HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Therapy and Psychiatry  (was: Anti-psychiatry)
Date: 8 Sep 92 23:09:46 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <18623tINNpj9@agate.berkeley.edu> werner@soe.berkeley.edu (John Werner) writes:
>
>I just started seeing a psychologist/therapist, and reading this
>last post has made me curious.  I realize this is an incredibly
>over-generalized question, but what is the role of therapy in
>psychiatry these days?
>
>My naive impression was that treatment was still mostly therapy,
>with drugs prescribed as well (sometimes as a temporary measure,
>sometimes long-term) when the psychiatrist thinks they will help. 
>Is it now starting to be the other way around?
>

Very definitely.  I'll let others answer for the role of
psychotherapy, but in my view, it is much less useful in
the cases of serious mental illness than are drugs.  For
people in need of counselling, it is a different matter,
and you can use psychologists for that, don't need an MD.
Talking to patients should never go away, not only in psychiatry
but in medicine in general.  But the "talking cure" is
not very useful, in my view.  Cognitive therapy can be
shown to be effective in depression, but there have been
precious few other studies validating other forms of psychotherapy
for objective effectiveness.  None for psychoanalysis, as far
as I know.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Mark D. Kline)
Subject: Re: Depression: Nutritional treatments
Organization: Syracuse University
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 19:12:13 EDT

In article <PHR.92Sep11152003@soda.berkeley.edu> phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) writes:
>In article <1992Sep10.093815.21854@newstand.syr.edu> mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Mark D. Kline) writes:
>
>   Hey, I'm glad your friend is feeling better but whoa....considerable
>   agreement among who, the people who sell amino acids?  While precursor
>   loading (a "nutritional" approach) makes sense in some neurological
>   disorders (e.g., parkinson's) there is no clear evidence that amino
>   acids reliably help any kind of depression.
>
>My friend had depressive episodes lasting a few days each, and found
>phenylalanine helped them.  I know someone else who has been depressed
>for years who tried it with no noticable effect.  I suspect the
>underlying causes of short and long depressions (when physical)
>are different but don't know much about the subject.
>I've taken phenylalanine tablets a few times and noticed a change
>in my mental state within 1-2 hours (made me feel more energetic
>but somewhat "wired").  Might be a placebo effect, I don't know.

Might not be a placebo effect.  I found a 1986 article which did find
(in an open trial) that phenylalanine was helpful for depression.
What I meant by my comment is that the mental health field would
jump on this with both feet if it had been shown to be effective.
Lots of depressed people are very resistant to the idea of taking
medication, and I'm sure some of them would be open to taking an
amino acid.  

--
================================================================= 
mark kline                              mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu
suny health science center, syracuse    voice: (315) 422-1050
================ courtesy of syracuse university ================
From: John Werner <werner@soe.berkeley.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: "Incompetent doctors"
Date: 8 Sep 1992 21:41:13 GMT
Organization: UC Berkeley School of Education
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: tol7mac19.soe.berkeley.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1



In article <16358@pitt.UUCP> Ken Mitchum, km@cs.pitt.edu writes:
>If you are unhappy with the fact that your choice of physicians
>within the military is more limited than you would like, please
>state that, rather than to stereotype an entire group of
>professionals.

I'm sorry if I struck a raw nerve.  You're right.  Ihouldn't have
stereotyped the entire group, and I'm sure there are good doctors in
the military and VA.  At the risk of another stereotype, I'd
actually expect the VA ones to be better; working there probably
takes a fair bit of dedication, given the VAs reputation, deserved
or not.  But from what I hear, many of the military doctors seem to
be there because the government paid off their med school debts, and
don't seem to really care.

BUT, the medical horror stories I've heard from my sister and her
husband are pretty bad.  Last year she had frequent stomach problems
and quite a bit of weight loss for two or three months, until they
figured out she had developed an intolerance for lactose.  More
recently, he has been fainting fairly often, especially after
exercise and meals.  This has been going on since April, and they
still haven't figured it out.  Last week a psychiatrist tried to
tell him it was "stress", even though there's evidence that
something is wrong physically.  (For the curious, the physical signs
are anemia, a slight heart murmur, and a regular pattern to when the
fainting happens.)

Maybe it's just a limited choice of physicians; maybe there is a
higher percentage of bad ones than in private practice.  I don't
really know, especially since all of these stories are second-hand.

--
John Werner                         werner@soe.berkeley.edu
UC Berkeley School of Education     510-642-9651
From: spissinger@urz.unibas.ch
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: NLP-Discussion
Date: 14 Sep 92 13:18:39 MET
Organization: University of Basel, Switzerland


I am sick of the way NLP is discussed here by -adult!- people.
And those who permanently cry for science behave most irrational and
aggressive.
Isn't this exactly the way new groundbreaking theories have always been
offended?

