Psychiatry...

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Let me know what you think about that, though, after you've seen someone who is fully psychotic make a complete 180 after being treated with antipsychotics.

Troll harder brah.

These types of patients are always really interesting, but I don't think I would ever have the patience to specialize in psych. Too many combative patients with UTIs or high ammonia levels.

Although not an antipsychotic regimen, seeing the change in a patient recovering from a brain-effecting illness is really amazing. I took care of a guy who I think had some sort of bilirubin encephalopathy. The first day they are speaking babble and are complete care, then a week or two later they are back to a normal high-functioning person.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I'll probably be one of the few that is more on your side than not. A lot of mental conditions are way over-diagnosed and meds are just thrown at people.

I definitely agree with that.

FWIW, I earned a psych minor in undergrad, and I really enjoyed the psych lectures in MS-1 and MS-2. I hated the actual rotation. I wasn't on inpatient psych, which seemed more interesting, but I still think it would have been my least favorite rotation of the year. I like procedures and being hands-on... definitely not the specialty for me.
 
I already said in my OP that I think pharmacotherapy has a place and has helped many people...like the psychotic patient you mentioned. However, there's, let's say, a disorder like ADHD, variants of normal...and then a whole bunch of gray area in between. My issue is with meds being prescribed when the patient may be/is probably better off without it or doesn't need it at all.

I really don't get what your point is...should we just ignore the grey areas then? Sounds like good reason to have people like, I don't know, people who specialize in treating disorders related to mental function, to parse out where in the grey zone those middle people are.

Secondly, these arguments about how "there are so many people who don't need meds" or how "people should just tough it up and go with the ebbs and flows of life" because you think you could "tough it out" don't sound any different to me than
IM: "You don't need metformin, get up off your fat ass, eat 1500 calories a day and exercise 5x a week cause that's what I would do if I weighed 300lbs!".
Neuro: "Migraines? Hell no I'm not prescribing sumatriptan, you just need to tough it out and go to work."
Anesthesia: "You need an epidural while you're giving birth? Well I can't see that pain, you just need to tough it out like the cavemen. Push harder and it'll be over faster!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
These types of patients are always really interesting, but I don't think I would ever have the patience to specialize in psych. Too many combative patients with UTIs or high ammonia levels.
You don't think you'll see this in Internal Medicine or GI? Psych won't take these patients as these aren't psych patients.
 
Not really cause a lot of patients would do well with some diet and exercise
Obviously, just as plenty of patients would be in better mental health if they could just "snap out of it." Neither one is all that likely or even possible for the majority of patients. That was the point........
 
You don't think you'll see this in Internal Medicine or GI? Psych won't take these patients as these aren't psych patients.
I have no doubt that many patients will have similar conditions, but I don't know if I would want my entire practice focused around it. Probably 1/50 patients I took care of had a UTI or high ammonia levels and the treatments seemed fairly routine. Floating to the psych floor to do a protocol sit and watching the pt show off to the resident their new paper cuts from when they were in the bathroom earlier alone with the paper towel roll? I can't imagine the frustration that one must feel as an advanced provider in those situations.

My post was more a somewhat fascination with how some psych situations can come on or be treated so acutely.
 
Last edited:
Remember, the people who believe they can "tough out" depression/anxiety are a HUGE minority as well.

Hell, people who have the ability to lose weight with "simple diet and exercise" is highly rare to find.

So be grateful if you are the rare seed who can tough out depression and anxiety and easily diet and exercise without blinking, cause you are the 1% :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I have no doubt that many patients will have similar conditions, but I don't know if I would want my entire practice focused around it. Probably 1/50 patients I took care of had a UTI and the treatm Floating to the psych floor to do a protocol sit and watching the pt show off to the resident their new paper cuts from when they were in the bathroom earlier alone with the paper towel roll? I can't imagine the frustration that one must feel as an advanced provider in those situations.

My post was more a somewhat fascination with how some psych situations can come on or be treated so acutely.

With all due respect, why don't you wait until you start MS1 before you worry about your entire practice? I have never seen nor heard of a patient with a UTI being transferred to psych to do "a protocol sit and watching" nonsense. What you're talking about is the patient having a sitter due to delirium, most likely, which can happen on ANY service. If a hospital actually requires a patient with non-psych issues be transferred to psych just to have a sitter, that hospital is most likely in the minority. You WILL see and deal with these patients on every single inpatient service. Psych might do the obligatory "delirium versus dementia" consult, but you will be the one examining them on a daily basis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
With all due respect, why don't you wait until you start MS1 before you worry about your entire practice? I have never seen nor heard of a patient with a UTI being transferred to psych to do "a protocol sit and watching" nonsense. What you're talking about is the patient having a sitter due to delirium, most likely, which can happen on ANY service. If a hospital actually requires a patient with non-psych issues be transferred to psych just to have a sitter, that hospital is most likely in the minority. You WILL see and deal with these patients on every single inpatient service. Psych might do the obligatory "delirium versus dementia" consult, but you will be the one examining them on a daily basis.
I initially had two separate thoughts in my head and thought I cancelled the edit, but apparently I didn't. It wasn't too cohesive. Just went back and fixed the post.

I'm not worrying about a private practice in the future, I'm thinking about different fields that I might want to go in... Exactly as every other medical student in the country (MS1 or otherwise) does.

Perhaps my post was confusing because I put together two different experiences. The patients I took care of on med surg floors sometimes had UTIs with ams and were very rarely on a sit, unless they were harmful to themselves to the point that restraints or a posie wouldn't work. The homeless patients who were bipolar, schizophrenic , and homicidal? Yes I can think of at least a handful that I sat with and listened to their thoughts and watched them pet imaginary cats. It was always amazing to see the transformation from when they were first admitted to our floor and when their medications were finally handled and their symptoms were under control. They were completely different people afterwards.

My intent wasn't to say I want nothing to do with dementia/sun downers/temporarily AMS patients, but rather to point out how interesting it is that some medications or treatments can have such an immediate impact on a patient's mental status.
 
Last edited:
[peeks head into room] I feel like it's possible that a lot of the issues with over-diagnosis and inappropriate psychopharmacologic treatment are due to non-psychiatrists treating mental illness. I can't help but think of the 8 weeks I spent during separate FM preceptorships during which the physician would pass out an SSRI to everyone who was 'feeling down' and Adderall to every parent whose kid got sent to the principle's office. Shockingly, the same phenomenon occurred with Viagra and 'just not feeling up to it'. [quietly backs out of thread]
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
I initially had two separate thoughts in my head and thought I cancelled the edit, but apparently I didn't. It wasn't too cohesive. Just went back and fixed the post.

