and their conclusion was: "there is no such thing as a scientifically correct 'balance' of serotonin."
Hello? Point blank, a review of decades of research suggests that SOMETHING OTHER THAN 'CHANGES IN CHEMICAL BALANCE MIGHT UNDERLIE DEPRESSION'
And, further: "Claiming that depression results from a brain-chemical imbalance, as ads do, is problematic on several fronts. Patients who believe this are more likely to demand a prescription. If you have a disease caused by too little insulin, you take insulin; if you have one caused by too little serotonin, you take serotonin boosters."
As for materiality: social realtions ARE material. Isn't that the basic insight of Marxism? If, in fact, it's about a chemical imbalance, it doesn't have to be necessarily something you were born with.
There was an article in SCIAM last year that discussed how the brain structure changes in response to events. They argued that one can be situationally depressed, for instance, and if that's not treated -- if you don't get help (talk therapy, whatever) -- then you can permanently change the chemical balance of your brain and become clinically depressed.
No doubt this can happen from the hurts and pains of childhood and living in a home where those things aren't dealt with particularly well. Maybe in a home where you were further ignored when you felt blue and down. Or whatever. Or just living in this shite system, as Doug said.
I don't have an investment in how this is handled one way or another, but at least get the freakin' article straight, mmmmkay?
(this isn't directed at Doug).
Finally,a t the edn of that article, they say "For many, SSRIs help little, if at all." Anyone know what "for many" means, percentage-wise?
>What's vulgar about biochem explanations of psychological disorders is
>that they assume that the chemicals are the cause - that once you've
>identified some chemical configuration or process, you've hit the bedrock
>first cause. But what if the chemicals themselves are an effect, a
>reflection of environmental influences? Or what if the chem configuration
>interacts with a particular set of environmental influeces to give rise to
>depression? And I don't mean just personal history - Carl's right that
>capitalism causes depression. And I'll bet that the anomic,
>individualistic American kind is more depressogenic than others. If you're
>life is fucked, it's *your* fault! Just pull up your socks, pick up a
>self-help book, and get on with it.
>
>Personal history and social structures are also materialist explanations.
>They're just more complicated ones.
>
>And yes, the drugs "work" to a certain extent. But as the conclusion of
>the article pointed out, the relapse rate is higher than with
>cognitive-behavioral therapy.
>
>Doug
"You know how it is -- come for the animal porn, stay for the cultural analysis."
Bitch | Lab http://blog.pulpculture.org