half keep up on themselves and still leave the house, but I can see a little attachment to their 'things' and if they were to lose faith in human interaction somehow, I could see how they may regress to those 'things'.

 

[MarcoD]

Ah well, I really don't like sharing. From stress and depression I went to anxiety to a bad response to medication to completely bonkers. It doesn't really affect my rationality much, but physically and mentally it's a mess. I'll never work again probably.

[ Anyway, to those here who are somewhat intelligent, a warning. Never, ever, take psychiatric medicine, unless it's really necessary or you really did your homework on it.]

 

[OmCheeto]

Gads! Are you people all still crazy?

Tell me if you've heard me say the following B4:

I used to think it was advantageous to be the 6th of 7 children. My sister was teaching me 3rd grade maths when I was only 4. Unfortunately, when I was 16, she brought home her college level psychology text. I was like; "Chapter One: I have those symptoms. I'm crazy. Chapter Two: I have those symptoms. I'm crazy." etc. etc. etc.

moral of the story: Do not leave psychology books laying around for teenagers to read.

 

[rhody]

Gads! Are you people all still crazy?

Om,

Does that avatar light bulb actually light ? For instance, when you are stressed, perhaps ?

Rhody...

 

[MarcoD]

Gads! Are you people all still crazy?

Tell me if you've heard me say the following B4:



moral of the story: Do not leave psychology books laying around for teenagers to read.

God Cheeto. Crazy, no, damaged, yeah. I don't even try to stick a label on it, as an adult, I think I know when stuff is damaged beyond repair. I just mostly sit around and suffer, it's not more difficult than that. It just happens to people. I don't like it, and if I would be in the US, I would sue the hell out of some people. But, well, endgame.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I don't see the point. The DSM classifies mental disorders according to the symptoms. It doesn't classify according to the cause. Even Alzheimer's disease is classified in the DSM as a mental disorder.



Yes, such a person could be classified under Affective Disorder if he meets the criteria. That's the whole point: the cause doesn't matter. Only the symptoms matter for the DSM.
And of course, people with the same symptoms might benifit from a different cure. Psychiatrists know this. No two people are alike. And no two people with depression will benifit from the same cure.

You've stated my point a few times without understanding the significance: the DSM classifies by symptom rather than cause. The cause doesn't matter!

If all branches of medicine did that we might have a a branch of medicine called "chest pain" which would treat everything from heart attacks, to lung cancer, to pulled pectoral muscles exclusively by administering different forms of painkiller.

It would be very foolish to treat a diabetic for the emotional manifestations of their endocrine disorder with antidepressants, ignoring the underlying insulin production problem.

The whole DSM should eventually be greatly pared down as the underlying causes are sorted out and each person shunted to the field of medicine where they actually belong. Then the people who are left, whose problems arose primarily from prolonged stress, can be treated, as best as we know how, for that.

Alzheimer's doesn't belong in there, either, now that you mention it.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I think it's the difference between mild OCD, like organizing things, being a prefectionist, a clean freak, that's on one hand, mild OCD doesn't interfere with your life in a negative way, it can even have positive results. Then there is severe OCD, which is what we've started discussing now.

There are two different diagnoses in the DSM: 1.) Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, and 2.) Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder.

They are not the same thing, one is not a mild form of the other and they are classified in two different locations. Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder is in among the Personality Disorders, as the name suggests it would be.

Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder is the disorder whose main symptom is hyper-perfectionism even when getting things perfect has a high cost.

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is primarily about anxiety and compulsive behaviors intended to relieve the anxiety.

To confuse things, although they are completely separate disorders, people with a diagnosis of one often exhibit some features of the other as well.

People with OCD more often than not successfully hide it from those around them for long periods of time. People with OCPD do not: it's usually quite apparent.

The casual, everyday use of the term OCD usually actually refers to symptoms of OCPD: perfectionism.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Somebody with OC tendencies already (not necissarily diagnosed with the D, for disorder) can be pushed over the top (into the actual disorder) by stress. This is actually a majority of what you see in hoarding episodes on TV, generally as a result of loss.

Most people will have lost a family member (or all the kids just grew up and moved away) right around when their hoarding started.

I know lots of hoarders that half keep up on themselves and still leave the house, but I can see a little attachment to their 'things' and if they were to lose faith in human interaction somehow, I could see how they may regress to those 'things'.

I've watched that show a few times and am surprised how often it comes out that the hoarders themselves have some insight into the fact it was triggered by a loss, but without understanding how to come to grips with that loss, except by hoarding.

I was also instantly reminded of that particular kind of homeless person who pushes around a shopping cart piled high with useless junk, and festooned with as many appended plastic shopping bags of useless junk as they can fit. I wonder how many of them lost their dwellings and their old lives, specifically as a result of their hoarding problem?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Ah well, I really don't like sharing. From stress and depression I went to anxiety to a bad response to medication to completely bonkers. It doesn't really affect my rationality much, but physically and mentally it's a mess. I'll never work again probably.

[ Anyway, to those here who are somewhat intelligent, a warning. Never, ever, take psychiatric medicine, unless it's really necessary or you really did your homework on it.]