Your post doesn't exactly reek of respect. I'm not worrying about a private practice in the future, I'm thinking about different fields that I might want to go in... Exactly as every other medical student in the country (MS1 or otherwise) does

It actually does. I was telling you that you shouldn't dismiss a field when you know so little about it.

Perhaps my post was confusing because I put together two different experiences. The patients I took care of on med surg floors sometimes had UTIs with ams and were very rarely on a sit, unless they were harmful to themselves to the point that restraints or a posie wouldn't work.

My intent wasn't to say I want nothing to do with dementia/sun downers/temporarily AMS patients, but rather to point out how interesting it is that some medications or treatments can have such an immediate impact on a patient's mental status.

Ok, but when you say that you don't want your entire practice focused around psych patients when your only experience seems to be delirium on the med-surg floor, I'm sure you can see why I said what I did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I say this as someone going into psych, but I really have no incentive to make other people like psych more so there is no reason for me to make things up.

I too was somewhat skeptical of the standing psych compared to other fields during preclinical years. I think this stems from the fact that because we don't yet understand the pathophysiology of mental illness, as a preclinical student we probably spend more time looking at the actual data related to psych treatments than we do for other fields. However in all the other fields we learn a lot of pathophysiology that then lines up with pharmacology concepts and then it seems like we have amazing understandable treatments for everything and spend less time on the actual outcomes data. But probably a pretty significant percent of the stone cold solid preclinical answers don't necessarily have tremendously awesome outcomes data either, but because they have an understandable mechanism we don't sweat it much and kind of just assume "it must work because it makes sense".

But now in my clinical years I see that almost nothing in any field of medicine works as well as it sounds like it will during MS2. Out in the real world, you have stuff like PSA, the Canadian mammogram study, sham ortho surgeries, etc. to show that nothing is as bulletproof as it sounded MS2.
 
Last edited:
Wow this thread caught fire pretty quick.

To OP and psych nay-sayers: I'll admit, I was once in a similar boat early on in med school. Especially the comments regarding depression -- I always thought "geez, why don't these people suck it up?" But once I started actually meeting people who struggle with depression/anxiety/substance abuse, it started to make more sense to me. I did my psychiatry rotation at a large public hospital on a C&L service, and really saw some incredible psychiatric pathology that completely changed my perspective on the field.

If you're open-minded, I'd recommend reading this book before your psych rotation (only takes an afternoon or so to get through it): "Unholy Ghost" http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Ghost-Depression-Nell-Casey/dp/0060007826/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1400721853&sr=8-1&keywords=the unholy ghost. It's a collection of memoirs from different writers who describe in vivid detail what was going through their minds when they struggled with depression. Really opened my eyes to the non-sensical/illogical -- but very real---despair that people with depression suffer from. One memoir follows a high functioning woman who decides to take a holiday from her depression meds during her pregnancy. She traces her thoughts from here initial excitement/optimism as soon-to-be mother to a gradual decline into suicidality while tapering the meds. Compelling stuff.

I've got nothing but respect for psychiatry. Psychiatrists are probably the most graceful in our profession when dealing with those on the fringes of society. I'm all about the surgical fields for my own specialty choice, but holy hell would society be a mess without psychiatry.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
This will probably be my last post as I just don't have the energy to respond to everyone. I appreciate that people are passionate about psych, but a lot of you are creating strawmen and drawing conclusions where none exist. I never said (or if I implied it, i retract it) that psych was a "useless specialty" or whatever. I have respect for the attendings that judiciously diagnose and spend time with patients. I said that psych disorders were over-diagnosed and over-medicated with questionable efficacy. NOT that other fields are immune to this, but I found it more prevalent (bias or not) in psychiatry. I did a full psych rotation, had honors from every attending I was with, etc. I was on outpatient and inpatient. Not that it gives me authority, but just saying that I did see the full spectrum of disorders. I will respond to the early posts.

Suffice to say I don't feel the need to get into the debate of defending psychiatry as a legitimate field. I'm disappointed that you - a colleague - approach psychiatry in this way and see the field as you do. I'm not sure if you had a ****** rotation or clueless preceptors or what, but I simply can't relate to your experience. It's not that I completely disagree with all of your criticisms, but I'm simply not going to try and have a discussion with someone who says that the approach is that meds are "just thrown at people." If only we could just CT everyone and find the spot that doesn't belong, right? Then it'd be a real disease. Just about the only thing I'd agree with you about are personality disorders. Then, yes - I could completely see the "5 psychiatrists" anecdote coming true, and I would agree that treating those individuals is going down a path that may or may not help patients. But depression? Psychotic disorders? Anxiety disorders? Sorry, can't agree with you there.

I think it's interesting that trainees are willing to swallow hook, line, and sinker just about anything with respect to teaching when it comes to the diagnosis of disease in almost every other field but in psychiatry suddenly everyone becomes the armchair psychiatrist with an opinion on everything. Just because the diagnoses are "soft" and the disease process more subtle doesn't make the medicine any less legitimate. Interestingly enough, it's typically these same people who knock psychiatry yet are the first people to call a consult as soon as a patient becomes "unruly" - irrespective of whether an actual psychiatric process is going on. If only those damn people didn't get in the way of our MEDICINE!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alright, well there's nothing for me to respond to in this one.

1) Give some specific cases in which this was the case. I never saw this during my clerkship.

2) Why does this matter at all to anything? There are people who are unresponsive to a variety of drugs that are used routinely. There are drugs used in a variety of fields that have unclear or unknown mechanisms of action. Anesthesia is probably the best example here. We don't accuse anesthesiologists of vein charlatans though, do we? Very little of OB/GYN practice is evidence-based. Do you chastise them as strongly as you do psychiatrists? Also keep in mind that long term outcome data is lacking for a huge amount of drugs used in routine practice. In many cases interventions are done simply because they "seem right" but the data supporting their use is lacking. Look at "cutting-edge" surgical techniques and procedures for a prime example here. The reality is that much of what you complain about psych is equally applicable to other fields as well.

