Hey. I agree with much of what you say but I would like to add something of a cautionary note.

The studies you cite are indeed important, often cited, and fairly notorious for casting doubt on psychiatry.

It is important to note, however, that the studies were done a fair while ago now (1974, 1949, 1962).

It is correct that there are still a number of disorders in the DSM that haven't been validated. Supporters would say something about now about how across the board validity is improved with each edition and hence each edition is getting closer and closer to carving nature at its joints.

I'm not too sure how they measure 'validity'. I get a bit muddled up with the relationship between 'validity' and 'inter-rater reliability'...

Everybody might agree that the caloric fluid flowed from one object to the next (in the good old days of alchemy) but that doesn't establish that there is any such thing as caloric fluid ;-)