C
CopticChristian
Guest
I understand what you are saying. The notion of chemical imbalance is over used. It is fact that our brain works with neurotransmitters and learning involves what would be called re-wiring and that re-wiring is via chemicals. It could be said that any change is a change in neurochemistry and if it is a malady made right then it is not necessarily an imbalance as if to imply there is a balance, rather a change in neurochemstry that allows an ecology of thinking and homoeostasis in the environment that allows the individual to progress with less stress.Everything in my post was either a quote or paraphrase from the Atlantic Monthly article which was the subject of the original post. Nowhere did I say that Psychiatry is valueless. Neither did the author of the article.
Here is another quote from the article: “I guarantee you that in the course of our conversation a doctor is telling a patient, “you have a chemical imbalance – that’s why you’re depressed. Take Prozac.” Despite the fact that every doctor who knows anything knows that there is no biochemical imbalance that causes depression, and most doctors understand that a diagnosis of depression doesn’t really tell you anything other than what you already knew, that doesn’t stop them from saying it."
Now I’m just a layman. I don’t know if the above is true or not. As you noted, treatment for severe psychoses can truly be a blessing. But when a psychologist treats a patient with some sort of disordered thinking with cognitive therapy—i.e., talking—is he treating a chemical imbalance?
and
When you change your thinking by self-reflective thinking and come to some different conclusion that you accept different than you accepted before it is also neurochemistry and yes, talk therapy would be considered a change in neurochemistry as learning and changing thoughts are neurochemistry.