I AM NOT A NLP-GUY!!!!

Thomas, fighter for truth, justice and politeness
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: lindae@netcom.com ()
Subject: Re: Baclofen
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 04:39:08 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

>>>>Is anyone familiar with the drug called Baclofen?  If so, I'd like to
>>>>know what it is, what it's used to treat, and any possible side effects.
>>>It has an effect on GABA, but Steve can tell you all about that
>>>better than I.
>>for me.  What is GABA?
>
>GABA is Gamma-Amino-Butyric-Acid, an inhibitory neurotransmitter in the
>brain and spinal cord.  Baclofen is a GABA-b receptor agonist, meaning
>
>Does this help?
>
A bit too technical for me...but thanks anyhow...
Linda

>-- 
>Steve Dyer
>dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer


Newsgroups: sci.med
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: NLP a psychoactive drug here?
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 22:56:17 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


Mark Kline attributes my observation that I didn't see nastiness in
the NLP discussion on Sci.psychology as I did here to the larger number
of NLP supporters over there.

The logic in Kline's message leaves something to be desired. As I said
in the message to which he responded, there are a lot more
professional psychologists over there than over here, one assumes,
judging both by the names of the groups and the messages I've read.
Thus if serious psychologists were going to attack NLP, it would be
more, rather than less likely to show up over there. Each person who
wishes can post, and even if there were a zillion NLP supporters over
there, those who were "anti" would post. Recall that the message Kline
responded to didn't speak of percentages but of absolute numbers.
From: brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Politics and sci.med (was: unc health care study)
Date: 11 Sep 1992 23:49:26 GMT
Organization: The Avant-Garde of the Now, Ltd.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

<flvnj__.strnlght@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>Steve Dyer's latest message says more about him out of his own mouth
>than I could possibly do, so there's no need for more than this
>one-sentence response to it.

Indeed it does.  It shows Steve to be a highly-competent, reasoning,
well-informed individual who knows what he's talking about.  One could
scarcely ask for better from anyone.
	- Brian
From: mcg2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Marc Gabriel)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: \*\* Lyme Discussion Group? \*\*
Date: 11 Sep 92 02:58:59 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University
Topic: Lyme Disease

Lyme disease diagnosis and treatment are two of the most hotly debated medical
issues today (just take a look at the latest posts on the subject).

It is the fastest growing infectious disease in the US, second only to AIDS.
If AIDS has its  SCI.MED.AIDS  usenet board, why can't Lyme have a
SCI.MED.LYME  discussion group?
Anybody interested?
Anybody know how to get this started?

-Marc.
-- 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
             Marc C. Gabriel '93    -  U.C. Box 545  -
               (215) 882-0138        Lehigh University
              mcg2@Lehigh.EDU       Bethlehem, PA 18015
                Compu$erve: >internet:mcg2@Lehigh.edu
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 I'm still thinking about the witty one-liner I'm supposed to put here.
Xref: sparky sci.med:17159 sci.psychology:3698
From: zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Eric Zorrilla)
Newsgroups: sci.med,sci.psychology
Subject: [Prescription Privileges]
Date: 10 Sep 92 19:57:34 GMT
Followup-To: sci.med
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Admission privileges have been granted to psychologists in DC and California
and are likely to follow in domino-fashion throughout the nation.

What do mental health professionals out there see as the future of
prescription privileges vis a vis clinical psychologists?

	1)  Should an appropriately trained psychologist be granted
limited prescription privileges of psychoactive medications?

If so,

	2)  What would be the nature (breadth and depth) of that training?
	3)  Who would supervise it? (Which APA, for instance)
	4)  What would the licensing procedures entail (would there be an
objective examination in addition to practica experience?)
	5)  To what degree should prescription privileges be "limited"
	(only can prescribed antidepressants, but not anxiolytics, etc.)

If not, why?

I obviously have my own agenda but would like to hear input from others
in my and related fields.

[--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------]
| Eric Zorrilla - Dept. of Psychology  | zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu     |
| University of Pennsylvania           | 3815 Walnut, Philadelphia, PA 19104  |
[--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------]
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: jensen@unlinfo.unl.edu (michael jensen)
Subject: Re: Cops & Radar
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 20:57:47 GMT

Kurt.Ullman@p0.f290.n231.z1.fidonet.org (Kurt Ullman) writes:

>MJ>From: jensen@unlinfo.unl.edu (michael jensen)
>MJ>Kurt.Ullman@p0.f290.n231.z1.fidonet.org (Kurt Ullman) writes:

>MJ>>Does anybody out there have any SCIENTIFIC studies on the
>MJ>>the relationship between traffic radars and cancer.  There is a great
>MJ>>deal of controversy, but little evidence either way.  My trip through
>MJ>>MEDLARS yielded nothing.

