In my Psychology Today blogpost of 12/11/11, Bipolar
or Borderline, I described how disease mongering, pill-pushing
psychiatrists have done their utmost best to blur the distinction between the
mood (affective) instability seen in borderline personality disorder (BPD) with
the mood episodes characteristic of
true bipolar disorder.
This distinction is important because BPD is clearly a disorder of interpersonal relationships and behavior mixed in with a history of trauma and family dysfunction, while true bipolar disorder is a serious biogenic brain disease. BPD, while some of its symptoms do respond quite well to the right medications, should be treated primarily with psychotherapy, while bipolar disorder should be treated primarily with medication.
This distinction is important because BPD is clearly a disorder of interpersonal relationships and behavior mixed in with a history of trauma and family dysfunction, while true bipolar disorder is a serious biogenic brain disease. BPD, while some of its symptoms do respond quite well to the right medications, should be treated primarily with psychotherapy, while bipolar disorder should be treated primarily with medication.
In the prior post I discussed the use
of invalid symptom checklists in studies to exaggerate the incidence of bipolar
disorder. They are also used by some incompetent psychiatrists to make diagnoses that justify snowing every patient who walks in the door with potentially toxic antipsychotic medication. In the June 2016 issue of the Journal of
Personality Disorders, researcher Mark Zimmerman goes into some detail about
exactly how corrupt researchers use slight of hand to distort their data (Improving the Recognition of Borderline
Personality Disorder in a Bipolar World, pp. 320-335).
They are very good at it. And it
matters. Zimmerman states: "Although BPD is as frequent as (if not more
frequent than) bipolar disorder, as impairing as (if not more impairing than),
and as lethal as (if not more lethal than) bipolar disorder, it has received
less than one tenth [emphasis mine]
the level of funding from the NIH [the National Institutes of Health] and has
been the focus of many fewer publications in the most prestigious psychiatric
journals."
And, Zimmerman points out, the
difference is not due to just the fact that there were more drug studies for
bipolar disorder. In fact, the amount of funding for the drug treatment of
bipolar disorder was just a little more than 10% of the total.
As I have mentioned several times in this blog, self-report symptom checklists are
meant to be screening devises. This means that if you are positive for bipolar disorder
on the screen, it does not mean you have bipolar disorder. It means you should
be evaluated further! Screening tests are designed
to have a lot of false positives - people who come out as positive on the test but who do not actually have the disorder. In fact, the majority of people who screen positively do not have bipolar
disorder.
Zimmerman specifically brings up the
Mood Disorders Questionnaire (MDQ) that I discussed in the previous post. Get
this: in one study by Frye and others in the journal Psychiatric Services in 2005, the authors found that one half of
the patients who were positive for bipolar disorder on the MDQ were not
diagnosed with bipolar disorder by the treating clinician.
Their conclusion? They said the clinicians "failed
to detect" or "misdiagnosed" bipolar disorder in these patients!
Actually, the exact opposite is far more likely: it sounds like the clinicians' judgments
tended to be correct.
Frye and others then went on to state that
these patients were "inappropriately treated because they were given
antidepressants instead of mood stabilizers." Again, exactly the wrong conclusion to
draw from the authors' own data. Yet they went on to say that this completely
false conclusion was "worrisome." Some of us would
call this real chutzpah.
Bipolar, my ass researchers love to
talk about the bipolar "spectrum," based on the crazy logic that if
a given symptom appears slightly similarly in two people, they must both have a version of the same syndromic psychiatric
disorder. Zimmerman asks why no one talks of a borderline spectrum, when
clinically, many patients are diagnosed as having borderline traits. This means that out of the nine criteria, of which you are
required to meet any 5,6,7, 8, or all nine to qualify for the diagnosis, the patients may only have three or four.
In fact, as reported in the July issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry (Vol. 173, pp. 688-694), Zanarini and others followed 290 patients with BPD closely over 2 years. They found that "...the symptoms of borderline personality disorder are quite fluid..." This means that they come and go over time. This was particularly true for acute symptoms like self-mutilation. Therefore, people with the disorder may frequently go from 5 symptoms to 4, and suddenly they don't "have" it anymore - unless and until the 5th symptom recurs!
In actual reality, he said redundantly, those people who exhibit three or four of the nine symptoms look a lot more like those folks who have five or more than they do like those folks who have none of them. Now that sounds like a "spectrum" to me.
In fact, as reported in the July issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry (Vol. 173, pp. 688-694), Zanarini and others followed 290 patients with BPD closely over 2 years. They found that "...the symptoms of borderline personality disorder are quite fluid..." This means that they come and go over time. This was particularly true for acute symptoms like self-mutilation. Therefore, people with the disorder may frequently go from 5 symptoms to 4, and suddenly they don't "have" it anymore - unless and until the 5th symptom recurs!
In actual reality, he said redundantly, those people who exhibit three or four of the nine symptoms look a lot more like those folks who have five or more than they do like those folks who have none of them. Now that sounds like a "spectrum" to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment