Medical Psychologists on path to getting prescribing privileges, AMA/APA oppose

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I obviously am a fairly opinionated wench! :D

Peace to you too. I hate that PhD v. PsyD stuff. :rolleyes:
Members don't see this ad.
 
Janusdog said:
I obviously am a fairly opinionated wench! :D

Peace to you too. I hate that PhD v. PsyD stuff. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Me too. :D :)

P.S. I really like your blue highlighted bottom statement; go Van Gogh! :thumbup:
 
sasevan said:
Still planning on being a psychopharmacotherapist in FL. Everything will depend on when FL approves RxP. What about you; are you at NYCOM? If so, what is your impression so far? NYCOM is my first choice outside FL.
Click to expand...

Good to hear. If FL passes legislation for psychologist RxP, will you not pursue med school? Any idea regarding the status of psychologist RxP legislation in FL?

I'm currently at NYCOM and it's going well. Busy as ever but enjoying every bit of it.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
PublicHealth said:
Good to hear. If FL passes legislation for psychologist RxP, will you not pursue med school? Any idea regarding the status of psychologist RxP legislation in FL?

I'm currently at NYCOM and it's going well. Busy as ever but enjoying every bit of it.
Click to expand...

CONGRATS!!! on NYCOM.That's awesome.
If FL grants RxP to psychologists I'm not sure if I would then go on to be a psychiatrist (8 more years of study/practice and licensing exams,etc.). I just finished my psychology residency this past July and I'm beginning to enjoy a little quality of life; right now doing another residency does not appeal to me at all, so we'll see. However, I'm not sure about the prospects for FL and RxP this year. Not really sure which direction I and FL will take on all of this. Maybe, I'll just leave FL's oceanfront and head for NM's desertland; we'll see...LOL
Peace.
 
This job posting from Kaiser Permanente is for a psychologist with training in psychopharmacology. Does anyone know if this position will allow psychologists to prescribe or just consult regarding pharmacotherapy? Last I checked, California did not pass legislation granting psychologists RxP. Thoughts?


US-CA-Tracy-Psychologist - Behavioral Medicine Specialist

EDUCATION/LICENSE/CERTIFICATION: Doctorate in Psychology required, licensed as Psychologist in the State of California

QUALIFICATIONS: Previous clinical responsibilities to include diagnosis, brief individual group therapy, parent education, crisis intervention with children and adolescents and consultation/collaboration with medical personnel; in depth knowledge of behavioral medicine and psychopharmacology; knowledge of state regulations and APA standards related to clinical treatment, patient rights, and client patient confidentiality; demonstrated ability to work effectively on a team, and in a primary care environment. Postdoctoral training in psychopharmacology highly desirable.

GENERAL SUMMARY: Provides diagnosis, triage and treatment of patients in Pediatrics who have mental disorders or behavioral problems which affect their medical condition, or are a consequence of their medical condition. Provides consultation and training to other members of the Pediatric team. Must be able to provide consultation with respect to patients' appropriateness for treatment with psychotropic medications. Thus must have an in depth knowledge of the medical model and medical treatment of mental illness. Experience with diagnosis and treatment of ADHD and other common childhood psychiatric conditions required.

ESSENTIAL RESPONSIBILITIES: Primary roles are to: 1) evaluate and diagnose Health Plan members seen in Pediatrics who have mental disorders or behavioral problems which affect their medical condition or are a consequence of their medical condition; 2) develop, implement, coordinate and evaluate treatment plans for referred members which may include crisis intervention, brief psychotherapy, psychoeducation groups and brief case management, and patient education; 3) prepare concise intake evaluations and treatment plans, and maintain ongoing confidential progress records in accord with state and NCQA regulations; 4) provide education and support to members and their families to encourage compliance with medical and behavioral interventions; 5) co-manage medical conditions through the use of non-pharmacological and behavioral interventions in to leverage physician time and develop appropriate patterns of utilization; 6) collaborate with physicians in screening and evaluating patients psychotropic medications, within the scope of practice; 7)provide consultation and training to other members of the APC team on the area of mental health, behavioral medicine, and health psychology; 8) serve as liaison and refer to the Psychiatry Department, chemical Dependency Services, Behavioral Health Education, specialty behavioral medicine services and other internal and external community resources as appropriate. Position may involve after hours on-call duties at local KP hospital.

MUST BE WILLING TO WORK IN A LABOR/MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP ENVIRONMENT

Contact: HR, 1625 "I" Street, Modesto, CA 95354. Fax: 209/557-1056.

Kaiser Permanente is proud to be an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer.
 
I have a Cali license. I have also interviewed at Kaiser before. All they mean is that you need to be able to understand what makes a patient a good candidate for meds (like vegetative sx and such) and be able to monitor the patient for compliance and side effects and consult intelligently. They don't mean that the employee will be recommending which meds to prescribe...although I am asked that occasionally and nearly always defer, and when I don't defer I just state why I think one over the other related to compliance issues (like expressed concern about weight gain), not prescription issues.
 
Why are so many psychologists so afraid of speaking about meds?? If you don't know much that is fine, but if you do then your opinion is valued. Why defer if you know what you think? I think deferring an informed opinion on your patient is really unethical, just as much as giving a supposed informed opinion when you do not know..... :)
 
psisci said:
Why are so many psychologists so afraid of speaking about meds?? If you don't know much that is fine, but if you do then your opinion is valued. Why defer if you know what you think? I think deferring an informed opinion on your patient is really unethical, just as much as giving a supposed informed opinion when you do not know..... :)
Click to expand...

I'm not afraid of speaking about meds. In fact, sometimes I even know the answers to patients' questions about meds and answer them. But I always issue a disclaimer that if they have very in depth questions they should ask the prescribing physician. Why? Because perhaps they're on Lamictal, Risperdal, and Eskalith, like one of my patients, and when I went to school, polypharmacy was something to be avoided. Today, in most of my patients it's the norm. I try and make sure I'm not giving an uninformed opinion, and like many things, when one doesn't know, one doesn't know what one doesn't know.

Your statement as to what is ethical completely depends on the synergy of me plus the population I work with. If I am asked by a PCP about my opinion, I give it if I am absolutely positive but am always clear they are the last word. If I get a sideways glance I defer. Our ethical code states we must practice within the realm of our competencies. Meds are something I can speak about intelligently, but only to a point. Well, hey, after all, since I'm a health psychologist, why can't I give opinions on Plavix? Or Zosyn? Or Agrylin?
 
I did not intend to imply you were afraid to speak about meds at all, just that many psychoogists are. What are your thoughts on that?

