Posted by JohnL on March 16, 2000, at 3:36:55
In reply to Brain Chemical Imbalance, posted by Ania on March 15, 2000, at 8:10:04
I read the book and found it fascinating. It actually makes perfect sense. I have lots of books on depression. If I had to throw them all out and keep just one, The Successful Treatment of Brain Chemical Imbalance is the one I would keep.
These are specifics I really like:
A description of how and why each of 10 different chemical imbalances result in the same symptoms. 250 case examples to illustrate.
A section for the general public to understand, as well as a section for the physician or the more technical oriented patient.
Specific examples with case stories, bar graphs, etc etc.
This book is loaded with cool stuff on every page.
If you think about it, it makes perfectly logical sense. We see it all the time in the real world, and here, but fail to put it into an organized manner as Dr Jensen attempts to.My doctor has never heard of Dr. Jensen, yet uses a very similar approach. He likes to do relatively quick two week comparisons and then let me choose which was the best to continue with. The underlying assumption is that our unique chemistry will prefer one molecule over another, and that when it does it is obvious quickly.
I've tried Paxil, Zoloft, and Prozac. Prozac was the best. But that wasn't good enough for my pdoc. He wanted to compare Celexa, Luvox, and Effexor before getting committed to any one of them. So I did. Celexa was clearly inferior. As was Luvox. One week each. Right now I'm on Effexor and I have to admit I was astounded with how good it made me feel THE VERY FIRST DAY! Just like he said would happen. I think my chemistry likes this molecule called Effexor! Dr Jensen's strategy has proved itself in real life with my own experiences. I find it interesting that he isn't the only one using this approach, though admittedly most pdocs don't. They prefer to commit their patients to these long drawnout trials where they'll never know if a different drug within the same class might have been a whole lot better. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to compare. Results are indeed obvious very quickly when the right drug is found.
In the beginning I objected furiously to Dr Jensens quick-trial comparison method. But after reading the book, I find it impossible to blow a hole in the theory. Results speak for themselves as well. He specializes in getting people well who have failed with other doctors, and getting well fast. His book makes it dramatically obvious that he understands the intricacies of the brain and the subtle differences between drugs like I never thought possible. He blows most pdocs right out of the water. He's a genius in psychiatry and brain chemistry. Six week trials become ancient primitive methods in his hands. Sure, drugs take 6 weeks to work fully, but the right ones make themselves obvious much quicker. The slower long trials usually indicate an inferior match.
I'm rambling. But yes, I've read the book. It's a masterpiece. It turned me--a true disbeliever and critic--into a true believer. And my own pdoc has proved the validity of these methods with me personally. Everything I read in the book has actually happened with me. Defintely a superb addition to the library. It is being used in some medical schools, and I can understand why. After reading it, I can't help but laugh at myself for being so critical before reading it. I thought I knew it all. I was way wrong. JohnL
poster:JohnL
thread:27081
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000312/msgs/27174.html