|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
25th August 2016, 03:24 PM | #201 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,454
|
If I had my way, this would be malpractice. Having said that: if you read the article, it's worth pointing out that these are not being prescribed by psychiatrists. I suspect most psychiatrists would say these prescriptions are not appropriate.
They're being prescribed by non-psychiatrists because they can't get their patients into psychiatric care. (the article says mostly family practitioners and pediatricians) It's certainly supporting my argument that GPs should not be performing psychiatric diagnosis and prescribing any more than they should be doing open heart surgery. |
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett |
|
25th August 2016, 03:31 PM | #202 |
The Grammar Tyrant
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,996
|
Trying to cover up your complete inability to defend the situation by making stupid accusations about me isn't working, sorry.
The entire industry is made up of many thousands of individual organisations, of which that is indeed one, and I have not suggested otherwise. This thread's purpose is to highlight individual occurrences as they come up. Oh, very good! It's also two logical fallacies, plus an attempt to deflect your inability to see the problem by asking another question. JAQing off, is how it's usually described. I note the continuing failure to provide evidence that the drugs are beneficial in any way, thereby making your silly question moot anyway. I'd go along with that entirely. It'd reduce consumption of psychiatric drugs by about 90% straight away. Certainly Prozac would fall off the charts if GPs stopped prescribing it. However, the psychiatric industry would clearly not be able to cope with the numbers, so it still shares the blame for the situation. |
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable. |
|
25th August 2016, 04:42 PM | #203 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,852
|
|
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman ξ |
|
25th August 2016, 05:08 PM | #204 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
The Atheist: You cited a news article not about the entire psychiatric industry
Pointing out what you actually cited is not stupid, The Atheist. The facts are simple.
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
25th August 2016, 08:32 PM | #205 |
The Grammar Tyrant
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,996
|
|
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable. |
|
25th August 2016, 08:51 PM | #206 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 13,833
|
I think I you missed where blutoski pointed out that the article says nothing about psychiatrists prescribing these drugs to babies.
Your continued use of the term "psychiatric industry" is mildly amusing but not the least bit convincing. The amount of misinformation you have posted in this thread is puzzling if you have a real point to make. What happened really? Did a shrink piss in your shoe or something? |
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!" |
|
25th August 2016, 08:59 PM | #207 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,852
|
|
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman ξ |
|
25th August 2016, 09:56 PM | #208 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
You have to drill down to get the actual numbers. The 2015 press release for the study which is the basis of the December 2015 news article has
Quote:
We do not know the numbers for babies since the figures are given for 1 - 6 year olds. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
25th August 2016, 11:07 PM | #209 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,852
|
Doesn't the fact that 59.7% of the prescriptions were from non-psychiatrists imply that 40.3% were from psychiatrists?
|
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman ξ |
|
25th August 2016, 11:12 PM | #210 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,852
|
Giving a psychiatric drug to a child with a barely formed brain (where there is no science concerning potential damage) is criminal in my view!
|
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman ξ |
|
25th August 2016, 11:24 PM | #211 |
The Grammar Tyrant
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,996
|
|
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable. |
|
26th August 2016, 08:19 AM | #212 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 13,833
|
|
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!" |
|
26th August 2016, 12:35 PM | #213 |
The Grammar Tyrant
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,996
|
|
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable. |
|
26th August 2016, 12:48 PM | #214 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,852
|
|
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman ξ |
|
28th August 2016, 02:07 PM | #215 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
That is almost correct, Perpetual Student.
No babies are included - that is The Atheist's assertion presumably from ignorance about what he cited (see below). The article says
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 03:40 PM | #216 |
The Grammar Tyrant
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,996
|
|
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable. |
|
28th August 2016, 04:35 PM | #217 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
The Atheist: Can you understand that your news article does not mention babies
Wrong, The Atheist: baby or infant
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 04:37 PM | #218 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
The Atheist: Can you understand that the study never studied babies
29 August 2016 The Atheist: Can you understand that the study never studied babies?
The paper that the news article cites does not even study infants or babies! Treatment of Young People With Antipsychotic Medications in the United States The 1 - 6 age group is described as young children. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 04:40 PM | #219 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
The Atheist: Can you understand that pediatricians and GPs are not psychiatrists
Treatment of Young People With Antipsychotic Medications in the United States
About 40% of the prescriptions for 1 - 6 year old children are from primary care physicians (pediatricians and GPs). 29 August 2016 The Atheist: Can you understand that pediatricians and GPs are not psychiatrists? |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 04:44 PM | #220 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
And another point - psychiatrists are not usually the primary care providers for children. So there is implicit agreement from pediatricians and GPs for the 60% of young children who are prescribed antidepressants by psychiatrists.