:)
 
psisci said:
I did not intend to imply you were afraid to speak about meds at all, just that many psychoogists are. What are your thoughts on that?

:)
Click to expand...

Well, I think if someone doesn't feel that they have the knowledge base to speak intelligently, they shouldn't! :)

Didn't Mark Twain say, "Better to keep quiet and be thought a fool, than open one's mouth and remove all doubt?" :cool:

But seriously, I don't know how you could practice nowadays without at least a rudimentary knowledge of meds. Someone just got disciplined here in Illinois for failure to follow meds adaquately...don't know the details.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
sorry if this has already been asked, but I couln't specifically find it in this BEAST of a thread...

so for those psychologists who want rxp, what do they think that the role of the psychiatrist should be if psychologists are able to rxp? surely they don't think that the role should be the same as the psychologist with the master's in pharm do they? do they think that psychiatry should be a specialty of mental health wards?
 
aggiecrew said:
sorry if this has already been asked, but I couln't specifically find it in this BEAST of a thread...

so for those psychologists who want rxp, what do they think that the role of the psychiatrist should be if psychologists are able to rxp? surely they don't think that the role should be the same as the psychologist with the master's in pharm do they? do they think that psychiatry should be a specialty of mental health wards?
Click to expand...

Psychosomatic psychiatry. Psychiatric disorders do not exist in a vacuum. Psychologists with RxP will find this out the hard way.
 
aggiecrew said:
1.how are psychiatrists uniquely better equiped than psychologists with rxp to handle psychosomatic problems?

2. of the psychologists who advocate for rxp, are they more of less unified in the opinion that psychiatry should be a specialty of psychosomatic problems?
so that all other types of cases are common ground?

thanks!
Click to expand...

1. Psychiatrists have training in medicine. Psychologists do not.

2. Psychiatry is not and will not be "a speciality of psychosomatic problems." Rather, psychologists with RxP will likely lead to an increase in the number of psychiatrists who pursue fellowship training in psychosomatic psychiatry, as this unique subdiscipline integrates basic medical care with psychiatric care and preserves a professional identity for psychiatry. Psychologists cannot practice this type of medicine/psychiatry. Keep in mind that psychiatrists are medical doctors who specialize in psychiatry. While psychopharmacologic training complements clinical psychology training, it is important to keep in mind that psychiatric disorders do not exist independent of the body. If a patient overdoses on a psychotropic or experiences an adverse reaction (that may be life threatening in some cases), you are now dealing with a MEDICAL issue that requires MEDICAL intervention. Psychologists, even with MS training in psychopharmacology, are simply not prepared to intervene in this manner. That being said, there may be a place for psychologist RxP in outpatient settings under supervision by licensed psychiatrists. This a grey area at present (which drugs psychologists may prescribe, which age groups that may treat, duration and extent of supervision, etc), so it will be interesting to see how it is resolved.

Last I heard, RxP efforts for psychologists have been temporarily stalled in NM and LA. Anyone have an update?
 
well, with my original question I was assuming general psychiatry practice without a fellowship. do the psychologists who want rxp view the role of the general psychiatrist to not change with the addition of psychologists with rxp entering the market? or do they see the profession of general psychiatry as one with a very unique role that should be very different than the one that the psychologists with rxp want to provide?

thanks!
 
aggiecrew said:
well, with my original question I was assuming general psychiatry practice without a fellowship. do the psychologists who want rxp view the role of the general psychiatrist to not change with the addition of psychologists with rxp entering the market? or do they see the profession of general psychiatry as one with a very unique role that should be very different than the one that the psychologists with rxp want to provide?

thanks!
Click to expand...

Psychiatrists are MEDICAL doctors with training in psychiatry. Psychologists are TALK THERAPY doctors with weekend seminar training in psychopharmacology. The uniqueness of each profession should not be a primary concern. Ensuring the safety of the patients they treat should. The main question is why have second-rate prescribers with less-than-adequate training in psychopharmacology and NO training in medicine prescribe some of the most powerful drugs known to man and put patients lives at risk?
 
PublicHealth said:
The main question is why have second-rate prescribers with less-than-adequate training in psychopharmacology and NO training in medicine prescribe some of the most powerful drugs known to man and put patients lives at risk?
Click to expand...

that might be the "main" question but it wasn't MY question. That "main" question has already been throughly debated on this thread and I'm sure will continue to be.

MY question IS about uniqueness. If the psychologists who want rxp don't think that psychiatry should be a unique field separate then than what the psychologists with rxp will hope to be doing then fine, ok. I'm not asking whether you guys think it should be unique or not, I'm asking what the american psychological association (or whatever the organization is called) thinks the role of the psychiatrist should be vs. the proposed psychologist whith rxp.

does anyone know that group's position on this issue?

thanks!
 
aggiecrew said:
that might be the "main" question but it wasn't MY question. That "main" question has already been throughly debated on this thread and I'm sure will continue to be.

MY question IS about uniqueness. If the psychologists who want rxp don't think that psychiatry should be a unique field separate then than what the psychologists with rxp will hope to be doing then fine, ok. I'm not asking whether you guys think it should be unique or not, I'm asking what the american psychological association (or whatever the organization is called) thinks the role of the psychiatrist should be vs. the proposed psychologist whith rxp.

does anyone know that group's position on this issue?

thanks!
Click to expand...

Here's their position (note that they really don't care what the role of psychiatry will be if psychologists obtain RxP. They simply want a slice of the financial pie because clinical psychology has lost its professional identity and is being quickly pushed out of the behavioral healthcare market): http://www.apa.org/apags/profdev/prespriv.html

While you're at it: http://www.quackwatch.org/07PoliticalActivities/rxp1.html
 
PublicHealth said:
Here's their position (note that they really don't care what the role of psychiatry will be if psychologists obtain RxP. They simply want a slice of the financial pie because clinical psychology has lost its professional identity and is being quickly pushed out of the behavioral healthcare market): http://www.apa.org/apags/profdev/prespriv.html

While you're at it: http://www.quackwatch.org/07PoliticalActivities/rxp1.html
Click to expand...


that link is their position on the issue of psychologists getting rxp. when I said I wanted to know their "position on this issue," by "issue" I meant their position on the issue of the role of psychiatrists if psychologists get rxp. if they don't have a position on this issue then that's fine, but I'd just like to know how you know that's the case, since I didn't see anything about it in that link.

thanks!
 
aggiecrew said:
that link is their position on the issue of psychologists getting rxp. when I said I wanted to know their "position on this issue," by "issue" I meant their position on the issue of the role of psychiatrists if psychologists get rxp. if they don't have a position on this issue then that's fine, but I'd just like to know how you know that's the case, since I didn't see anything about it in that link.

thanks!
Click to expand...

