Watch this presentation if you have a mental illness diagnosis or have ever been on a mood altering drug.
How the Diagnostic Statistical Manual was created will shock you.
The Diagnostic Statistical Manual. How it was created.
Thank you to a reader for sharing this video link with me. It is essential to watch this presentation to understand how mental illness diagnoses were and still are created.
Each new DSM volume gets more extensive, with more mental health diagnoses. It makes you wonder what normal behavior is anymore.
When I was in graduate school many years ago for social work, we were taught that the DMS (the 3-Revised) was our “bible.” We had to memorize the entire thing and take tests on the material.
The schools do a great job of brainwashing you. I thought we were so special, knowing about all these mental health disorders. Still, we could not diagnose, so the book was just a tool to look at the symptoms of a person's diagnosis.
Looking back, I don't know why we had to memorize it. If I had a client with schizophrenia, all I would have to do was look it up in the book to understand the symptoms the person would experience.
But as you watch this presentation, you realize that the list of symptoms needed to make that diagnosis is very subjective and based on a handful of people’s interpretations.
In modern medicine, a doctor only needs to identify which mental health box the person falls into subjectively, then scroll their finger over to the box that indicates which drugs are used for that specific mental health condition.
The presentation is almost 2 hours long but well worth watching and is entertaining.
Dr. Davies, PhD, describes the DSM 3, created by a small group of psychiatrists. When he interviewed one of the original DSM 3 creators, the psychiatrist stated that they voted on the criteria for a diagnosis.
Davies asked how they voted on DSM criteria, and the psychiatrist responded, “Oh, it was a small group, so people just raised their hands in a show of support.”
Others commented that within the group were those with more influence and others whose voices got suppressed or who went along with the people with the louder voices.
Think about that.
When you get a diagnosis, is it based on subjective and influential decision-making from a handful of people?
At one point, Davies said the psychiatrist said one of the voters voted down criteria for a mental health issue because he did that behavior. So, if the psychiatrist does that behavior, then it is normal?
Just under the hour mark in the video, Davies mentions some of the newer disorders added to the DSM, one of which is behavior change just before monthly menstruation.
Seriously. Were there no women involved in the decision-making process?
Due to a hormonal shift, women can experience mood changes for a brief time just before menstruation. Women who experience this shift more severely than others may have blood sugar dysregulation and hormonal dysregulation, both of which are tied to dietary intake such as sugar, refined carbs, CAFO dairy, and beef that is injected with hormones.
But instead, let us label these women with a diagnosis and give them a drug!
What doctor in their right mind would even make this diagnosis? It is absurd.
The DSM reminds me of the “turtles all the way down” concept in which all future DSMs are built upon a flawed book without scientific evidence.
(For those unfamiliar with the turtle term or the book by the same name, it refers to how each vaccine is compared to a previous vaccine when examining safety, thus never comparing a vaccine to a placebo. For example, the original HPV vaccine was compared to other vaccines for safety. When updating the HPV vaccine with more strains, they compared it to the older versions to determine safety, never to a placebo).
The DSM creators also misled the public by saying that only a few new mental health diagnoses have been added to newer DSM versions. Davies explains that many new diagnoses were added, but they placed them in the appendix instead.
Watch the video below to understand how mental health diagnoses are a complete sham.
Please show my posts some love! It is a busy spring, and I am writing, researching, seeing clients, and doing all my spring chores on our mini ranch.
I just watched the video - shouldn't have been surprised. It is staggering how corrupt psychiatry and big pharma is and how dangerous is the game they are playing with innocent lives. Cherry picking data, financial conflicts of interest, down right lying in the name of profits. Sad.
In the Masters program for SPED/ED I never learned about the DSM! Is that crazy or what? I'm going to check out this video to learn what nonsense is in the diagnosis's.