3) Who cares? If a patient feels better on medication and thinks the medication is worthwhile, is that meaningless? The fact that you question whether anxiety is even a disorder worth treating makes me not take you seriously. Now you're right that psychiatrists may misdiagnose and label someone with an anxiety disorder when that isn't the case, but if you've ever had a panic attack or dealt with anxiety before then I think you might be a tad offended at your own comments.

Your school either did you a great disservice on your psych rotation or you failed to approach it with an open mind. I mean, really, I'm surprised that your bringing up the complaints that you did. This is Tom Cruise level complaining here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1. For the different dx same cases, i'd just offer up any patient with mood symptoms. Very similar circumstances could get adjustment disorder NOS, MDD, Bipolar, Cyclo, substance induced, etc. Because a patient with depressive symptoms could really be diagnosed with literally any of those depending on how you interpreted their (often highly unreliabel) ihstories. Diagnoses were made INDEPENDENT of timeline, actual substance abuse, etc. Yes, I know the DSM guidelines for diagnosis. They were not followed a great deal of the time. When I asked why - either no response, or MDD reimburses better than adjustment d/o or substance induced. Perhaps it is specific to my institution, but it's a top 50 MD school so I would venture that is not the case. I also had outpatient clinics in non-university affiliated clinics that I saw this.

2. The difference is that this is the entire field, not one condition. I am not sure what you mean when you saw very little of OBGYN is evidenced based, or anesthesia. Please elaborate (though I doubt I'll respond). Look, everyone has made this argument. Yes, every field has treatments without proven efficacy. But almost the entire field of psychiatry is not well understood and not evidence based. There is a distinct difference in my mind. And I appreciate that it's a young field and may one day be well understood, but for now I see treatments being used with highly questionable efficacy or need and very little restraint and it is far too prevalent.

1. Hyperbole reveals an unbalanced attack. You're reacting emotionally to psychiatry and psychiatric patients and looking for situations that justify those feelings. Differing opinions occur everywhere in medicine. Why should it surprise you that given all of psychiatric diagnoses are based on patient history that different clinicians elicited different histories and therefore different preliminary diagnoses. Especially in an inpatient setting, which what most medical students experience. We don't have biological markers or lab tests or radiologic findings or pathology reports. So of course we are fumbling through the subjective nature of consciousness itself.

You are correct, research is difficult when identifying your patient population is a subjective process.

2. Did the medication help indeed? That is where we are at in psychiatry. All of our mechanisms are theoretical. And we use the same medications for entirely different diagnoses. That should raise alarm bells in any rational mind. So basically our diagnostic manual is a statistical encyclopedia of patients with similar symptoms. It is researched with the best evidence and understanding we have. Which is entirely problematic in itself. As a human with a phenomenon we call consciousness, I blame you, me and any other bipedal ape for being in the ridiculous position of being aware of self enough to ask these questions for our inscrutability in answering them.

3. You've basically illustrated the problem of egocentrism. In attempting to understand and interpret the consciousness of another human being we are stuck with the tool of our own consciousness which we know best. It takes a certain kind of person to be able to reimagine the possibility of the patient's unique consciousness through their experience.

I'll give an example of my egocentrism. I've had multiple back surgeries after a work injury and was on heavy round the clock narcotics for 2 years. After my 2nd major surgery and my wound healed I told myself one day I'm not taking any more narcotics. Period. And I didn't. And went into violent withdrawal. I was curled up in the fetal moaning, waiting for it to pass.

So on my addiction psychiatry rotation I was having trouble empathizing with heroine addicts and why they seemed convinced they would die if they didn't get their suboxone.

I asked my seniors on the psych forum about my rejection of their experience. Learned from them. And after thinking about it decided I was stuck with the problem of viewing things through my own consciousness which had the resources and ability to go cold turkey. And that not everyone was me.

This is both the problem of the doctor/patient relationship in psychiatry and why it is so fascinating. It requires the commitment to imagining the consequences of alien consciousness to our own.

It's interesting that you think I'm reacting emotionally, because I could not care less about the field as a whole. I see that it's a needed specialty, and I respect the attendings that have to deal with the crap that rolls through the psych floor. I never said otherwise. Besides that, I don't know what part of your post is supposed to disagree with me. Seems like you agreed with all my points. You see the same issues with psych that I do, except you embrace them and it runs contrary to my entire thought process.

Would love to know where you did your psych rotation that your five attendings each gave a patient different diagnoses with different treatments. It's difficult to take your post seriously when make such claims because, as you said, we ALL rotate through psych and I have yet to hear of anyone experieincing what you say you experienced. Awaiting your example.

see above

They are not used for a million different psych diagnoses, but a lot of the medications do overlap because you're dealing with a relatively small portion of the body. Mental illness is localized to the brain, so it makes sense that the mechanism of action of the psych meds can treat a number of conditions caused by the brain. Much like antibiotics work on a number of bugs, psych drugs work on a number of illnesses.

No, come on, you can't be serious with this argument. Mental illness is localized to the brain so one class of medications can treat them all? As though the MOA of all mental illness is the same? Likening psych drugs to antibiotics? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and let you rephrase this.

For the same reason some respond substantially to low-dose statins without problems and others just get myopathy without any significant decrease in their LDL.

No. If you switch from one statin to another you aren't likely to see a substantial difference in cholesterol lowering (there are exceptions, but generally speaking). I'm talking about say, someone will say paxil/zoloft/etc does not help, but celexa/citalopram will. Significant differences in effect.

The majority of people who have a condition indicated respond to antipsychotics. If you have to ask if the medication actually helped, then you spent a month on psych and you either didn't see someone with a condition that necessitated the use of antipsychotics (which means you had a sub-par psych rotation), you didn't understand the course of the patient's illness, or you were too busy criticizing the field to pay attention to what was happening.

As I said, I'm not talking about antipsychotics. Way to straw man anyhow. I've seen plenty of schizophrenics off their meds to appreciate the need. I DO have my doubts about the dopamine hypothesis, however.

This statement right here is why you have trouble respecting psychiatry. I hope that you are never hit with such hard blows that it leads to depression or anxiety or PTSD. These are MEDICAL problems in which the brain, the same one that tells you to spout such absurd things on a message board, stops working the way it has and promotes actions that create chaos in your life. You should be thanking God that you've never been affected by such problems.