Aggie,

No one can really answer your question because psychologists don't have an answer themselves. Some think that psychiatrists are going to be willing to run the training programs (which I doubt...who wants to train their competitor?), but after that I can't say that psychologists who believe in RxP think about psychiatrists much, if at all. The APA has no position on the issue, and there is nothing in the ethical code except a clause that says, in essence, "Thou shalt not practice outside one's competency."
 
PublicHealth said:
Psychiatrists are MEDICAL doctors with training in psychiatry. Psychologists are TALK THERAPY doctors with weekend seminar training in psychopharmacology. The uniqueness of each profession should not be a primary concern. Ensuring the safety of the patients they treat should. The main question is why have second-rate prescribers with less-than-adequate training in psychopharmacology and NO training in medicine prescribe some of the most powerful drugs known to man and put patients lives at risk?
Click to expand...

True, psychiatrists are medical doctors (or better yet, physicians, since they aren't real doctors like PhDs -- just holders of professional degrees), and do have medical training, but what's the real issue here? Is it turf protection and fear of obsolescence? Let's take a look at some other professions that have Rx privileges and are not medical doctors:

1. Dentists - are not physicians and have pretty extensive RxP; in fact, in most states, they can Rx narcotics!

2. Podiatrists - are not physicians and can Rx a wide range of meds and even perform surgery (shudder!).

3. Optometrists - are definitely not physicians, have very little medical training, and can Rx some basic meds like topicals and antibiotics in some states. Since they are glorified technicians and not true primary health care professionals, this is scary.

4. Nurse Practitioners - who only have a master's degree, and in some cases, less, can Rx under physician protocols, but in some states, have full RxP.

5. PAs - can Rx under physician supervision, and some of the PAs have only an associate's or bachelor's degree.

So, given this, why is it that psychiatrists are so hostile about psychologists getting RxPs? They didn't do a good job at keeping these other professions from gaining RxPs, did they?

A clinical psychologist, who is fully licensed and holds a PhD or PsyD degree with APA approved internship/residency, and advanced training in psychopharmacology, would be more than qualified to Rx psychotropic meds. I mean, if an optometrist (who doesn't even need a bachelor's degree to get into optometry school) can Rx antibiotics, and an NP with a master's can Rx psychotropics, why not a PsyD/PhD? Optometrists have less pharmacology in their training than associate's-level paramedics and they somehow got RxPs! Nurses? PAs? Come on!

Some facts to consider:

A) Most prescribers of psychotropics are NOT psychiatrists, but rather OB-GYNS, internists, Family docs, or neurologists.
B) Most practitioners who Dx mental illness are from the above list or MSWs, not psychiatrists
C) Many psychiatrists in the US are foreign educated with little training in psychopharmacology. In fact, many of these foreign trained psychiatrists (with bachelor's degrees in medicine, not MDs or DOs), are from countries that don't view common mental illnesses like depression or anxiety the same way as Americans or other Westerners do) and many of these foreign trained psychiatrists are responsible for many deaths each year due to irresponsible Rx'ing.
D) Psychiatrists are expensive and are, for the most part, simply pill pushers who do little in the actual treatment; they Rx meds and see their patients for 5-15 minutes for med reviews and are extremely overpaid for this
E) Many psychiatrists forget real medicine after practicing psychiatry for years. They forget how to read lab reports, MRIs, etc. You don't use it, you lose it.

So, your argument was? :)
 
First of all, to address your arguement about Dentists and others with script rights all of those professions you listed at least have medical training (except the optometristist and they aren't scripting the powerful psychotropic meds we are discussing so they really don't count). But, the others do have medical training, most PA's and NP's know how to look at an EKG and understand what QTc prolongation means and why that is relavant for certain psych meds, psychologists can't even order the test, much less have they had training about what its results mean. Furthermore, those other medical professionals, again not the optometrists, are more likely to appreciate the manifestations of hyponatremia induced by a psych med, because they have very likely seen clinical cases of hyponatremia in other settings. In my graduate training in psychology we saw none of those, nor did we have even the basics of medical training I have learned during Medical school. It is absolutely ludicris and arrogant that anyone without medical training could truely believe they will be competant to use these medications safely over time. Yes, I know about the DOD reports. I still am convinced that in the long run the patient whom we are supposed to serve will suffer.
 
Can someone please define psychosomatic medicine used in this context?

Do you mean fMRI research/studies, etc? Or do you mean treatment of somatization disorder? Or things like NMS?
 
Anubis84 said:
True, psychiatrists are medical doctors (or better yet, physicians, since they aren't real doctors like PhDs -- just holders of professional degrees), and do have medical training, but what's the real issue here? Is it turf protection and fear of obsolescence? Let's take a look at some other professions that have Rx privileges and are not medical doctors:

1. Dentists - are not physicians and have pretty extensive RxP; in fact, in most states, they can Rx narcotics!

2. Podiatrists - are not physicians and can Rx a wide range of meds and even perform surgery (shudder!).

3. Optometrists - are definitely not physicians, have very little medical training, and can Rx some basic meds like topicals and antibiotics in some states. Since they are glorified technicians and not true primary health care professionals, this is scary.

4. Nurse Practitioners - who only have a master's degree, and in some cases, less, can Rx under physician protocols, but in some states, have full RxP.

5. PAs - can Rx under physician supervision, and some of the PAs have only an associate's or bachelor's degree.

So, given this, why is it that psychiatrists are so hostile about psychologists getting RxPs? They didn't do a good job at keeping these other professions from gaining RxPs, did they?

A clinical psychologist, who is fully licensed and holds a PhD or PsyD degree with APA approved internship/residency, and advanced training in psychopharmacology, would be more than qualified to Rx psychotropic meds. I mean, if an optometrist (who doesn't even need a bachelor's degree to get into optometry school) can Rx antibiotics, and an NP with a master's can Rx psychotropics, why not a PsyD/PhD? Optometrists have less pharmacology in their training than associate's-level paramedics and they somehow got RxPs! Nurses? PAs? Come on!

Some facts to consider:

A) Most prescribers of psychotropics are NOT psychiatrists, but rather OB-GYNS, internists, Family docs, or neurologists.
B) Most practitioners who Dx mental illness are from the above list or MSWs, not psychiatrists
C) Many psychiatrists in the US are foreign educated with little training in psychopharmacology. In fact, many of these foreign trained psychiatrists (with bachelor's degrees in medicine, not MDs or DOs), are from countries that don't view common mental illnesses like depression or anxiety the same way as Americans or other Westerners do) and many of these foreign trained psychiatrists are responsible for many deaths each year due to irresponsible Rx'ing.
D) Psychiatrists are expensive and are, for the most part, simply pill pushers who do little in the actual treatment; they Rx meds and see their patients for 5-15 minutes for med reviews and are extremely overpaid for this
E) Many psychiatrists forget real medicine after practicing psychiatry for years. They forget how to read lab reports, MRIs, etc. You don't use it, you lose it.

