Post-natal depression is a myth.

3ndahalfof6

Pinklady11 wrote: »

So if you have a chest infection or similar, you won't take antibiotics because they are just trying to scam money out of you?

it is physical, a leap of faith is required to believe PND, as is heaven

Wibbs

Pinklady11 wrote: »

So if you have a chest infection or similar, you won't take antibiotics because they are just trying to scam money out of you?

Oh certainly I'd take an antibiotic for a bacterial infection, but' I'd not take one for a viral infection. Too many in the past did the latter and were prescribed same by GP's. I'd put good money that some people reading this still think antibiotics are effective against viral infections.

PS Pinklady11 good to hear you're recovering from this bad time. I'm sure you've worked hard to get to this place today. Kudos.

Sid_Justice

Wibbs wrote: »

Only last year a 16 year old niece of a friend of mine was put on high dose SSRI therapy. She's required hospitalisation on two occasions since because of serious and in earnest suicide attempts. Attempts she never made, nor reported as having feelings for before. Her parents have subsequently sought a second medical opinion(abroad as her mum isn't Irish) and she's been taken off them and while not out of the woods, is not suicidal.

It's a well known side effect that someone on the early stages of SSRI treatment become a higher risk for suicide. I was under the impression SSRIs can take up to 6 months to take effect. One of the reasons for the increase in suicidal action is people who are extremely depressed lack the energy to attempt suicide but with SSRI therapy they got out of the apathy/low-energy state but not the depressive and go and attempt it.

Are you not a psychologist by profession it sounds like this type of reaction seems new to you.

3ndahalfof6

Biggins wrote: »

Post something with intelligence - that has intelligence.
It will do you better credit.

ok i will conform and just post,

never mind its not worth the rant, ill just keep watching as i'm not part of the click.

but thanks for the feedback.

Wibbs

3ndahalfof6 wrote: »

it is physical, a leap of faith is required to believe PND, as is heaven

Wut? Bit early for the gargle isn't it?

Sid_Justice wrote:

Are you not a psychologist by profession it sounds like this type of reaction seems new to you.

Nope, not a shrink. In need of one maybe I dunno where you get "new to me" though? It's been a well known issue with that class of drugs for years. And sure the idea that it gives the already somewhat suicidal person the energy likely has something to it, but where such thoughts come where they've not been present before it's more of a worry.

Sid_Justice

Addressing the original posters point, why exactly is there such an outpouring of rage against it?

Some women become depressed post-natally, this condition is described as post-natal depression.

Some think this depression is down to neuro-hormonal conditions entirely separate to attitudes towards sudden motherhood. Some think the stimulus may be a mother's negative attitude to motherhood.

It appears some people who are mothers cannot accept the possibility that they have genuine and strong adverse feelings to being a mother. While in society we can safely say some men weren't cut out to be fathers and / or made bad fathers we seem to have an extreme reluctance to say the same about women.

That is not to imply women with PND are or will be bad mothers.

Sid_Justice

Wibbs wrote: »

Wut? Bit early for the gargle isn't it?

Nope, not a shrink. In need of one maybe I dunno where you get "new to me" though? It's been a well known issue with that class of drugs for years. And sure the idea that it gives the already somewhat suicidal person the energy likely has something to it, but where such thoughts come where they've not been present before it's more of a worry.

Some kind of scientist is it?

Is your opinion
People with low mood and depression who aren't suicidal and never had suicidal thoughts when on SSRI become suicidal. Therefore, SSRIs are bad in this case.

I would assume the standard is:
People with low mood and depression probably have suicidal thoughts, they may not have communicated with others or admitted to themselves. On SSRIs the extreme lethargy and cognitive impairment is taken away and they have the ability to orchastrate a suicide attempt.

The risk - short term (~6 months) higher risk of suicide.
The benefit - long term (years and years) significantly less depression, no suicidal tendencies once you've gotten over the bad patch.

I'm only guessing at this stuff, I'd love to see sam34 confirm / deny.

softmee

Kaneda_ wrote: »

motherhood as some magical transcendent experience

-motherhood is a magical transcendent experience -just not every women is mature enough or sensitive enough to feel it..

parrai

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Addressing the original posters point, why exactly is there such an outpouring of rage against it?

Some women become depressed post-natally, this condition is described as post-natal depression.

Some think this depression is down to neuro-hormonal conditions entirely separate to attitudes towards sudden motherhood. Some think the stimulus may be a mother's negative attitude to motherhood.

It appears some people who are mothers cannot accept the possibility that they have genuine and strong adverse feelings to being a mother. While in society we can safely say some men weren't cut out to be fathers and / or made bad fathers we seem to have an extreme reluctance to say the same about women.

That is not to imply women with PND are or will be bad mothers.

