Talk:Clinical depression/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Right, SE. Watch and learn as I incorporate your opinions into the text. -- The Anome

The first edit: my first para goes, except for two sentences which drop down lower (and are phrased in non-dogmatic terms that can be backed up by cites if you wish). Your correction becomes the first para, except that 'may or may not' becomes 'often'. Here endeth the first edit. -- The Anome

The second edit: I incorporate your correction re non-loss medical reason into the para above. -- The Anome

The third edit: now your correction is incorporated into the para above, it is no longer needed. So it goes.

Now I have incorporated your corrections into the article. I have

  • replaced my words (or someone else's?) with yours for correction 1
  • incorporated the sense of correction 2 into my text, and deleted the redundant correction

You should now be happy - if not, please tell me why. -- The Anome

This article merges discussion of depression in general and unipolar depression. I'm wondering if anyone else feels it might be better to have one page called "Depression", and another called "Unipolar disorder" or "Clinical depression" or "Major depression" to discuss particulars. -- Ryguasu

I agree that a simplification and rationalization of these topics makes sense. Beans

Here's a link to a useful public domain booklet; material from this can be freely copied into the article: [1] Enchanter

WikiProject Psychopathology started, please feel free to join.

This article, like most of the psychiatry articles on Wikipedia, currently basically reads like the "party line" from the DSM-IV, which, while influential, is hardly the only word on the topic. Things that I would like to see eventually included: critical viewpoints that do not accept the "medical model" (Szasz is the most notorious, but there's a wide range); literary connections (van Gogh, Rothko, etc.); controversy over treatment; etc. As with most things relating to the human psyche, it is possible to view depression as simply a biological condition, but this is not the only viewpoint. --Delirium 23:58, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)

Actually, to keep things manageable, perhaps this article (at clinical depression) should remain a dispassionate exposition of the medical model viewpoints (as dictated by the APA and NIMH, among others), but there should be a more general article as well, exploring varying viewpoints on the condition, literary and artistic connections, the history of "melancholia" and social reactions to it, etc. --Delirium 00:00, Dec 10, 2003 (UTC)
I'd like to say that the medical establishment with regards to depression reminds me of the dentistry establishment with regards to mercury amalgam fillings. The attitude towards depression tends to be that it is purely caused by psychological and genetic factors and is a disease like diabetes, and the way to treat it is with psychoptherapy and psychotropic drugs. The whole biological role in causing and treating depression is not taken very seriously. For example, oftentimes depressed people have deficiency in serotonin synthesis, so that is treated with costly SSRI drugs. Actually treating the biological problem, such as dietary mineral deficiencies or heavy metal poisoning, just isn't cricket. I suppose you could be cynical and say that the medical companies would not make any money that way, nor would the psychologists, and the doctors would turn their nose at making themselves sound like their enemies the naturopaths. For whatever reason, the causes are medically known just like how mecury fillings emit mercury vapour, but people in the white coats are not listening.
That strikes me as a pretty POV stance to take. I agree with Delirium that this needs to be an article without bias, and if bias needs discussing, it can be done in another article on Controversial issues in psychiatric medicine, for instance.

Medical researchers are currently following physiological/genetic approaches to depression with great vigor, both in terms of chemical pathways and genes that modify the operation of these pathways. They are also aware that there is a two-way traffic between psychology and brain activity. One case in point is the work of Stoll et al on the effect of essential fatty acids on depression, which is absolutely mainstream medical research that looks at diet as a crucial factor. You might also want to look at the work on phototherapy for depression, which is also entirely mainstream. -- The Anome 08:22, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

  • You're most definitely on the money with your obsevations. Genetics is almost certainly a factor (as the article notes), and cognitive therapy recognises the role between attitude and brain chemistry. I know that phototherapy is widely recognised as an effective way to treat SAD, and I suspect it would be of benefit in typical depression as well. Considering that normal people feel better in the sunshine than shut up in a dark room, I believe the same applies to the depressed individual. Denni 16:38, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

"About twice as many women as men experience depression, though the gap is shrinking."

Would it be more accurate to say seek treatment for than experience? --bodnotbod 20:55, May 9, 2004 (UTC)


No. Many (if not most) people suffering from depression never seek treatment. Even though they know what they're dealing with, the stigma of having been formally diagnosed is too much for some to handle. Others do not appreciate the serious nature of their illness and choose to live with its symptoms. Experts say roughly ten percent of the population will experience an episode of clinical depression sometime in their lives. Denni 00:38, 2004 May 10 (UTC)

So how are the figures obtained that state women are twice as likely to suffer from depression as men? --bodnotbod 01:53, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

People will discuss it with their doctors, and often, doctors are able to spot depression even when a patient does not realize that's the problem (when you know what you're looking for, it's not hard to tell). Just because a doctor tells you you have depression doesn't mean you'll agree to treatment, any more than if the dentists says you need a root canal, you'll go along with him/her. Denni 04:52, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

parts that need fixin'

  • "Most people who have not experienced clinical depression do not properly understand its emotional impact..." (double negative)
    • A double negative is an issue only when it inverts what the person intends. If I say "I don't got no marbles," I probably mean I don't have any marbles, but what I'm actually saying is that I do have marbles. So don't give me no more argument. Besides, I lost my marbles years ago.Denni 04:42, 2004 May 18 (UTC)
  • "...to the person's own efforts to feel better." So the depressed person makes efforts to feel better, but does not respond to it? is that what that is saying?
    • Yes. Cognitive therapy often focuses in part on what is called "negative self-talk'—"I'm just a loser. I have no friends. I have no reason to live." Therapists ask clients to focus on the positives in their life. Some therapists have their clients keep journals of things like "three things I am grateful for today" or creating and stating affirmations such as "I am a caring, loving person". In major depression, sufferers may see this as just so much feel-good BS, and even though they may attempt it, the negative self-talk wins out in the end.Denni 04:42, 2004 May 18 (UTC)
  • "Because of its intractible nature..." intractible? Please explain what that means and how it applies here.
    • "Intractible", according to my trusty Oxford Dictionary of Current English (I know you would not expect less :) ) means "stubborn or difficult to control". Depression most assuredly is that.Denni 04:42, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

sincerely, Kingturtle 06:24, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Despite being a double negative it makes sense. Would you prefer it is largely those that have suffered from CD that understand its impact...? Sounds odd to me. --bodnotbod 09:36, May 11, 2004 (UTC)

I think, perhaps, that the section on psychotherapy treatments could be fleshed out a bit, as to how the specific approaches may be employed. Would this be better left as it is, except changed to link to the relavent articles? (I admit I havn't read them as yet...) - Xgkkp

  • I have added links to the various types of psychotherapy. I think they're important enough for stand-alone articles, but I will not commit to writing them. My next job is to see what kind of shape the Bipolar disorder article is in. Denni 04:42, 2004 May 18 (UTC)