> places like CA attract homeless people from other places, because they have good services.
California's winter weather is more survivable than most parts of the country.
> Part of the problem is that the US doesnt have a good plan for what to do with crazy people. We had a lot of problems with long-term institutions, but when we shut them down, we didn't actually start a new solution. We just left them on the streets.
Institutions were replaced with drugs. In 'Anatomy of an Epidemic' [1], Robert Whitaker says that before the drugs were available, many people were able to recover enough to get out of the institutions.
The book makes the case that commonly-used psychotropic drugs take an episodic illness and make it chronic.
This HN submission was from 2 days ago:
Psychiatrists Must Face Possibility That Medications Hurt More Than They Help (scientificamerican.com) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13186201
This has been my observation of the system... My friend was doing well until they got hold of her.
This is getting downvoted with no explanation, rude if you ask me;
The points are salient: I personally know a man in care who's been seemingly "kept stupid" with drugs while in an assisted living facility receiving treatment, and yes you can sleep outdoors most winter nights in CA, not comfortably but it's doable.
> This is getting downvoted with no explanation, rude if you ask me;
If I check my comments frequently enough I sometimes notice oscillations. That one was voted up once, then down twice, then I didn't check for a while. 2 people have since appeared to cancel out those two downvotes.
After I posted that comment I thought about editing it to say something about how the nicer weather is "in addition to the state's services...".
Perhaps some of the downvoters thought I was disagreeing with the comment I was replying to, whereas I actually meant to supplement his/her good points with my experiences.
Where is the data for the point about making psychotic chronic? Because there is peer-reviewed medical literature (meaning double-blind clinical trials) about their effectiveness in reducing symptoms, and "longer lasting symptoms" would have been a reportable adverse event that could/would have been seen.
Additionally: to advance this model, you have to think that the people caring for these individuals (both families and doctors) are either unable to see that the treatments make it worse, or that they see it but are motivated by something other than the patient's best interests. My uncle had schizophrenia. In my experience, neither of these were true.
Finally: these symptoms are chronic and intractable by nature, if you talk to people that have them. Look at the homeless people who are clearly mentally ill: they react to things we can't see all the time; not episodically.
Asking iconclastic questions like Whitaker does is important; we need to have a discussion about it and make sure we're not completely off base, but when you look at a persons total ability to function and their global quality of life, antipsychotic medications are helpful.
Just to comment on a case I know personally: the person had semi-regular psychotic episodes, a few per quarter, but every day meds to prevent them definitely made him less smart and... "there" on the good days (in addition to stopping episodes). That's how he was treated until about 20, when he managed to convince a doctor he should just have an as-needed supply of fast acting ones.
I know it's anecdata, but my experience is that there are a fair number of borderline cases where they can't hold it together sporadically, but the meds definitely lower the quality of the "good days" to fix that. Sometimes there's a fast acting med that can work; often there's not and patients are faced with a stark choice.
I think we see a lot more homelessness in that group of people than we should, because we basically trap them there after one or two episodes, even though if we fixed it and got them some help (usually better coping techniques; occasionally meds), we'd see a lot less homelessness.
I do think that meds have become a substitute for real coping technique teaching, and that in many of those cases, the caregiver isn't making the optimal choice for the patient, because they're optimizing cost or time invested, rather than long-term quality of life.
There are obviously things like hardcore schizophrenia where that isn't the case, but even for more sporadic delusion disorders, it can be.
> I think we see a lot more homelessness in that group of people than we should, because we basically trap them there after one or two episodes,
yes, this exactly: the system "traps" its patients with medications that do not address the cause of their psychotic presentations.
My friend just needed sobriety, but all she got were tranquilizers and other "bad prescriptions". She briefly escaped from her court-ordered medications, but then she got an SSRI which destroyed all the progress I'd made with her. See my comment history.
> Where is the data for the point about making psychotic chronic?
The term for psychosis which is worsened by its treatment is Supersensitivity psychosis, or tardive psychosis [0]. I think it originated in the early 1980's. Whitaker references some of the early studies in 'The Case Against Antipsychotics' (link in several of my earlier comments).
There is no controversy that some psychotic presentations are caused by alcohol, cocaine and meth amphetamine, and other substances [1]. Emergency departments typically test for substances, and also for urinary tract infections.
When the cause of a psychotic presentation is determined, the psychosis is said to be 'secondary' to its cause. If no cause is determined, the psychosis is said to be 'idiopathic' [2]:
Finally, we discuss how careful studies of secondary
psychotic disorders can help elucidate the
pathophysiology of primary, or idiopathic, psychotic
disorders such as schizophrenia.
> but when you look at a persons total ability to function and their global quality of life, antipsychotic medications are helpful.
When I met my friend, I figured she was "high as a kite", because she fluttered from topic to topic like a butterfly. I gradually learned that she really was supplementing her methadone (an opiate) with cocaine, and a constant dose of alcohol.
At the time, I didn't know anything about psychosis. But looking back, I now recognize that were times that she became psychotic due to cocaine, and that she recovered with sobriety.
Methadone is known to cause sugar cravings, but I think it also contributed to the 2-bottle-a-day liquor habit she developed after a month on the drug.
When my friend ran out of alcohol, she became profoundly psychotic. The hospital she was taken to used anti-psychotics. But these drugs were not indicated because they do not treat the cause of the presenting symptom (they found cocaine metabolites, and ought to have found evidence of alcohol use, which I think can be detected at up to 3 days).
There was a story submission here about how cocaine destroys mitochondria. I think this is fairly well-established. Today there's this:
Dementia is the name for a type of psychosis, when it is experienced by old people [3]. Sauna bathing is good for dementia because it supports the metabolism. Old people frequently become cold, which indicates poor metabolism, and reduced ATP (energy molecule used by cells to power everything).
From my observations, anything that helps the metabolism is also good for psychosis.
Neuroleptics (so-called "Anti-psychotics") are palliative medications that just slow people down to match their reduced energy capacity. They hurt people, and should all be withdrawn from use, in favor of treating the cause of their condition.
Edit: Adding a link to "Psychosurgery as Brain-disabling Therapy" [4], for my own future reference:
Psychosurgery merits special attention
because, as the prototype of brain-
damaging therapeutics, it can shed
light on the clinical effects of other
brain-disabling treatments such as
electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and
the major tranquilizers [aka neuroleptics -tcj_phx].
California's winter weather is more survivable than most parts of the country.
> Part of the problem is that the US doesnt have a good plan for what to do with crazy people. We had a lot of problems with long-term institutions, but when we shut them down, we didn't actually start a new solution. We just left them on the streets.
Institutions were replaced with drugs. In 'Anatomy of an Epidemic' [1], Robert Whitaker says that before the drugs were available, many people were able to recover enough to get out of the institutions.
The book makes the case that commonly-used psychotropic drugs take an episodic illness and make it chronic.
[1] https://www.madinamerica.com/anatomy-of-an-epidemic/
This HN submission was from 2 days ago: Psychiatrists Must Face Possibility That Medications Hurt More Than They Help (scientificamerican.com) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13186201
This has been my observation of the system... My friend was doing well until they got hold of her.