Taxes!

[Marlin]

I'm not going to argue that there is a problem with over-prescribing by docs going on, but a few things about your statement seem either inaccurate or exaggerated. Regardless of the type of bachelors degree associated with an undergraduate education, psychology is not an "art", it is a science, albeit a soft science, say in the way that economics is. Universities vary as to whether it is a BA or a BS, with some offering both options. But that is hardly the issue because prescribing of such medication is done by either a full doctor (often a psychiatrist), but not a psychologist. The former has a full medical degree not just a BA or BS.

As for fact vs theory, that pretty much describes science as a whole. Gravity is a theory. The Germ Theory of Disease is a theory. The question is if the theory is well supported and in the case of benzos or other psychiatric meds, are the chemical mechanisms known. You seem to be suggesting that they are not, that doctors stumbled across these chemicals and found that the produce X result much of the time without knowing how. This is just not true. The mechanisms for Xanax and the rest are quite well known. Might want to do some research before you say its quite well known.This is straight out of the xanax warning sheet, its several pages long, like anyone has ever read it....lol. I will provide the link if you'd like, but this is the opening paragraph "CNS agents of the 1,4 benzodiazepine class presumably exert their effects by binding at stereospecific receptors at several sites within the central nervous system. Their exact mechanism of action is unknown." C Which is not to say that they are not overprescribed, addictive, contain variable side effects, have varying efficacy for different individuals, and must be weened off to avoid a bad and dangerous chemical imbalance. They also have great value for quite a number of people.
The xanax site says it is designed for people who suffer from panic disorder. Unless you are inferring that 44 million people suffer from panic disorder, there are not just a few doctors prescribing these recreational meds.
I have also experienced exactly the opposite in terms of doctors willingness to prescribe much of anything. I suspect this may be a function of being on Tricare rather than having access to an actual military clinic now, but the last primary care doc my wife and I had was about as stingy with even the most basic prescriptions, and wreaked some havoc for us when we were trying to continue a course of treatment for allergies after moving to his area. I can't imagine what we would have had to do to get him to prescribe something like Xanax.

Pain medication is a funny thing. For many injuries, not having the pain med significantly interferes with the healing process due to an inability to relax the muscles around the effected area, sleep, or work through rehabilitation. I want to repeat that I believe you about overprescription for plenty of people, and abuse by even more, but pain treatment has become pretty demonized, and doctors specializing in it are getting harder to find as they become more afraid of being raided based on bad or manufactured evidence, and caught up in a politically charged overreaction by the government when all they are trying to do is manage real patient pain. Which brings us full circle.

http://www.npr.org/2011/03/02/134143...abuse-epidemic

This is an epidemic across the nation. These meds are not obtained illegally, they are given to patients by their doctors. Doctors who are paid by the pharmacorp industry to perpetuate this addiction. Doctors that are supposed to be oath bound to help the patient, not addict them to a deadly drug. The more addicts, the more money. Much the same as cigarettes. As for the difficulty of getting meds, I agree, on base docs, almost impossible. Military docs can't get a kickback form the drug company. Unfortunately, most military docs only see active duty now, they farm out dependents to civilian drug dealers...I mean doctors. Those doctors that accept tricare do it a significant cost reduction compared to other insruance policies. That means in order to receive the same profit, they need to blow thorugh as many patients as possible, no time for treatment, write a script, bill tricare, cha-ching!!! I interviewed my wife's psych and recorded the one hour session, with her permission of course. She was a therapist and medicinal manager. That is her official title. Turns out, they do absolutely no therapy at those places. I asked what therapy they offered, her response was that they talk. She saw my wife 3 hours in a 9 month period, yet my wife had xanax, ambien, and sometimes lunesta as well, overlapping. This is on top of her vicodin topomax that was prescribed by other doctors. The doctors also went on to say that it was my responsibility to let the doctor know if she was abusing her meds. How am I supposed to know what meds she is on, or even who her doctor is?! An addict doesn't dime out her dealer. I only found it by going through my wife's purse while she was in rehab. The doctor also knew that I had two toddlers at home, yet she said it was not her problem if my wife was watching the kids while rolling on xanax/vicodin and ambien. NOT HER PROBLEM!!!! She is the one that prescribed it. This is not just one doc, this is 7 years of doctors in San Diego, Guam, Norfolk, Ohio, and Charleston. This is a string of civilian docs across the nation. This infers a pattern of drug dealing. 44 million xanax prescriptions last year alone. That is evidence enough that your situation is the exception, not the norm.
ANyway, you can see where this is going, it lead to disaster. One month in patient rehab, and a lifetime of pain. The doctor said it was no big deal to prescribe xanax over the phone, it was only 30 days at a time!
I pulled the string, started calling past doctors, same story. I inquired whether my wife was diagnosed with some type of panic disorder? Nope, they said (the lead Dr was present at my interview) that she indicated symptoms of stress and that xanax is often prescribed to mediate stress. Holy ****, stress, really? That is enough to get life altering highly addictive meds?
My wife was eventually sent to an addiction specialist psych. That guy tried ot give my wife ambien the first visit!!! Are you kidding?!
SO no, its not just a few docs, its an entire industry. The entire industry is a crock. Therapy is EXTREMELY time consuming, and therefore the insurance company will not pay for it, and the doc would be limited to only 3-5 patients per day. He isn't gonna make any money that way. 15 minutes, write a script, 20 patients a day, now thats how you make money.

