IHR Podcast #15: To screen or not to screen (everyone for depression)

In this episode of the Integral Health Resources Podcast, I discuss the new depression screening guidelines proposed by the The US Preventive Services Task Force, the response to these guidelines by Allen Frances, and the perils of podcast procrastination.

Related articles:

  • Depression screening for adults and adolescents has benefits, but don’t ignore the downsides
  • (Debate between Karina Davidson and Allen Frances)

  • Screen everyone for depression? Good intention, very bad idea (Allen Frances)
  • New depression screening guidelines outline very helpful, yet achievable goals (Harvard Medical School)
  • Do Antipsychotics Help or Harm Psychotic Symptoms? (Allen Frances)
  • Are ‘Psychiatric Disorders’ Brain Diseases? (Phil Hickey)
  • princ_rm_pet_scan_of_depressed_brain

    NPR gets it wrong about “undiagnosed adult ADHD”

    npradhd

    I was scrolling through my twitter feed this morning, enjoying my coffee, when I came across the following headline from NPR Health News: Can’t Focus? It Might Be Undiagnosed Adult ADHD. My heart sunk. It seems even the smart folks at NPR are not above peddling the dodgy “mental illness as medical condition” narrative. This shouldn’t surprise me. Just the other day I was tuned in to NPR’s Here and Now, a show I totally dig, and I cringed hard as host Robin Young trotted out the whole “addiction is a disease, just like diabetes and cancer” song and dance. I suppose I find it particularly depressing when otherwise smart, sensitive people demonstrate such a profound and consequential failure of critical thinking. And it’s such a touchy subject to discuss. When I say something like “addiction is most definitely not a disease and is nothing like cancer,” people might think I’m saying that addiction itself is not real, or that the suffering addicts experience is not real. As a mental health professional, it is rather inconvenient that my perspective of mental health is at odds with the most prominent points of view. It is simply a fact that vast swaths of people, both in the general public and across mental health professions, buy into the medical model of mental illness, at least to a significant extent. It’s impossible to escape the language of this way of thinking, the talk of “symptoms,” “diagnoses,” and “treatments,” and all the distorted thinking and misplaced actions that follow.

    How can I point out, convincingly and with compassion, that it was wrong and potentially harmful for the hero in the NPR story, psychiatrist Dr. David Goodman , to frame his patient’s lack of attentional focus as a medical condition in need of medical treatment? After all, one of the patients (Kathleen) reported that she was completely and positively transformed by Dr. Goodman’s medical treatment, that she can now finally focus her attention, finish projects she’s started, and stop beating herself up for being a stupid or lazy person. It’s a difficult discussion to have, no doubt. But the truth matters. And the truth is that a lack of attentional focus is not caused by a stimulant deficiency, any more than drowsiness is caused by a stimulant deficiency. Yes, stimulants increase focus and alertness in most people. No, a lack of focus and alertness is not a disease or medical condition. Yes, Kathleen, your lack of attentional control might lead to problems, difficulties, and suffering. These problems are real. Your suffering is real. And yes, stimulants may help. But no, you do not “have” a medical condition, a glitch somewhere in your brain, that is being targeted, treated, or cured by the miracles of modern medicine. The truth is, no one, not even Dr. Goodman, knows why you have trouble focusing your attention. Maybe it is partly how you’re “wired.” Maybe your innate attentional tendencies aren’t a great fit in a society that values a laser-like focus of attention over other ways of taking in the world. Maybe your relationship with electronic devices can be tweaked for the better, and that might make a difference. Maybe your diet factors in somehow. Maybe a lot of it has to do with the fact that you are bored as hell with your job. Who knows for sure? Not Dr. Goodman, no matter how impressive he looks in his white jacket with a stethoscope dangling around his neck.

