Is investment in Big Pharma a mental illness?

I get the idea that while there's been all sorts of criticisms aimed at the authors of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders for suggesting that temper tantrums or binge eating may be included as a mental disorder, or that eccentricity might result in you lying down on the shrink couch, there are those among us who'd like to see the new book put into practice, if only for the utterly ridiculous factor.

Reading the stories, it got me thinking. It's so ridiculous, I wanted to see how far it could go. I started making a list of things that I didn't like about other people's behaviour, things I objected to, and so on. I basically settled on one thing and it's the reason for this blog. It's the person who asserts something is so with no shed of evidence to back it up. Weapons of mass destruction is an example. So it's not just psychiatrists who blast out hot air.

Shrink says temper tantrums are a mental illness or disorder or whatever. "How d'you know that then?" Are temper tantrums actually a mental illness, or are they so disliked by many, that psychiatrists are about to give parents the day off with a drug nanny?

As for eccentricity, I think my name could be in the hat. My words here could be psychiatrically reinterpreted as being that of a slightly unhinged individual who has a particular eccentricity about psychiatry, where his or her idiosyncracies could impact upon their well being taking over their life, leading to mental this and that. But that would only be because a shrink said so. If he or she were asked, "how d'you know that then?", there'd be even more hot air.

If it weren't for the complete nuttiness of this whole thing, I don't think the DSM would see the light of day. The fact it's so stupid, seems to blind people to the point they think there might be something in it.

But there is something in it: money. If you're a shareholder in Big Pharma, then it's not so ridiculous, stupid, or nutty.

Perhaps there should be a tag for those who invest in Big Pharma.

Psycho-ramblers go rambling

A journalist in the Boston Globe, has written what can only be described as poetry to those who recognise the idiocy of psychiatry. 'So who's crazy now?' considers all of the psycho-ramblers [psychiatrists] and their psycho-ramblings ['disorders'] who periodically come together to form the comic known as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

And I thought I was needed to trivialise psychiatry. In an editorial published in Psychiatric Times, Dr. Allen Frances, the editor of DSM-IV, called DSM-V "a wholesale imperial medicalization of normality that will trivialize mental disorder and lead to a deluge of unneeded medication treatment - a bonanza for the pharmaceutical industry but at a huge cost to the new false positive 'patients' caught in the excessively wide DSM-V net." Exactly doc.

And psychiatrist, Dr Daniel Carlat, has described the rambling process on his blog, the Carlat Psychiatry Blog, as a 'Bar Room Brawl'. He says, "There can be no dramatic improvements in psychiatric diagnosis until we make a fundamental leap in our understanding of what causes mental disorders. The incredible recent advances in neuroscience, molecular biology, and brain imaging that have taught us so much about normal brain functioning are still not relevant to the clinical practicalities of everyday psychiatric diagnosis. The clearest evidence supporting this disappointing fact is that not even one biological test is ready for inclusion in the criteria sets for DSM-5."

What? No biological test ready? Surely not.

My tongue, by the way, is once again firmly planted in my cheek.