>MJ>My question revolves around the nature of the "little evidence either
>MJ>way." Since there exists a defined group who use the guns, and since
>MJ>figures of frequency etc. can be ascertained, why is it difficult to
>MJ>generate a control group of similarly aged, similarly sedentary people
>MJ>to determine if there *is* a relationship between radar gun use and
>MJ>odd, unusual cancers? Why is this hard?

>        It does not seem to be hard. It just seems that it hasn't been
>done or hasn't passed through the peer reviewer gauntlet and into
>publication. Actually one of the problems may be frequency figures
>(assuming you are talking about frequency of use and not radio frequency
>of the radar). Relatively few officers run radar every day during the
>entire shift. Most do at the very least traffic accidents and many
>others are required to address any run that comes down the pike.  Thus,
>there may be great difficulty in deciding what expsoure really took
>place.
>        The other interesting thing is why use sedentary. As noted, even
>traffic officers seldom sit and run radar all day. Due to the desire of
>cities to keep the officers in shape for health and disability
>insurance reasons, this population is more active than it used to be.

The "sedentary" has to do with controlling for physical factors; that 
is, trying to find an appropriate control group. Since (I'd assume) 
most of the patrolmen who have been getting the testicular and other 
cancers tend to sit while they run their radar guns, you'd want men 
who do the same sorts of sitting. Sure, many of us have occasional 
workouts, as do the patrolmen, but that doesn't mean they're as active
as, say, delivery drivers. They're more like computer jockeys, I'd 
wager, in the amount of daily activity they get.

Michael Jensen
jensen@unlinfo.unl.edu

> 

>--  
>Internet: Kurt.Ullman@p0.f290.n231.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Xanax
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 16:27:29 GMT

>This is true; however readers should note that it is equally true if the
>claims are that the cure is ineffective as well as effective.

Not really.  When you're testing a possible cure, the null hypothesis is
that it is ineffective or worse.  In the absence of affirmative evidence
of efficacy, out it goes.  It's the only sensible approach -- how else
would you react if I said "eating a whole box of Wheaties, including the
box, cures your hemmorhoids?"

A few reports of cures aren't very persuasive, since diseases go away on
their own, the placebo effect can be very strong, other treatments may
also have been given, etc.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
From: mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Mark D. Kline)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Phobias, NLP, etc (was Re: Xanax)
Summary: ignorance & foolishness abound
Date: 12 Sep 92 18:19:44 GMT
Organization: Syracuse University


 
In article <0jvnrk.strnlght@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>
>Sean McLinden seems to be applying pharmaceutical standards of effectiveness
>to therapies. Few, if any "widely accepted" non-pharmaceutical therapies
>have been subjected to such standards, and it is as inappropriate to
>apply them to new therapies as it would have been to, say, Freud.

Wrong.  There is a very extensive research literature on the effectiveness
of various psychotherapies.  Many Freudian constructs have been subjected
to experimental validation.  The outcome literature on psychoanalytic
psychotherapy is not as strong (in support of the treatment) as the 
literature on cognitive & behavioral methods. 

>
>For bettor or worse, non-chemical psychotherapy has been subjected
>to something like the following standards:
>
>1. Does it help patients?

How do you know this if you don't do an empirical study?  That's
the point.  If you just ask the patients, who pay the money, and
the therapists, who take the money, its clear in advance what
they're going to tell you.

>2. Is there a credible theoretical underpinning?

Theoretical underpinnings are really credible only in so far as they
have empirical support.  

>3. Are its practitioners trained in some reliable and replicable way?

Like scientologists?  They've got a training program all worked out.

>4. Is there any substantial body of people hurt by the technique? (note
>that this standard is often ignored or obfuscated--did the psychiatrist's
>patient commit suicide as a consequence of the therapy or was he
>going to unstoppably do so anyway?

How do you know if a treatment hurts or helps unless you study 
treatment outcomes?   Unless you do a systematic study, how do
you know whether people are better or worse off as a result of
the treatment?

>Not that the above aren't dicta but an attempt to describe what I think is
>going on. Others may have additional criteria to add.

