Best books about depression according to redditors

We found 57 Reddit comments discussing the best books about depression. We ranked the 24 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top Reddit comments about Depression:

u/hillsonghoods · 587 pointsr/AskHistorians

Any mental illness is both very real and something that is a social construct at some level. It's real in the sense that it causes real suffering in those who have it - people who commit suicide because of severe depression are not pretending. But a mental illness also a product of a time and a place and a culture: a mind is, practically, all about the relationship between a person and a world, and an illness of the mind is in some way a disordering of that relationship. If that world changes - and obviously it does, or history would be quite boring indeed - mental illnesses are also quite likely to change.

The upshot of this is that it's unclear whether mental illnesses described by people in the past are the same as the ones today. The modern American psychiatric diagnostic manual - which has been incredibly influential on how English speakers conceptualise mental illness in 2016 - has only existed in its current form since the release of the DSM-III in 1980. In contrast, the way that Sigmund Freud categorises mental illness in books like Introductory Lectures On Psychoanalysis is very different; Freud categorises the illnesses by his perception of their psychological root causes (e.g., by the childhood problems he feels caused the disorders) rather than by groupings of symptoms that often happen together (as the DSM-III does).

It's therefore often difficult to accurately compare mental illnesses from even 50-60 years ago to today, as psychiatrists and psychologists 50-60 years ago were often looking for very different things when they were making diagnoses (Freud was very influential in American psychiatry in the first two-thirds of the 20th century, though his influence declined rapidly after the 1970s). Reading Freud's case studies, he goes into quite a lot of detail about his patients, but it's not always easy to diagnose his patients according to the current DSM-V, because Freud is often focused on very different stuff to what a modern psychiatrist or clinical psychologist would look for.

The most vivid example of this issue is the (mostly female) mental illness that was called 'hysteria'. Freud wrote extensively about hysteria in works like Introductory Lectures On Psychoanalysis; reading his writing on hysteria in 2016 is interesting, because the peculiar set of symptoms that seemed to characterise hysteria (the physicalisation of psychological distress, a certain sense of over-emotionality that is still seen in the layman's meaning of the word, etc) are way less common than they seem to have been in Freud's day. In a book that it should be noted is titled Introductory Lectures On Psychoanalysis Freud actually doesn't bother to explain in much detail what hysteria is, and in fact clearly states that he doesn't need to - everybody already knows. Nonetheless, hysteria is not a commonly discussed mental disorder in 2016 (when's the last time there were frenzied media stories about people with 'conversion disorder', which is what psychiatrists now call it?) and seems to be much less frequent than it was. If societal conditions in Freud's day played a role in the way that its disorder manifested, it seems likely that things like women's rights and a more sexually open society changed those conditions in a way that reduced its frequency.

Which is to say that it's difficult to say whether depression is more prominent today than it was in 1366 AD, because we likely have a somewhat different conception of it today than they had in 1366 AD. Even if the symptoms were similar, it might not even be quite the same mental illness in a very real sense, because of the fairly large changes in Western society in the intervening hundreds of years (a mental illness that occurs because of brain state A and social situation X may have very similar symptoms to a mental illness that requires brain state B and social situation Y, but would clearly have different causes despite the similar symptoms).

With all that said: yes, many historical writers have written extensively about mental illness. In terms of thousands of years ago, the modern English word 'melancholy' comes from a Greek term 'melancholia', a word that originally meant 'black bile'. Ancient Greek writers appeared to believe that there was a causal relationship between levels of 'black bile' in your system and mental illness. It's not tremendously clear what the ancient Greek physicians meant exactly by 'melancholia' - Stanley W. Jackson argued that the term not only included symptoms that sound to us like depression but also symptoms that come across as being indicative of schizophrenia. Whatever it meant, the term was discussed in writings attributed to Hippocrates, Aristotle, and Galen.

In terms of hundreds of years ago, the English writer Robert Burton's The Anatomy Of Melancholy, first published in 1621 in Latin, discusses a condition that is clearly closer in definition to clinical depression than the Ancient Greek melancholia. There's an old translation available freely on the web, and a more modern 2001 translation from the Latin currently in stock at Amazon. As you might guess from there being recent translations, it's a fairly well known literary work; it's a forbiddingly lengthy book that discourses on the nature and philosophy of the mental condition - going into theology and demonology as well as theories about black bile - and quotes previous authors at length.

u/TechySpecky · 87 pointsr/depression

Because they aren't legit. You are most likely reading pseudoscience.

Don't google self-help books. Depression isn't something you usually self-help. It's something you get professional help with, it's a fairly complex mental disorder, it's not something that a stranger can help you cure through a book.

If you want serious books on it, look at medical psychiatric textbooks only. If you want to learn more about treatments rather than about depression, look at psychiatric/psychologist guides (Official ones released my journal of medicine blablabla)

I haven't checked these at all but some less official ones I quickly found were:

http://www.amazon.com/Depression-Treatment-Aaron-T-Beck/dp/0812219643

http://www.amazon.com/Manic-Depressive-Illness-Disorders-Recurrent-Depression/dp/0195135792

Or rather check a book like this, there should be chapters on depression: http://www.amazon.com/Psychology-11th-David-G-Myers/dp/1464140812

u/zabadap · 7 pointsr/france

Salut !


Alors tout d'abord tu as ce qu'on appelle un trouble de l'anxiété. C'est normal d'être anxieux, c'est ça qui nous permet d'échapper à des situations dangereuses où d'éviter de prendre des mauvaises décisions. Cela devient un problème lorsque le trouble est si important qu'il t'empêche de profiter simplement des choses et voir pire, qu'il modifie ton comportement de tel sorte que tu te mettes à d'éviter les situations que tu sais anxieuses (agoraphobie). Exemple, tu as peur de l'avion, tu sais que tu vas faire une crise dans l'avion que ce sera horrible et donc tu décides de ne plus prendre l'avion et donc de ne plus voyager et si tu n'as pas le choix c'est l'enfer.


