Subscribe Now!

Thursday, 13 May 2010

Commercialization vs. Medicalization

Suppose there was someone who's perfectly healthy, just stressed, or worried, or or unhappy.

And suppose that, for whatever reason, they go see their doctor about their problems, they get a diagnosis of depression, or social anxiety disorder, or something, and a prescription for Prozac.

What's wrong with this picture? Well, it's a clear case of medicalization: because I made it up to be a good example of medicalization. But what's wrong with medicalization? The medicines themselves? Many people think so, but if you ask me, they're the least troublesome part of the process.

*

Drugs cost money, but not much: generic fluoxetine, i.e. non-brand-name Prozac, currently costs less than 10 cents per day. Drugs have side effects, but if our hypothetical person doesn't like the Prozac he or she's been prescribed, there's nothing stopping them from chucking it in the bin.

A diagnosis, on the other hand, is a lot harder to shake. In theory, one could get a second opinion from a different doctor and be declared perfectly healthy but in all my conversations with psychiatrists and patients I've never known of someone with a mental health diagnosis getting "undiagnosed" completely.

What's harmful about a mental health diagnosis? It changes the way you think about yourself, in many complicated ways. Just for one thing, it's likely to make you reconsider your past actions and ask if they were "really you", or whether they were caused by your illness.

Now, if you really are mentally ill, that is, if the diagnosis is accurate, this change will probably be a good thing; it might help you realize that with help, you can change, and avoid making the same mistakes you blame yourself for, for example. But if you're not ill, the same changes might be harmful.

A diagnosis invites you to think about problems through the lens of objective, impersonal analysis and treatment, what we might call the "clinical approach". The clinical approach is obviously the best one for most physical diseases. If you have cholera, you are ill, and you need to be diagnosed, and treated appropriately. Most people would agree that the clinical approach is also useful, albeit more problematic, in clear cut mental illnesses like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and (some cases of) depression.

But if your problem, or the root of your problems, is not that you're ill but that you're poor, or a victim of discrimination, or in the wrong job, or the wrong relationship, or you don't have either, etc. then a diagnosis is both futile, and quite possibly, actively harmful.

Futile because there's no disease to treat, and harmful because by situating that the origins of your problems are inside yourself (your neurochemistry, a "chemical imbalance"), it diverts attention from the real issues and the real solutions. Maybe you just need to change your situation, take a decision, get a new perspective, stop doing something.

*

Is there an answer? Many people want us to stop taking so many antidepressants: reverse the trend of medicalization, by reducing the number of pills we take. But there may be another way: commercialization.

Suppose that you didn't need a prescription to get Prozac: you just bought SSRIs over the counter, like aspirin, whenever you felt like it. What would this mean? It might mean more people taking Prozac, although I'm not sure it would. But it would almost certainly change the way people think about antidepressants.

Commercializing SSRIs would, I think, mean that many SSRI users stopped seeing themselves as "psychiatric patients", or as the pills as cures for their "illnesses". Instead they'd see them more like aspirin, or coffee, or beer: something to help you "feel better", a nice thing to have in some circumstances, but not something that's going to solve all your problems. It would, in other words, prevent mentally healthy people from thinking of themselves as "mentally ill". With any luck, our hypothetical friend from the first paragraph would be one of them.

Of course, this would be no benefit if you think that the whole problem with Prozac is the actual drug, fluoxetine hydrochloride. But if, like me, you think fluoxetine hydrochloride is pretty benign compared to the idea of Prozac, it would be a good move. The good thing about commercialization is that it makes it easy to buy things without having to think about them.

*

You can easily take this argument too far, and if you do, you'll eventually arrive approximately here. Don't. Serious clinical depression and anxiety disorders are real, and people who suffer from them often need "prescription-strength" drugs, and more importantly, professional help rather than being left to self-treat, because the ability to take care of yourself is, almost by definition, impaired in mental illness.

But these people might benefit from the commercialization of mood as well. They'd no longer be seen as qualitatively different from everyone else, weird and unusual. It's like how if someone's got severe pain, and needs prescription-strength painkillers, that's no big deal, because hey, we've all taken aspirin for headaches.

*

Commercialization would be better than medicalization for other drugs too. Take flibanserin, the new drug for "Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder", a condition which, according to the drug company who make flibanserin, affects maybe 20% of women.

Whether flibanserin really boosts libido to any significant extent is unclear, but let's assume it does. Why not sell it over-the-counter? Give it a raunchy name, put it in a colorful box, and sell it in pharmacies next to the condoms. I can picture it now...

Now that would be pretty ridiculous. It would be a crass example of the commercialization of sexuality. But flibanserin already is - or at least, saying 20% of women ought to be taking it is. By selling it as a lifestyle product, instead of a medical treatment, its crassness would be obvious, and we'd just have lots of people taking flibanserin, instead of lots of people taking flibanserin and thinking of themselves as suffering from "Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder" i.e. a mental illness.

Unfortunately, I rather doubt that this is going to happen any time soon, although if you go to many "3rd world" countries, you'll find antidepressants, and indeed most other drugs, on the pharmacy shelves for anyone to buy without a prescription. To Westerners, this might seem primitive. I'm not so sure.