So, your argument was? :)
Click to expand...

PhDs are "real doctors?" When someone says, "I'm going to see my doctor," they are most certainly referring to their PhD history professor. Give me a break. :laugh:

The fact that OB/Gyns and family docs are prescribing psychotropic meds is MUCH better than having a psychologist with minimal training in psychopharmacology and NO training in medicine doing it. Similarly, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, NPs, and PAs all receive rigorous training in medicine at the PREDOCTORAL level, and many complete postdoctoral training in their respective fields before becoming licensed to practice.

Clinical psychology programs do not require their students to take ANY courses in the hard sciences at the predoctoral level. They want RxP but structure their programs around a 40-year-old training model. Clinical training includes nothing more than coursework and practica in psychological assessment and talk therapy (both of which are very poorly reimbursed, by the way). An introductory course in neuropsychology constitutes the extent of predoctoral coursework in the biological sciences. In fact, the APA only requires that predoctoral clinical psychology students take ONE COURSE in "biological bases of behavior." I challenge you to articulate how this is sufficient training to prepare psychologists to prescribe psychotropic meds and manage complications that may arise when treating medical patients with psychiatric disorders. Same goes for the weekend seminar programs in psychopharmacology. They simply do not provide enough training to ensure that their graduates can provide safe and effective psychopharmacologic care.

Let me guess...you're an undergrad who is considering clinical psychology because you're afraid of med school? My advice: suck it up and pursue medical school. It's really not that grueling, and you'll learn a wealth of information that will allow you to understand and treat the TOTAL human organism. Why take the easy way out when you'll likely regret it in the end?

Here's an idea...attend a clinical psychology program for a couple days. Make sure you go to their clinical teams and see what kinds of patients they "treat" and the "treatment" modalities that they employ. Then attend medical school for a couple days (first or second year for one day, third year for another day), and shadow a psychiatrist on an inpatient floor.

I welcome your impressions of the differences.
 
A clinical psychologist, who is fully licensed and holds a PhD or PsyD degree with APA approved internship/residency, and advanced training in psychopharmacology, would be more than qualified to Rx psychotropic meds.

Care to back it up other than repeating the DOD study, which is essentially flawed?

Some facts to consider:

A) Most prescribers of psychotropics are NOT psychiatrists, but rather OB-GYNS, internists, Family docs, or neurologists.
B) Most practitioners who Dx mental illness are from the above list or MSWs, not psychiatrists
C) Many psychiatrists in the US are foreign educated with little training in psychopharmacology. In fact, many of these foreign trained psychiatrists (with bachelor's degrees in medicine, not MDs or DOs), are from countries that don't view common mental illnesses like depression or anxiety the same way as Americans or other Westerners do) and many of these foreign trained psychiatrists are responsible for many deaths each year due to irresponsible Rx'ing.

Again, can you provide some data wrt the FMGs? Or is it just your frustation that MSWs and even college graduates are eating away your share of pie? ;)

D) Psychiatrists are expensive and are, for the most part, simply pill pushers who do little in the actual treatment; they Rx meds and see their patients for 5-15 minutes for med reviews and are extremely overpaid for this
Yup! This is the core belief. :D
E) Many psychiatrists forget real medicine after practicing psychiatry for years. They forget how to read lab reports, MRIs, etc. You don't use it, you lose it.
Again, prove it.

And for Janusdog, psychosom med essentially means consult-liasion psych. Now there has been an accred fellowship in it which trains a psych resident to practice psychiatry in the medically ill pt or the other way round.
However it's what the job description says-the CL psych does a lot more than that.
Neuroimaging techniques are a part of regular psychiatric work-up. There is nothing special about them.
 
Anubis84 said:
True, psychiatrists are medical doctors (or better yet, physicians, since they aren't real doctors like PhDs -- just holders of professional degrees), and do have medical training, but what's the real issue here? Is it turf protection and fear of obsolescence? Let's take a look at some other professions that have Rx privileges and are not medical doctors:

1. Dentists - are not physicians and have pretty extensive RxP; in fact, in most states, they can Rx narcotics!

2. Podiatrists - are not physicians and can Rx a wide range of meds and even perform surgery (shudder!).

3. Optometrists - are definitely not physicians, have very little medical training, and can Rx some basic meds like topicals and antibiotics in some states. Since they are glorified technicians and not true primary health care professionals, this is scary.

4. Nurse Practitioners - who only have a master's degree, and in some cases, less, can Rx under physician protocols, but in some states, have full RxP.

5. PAs - can Rx under physician supervision, and some of the PAs have only an associate's or bachelor's degree.

So, given this, why is it that psychiatrists are so hostile about psychologists getting RxPs? They didn't do a good job at keeping these other professions from gaining RxPs, did they?

A clinical psychologist, who is fully licensed and holds a PhD or PsyD degree with APA approved internship/residency, and advanced training in psychopharmacology, would be more than qualified to Rx psychotropic meds. I mean, if an optometrist (who doesn't even need a bachelor's degree to get into optometry school) can Rx antibiotics, and an NP with a master's can Rx psychotropics, why not a PsyD/PhD? Optometrists have less pharmacology in their training than associate's-level paramedics and they somehow got RxPs! Nurses? PAs? Come on!

Some facts to consider:

A) Most prescribers of psychotropics are NOT psychiatrists, but rather OB-GYNS, internists, Family docs, or neurologists.
B) Most practitioners who Dx mental illness are from the above list or MSWs, not psychiatrists
C) Many psychiatrists in the US are foreign educated with little training in psychopharmacology. In fact, many of these foreign trained psychiatrists (with bachelor's degrees in medicine, not MDs or DOs), are from countries that don't view common mental illnesses like depression or anxiety the same way as Americans or other Westerners do) and many of these foreign trained psychiatrists are responsible for many deaths each year due to irresponsible Rx'ing.
D) Psychiatrists are expensive and are, for the most part, simply pill pushers who do little in the actual treatment; they Rx meds and see their patients for 5-15 minutes for med reviews and are extremely overpaid for this
E) Many psychiatrists forget real medicine after practicing psychiatry for years. They forget how to read lab reports, MRIs, etc. You don't use it, you lose it.

