Mental Illness and Stress and Meds

Ketamine is very new. Promising results in studies for depression. Quick acting. Even have a nasal spray. I don't think it is in use very much clinically yet. Way to early to tell long term results, effectiveness, side effects, abuse, addictive, and so on. A drug has to be on the market a long time. Probably discovered totally by accident for depression. If my meds quit working I will beg for it. I wanna go in the K hole.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You seem to think about the use of drugs in a fundamentally different way too. I don't think the object is to get high or to fall asleep. I understand the doses for pain are much higher. A lot of pain medication is self administered because you can't really schedule pain so a nasal drip makes sense. One of the promising parts for k is how long it lasts. You can get it off label but no, long term side effects are difficult to assess in 5 year studies. Hence the difficulty, IMO, with making them your only treatment.

Topic creep.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The ketamine possibility is sure intriguing.

I don't think I think about them differently. Sometimes I joke. When I said I want to go into the K hole it was a joke. I have never done special K but the K hole is a saying from that culture. I still have an addictive mind and sometimes I make remarks like that but it is joking.

The only reason I would want to take ketamine would be for the effective treatment of my depression. That is it. If it got me high a little for awhile I would not complain but that is not why I would take it.

Michanne
I do think it is a spectrum and I do not want to exclude anyone from the covno. I do not want to invalidate anyones experience or point of view. I have my experience, the experience of others I know and have known, the depression section of these forums, and education. This would cause me to focus and talk more about the more severe side of the spectrum. I am not sure which invalidating comment you are referring to?

I think my statements were reacting to statements like this-
I know Venus has a different outlook on things than I do. I think we established we have different personalities and a different way of looking at things. Her experience and perspective is as valid as mine. I don't know if she suffers from mental illness or not or if it is mild or whatever. I don't think she has said that I have saw. Doesn't matter it is none of my business. Those statements cause me to question her understanding of mental illness or at least severe mental illness. To say mental illness does not cause stress just baffles me. I guess I am trying to get her to understand the point of view of someone seriously mentally ill.

I am happy to talk about milder forms. I know a little bit from my own experience. I have spent 90% of my life in mild to moderate depression. That is my normal. If I never experienced severe I don't know if I would have ever considered meds. In my normal mild to moderate many other things work quite well. Like going golfing yesterday. My sister suffers from a milder form and has taken Effexor for years and done quite well. She never has a severe depression.

So if you are talking about mild forms and how there is some line between in there between what is real and what is culturally defined I think I would agree with you. I have not looked through the DSM is a long time so I don't know what exotic new disorders they have come up with. I am sure I would find some of them real and serious and probably a bunch ridicules. I think it is a very good thing that we are understanding more about how people learn differently and think and process differently. We should be better able to teach and accommodate people in work environments. I don't think a lot of it should be labeled this disorder or that disorder or that people should be labeled unless it is real and serious. I am sure many many mild forms or this disorder or that disorder could be treated successfully with a change in cultural attitude and understanding, or other non invasive techniques, or a persons change in outlook, or meditation or whatever. I guess my opinion would be based totally on what we are specifically talking about. There are probably a lot of things or labels people may get that I would not consider a mental illness or disorder at all. There are probably many people that may have a dx that I would not consider mentally ill. My personal definition probably lies lower on the spectrum. I am not sure if I am making sense or on the same page as you. You have a better understanding of these types of issues than me. I focus more on severe because of my experience. That doesn't mean we can't discuss other issues.

Another note. I could be very wrong on this because it does seem there are a lot of people on anti depressants. I don't know if this is because it has become more acceptable or trendy or what. More people looking to them for a quick fix or what. This has been my perception of it - the vast majority of people are not going to wake up one day and willy nilly think of I am a little stressed I am gonna go get an AD. Myself and the people I know had to go through a lot of pain and suffering before they reached the point of going to a doc for help. It was really the last thing they wanted to do. To go on an AD you have to admit to yourself that something is seriously wrong and most people don't want to do that. There are many in the depression section very sick and they still can't bring themselves to get to a pdoc and T. Someone who goes to get a quick fix for stress or to be happy is under an illusion and is gonna find out real quick it don't work that way. They are not going to take it long especially is they get side effects. They will go back to alcohol or pot if they want a chemical. So it doesn't seem to me there should be a lot of people on AD's who don't really have depression. If there are it makes no sense to me.

