iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Allen Frances

GET UPDATES FROM Allen Frances
 

America Is Over Diagnosed and Over Medicated

Posted: 01/09/2012 10:48 am

The history of medicine has its glorious moments, but is also littered with false theories, blind allies, and harmful treatments. The emergence of invasive therapies in ancient Greece inspired Hippocrates to make 'First, Do No Harm' the foundational injunction of western medicine. Psychiatric medicines are quite effective when correctly prescribed for clearcut disorders. But Americans are taking too much medicine, often casually and unnecessarily prescribed by the wrong people for the wrong reasons, and causing lots of needless harm.

The really bad news is that the bulk of psychiatry is no longer done by psychiatrists. Psychiatric medicines are most often prescribed by primary care doctors who are always busy and usually under trained in psychiatry. And their diagnostic and treatment decisions are heavily influenced by drug company advertising aimed directly at patients combined with aggressive marketing campaigns aimed at doctors.

The result is massive overprescription of medicine for off label, untested, and inappropriate indications. Drug companies have more unregulated freedom in the U.S. than anywhere else in the world to push their product where it does not belong. Their success is measured in returns to shareholders, not benefits to patients.

It simply makes no sense that the antipsychotics are now the largest revenue producers among all classes of medicines -- bringing in $15 billion per year -- much of it coming from excessive use in vulnerable populations of children and the elderly. Antipsychotics often cause large weight gains increasing the risks of diabetes, heart disease, and shortened life expectancy. Almost equally concerning is that eleven percent of U.S. adults are taking an antidepressant medicine, making these the fourth most lucrative class for drug companies. Perversely, only a third of severely depressed people get the medicine they so desperately need, while many taking antidepressants do not need them at all and receive no more than placebo effect. And 4% of our kids are on stimulants for ADD, sometimes without a careful diagnostic workup and consideration of alternative approaches. A large secondary market has encouraged a third of college students to use stimulants for performance enhancement and/or recreation. We seem to be creating a brave new world in which everyone will take a psychiatric medicine, and some will take two or three or even more.

Psychiatric diagnosis and treatment is particularly subject to fads and undue drug company influence because judgments are still based on subjective data that cannot be confirmed or disproved by laboratory tests. The pride of psychiatry is the enormous neuroscience base accumulated in the past thirty years, but the brain is the most complicated organ in the known universe and reveals its many secrets only very slowly. We have learned a great deal about normal brain functioning -- but still know very little about what causes the mental disorders. This enormous leap from basic brain science to clinical psychiatry will take decades to bridge in very small steps. In the meantime, decisions about diagnosis and treatment are only as good as the people making them -- and too often they are made after brief and cursory evaluations that ignore best diagnostic and treatment practices.

I am a psychiatrist and was chair of the group that prepared DSM-IV -- the manual that currently guides psychiatric diagnosis. Sad to say, DSM-IV is often used carelessly or not at all (especially in primary care) -- resulting in a great deal of mislabeling and unnecessary treatment. The overdiagnosis of mental disorders has recently gotten out of hand with faddish false epidemics of childhood bipolar disorder (increased by forty fold), autism (increased by twenty fold), and attention deficit (doubled). One quarter of the general population would now qualify for a diagnosis in any given year, more than half lifetime.

The next edition of the diagnostic manual (DSM 5) is in preparation now and will become official in 2013. I'm terribly concerned that it will make our current worrying situation a great deal worse. Unless its ambitions are trimmed dramatically, DSM 5 will promote the misdiagnosis of tens of millions of people and an even greater misuse of potentially harmful medication. It proposes to introduce many new diagnoses and broaden the criteria for existing ones. Normal grief will be mislabeled major depression; everyday worries, stress, and sadness will become mixed anxiety/depression; one episode of binge eating a week will label you mentally ill; older people with expectable memory problems will be inaccurately warned that they are on the road to dementia; difficult to manage kids will be given unproven diagnoses that will lead to even more misuse of antipsychotic drugs, and there will be a further boost to the false epidemic of attention deficit disorder.

The people working on DSM 5 mean well, are not drug company shills, and genuinely believe their suggestions will help patients. The problem is that they are researchers who have worked in ivory tower settings with little experience in how the diagnostic manual is often misunderstood and misused in actual practice. A suggestion that might be fine in their own hands can cause disaster if misapplied by a less expert primary care doctor. As researchers they are much less worried than I am that their proposals are largely untested. They call them 'scientific hypotheses' that can always be tested and corrected after DSM 5 is published. This is dead wrong and dangerously reckless. DSM 5 will have a dramatic effect on peoples lives and everything in it must be certified safe and scientifically sound.

Final decisions on DSM 5 will be made soon. I will post a series of blogs highlighting its worst proposals and updating the efforts to shoot them down before they can become official. Public health will be adversely affected by DSM 5 -- the public should become informed and have its say before it is too late.