Je te conseille de suivre une thérapie TCC c'est hyper efficace. J'avais également des gros problèmes d'anxiété (j'étais étudiant en doctorat également mais depuis j'ai résolu mon problème et soutenu ma thèse :]) et la science derrière le TCC est toute simple. Pour avoir faire des crises de panique tu te reconnaitras surement dans la description: tu as la sensation que tu vas mourir d'une crise cardiaque où d'une rupture d'anévrisme dans les minutes qui suive. C'est très désagréable, tu ne sais plus vers quel saint te tourner et tu ne veux qu'une seule chose c'est fuir. Une fois la crise terminé, tu es épuisé.


Un peu de théorie pour comprendre ce qui se passe pendant la crise de panique. Notre cerveau est constitué d'une partie très primitive où siège les émotions. En cas de danger imminent (face à un ours, un aggresseur etc.) tout un tas de molécules sont libérées par le cerveau qui vont provoquer une réaction de la part de notre corps. Ça implique entre autre l'accélération du rhythme cardiaque, de la respiration, du taux d'adrénaline etc. En gros ça nous prépare soit à fuir très vite soit à nous battre et ça mobilise pour cela toute notre énergie, nos muscles etc.


Les problèmes avec les gens anxieux comme toi et moi, c'est que le système est un peu déréglé et l'alarme se déclenche un peu trop facilement et en plus, tout ces symptômes vont augmenter notre anxiété et donc alimenter l'alarme. Pourquoi mon cœur bat-il si vite ? pourquoi j'ai la tête qui tourne ? pourquoi j'ai du mal à respirer ? est-ce que ce sont les signes d'une mort imminente ?


Chez les sujets "normaux" le déclenchement de l'alarme ne provoque pas d'angoisses mais ches les sujets "anxieux", cette réaction "normal" du corps est un élement déclencheur de l'alarme et donc ça monte en mayonnaise. Prendre un antianxyoletique ou fuir la situation pour éviter ou terminer plus rapidement la crise de panique fonctionne à cour terme (certain medoc sont même redoutablement efficace) mais en réalité cela ne fait que abaisser un peu plus le seuil de tolérance et donc nous rend plus vulnérable à la prochaine attaque de panique. En gros l'association dans notre cerveau est renforcé et c'est pour ça que les agoraphobes tendent petit à petit à éviter de plus en plus de situation dont ils savent qu'elles risquent de déclencher une crise de panique.


Heuresement on peut s'en sortir et même assez facilement ! Pour moi il ne m'a fallu que deux entretiens alors que presque chaque nuit je faisais une crise de panique. Pour ça, il faut casser l'angoisse provoquée par la réaction normal du corp humain en cas de "danger" (ne plus s'angoisser des palpitations et des réactions corporelles). Ensuite il faut détecter ce qui déclenche en nous l'alarme et travailler sur cela mais si déjà tu arrives à gérer ton angoisse et arrêter qu'elle ne se transforme en crise, ta peur de l'avion ne provoquera plus "d'alarme" et sera une simple peur que tu peux gérer comme la peur de te noyer ou des hauteurs.


Pour la première partie, knowledge is power ! tu te sens vertigineux car tu hyperventile, tu as du mal à respirer car tes muscles au niveau du thorax sont contracté, ton cœur bat vite car tu es bourré d'adrenaline. ta meilleure arme dans ce cas c'est la respiration. Fait cet exercice trois fois par jour:


1- tu inspires 2 secondes

2- tu gardes ton souffle 2 secondes

3- tu expires 4 secondes

4- répète cela 15 fois


cela aura pour effet de diminuer ton rhythme cardiaque, apprendre à contrôler son corp te rendra beaucoup plus fort. Pendant la crise d'angoisse, les réactions alimentent l'angoisse, apprendre à se calmer calme va donc apprendre à ton cerveau de ne pas déclencher l'alarme pour rien :)
Aussi, c'est important d'aller jusqu'au bout de la crise de panique. Une crise de panique ne peut pas durer plus de 1h30 ~ 2h car au bout de ce temps là ton corps à vidé tout son stock de molécule alarmante. En Allant jusqu'au bout de la crise plutôt que de la fuir tu vas lentement détruire l'association que ton cerveau a créé. Documente ta prochaine attaque de panique, note sur un bout de papier tes symptômes et apprend à les reconnaitres pour mieux les combattre.


Ensuite ta peur de l'avion c'est ça qui "déclenche" l'alarme. Une fois que tu auras appris à ne plus avoir peur de l'alarme ce sera déjà beaucoup plus simple et tu seras beaucoup plus capable de gérer ta phobie de l'avion car la peur ne se transformeras plus en panique, tu auras peur comme certain ont peur des hauteurs mais elle ne te paralysera plus.


Je te conseille énormément de lire le livre http://www.amazon.fr/Surmontez-Vaincre-trouble-panique-lagoraphobie/dp/2738111483/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1420443182&sr=8-1&keywords=agoraphobie











u/urethraFranklin1 · 6 pointsr/suggestmeabook

Here are a few workbooks that can help:

cbt for depression

dbt skills


act workbook


These are all solid workbooks to help build your coping skills even when you do not feel like it. Treating Depression can be like cleaning the dishes. Even if you do not feel like doing it, it gets better once you do one at the time. Otherwise it just piles and piles.

u/GruePineapple · 5 pointsr/Documentaries

>Obesity is the result of many other factors. When some are stressed they overeat.