The poster is implying its a myth, when really the only mythological thing is himself

up for anything

I wonder what the OP has to say about pre-natal depression from which I suffered? A figment of my imagination? :rolleyes:

My name is URL

I haven't had a chance to read through all of the thread yet, but I remember reading a story about how PND, like some other conditions, is massively over-diagnosed these days, and other possible causes (SAD, PTSD etc) are overlooked. Something like 1 in 4 mothers are treated for it. I know that's not what the OP was getting at and it's not what the thread is about, but perhaps the extent to which it is diagnosed these days is partly responsible for the notion that some people have about it being a 'myth'. I'd imagine it can certainly sometimes be a constructed problem for some women, through no fault of their own.

Kaneda_

up for anything wrote: »

I wonder what the OP has to say about pre-natal depression from which I suffered? A figment of my imagination? :rolleyes:

While pre-natal depression does affect some,it is very rare.So yes,it was more than likely a figment of your imagination.

parrai

Kaneda_ wrote: »

up for anything wrote: »

I wonder what the OP has to say about pre-natal depression from which I suffered? A figment of my imagination? :rolleyes:

While pre-natal depression does affect some,it is very rare.So yes,it was more than likely a figment of your imagination.

You are incredible...

And a definite troll

opinion guy

This thread:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3iRu71PGDA

Successful Troll is successful

Kasabian

Kaneda_ wrote: »

While pre-natal depression does affect some,it is very rare.So yes,it was more than likely a figment of your imagination.

You really are a closed minded individual, I would prefer to tell you what I really think, but I ain't taking a ban for someone with your evident credentials. You are a troll, a sad one, the one's that spend their time trying so badly to be involved but lack the class, intellect or dedication to make it a worthwhile pastime.

Sid_Justice

parrai wrote: »

The poster is implying its a myth, when really the only mythological thing is himself

the original poster makes the treatise that all depression is just depression and what the mothers are depressed about is being mothers. It seems like a legitimate opinion to me.

Sauve

I don't know why anybody would take the opinion of somebody who isn't qualified to make such a statement as PND
Ask anybody who has suffered from this, and they will tell you exactly how tangeable and real it is.

Sid_Justice

Sauvignon82 wrote: »

I don't know why anybody would take the opinion of somebody who isn't qualified to make such a statement as PND
Ask anybody who has suffered from this, and they will tell you exactly how tangeable and real it is.

But that's not what the OP is saying. She/he is saying that Yes you are depressed but she has different opinions on what causes it. People need to read more and shout less.

Sauve

Sid_Justice wrote: »

parrai wrote: »

The poster is implying its a myth, when really the only mythological thing is himself

the original poster makes the treatise that all depression is just depression and what the mothers are depressed about is being mothers. It seems like a legitimate opinion to me.

They're not depressed about being mothers necessarily. A lot of it is caused by the hormonal shift after giving birth.

parrai

Sid_Justice wrote: »

parrai wrote: »

The poster is implying its a myth, when really the only mythological thing is himself

the original poster makes the treatise that all depression is just depression and what the mothers are depressed about is being mothers. It seems like a legitimate opinion to me.

It think that is generalising just a tad....

Biggins

up for anything wrote: »

I wonder what the OP has to say about pre-natal depression from which I suffered? A figment of my imagination? :rolleyes:

The OP isn't saying much at all - and what he has posted before he scarpered away, is absolute cobblers.

Thankfully the Op is remaining further silent. His work is done it seems.

kelle

Biggins wrote: »

The OP isn't saying much at all - and what he has posted before he scarpered away, is absolute cobblers.

Thankfully the Op is remaining further silent. His work is done it seems.

Here's your answer, Biggins!

TheyKnowMyIP

Nobody has the balls to comment on the links I have provided. Says alot about the people on this board imo. If you aren't willing to engage in a rational discussion about the problems with Psychiatric labelling, there is no point in responding.

By definition, if the dianostic criteria is based on opinion and less so on scientific fact, it is not unreasonable to sugget that PND could simply be a state of mind and not an actual clinical illness/disease. The top brass in Psychiatry agree with this statement, why should you bury your head in the sand.

The reason alot of people are stigmatising those with mental illness in this country, is because the field is totally second rate in comparison to conventional medicine. It really is the black sheep in medicine.

As long as Psychiatry remains in the dark ages with regards to dianostic criterion, the more people will rile against it. The mere fact the stigma is so prevelent today in society, serves to reenforce this idea.

One thing is for certain, there is more than enough evidence out there to support my claims. Therfore, unless you address this evidence, you cannot challenge my position. It really is that simple.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CHEMICAL IMBALANCE IN THE BRAIN:)

Until someone addresses the concerns I have raised, there is no point in engaging any further. Let the grown ups speak, please.

TheyKnowMyIP

If I fall over a ledge and hurt myself, do I suffer from post ledge falling depression? Logically speaking, one could apply this label to a patient given the current diagnostic criteria used by Psychiatrists. Is that enough to state objectively that "post ledge falling depression" is a disease of the mind though, or simply a rational response to falling off a ledge? Likewise, is it reasonable to suggest PND is a disease, or simply a state of mind attributed to the period of time(3 months to 1 year mostly) following the birth of a child?