13 comments:

SustainableFamilies said...

This post is simply magnificent. I sent the e-mail freaking out about the veterans being pumped full of drugs, but I would like to add, my concern is not entirely THAT THEY ARE PUMPED FULL OF DRUGS, as that they are not given support for the trauma.

The drugs, whether you think they're terrible or mildly affective... are simply not ever going to be the "Cure" for trauma which is inherently a condition of emotional suffering that I believe needs treatment in the form of... emotional support.

But while I'm one of those weirdos that thinks psych meds are terrible (though I respect any human beings decision to take them.... however you get through suffering is your own business) I agree with you completely that the bigger problem is the diagnose, the expectations of what the pills will do, and the ways that the limited thinking affect the ability to see yourself as a regular person with chemical deficit rather than a mental illness living in a body.

I love this post, and I actually agree that quite possibly making psych meds legal could be a good thing for all.

(I don't know though, might have to think it through before I'd actually vote that way lol)

katiedid said...

I agree that your scenario sounds like it would really help the problem and I also agree that there most definitely IS a problem. However, what about the side effects of said drugs? What about how most antidepressants must be taken for several weeks before they work and some, if taken then stopped, will not work as well if they are restarted later.

I get that this post is just an idea and it's a neat idea but I think a bit of info about why it's not very plausible would be good too.

jim said...

Good to see Szasz used as a several steps too far point. I recently heard him claiming that suicide is a valid treatment for depression.

Neuroskeptic said...

katiedid: Sure, psychiatric drugs have side effects. But so do all drugs that are currently sold over the counter. From a safety perspective, it's much easier to kill yourself with paracetamol than with Prozac, and cigarettes and beer have nasty side effects long term too.

I'm not sure that selling Prozac OTC would actually be a good thing, but as a thought experiment it's useful, and it might well be a good thing overall. In many countries, it's already happening. It would be really interesting, actually, to see how antidepressants are viewed and used in those countries. Almost everything that's written about the "Prozac generation" etc. comes from the US or Europe.

E said...

Of course people can get undiagnosed. They get re-diagnosed as having a personality disorder and then no one in the psychiatric field touches them with a 10ft barge pole

At one point, I think I am right in saying, tea was considered to be a medication and Ayurvedic & traditional chinese medicine (not that I am a fan) often recommend changes in diet to treat disorders of the mind and body.

The use of recreational drugs, legal and non legal, is nothing more than an attempt to self medicate. I think the trend to medicalize is most prevalent in addiction therapy where AA, rather perniciously in my opinion, seek to convince you that you have an illness but one to which their is no cure and for which the only treatment is continued mmebership of the group.

aethelreadtheunread said...

Overdiagnosis of mental illness (depression/ anxiety disorders especially) is undoubtedly a problem, but you're over-thinking the solution. The solution is to stop overdiagnosing mental illness. I have great sympathy with GPs who have no time, and are the first port of call for people suffering from reactive emotional distress, and know that prescribing a pill will work, thanks to the placebo effect, even with non-clinical problems. The fact remains that they need to stop diagnosing depression and anxiety in people who are not clinically depressed or anxious. This is the only way of fixing the problem.

Making clinical depression and anxiety fully self-diagnosed conditions - which is all making antidepressants over-the-counter (or off the shelf, if you really mean the comparison with aspirin) medications would achieve - won't stop the problem of overdiagnosis, it will just make different people responsible for it. When people buy an off the shelf or over the counter medicine they think of themselves as ill, in a way they don't when they buy a coffee or a beer; just think of the way people who aren't badly affected talk about their serious 'seasonal allergies' in the context of freely-available (and aggressively marketed) antihistamines, versus the way they used to regard 'hay fever' as a trifling annoyance. As you say, making prozac and the like available without a prescription would be very likely to increase consumption, and this would go hand in glove with an increase in the numbers of people who think of themselves as mentally ill - 'as qualitatively different from everyone else' - and use the fact they "have" to take pills for it as "proof" that their illness is "real".

Sorry for the long comment.

Neuroskeptic said...

aethelread: I love long comments! :)

"When people buy an off the shelf or over the counter medicine they think of themselves as ill, in a way they don't when they buy a coffee or a beer; just think of the way people who aren't badly affected talk about their serious 'seasonal allergies' in the context of freely-available (and aggressively marketed) antihistamines, versus the way they used to regard 'hay fever' as a trifling annoyance."

This is a good point, but I'm not sure... people take aspirin for lots of reasons. Hangovers, for example, and people don't think of those as illnesses. People take aspirin for coughs and colds and flu, too, but I don't think people expect aspirin to cure them, they take it to feel better until it goes away on its own. Basically I don't think people self-diagnose very much when they take aspirin, they just take it because they have a headache and they want it to stop, they don't worry too much about why.

Now if you sold Prozac OTC the same thing might happen. You're right that it might end up with more people self-diagnosing. But I'm not sure that people do self-diagnose with psychiatric diagnoses. I think they get the idea that they might have something, but they seek medical confirmation before they consider it a sure thing. Maybe I'm wrong...