Overeating is a personal choice

>People digest food differently as they have different amounts and species of microorganisms in their digestive tracks.

Your microbiome is determined by what you eat and is therefore a reflection of your personal choices when it comes to your diet

>Additionally, the average lower class obese person is preoccupied with long hours working minimum wage and don't have the energy to learn and just want the pleasure from eating after a difficult day.

Again, personal choice. If you have enough time to keep up with the Kardashians and what other bullshit is on TV, you have enough time to sit down for one hour one day and learn the basics of nutrition, the glycemic index, and insulin response

>While there is a simple fix in a vacuum, it is more complex in actual practice.

No, it's not. It's all about making the decision to follow a healthful diet and applying yourself in that effort. More protein, less sugar. Less junk food. It's called junk food for a reason.

>I overate when I suffered from depression unmedicated, my weight stabilized when I got prescribed antidepressants.

Again, personal decision. You chose to eat. You chose drugs over a healthy lifestyle. You chose not to educate yourself. Put down the TV remote and pick up a book.

https://www.amazon.com/Emperors-New-Drugs-Exploding-Antidepressant/dp/0465022006



>If people in similar situations can't afford antidepressants or have the privilege of having a support system in place, it will be harder to stop stress-eating.

Antidepressants are not medication. They do not work. There's something in between a placebo and an actively harmful chemical. The science is settled and anyone who says differently is either a fool or charlatan. Psychiatry is neither medicine nor science. You just have to make a decision. You have to have strength of will and a strong mind. You have to stop choosing to be a victim and stop evading responsibility for your own actions and decisions.

u/SolumAmbulo · 4 pointsr/aspergers

Tony Attwood has a great book on this subject.

Edit: typo

u/miguel_m · 3 pointsr/Antipsychiatry

> How have researcher framed performance of a certain drug in research process?

I didn't read about this subject as much as I would like, but there is some evidence that antidepressants don't work, or in other words they aren't more effective than a placebo. And there is some evidence that there were a bunch of flaws in the approval process of them by the FDA. This book talks about this subject:

https://www.amazon.com/America-Fooled-Antidepressants-Antipsychotics-Deceived/dp/0977307506/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1509910303&sr=8-1&keywords=america+fooled

And I didn't read this other book, but I think it talks about this same subject:

https://www.amazon.com/Emperors-New-Drugs-Exploding-Antidepressant/dp/0465022006/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1509910390&sr=1-1&keywords=emperor%27s+new+drugs

So antidepressants might be the focus of your research.

u/MpVpRb · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

> Am I the only Person who takes this and I feel better?

There are probably many who see positive results

It didn't work at all for me

And...serious researchers are questioning whether it works at all

http://www.amazon.com/Emperors-New-Drugs-Exploding-Antidepressant/dp/0465022006/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1416267741&sr=8-1&keywords=emperors+drug

u/cheddar-kaese404 · 2 pointsr/autism

That's rough. As a thought, some therapists will work on a sliding scale if your insurance doesn't cover it. In the meantime, this is a link to a book. It really helped me work through some of the aspects and hang on until I was able to get a therapist who understood that the interplay of the ADHD and ASD were partially causing and definitely exacerbating the depression and anxiety.


https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01HYLPF6Q/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_t1_rjA5Bb418E2XZ

u/mckay949 · 2 pointsr/Antipsychiatry

> Has anyone looked into the antidepressant vs placebo debate ?

I did look into it, but not in as much detail as I would like. I didn't study medicine or psychology, I studied engineering and started studying either books or scientific articles or reading whatever I found on the internet about psychiatry because the treatments I did were pretty crappy.

Of what I read about this specific debate of antidepressant vs placebo, there is the article you mentioned that is on the side that antidepressants work better than placebo. [This blog] (https://fugitivepsychiatrist.com/) by a psychiatrist is of the opinion that they work better than a placebo too, but I don't remember where exactly in the blog he makes his argument. If you search for "placebo" inside it, you find a bunch of his articles, some of them will be the ones that deal with this debate. The author of this blog is one of the moderators of the subreddit /r/PsychMelee/ , he is user u/fugitivepsychiatrist

There is this book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0977307506/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_pt_BR=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&keywords=america+fooled&qid=1571429094&sr=8-1 that I read it all, and half of it is about the whole antidepressant VS placebo debate, and how big farma's influence pushed bad science as good science. According to him, antidepressants simply do not work better than a placebo, trials show this, and the trials that supposedly prove that they work better than a placebo are just bad trials with methodological errors. For instance, one error in those trials is that in some of them, the patient taking the antidepressant was also taking another drug to counteract the agitating effect of the antidepressant. If you search for "timothy scott antidepressant" on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=timothy+scott+antidepressant , you will find some videos on which the author talks about his views. There was a site where you could get one of the chapters of his book for free, I remember it being www.americafooled.com or the same site .org, but it's not on those addresses, and can't find it anymore.

There's also this book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465022006/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_pt_BR=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&keywords=the+emperor%27s+new+drugs&qid=1571430255&sr=8-1 , which I only read a little of it, it's entirely about this antidepressant vs placebo debate, and the author I think also proposes that antidepressants are no better than a placebo in the book. If you search for the author on youtube, https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=irving+kirsch, you find some videos where he explains his findings.