I think there needs to be a differentiation between mental illness (which is neurobiological) and emotional disorder. Furthermore, within each mental illness or emotional disorder, there is a spectrum. Much of the arguing that goes on on this board (Psych Meds) is, I believe, the result of confusing mental illness with emotional disorder. Of course, the two have degrees of overlap, but I do believe that one or the other tends to dominate.

Point of debate to administration.

Isn't education and understanding a large part of support? It is to me. So if those who participate in debate and those who might read it are getting educated by it, isn't it supportive. I know there is much on the internet but reading a side effect profile or an educational article on the web is not the same as real world people with real world experience debating or discussing these issues. We hopefully gain a better understanding of each others widely varying points of view and this should make us better at supporting ourselves here and others. People outside the forums may read it and it increases their understanding and helps them decide which course of action they should take. It is often very hard to know what the right thing to do is and debate can help you choose. It causes you to question what you believe and if you need to change it or you become more affirmed in it and feel better about your choices. So I think debate is supportive if it keeps within certain lines. No attacks, no abuse, should stay on topic so others could follow it easier.

Well, I think Venus answered your question in a later post. If you want to know what experience she has that allows her to have an opinion I think the best thing to do is ask her. You are basically saying you don't trust her opinion because she doesn't advertise her illness. Why not just accept her at face value? I find her insights to be unique and helpful. What you wrote still comes across as very invalidating to me.

Yes, antidepressants are the second most prescribed drug or up in the top three. Can't remember exactly. The book Prozac Nation (90s I think) was a huge success and had a lot to do with its popularity as a drug for just about anyone. Then the Zoloft campaign was brilliant. Who doesn't remember the little round neurotransmitters? It is very clever in how it says but doesn't say depression is a chemical imbalance which Zoloft can cure, btw. The ad is on YouTube if you want to scrutinize it. Next, although it isn't an antidepressant, abilify has been advertised as a supplement to ADs. It is close to or is the most successful drug ever. It is called a "blockbuster". If not in volume then certainly in profits. Since I don't watch commercial TV I don't know what they are advertising now. I'm sure it is clever too.

I studied some advertising so I can have respect for the campaign and hate the industry at the same time.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I do believe arguing is different from debate. That I am sure of.

I am curious as to how you differentiate emotional disorder from mental illness and why it matters. Can you expand?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That is not true and not all what I said. I said I didn't know, that she hasn't said, and it is none of my business. I said her experience and point of view is as valid as mine including her opinion. She is free to share her experience and opinions as she chooses.

What I actually said was that I questioned her understanding of severe mental illness. If her opinion is that severe mental illness does not create stress then I strongly disagree. If it is her opinion that depression and mania is not a big deal but only the consequences then I strongly disagree. She has a right to her opinion and I didn't say she didn't have a right to it. I have a right to disagree. And based on those statements I don't see how she possibly could understand mental illness. So I am questioning her understanding not her opinion.

If someone says mental illness does not create stress or depression and mania are not a big deal then I feel invalidated. For me and a vast number of others it creates a huge amount of stress and is a very big deal. There are consequences for sure, that is where the stress comes from. But the depression and mania itself is a huge deal.

Well I really think you are addressing the wrong person here. I think direct communication is usually the best. I have found that is challenging with some people in this forum but I do think you and she are mature and intelligent enough to handle it or I wouldn't have the respect I do for you both

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, first off, I'm not referencing any psychiatric professionals or schools of thought, specifically. I'm drawing my thoughts from decades of self-education, job experiences, and life experience. And intuition. I am generalizing for the sake of keeping this post from being annoying lengthy.

To me it is usually clear when someone is neurobiologically mentally ill with the "hardcore" psych diagnoses: schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depression, certain anxiety disorders, OCD, etc. If mental illness interferes with everyday living that is in the range of societal normality, that is when psychiatric medication is necessary imo. Psychotherapy isn't helpful for untreated (with medication) mental illness - in fact, therapy and other tools (meditation, for example) can trigger symptoms (such as hearing voices). When, however, medication is working as it should and the person is stable therapy (individual, group, or both) can be helpful, and that's when I believe alternative tools (yoga, mindfulness, meditation, etc.) are of tremendous benefit.

Emotional disorder manifests differently than mental illness does and is much more treatable with therapy than with meds (especially the more hardcore meds, or meds at higher doses). In my mind I call such people "normal neurotics".