So, your argument was? :)
Click to expand...


Most of what you said has already been addressed by others, but I'd like to clear up a few things as best I can.

Optometrists, while not having as much medical training as MDs, are hardly glorified technicians. Also, they definitely are primary health care professionals. Even ophthalmologists (optometrists' rival when it comes to scope of practice) will say that ODs are good primary health care providers, taking care of minor problems while referring larger problems to the MDs. ODs also, I'm fairly certain, do have to have a bachelor's degree to attend optometry school. Not being a paramedic, I can't say in any certainty that ODs have less training in pharmacology. However, I would be willing to bet that, at the very least, ODs have more indepth training when it comes to ocular medicines.

All of that being said, I don't know enough to comment on the MD/Pysch debate here. I merely wanted to step in and, hopefully, correct a few errors that you made. If anything I said is incorrect, please correct me as I'd rather be corrected than be wrong and not know it.
 
boxerman said:
First of all, to address your arguement about Dentists and others with script rights all of those professions you listed at least have medical training (except the optometristist and they aren't scripting the powerful psychotropic meds we are discussing so they really don't count). But, the others do have medical training, most PA's and NP's know how to look at an EKG and understand what QTc prolongation means and why that is relavant for certain psych meds, psychologists can't even order the test, much less have they had training about what its results mean. Furthermore, those other medical professionals, again not the optometrists, are more likely to appreciate the manifestations of hyponatremia induced by a psych med, because they have very likely seen clinical cases of hyponatremia in other settings. In my graduate training in psychology we saw none of those, nor did we have even the basics of medical training I have learned during Medical school. It is absolutely ludicris and arrogant that anyone without medical training could truely believe they will be competant to use these medications safely over time. Yes, I know about the DOD reports. I still am convinced that in the long run the patient whom we are supposed to serve will suffer.
Click to expand...


A dentist has medical training? Hmm, ya? I don't think so. A dentist prescribes some powerful meds -- more powerful than psychotropics. Narcos, etc. How much pharmacology do they really know? I agree, clinical psychologists don't know squat diddly about lab reports, EKGs, contraindications, etc. Dentists know almost nothing about clinical medicine, yet the Rx meds and seem to do a good job overall. NPs and PAs have a master's or undergrad degree and while they have medical training, it's nothing on par of an MD or DO, yet they seem to be prescribing fairly safely with few accidents or fatalities. In fact, according to some research reports from the Nursing Associations, NPs are typically better at diagnosing and prescribing than internists, who usually rush through things.

The psychologists who have RxP in NM and in the military have extensive training in pharmacology and advanced training in clinical medicine. While they know much less than an MD, they know enough to safely prescribe without killing anyone or causing any harm. In fact, the DoD report indicated that the psychologists with RxP prescribed psychotropics much more safely than most internists, OG-GYNs, and many foreign-trained psychiatrists, especially the ones in the VA hospitals.
 
PublicHealth said:
PhDs are "real doctors?" When someone says, "I'm going to see my doctor," they are most certainly referring to their PhD history professor. Give me a break. :laugh:

The fact that OB/Gyns and family docs are prescribing psychotropic meds is MUCH better than having a psychologist with minimal training in psychopharmacology and NO training in medicine doing it. Similarly, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, NPs, and PAs all receive rigorous training in medicine at the PREDOCTORAL level, and many complete postdoctoral training in their respective fields before becoming licensed to practice.

Clinical psychology programs do not require their students to take ANY courses in the hard sciences at the predoctoral level. They want RxP but structure their programs around a 40-year-old training model. Clinical training includes nothing more than coursework and practica in psychological assessment and talk therapy (both of which are very poorly reimbursed, by the way). An introductory course in neuropsychology constitutes the extent of predoctoral coursework in the biological sciences. In fact, the APA only requires that predoctoral clinical psychology students take ONE COURSE in "biological bases of behavior." I challenge you to articulate how this is sufficient training to prepare psychologists to prescribe psychotropic meds and manage complications that may arise when treating medical patients with psychiatric disorders. Same goes for the weekend seminar programs in psychopharmacology. They simply do not provide enough training to ensure that their graduates can provide safe and effective psychopharmacologic care.

Let me guess...you're an undergrad who is considering clinical psychology because you're afraid of med school? My advice: suck it up and pursue medical school. It's really not that grueling, and you'll learn a wealth of information that will allow you to understand and treat the TOTAL human organism. Why take the easy way out when you'll likely regret it in the end?

Here's an idea...attend a clinical psychology program for a couple days. Make sure you go to their clinical teams and see what kinds of patients they "treat" and the "treatment" modalities that they employ. Then attend medical school for a couple days (first or second year for one day, third year for another day), and shadow a psychiatrist on an inpatient floor.

I welcome your impressions of the differences.
Click to expand...

First off, you're right...in the US, the term doctor denotes medical people...usually an MD or DO. However, the word doctor is from Latin, to teach. Physicians stole the title from theologians and academics. I don't know why, but over the years, the common person only saw physicians and not PhDs, so it took on a new meaning of physician. So, in a way you're right, but from an academic perspective, an MD, DDS, JD, DVM, PharmD, DPM, etc., are just professional degrees, not doctoral degrees. However, compare a PhD in history to an MD in neurosurgery....of course the MD is harder and more rigorous, no one would argue that.

However, optometry? Chiropractic? Podiatry? Damn, you don't even need a bachelor's to get into those programs and they are NOT trained in rigorous medicine. I don't know what you mean by "dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, NPs, and PAs all receive rigorous training in medicine at the PREDOCTORAL level." Are you talking about their undergrad training? Hmm, so you're equating a BS in pre-med, which is basically bio, chem, and physics, with rigorous training in medicine? What the hell does zoology, cell biology, and molar equations have to do with clinical medicine? Do you call 2 years of undergrad at a community college rigorous medical training? Many PA programs consist of an associate's degree or a BS degree. How rigorous is this? MCAT? Residency? USMLE? Hell no! Almost anyone with some intelligence can get into nursing school or PA school. ******s can get into optometry or chiro school. Prisoners can get into podiatry school. You don't even need a BS/BA to get into Opt/chiro school! So, tell me, doc, how rigorous are these predoctoral programs?

Do they have more medical training than clinical psychology? Well, certainly an optometrist knows ocular anatomy and physiology and refractive optical physics, but how much basic neurology does he know? How much vascular medicine does he know? Does an optometrist truly understand the dynamics of proliferative diabetic retinopathy? Does an OD have any clue how photocoagulation works or how to perform laser surgery? Does an OD really understand pharmacology and drug interactions? HELL NO!