There is also the psychiatrist Peter Breggin, who is pretty critical of all psychiatric drugs, he was involved as an expert witness in an lawsuit against Ely lilly when they were sued because a patient taking prozac killed a bunch of people with a gun and committed suicide, and he writes about what he found out researching the drug company papers when he was involved in the trial. He writes that the trials the company did to get the approval of the antidepressant had problems (he mentions the same problem I mentioned, that patients given antidepressant were also given another drug), but I don't remember in which of his books he writes about this, it was either one or more than one of these 3 books of his that has this information: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0738210986/ref=sr_1_3?__mk_pt_BR=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&keywords=peter+breggin&qid=1571430780&sr=8-3 ; https://www.amazon.com/dp/073820451X/ref=sr_1_7?__mk_pt_BR=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&keywords=peter+breggin&qid=1571430780&sr=8-7 ; https://www.amazon.com/dp/082612934X/ref=sr_1_8?__mk_pt_BR=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&keywords=peter+breggin&qid=1571430780&sr=8-8 .

I've also come across a page from the FDA on the internet saying that the trials to approve the antidepressants really show that they work better than a placebo, but I don't remember what the link to that page was.

So that is what I came across. But as I didn't read each of the individual trials that supposedly show that antidepressants either work better or don't work better than a placebo, I don't know who is right. I just know what the people who read those trials and/or read studies of people who read those trials has to say. I'm actually curious to study more of this subject to find out who is right in this debate, but I ended up not studying this any further due to a bunch of factors.

u/halinc · 2 pointsr/AskMen

DFW was on old-school tricyclic antidepressants which have a host of horrifying side-effects.

You're dramatically overestimating the usefulness of antidepressants, which is understandable given the insane influence pharmaceutical lobbying has had over doctors and society at large. The Hamilton Depression Rating scale runs from 1 to 59, and antidepressants have an average impact of a boost in 1.8 points according to a study from Harvard doctor Irving Hirsch, compared to say, sleeping well, which tends to boost 6 points. For some people that 1.8 point bump is a difference maker, sure, but reducing his suicide to cessation of medication is wildly reductive at best and totally presumptive, since, you know, you never met the guy.

>Antidepressants allowed him to live a normal life and believe the stuff he was saying. He was wrong, clearly.

The stuff he was saying is basically mindfulness, which is widely accepted as having a positive impact on well-being and used productively by millions. Maybe it wasn't solely responsible for keeping him alive, but discounting it because he wound up dying doesn't make sense.

u/sunnywiltshire · 2 pointsr/DeadBedrooms

Oh, I had not quite realised that you are struggling with this, I am so sorry..! I hope you feel better soon! Please don't think you are just stuck in this mode now, it is not true and something can be done. I felt for myself at least that things like movies and music one used to have an emotional connection with can help. If there are no emotions the 5th, 6th or 7th time, don't be discouraged. For me it may have been the 30th time, but then it worked. The constant repeat of trying to break through that wall eventually worked, and the NAC is very good, too!

You are right, exercise is fantastic, but so is omega 3 fish oil / cod liver oil. Have you tried that? It does have an effect.

I wonder if I might take the liberty to recommend two books to you, perhaps you would like to check out the reviews, they have helped me enormously, very practical, simple, and above all effective:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Depression-Cure-Six-Step-Programme-Without/dp/0091929814/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=depression+cure&qid=1556395957&s=gateway&sr=8-1

​

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Overcoming-Depression-Cognitive-Behavioural-Techniques/dp/1849010668/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=overcoming+depression&qid=1556396277&s=gateway&sr=8-1

​

If you have the chance to do compassion focused therapy (a part of cognitive behavioural therapy), I would go for it. I cannot stress enough how much it has helped me! My therapist is my superhero without a cape. ;-)

Hope so much you will feel better soon, depression can make you feel passive and as if nothing is really worth it, but you know what? I see depression as a bully, and bullies try to tell us all kinds of things that apparently are bad about us or useless or that are impossible. Does this mean he is right? No. Don't believe the discouraging voice that tries to discourage you., should you hear it. It's all lies. :-)

u/thecrazing · 2 pointsr/HumanPorn

> (sorry I'm on my mobile and don't know how to like anything)

Incidentally, thanks for meeting me more than halfway on this. I dunno if I would've been so cordial responding to someone who opened with 'I think a major is stupid and I roll my eyes at it', especially while typing on mobile the whole time.

..Although in my case, my first undergrad was psych and I probably would at least partially agree with said hypothetical person anyways.

>I don't know that there needs to be a hard and fast line thats drawn, if that makes sense.

It does make sense, though I'm not sure I agree. If 'take seriously' means 'read it and think about it', sure, I'll read and think on just about anything. If 'take seriously' means trust, then I think think there should be lots of lines drawn.

>Her latest book

http://www.amazon.com/Bipolar-Expeditions-Depression-American-Culture/dp/0691141061/ref=la_B000APQSLA_1_1/191-0865590-9805423?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1427334560&sr=1-1

This one, I take it.

u/snickersnack · 2 pointsr/literature

Julia Kristeva writes about Nerval in Black Sun (the title of which comes from Nerval).

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0231067070

u/StructuralViolence · 2 pointsr/lectures

If you enjoyed that talk, you'd likely enjoy books from Irving Kirsch and Robert Whitaker. If you don't have a dozen or more hours to read both of these books, the NYBOOKS writeup is pretty good (and might convince you to spend the dozen hours, as it did me). Lastly, if your schedule/lifestyle better accommodates listening to an mp3 rather than reading a book, I cannot recommend highly enough a talk from UW School of Public Health senior lecturer Dr. Stephen Bezruchka, "Is America Driving You Crazy?" [10mb mp3 or low quality YouTube video].

For those who are too lazy to click the NYBOOKS writeup above, here's a brief excerpt that gets at some of the good stuff:

>For obvious reasons, drug companies make very sure that their positive studies are published in medical journals and doctors know about them, while the negative ones often languish unseen within the FDA, which regards them as proprietary and therefore confidential. This practice greatly biases the medical literature, medical education, and treatment decisions.