Personality disorders are probably the toughest to discern and treat. i.e., one person with BPD might respond well to a prn benzo where another person who suffers with BPD takes benzos and the medication causes mood swings. Of course, there's still the controversy about whether personality disorders are biological or environmental - although the most recent studies that I've read indicate that personality disorders are basically organic and set in motion by environmental factors.

So, just throwing some thoughts out there.

Once he left the hospital system john Nash rejected meds and learned to live with his delusions and eventually regained much of his thinking. He wrote that meds was never his choice. He has a Nobel prize. Today he believes in mental diversity (I refer to neurodiversity). He also believes in therapy. So therapy, no meds. His diagnosis is schizophrenia.

"Normal" is a deceptive word. It used to only refer to mathematics as in "normal mean" and at some point within the last century it started being used to define people. It may have even been within the last 60 years. I hope future gens leave this system of segregation behind because that is exactly what it is. I can assure you that being normal or abnormal by whatever litmus you want to use makes my depressive episodes no less painful or debilitating. Of course you are entitled to your own opinions.

Naturally if this thread is annoying there is always an option to start your own

Talk about stress... Thinking the government is following you all over the place certainly would be stressful.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I posted the following: "I am generalizing for the sake of keeping this post from being annoying lengthy." By that I meant that I was trying to keep my post concise. I was not offering my opinion about the thread in general.

Movies are made about people like John Nash because their situation is extremely rare. When all is said and done, it's how we feel about ourselves in relation to our world that helps us decide what works for us and what does not.

zinco14532323, of course mental illness causes stress and anyone who claims it doesn't truly comprehend mental illness...or feelings...perhaps someone who claims that mental illness doesn't cause stress is a sociopath.

I think I explained myself in the later post.

I am kinda getting tired of this convo. When I state my point of view, it's seen as lack of understanding because it doesn't adhere to the mainstream point of view.

When I confess something about myself, I am dragge in the ground for that, be it simple adminission of my faults, or my experience with my MI.

Maybe zinco would be interested in the fact, that ignorant Venus, that probably has no problems is experiencing mild hallucinations almost all times? But most of times I can just go with it.
Not to brag or anything, but sometimes when I read in the forums "I am experiencing this, should I call my pdoc" and see the string of "yes! Right NOW!!" responses, I kinda think to myself that if I went to ER each time I have my food talk to me or experience some flashvision or whatnot... I wouldn't get out.

But my personal interpretation of this is it's not something from the outside.... it's kinda internal reflection of the external.

I don't feel need to repeat it in every damn post. Especially, when I feel it's not relevant. Especially when I don't believe in DSM labels. But you could slap a list of DSM labels on me. My main issues would be bipolar, quite bad anxiety and some trauma issues (I REFUSE to call myself disordered for that).

But there is also where a personal stance comes in. I mean, there's tough guys who fix broken fingers with duct tape, cause they consider it trivial and there were people who go to doctor with every little thing, just in case. None of these are wrong (although later is soemwhat annoying if you live in country with universal healthcare......), but that is just personal approach. Would you argue that broken pinkies is less serious than weird looking insect bite or a cold because the latter person seeks medical attention for it?

Is lecturing education though?

You asked to clarify. I did the best I can. You didn't even adress my second post with real arguments, you just use it as proof I know nothing. I think I am not bothering anymore, you seem to have your agenda and are unwilling to see any other point of view.

I think I have been nice, never once I used your statements to declare you ignorant, I thought we are having an intelligent debate. Apparently not.

Support my ***.



You really consider this supportive?

I apologize if my OPINION makes you feel invalidated, but is it really to attack me as a person and my whole experience and knowledge?

You know, you are always free to put those who diagree with you on ignore and then declare how you are finally getting honest answers. Ignore feature is almost as great as glass ballot boxes and prefilled ballots when used right

its being well abused in ENGLAND by the drug user,s . so not many docs would ever script it , has for shrinks NOW WAY

Venus I fully apologize to you then. I really do. I do not want to be unsupportive or invalidate anyone. Ignorance is a stronger word and I questioned your understanding. I guess I worded things not in a good way. I think maybe mainly I wanted you to understand my point of view if I felt invalidated. I could argue that you are not willing to look at others point of view. I am willing to look at and acknowledge anyone's point of view. I may disagree with it and I may have a really hard time understanding it. It seems we in some ways we have a much different perspective on mental illness. We can agree to disagree. I don't really have an agenda, but in debate people often disagree and will argue for their point of view and may question the others and visa versa. That is just debate. I think I can learn from your point of view and you from mine. Some statements took me aback. Part of what you said I totally agreed with. You said external factors we internalize and that causes us problems. I totally agree. I didn't expect you at all to share your experience, I just said I didn't know and it was none of my business.