This is a chronic problem and I can't tell you how many times I've heard the same thing: a person goes to a shrink for depression, gets a prescription for an anti-depressant, and the anti-depressant throws them over into a mania with psychotic features. It happened to one of my sisters who is now, as you say, completely bonkers.

I posted on a bi-polar forum for several months out of curiosity over the fact that most anti-convulsants seem to have a beneficial effect on bi-polar symptoms, and got the same story from several people there: their problem started as depression, they took and anti-depressant, and then got thrown over into mania and a psychotic episode.

 

[MarcoD]

This is a chronic problem and I can't tell you how many times I've heard the same thing: a person goes to a shrink for depression, gets a prescription for an anti-depressant, and the anti-depressant throws them over into a mania with psychotic features. It happened to one of my sisters who is now, as you say, completely bonkers.

I posted on a bi-polar forum for several months out of curiosity over the fact that most anti-convulsants seem to have a beneficial effect on bi-polar symptoms, and got the same story from several people there: their problem started as depression, they took and anti-depressant, and then got thrown over into mania and a psychotic episode.

God, the silly thing is that after forty years I think I know myself pretty well. That burn-out should never have ended into the position I am in now. Some tea and a little rest would have taken care of it.

The thing I am the most annoyed about is the 'repression' of the medical system. I don't think I am an outlier, it must have happened to lots of people, which means that psychiatrists just willfully destroy people's life, and there's no feedback system (like a financial penalty, or something else) which make that they don't continue that practice. Whoever gets 'burned,' ends up in another route of the system.

The whole system is flawed, as far as I see it, they sometimes help people by accident [IMO, probably the people who would get better anyway], and the rest ends up in the wastebasket. Unless your condition is such that you really need medicine, you're better off with any other solution.

[ Ah well. I am going to drop off this topic. But better you all people know the risks involved. ]

Addendum since I am a little annoyed:

Most of you are physicist so probably a great deal smarter than me. After the medication I looked at the statistical studies, the professional opinions, and the responses of patients on the net. Most studies show that most medicine hardly outperform placebo (and are also statistically flawed, IMO), a lot of people don't feel helped, and lots of people question the validity of the whole field.

Let's assume that you have a condition which either hardly can be treated or will pass by itself. Assume a Markov model where you have a 5% chance of getting better, and a 30% (probably to low) chance of being worse off: In how many steps will you probably be reduced to a blubbering idiot?

 

[micromass]

You've stated my point a few times without understanding the significance: the DSM classifies by symptom rather than cause. The cause doesn't matter!

If all branches of medicine did that we might have a a branch of medicine called "chest pain" which would treat everything from heart attacks, to lung cancer, to pulled pectoral muscles exclusively by administering different forms of painkiller.

It would be very foolish to treat a diabetic for the emotional manifestations of their endocrine disorder with antidepressants, ignoring the underlying insulin production problem.

The whole DSM should eventually be greatly pared down as the underlying causes are sorted out and each person shunted to the field of medicine where they actually belong. Then the people who are left, whose problems arose primarily from prolonged stress, can be treated, as best as we know how, for that.

Alzheimer's doesn't belong in there, either, now that you mention it.

The argument you're making now is that the DSM is essentially useless. I agree with that...

 

[bohm2]

Let's assume that you have a condition which either hardly can be treated or will pass by itself. Assume a Markov model where you have a 5% chance of getting better, and a 30% (probably to low) chance of being worse off: In how many steps will you probably be reduced to a blubbering idiot?

I'm not sure how representative this is of the population at large but I thought you might find this interesting:

Do antidepressants work? The Internet says...

http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.com/2011/05/do-antidepressants-work-internet-says.html

Montagne M: Miracle drug, poison, or placebo: patients' experiences with antidepressant medications as described in postings on an online message board.

Messages posted on the MSN Health message board in response to a news story reporting that antidepressant medications are placebos were examined. Over 37 days, 1,624 messages were posted by 1,238 unique authors. The sampling unit consisted of 960 authors who were users. Users' messages were gathered in real time and content analyzed. Few users explicitly responded to the question posed in the article: 2.5% of the users stated their antidepressant was a miracle drug, 2.0% stated it was a poison, and only 0.2% stated it was a placebo. Users reported positive experiences with antidepressants more than twice as often as they reported negative experiences.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21599508

 

[OmCheeto]

Actually, looking at the list again, and seeing the comment in the parentheses, I wish they'd have put; "All of the above" on the the list.

though the schizophrenia is discountable if one believes one is receiving messages from god. But I will still not vote for Bachmann... She cannot discern the difference between god and Satan... Would god have told her to marry that man? I don't think so.

ps. I will not be offended if a moderator deletes my post.

Though it will probably make me a bit more neurotic...

 

[lisab]

Lately I have had a strange thing going on with me, mentally...I'm not sure what it means.

Like, I feel like no one will give me up or let me down. And no one will run around and desert me. No one will make me cry, or say goodbye, or tell a lie and hurt me.

What do you suppose this is all about?