>Kirsch and his colleagues used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain FDA reviews of all placebo-controlled clinical trials, whether positive or negative, submitted for the initial approval of the six most widely used antidepressant drugs approved between 1987 and 1999—Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, Serzone, and Effexor. This was a better data set than the one used in his previous study, not only because it included negative studies but because the FDA sets uniform quality standards for the trials it reviews and not all of the published research in Kirsch’s earlier study had been submitted to the FDA as part of a drug approval application.

>Altogether, there were forty-two trials of the six drugs. Most of them were negative. Overall, placebos were 82 percent as effective as the drugs, as measured by the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D), a widely used score of symptoms of depression. The average difference between drug and placebo was only 1.8 points on the HAM-D, a difference that, while statistically significant, was clinically meaningless. The results were much the same for all six drugs: they were all equally unimpressive. Yet because the positive studies were extensively publicized, while the negative ones were hidden, the public and the medical profession came to believe that these drugs were highly effective antidepressants.

>Kirsch was also struck by another unexpected finding. In his earlier study and in work by others, he observed that even treatments that were not considered to be antidepressants—such as synthetic thyroid hormone, opiates, sedatives, stimulants, and some herbal remedies—were as effective as antidepressants in alleviating the symptoms of depression. Kirsch writes, “When administered as antidepressants, drugs that increase, decrease or have no effect on serotonin all relieve depression to about the same degree.” What all these “effective” drugs had in common was that they produced side effects, which participating patients had been told they might experience.

>It is important that clinical trials, particularly those dealing with subjective conditions like depression, remain double-blind, with neither patients nor doctors knowing whether or not they are getting a placebo. That prevents both patients and doctors from imagining improvements that are not there, something that is more likely if they believe the agent being administered is an active drug instead of a placebo. Faced with his findings that nearly any pill with side effects was slightly more effective in treating depression than an inert placebo, Kirsch speculated that the presence of side effects in individuals receiving drugs enabled them to guess correctly that they were getting active treatment—and this was borne out by interviews with patients and doctors—which made them more likely to report improvement. He suggests that the reason antidepressants appear to work better in relieving severe depression than in less severe cases is that patients with severe symptoms are likely to be on higher doses and therefore experience more side effects.

u/westernatm · 1 pointr/needadvice

I'd recommend checking out the book The Depression Cure. There's a lot in here that can help with mental well-being whether depression, low self-esteem, confidence, or anxiety.

I saw a recommendation for Coursera which could be good. I would also recommend getting involved in something physical - a sport, game, or activity that can keep you busy. Best of luck, sounds like you're on the right track.

u/CreakyOldDev · 1 pointr/aspergers

Tony Atwood wrote a great book on the subject of depression and Aspergers. https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1849055025

u/hotrulers · 1 pointr/occult

This is not exactly what you're asking about, but you may find this book interesting and relevant.

u/bip2throw · 1 pointr/depression

>how can I learn the true nature of why I am this way?

That's what science does at its best. It looks for causalities. It's predictive. We know quite a lot about these diseases, we have advanced hypotheses and data to back them up. The reason why certain symptoms are required for clinical depression is that there are specific regions of the brain which are commonly hyper or hypoactive, so normality is defined as those regions acting in a healthy way. It's unlikely that someone wouldn't want all those regions functioning normally, but if they do it is possible to minimize alteration of activity there to some extent. If you'd like to know yourself, this book goes in depth and is a good start: http://www.amazon.com/Depression-Bipolar-Disorder-Essential-Psychopharmacology/dp/0521714125/ref=sr_1_1 . It sounds like you'll mainly be interested in the neurological discussions rather than the drug interventions, don't worry you can skip those and still have a solid grasp on the material.

>Why is it more important to eliminate the symptoms without ever finding out the whys and wherefores?

It isn't, at all. We know many of the causes, and furvent research attempts completing and clarifying those causes. Just because you haven't done the research, doesn't mean the information isn't readily availiable.

> We are ever-changing beings

Absolutely, and that's a double edged sword. It's the reason why the longer someone is symptomatic, the worse they will become because neural nets strengthen a behavior when repeatedly used in that way. In the same way, if someone stays asymtomatic, they will stabilize long term.


The reason why I say to see if you have the disorder, is that it's degenerative. If you do have it, and you relapse at some point you have a better idea of the prognosis and what your best options for treatment are.

Also Not Otherwise Specified is somewhat misleading, we still know quite a lot about the causes of symptoms and their treatment, NOS refers to the fact that we haven't created a specific name for that part of the spectrum of the disorder.

>How many people are being medicated because they can't cope with life as it is lived today?

Yeah, many doctors(most?) don't know enough about the science and treatment options.

u/classicrando · 1 pointr/exmormon

Imagine being alone in the universe or even just alone here on earth; would you lay on the ground all day doing nothing or would you live and build and explore and wonder at the beauty of world? All western versions of god are petulant evil children, they are hypocrites - "humans should be extra 'good' but I can be tyrannical and egotistical and immoral because I am god" - what a crock.

The other thing you are probably suffering from is:
The modern American version of capitalism requires people to take massive doses of SSRIs to continue trudging through corporate slave life, and Utah has more anti-depressant users that anywhere - for a reason, many Mormons are trudging through corporate work slavery, highly bureaucratic corporate church slavery and a marriage where sex and true happiness have been perverted into a ritual bordering on self-hate.

Breaking free from any/all of that makes one wonder what it is all about. One thing I am certain about is that there is no god, no "karma", no "force" in the universe that has my back. The vagaries of the universe and life will ebb and flow and assigning any of those positive or negative circumstances that might occur to a god or karma or "attracting energy to yourself" are ways to mislead and/or control you.