I will try very hard to stick to my experience only and my point of view and be supportive and not comment on anyone elses point of view. That is not really debate though. Even if I say I agree with your point of view, it might be supportive, but it is still commenting on your point of view. Often in debate someone will say I agree with you on that point but on this other I strongly disagree and question their rational for having it. It is the nature of debate and sometimes it gets heated. If an article says all psyche meds cause insulin resistance it would be very hard for me not to comment of that. So maybe Doc John is right and we should not debate at all. I would be sad to lose that.

By debate being supportive I mean it is educational. I might get my feelings hurt but if I am open enough to consider your point of view then it will help me. If I totally disagree with everything someone says then it may not be beneficial to me, but that is rarely the case. I believe there is much we agree on. I am having a debate with someone in the addiction section and there is much we disagree on and he questions my point of view and I question his. And we have both agreed it is a healthy discussion. He may say something I have never thought of or he may say something that causes me to question my point of view and change it. That is why I think it is healthy. We may even occasionally offend or get our feelings hurt but I think we can get past that. Debates are often heated and passionate.

Zinco, I do see your point of view, but that is not my experience, but that has more to do with our philosophies than severity of our condition.

I don't think that the internal stress doesn't matter at all, but it's just not the main factor imho. That is, as i said, imho, the problem of outer interactions, the way we internalize the external...

I posted this long time ago, which explains my position.

http://forums.psychcentral.com/other...ving-live.html

I really hope it makes sense.

You fail to understand the modern trials of the drug. It makes it extremely difficult to communicate with you when you fail to comprehend what I wrote.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

And I would say John Nash's story is only so "unusual" because of how our culture has defined MI and chooses to deal with it. By medicating the f out of it instead of learning to except who we are. Instead of valuing their oddities as beautiful. To give people an unmedicated space to heal as a choice instead of making medication into a federal mandate. The other reason stories like that are told is because they are good examples of how it COULD be rather than how the gen population have decided it should be. John Nash is by no means alone. You have somebody in this thread working to live without meds and someone working on it. You said "meds are necessary" for people with hardcore MI. The implication being that people that don't need meds aren't hardcore. I think that kind of thinking closes minds to possibility. That's my opinion.





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think we agree. I don't think internal stress is the main factor either. I think mental illness and the effects it has on our lives creates an enormous amount or stress for many people. It is a byproduct of mental illness. That can have serious health implications. It is a side issue really.

I totally agree with you that the way we internalize the external is a huge factor in mental illness, especially at a young age and into the teens. And not just mental illness but low self worth, self loathing, anger issues, and all kinds of things we may not call mental illness. Probably the emotional disorders Sister Rags talks about. I would say parenting and immediate family is the biggest external factor. There are other cases such as rape or a soldier returning from a horrendous experience in war and have PTSD that causes depression and maybe alcohol and drug use. Those are solely external, not family, and very hard for people to deal with because they do tend to internalize them.

I will read your triggered philosophy when I have some more time. I expect we would disagree on how much influence societal and cultural pressures play a role. I think they do play a role but to what degree. I just have my experience that I want to share but it will be a long post.

I will try to be brief because I have to go do a little plumbing job.

My views on mental illness and the causes. Based on my experience, on the experience of many other I know and have known, and on my education on the issues we talk about.

Severe Depresion (in many cases), Bi Polar I, and Schizophrenia I believe have huge genetic and biological components. They are the primary cause in my view. For example someone with schizophrenia who experiences hearing voices, hallucinations, psychosis, and so on in my view is totally biological and I don't thing external factors have anything to do with it. I watched a very good friend of mine develop it in his early teens. Someone who is Bi Polar I and has extreme manic episodes with psychosis (maybe only one or two in a life time) and last 6 months or a year. Solely biological. Some people may choose not to take meds and I respect that decision. My buddy did not want to take meds but when he didn't he got extremely paranoid and there were cameras and the CIA and government and all of that. He could not "function" very well without meds. At least based on societal norms. Maybe he could live with it without meds but the paranoia had to be very unpleasant and uncomfortable to him.