What is your justification for "these are MEDICAL problems in the brain"? You have none. Because it is completely unknown what the etiology of depression is. Likely multifactorial. And again, you create strawmen and it is like arguing with a 12 year old. Anyone who denies that depression is over diagnosed and over treated is living in a dream world. Tell me, do you believe the incidence/prevalence of depression has changed in the last 50 years?

And no, I don't need to thank Zeus, Satan, or any other diety because I take responsibility for my mental health. You keep praying to God for cures, though. I grew up in very ghetto areas, around drugs and violence. A good 1/3 of my childhood friends are dead, some I watched die, others in jail. So kiss my ass. I've dealt with things far worse than 99% of the psych patients on rotation. I didn't sit around feeling sorry for myself. I can understand that people don't respond the same way to life stressors. I never denied the existence of depression. But keep overreacting to words unsaid. It's all you seem to be able to do.


Because you have trouble seeing and empathizing beyond your own life.

This is probably true. But then again you aren't able to consider anything except the sanctity of psychiatry.

See bold above
 
2. We just don't know enough about the mind/brain. I, too, have heard this from people I've run across and apparently these drugs must be sampled and results vary with patients. But the number of people who have felt huge life improvements is startling.

3. You already know I'm a big hater of whiny baby syndrome :) Yet...when we talk about actual medical care, I don't feel comfortable making any call which doesn't in some way enhance a patient's life. If someone has come to seek help - and you believe their story to be accurate, there should be significant effort made to uplift. Psychological pain - even in those who don't exhibit things in polite company - can be excruciating and a huge subtraction to fulfillment. If medication can help, I'm a fan.

All of this really just shows that psychiatry has more complications and lesser knowns to work with so must be extra vigilant and well-trained. All the unknowns of the mind in fact make me very uneasy with both psychiatry and neuro. That may very well be the medicine that is still being done at some point when all the other mechanical things have been figured out.

Really enjoyed reading this.

Again, I am NOT DENYING that antidepressants have efficacy and their place. I have seen plenty of people go from suicidal to functional. I am saying they are overprescribed with considerable callousness considering how little is known about their actions. People in this thread have blamed FM and peds docs, but I see this plenty with psychiatrists.

Regarding your second point, I would argue that you are not doing them any favors giving them medication for non-debilitating (ie suicidal) conditions. Why do we not give painkillers willy nilly? Pain is excruciating and a huge subtraction to fulfillment. Because it's better to treat the underlying cause, not mask it with medications. You can argue neurotransmitter imbalance as the cause if you want, but it's unproven at best.
 
It's interesting that you think I'm reacting emotionally, because I could not care less about the field as a whole. I see that it's a needed specialty, and I respect the attendings that have to deal with the crap that rolls through the psych floor. I never said otherwise. Besides that, I don't know what part of your post is supposed to disagree with me. Seems like you agreed with all my points. You see the same issues with psych that I do, except you embrace them and it runs contrary to my entire thought process.

I agree with some of your points. But I find your perspective fairly pedestrian. Your intent uninspiring. And your style of critique--not that interesting. As I've already grappled with those issues with more seriousness than your passing regard. And decided to go forward despite those flaws because I feel compelled to help psychiatric patients and I think it's the most interesting and creative mode of medical practice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Again, I am NOT DENYING that antidepressants have efficacy and their place. I have seen plenty of people go from suicidal to functional. I am saying they are overprescribed with considerable callousness considering how little is known about their actions. People in this thread have blamed FM and peds docs, but I see this plenty with psychiatrists.

Regarding your second point, I would argue that you are not doing them any favors giving them medication for non-debilitating (ie suicidal) conditions. Why do we not give painkillers willy nilly? Pain is excruciating and a huge subtraction to fulfillment. Because it's better to treat the underlying cause, not mask it with medications. You can argue neurotransmitter imbalance as the cause if you want, but it's unproven at best.

when you say antidepressants are overprescribed are you talking strictly from a therapeutic standpoint or did you take into account liability?

a lot of overprescribing is done due to defensive medicine and quality of life considerations.

to me, it sounds like you are saying that you don't like it when psychiatrists prescribe antidepressants with very little information about the patient. did you consider the legal ramifications if the psychiatrist refused to prescribe medication due to lack of information and the patient killed himself? would a jury understand and absolve the psychiatrist or would they crucify him?

also, i've had an experience where an attending refused to give a PRN order and one of the nurses was assaulted by the patient (no harm was done). depending on the attending, the safety of the hospital staff might warrant medication.

an attending has a lot more things to consider than symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment. he has to worry about malpractice lawsuits and the safety of the people on his team.

i don't want to get into a quality of life discussion because that will open up a whole new can of worms.
 
[peeks head into room] I feel like it's possible that a lot of the issues with over-diagnosis and inappropriate psychopharmacologic treatment are due to non-psychiatrists treating mental illness. I can't help but think of the 8 weeks I spent during separate FM preceptorships during which the physician would pass out an SSRI to everyone who was 'feeling down' and Adderall to every parent whose kid got sent to the principle's office. Shockingly, the same phenomenon occurred with Viagra and 'just not feeling up to it'. [quietly backs out of thread]
Wait wait wait...could you privately provide some of the names of the...erm...doctors who give Adderall like candy? You know there are boys in med school who try to get handjobs in exchange for Adderall? Don't ask for names. You know who you are. :)
 
I agree with some of your points. But I find your perspective fairly pedestrian. Your intent uninspiring. And your style of critique--not that interesting. As I've already grappled with those issues with more seriousness than your passing regard. And decided to go forward despite those flaws because I feel compelled to help psychiatric patients and I think it's the most interesting and creative mode of medical practice.

You make it sound as though I should be trying to write an english essay rather than a logical argument. Which is probably the gulf that divides us. Nonetheless, I can see that you are intelligent and capable of delivering a coherent argument without resorting to less compelling insults. You are certainly correct that your field does not get any respect and you are looking to change that; I wish you the best of luck and think you may succeed.

when you say antidepressants are overprescribed are you talking strictly from a therapeutic standpoint or did you take into account liability?

a lot of overprescribing is done due to defensive medicine and quality of life considerations.

to me, it sounds like you are saying that you don't like it when psychiatrists prescribe antidepressants with very little information about the patient. did you consider the legal ramifications if the psychiatrist refused to prescribe medication due to lack of information and the patient killed himself? would a jury understand and absolve the psychiatrist or would they crucify him?

also, i've had an experience where an attending refused to give a PRN order and one of the nurses was assaulted by the patient (no harm was done). depending on the attending, the safety of the hospital staff might warrant medication.

an attending has a lot more things to consider than symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment. he has to worry about malpractice lawsuits and the safety of the people on his team.

i don't want to get into a quality of life discussion because that will open up a whole new can of worms.