Psychiatric disorders are not medical diseases. There are no lab tests, brain scans, X-rays or chemical imbalance tests that can verify any mental disorder is a physical condition. This is not to say that people do not get depressed, or that people can’t experience emotional or mental duress, but psychiatry has repackaged these emotions and behaviors as “disease” in order to sell drugs. This is a brilliant marketing campaign, but it is not science.
Psychiatry’s diagnostic criteria are literally voted into existence and inserted into the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM). What is voted in is a system of classification of symptoms that is drastically different from, and foreign to, anything in medicine. None of the diagnoses are supported by objective evidence of physical disease, illness, or
science.

Here is the link for the xanax info, straight off of the pfizer/xanax website
http://labeling.pfizer.com/ShowLabeling.aspx?id=543

[Marlin]

While “there has been no shortage of alleged biochemical explanations for psychiatric conditions…not one has been proven. Quite the contrary. In every instance where such an imbalance was thought to have been found, it was later proven false.” —Dr. Joseph Glenmullen, Harvard Medical School psychiatrist

“The theories are held on to not only because there is nothing else to take their place, but also because they are useful in promoting drug treatment.” —Dr. Elliott Valenstein Ph.D., author of Blaming the Brain

Little surprise then that worldwide statistics show that a rapidly increasing percentage of every age group, from children to the elderly, rely heavily and routinely on these drugs in their daily lives. Global sales of antidepressants, stimulants, antianxiety and antipsychotic drugs have reached more than $76 billion a year—more than double the annual US government budget spent on the war against drugs.

When you say that psychology is a science, I beg to differ, even the "doctors" involved admit that isn't science.

The “science-by-vote” procedure is as surprising to a layperson as it is to other health professionals, who have witnessed DSM voting meetings. “Mental disorders are established without scientific basis and procedure,” a psychologist attending the DSM hearings said. “The low level of intellectual effort was shocking. Diagnoses were developed by majority vote on the level we would use to choose a restaurant. Then it’s typed into the computer. It may reflect on our naiveté, but it was our belief that there would be an attempt to look at the things scientifically.”

[Ebenezr]

[Ebenezr]

I must say however that you two have given me the honor of having started the thread with the highest reply to view ratio of 122 over 102? gives this thread a 12% reply rate. Most threads are less than 10%. Thank You! what an honor.

[Marlin]

No, it relates, my wife's addiction was funded with tax dollars..... So there

Plus, if Obama had his way, everyone would have access to the cash cow. Pharmacorp is the biggest proponent of universal health care, just think how many prescriptions for pain meds and psych meds there would be if everyone could go to the doctor whenever they wanted?!!!! This is the last thing that the alcohol industry and drug dealers want.

[Osteomata]

Look Marlin, I'm not gonna try to argue with you about the anecdotal and deeply personal situation involving your family. I disagree with you. It is a form of science. I have already stipulated to the overmedication of the country, but the overwhelming majority of scientists would classify psychiatry as medicine, and psychology as a form of science, particularly when given the choice of "is it science or is it art?" I think you play fast and loose with the facts, and draw broad conclusions from limited and disparate data, which might well characterize every discussion we have every had.