My depression I believe is very hard wired into me genetically and biologically. I have never been able to figure out what environmental triggers may have caused those genes to express themselves or how to get them to turn off. It hit me in 7th grade. I think they were triggered by adolescence and the biological changes that happen then. All the very hard work I did for many years that have nothing to do with meds didn't seem to put a dent in it. I have elaborated a number of times on what all that hard work entailed and I won't list it again here but it was a lot and varied. That was external methods with the goal of changing biology and whatever the underlying causes of the depression were. I resolved all past external influences. I have current ones I have to stay on top of. But that is why I believe for me it is very hard wired biologically.

Alcoholism/addiction. I think for me it is a disease with very strong genetic factors. Propensity to addictive personality. It is controversial. DSM calls it a disorder. It was very easy for me to identify the external factors that caused those genes to express themselves and I worked through them all. I went to AA for many years and followed the philosophy and successfully treated my alcoholism and addiction. I have been clean and sober 19 years. Huge success. No meds involved. Why it didn't work on my depression I can only assume it is much more hard wired. Especially since it has gotten worse with addition of anxiety/paranoia.

Causes of severe depression with no genetic or biological component.
This I believe is mostly family based. Sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse, emotional neglect, abandonment, lack of needs getting met, no love and nurturing, no physical touch as a baby, poverty that induces huge stress, severe trauma, and lots of factors. Many of them could happen out side the home as well. Ages 0 to 10 we are the most vulnerable because we are in such a crucial developmental stage for our brains and bodies. They younger it starts the worse it will become. Often by the time someone get in their teens the patterns are set. Although the teenage years can also have a big influence on things from the environment. Domestic violence, rape, PTSD, a lot of factors that are totally environmental and it is going to get internalized. Attachment disorder. It is proven that a baby that gets separated from his mother at birth and ends up a ward of the state with not much nurturing and so on will have huge changes in the brain compared to a baby that has a very loving and nurturing mother. My sisters adopted son from Russia is an example. He is nine and has come a long way but has always shown signs or sociopathic behaviors. So environmental factors can have a huge impact on biology especially the brain in my view.

Emotional Disorders- I don't know much about them so can't comment to much.
I would think all the same factors that I talked about for non biological depression would apply to these as well. All kinds of different symptoms for the same types of causes.

The most important thing is how do you treat it. I think meds if they work can play a large role in both types, genetic/biological, and environmental that has changed biology. The goal should be to get to the root causes of the symptoms and not just treat the symptoms. I wish there were better meds but they do play a role in getting to root biological causes of symptoms. Therapy should be aimed at treating root causes. There are many varieties and theories. Some say forget about the abuse and trauma of the past and that we are going to heal the past in the present. Some say you have to really dredge up those abuses and traumas and face them head on before you can move forward. I believe it is a combo of both. You have to face and work to resolve issues from your past but it gets to a point where you can dwell on it to much, at that point it is best to move to methods that will heal you in the present. At this point in my life I choose to focus on present circumstances in my life and to practice proven methods that are only about the present but will also heal any old wounds that are still there. My depression has to be treated with meds as well because of the huge genetic and biological factor. I wish they had better meds for this but my current meds are working better than anything I have ever tried. I do not feel flat or numb, I actually experience a much wider range of emotions. I can actually cry.

I think people regardless of the disorder or illness or the severity of it should be able to choose to take meds or not take meds, to choose how they want to treat it or how they want to live with it. Some people do it successfully and I am sure there are many others who refuse to take meds and do not have a lot of success in managing or living with their disease. That would be a very subjective matter of perspective. I think the vast vast majority of people with mental illness and emotional disorders to not want to accept and live with them. They would rather not have them. They choose to try to do something about it to at least alleviate symptoms and hopefully get to root causes. This has nothing to do with societal influence it is because they are just not comfortable with it and want to get rid of it. Severe depression and anxiety is not comfortable at all and something you really want to live with. I am sure extreme paranoia is not comfortable either.

I am sure it is very difficult for someone with severe mental illness who chooses to not take meds or to even treat it and is happy to live with it faces enormous societal pressure. All the messages would be the opposite of what they are doing.

People with milder forms and choose not to take meds or use other alternative forms of treatment....I dunno how much societal pressure they would face. It seems to me it wouldn't have as big an impact on that persons life and would be easier to treat in whatever way they choose. It doesn't seem to me that person would face that much societal pressure. I don't feel it when I am in my mild to moderate normal state. I feel it very much when I am in severe, but I freely choose to go along with those pressures because I want to treat it in anyway I can. Other conditions I don't know about. Aspbergers, autism, the different ways people learn and perceive, probably does need to be a huge cultural shift in attitudes. I don't know much about them.