I am speaking from a therapeutic standpoint only. You're right that liability plays a role, but that is true of all fields. Nonetheless, how many lectures do we get about not overprescribing pain/abx/surgeries? There is no such thing as a harmless intervention.
 
You make it sound as though I should be trying to write an english essay rather than a logical argument. Which is probably the gulf that divides us. Nonetheless, I can see that you are intelligent and capable of delivering a coherent argument without resorting to less compelling insults. You are certainly correct that your field does not get any respect and you are looking to change that; I wish you the best of luck and think you may succeed.



I am speaking from a therapeutic standpoint only. You're right that liability plays a role, but that is true of all fields. Nonetheless, how many lectures do we get about not overprescribing pain/abx/surgeries? There is no such thing as a harmless intervention.

then i share your concern as well. psychiatry is definitely more of a wild wild west specialty compared to other medical specialties. however, instead of that being a turn off for me, i see it as an opportunity. here is a field where being a skilled practioner will make a bigger difference and where there are more opportunities for you to revolutionize the field.
 
Last edited:
I have no doubt that many patients will have similar conditions, but I don't know if I would want my entire practice focused around it. Probably 1/50 patients I took care of had a UTI or high ammonia levels and the treatments seemed fairly routine. Floating to the psych floor to do a protocol sit and watching the pt show off to the resident their new paper cuts from when they were in the bathroom earlier alone with the paper towel roll? I can't imagine the frustration that one must feel as an advanced provider in those situations.

My post was more a somewhat fascination with how some psych situations can come on or be treated so acutely.
A psychiatrist would rightfully laugh in your face, if you consulted them for an elderly patient who was combative due to a UTI or a patient whose sensorium is not intact bc of high ammonia levels. These patients aren't psychiatric patients. They have organic medical problems, causing CNS symptoms. The key to getting rid of these symptoms is to treat the underlying medical problem. The answer is not - consult Psych or send them to the Psych inpatient service, and no self-respecting Psych service would dare take those patients, and rightfully so.

You seem to think that each organ system acts in isolation. That's how an NP thinks, not a doctor. That's how you get someone who has a pulmonary embolism who suddenly feels short of breath, being treated with albuterol.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I too was somewhat skeptical of the standing psych compared to other fields during preclinical years. I think this stems from the fact that because we don't yet understand the pathophysiology of mental illness, as a preclinical student we probably spend more time looking at the actual data related to psych treatments than we do for other fields.
Funny bc a lot of medical school can trigger mental illness (anxiety, depression, etc.) in it's students. There are certain required clerkships which are full of residents and attendings with "issues" to say the least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If you're open-minded, I'd recommend reading this book before your psych rotation (only takes an afternoon or so to get through it): "Unholy Ghost" http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Ghost-Depression-Nell-Casey/dp/0060007826/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1400721853&sr=8-1&keywords=the unholy ghost. It's a collection of memoirs from different writers who describe in vivid detail what was going through their minds when they struggled with depression. Really opened my eyes to the non-sensical/illogical -- but very real---despair that people with depression suffer from. One memoir follows a high functioning woman who decides to take a holiday from her depression meds during her pregnancy. She traces her thoughts from here initial excitement/optimism as soon-to-be mother to a gradual decline into suicidality while tapering the meds. Compelling stuff.

This sounds like a great book. I read Staring At the Sun by Yalom a while back and it was so tough to get through...the book made me so sad. I'm really drawn to books like this (also looking into getting Darkness Visible by Styron) due to fascination and a satisfying sense of empathy, but I also get this uneasy feeling that my empathy draws me into their world a little too much. I'm tearing up just reading the Amazon description and comments from people with depression.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Wow. This tells me that you're really out of sync with the patient. Your reality is not their reality. Your happy-go-lucky-I can-handle-this-**** is not their reality. When it finally clicks that the brain is really as complicated as it is and renders different psyches for other (hello schizophrenia and omg...it's just occurred to me that maybe these last 15 minutes on wikipedia reading about neurodisorders is what makes me a weird nerd despite having the potential for so much more - wait...what is more?)

Umm, hello? Did you just not read anything else I posted? And I specifically, MULTIPLE TIMES, singled out psychotic disorders as extremely serious conditions?

"Again, I am NOT DENYING that antidepressants have efficacy and their place. I have seen plenty of people go from suicidal to functional. I am saying they are overprescribed with considerable callousness considering how little is known about their actions. People in this thread have blamed FM and peds docs, but I see this plenty with psychiatrists."

"I can understand that people don't respond the same way to life stressors. I never denied the existence of depression."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It's interesting that you think I'm reacting emotionally, because I could not care less about the field as a whole. I see that it's a needed specialty, and I respect the attendings that have to deal with the crap that rolls through the psych floor. I never said otherwise

You only respect the attendings because they're attendings. The problem is, you don't respect the patients because they don't subscribe to your philosophy of normal behavior. You describe depression as "whiny baby syndrome" and then you protest when people take you to task for it. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

No, come on, you can't be serious with this argument. Mental illness is localized to the brain so one class of medications can treat them all? As though the MOA of all mental illness is the same? Likening psych drugs to antibiotics? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and let you rephrase this.

When did I ever say that one class of medications can treat them all? I said there is OVERLAP. SSRIs have been shown to be efficacious in both depression and OCD. It doesn't mean that an SSRI is standard treatment for schizophrenia. Also, no one said the MOA of all mental illness is the same. I said that it's localized to the brain, which is where these drugs work. It makes sense (to those of us willing to use some common sense) that since serotonin controls mood, SSRIs would work for both depression and anxiety.

No. If you switch from one statin to another you aren't likely to see a substantial difference in cholesterol lowering (there are exceptions, but generally speaking). I'm talking about say, someone will say paxil/zoloft/etc does not help, but celexa/citalopram will. Significant differences in effect.