Some people enjoy hard work as an end in itself; similar to people who enjoy the "pain" associated with intense fitness/sports activities. As I mentioned in a previous thread there is a story of a Zen master asking his students why they ride their bikes; the students all have various reasons, health, cheap transportation, etc but one says "I ride simply to ride..."

Chop wood, carry water - live simply to live.
http://www.amazon.com/Chop-Wood-Carry-Water-Fulfillment/dp/0874772095

To think about how you can/will mold your child without even realizing it, check out this book:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Optimistic-Child-Depression-Resilience/dp/0618918094

u/YungsMoobs · 1 pointr/Scholar

That theory is quite new (Thats the first paper, 2004) and needs much more research.

Yeah, there's quite a few thats your classic nocebo response. There's more studies showing positive responses due to ethics. Its all around response expectancies, which pretty much are non volitional self confirming responses.

Open-Hidden (if you tell people the drugs stopped, the effect is much worse) morphine interruption (or really any drug), Benedetti et al. (1997, 2006) expectation-induced hyperalgesia in clinic + Ex setting, Dworkin et al. (1983) verbal suggestion alone changing direction of nitrous oxide action from analgesia to hyperalgesia (havn't read that paper yet, sounds pretty crazy), Response Expectancies are a universal placebo mechanism so they kinda show up everywhere.

The two most interesting papers on RE:


  1. Pollo et al. (2001) patients after chest surgery in 3 groups. One control group told nothing, given saline solution and a button for painkiller (buprenorphine) subjective pain rating taking before painkiller administered. Second group in a blind condition, told there was a 50% chance of a placebo or a powerful painkiller (just another saline solution). The last group was deceptive administration, told the saline solution was a powerful painkiller. The results showed 16.4% decrease in opioid painkiller intake in the blind group and a 33.8% decrease in the decieved group. The logic behind this is the blind groups response expectancies are half of the deceived and ACTUAL pain intake was half!!! The researchers controlled for subjective pain ratings and they were equal across groups at the time of requesting more medication. (there's also a shitton of research showing this control > blind > decpt.)

  2. Kirsch et al. 2008 (the father of RE). This paper made headlines... his argument is that SSRI's for depression are simply enhanced (active) placebos therefore strengthen the RE. He conducted a meta-analysis (using FDA data, drug companies don't release all trails) on a antidepressants and showed no clinical difference with comparison to placebo. The EMA disagrees with this theres a lot of controversy and a lot of money involved.

    http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0050045

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Emperors-New-Drugs-Antidepressant/dp/0465022006
u/lutusp · 1 pointr/science

> Psychology has existed as a scientific discipline using scientific methodology for quite a long time.

I'm sorry, but it's not me who is saying this is false -- it's the past president of the APA, who argued for scientific standards but was shouted down by his own membership. And more recently, this point was made by the present Director of the National Institutes of Mental Health, in a much-read article in Scientific American entitled Faulty Circuits -- the title is meant to suggest that "mental" problems are actually physiological problems, in some cases potentially remediable using medical, not psychological, methods.

Psychology cannot be a scientific discipline unless and until it puts forth falsifiable theories about the working of the human mind. This has not happened yet, and there is no prospect for it to happen in the future. As a result, clinical psychologists can do pretty much anything they please, because there is no scientific evidence to declare one treatment ineffective, and another one effective. This constitutes a wall between medicine and psychology. On one side we have treatments that must meet scientific standards. On the other, we have treatments that don't, and that can't. I don't see how to make it clearer than that.

The research on CBT is a case in point -- the research results are scattered about, many papers contradicting others on the same topic, with no one seeming to notice. A number of meta-analyses have come to the conclusion that there is no difference between therapies.. In "Manufacturing Depression," Psychotherapist Gary Greenburg calls CBT "a method of indoctrination into the pieties of American optimism, an ideology as much as a medical treatment."

The only way psychologists can claim to be part of a scientific field is by redefining science -- and that's exactly what they do. It's science because it's called science. It's science because it's listed as a science in college curricula. It's science because there are scientists doing science in the field (true). But that is not enough to make a field into a science -- for that, one must shape falsifiable theories and then test them, then discard those that are falsified. Psychology won't do that -- there are any number of outright beliefs in the field that masquerade as scientific theories.

> CBT has tons and tons of evidence supporting efficacy as well ...

Yes, and there is an equal corpus of research evidence suggesting that it is no more effective than any arbitrary therapy. I can't tell you how many studies I've read that claim support for CBT in which there was no control group as that term is defined in science. One group got CBT, the other group were told to go home. The result was counted as support for CBT, and it was called "science".

> To suggest that psychotherapy (or as you mislabel it, clinical psychology) is without scientific evidence is surprisingly ignorant ...

Not as ignorant as making up positions for other people, as you have just done. There are scientists doing science in psychology, they gather and publish evidence (and I have made this point more often that I care to remember), but those who understand science realize this is not enough to turn a field into a science. Scientific fields are not knit together by white lab coats and clipboards, they are knit together by tested, falsifiable theories, theories that are unceremoniously discarded once they have been falsified.

Asperger Syndrome wasn't discarded because of the overwhelming evidence that it had no agreed meaning or clear diagnostic criteria, it was discarded after it was exposed as an obvious scam by (a) people like me who pointed out that it was a way to stigmatize bright young people and push them into therapy, (b) people in the public school system, who noticed a lot of opportunistic parents who used it to get special (undeserved) attention for their kids, and (c) by the original advocate for its inclusion in DSM IV (Allen Frances) who now regrets his advocacy and is working to reverse it.

