All of the panel members that produced the American Psychiatric Association (APA)’s Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Patients with Major Depressive Disorder had numerous financial ties to drug companies that manufacture antidepressants, raising questions about the trustworthiness of the guideline, a UMass Boston researcher says.
Paid speaking “is perfectly legal, and if people want to work for drug companies, this is America,” said Scully, whose specialty has often been criticized for its over-reliance on medications. “But everybody needs to be clear — this is marketing.”
In 1952, the first hydrogen bomb was detonated and the American Psychiatric Association, APA, published its first book of mental illnesses: the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM.
No one, then, could have imagined that this seemingly innocuous manual would be more destructive, and result in producing more victims, than a nuclear weapon.
Since then the DSM has mushroomed and with each revised DSM untold millions carry the scars from its devastating effects.
Towards the end of May, the fifth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V), the iconic bible of psychiatry, is coming off the presses after much revision and delay. It’s bound to keep people asking, “Am I normal or do I have a mental illness?”
If you think most diseases are established with objective criteria and rigorous debate, you’d be somewhat wrong. The DSM has a strong track record of taking clusters of symptoms and wrapping labels around them, which lead to the accelerated use of some of the most toxic medications on the planet. How does this happen?
The new version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) will be out this May and has received a lot of criticism. Published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA), the manual is the bible of who is not “normal” and has some kind of mental disorder that needs treatment.