I agree that SSRIs are relatively new drugs (late 80s, early 90s), so we don't know as much about them. But the reason they don't all work the same is for the same reason that most drugs in particular classes don't work the same -- their chemical makeup is different, which causes variations in pharmacokinetics and that has a bigger effect in mental illness than it does in other conditions. And yes, you can see improvements in someone's response from one statin to another, most notably in the side effects, but in the efficacy as well. I've seen it myself in clinic.

As I said, I'm not talking about antipsychotics. Way to straw man anyhow. I've seen plenty of schizophrenics off their meds to appreciate the need. I DO have my doubts about the dopamine hypothesis, however.

You weren't talking about antipsychotics? Then what, pray tell, did you mean when you said "There is no way to predict how a patient responds to an antipsychotic - or which is best for them. Did the medication actually help?" Because it sounds to me like you're questioning whether an antipsychotic actually helps.

What is your justification for "these are MEDICAL problems in the brain"? You have none. Because it is completely unknown what the etiology of depression is. Likely multifactorial

It is unknown, as are a lot of things in medicine. Their medical symptoms make them medical problems and depression IS a medical symptom. Is irritable bowel syndrome a medical problem? Because last I checked, the etiology of that was unknown. Is lupus a medical problem? Because last I checked, the etiology was unknown. Is scleroderma a medical condition? Alzheimer's?

And again, you create strawmen and it is like arguing with a 12 year old. Anyone who denies that depression is over diagnosed and over treated is living in a dream world. Tell me, do you believe the incidence/prevalence of depression has changed in the last 50 years?

I think you better learn what the word "strawman" means because you're using it incorrectly. No one denied that depression was over-diagnosed. Not a single person denied that in this thread. It seems that YOU'RE the one going to extremes in order to twist the facts of your argument and blame those arguing with you for ridiculous assertions they never made.

And no, I don't need to thank Zeus, Satan, or any other diety because I take responsibility for my mental health. You keep praying to God for cures, though. I grew up in very ghetto areas, around drugs and violence. A good 1/3 of my childhood friends are dead, some I watched die, others in jail. So kiss my ass. I've dealt with things far worse than 99% of the psych patients on rotation. I didn't sit around feeling sorry for myself. I can understand that people don't respond the same way to life stressors. I never denied the existence of depression. But keep overreacting to words unsaid. It's all you seem to be able to do

You just told me to kiss your ass and you're accusing ME of 12-year-old behavior and overreaction? Yeah, okay. Keep deluding yourself. When you post that depression is whiny baby syndrome, you better expect fall-out from those of us who have enough respect for our patients and our duty as healthcare providers to take you to task for it. In the interest of keeping my SDN account, I'll leave it there.


Regarding your second point, I would argue that you are not doing them any favors giving them medication for non-debilitating (ie suicidal) conditions

Can someone please tell me when suicidal ideation/conditions became non-debilitating?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I don't like the fact that we don't understand psych drug mechanisms or that we don't have clean organic explanations of disease process that effects behavior either. And the neurotransmitter deficiency model is an entirely inadequate.

But here we have the most complex quantum supercomputers in known universe walking around autonomously with behavior that hurts themselves and their loved ones and the least we could do is try to help where we can, be compassionate, and be constructive to your colleagues who decide against the ill repute of the field to undertake this endeavor.

It's easy for a surgeon or any other "real" doctor to be heroic in the eyes of parents, colleagues, etc. Try doing it when nobody cares or thinks you're a villain and a fraud for caring enough yourself. That's real guts. When there's no glory.

This is why I am a psychiatrist. And why I demand your respect as your colleague.

I welcome all constructive criticism. But expect no welcome for Maury-level commentary. Which is what most medical student criticism is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
A psychiatrist would rightfully laugh in your face, if you consulted them for an elderly patient who was combative due to a UTI or a patient whose sensorium is not intact bc of high ammonia levels. These patients aren't psychiatric patients. They have organic medical problems, causing CNS symptoms. The key to getting rid of these symptoms is to treat the underlying medical problem. The answer is not - consult Psych or send them to the Psych inpatient service, and no self-respecting Psych service would dare take those patients, and rightfully so.

You seem to think that each organ system acts in isolation. That's how an NP thinks, not a doctor. That's how you get someone who has a pulmonary embolism who suddenly feels short of breath, being treated with albuterol.

****, i mean this thing even has it's own term/condition "psychiatric disorder to due general medical condition"

dude needs to up his game if he wants to smoke Step 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
****, i mean this thing even has it's own term/condition "psychiatric disorder to due general medical condition" dude needs to up his game if he wants to smoke Step 1.
Don't worry, if a patient has hyperthyroidism and is exhibiting anxiety he'll just throw him some SSRIs or benzos.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This sounds like a great book. I read Staring At the Sun by Yalom a while back and it was so tough to get through...the book made me so sad. I'm really drawn to books like this (also looking into getting Darkness Visible by Styron) due to fascination and a satisfying sense of empathy, but I also get this uneasy feeling that my empathy draws me into their world a little too much. I'm tearing up just reading the Amazon description and comments from people with depression.

Yeah, this book has that effect on a lot of people. For me, I was initially very annoyed reading it. But it reminded me of one of my favorite attendings from 3rd year, who used to harp on students for being annoyed with patients. He'd say that "annoyance" is one of the most valuable forms of countertransferrance. When patients annoy you, they probably annoy everyone else as well, and as their doctor, its worth thinking hard about what exactly annoys you and why the patient is employing those traits. It definitely forced me check myself and my initial assumptions about depression and psych patients in general.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Umm, hello? Did you just not read anything else I posted? And I specifically, MULTIPLE TIMES, singled out psychotic disorders as extremely serious conditions?

"Again, I am NOT DENYING that antidepressants have efficacy and their place. I have seen plenty of people go from suicidal to functional. I am saying they are overprescribed with considerable callousness considering how little is known about their actions. People in this thread have blamed FM and peds docs, but I see this plenty with psychiatrists."

"I can understand that people don't respond the same way to life stressors. I never denied the existence of depression."

Unfortunately you speak out of both sides of your mouth as what you're saying now directly contradicts what you said in your OP. I agree with Nasrudin: you have some kind of weird aversion to psychiatry and rationalize that aversion using whatever methods you can but fail to see how they apply in other fields which you apparently respect further. For example, you use mood disorders as an example of pathology with a wide differential but fail to consider vague complaints like headache or abdominal pain with equally wide if not wider differentials. The difference is that you can order a bunch of imaging or do labs or a physical exam to narrow your differential. In psych, you narrow your differential by interacting with the patient. That is, inevitably, a vague and slow-going process, but yet - at it's core - the exact same process you work through in any other specialty. The difference is there is no cutoff at the second sigma for behavior or thought processes which I can label as abnormal in an objective way. Make no mistake, though: that doesn't mean that abnormalities don't exist.

