Well, we'll agree to disagree then. The "exact criteria" that you say is, sorry to say, a joke to me. The comorbidities ARE very important because, causing ''emotional dysregulation'', as you've said, is something that's far from being improved upon when you ser on a single set of symptoms that define the illness. My point is not trying to find treatment for the comorbidities, but to find the right therapeutical and psychiatric measures so ALL of them are taken care of, which to me, improves a lot of the picture rather than worsens it.

It's irresponsible for, say, a psychiatrist to focus on the most prevalent traits and try to treat them separately, otherwise - no actually in a good 70% of the cases, indeedly patientsa are crammed either with an excess of medications and the wrong kind of therapy for it; iot's too reckless to do that - one needs to be careful and see the whole picture, otherwise THEN I think the ''emotional dysregulation'' worsens even more. As fewer meds as possible and a therapist competent enough not to be a specialist in BPD - because it's an illusion to think there are authorities on BPD, the way I see it and experienced it. Accuracy standards are the most misleading, appalingly misleading standards that there are. In a certain way, there IS indeed a ''combo'' as you've said of illnesses but nor should they be treated separately, which is a point I agree with you, yet nor they should be taken lightly and tossed aside by the DSM standards. What if the dysregulation happens EXACTLY because the doctor didn't take heed of the otherr traits and follow the ''official diagnosis'' and then neurological and psychiatrical/psychological symptoms are worsened because of it? Ever stopped to think about thst? I believe in NO authorities over the subject, as they in almost ALL of the cases conflict with each others, and certainly BY NO MEANS believe in the DSM. Sorry, but we'll have to agree to disagree. To me it's an over generalizing, reckless tome of no use in psychiatry. I speak from extensive experience an research too, and I'll have to aologize again, but YES, the DSM is a JOKE.

And I'll stand by my opinions and convictions and unfortunately, there's nothing you can say that will convince me of otherwise. I'm pretty much alone on this as I'm in the southern hemisphere and will refrain to discuss about this from now, as most of you are up north; differenmt mindsets, and different ways of treating it here in Brazil. In fact my therapist and psychiatrist put it very well when they said that those terminologies in the DSM here are naught but mere addendums. It might be very useful, but the way I see it, there's a good reason as to why the 'I' in the ICD stands for International, and I think it's presumptuous and reckless from a group of qualified specialists to think they know better and take the liberty of pissing all over the international standards and making things even more misleading. As far as I'm concerned, this debate ends here. We'll have o agree to disagree, and I won't say anything else anymore about the matter as means to not end offending people here. But if the shoe fits....