Posted by violette on June 28, 2010, at 20:45:44
In reply to Re: The biology of depression: Wolkowitz brings hope, posted by rovers95 on June 27, 2010, at 17:44:25
Rosy-I loved it! I listened to it while painting so I didn't see the visual aids he was referring to--I did check the affiliated organizations at the end and watched the last 10 mins..I'll probably watch it to listen to it again since I didn't quite absorb all the genetic stuff due to the terminology.
..The whole model he suggests sounds as if he was explaining exactly what happened to me...(minus the genetic change stuff I don't understand entirely). I really like his suggested model!
How I benefited from the video:
1. Felt optimistic about the funding of research that is not the same comparison of SSRI drugs vs. thse drugs or SSRI drugs vs. ___ over and over..also was informative to understand why ADs are not as effective as they could be
2. Reminded me of the importance of how research funds are directed and from what source it came from...(funding sources are on a slide at the end)
3. Validated that the current treatment I have chosen--relational/attachment-based psychodynamic therapy--is the best choice for me given the other options (I plan to grow new neurons from psychotherapy instead of drugs..lol...and yes, it's been researched)
4. Made me feel less guilty of the time I spent researching mental health; the stuff I had pieced together about my situation-the stress exposure, childhood, relation with parents, and personality traits (ex. perceptual sensitivity--maybe this is from genes?) which explained how I got where I am today was verified by much of what he said
5. Validated my recent decision to not further pursue neurological testing, thinking lately my brain was damaged from the cognitive traits/neuro changes I developed as a result of the risk factors rather than from meds (saved lots of time/money
6. Confirmed my positive feelings about attachment theory-alot of what he said seemed to originate from attachment theorists-people who subsequently looked into the neuro, endo, and cognitive stuff a decade or so ago (like Schore)
7. Inspired me to exercise more, as it was pointed out that exercise had the same effect as ADs alone (not that I never heard of the benefits of exercise before-but it gave me motivation)
8. Enabled me to think of trying DHEA since I had never thought of that before
9. Validated I was not delusional when I showed up at endocronologist's offices, after ADs didn't work after years of heavy stress, asking about cortisol--although the endocronologists basically said they don't deal with 'mental health'
10. Confirmed some of my thoughts about psychosomatic illnesses (something psychoanalysts from the 1800s connected w/o the science to back it up)
11. Felt positive about future potential risk screening methods to intervene before people get ill
12. Gave me hope for future treatments for my grandchildren resulting from a new model which integrates endo/cog/psycho/bio/social
He seems like a sensible and humble guy, always pointing out much of what he thought was "highly speculative", only theory/not proven, or only tested in rats....that's how all higher theory starts I suppose..I wonder how clinicians generally feel about his model? Any out there who'd like to opine?
Some things I had wished he addressed in more detail: psychotherapy, anticonvulsants and off-label scripts..neuro in regard to defense mechanisms.
Tanks for posting this-I don't think I had ever seen one presentation that synthesizes everything so well. :)
Question: ??? I probably have to listen to it again because I missed something or another-did he say something about MAOIs enabling neurological growth, or was he referring to ADs in general?
poster:violette
thread:952373
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20100628/msgs/952587.html