I read the claim recently that compounds used recreationally are unusually likely to have therapeutic effects compared to random chemical
Show this thread
-
-
I think the actual explanation is something like this: 1. Druggies are trying to feel good specifically (positive affect, interestingness)
Show this thread -
2. Pharma is trying to “treat constructs” but what consumers actually care about is feeling good and nothing else matters much
Show this thread -
Mental illness constructs aren’t actually what people (consumers/patients) care about, they care about feeling shitty or not
Show this thread -
Since DSM tends to have “clinically significant distress” thresholds for disorders you should be able to knock them all out by fixing that
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
also ugghh i'm disappointed this poast doesn't touch the third rail of using opioids (which is absolutely and incontrovertibly trad, by the way) for treatment of suicidality even though there's evidence that it actually works lol https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.15040535?journalCode=ajp …
-
yeah I wrote a whole chapter of a science book about that lol
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
a wise sloth once said "thou shalt not legibilize the ingroup"
End of conversation
-
-
-
This was the pull-quote I had in mind. "Smack the brain really hard" rang a bell though I actually found it by searching the archives for "large effect size."pic.twitter.com/tCiXLLLRk9
-
yeah I’m excited because I think I found a point of genuine disagreement
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.