[Marlin]

Look Marlin, I'm not gonna try to argue with you about the anecdotal and deeply personal situation involving your family. I disagree with you. It is a form of science. I have already stipulated to the overmedication of the country, but the overwhelming majority of scientists would classify psychiatry as medicine, and psychology as a form of science, particularly when given the choice of "is it science or is it art?" I think you play fast and loose with the facts, and draw broad conclusions from limited and disparate data, which might well characterize every discussion we have every had.

Did you not read about how psychological disorders come to be? They aren't real, they are voted on by other psychologists and sponsored by the drug company. The disorder comes after the drug that is designed to treat it is approved. They then vote the disorder into the catalog, that way insurance can pay for it.

How is that science in any way shape or form? Its no more science than politics is.

I would like to see some stats from this overwhelming majority of scientists you seem to know...

I provided you with direct info from the drug manufacturer, they have no idea how the drug works, just that it does.

[Ebenezr]

Look Marlin, I'm not gonna try to argue with you about the anecdotal and deeply personal situation involving your family. I disagree with you. It is a form of science. I have already stipulated to the overmedication of the country, but the overwhelming majority of scientists would classify psychiatry as medicine, and psychology as a form of science, particularly when given the choice of "is it science or is it art?" I think you play fast and loose with the facts, and draw broad conclusions from limited and disparate data, which might well characterize every discussion we have every had.

Marlin!!! Are you doing this??!!?? SHAME on you. Don't you know you should never do this???? Drawing broad conclusions aye
and play fast and loose. Hah!

[Ebenezr]

Did you not read about how psychological disorders come to be? They aren't real, they are voted on by other psychologists and sponsored by the drug company. The disorder comes after the drug that is designed to treat it is approved. They then vote the disorder into the catalog, that way insurance can pay for it.

How is that science in any way shape or form? Its no more science than politics is.

I would like to see some stats from this overwhelming majority of scientists you seem to know...

I provided you with direct info from the drug manufacturer, they have no idea how the drug works, just that it does.

Yeah Osteo!! How come you don't understand this??? Don't you know the FDA is in bed with big corporations and thier psychiatrists ???!!!!! Yes and Stats we want stats! We want stats! We want Stats! right now!!! come buddy give em up right this minute!!!

[Marlin]

Marlin!!! Are you doing this??!!?? SHAME on you. Don't you know you should never do this???? Drawing broad conclusions aye
and play fast and loose. Hah!

I think there are some fundamental differences between osteo and myself. I can only guess as to why.

I am critical, cynical, and assume the worst in people. I see conspiracy in everything. I assume that those who have the most to lose, will take the most extreme and unthinkable actions/lies to make sure they don't. Most of this is based on my experience in the real world, at home and abroad. I was never like this until I started moving around the country and meeting other than midwesterners. The predators in Norfolk and self-centered of So Cal kind of ruined me toward people in general. People in the world are not good, believe what you like, but the bad far outnumber the good, and the good will lose nine times out of ten. Furthermore, you can't lose assuming the worst, and you will never be disappointed. I also know that once you give someone power, it is virtually impossible to take it away. (government, CEOs, police and so on)

Disclaimer!!
These are just my thoughts based on our discussions here:
Osteo seems to see the best in people and assume everything is good unless proven otherwise. He seems to think that the systems work and there is no conspiracy in the upper echelons to make as much money as possible, or obtain as much power is possible.

If there was a stranger in my living room in the middle of the night, I would assume he is up to no good and he would get 3 shots in the chest. It seems that Osteo would assume it was a neighbor needing some sugar and offer him a cup of coffee.
I may be wrong about the intruder, but I would rather be wrong and alive then assume the best of the intruder and end up dead.

[Marlin]

Yeah Osteo!! How come you don't understand this??? Don't you know the FDA is in bed with big corporations and thier psychiatrists ???!!!!! Yes and Stats we want stats! We want stats! We want Stats! right now!!! come buddy give em up right this minute!!!

Wait, is that sarcasm? I am not being broad or judgmental on the psych thing, that is how the entire process works.

Google "American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders".

"Of the authors who selected and defined the DSM-IV psychiatric disorders, roughly half had had financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry at one time, raising the prospect of a direct conflict of interest.[50] In 2005, then American Psychiatric Association President Steven Sharfstein released a statement in which he conceded that psychiatrists had "allowed the biopsychosocial model to become the bio-bio-bio model".[51]"

When you are talking about a 76 billion dollar a year industry and the go/no-go is on the shoulders of a dozen people, half of which are psychologists, not even doctors that can prescribe meds, its not a long shot to believe that there are bribes/incentives and so on. Matter of fact, I would say its impossible that there isn't bribery going on. What company would risk their share of 76 billion dollars based on the ungreased decision of a few uppity psychologists?

