QUOTE(tarantino @ Wed 11th November 2009, 12:55am)
QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 10th November 2009, 11:13pm)
Your analysis is also very simplistic, ignoring as it does the cultural aspects of "mental illness". Many of those revered as saints in medieval times would be considered the most hopeless lunatics if they were alive today. When do you think that the concept of mental illness first emerged?
Many of the symptoms exhibited by saints could be explained by a physical illness,
temporal lobe epilepsy. From personal experience, I believe this to be a likely explanation.
A relative of my mine exhibited many symptoms of various mental disorders. They had rapid mood swings, auditory and visual hallucinations and violent outbursts, among several other problems. After years of ineffectual and sometimes harmful treatment by psychiatrists, a neurologist was consulted, and it was discovered they were having seizures. An effective anti-epileptic was soon found and all symptoms were significantly lessened or disappeared entirely.
I'm glad that your relative was finally sorted out, sounds like quite a distressing experience. My point though was that such behaviour would not have been considered a symptom of "illness" during the medieval period, whatever its cause, whereas depression is now one of the most common "illnesses" in many countries. I think I'm right in saying that depression is now the most common illness in the UK. Depression in its more severe forms may be debilitating, but an illness?
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 11th November 2009, 12:59am)
QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 10th November 2009, 5:36pm)
I suggest Milton that you take some time out to at least peruse Thomas Szatz's book, because you're quite clearly completely unaware of the anti-psychiatry movement. You could always start at
The Myth of Mental Illness.
I'm well aware of the book and read it years ago. Szasz reminds me of those people who refuse to believe that HIV causes AIDS or that cigarettes cause cancer. How do you PROVE it to them? Turns out you can't. It's almost impossible to prove a causal relation to somebody who refuses to believe it, if you can't do the demo where you deliberately cause the effect.
A causal relationship can be demonstrated to be statistically significant rather easily, as I'm sure you know. What's rather more difficult to prove to any individual is that their own smoking will shorten their life, as it's only a probability after all, not a certainty; "My mother lived to be 98, and she smoked 20 cigarettes every day of her life."