And none of this is remotely science. Science is not what you think it is. It's not advocacy, it's not collecting evidence for a particular outlook and discarding evidence that goes the other way (a serious problem in the field). It's not research without theories, and it's not theories without research -- both problems in the field.

Physics is not a science because it has theories, and it's not a science because there is lots of evidence-gathering going on. Physics is a science because the evidence that is gathered either supports or contradicts the theories, and physical theories are regularly discarded when they prove not to be supported by evidence.

This is why psychology is not a science.

u/super-serial · 1 pointr/IAmA

I'm hoping that with the average age of the TV viewer surpassing 50, in another generation or so all the people watching US network television will have died.

Do you think this dream of mine is feasible? How can I help fulfill my vendetta against your industry, and stop you people from destroying Democracy in America?

u/bunnymoneyderp · 1 pointr/Tackle_depression

I happened to find this author who helped save my life. He has now written the things he told me, that saved me from my awful depressive disease, into a book! Please go check it out and support him!
http://www.amazon.com/Depression-Powerful-Naturally-Overcome-Anxiety-ebook/dp/B01AYCJEYG

u/natxo · 1 pointr/neuro

As it has been said already, nobody really knows the biological causes of psychiatric disorders. To make things a bit complicated, what we think we know cannot be summarized in a comment.

If you are really interested in studying the condition, I find Stahl's psychopharmacology books really easy to follow. Heck, the use them to train residents in psychiatry, so they have to be simple.

I would recommend you either buy this book: http://www.amazon.com/Depression-Bipolar-Disorder-Essential-Psychopharmacology/dp/0521714125/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323028038&sr=1-8 or follow this link to a somewhat old version of his "Essentials of psychopharmacology.

The right way to read Stahl's books is to look at the figures for an entire chapter first and then read the text and the figures together.

I hope this helps!

u/Trivian · 1 pointr/AskReddit

I recently finished a book entitled, Sin & Syntax that is quite good - a lot of fun, and goes over not only the basics, but also artful writing.
Otherwise, if you read a lot of books with very good grammar/writing you'll tend to pick it up - I don't mean to make any unfounded judgments on your taste, but, as a general comment, read something like The Anatomy of Melancholy instead of Dan Brown. (At least, I think his writing is dreadful.) Otherwise, one comment suggests learning another language, and that is definitely a step in the right direction if you can manage it - I recommend Latin.

u/ALexusOhHaiNyan · 1 pointr/todayilearned

> Your citations are extremely selective

And pharmaceutical companies aren't?! You seem like an intelligent guy too. So why aren't you applying the same incredulity and skepticism towards a trillion dollar industry that have for one individual with nothing to gain?

http://www.amazon.com/The-Emperors-New-Drugs-Antidepressant/dp/0465022006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomy_of_an_Epidemic

http://www.metafilter.com/113750/How-Corporations-Corrupt-Science-at-the-Publics-Expense

http://www.amazon.com/Merchants-Doubt-Handful-Scientists-Obscured/dp/1608193942/ref=pd_sim_b_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=1FEQ9E7PZVCNEAJT8VYM

u/slabbb- · 1 pointr/Jung

Possibilities?

The Black Sun: The Alchemy and Art of Darkness (Jungian)

Black Sun (concerns depression from a neo-Freudian pov)

u/sugarhoneybadger · 1 pointr/depression

Not completely free, but this is the workbook my therapist uses. I saw dramatic improvements in several months, although I don't feel "cured" yet.

There are many natural treatments for depression, not limited to aerobic exercise, yoga, Vitamin B12, St. John's Wort (don't take with birth control), meditation, sleep hygiene and melatonin for insomnia, and support groups. Having a pet helps some people take their mind off their depression and they benefit from the companionship.

I have found that having a daily routine combining several natural treatments works best for me. I also found that any drug that causes drowsiness would contribute to my depression, so no antihistamines.

You can also check out r/frugal for ideas for eating healthy on the cheap. I actually spent less when I was eating a healthy diet for myself, and exercise is free.

u/undercurrents · 1 pointr/depressed

part 2:

books:

copy of chapter "Children of Depressed Parents" from the book The Edge of Darkness by Kathy Cronkite: http://imgur.com/QsW1D,neLcM,KeByl,tKhTz,Y2VzK

http://www.amazon.com/Sorrows-Web-Understanding-Depressed-Children/dp/B004JZX1TE/ref=sr_1_sc_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1329195154&sr=8-3-spell

http://www.amazon.com/Pregnant-Prozac-Essential-Making-Decision/dp/0762749407/ref=pd_sim_b_3

http://www.amazon.com/Mommy-Childs-Guide-Parental-Depression/dp/1929622716/ref=pd_vtp_b_5

http://www.amazon.com/Ghost-House-Maternal-Depression-Children/dp/B003B3NWXU/ref=pd_vtp_b_3

http://www.amazon.com/Deeper-Shade-Blue-Recognizing-Childbearing/dp/0743254759/ref=pd_vtp_b_5

http://www.amazon.com/Pregnancy-Blues-Every-Depression-During/dp/0385338678/ref=pd_vtp_b_4

http://www.amazon.com/Pregnancy-Decision-Handbook-Women-Depression/dp/0976581418/ref=pd_vtp_b_5

http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Your-Moods-Youre-Expecting/dp/0547053622/ref=pd_vtp_b_8

http://www.amazon.com/Pregnancy-Postpartum-Anxiety-Workbook-Compulsions/dp/1572245891/ref=pd_vtp_b_7

http://www.amazon.com/Mother-Mother-Postpartum-Depression-Support/dp/0425208087/ref=pd_vtp_b_6