[Osteomata]

A self serving self portrait, and a gross mis-characterization of my views. Yes, Marlin, you are so right, I would offer them coffee. Moronic on its face. I think people are a wide mix of horrific and good, and sometimes at nearly the same time. What I try to do is avoid tinfoil hat conspiracy theories, gross assumptions about groups based upon anecdote and emotionally based confirmation bias, as well as the libertarian vice of assuming all government programs are evil, and equally evil. While maintaining skepticism about psychiatric medication, I reject your Tom Cruise endorsed views on the entire science of psychology and psychiatry. Go jump on an Oprah couch.

I think there are some fundamental differences between osteo and myself. I can only guess as to why.

I am critical, cynical, and assume the worst in people. I see conspiracy in everything. I assume that those who have the most to lose, will take the most extreme and unthinkable actions/lies to make sure they don't. Most of this is based on my experience in the real world, at home and abroad. I was never like this until I started moving around the country and meeting other than midwesterners. The predators in Norfolk and self-centered of So Cal kind of ruined me toward people in general. People in the world are not good, believe what you like, but the bad far outnumber the good, and the good will lose nine times out of ten. Furthermore, you can't lose assuming the worst, and you will never be disappointed. I also know that once you give someone power, it is virtually impossible to take it away. (government, CEOs, police and so on)

Disclaimer!!
These are just my thoughts based on our discussions here:
Osteo seems to see the best in people and assume everything is good unless proven otherwise. He seems to think that the systems work and there is no conspiracy in the upper echelons to make as much money as possible, or obtain as much power is possible.

If there was a stranger in my living room in the middle of the night, I would assume he is up to no good and he would get 3 shots in the chest. It seems that Osteo would assume it was a neighbor needing some sugar and offer him a cup of coffee.
I may be wrong about the intruder, but I would rather be wrong and alive then assume the best of the intruder and end up dead.

[Ebenezr]

Wait, is that sarcasm? I am not being broad or judgmental on the psych thing, that is how the entire process works.

Google "American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders".

"Of the authors who selected and defined the DSM-IV psychiatric disorders, roughly half had had financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry at one time, raising the prospect of a direct conflict of interest.[50] In 2005, then American Psychiatric Association President Steven Sharfstein released a statement in which he conceded that psychiatrists had "allowed the biopsychosocial model to become the bio-bio-bio model".[51]"

When you are talking about a 76 billion dollar a year industry and the go/no-go is on the shoulders of a dozen people, half of which are psychologists, not even doctors that can prescribe meds, its not a long shot to believe that there are bribes/incentives and so on. Matter of fact, I would say its impossible that there isn't bribery going on. What company would risk their share of 76 billion dollars based on the ungreased decision of a few uppity psychologists?

It is true we are at the mercy of a paid group of beaurocrats who decide what pills we can have in the US. Example: 2 months ago Darvoset was pulled from the markets. Supposedly because of some effect on the heart. It has been around for 50 years, generic as heck and a good pain reliever for many. Now users have to go fish or actually reach for some new drug that is on patent still and thaat will bring $$$ into the drug companies.

[Ebenezr]

Another non medical example: good bye incandescent light bulb...you were my friend for many years but some green headed liberal thinks you waste too much nrg.

[Osteomata]

I can completely understand your irritation, and agree that this is a silly government mandate, although it is not near as severe as you sentence suggests. The 2007 legislation, slated to phasing in next year, forced the light bulb industry to improve the efficiency of standard bulbs in a certain watt range, which has the effect of not outright banning, but sorta shoving the industry towards stopping production of incandescents in favor of other forms. I would much prefer a market solution.
If you are still buying incandescents, you are wasting money, regardless of your environmental views. CFLs use way less energy and last multiple times longer. In loose terms, a CFL is worth 40 regular bulbs. The real tech is in LEDs, but I am waiting for the maturation of that market before making those my replacement option. On my reef aquarium though, its all LEDs.

Another non medical example: good bye incandescent light bulb...you were my friend for many years but some green headed liberal thinks you waste too much nrg.