Allen Frances is a professor emeritus at Duke University and was the chairman of the DSM-IV task force.

 
 
 
FOLLOW SCIENCE
 
 
  • Comments
  • 22
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:34 PM on 01/29/2012
It's not just psychiatric diagnoses that are over-prescribed for. I just finished a blog called "Life: The Ultimate Disease" in which I argue that we all are being over-diagnosed and over-prescribed for conditions that used to be just a part of life's passages. The current controversy over grief as a disorder is one example, as are menopause, peri-menopause, osteopenia, etc. It's happening to adults and children alike--over-diagnosed, over-medicated, often with drugs whose side effects are little understood. (See http://thepoliticali.blogspot.com/2012/01/life-ultimate-disease.html) Patients need to become better consumers and participate in these decisions.
07:14 PM on 01/12/2012
2(of 2)

A filing for Legal Guardianship has been approved, and amongst the various rights that have been revoked, is the right to approve, decline, or otherwise modify the proposed treatment plans devised by the medical staff.

I became confined to New Hampshire Hospital on May 28, 2011, under the tenets of an Involuntary Emergency Admission. Once one has been confined in such a manner, one may change one's status to voluntary. Such a change in status may reduce one's stay to a handful of days, whereas, if one remains held involuntarily, one's stay may extend to a number of years.

Being released from the hospital seems to become more a matter of leaving the hospital as soon as possible, rather than promoting health or allowing people the freedom to pursue avenues of their choice towards health and wellbeing.

I've devised two petitions in regard to this matter, and I pray that your heart may be touched.

The petitions may be found at the following addresses:

-----
US Citizens Are Being Confined Without Having Been Charged with a Crime.
http://www.change.org/petitions/governor-of-new-hampshire-us-citizens-are-being-confined-without-having-been-charged-with-a-crime
-----
Guardianship Granted to Those Who Are Shown to Be Abusive Influences
http://www.change.org/petitions/governor-of-new-hampshire-george-and-monica-lajoie-guardianship-granted-to-those-who-are-shown-to-be-abusive-influences?share_id=QsNkHeQSuH&
-----

Please offer your support in regard to this matter.

Take care,
Jeremy
07:11 PM on 01/12/2012
1(of 2)

In regard to being overmedicated, I have expressed on numerous occasions, that in my experience, not only are antipsychotics not beneficial towards health, they are abjectly harmful.

Under the influences of these substances, I find that cognition is crippled.

I much prefer the experience of life without these substances.

---
I am currently confined at New Hampshire Hospital, and I've indicated on numerous occasions that antipsychotics are, in my experience, harmful.

Such indications has been largely disregarded by the staff.

---
10:06 PM on 01/10/2012
The contrast between reason and nonsense is demonstrated here:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/08/allen-frances-thomas-insel-and-the-black-white-rise-of-autism-its-fashionable.html

Bad enough that parents are being fed such commentary that is so void of understanding or competence that it only serves to misinform.

But I think their true nature is revealed when they are so busy with the standard personal attacks that they can't even figure out that Allen is a man.

Sadly, a not trivial number of people fall for such nonsense.

W&N
12:50 PM on 01/10/2012
Lovely that Allen now rips into the DSM-5, but how to trust someone whose second paragraph is the presentation of psychiatrists as a class as somehow better, more ethical, better-informed, more responsible than other physicians or other therapists? Readers of what he writes here need to know that he has warned professionals who critique DSM-5 against aligning themselves with people in the anti-psychiatry movement. I can only assume that neither Allen nor anyone close to him has suffered at the hands of psychiatrists or other therapists, and people who raise questions about not only psychiatry but also other therapy disciplines are often precisely those people. For more than a quarter of a century, I have been involved in exposing the false claims to a scientific foundation that various DSM editors have made, and DSM-5 promises to be at least as unscientific and damaging as the previous editions. That is why we have formed the PLAN T Alliance (Psychiatric Labeling Action Network for Truth), which is focused on actions and not on more and more requests that the DSM editors listen to reason, for there is no cause to believe the current editors will listen any more than did Allen or his predecessor, Robert Spitzer. People wanting information about our actions and wishing to consider joining can contact me directly atpaulacaplan@gmail.com or soon watch for the PLAN T Alliance page on Facebook.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Doug Bremner
Doctor, author - 'Goose That Laid the Golden Egg'
11:35 AM on 01/10/2012
Thank you Dr. Frances for continuing to write about this topic. Academic psychiatry has developed a tin ear to the concerns of the public and other professions regarding the expansion of psychiatric diagnoses with the potential for increased use of psychotropic medications. We can no longer ignore the corrupting influence that the pharmaceutical industry has had on our medical educational system and by extension the practice of medicine and psychiatry in this country. This situation may take years to revert. Currently there is an open letter to DSM5 committee from the American Psychological Association-- i don't think we can continue to ignore these concerns.
http://dsm5-reform.com/the-open-letter-committee-calls-for-independent-review-of-dsm-5/
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
R.W. Sanders
Numerous questions, too little expertise
02:59 AM on 01/10/2012
I have 3 conditions that require medical care. In our health care system, I am forced to see a separate doctor for each. They often double test, and would double prescribe if I did not catch their error. Though definitely not wealthy, I do live in a very wealthy and sophisticated area so it is not as if there is a shortage of doctors, though far too many are plastic surgeons. So why cannot just one doctor treat me? That is how it was when I lived in a smaller and much more remote area. And I did better than I do now.