    Yes, it may be comforting to externalize your problem as a “treatable disorder.” But you don’t have to choose between “I have the disease of ADHD. It has nothing to do with how I live my life.” and “It’s all my fault. I’m stupid and lazy.” The truth is that psychological problems are complicated. The truth is that ALL behaviors and experiences are rooted in the brain and body, and yet our neurophysiological processes are also constantly being influenced, fashioned, and shaped by what we do in the world, by the actions we take, by the quality of our interpersonal relations and other psychosocial engagements. So go ahead and take the Ritalin, if it helps. But consider the potential side-effects and health impacts first. And don’t buy into to false notion that Ritalin is curing some illness that you have. Buying into that false notion shuts down consideration of all the psychosocial factors that are well worth considering.

    The same goes for the vast majority of psychological problems faced by the vast majority of human beings. Are there neurodevelopmental and genetic anomalies that affect some people? Of course! Can the tools of modern medicine be brought to bear on these and other problems? Of course! But if the medical model of understanding mental health problems was effective in addressing the more common concerns of the general population (as it has been with say, vaccinations for various infectious diseases), then we should see a reduction in the severity and rates of mental illnesses as our medical treatments are being increasingly applied. But we don’t see that, and that’s because the vast majority of psychological problems experienced by the vast majority of human beings are not best understood using the conceptual tools of the medical model.

    I know a kid, about ten years old, who takes the antipsychotic medication Risperdal to help control his behavioral outbursts. The meds are helping, no doubt about it. Fewer explosive outbursts. Fewer trips to the hospital. Better grades in school. This kid’s problems are real. His suffering is real. His parents’ suffering is real. But this kid doesn’t have a “disease” that is being “treated” by the Risperdal. He’s not suffering from a Risperdal deficiency or from brain damage in some hypothetical neural circuits that Risperdal might be affecting. Perhaps smoking some marijuana every day would help control his outbursts as well, but that would say nothing about the “cause” of his problems. The truth is, no one knows why he is the way he is. It’s complicated. But thinking of his problem as a “brain disease,” however comforting that might be to him and/or his parents, is bad thinking, wrong thinking, and potentially dangerous thinking. That thinking pushes his parents to accept the often severe side effects of Risperdal, the unknown effects on the child’s developing brain, and to close the door on exploring the many other interventions (e.g., physical exercise, dietary changes, parental-style adjustments, creative outlets, behavioral modification strategies) that may also help to control the child’s outbursts. And psychosocial interventions have the distinct advantage of being side-effect-free, while also building skills and positive behaviors that can shape both subjective experiences and neurophysiological structure in enduring ways.

    So, going back to the NPR story that started me on this rant, I’m happy that Kathleen is able to focus her attention in a way that’s more to her liking. But I’m not happy to see NPR falling into the same traps of poor thinking that have been keeping the broken mental health model in place for decades. Decade after decade we apply the same medical model to the problems of mental illness and addiction, and decade after decade we scratch our heads wondering why everything keeps getting worse and worse.

    What are some alternatives, you might ask? There are plenty of them. Check out, well… anything on this website, for starters!

    IHR Podcast #14: Thoughts on Integral Theory and the associated community

    In this episode of the Integral Health Resources Podcast, I discuss my current perspective on Ken Wilber’s “Integral Theory” and the associated community, especially in light of the recent New York Times article on Marc Gafni, a known sexual predator who is unconscionably endorsed as a leader in the integral community.

    Related media:
    Brief description of the “Four Quadrant” model of Integral Theory
    – “A Spiritual Leader Gains Stature, Trailed by a Troubled Past” – New York Times article on Marc Gafni
    Blog post by Judy Rogers, one of Marc Gafni’s victims
    Articles critical of Gafni, by William Harryman of Integral Options Cafe
    – My blog post on Ken Wilber, “Has Ken Wilber jumped the shark?

    Screen Shot 2015-12-28 at 3.03.35 PM

    IHR Podcast #13: Bruce Levine and the anti-authoritarian mental health movement

    In this episode of the Integral Health Resources Podcast, I talk about the anti-authoritarian pushback against mainstream mental health perspectives, highlighting an excellent video presentation by psychologist Bruce Levine.

