To Kevin and the list.
I think this is getting ridiculous. Calling something a euphemism may be one way of communicating uncertainty to someone who is not "cleared". I don't know how scientologists communicate the diagnosis of mental illness to a 'fellow' scientologist who is in denial about signs and symptoms of depression.
However, the issue is not whether there really is a chemical imbalance. This is induced (I think I am using the right word here) from the response to SSRIs of people who are depressed. We could call pain a chemical imbalance, that is, a deficiency of endorphins, treatable with exogenous endorphins. However, pain is a socially acceptable disease, where mental illness is not.
Now as for the other issue, dissing EBM because you believe in another form of thinking that (as it appears to me) rejects the traditional hypothetico-deductive method of assembling knowledge, I am sick of it and as it seems to be one reason that people are quitting the list, ought to be stopped. EBM may not be perfect, but that is part of the role of science, to continue to strive for perfection. Let's keep the discussion on this level.
Sorry for the diatribe.
Dan Mayer
****************************************************************************
Dan Mayer, MD
Professor of Emergency Medicine
Albany Medical College
47 New Scotland Ave.
Albany, NY, 12208
Ph; 518-262-6180
FAX; 518-262-5029
E-mail; [log in to unmask]
****************************************************************************
>>> Kevin_Owen <[log in to unmask]> 11/22/01 03:05AM >>>
I agree people are not aware that " Chemical Balance " is used as
euphemisn.We are working on that.They still think that when a doctor gives them a label it is a true disease.
My point is that calling symtoms diseases when there is no proof of a Physical
Disease is fruad but maybe that is how EBM operates.Excuse my ignorance if it is.
http://psychextortion.cchr.org/eng/page12.htm
Regards
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr Alun Price" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: Clinical Examination and Evidence base
> I would disagree, most people are aware that------'Chemical imbalance'-----
> is used as an euphemism for ---I've no idea whats up but I've already told
> the last 10 people they had---- a virus----- and I was fed up with
> saying ---you have a virus---- and wanted to give an alternative label for
> the patient to go away happy.
> I would find the loss of 'Chemical imbalance' from my list of EBM diagnoses
> difficult to replace. I certainly would discourage any of my patients from
> having a biopsy, they might find something really wrong.
> Most of my diagnoses are invented from sound EBM principles. I've got some
> great ones. ;-)
> So what is it that your posting is about Kevin? I wasn't clear about what
> point you were making.
> Regards,
> Alun
>
|