Since you yourself admit that you likely won't respond I won't waste my time addressing your points regarding anesthesia or OB/GYN, but suffice to say I hope you take some time to think about the things you're saying from the perspective of people that are either mentally ill or want to work with the mentally ill and perhaps wonder why they might be so offended by your comments. The fact that you tout your honors in psychiatry as some kind of badge and that your argument therefore has authority (exactly what you're doing regardless of your qualifier to the contrary) is totally laughable but not unexpected from your typical medical student. The fact that you fail to see that demonstrates your mind-boggling lack of insight.

Working to improve how we practice medicine is a noble goal. Disrespecting physicians and their patients because you don't find the field of medicine "real" enough - which, irrespective of your hand-waving, is exactly what you're doing to one degree or another - is not and is the height of pathetic.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
It's easy for a surgeon or any other "real" doctor to be heroic in the eyes of parents, colleagues, etc. Try doing it when nobody cares or thinks you're a villain and a fraud for caring enough yourself. That's real guts. When there's no glory.
Some medical students believe they have the full right to comment about Psychiatry just because they do a 4 week rotation and aced the NBME shelf exam. They truly believe that Psych is checking off symptoms in the DSM, memorizing time lengths for specific diagnoses, and memorizing side effects. They truly lack in understanding nuance and that conditions can coexist (i.e. anxiety and depression).

Part of what is hilarious to me is that the surgeons who put down Psych are one of the biggest perpetrators when it comes to being labeled "disruptive physicians" and are demanded by their institutions to see Psych before they can come back. There are entire psych practices that advertise for treating these "disruptive physicians". So for all the nonsense in believing that Psychiatrists aren't real doctors, they sure provide them a lot of business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Guys, I just finished studying for the year (or until August) and would rather be done with this thread then go on an on.

  • What bothers me with the field is that some disorders seem to be arbitrary and vague, some are way over-treated, some disorders don't seem to be disorders at all, problems with validity, etc...not saying there aren't similar problems in other specialities.
  • That was the gist of what I was trying to saying in my OP but I see that some interpreted it as me trashing psychiatry.
  • There are a lot of things I like so far about psychiatry and I'm not at all ruling it out as a specialty.
 
Guys, I just finished studying for the year (or until August) and would rather be done with this thread then go on an on.

  • What bothers me with the field is that some disorders seem to be arbitrary and vague, some are way over-treated, some disorders don't seem to be disorders at all, problems with validity, etc...not saying there aren't similar problems in other specialities.
  • That was the gist of what I was trying to saying in my OP but I see that some interpreted it as me trashing psychiatry.
  • There are a lot of things I like so far about psychiatry and I'm not at all ruling it out as a specialty.
You are an MS-1. You know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the specialty of Psychiatry and how it is practiced and what it entails. Your MS-1 course in Psychiatry/Behavioral Science is not real-life and is not how Psychiatry is practiced. Period.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
You are an MS-1. You know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the specialty of Psychiatry and how it is practiced and what it entails. Your MS-1 course in Psychiatry/Behavioral Science is not real-life and is not how Psychiatry is practiced. Period.
1400856955743.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Guys, I just finished studying for the year (or until August) and would rather be done with this thread then go on an on.

  • What bothers me with the field is that some disorders seem to be arbitrary and vague, some are way over-treated, some disorders don't seem to be disorders at all, problems with validity, etc...not saying there aren't similar problems in other specialities.
  • That was the gist of what I was trying to saying in my OP but I see that some interpreted it as me trashing psychiatry.
  • There are a lot of things I like so far about psychiatry and I'm not at all ruling it out as a specialty.

What bothers me with what bothers you with the field is that you don't seem understand that you don't know anything about the field. How would you know who's being over-treated? How would you know what disorders are disorders? You can't possibly make that determination as a first year. When you actually see patients during your third year clerkships, you will have a better handle on what psychiatry is. You might feel the same at that point or you could completely change your mind. The point is that you're making way too many generalizations about a field based on book knowledge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
What bothers me with what bothers you with the field is that you don't seem understand that you don't know anything about the field. How would you know who's being over-treated? How would you know what disorders are disorders? You can't possibly make that determination as a first year. When you actually see patients during your third year clerkships, you will have a better handle on what psychiatry is. You might feel the same at that point or you could completely change your mind. The point is that you're making way too many generalizations about a field based on book knowledge.
Most likely he thinks he knows all of Psychiatry bc he aced his Behavioral Science NBME exam.
 
Last edited:
Most likely he thinks he knows it all bc he aced his Behavioral Science NBME exam.

which is funny because if he actually knew anything about clinical medicine, he'd know that shelfs/pre-clinical years =/= clinical practice in the slightest. if i had to boil down the pre-clinical years, it'd be simply "world's most stressful vocab test"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
which is funny because if he actually knew anything about clinical medicine, he'd know that shelfs/pre-clinical years =/= clinical practice in the slightest. if i had to boil down the pre-clinical years, it'd be simply "world's most stressful vocab test"
Yup, he thinks bc he can answer NBME clinical vignette questions, he's got the entire specialty pegged down. I know whenever I got a clinical vignette question right, I always felt like I healed the patient. :rolleyes: Too bad I couldn't bill for it.
 
"some disorders seem to be arbitrary and vague, some are way over-treated, some disorders don't seem to be disorders at all, problems with validity, etc...not saying there aren't similar problems in other specialities."

How does that ruffle so many feathers? That's a pretty neutral statement. Just because the messenger is an MS1? Enjoy your summer guys.
 
"some disorders seem to be arbitrary and vague, some are way over-treated, some disorders don't seem to be disorders at all, problems with validity, etc...not saying there aren't similar problems in other specialities."

How does that ruffle so many feathers? That's a pretty neutral statement. Just because the messenger is an MS1? Enjoy your summer guys.

Now I see your problem with psychiatry. You lack insight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
"some disorders seem to be arbitrary and vague, some are way over-treated, some disorders don't seem to be disorders at all, problems with validity, etc...not saying there aren't similar problems in other specialities."