    Related media:
    – My recent blog post on Levine’s presentation
    – Levine’s article, Why Psychiatry Holds Enormous Power in Society Despite Losing Scientific Credibility

    LevineHome2

    Bruce Levine and the anti-authoritarian mental health movement

    LevineHome2I stumbled across a fascinating talk by Bruce Levine, a clinical psychologist who has articulated a convincing anti-authoritarian critique of the mainstream American mental health system. In the presentation (called “The Anti-Authoritarian Movement to Rehumanize Mental Health“), Levine defines authoritarian as “an unquestioning obedience to authority, regardless of the merits of authority,” and he laments the fact that so many of his fellow mental health professionals seem to accept the legitimacy of “establishment psychiatry” despite the last several years of fairly damning media coverage. I too have recently lamented the tendency of my peers, graduate students in mental health counseling, to acquiesce–with very little critical pushback–in the face of whatever prevailing points of view are presented by professors, in textbooks, or through representatives of professional organizations. Levine calls for an anti-authoritarian attitude toward establishment perspectives of mental health, whereby we assess the legitimacy of authority and actively resist any authority that is determined to be illegitimate.

    Remember, back in 2007 or 2008, when Senator Chuck Grassley led a congressional inquiry that exposed the undeniable fact that many of the nation’s most influential psychiatrists and “thought leaders” were being scandalously influenced by the pharmaceutical industry? Well, it was all over the mainstream media. We also learned how Dr. Joseph Biederman, the main psychiatric “thought leader” responsible for the 40-fold increase in kids being diagnosed with bipolar disorder, was exposed as a shill for Big Pharma. Then we saw top establishment psychiatrists–from Allen Frances to Thomas Insel–take a subversive turn by either distancing themselves from or flat-out rejecting the validity of the DSM-5.

    Levine, in this presentation and in his writing, also reminds us that the effectiveness of some commonly used psychiatric drugs has been seriously called into question by researchers, and that the “biochemical brain imbalance theory” of mental illness has been effectively and repeatedly debunked by many thoughtful commenters in recent years. And yet so many of us in the field of mental health continue to acquiesce to the dictates of establishment psychiatry, even as we pay lip-service to perspectives based on wellness models and integrative perspectives. Why? Why does establishment psychiatry continue to wield its authority so hegemonically despite the loss of credibility?

    Levine answers that “drug company money” is just the tip of the iceberg. He points to a broader, more insidious function of establishment psychiatry, whereby it is used to cover up the adverse, dehumanizing, oppressive, alienating aspects of society. In this view, establishment psychiatry serves to discount, invalidate, and marginalize people who don’t conform or adjust to society, or who rebel against it. For instance, schools can often be oppressive and dehumanizing to children, dampening their inherent curiosity and ebullience. For too many kids, failure to adjust to this situation can result in a psychiatric diagnosis and a central nervous system dulled by drugs. For adults, many jobs pound the humanity out of us through daily routines characterized by dullness and disconnection, and too many of us adapt to this state of affairs with a “helping” hand from psychiatry. Psychiatry, according to Levine, has become a tool to cover all of this up, a tool that is put to use in maintaining the status quo. Especially when the general population is fearful, which seems to be the case in our current political and social climate, people are more likely to comply with authority without critical assessment.

    And so there you have it, and that’s why it’s important, I think, to support people like Levine who have the guts to “speak truth to power.”

    IHR Podcast #12: Lifestyle and mental health

    In this episode of the Integral Health Resources Podcast, I revisit an incredibly important and sadly under-appreciated article (written in 2011) by Dr. Roger Walsh called Lifestyle and Mental Health. The article outlines eight major lifestyle factors that are woefully underestimated and underutilized in the field of mental health, despite overwhelming evidence of their psychological (and physical and social) benefits.

