Abstract Details

How Evidence Based is "Evidence Based" Medicine? Implications for Future Directions in Neuropsychology and Neuroethics.  Rado Gorjup , N. Gorjup, ASC, Research And Development, Ltd., Slovenia, EU (Cognitive Science, ASC, Research and Development, Ltd, Slovenia, EU, Nova Gorica, EU, SLOVENIA Slovenia)   P1

Over the past 70 years there have been many justified critiques made by prominent psychiatrists about psychiatry as not a branch of medicine but instead a pure pseudo-science. Professor of psychiatry Thomas Szasz evolved a conceptual and logical critique through disclosure of a mental illness as a myth. Psychiatrist Ron Leifer expressed concerns regarding social control through coercive psychiatry. Furthermore, psychiatrist Peter Breggin has done extensive medical and psycho pharmacological research evaluation of the assaults on the brain with psychotropic drugs, electroshock and lobotomy, which was accompanied by a critique of ex-users of such malpractice. But the best proof of sterility in bio-psychiatry as a false science can be found in the confession by Nancy Andreasen, the editor of the American Journal of Psychiatry, the most financed and influential psychiatric journal. In a book titled Brave New Brain in 2001, she admits that there are no genes responsible nor laboratory tests that determine who is mentally disturbed and who is not. There have not been found any physiological pathologies nor chemical imbalances that they postulate in the major disorders classified in the revised, fourth edition of the DSM-IV-TR. If biological psychiatry would find biological markers, it would instantaneously disappear on the medical cemetery and neurology would replace it. The easiest way for psychiatry to resist the critique and survive as a false science is to stand on irrefutable hypothesis (dogmatic postulate of baptized illnesses such as MDD) as a proposition that is accepted without proof. All one must do to debunk such biological pseudo sciences (psychopharmacology and bio-psychiatry) is to use the Karl Poppers and Occam?s razor principle. The critiques are summarized as follows: psychiatric diagnostic manuals DSM and ICD are school examples of what evidence-based science is not and represent nothing but a failed attempt to provide the legal road from Health Care to Hell Care by over medicalization and suffering of humanity. Furthermore, psychiatric drugs can have long-lasting effects on the brain and central nervous system, withdrawal from them can cause a range of severe physical and psychological effects, psychotropic drugs are extensively prescribed to children and adolescents even though they produce altered mental states, are very harmful and do not cure diseases. There is a clear scientific evidence that many of psychiatric drugs do no better than placebo pills and all the major classes of psychiatric drugs demonstrate little additional long-term effect, and majority of patients show significantly worsened long-term outcomes. It seems that medicine/pharmaceutical industry in general and psychiatry/psychopharmacology in particular are caught in a trap, and they cannot find the way out. In order to resolve that puzzled situation and unnecessary suffering we propose some practical solutions that could have treatment implications on both psychiatrists and society. Furthermore, we explain why all so called "psychiatric problems" are not biological disease entities but instead existential problems of living caused by extensive stress. In conclusion, we provide unique innovation, namely "ASC App-roach"(Anti Stress Concept), which can effectively replace harmful psychopharmacological (psychotropic) neurotoxins thusly permanently save our Humankind.