To me, over prescribing is just one problem.
02:26 AM on 01/10/2012
Allen Frances invited me to serve on two committees when he edited DSM-IV, and I resigned when I saw how, despite what he had claimed when issuing the invitation, they were NOT basing their decisions on well-done scientific research but instead ignored or distorted the research -- or worse -- when it suited them. I saw how they used poorly-done research (I am the co-author of a textbook about research methods) as though it were well-done when it suited them. Allen knows that, as I wrote in They Say You're Crazy: How the World's Most Powerful Psychiatrists Decide Who's Normal, when I called to ask if we could work together back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, saying that I kept hearing from people whose lives had been seriously damaged by the use of psychiatric diagnosis and that I wished he could tell me whether he at least had reason to believe that these labels did more good than harm, he responded, "Well, of course there's no way of knowing that." Strange response for someone who claimed he would create a diagnostic manual based on science. For him now to claim that the problems with DSM-IV came from its misuse or from overuse of diagnoses is stunning, given the vast number of in-depth documentations over two decades of the lack of science, overpowering role of politics and money (often via the DSM's connection with Pharma), and lives destroyed by DSM-IV editors' work.
09:41 PM on 01/09/2012
I believe that psychiatrists themselves need to take some of the blame for over medicating. Psychiatry has changed from the days of Freudian therapy, individial and group therapy. The present health system (insurance companies etc) is no longer paying psychiatrists all those high rates, thus they are making less money. The field of psychiatry, for the most part, is simply dispensing medications for a number of mental complaints, disordeers etc. There is very little therapy involved any longer.
Most importantly for those concerned about autism in the new DSM-V, as I am, autism cannot be catagorized along with mental disorders like depression, anxiety. Although those on the spectrum can often struggle with both, autism is a metabolic disorder affecting every organ in the body. So of course, the brain is also affected. But children with autism have many terrible physical disorders like oxidative stress, autoimmune disorder, inflammatory bowel disease-often seizures.
Personally I don't think autism belongs in the DSM at all.
08:13 PM on 01/09/2012
The DSM has become gospel in Health care and it is a dangerous didactic error to rely so heavily on it without having some informed knowledge of both the mental health issues and the client in question. I find the DSM helpful when speaking with other health care professionals but much less significant with the general population. Maybe more awareness aimed at the general population would be a benefit, focusing on caution...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amdachel
08:11 PM on 01/09/2012
So according to Dr. Frances all the autism is just one of the "faddish false epidemics" out there. There really aren't massive numbers of kids with learning problems. We've just had an "overdiagnosing of mental disorders."

Many parents struggling with autistic children want to know why a neurological condition is in the Manual of Mental Disorders in the first place. They'd also like to know why Frances ignores the stories of tens of thousands of parents who report that their child was born healthy and was developing normally until they received certain routine vaccinations. Suddenly those kids got sick with things like bowel disease, sleep disorders, and seizures. Many stopped talking and lost learned skills, eventually ending up with an autism diagnosis. Why does Frances neatly omit any mention of the concomitant health problems of so many children with autism?

Frances can't explain where all the autistic children are coming from so, according to him, they don't really have autism. I can't think of a worse example of the medical community simply turning their backs on an epidemic of sick children they can't reasonably explain.

Anne Dachel, Media editor: Age of Autism http://www.ageofautism.com/
09:21 PM on 01/09/2012
Since you were unable to correctly read Dr. Frances's comments I guess we shouldn't be surprised that you haven't followed the decades of data showing that these kids were not normally developing prior to vaccination.

Or that you will have missed the attempts by some to profit by hiding this from parents.

Good news: the courts haven't missed these facts. And things are looking pretty bad legal-wise for the vaccines cause autism crowd. The real question left is how many will end up convicted felons?

But then I don't think there has been any coverage of the these legal problems at Age of Autism. Wonder why....