Yeah, others like the psychologists who have made a life work out of
studying whether or not psychotherapies work.  Read Strupp, Luborsky; and
see Garfield & Bergin: _Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change_.
Others people have worked out strenuously on the problem of how to
study whether psychotherapies work or not.  You obviously haven't.

>
>NLP fulfills all 4.
 
Like shit it does.  As far as "criteria" are concerned, if you
keep at it long enough, you might reinvent the wheel. 

--
================================================================= 
mark kline                              mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu
suny health science center, syracuse    voice: (315) 422-1050
================ courtesy of syracuse university ================
From: turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: The null hypothesis  (was: Xanax)
Date: 15 Sep 1992 09:36:44 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu
Summary: Prove = test

-*----
In article <P_MISIAK.92Sep15091157@grafix.unibwh.unibw-hamburg.de> p_misiak@unibwh.unibw-hamburg.de (Carlo Misiak) writes:
> Any idea how to *prove* anything empirically (-:) ? 

In general, to prove something just means to test it.  Now,
are you claiming no knowledge of how to empirically test
claims, or are you one of those who tries to read "prove"
in this context as holding the narrower meaning of 
"prove logically"?

Russell
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Subject: Re: Victims; was: Re: Xanax
Originator: glp@merlin
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 13:35:36 GMT


In article <1992Sep8.204435.11487@athena.cs.uga.edu>, mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep8.152258.28377@news.eng.convex.com> cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:
|> >
|> >You know, there's something oddly pathological about this insistence that
|> >"parental abuse" is the source of all mental illness....

You two certainly don't believe that all people who believe
in mental illness believe this?

Ah, but it's necessary to support this tired concept:

|> >I guess part of the motivation to see the world this way comes from a deep
|> >desire (and need) to be able to claim title to the role of "victim". It's
|> >sooo "empowering".
|> 
|> Precisely,  "Nobody should expect very much from me because
|>              (a) I was a victim of child abuse; or
|>              (b) I belong to an oppressed minority."
|> 
|> What happened to the American dream of _overcoming_ one's disadvantages?  :)

"Nobody should expect very much from me"?  Where does that
come from?  For many people the first step in getting better
is realizing that many of their problems comes from things
that were done *to* them that were not their fault, and
transferring the anger they've been directing at themselves
to the responsible parties.  But "don't expect much from
me?"  I don't think it's fair to ascribe that attitude to
everyone dealing with an abusive childhood or a society
which oppresses them.
-- 
Greg Parkinson                  Phone: 212-657-7814  Fax: 212-825-8607
Citibank,111 Wall Street        E-Mail: glp@fig.citib.com
New York, New York  10043
The opinions expressed are my own and not those of the big 'ol bank.
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: seeger@oceania.com (Seeger Fisher)
Subject: Re: DMT
Reply-To: seeger@oceania.com
Organization: Oceania Health Care Systems
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 23:25:15 GMT

In article <g4vnasf@lynx.unm.edu> mulberry@triton.unm.edu () writes:
> Anybody know what the street name(s) for DMT (dimethyltryptamine)
> is?
> 
"Businessmans high" because it supposedly doesn't last long.






-- 
|     seeger@oceania.com     |
| NeXT-mail happily consumed | 

Newsgroups: sci.med
From: lindae@netcom.com ()
Subject: Re: Baclofen
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 00:57:36 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <16373@pitt.UUCP> geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks) writes:
>In article <h2mnx4#.lindae@netcom.com> lindae@netcom.com writes:
>>
>>  
>>Is anyone familiar with the drug called Baclofen?  If so, I'd like to
>>know what it is, what it's used to treat, and any possible side effects.
>>
>It is a drug used mainly to treat spasticity, but also used for
>a severe facial pain called trigeminal neuralgia.  Side effects
>are usually not seen, but it can cause encephalopathy, dizziness
>and drowsiness.  If spastic patients are overdosed, they may become
>weak.  It has an effect on GABA, but Steve can tell you all about that
>better than I.
>
Thank you for the information, but now you've created another question
for me.  What is GABA?



Newsgroups: sci.med
From: jrt@omega.kcr.uky.edu (J. Randall Thompson)
Subject: Re: "Incompetent doctors"
Organization: Kentucky Cancer Registry, Univ. of Ky
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:41:26 GMT

People don't realize that many VA Hospitals are closely
associated with teaching insitutions. Here, most of the faculty rotate 
through both the VA and University, so depending on when you are 
admitted, you could have the same physicians at both institutions.
It is humorous to have patients tell me how they would never go to
the VA because of the doctors when I could be the physician seeing
them there, too.

-- 
[]  J. Randall Thompson                                      jrt@kcr.uky.edu []
[]  University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky                              []