For its position, the WTO emphasizes Thomas R. The stern words of Insel, who was the head of the National Institute of Mental Health in 2002-2015, which is the largest sponsor of mental health research in the world. “I spent 13 years at NIMH. really puts forward the neuroscience of mental disorders և genetics և when I look back on it, I realize that although I think I have managed to get great papers published by many great scientists at a fairly high cost (I think $ 20 billion) : “I think we moved the needle to reduce suicides, to reduce hospitalizations, to improve the healing of tens of millions of people with mental illness.”
Better results, the WHO predicts, “will depend on reassessing many of the current assumptions, norms and practices, including what other” expertise “means when it comes to mental health.” Michelle Funk, a former clinical physician-researcher who oversees the WHO’s work on mental health policy, human rights law, and the author of the report, spoke to me about the need for radical change in prevailing clinical assumptions. they can not base their experience on the experience of those they are trying to support. ” Current methods can be detrimental ել disrupting outcomes not only through psychotropic side effects, միայն not only in the imbalance of power in locked wards; a professional mindset that makes people feel like they are being looked at as diagnostic criteria rather than as human beings. “The widespread belief in the healthcare field that people with mental health problems have a brain defect or brain disorder,” Funk added. stigma and isolation. “
Demanding a “fundamental paradigm shift” in mental health, the WHO is calling for a nearly half-century-long history of psychiatry. In the early 1960s, weeks before his assassination, President John F. Kennedy signed the Mental Health Bill, declaring that “in the current context of scientific advancement, it will be possible for a nation rich in human and material resources like ours.” to make distant places of thought accessible. ” In American science, he promised that not only would man land on the moon, but he would defeat mental illness.
This belief stems from a decade before the first pharmacological breakthrough in psychiatry was the discovery of chlorpromazine (sold in the United States as Thorazine), the original antipsychotic drug. The drug led to debilitating side effects – confusing gait, stiffness of the face, persistent tics, numbness, but it alleviated the difficult behavior և seemed to reduce deviant beliefs. The Times hailed the drug’s “humanitarian-social significance”, and Time magazine compared Thorazine to “bactericidal sulfas”, innovative drugs developed in the 1930s and 1940s to fight bacterial infections. But patients did not seem to be convinced that the benefits outweighed the harms. they often refused medication.
Thorazine was followed by Haldol, a more potent antipsychotic whose side effects were no better. However, each drug contributed to the large-scale evacuation of psychiatric patients, and in the 1970s, rough ideas emerged about how those drugs worked. Overactive dopamine systems, neurotransmitters, were thought to be responsible for psychosis, and antipsychotic drugs inhibited those systems. The problem was that they disrupted dopamine networks throughout the brain, including those that led to movement disorders and weakness.
Until the 1980s, however, biopsychiatrists believed that they would address this shortcoming by developing more detailed antipsychotic medications. Joseph Coyle, then a professor of psychiatry and neuropathy at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, was quoted in the 1984 Pulitzer Prize-winning Baltimore Sun series as heralding new brain research, on-the-spot antipsychotic and other psychotropic drugs. “A large amount of knowledge has passed from ignorance in almost 10 years.” Coil’s sponsor, Donald Goff, now a professor of psychiatry at Grosman Medical School in New York University, one of the country’s leading psychologists for decades, told me in the late 1980s: “Every day as he approached the Boston Clinic he headed, he saw Haldol’s footsteps in some of the people he walked across the sidewalk. bodies, their concussions. Not only did the disease weaken. The drugs made them so physically miserable. ” However, he felt, he said, “the possibility of boundless progress.”
What were called “second-generation antipsychotics,” including Risperdal, Serocel, and Ziprexa, were introduced mainly in the 1990s. In addition to attacking dopamine, they seemed to have less of an effect on other neurotransmitters, and seemed to have fewer side effects. “There was so much optimism,” Goff recalls. “We were convinced that we were improving people’s lives.” But worries soon arose: li Eli Lilly և Johnson & Johnson’s manufacturers Z Zyprexa և Risperdal’s to pay billions of dollars, part of drug profits with lawsuits. . Zyprexa greatly increased the risk of diabetes և severe weight gain (Ellie Lilli concealed internal data showing that 16% of patients gained more than 66 pounds with Zyprexa). Some of the young men who received Risperdal suffered from gynecomastia. they grew hanging breasts. In 2005, the NIMH published a study of 1,460 people to find out if new antipsychotic drugs were actually better than one of the first-generation drugs. The answer was no. “It was a great disappointment,” Goff said, noting that he advocates long-term, probably lifelong, medication as the best way to protect himself from psychiatric devastation.
see secret product in Box below
‘The accuracy or reliability of any information/material/calculation contained in this article is not guaranteed. This information has been brought to you by collecting from various mediums / astrologers / almanacs / discourses / beliefs / scriptures. Our purpose is only to deliver information, its users should take it as mere information. In addition, any use thereof shall be the responsibility of the user himself.’