What about an NP? They sure know a lot more than optometrists, but optometrists somehow fooled some politicians into granting them RxP in many states, with little to NO real medical training.

Tell me how much clinical medicine a dentist has to know. Seriously, other than dental surgery and disease, how much does a dentist know about lab reports, drug interactions, etc. I don't know, but I don't think much...but maybe I'm wrong.

In LA, the state legislature mandated a clinical psychologist who wishes to have RxP to have a (1) A PhD or PsyD in clinical psychology with full licensure; (2) a master's degree in psychopharmacology from an APA approved program in pharmacology; (3) passage of several certifying examinations; and (4) training in CPR, clincial laboratory medicine, and other medical procedures.

I agree, this doesn't make these PhDs psychiatrists. However, it does fill a void in the mental health care field and, so far, it seems to be working okay. Like NPs and PAs, the PhDs would work under physicians or with teams of physicians who would guide them. Over time, Rx'ing would become rote and second nature. Patient comes in with endogenous depression, you do a hx and find out he's on an ACE inhibitor for HTN. You Rx an SSRI instead of an MAOI or something because of contraindication. You don't need an MD to know that...you learn it after a while. If some low-level LPN can understand that, why can't a PhD with a master's in pharmacology learn it?

No one is suggesting you just give all clin. psychologists RxP and let them go at it. We're saying, traing them effectively and see how it works. Have safety protocols in place and double check their work. If other non physicians can do it safely, then why not doctorally-prepared mental health professionals?

yes, I'm an undergraduate student at Michigan State University. I'm 20 years old and I'm a pre-med major with plans on going for my MD or my PharmD after I get my BS in biology with a minor in chemistry and political science. I have NO plans on going on for a PHD because I hate research and I love money too much! :) I want to be a physician (plastic surgeon) or a clinical pharmacist (who know tons more about meds than any MD!!!!) in a hospital. I still don't know what I want to do, but I would never be a clinical psychologist.
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
Most of what you said has already been addressed by others, but I'd like to clear up a few things as best I can.

Optometrists, while not having as much medical training as MDs, are hardly glorified technicians. Also, they definitely are primary health care professionals. Even ophthalmologists (optometrists' rival when it comes to scope of practice) will say that ODs are good primary health care providers, taking care of minor problems while referring larger problems to the MDs. ODs also, I'm fairly certain, do have to have a bachelor's degree to attend optometry school. Not being a paramedic, I can't say in any certainty that ODs have less training in pharmacology. However, I would be willing to bet that, at the very least, ODs have more indepth training when it comes to ocular medicines.

All of that being said, I don't know enough to comment on the MD/Pysch debate here. I merely wanted to step in and, hopefully, correct a few errors that you made. If anything I said is incorrect, please correct me as I'd rather be corrected than be wrong and not know it.
Click to expand...

My cousin recently graduated from Ferris State University with his OD. He attended Central Michigan Univ. for 2 years as a biology major, got good grades, took the necessary pre-reqs, and was admitted into the OD program at FSU. He has one degree: an OD. He has 6 years of schooling, whereas most physicians have 8 years of formal education. A physician has to go through a comprehensive residency lasting 3-9 years, depending on the specialty. An optometrist does not have to do any residency, but can on an optional basis. To get into medical school, even a bottom tier medical school, one needs excellent grades and a BS/BA, plus good scores on the MCAT. To get into a good optometry school, you would need a BA/BS, but to get into most optometry schools, just 2-3 years of college with certain prerequisites. Good grades are not always necessary since one can get into an OD program with a 2.0 or 2.5. Some schools require the OAT (optom. admission test), others don't.

By law, in most states, an OD cannot diagnose or treat ocular disease...they can only refer to an MD/DO. By law, in all states, an OD cannot perform surgery, assist in the performance of surgery, or Rx medications that are beyond the approved protocol. To do so = the unauthorized practice of medicine. Patients only come to the optometrist to get a basic vision exam and prescriptions for lenses or contacts, NOT medical treatment.

To be considered a primary health care provider, one must render medical services that constitute diagnosis, treatment, prevention, etc. Dentists do this. NPs do this. Chiros do this to some extent. Psychologists do this. Optometrists most certainly do not. An OD can easily diagnose glaucoma or macular degeneration, but he/she can only refer the patient to an MD or DO; he/she cannot treat the patient or even diagnose the condition.

The only thing they might be able to do is to say, "you have conjunctivitis". In most states,they can't even Rx a simple topical antibiotic...and thank God they can't since they have piss poor training in medicine.

No, I have no respect for ODs to do anything other than examine my vision and Rx corrective lenses. They are technicians, not medical professionals...just like PTs.

You cannot even compare an OD to the rigors of medical or osteopathic school. Dental school and vet school are definitely on par with medical school. Pharmacy school is rapidly approaching the rigors of medical school with increasing admission requirements and enhanced curricula for the PharmD, but optometry is a joke among most health care professionals. naturopathy and chiro even more so. They are definitely not worthy of the title "doctor".

By the way, did you know that even the worst doctors, the ones who have restricted licenses, can practice in VA hospitals? Most physicians working at VA hospitals are pathetic and the services our veterans receive is pure crap. I would rather see an OD than a VA doctor any day! Most can't even speak English.
 
:D I have more than 1 year's residency as a psychiatrist in XI'an and Changsha China,but I still think it is very difficult to prescribe,ESP,for rapid cycling BPD.So,how can a psychologist make a prescription???I am certain They may kill some one sooner or later! It is my idea.
 
平一指 said:
:D I have more than 1 year's residency as a psychiatrist in XI'an and Changsha China,but I still think it is very difficult to prescribe,ESP,for rapid cycling BPD.So,how can a psychologist make a prescription???I am certain They may kill some one sooner or later! It is my idea.
Click to expand...

How do things work in China when you're a psychiatrist pursuing graduate training in psychology. Will this training complement your medical/psychiatric training in any way?
 
-------Actually, clinical psychology PhD programs are much more difficult to obtain entrance into than medical school. IMO, they are also much harder. Med students really cannot "flunk" out while psych grad students can. Med students do not have to take rigorous courses in stats and research methods (which teaches us to be critical thinkers); med students just do rote memorization.

Hmmm, I see many inpatients with very complex situations. Korsakoff's versus AIDS dementia vs. delirium, Alcohol induced psychosis versus AIDS dementia, etc. It appears that you really don't know what psychologists do. However, you soon will because we are going to become ascendant in the mental health field, and rightfully so... The best diagnosticians, treatment providers and soon to be the best prescribers!


