NIMH Delivers A Kill Shot To DSM-5 ((NIMH) is distancing itself from the the American Psychiatric Association and its upcoming Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5))

[23x]

NIMH Delivers A Kill Shot To DSM-5
By Hank Campbell | May 3rd 2013 02:00 PM | 15 comments | Print | E-
mail | Track Comments

Science 2.0
MORE ARTICLES
Social Psych For Burgers - Men Who Prefer Grilled Burgers Are More
Attractive
NIMH Delivers A Kill Shot To DSM-5
Euthanasia: Slope For Newborns Not That Slippery Yet
All Articles
ABOUT HANK
I'm the founder of Science 2.0® and co-author of "Science Left
Behind".

A wise man once said Darwin had the greatest idea anyone...
View Hank's Profile

Hank Campbell

The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) is distancing itself
from the the American Psychiatric Association and its upcoming
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5).

While they acknowledge that the goal of DSM "is to provide a common
language for describing psychopathology" they are no longer convinced
that approach has value if we are going to solve 21st century
cognitive science problems. It is, paraphrasing the statement of
Thomas R. Insel, M.D., Director of the National Institute of Mental
Health, more of a dictionary than a manual. He uses the term "Bible"
instead of 'manual' but I would have used 'glossary' rather than
'dictionary'.

Insel pulls no punches in his statement on why they are not going to
fund things based on DSM criteria any more.

"The weakness is its lack of validity. Unlike our definitions of
ischemic heart disease, lymphoma, or AIDS, the DSM diagnoses are based
on a consensus about clusters of clinical symptoms, not any objective
laboratory measure."

This is a charge leveled at psychology as well, and the field in
general, but psychiatry takes the biggest hits, because they are
supposed to be the most evidence-based. Unlike psychology,
psychiatrists have to be M.D.s first. Writing in The New Yorker, Gary
Greenberg tries to tackle why cognitive science hasn't kept pace with
medicine, much less the physical and life and earth sciences, writing
rather nicely that "it’s not entirely clear that psychiatrists want a
solution to the problem."

Insel is more blunt. "DSM diagnoses are based on a consensus about
clusters of clinical symptoms, not any objective laboratory measure.
In the rest of medicine, this would be equivalent to creating
diagnostic systems based on the nature of chest pain or the quality of
fever."

Basically, he says DSM is stuck in the past.
Indeed, symptom-based diagnosis, once common in other areas of
medicine, has been largely replaced in the past half century as we
have understood that symptoms alone rarely indicate the best choice of
treatment.

Patients with mental disorders deserve better.
NIMH is leaving the past behind. In the past, Insel notes, they would
reject a biomarker that did not match a DSM category. Now they instead
want to collect how all data - genetic, imaging, physiologic and
cognitive - cluster, and not just how symptoms do. They call it the
Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project.

"That is why NIMH will be re-orienting its research away from DSM
categories.," he wrote, and that means funding applicants are going to
have to adjust to the 21st century.

The APA may be outraged, and certainly some DSM-5 defenders, but I
predict people in cognitive science who want to really do science and
get NIMH funding are relieved that they are not going to have to cater
to a document everyone seems to know was always flawed.

Read Insel's whole statement, Transforming Diagnosis, and have hope
for the future.
RELATED ARTICLES ON SCIENCE 2.0

Figuring Out The Mind Of The Psychopath - Or Not
The DSM-V: The New, The Revised, The Opportunities For Pharma
An Interview With Simon Baron-Cohen On Zero-Empathy, Autism, And
Accountability
Considering Psychopaths
Is DSM-5 Unscientific?




http://www.science20.com/science_20/blog/nimh_delivers_kill_shot_dsm5-111138

[Dr. AR Wingnutte, PhD]

yep
yep - (1) interjection (2)adjective:

1. Affirmative, yes, to convey agreeance.
2. Gives the subject a good characteristic, feeling or appearance.
In the case of (2) this is a contextual word, ie: the use of the words around it define the exact meaning of yep.

Examples:
"She is all yep" - The subject is in some way desirable, or has said or performed something desirable or agreeable to the speaker.
"Yep, that's a yep" - A double confirmation. Generally used after confirmation has been asked for on a particular subject.
by Cabji August 03, 2003


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=yep

On Sunday, May 5, 2013 6:47:38 PM UTC-5, 23x wrote:
> NIMH Delivers A Kill Shot To DSM-5
>
> By Hank Campbell | May 3rd 2013 02:00 PM | 15 comments | Print | E-
>
> mail | Track Comments
>
>
>
> Science 2.0
>
> MORE ARTICLES
>
> Social Psych For Burgers - Men Who Prefer Grilled Burgers Are More
>
> Attractive
>
> NIMH Delivers A Kill Shot To DSM-5
>
> Euthanasia: Slope For Newborns Not That Slippery Yet
>
> All Articles
>
> ABOUT HANK
>

> I'm the founder of Science 2.0(R) and co-author of "Science Left