    Here’s the abstract:

    Mental health professionals have significantly underestimated the importance of lifestyle factors (a) as contributors to and treatments for multiple psychopathologies, (b) for fostering individual and social well-being, and (c) for preserving and optimizing cognitive function. Consequently, therapeutic lifestyle changes (TLCs) are underutilized despite considerable evidence of their effectiveness in both clinical and normal populations. TLCs are sometimes as effective as either psychotherapy or pharmacotherapy and can offer significant therapeutic advantages. Important TLCs include exercise, nutrition and diet, time in nature, relationships, recreation, relaxation and stress management, religious or spiritual involvement, and service to others. This article reviews research on their effects and effectiveness; the principles, advantages, and challenges involved in implementing them; and the forces (economic, institutional, and professional) hindering their use. Where possible, therapeutic recommendations are distilled into easily communicable principles, because such ease of communication strongly influences whether therapists recommend and patients adopt interventions. Finally, the article explores the many implications of contemporary lifestyles and TLCs for individuals, society, and health professionals. In the 21st century, therapeutic lifestyles may need to be a central focus of mental, medical, and public health.

    In my opinion, Walsh’s article has the potential to influence and unify the fields of mental health, public health, and medicine in much the same way as Dr. George Engel’s biopsychosocial challenge for biomedicine did back in 1977. The following is a list of resources related to Walsh’s article:

    PDF of the article in American Psychologist

    Lifestyle and Mental Health topic page on Dr. Walsh’s website

    Dialogue between Roger Walsh and philosopher Ken Wilber (Part one)

    Dialogue between Roger Walsh and Ken Wilber (Part two)

    Full video presentation at University of California, Irvine

    UC Irvine presentation in ten parts via YouTube:

    (1) Impact of Lifestyle on Mental Health
    (2) Exercise Benefits Body, Brain and Mind
    (3) Eating for Mental Health: What Kind of Diet Is Best for Brain and Mind?
    (4) Fish Oil and Vitamin D: Supplements That Benefit Body, Brain and Mind
    (5) The Effects of Nature and Technology on Mental Health
    (6) Relationships: The Most Powerful Factor Affecting Wellbeing
    (7) Recreation and Mental Health: Good Times Make for Good Minds
    (8) Relaxation and Stress Management:The Benefits of Letting Go and Letting Be
    (9) Religion, Spirituality, and Mental Health
    (10) Helper’s High—Feeling Good by Doing Good

    There is also a documentary multimedia project in development, 8 Ways to Wellbeing, that will feature Walsh’s work on TLCs. Here are two promotional videos:

    IHR Podcast #11: Allen Frances on the anything-but-rational American mental health system

    allen-francesIn this episode of the Integral Health Resources Podcast, I review an excellent article by Allen Frances in which he excoriates us all for turning a blind eye to those in our society who need mental health services the most.

    Here is the article that was referenced in this discussion:

    What Drives Our Dumb and Disorganized Mental Health Policies? by Allen Frances

    IHR Podcast #10: Diagnosing for Dollars

    In this episode of the Integral Health Resources Podcast, I discuss the issues of upcoding, downcoding, and “diagnosing for dollars” — practices that mental health professionals too often engage in, for various reasons, when they are beholden to managed care insurance systems.

    Here are the media resources that were referenced in this discussion:

    Prezi Presentation: Diagnosing in a Managed Care Environment, by Sharon Savino

    IHR Podcast #9: Professional Identity in Counseling

    counselingIn this episode of the Integral Health Resources Podcast, I discuss my personal struggle to embrace a professional identity as a “counselor,” given my unconventional views on certain mental health issues.

    Here are some other media resources that may be helpful/relevant to this discussion:

    20/20: A Vision for the Future of Counseling (from the American Counseling Association): http://www.counseling.org/knowledge-center/20-20-a-vision-for-the-future-of-counseling

    A Vision for the Future of Counseling: The 20/20 Principles for Unifying and Strengthening the Profession, by David M. Kaplan and Samuel T. Gladding (PDF file): http://www.counseling.org/docs/david-kaplan’s-files/principles-for-unifying-and-strengthening-the-profession.pdf?sfvrsn=0

    A Critical Analysis of Counseling’s Professional Identity Crisis, by Jason H. King and LoriAnn S. Stretch (PDF file): http://www.coping.us/images/King-_Critical_Analysis_of_Counseling_s_Professional_Identity_Crisis.pdf