PublicHealth said:
PhDs are "real doctors?" When someone says, "I'm going to see my doctor," they are most certainly referring to their PhD history professor. Give me a break. :laugh:
HMMM..
The fact that OB/Gyns and family docs are prescribing psychotropic meds is MUCH better than having a psychologist with minimal training in psychopharmacology and NO training in medicine doing it. Similarly, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, NPs, and PAs all receive rigorous training in medicine at the PREDOCTORAL level, and many complete postdoctoral training in their respective fields before becoming licensed to practice.

Clinical psychology programs do not require their students to take ANY courses in the hard sciences at the predoctoral level. They want RxP but structure their programs around a 40-year-old training model. Clinical training includes nothing more than coursework and practica in psychological assessment and talk therapy (both of which are very poorly reimbursed, by the way). An introductory course in neuropsychology constitutes the extent of predoctoral coursework in the biological sciences. In fact, the APA only requires that predoctoral clinical psychology students take ONE COURSE in "biological bases of behavior." I challenge you to articulate how this is sufficient training to prepare psychologists to prescribe psychotropic meds and manage complications that may arise when treating medical patients with psychiatric disorders. Same goes for the weekend seminar programs in psychopharmacology. They simply do not provide enough training to ensure that their graduates can provide safe and effective psychopharmacologic care.

Let me guess...you're an undergrad who is considering clinical psychology because you're afraid of med school? My advice: suck it up and pursue medical school. It's really not that grueling, and you'll learn a wealth of information that will allow you to understand and treat the TOTAL human organism. Why take the easy way out when you'll likely regret it in the end?



Here's an idea...attend a clinical psychology program for a couple days. Make sure you go to their clinical teams and see what kinds of patients they "treat" and the "treatment" modalities that they employ. Then attend medical school for a couple days (first or second year for one day, third year for another day), and shadow a psychiatrist on an inpatient floor.

Hmmm, I see many inpatients with very complex situations. Korsakoff's versus AIDS dementia vs. delirium, Alcohol induced psychosis versus AIDS dementia, etc. It appears that you really don't know what psychologists do. However, you soon will because we are going to become ascendant in the mental health field, and rightfully so... The best diagnosticians, treatment providers and soon to be the best prescribers!

I welcome your impressions of the differences.
Click to expand...
 
edieb said:
-------Actually, clinical psychology PhD programs are much more difficult to obtain entrance into than medical school. IMO, they are also much harder. Med students really cannot "flunk" out while psych grad students can. Med students do not have to take rigorous courses in stats and research methods (which teaches us to be critical thinkers); med students just do rote memorization.

Hmmm, I see many inpatients with very complex situations. Korsakoff's versus AIDS dementia vs. delirium, Alcohol induced psychosis versus AIDS dementia, etc. It appears that you really don't know what psychologists do. However, you soon will because we are going to become ascendant in the mental health field, and rightfully so... The best diagnosticians, treatment providers and soon to be the best prescribers!
Click to expand...

Who invented this notion that med students cannot "flunk" out? From what I've seen over the years, the beginning medical school class is often pared down significantly after the first few tests. I've heard of much fewer graduate students failing out after obtaining entrance. Almost 10 people failed out of my medical school class in the first year alone. Considering that in most psych grad programs, there are only a handful of students....as opposed to medical school where there are 100-300 others in your class, I would think they have more invested in a graduate student than a med student.

In psych grad school you take only a few statistics classes, some of which are largely theoretical. You have no idea how much "rote memorization" there actually is in medical school. It's not as easy as you even begin to think it is. Your post reflects a gross ignorance of typical medical school curricula and coursework. Critical thinkers are what medical doctors are trained to be. It's hard to believe the complete lack of understanding you have for the training methodologies undertaken in med school. Every medical school teaches their students to critically assess patients signs, symptoms, and think down to the molecular levels, in some cases, something as simple as cough (while assessing other comorbid conditions, medications, previous reactions, relevant family genetic contributions to efficacy of treatment, etc, etc.) Many medical conditions cannot be diagnosed on simple lab tests or physical exam alone. Critical thinking forces the doctor down multiple paths, forcing him or her to gather data from multiple sources (lab/physical/history/imaging/signs/symptoms), make crucial choices and reassess their own evaluations of the patient at each step. When mistakes are made people can become sicker, delay lifesaving treatment or even die.

To call yourself the "best diagnosticians, treatment providers and soon to be the best prescribers!" is laughable considering the complete lack of understanding for what physicians do on a daily basis. Considering that psychologists have no training in medicine, and eons less even after completing the master's psychopharm degree, you are less qualified to diagnose and treat the conditions that you mention. The best prescribers? With attitudes like this, considering a practically zero-level experience and lack of understanding of medicine, surgery, related subspecialty fields, and no experience in clinical medicine rotations, I fear for your future patients. I suggest you humble yourself before another physician has to.
 
PublicHealth said:
How do things work in China when you're a psychiatrist pursuing graduate training in psychology. Will this training complement your medical/psychiatric training in any way?
Click to expand...

China is a very very imbalance country :at rural areas, doctors only studied medicine at middle school for 3 years then get a licence of rural doctor .They can practise medicine at rural areas,but can not in the city. Now we have 5 or 7 course for medical student in the city: a 5 year student study science and liberal art for about 1 year and medicine for 4 years, a 7 year student study total 6 years and leave the last year for research work. After graduation and one year's residency, we take a pass/not exam, then get licenced and the privilege to prescribe medications. But if we want to work at a good hospital ,we should have a residency of at least 5 years. Doctors working in big hospitals without 5 years residency should be under other doctors supervision.
I do not know how long my medical residency should be:if I want to work at high school as a counsellor, I think one year's residency is enough and if I want to work at a big hospital as a "psychology doctor" ,I do think my medical residency should be at least 4 years. Actually,some one said a Chinese "psychology doctor" should have a medical degree and one year's residency as a psychiatrist,some one said the residency should be at least 5 years.
China is just a developing coutry,but a"psychology doctor" should spend at least 5 years in learning medicine then get the privilege to prescribe. :eek: So I do think it is strange for the "360 hours and every 3rd weekend" program in your country.
 
PublicHealth said:
Here's an idea...attend a clinical psychology program for a couple days. Make sure you go to their clinical teams and see what kinds of patients they "treat" and the "treatment" modalities that they employ. Then attend medical school for a couple days (first or second year for one day, third year for another day), and shadow a psychiatrist on an inpatient floor.
Click to expand...

I am learning this way!!! I am doing my BDD research now and will receive half a year's residency of neurology.
 
I have a PhD in psych. and Rx as an FNP working in pvt. practice and doing C/L in hospital.