W&N
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amdachel
12:04 AM on 01/10/2012
HDNet TV exposed the fact that while health officials continue to tell us studies show no link, the federal government has paid out millions of dollars for compensation for vaccine injuries that included autism. Seeing these children who were born healthy and were suddenly and dramatically affected by their vaccinations should give us all pause. http://www.ebcala.org/news/video
The federal government also conceded the vaccine damage case of Hannah Poling, a young Georgia girl who regressed into autism following her vaccinations.

See CBS News story from Sept, 2010http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20015982-10391695.html

Anne Dachel, Media editor: Age of Autism http://www.ageofautism.com/
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amdachel
12:07 AM on 01/10/2012
The short trailer to the movie, the Greater Good found on their website http://www.greatergoodmovie.org/experts-in-the-field makes it clear that there are experts on both side and a lot of serious questions that need to be asked. The medical community and health officials promote vaccines as the greatest achievement in modern medicine yet there is going fear over vaccine side effects.
Claire Dwoskin from the National Vaccine Information Center and Leslie Manookian, producer and writer of new movie, "The Greater Good," talked about vaccine safety claims with NY talk show host Thom Hartmann on Nov. 21. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38qPvdFit_U&feature=channel_video_title

They discussed the poor design of the research used as proof that vaccines are safe. No one ever talks about this!

Anne Dachel, Media editor: Age of Autism http://www.ageofautism.com/
07:46 AM on 01/10/2012
Based on your silence, I take it that Age of Autism will not post the legal actions against the biomed docs, testing labs, or lawyers?

Strange, you would think that if there were allegations that parents were being conned out of huge sums of money with useless/dangerous treatments you would want to post the legal proceedings.

Very strange indeed....

W&N
05:47 PM on 01/09/2012
There is a petition that asks the DSM-5 to reconsider some of these changes. We hope that if you are a mental health professional you might consider reading the petition and signing it.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dsm5/
photo
DannyHaszard
Danny Haszard Bangor Maine Educator
04:56 PM on 01/09/2012
Risperdal is a cousin of Zyprexa and Seroquel.
PTSD treatment for Veterans found ineffective.

Risperdal and Eli Lilly Zyprexa can cause diabetes.
This is a powerful drug that can damage a young person physiologically for life.
Please take with caution and learn as much as you can about side effects.
*FIVE at FIVE* The Zyprexa antipsychotic drug,whose side effects can include weight gain and diabetes, was sold for "children in foster care, people who have trouble sleeping, elderly in nursing homes.
*Five at Five* was the Zyprexa sales rep slogan, meaning *5mg dispensed at 5pm would keep patients quiet*.

WARNING- If a drug Risperdal (Zyprexa) lists anything about the pancreas among the side effects, it probably means it can cause diabetes.
Risperdal,Zyprexa is glorified Thorazine at ten times the price.
-- Daniel Haszard Zyprexa victim activist.

FMI
http://www.zyprexa-victims.com
02:44 PM on 01/09/2012
All true and there are may more problems with the DSM, including marginalization, cultural misalignment, constructed disorders and so on. AND most of it is not backed by any research at all. There are no researchers in ivory towers, there are drug companies and other special interests that construct these disorders. The clinical trials that are supposed to be in effect now, are bogged down in red tape. They have not begun to train clinicians. The DSM has been formed over time by practical needs of the census, the military and recently: insurance companies. Its foundations have changed with whims and fads such as Freudian theory, behaviorism and cognitive perspectives. It almost completely ignores context, culture, gender and class. I think there is little to salvage.
02:11 PM on 01/09/2012
There are also the problems of diagnoses denoting psychogenic explanations for somatic (physical) illnesses of uncertain aetiology The new categories of Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder (CSSD) and Simple Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSSD), and the diagnoses they may replace, result from a fallacy of assuming that, just because presenting somatic illnesses are not easily explained by immediately obvious organic processes, they are therefore ‘medically unexplained‘, and, by default, ‘psychogenic’ in nature.

These new categories will lead to greater misdiagnosis (even than is already unfortunately occurring) of organic illness as psychogenic, leading to psychogenic dismissal of illness symptoms and signs, both in patients given diagnoses denoting illnesses of uncertain aetiology (such as ME/CFS), and in patients with established ‘uncontested’ illnesses, such as cancer, AIDS and diabetes. They will lead to an epistemic ‘laziness’ preventing doctors from working to elucidate and treat organic dysfunction so patients are at risk of further harm.

While advances in psychiatric and medical reasoning might render the current DSM categories associated with default psychogenic explanations defunct, the insertion of CSSD and SSSD into DSM-5 is worrying because those who propose these new diagnoses clearly believe their propositions already denote advances in psychiatric thinking, when they do not. Erroneous confidence in their use appears high. Their insertion risks irrational ‘black-boxing’ of alleged but un-elucidated and therefore unsafely assumed ‘psychogenic’ processes, so that doctors will not be required to robustly defend the logic or rationality of their diagnosis, increasing the risk of misdiagnosis.