How does that ruffle so many feathers? That's a pretty neutral statement. Just because the messenger is an MS1? Enjoy your summer guys.
Yeah, neutral indeed. Our feathers aren't ruffled. Your oversimplification of the field is what we're laughing at, which is fully explained by your depth of experience as an MS-1. Your lack of insight is hilarious. It would be like a medical student correcting a resident/attending on a fact, bc he/she read it in First Aid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
"some disorders seem to be arbitrary and vague, some are way over-treated, some disorders don't seem to be disorders at all, problems with validity, etc...not saying there aren't similar problems in other specialities."

How does that ruffle so many feathers? That's a pretty neutral statement. Just because the messenger is an MS1? Enjoy your summer guys.

lol it's not because you're an M1. It's because you have no idea what you're talking about which is explained by the fact that you're an M1. I'm an M2 now and I already see how far I've come from last year. I've seen a few more things and learned a lot more. So just think about how these guys, who are clinical year med students or residents, would feel about your "analysis". Your only exposure to psych is your class and maybe one or two patient if you're lucky. And you see fit to pass judgment on a field that you've had no exposure to, critiquing the opinion of experts who have been practicing that field for years if not decades.

You're showing a basic lack of understanding of how medicine actually works. Doctors see sick people, make patterns and connections and group these observations. Then we give the problem a label like "hypertension" and figure out what the best way to deal with it is. Later on, someone figures out how it works and this gets taught to medical students. That's why professors are always harping on about history. We don't have the luxury of being there when things were discovered and we need perspective. When HIV started killing people, do you think that the diagnosis was an easy slam dunk with all these protease inhibitors and reverse transcriptase inhibitors ready to slow disease progression? No, people started noticing that homosexuals were dying of some disease that didn't fit the pattern of known diseases. It's only now after years of careful observation by physicians, decades of research by research laboratories and billions of dollars spent that we have an idea of how the virus works, how to stop it and how to improve people's lives. Medicine is more than just sitting there, going through sig e caps and then telling the patient that now they're officially depressed because it's exactly 6 months since the onset of the disease with 7 out of the 9 associated symptoms.

We're dealing with probabilities and pattern recognition. Someone comes in with swelling in their right leg and sudden onset shortness of breath. They sit at their desk all day. This leads you to think of a pulmonary embolism. You run some tests that make that idea more likely so you go for the appropriate treatment. But not everyone with a PE is going to come in as a middle aged truck driver. That's why people say that patients don't come in reading the textbook. It's your job to figure out what the probem is and how to fix it.

By the way, you're probably the only one who actually has a summer. Enjoy it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
"some disorders seem to be arbitrary and vague, some are way over-treated, some disorders don't seem to be disorders at all, problems with validity, etc...not saying there aren't similar problems in other specialities."

How does that ruffle so many feathers? That's a pretty neutral statement. Just because the messenger is an MS1? Enjoy your summer guys.

Fortune cookies make neutral statements. But I don't consider it a messenger. Or a prophet. I can make neutral statements about the over diagnosis and over-proceduralization of spine problems. With more authority than you twits have gone about here. But I don't. Because I don't know the gritty details of the research that would say it with some authority.

Basically. The Internet has empowered idiots everywhere. Very few people know the ins and outs of anything. Much less the research that supports clinical decision making in a specialty of medicine. I recently made a 1000+ page textbook of research articles in psychiatry with the help of a senior in my field.

When I'm done with it. I hope to be competent enough to understand what the experts are talking about and why.

Your ignorance. Or mine. Should never be underestimated.

If you don't learn that and learn it quick. You're more than just an idiot on the Internet. You're an idiot with a license to kill.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
lol it's not because you're an M1. It's because you have no idea what you're talking about which is explained by the fact that you're an M1. I'm an M2 now and I already see how far I've come from last year. I've seen a few more things and learned a lot more. So just think about how these guys, who are clinical year med students or residents, would feel about your "analysis". Your only exposure to psych is your class and maybe one or two patient if you're lucky. And you see fit to pass judgment on a field that you've had no exposure to, critiquing the opinion of experts who have been practicing that field for years if not decades.

You're showing a basic lack of understanding of how medicine actually works. Doctors see sick people, make patterns and connections and group these observations. Then we give the problem a label like "hypertension" and figure out what the best way to deal with it is. Later on, someone figures out how it works and this gets taught to medical students. That's why professors are always harping on about history. We don't have the luxury of being there when things were discovered and we need perspective. When HIV started killing people, do you think that the diagnosis was an easy slam dunk with all these protease inhibitors and reverse transcriptase inhibitors ready to slow disease progression? No, people started noticing that homosexuals were dying of some disease that didn't fit the pattern of known diseases. It's only now after years of careful observation by physicians, decades of research by research laboratories and billions of dollars spent that we have an idea of how the virus works, how to stop it and how to improve people's lives. Medicine is more than just sitting there, going through sig e caps and then telling the patient that now they're officially depressed because it's exactly 6 months since the onset of the disease with 7 out of the 9 associated symptoms.

We're dealing with probabilities and pattern recognition. Someone comes in with swelling in their right leg and sudden onset shortness of breath. They sit at their desk all day. This leads you to think of a pulmonary embolism. You run some tests that make that idea more likely so you go for the appropriate treatment. But not everyone with a PE is going to come in as a middle aged truck driver. That's why people say that patients don't come in reading the textbook. It's your job to figure out what the probem is and how to fix it.

By the way, you're probably the only one who actually has a summer. Enjoy it.

I wish I could like something a thousand times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The issue here seems to be not with my opinion (then again the med student who had gone through rotations and and seemed to hold a similar view was flamed out of here)...more "well, you're an MS1, you haven't even gone through rotations, so how can you make such a sweeping statement...how can you just get an impression from your syllabus and apply it to real medicine?" Fair enough. Obviously, as an MS1, I'm ignorant of a lot of things, but that's my opinion, you can call it an "oversimplification" (which I know is "felt" by more than a few med students, physicians, and "experts"). And it's subject to change at this early stage of the game.

"....critiquing the opinion of experts who have been practicing that field for years if not decades."....don't see anything wrong with that. Not touching your condescending novel on the workings of medicine.
 
I just finished my 3 month intro to psych course. I'm on the phone with Obama right now recommending he outlaw psychiatry.
 
Top