I am now looking for an MD program because I feel that I need to know more to do Rxing right.

I simply can not imagine how Medical Psychologists can begin to be safe Rxing practitioners.

BTW: Any leads on med. schools that might give some credit for what I have already done and will accept a 48 y/o with good grades and now studying for MCAT? Now I'm only looking at Big Three in Caribbean.

Thanks for any and all leads.
 
Judging from all of your postings' grammatical mistakes, I really doubt you're either a Ph.D. psycholgist or a nurse practitioner. Since you have not undergone the coursework to become a prescribing psychologist, you are making an uninformed judgement as to how comprehensive the coursework is. The coursework is much more comprehensive than any NP training. If all these gaffes on your part are not enough, you come to a forum which is frequented by people you don't even know and ask them whether or not you should go to medical school. If you are a psychologist and are going to medical school, psychology's gain is medicine's loss...
 
I know you are wrong, believe you are rude and sincerely hope you are a better clinician than colleague.
 
This kind of reminds me of how optometrists are able to do more and more of what an ophthalmologist does. Ten years ago, optometrists weren't allowed to diagnose some conditions of the eyes, now they can write prescriptions. No offense to the optometrists, but I do feel it is an insult to the ophthalmologists who have more extensive training and in my opinion, are the proper authority to make that judgment.
 
genung said:
BTW: Any leads on med. schools that might give some credit for what I have already done and will accept a 48 y/o with good grades and now studying for MCAT? Now I'm only looking at Big Three in Caribbean.

Thanks for any and all leads.
Click to expand...

Why are you only looking at SGU, Ross, and AUC?
Have you considered the DO route?
What about Drexel?
 
:) Thank you for the Drexel lead.
I just E-mailed my older applicant question to them.
I am hoping that there is a US school that will consider
someone my age.

In my area there are VERY few DOs in practice.

Thanks again....
 
edieb said:
-------Actually, clinical psychology PhD programs are much more difficult to obtain entrance into than medical school. IMO, they are also much harder. Med students really cannot "flunk" out while psych grad students can. Med students do not have to take rigorous courses in stats and research methods (which teaches us to be critical thinkers); med students just do rote memorization.

Hmmm, I see many inpatients with very complex situations. Korsakoff's versus AIDS dementia vs. delirium, Alcohol induced psychosis versus AIDS dementia, etc. It appears that you really don't know what psychologists do. However, you soon will because we are going to become ascendant in the mental health field, and rightfully so... The best diagnosticians, treatment providers and soon to be the best prescribers!
Click to expand...

Haven't been on this site in a while, been busy doing RESIDENCY. I just had to respond to your cavalier attitude. It's people like you with your self-inflated ego and cavalier attitude that will KILL patients. I've had 4 years of med school which included 2 years of clinical experience and am halfway through my intern year and I'm still afraid of making a mistake and hopefully I'll always feel that way. My biggest fear is doing something wrong and causing harm to the patient. What will you do when sombody is actively seizing in your unit, has EKG changes, Cellulitis, Hypotention, Allergic drug reaction, acute angle glaucoma? Those are some of the problems I've dealt with this week on a PSYCH unit! I apologize, but knowing statistics and criticaly evaluating research won't mean a rat's ass when dealing with REAL people. Believe me when I say you can't sepate the medicine from the psych. There isn't a vacuum when it comes to drugs. I'm humbled EVERY DAY I'm in the hospital as there is so much to know and never enough time to learn it all. When and if you ever get prescription rights, I pray for your patients. God only knows how many people will get killed with that attitude. It's certainly not becoming of a doctor, but then again, you're not one anyway!
 
I'm a third year psych resident, and while I am not happy the psyDs will be able to prescribe, I can't say I'm surprised. What's really going to hurt us is how it will affect reimbursement. Insurance cos. will divert to psychologists, who will cost less, and provide therapy.

Read this:


http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/index.php?p=59&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Things will be different in a few years, I think.
 
elisamaulin said:
I'm a third year psych resident, and while I am not happy the psyDs will be able to prescribe, I can't say I'm surprised. What's really going to hurt us is how it will affect reimbursement. Insurance cos. will divert to psychologists, who will cost less, and provide therapy.

Read this:


http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/index.php?p=59&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Things will be different in a few years, I think.
Click to expand...

That site reads like a more streamlined version of some CCHR/Scientology nonsense. There's great quotes like the "Myths" section: who makes these Myths up? Certainly not psychiatrists. Several of the "Myths" actual contradict confabulated information. Like when in an argument with someone who says things like "People say that x is y but I don't think so" thereby exonerating themselves. The initial fact is bollocks and it is pure management/bull**** speak - introduce a false concept as someone else's fact and then distance yourself. (e.g., French people being cheese eating surrender monkeys, 35 billion in aid to asian tsunami victims after UN criticism when it's really only 35 million, etc.,).

MYTH #1: Antidepressants induce mania: says who? Where are the studies and so can ECT but this will boggle the mind of the non-psychiatrist: ECT can also *cure* mania! Woooo! Soo many contradictions!

MYTH #2: Antidepressants prevent (or cause) suicide: again, WTF says this? honestly this is just laughable.

MYTH #3: Depakote is a mood stabilizer: yes it is, no ****ing question. Check the mountains of studies.

And so on, and so on., even MYTH #4: Bipolar is a kindled disorder of the CNS and "neurologists laugh at "us". Well seeing as it has been visualised on fMRI and no neurologists don't laugh at us given the increasing cross over of mental illness and the fact that the mind doesn't exist without the brain, I mean come on. Using the "us" is just bollocks again, to appear to the ignorant passer by that it's a disillusioned psychiatrist.

That site is pure BS. The domain was registered on Nov 30th, has numerous such "articles" with zero comments. I could'nt even find it in Google with a " " search so by you coming here and posting it as your first post then I have to say I think you are BS and the post be stricken from the forum as it leads to misinformation.

The Whois info is protected by ProtectFly. I would question a "psychiatrist" who doesn't enter into reaosnable debate in reality or provide a point of contact in the real world.

Tell me, why is it your first post on this forum is to advertise and link a site that isn't even findable in Google by *accident*.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

P
When to contact prescribing physician?
Replies
15
Views
728
Stagg737
Stagg737
A
APA guidelines on benzodiazepine use
Replies
9
Views
907
annoyedpsychiatrist
A
A
I moved to New Zealand AMA
Replies
40
Views
2K
trophyhusband
T
PikminOC
Free E Prescribing programs?
Replies
7
Views
1K
whopper
whopper
N
Insurance credentialing hospital privilege
Replies
7
Views
547
When is graduation again?
When is graduation again?
Top