SustainableFamilies said...

You know I have been using caffeine basically to treat ADD symptoms. The results are probably not particularly great, but I think my aversion to being stuck on some drug of someone elses choice make it more appealing.

I'm in the unfortunate position of having found some really expensive stuff that works AMAZINGLY well. I can function! Unfortunately....

I can't afford to pay for neurofeedback+accupuncture+massage+personal yoga trainer+ayurvedic specialist

LOL I am ruined by experiencing an amount of support that gave me results drastically beyond anything I had experienced with meds.

However after doing that for a year... well you know, you do run out of money eventually.

So now I'm stuck. I'm far more functional than I was even on the meds, but I still have inattentive symptoms, constantly fight chronic disorganization, really obvious problems with frontal lobe functioning... although from the EEG's it was my parietal lobes that were struggling... (I can't find much on what the parietal lobes do though...)

Anyways, sorry for the TMI

I was just thinking, I wonder if people like me who don't want to be "stuck on meds" would be more likely to use a prescription for meds if it was considered a temporary solution until funding for other solutions could be put together.

I know for me I still wouldn't, but I still like the idea.

At least it made me look at how I use coffee which is terrible for you, and I'm sure contributing to a worsening of symptoms (and there's that whole the coffee gives less results as you get more used to it... I have to take a week break from coffee and then it works again... you would think I wouldn't be so opposed to psych meds!)

: )

I'm honestly surprised that people wouldn't see caffeine in a more positive light. From what I've read, ADHD meds don't actually do as much as they claim as far as school performance. And they do have downsides, as does caffeine.

I think they both actually cause long term damage in the brains ability to function. Is it all about the money or is there really evidence that caffeine is WAY TOTALLY WORSE.

It seems like there's as much logic in it as there is in prohibiting marijuana but allowing alcohol use.

Anonymous said...

Really interesting post. I think I might be one of those who have taken these ideas, in your words, a step 'too far'. I'm not entirely convinced that depression/anxiety/ADD (the less 'clear cut' mental illnesses) exist (or rather, that they're valid disorders). In the case of depression that is situational, a diagnosis (in my opinion) makes no sense - sorting out the root problem does. It seems that people these days are desperate to be diagnosed. Which is sort of the biggest problem. As I've mentioned, I don't 'believe' in depression as such - I think some people are just naturally (I'm going to use the word 'unhappy' here - I know depression constitutes a lot more than unhappiness, but please, no yelling. :) ) unhappy in life, regardless of their situation. And there's nothing wrong with being that way - sure, they got the short end of the stick, but they can live with it, mostly. (And again, if they can't, what's so bad about that? I'm starting to think I may have found a kindred spirit in Mr. Szasz. :s) The real problem arises when people start to consider these feelings abnormal - no-one's satisfied with who they are, and everyone wants to be 'fixed'. I don't know, I think life is too short to spend time wasting it on doctors visits. We should all just get on with it.
There's also an argument to be made that diagnosis and treatment actually makes things worse - you have to take medication/take part in talking therapies, all a constant reminder/reinforcement that there's something wrong with you.
In spite (?) of all my ramblings above, I do agree with the idea of self medicating - if people are capable of it. The potential benefits of the drugs used to treat depression, etc. supposedly outweigh the risks/side effects - really, what's the worst that could happen?
Sorry for the long post! And being anonymous, I don't have any accounts. I shall continue to lurk though. :)

Lisa said...

I'm gently, without yelling, telling anonymous I disagree with him or her. My first depression occured when I was 16 years old. Then the shizoaffective disorder (bipolar type) hit me at 19 years old. I've had adhd and ocd since I can remember. I take medication for all of those things...yes, it's a lot of medication. Without it, I'm not very functional and life isn't fun. No one will ever convince me that I was just an "unhappy" 16 year old and that my adhd and depression don't really exist. I would invite you to live a month in my shoes....schizophrenia/bipolar disorder, ocd and adhd...without medication, then get back with me and let me know whether you think these things exist. I bet you wouldn't last 2 weeks.

MikeS said...

A big issue with making Prozac available OTC is that it does not work like a typical OTC drug. If you have a headache, you take Tylenol to relieve the pain. You can't just wake up in the morning and say "oh I'm feeling a little moody, I'll take a Prozac to brighten up my day." As a psychotropic medication, it takes several weeks of daily usage before beneficial effects would occur. If the medication was available OTC, I don't think you would see the same kind of discipline from people in taking the pills as when it is given in a prescription from a doctor.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am firmly in the anti-antidepressant camp. Psychotropic medications should only be used in severe cases, as they are dangerous and physically addictive, leading to worse long-term outcomes, and CREATING rather than fix any mythical neurochemical imbalances. These drugs should not be mass-consumed by the public, and they should not be available OTC.

Anonymous said...

Depression is much more long term than headaches. Unlike headache medicine, you must consistently take antidepressants over long periods of time to maintain their beneficial effects; you do not simply use them once to get yourself through a bad day.

Neuroskeptic said...

Yes, there are important differences... But people buy lots of things that have to be taken long term OTC - vitamins are the biggest one, also in the UK they now sell orlistat OTC.