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 05:37 PM | #221 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,852
|
I think quibbling over what is or isn't a baby is beside the point. People in the medical community (including psychiatrists) are prescribing psychiatric drugs to very young people where there is little support for efficacy and no evidence regarding safety. I find that arrogant, negligent, irresponsible and criminal.
|
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman ξ |
|
28th August 2016, 07:36 PM | #222 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Prescribing psychiatric drugs with known efficacy and risks for adults as a last resort in children is not "arrogant, negligent, irresponsible and criminal". It is doctors taking a less than educated risk aka the "art" part of the Hippocratic oath.
When it is just pill pushing as implied by the article then it is bad practice. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 07:57 PM | #223 |
The Grammar Tyrant
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,996
|
Yeah, but it's bloody hilarious. Every parent I know of calls their one-year old a "baby", but when you're failing to win a trick, it's obviously ok to shriek in bold eleventy times that babies over 12 months aren't babies.
Utterly pathetic, but extremely revealing. A point he's conveniently ignoring, because only about half of them were psychiatrists. Ignore that and shriek about paediatricians. Seriously, it's as funny as hell, especially in light of this valid point you make: ... but thoroughly defendable. Have you noticed the complete lack of evidence posted by Reality Check on the safety of these drugs in babies and kids aged 1-6? It's a superb shill tactic - when there is no evidence, shriek as loudly as possible about some irrelevant point which might have a semantic argument. Semantics in the face of atrocious behaviour of unknown dangers. Genius! |
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable. |
|
28th August 2016, 08:05 PM | #224 |
The Grammar Tyrant
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,996
|
|
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable. |
|
28th August 2016, 08:19 PM | #225 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
That is wrong, The Atheist, because I was the one to first point out the actual numbers as repeated today.
29 August 2016 The Atheist: I cited the number 57.9% for young children (1-6) receiving a prescription from a psychiatrist which you did not seem know about on 26 August 2016. One point that is not clear in that post was that IMO psychiatrists should be more involved with the diagnosis and treatment of mental conditions in younger children. It should be harder to diagnose conditions in younger children than older children. But the study shows that opposite is true. I am not the one ignoring that pediatricians and GPs are not psychiatrists! I am not the one ignoring that psychiatrists are not the primary care providers for young children - that is pediatricians and GPs. 29 August 2016 The Atheist: There is implicit agreement from pediatricians and GPs for the 60% of young children who are prescribed antidepressants by psychiatrists. 29 August 2016 The Atheist: Can you understand that your news article does not mention babies? 29 August 2016 The Atheist: Can you understand that the study never studied babies? 29 August 2016 The Atheist: Can you understand that pediatricians and GPs are not psychiatrists? |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 08:26 PM | #226 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
My dog reads a half lie by highlighting half of what Wikipedia says !
Infant
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 08:40 PM | #227 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
The Atheist: What is your evidence to back up your assertion
It was your assertion, The Atheist. It is up to you to provide the evidence.
29 August 2016 The Atheist: What is your evidence to back up your assertion about "babies" being prescribed antipsychotics being a fail? Cite the scientific evidence that the drugs being prescribed have no effect on young children. Cite the scientific evidence that the drugs being prescribed have unreasonable risks for young children. It is a lie that the drugs were prescribed to "babies and kids aged 1-6" - the study included a youngest age group of young children 1 - 6 and did not have a separate "babies" category. I am not asserting that the drugs are safe for young children. I am questioning that the doctors prescribing them do not seem to have any evidence that they are safe for young children other than assuming that their safety for adults applies to young children. As I wrote: If drugs are shown to help young children with mental issues then the question becomes what is the lower limit of the age of suitable patients? |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 09:03 PM | #228 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
The news articles that actually mention babies and antipsychotic drugs are a 10 December 2015, New York Times: Still in a Crib, Yet Being Given Antipsychotics. This is based on the reported usages of the drugs - not who prescribed them for what conditions. This is what the "psychiatric industry" says about this
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
28th August 2016, 10:28 PM | #229 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,852
|
I disagree. A drug that might be relatively safe and effective for an adult (with a fully formed brain) may very well not be safe and effective for a brain not yet fully formed. In fact it might be quite dangerous.
There is a dearth of convincing research in this area. A child's brain will undergo an enormous amount of change (synaptic connections, etc.) to become fully mature. We have no idea how these drugs may interfere with or otherwise affect this development. I stick with my assessment; without any scientific support, prescribing these drugs is arrogant, negligent, irresponsible and criminal. Frankly, I regard these children as victims, irrespective of their behavior, short of them being demonstrably homicidal or suicidal. |
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman ξ |
|
28th August 2016, 11:20 PM | #230 |
The Grammar Tyrant
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 34,996
|
I'm really not sorry your fallacy is failing, because it's so idiotic. Babies are a subset of young children, and as you Wiki link shows, count up to 2 years old.
