INTENSITY²
Start here => Free For ALL => Topic started by: Taimaat on April 09, 2008, 07:21:21 PM
-
It seems some people, following the lead of a perverted drug-addict, decided to get together and write up a book of "what is wrong with people so we can marginainalize them and say their opinions don't count."
There used to be gayness as one of the "disorders" of the DSM, but notice it isn't there anymore.
-
I dunno
I am definitely fucked up though, and I call it my AS
It doesn't make much difference to me either way
I don't think they're perverted though
And drugs can be good
Seroxat is working great for me
-
yeah everything is in there. the worst and possibly the funniest disorder in there is that smelling disease where people cant stand other peoples perfume or aftershave, one of my sisters friends moms has it and she collects disability because she cant even go into an office because everyone smells :laugh:
people like that ARE fucking wierd i tell you :P
-
I hate things that stink
Apart from some things, like nail polish remover, felt tip pens, Loreal Kids No-Tears Scented Shampoo and petrol (although too much petrol makes me nauseous)
-
The problem with the DSM-IV is that it only describes symptoms, and alorythyms for diagnosing the different disorders. It's essentially a cookbook for all the different labels out there. They don't describe the etiology of them , treatment or prognosis. Just a demeaning way to categorize people. My therapist doesn't believe in the DSM-IV.
-
yes.
-
I deny involvement.
-
yeah
-
Yes
-
Yes.
-
hey! Lit! you're posting. :toporly:
-
8)
-
I'd say yes, to a point.
A lot of the problem is that I think a lot of "problems" are culture-specific in many cases.
-
Yes.
:plus:
-
I'd say yes, to a point.
A lot of the problem is that I think a lot of "problems" are culture-specific in many cases.
Exactly.
-
I have had it up to my eyeballs having so called professionals tell me what I am thinking based in it
-
Yeah, especially when there are so many overlapping symptoms between all those diagnoses.
-
I have Sophistic Syndrome
I diagnosed myself :sexymush:
-
I have Kevvtronic Disorder. :sexymush:
-
My dad diagnosed me with opticolitis - the nerves to my eyes and ass got crossed, giving me a shitty outlook on life.
That was so fucking corny - please forgive me for posting it. :-\
-
i have millonic syndrome.
-
I don't have a good name for this...carlatonica?
-
There's some (really, a great deal) of utility to it, but it gets misused and misiterpreted- just like any other labelling system. I have a problem with people "taking it too seriously," and I feel the same way about other popular psychometric measures- IQ and/or intelligence is my other pet hate in that regard.
The problem with the DSM-IV is that it only describes symptoms, and alorythyms for diagnosing the different disorders. It's essentially a cookbook for all the different labels out there. They don't describe the etiology of them , treatment or prognosis. Just a demeaning way to categorize people. My therapist doesn't believe in the DSM-IV.
Well, it talks about the typical courses of individuals with certain clusters of symptoms. It could be dangerous for the DSM to discuss treatment, because if you think of what happens when a diagnostic system gets minunderstood and casually used, think what woud happen if that same diagnostic system came with reccommended treatments right in the same goddamn place, lol. I think that could go wonky prety fast. plus, the diagnostic categories are more stable than reccommended treatments, seeing as the categories are more for convenience/communication/to work with the health care and insurance system (ideally, though not in use); whereas treatments are more based actually on science and constantly ongoing research, so new information in terms of treatment is constantly being added (and scrutinized- andother reason why listeing treatments would be dangerous).
In terms of not listing suspected etiology- that's a good thing too IMO, because, for the most part, we don't know what causes things. We get ideas, sure, but as it is, if no specific cause is assumed, it gives the labelling system less power. For example, a specific etiology isn't mapped out for scizophrenia, and, to my understanding, it's not even certain that what is labelelled under the broad category of "sciziophrenia" is even one disorder, or rather a cluster of disorders that have similar symptoms (there seems to be more evidence for the latter). Besides, knowing the "underlying cause" for a disorder doesn't necessarily tell you anywhere near all you need to know about it- genetically speaking, the inherited risk for depression or anxiety are pretty much identical/they have the same shared heritability, which might mean that there's the same underlying vulnerabilty in both cases but with different manifestations.
I'd say yes, to a point.
A lot of the problem is that I think a lot of "problems" are culture-specific in many cases.
...like the culture-specific syndromes? XD
-
My dad diagnosed me with opticolitis - the nerves to my eyes and ass got crossed, giving me a shitty outlook on life.
That was so fucking corny - please forgive me for posting it. :-\
:plus:
Sometimes the dad-joke is good.
-
My dad diagnosed me with opticolitis - the nerves to my eyes and ass got crossed, giving me a shitty outlook on life.
That was so fucking corny - please forgive me for posting it. :-\
:plus:
Sometimes the dad-joke is good.
Well, thanks. My dad was an appliance salesman, so he's full of these lines. :laugh:
-
..like the culture-specific syndromes? XD
Western Culture is the disease, we are the cure.
-
..like the culture-specific syndromes? XD
Western Culture is the disease, we are the cure.
"we"?
-
yes, that is why i diagnosed myself with something that isnt in the DSM. its all just a bunch of stereotypes. bullshit if you ask me.
How would you define "stereotypes?" You may be right on the button with that idea, but I'm not sure- depends what you want "stereotype" to mean.
-
I read the DSM for Aspergers a few years ago, and it never occurred to me that I had it until ages later when people started telling me I did
-
I never even fit most of the symptoms for the disorder, thats why I got PDD rather than Aspergers. I think it has just become a catch all term for people who don't "think exactly the same as everyone else" All the social problems really seem to do with how people have responded to the fact that you don't agree with them and think differently.
-
A better question is, IS AS bullshit?
I'm still having difficulty understanding
how some of the 'traits' can possibly go
together.
-
Which ones?
-
Not from the DSM itself, but shit like
enjoying climbing, and shiny objects.
-
i enjoy shiny things and climbing muchly. 8)
-
Not from the DSM itself, but shit like
enjoying climbing, and shiny objects.
I have ADD-ooooh! shiny!!! :green:
-
The DSM is brilliant. Psychology is generally theoretical in nature. The DSM is organized and systematic; that's hard to do with the theoretical.
-
Shiny. :autism:
-
No one has mentioned the ICD. :GA:
-
WHO should. :M