http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Blue-Surviving-Depression-Anxiety/dp/B004X8W91S/ref=pd_vtp_b_10

http://www.amazon.com/Therapy-Postpartum-Woman-Depression-Clinicians/dp/0415989965/ref=pd_rhf_ee_shvl2

http://www.amazon.com/Sucked-Then-Cried-Breakdown-Margarita/dp/B004J8HXA4/ref=pd_sim_b_6

http://www.amazon.com/Down-Came-Rain-Postpartum-Depression/dp/1401308465/ref=pd_sim_b_4

http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Having-After-Postpartum-Depression/dp/1413473474/ref=pd_sim_b_6

http://www.amazon.com/Parenting-Well-When-Youre-Depressed/dp/1572242515/ref=pd_vtp_b_11

http://www.amazon.com/Bipolar-Bear-Family-Parent-Disorder/dp/1425929524/ref=pd_vtp_b_2

http://www.amazon.com/My-Mothers-BiPolar-So-What/dp/1419620061/ref=pd_vtp_b_4

http://www.amazon.com/Bipolar-Pregnant-Planning-Parenting-Depression/dp/0757306837/ref=pd_sim_b_9

http://www.amazon.com/Sometimes-My-Mommy-Gets-Angry/dp/0142403598/ref=pd_vtp_b_4

http://www.amazon.com/Hand-Me-Down-Blues-Depression-Spreading-Families/dp/0312263325/ref=pd_vtp_b_13

http://www.amazon.com/When-Parent-Depressed-Children-Depression/dp/0316738891/ref=pd_vtp_b_6

http://www.amazon.com/Life-Will-Never-Same-Postpartum/dp/0982641001/ref=pd_sim_b_9

http://www.amazon.com/This-Isnt-What-Expected-Overcoming/dp/0553370758

videos: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/takeonestep/depression/video-ch_01.html - pbs out of the shadows (this is a full documentary but it has parts about postpartum depression that I think are worth watching)

check out my original post as well for lots more info.

Things to keep in mind if you are a mother with depression; quotes from two resources:

Harvard maternal postpartum depression links:
http://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/reports_and_working_papers/working_papers/wp8/

Serious depression in parents and caregivers can affect far more than the adults who are ill. It also influences the well-being of the children in their care. The first joint Working Paper from the National Scientific Council on the Developing Child and the National Forum on Early Childhood Policy and Programs summarizes recent evidence on the potentially far-reaching harmful effects of chronic and severe maternal depression on families and children. When children grow up in an environment of mental illness, the development of their brains may be seriously weakened, with implications for their ability to learn as well as for their own later physical and mental health. This report examines why the continuing failure to address the consequences of depression for large numbers of vulnerable, young children presents a missed opportunity to help families and children in a way that could support the future prosperity and well-being of society as a whole.


Here is a quote from The Noonday Demon from the section on mothers with depression (my own added comment is in the parentheses and not part of the original quote),

"Depressed mothers are usually not great mothers, though high-functioning depressives can sometimes mask their illness and fulfill their parenting roles," (this is not an insult against depressed parents, it's an inevitable consequence of what happens when you are depressed because you are more irritable, have less energy, can be less outwardly loving, sometimes fail to respond to social cues from your children, possibly unaffectionate and withdrawn...), "In general, the children of a depressed mothers not only reflect but also magnify their mother's state. Even ten years after an initial assessment, such children suffer significant social impairment and are at a threefold risk for depression and a fivefold risk for panic disorders and alcohol dependence. To improve the mental health of children, it is sometimes more important to treat the mother than to treat the children directly..."
***
Resources for men with postpartum depression:

http://www.postpartummen.com/resources.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Parenting/postpartum-depression-fathers/story?id=10672383#.TydWX8VAb6k

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32403497/ns/today-relationships/t/new-dads-coping-baby-blues/#.TydWZsVAb6k

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/time-to-focus-on-sad-dads/

book: Kleinman, K. (2001). Postpartum Husband: Practical Solutions for Living with Postpartum Depression. Xlibris Corporation.

u/shade404 · 0 pointsr/news

> What's one thing that SSRI's, marijuana, and sleep deprivation do the same to a patient? Raise serotonin levels in the brain

I am in no way making the claim that neurotransmitter function isn't related to mental illness, that would be a crazy thing to say. I just bristle at "chemical imbalance" because I think it's a vast oversimplification and has been used as a marketing ploy for any number of things which may or may not actually be effective for the conditions they're marketed for, by companies who have largely been able to internally conduct essentially all of the safety and efficiency trials of those products. Reality is a lot more nuanced and complex. Even the statement "SSRIs raise serotonin levels in the brain" is a simplification, IMO -- yes, short term that happens. What happens longer term? Well, downregulation.... http://www.jneurosci.org/content/22/15/6766.short (the tl;dr from that is that to the extent it remains true long term, it has more to do with downregulation than the blockade action cited in various marketing slicks I've seen).

None of this means that these drugs are wholly ineffective, shouldn't be used, etc -- but we need a much higher standard of data, and, I think, much less direct-to-consumer marketing.

I basically like this book and think it's thought provoking; granted the author has a pretty strong anti-industry bias, but, everyone has a bias and that doesn't mean he's completely wrong (anymore than the fact that companies have cherrypicked their drug data in many cases means that the drugs themselves are wholly ineffective): https://www.amazon.com/Emperors-New-Drugs-Exploding-Antidepressant/dp/0465022006

u/m00z9 · -2 pointsr/worldnews

Puh-leez. Wake up / grow up. Read => http://www.amazon.com/The-Emperors-New-Drugs-Antidepressant/dp/0465022006

"All is Mind," they say. Including depression. Including the antidepressant "effect"