Then why, for Zarquon's sake are you arguing the point? Are you a shill for psychiatry? Or are you a psychologist yourself? |
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable. |
|
29th August 2016, 11:01 AM | #231 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,454
|
It is worth mentioning that there is some evidence regarding safety, but not of the same quality we have for adults since there are no double blinded placebo controlled trials.
Primarily, the research on infant dosing and safety profiles is intended to explore potential risks associated with nursing from a mother who is taking these medications. The research estimates dosage and attempts to quantify any potential side effects. |
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett |
|
29th August 2016, 11:38 AM | #232 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,852
|
Perhaps so, but there is no scientific evidence regarding the long term (say, fifteen or twenty years) consequences of these drugs. Since they are given to an individual with a developing brain, it seems to me that it is critical to understand what these drugs might do to the development process.
|
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman ξ |
|
29th August 2016, 01:31 PM | #233 |
Muse
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 583
|
this is actually what the worst psychotherapists do.
well, there are good and bad people in all professions. some very bad psychotherapists don´t really apply psychotherapy. Instead they really TALK like friends. They try to make you happy, by saying you are right in all situations, etc. patients have a momentary relief and keep going for more sessions and giving money. only it´s short term and in the long term it solved none of the issues. they give a bad name to the profession. Some of them even get media famous. |
29th August 2016, 02:01 PM | #234 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
|
Hello,
I am not going to debate any one who flames me, so say you have a child 3 yo who never sleeps, and is psychotic and destructive. Would people consider that this might be an individual to refer for psychiatry, after a neurological work up. |
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar |
|
29th August 2016, 02:23 PM | #235 |
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 21,505
|
I concur: Just because a drug is old doesn't mean it's not effective. Phenobarbitol is still the single most effective drug for controlling epilepsy. There are other, newer drugs, which have fewer side effects and put less strain on the kidneys and liver... but they're not effective for everyone, and many of them lose effectiveness over time. Phenobarbitol still works very well. I know epilepsy is a neurological disorder, not a mental disorder, but it was the best illustration I have for "Old <> Bad"
|
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian |
|
29th August 2016, 02:34 PM | #236 |
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 21,505
|
|
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian |
|
29th August 2016, 02:51 PM | #237 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,454
|
No, but the short term safety is going in the right direction, and there's no immediately obvious mechanism of action for harm, so this is an example of a debate about where we have to consider "In light of weak evidence of safety and no evidence of harm, is the burden of proof on proving safety or harm?"
This is always the situation with pregnant women and children. We don't allow them in clinical trials, so we have to revert to other sources and qualities of evidence. My personal opinion is that the burden should reflect the danger associated with not prescribing. In this case, the worst case scenario is misbehavior, which does not appear to justify prescribing with such thin benefit/risk profiles. "if anything" - that's the challenge. It's hard to show long term safety for any drug or intervention, period. Adult clinical trials aren't performing generation length longitudinals. Phase III clinical trials for adults might be a year or two follow up max, but usually none. Anything in the fifteen-twenty year zone is usually beyond the scope of even post market surveillance, and falls into the category of ad hoc investigations based on anecdotal/cultural reports of harm or epidemiology. |
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett |
|
29th August 2016, 02:52 PM | #238 |
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 21,505
|
Cancer vs Mental illness isn't really a very good comparison. It's kind of like comparing mental illness and the flu. One is a persistent condition, the other is a short term contagion.
A better comparison would be Mental Illness versus Diabetes, or Congestive Heart Failure, or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, or Asthma. At least all of those are persistent conditions. And in all cases, medicine has made advances in treating those diseases, in allowing people suffering from them to lead better lives. And in all those cases, medicine has not managed to cure any of them. There's been a huge amount of progress in pharmaceutical treatment for mental disorders in the last 50 years. Heck, Prozac didn't even come out until the late 80s! Since then there's been a host of prescription treatments for depression. There've also been advances in treatment for schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder. |
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian |
|
29th August 2016, 02:53 PM | #239 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,454
|
|
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett |
|
29th August 2016, 03:06 PM | #240 |
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 21,505
|
Limit your search to stage 0 and stage 1 trials.
EVP-6308 for schizophrenia EVP-6124 for schizophrenia RO4917838 for schizophrenia That's 3 in the first 20 listed. There are 3 new treatments in trial for bipolar disorder, two of which are non-pharmaceutical trials. |
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|