Quote (thesnipa @ Jul 29 2020 11:46am)

where is the info i dont already know tho lol?

im saying most 4 year psychiatrists should be 2 year psychologists and have their ability to prescribe drugs taken away. first reason because i find this practice overdone and dangerous, but also the root of both is flawed, that being psychology.

oddly enough surgeons can and do replicate results, and they're dealing with generally static anatomy. a heart surgeon might find an irregular heart once a year if he does a surgery 300 times that year, to a psychiatrist every brain is irregular and a puzzle they have to figure out.

none of this is a condemnation of psychiatry generally or those in therapy, just as a masseuse not having a medical degree doesnt invalidate them. psychologists can and do deal with trauma, depression, etc. i know many and they do great work.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 29 2020 11:59am)

Psychiatry and Psychology publish in different journals. Psychiatry publish in medical journals and have more stringent controls on trials before they implement, especially in regard to medication.

Psychiatrists replicate results and have stricter controls, psychologists are in the middle of a replication crisis. I think you overestimate the overlap between the psychiatry and psychology literature.

Quote (thesnipa @ Jul 29 2020 12:24pm)

i dont know where u got literature from at all, that wasnt even my focus.
psychiatrists do all of the training a psycologist does and then more, correct? under grad in psychology, then additional medical training.
and in any case im arguing for more psychologist, despite their issues with replication, because my problem is the drugs psychiatrists recommend. that's my focus, not necessarily journals.
i could go into 5d chess mode with gender specialists specifically with indoctrination in academia, but that's rather fruitless conversation for a myriad of reasons.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 29 2020 12:30pm)

No. Psychiatrists do whatever they want in undergrad, get into medical school, do 4 years of medical school, then learn 100% of their psychiatry training in residency.

We are talking about the literature because that's where the replication crisis exists.

You can do 5d chess mode but with what you've said so far I'm confident it would just be you not understanding the rules of checkers and claiming a 5d chess victory :D By which I mean you clearly don't understand what training even goes into what field, so any discussion about indoctrination, specialties, etc. would indeed be fruitless because it would require you do a lot of reading on the basics.

Quote (thesnipa @ Jul 29 2020 12:42pm)

but we're not talking about literature, you are lol. im talking about over prescription of drug cocktails as a tie in to a lack of replication.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 29 2020 12:45pm)

Then we can stop here because you are equating two fundamentally different parts of the literature.

The "drug cocktails" are subject to different levels of scrutiny as they are in medical journals, not the body of psychological literature that is currently subject to the replication crisis.

Quote (thesnipa @ Jul 29 2020 12:48pm)

waffle fries and tater tots are subject to different levels of scrutiny but are both still made from potatoes.

my contention is simply that, along with psychology having replication issues, drug cocktails causing unprompted suicides are another issue of replication. its guesswork, maybe educated guesswork, but guesswork all the same. its not heart surgery, its exploratory surgery.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 29 2020 12:53pm)

Patient outcomes are not an issue of replication. The replication crisis is something specifically happening in psychology journals and has not been shown to happen in psychiatry and medical journals. Psychiatry trials are virtually never predicated on the psychology literature.

The fundamental problem here is you don't really know how anything works in either of the fields you are trying to criticize, so you end up conflating ideas and entire fields and are just speaking nonsense.

Quote (thesnipa @ Jul 29 2020 01:06pm)

if a psychiatry study on a certain pill or cocktail of pills is done the success rate is far lower than studies in other medical practices, correct? like say someone prescribing high blood pressure medication, even with a list a mile long of side effects most of the ones so bad they would prevent use of the pill are a tiny % of the group, correct? whereas even fairly reliable psychiatric drugs have a far lower overall success rate, correct? and rather than bloody noses or diarrhea the side effect can be suicide, correct?

honestly just seems like you're looking to have a different conversation than me while trying to flex with knowledge of medical school, despite not getting in. see anyone can throw jabs.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 29 2020 01:12pm)

"Successful study rates" can't be meaningfully compared across medical disciplines. If they could oncology would look like absolute shit. And beyond that publication bias would be a whole beast that needs to be tackled.

I'm not trying to flex anything. I'm pointing out that in order to have a productive conversation it would require you to put in the work to understand at least the basics. I don't come in and try to tell you about automation, and if I do say something and you correct me I defer. Right now you're trying to speak authoritatively about a field you don't even have an introductory knowledge of and as a result you're making criticisms that just don't make sense.