I call bull****, personally. The lead author of the DSM bible used by Psychiatrists raises this concern. This guy is the top brass in Psychiatry. Why is he stating the field is moving "towards a cliff"? Is this guy uneducated to speak on the matter?

Millicent

TheyKnowMyIP, may I ask how you have become such an expert on this in a little over a week?

I will point you to this post: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74912826&postcount=95 .

Now, are you seriously trying to tell me, that you have researched depression, serotonin, psychiatry and postpartum depression extensively within a week? Or are you just trying to be argumentative with an ill-thought out, aggressively stated argument you appear to have formulated on a whim?

TheyKnowMyIP

Millicent wrote: »

TheyKnowMyIP, may I ask how you have become such an expert on this in a little over a week?

I will point you to this post: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74912826&postcount=95 .

Now, are you seriously trying to tell me, that you have researched depression, serotonin, psychiatry and postpartum depression extensively within a week? Or are you just trying to be argumentative with an ill-thought out, aggressively stated argument you appear to have formulated on a whim?

I lied. I was just trying to suss you up. Sorry. There is no empirical evidence for this theory that has stood the test of time. I am not an expert in this field, but from what the experts have stated on the matter, it's hard to know exactly how trustworthy the industry really is.

Suicidal people should not have drugs thrown at them. It's not addressing the real reasons for the depression, which are most likely socioeconomic, and not the result of low serotonin.

I want to make myself clear: The serotonion hypothesis of Depression is not real. It's about as trustworthy as a fairytale. Research it yourself if you don't believe me. Mental Health is a priority, but drugs aren't the answer. Biological Psychiatry has severe problems when it comes to the word "Science". None of this stuff has been proven. This is fact, not opinion.

TheyKnowMyIP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OVNiLKjMME

Millicent

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

I lied. I was just trying to suss you up. Sorry. There is no empirical evidence for this theory that has stood the test of time. I am not an expert in this field, but from what the experts have stated on the matter, it's hard to know exactly how trustworthy the industry really is.

Suicidal people should not have drugs thrown at them. It's not addressing the real reasons for the depression, which are most likely socioeconomic, and not the result of low serotonin.

I want to make myself clear: The serotonion hypothesis of Depression is not real. It's about as trustworthy as a fairytale. Research it yourself if you don't believe me. Mental Health is a priority, but drugs aren't the answer. Biological Psychiatry has severe problems when it comes to the word "Science". None of this stuff has been proven. This is fact, not opinion.

You lied about what?

Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe that antidepressants are over-prescribed, when counselling is often the better choice for the depressed person.

That in no way means that serotonin has no place in depression.

At present, the link is unproven, not disproven. There is a huge difference. Did you know that gravity is an unproven theory but also a fact given observation of its effects? Does that mean you don't believe in gravity either?

Millicent

Btw, TheyKnowMyIP, how do you propose researchers prove the serotonin link within the brain when they can't measure it on living persons? There is not some grand conspiracy to stifle the truth here. The research just cannot be proven without causing harm to individuals.

How do you account for the fact that serotonin has proved to be at lower levels in the blood of people who have been diagnosed with depression? Whether you believe it's psychosomatic or not, you can't doubt that the link exists, even if the reason for the link remains unknown.

TheyKnowMyIP

Millicent wrote: »

You lied about what?

Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe that antidepressants are over-prescribed, when counselling is often the better choice for the depressed person.

That in no way means that serotonin has no place in depression.

At present, the link is unproven, not disproven. There is a huge difference. Did you know that gravity is an unproven theory but also a fact given observation of its effects? Does that mean you don't believe in gravity either?

I never said it didn't. I am simply stating the widely believed idea that Depression is caused by a "biochemical imbalance" of neurotransmitters in the brain is the result of fraud, not scientific enquiry. If their claims have been proven, it's safe to say it's bunk.

Gravity holds up, because we can reliably observe it over a period of time. Gravity has far more weight, but that is not to say it can't be disproven. However, unlike the serotonin idea, it's been observed over a very long time to be reliable. The same cannot be said of the chemical imbalance theory.

To quote Daniel Carlat of Tufts, a leading Psychiatrist:

There is no question that among the medical professions, psychiatry is the most scientifically primitive. We have no more than the most rudimentary understanding of the pathophysiology of mental illness and we have resorted to tenuous and ever-shifting theories of how our treatments work. Dr. Angell’s review highlights these truths well, but at the same time gives short shrift to the very real benefits that we still provide our patients.
Daniel Carlat, M.D.

Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry
Tufts University School of Medicine
Boston, Massachusetts


Gravity has been mostly shown to be correct through scientific research. The chemical imbalance stuff has not. The above paragraph illustrates why. The link has not been shown, why believe it could be there, when science has shown that so far, there is no reliable evidence to support this idea. Gravity would not be believed had the physics behind the idea not held up over time. Any decent Scientist will tell you this.