Talk:Posttraumatic stress disorder/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Prolonged Exposure

Such an argument would justify redeployment of troops to never ending rotations of duty, and also justify continued mental abuse under the pretexts of therapy. Becommming emotionally numb or nonreactive to unjustified adverse circumstances is not a therapuetic effect, it is just putting the patient (victim) in a more advanced stage of pathology.

71.114.183.105 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Prevalence section rewrite

I removed the Hurricane Katrina and 911 references in the "prevalence" section (and did a small rewrite). Hurricane Katrina is a major disaster that caused almost 2000 lives and 911 caused 3000 - a large number in American standards, but not anywhere else. It is nothing compared to the tsunami (last count was 230000) and certain other catastrophes that happened around the world and seem to be unnoticed by our comrades living in America, who continue to mourn over the nearly three deaths a day in Iraq. In fact, even the Iraq war caused more American casualties than 911, and for many, it is a much more daunting experience (with over a million casualties including civilians, directly or indirectly). I am in no way undermining the impact Hurricane Katrina and 911 had on many's emotional lives, but, in my assessment, it is ridiculous to compare it with the impact of the tsunami. I don't believe a significant number of PTSDs would result in 911 - the people directly affected, after all, are small, and I believe they have the ability to withstand the emotional impacts. The Indonesians would beg for a place on the World Trade Towers if they could. Herunar (talk) 19:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Double redirects

I've moved this talk page to match the article, but I see the article has a number of double redirects remaining from the move. I've fixed a few, but a number remain, and I don't have time to do these. See Special:WhatLinksHere/Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Could someone fix these please. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 11:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Revert

Just that. Someone had typed in a few rather malicious and misleading remarks. (NohraK (talk) 08:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC))

Politics of PTSD - need for separate article

Can we please make a new article or whatever about the politics of PTSD? This article here should be fairly clinical and objective. By having all these 'real world' examples such as the prevalence of PTSD following Katrina and whatever, it makes this article seem more inflammatory than anything else. I know that situations such as wartime exposure are high up there in terms of eliciting these traumatic reactions, but please, don't overburden this article with more writings about that.124.169.36.244 (talk) 03:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

updated causes section

I have updated the causes section, adding refs to the statements and deleting "or prolonged or extreme childhood neglect" since I was unable to find any support for this statement. I also added a ref from a recent JAMA study. ResearchEditor (talk) 03:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

fixing reference on veterans

I have fixed the LATimes ref on veterans, so it is wikified and easier to find if it moves.ResearchEditor (talk) 14:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Hippocampal Volume doesn't change

It is more likely that a small hippocampus is a risk factor in developing PTSD than PTSD causing shrinkage of the hippocampus. (Pitman et al., 2002) Therefor, a nuance must be made in the wiki-article.

reverting vandalism

I have reverted recent vandalism to the page. ResearchEditor (talk) 14:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

is this vandalism?

"In some cases it can also be from great emotional stress when someone has tinkered with their brain, but no one is actually hurt."

english is not my first language, but this sounds like complete nonsense. should it be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.180.9.6 (talk) 07:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

recent edit to causes section

I deleted an unsourced phrase, replaced it and moved it to a more appropriate part of the paragraph with DSM-IV TR sourced info. I was unable to find information on refugees in the DSM-IV, but this would be good to add to the article if it can be found. ResearchEditor (talk) 16:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

deleting OR, restoring quote

I have deleted a section added by an anon IP w/o sources and restored a quote deleted by another anon IP w/o reason. IMO, the quote may be too long and undue weight. ResearchEditor (talk) 03:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Objection to "psychosocial perspective" emphasis

(moved here from page header, where it didn't belong)

I am concerned that the opening paragraphs on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) convey a psychosocial perspective that implies the biological perspective is of secondary importance. This seems to be a byproduct of the applauded biopsychosocial approach which is taken to mean that biological, psychological and sociological explanations are equelly important no matter what is being talked about or, which is more of a worry, that which of the three is more important is open to a democratic vote. Following the introduction with the Neurophysiology of PTSD redresses the balance somewhat but would leave many people thinking that the biological changes are psychologically generated. The events that lead to PTSD are best discussed in sociological terms and there is no doubt that the personal experiece of such events opens up the possibility of endless psychological discussion. The condition itself also has social and psychological consequences but what it does inside the body is a largely biological concern. We know for instance that all animals respond with similar biological defences to threat and challenge, however well developed. or not. their brains and that past a certain point such stess can lead to illness or even death. As Joseph LeDoux remarks in "The Emotional Brain", Touchstone, New York, 1996, the emotions are less important than the functions that generate them. How can Wikipedia ensure a well balanced presentation of such a centrally important psychiatric condition even though some psychiatric opinion does not see it this way? Paddybw (talk) 08:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)paddybw 27th May 2008.

Please allow me to point out, as a professional who specializes in treating PTSD, that the overwhelming consensus among professionals is that biology plays only a small role in development of PTSD (when it plays a role at all), and is never a primary cause. Environment events, which lead to certain types of critical affective response are viewed as the prime causes. It is not war that causes PTSD, but people's experience in war, for example. Getting the problem correctly understood opens the door to effective treatment, and that's why it's so important to get it right. There IS no biological treatment (i.e., psychotropic medication) for PTSD - only for a few of its symptoms. It's not biological any more than learning the multiplication table is.
The "biopsychosocial model" advocated by the American Psychiatric Association is NOT to be taken as a statement that all factors are of equal importance, as you'd know, if you ever formally studied the subject. The key idea behind the promotion of the model, as the APA states in its Preface to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, is that all factors should be considered when we seek to understand a disorder. This has proven to be a very good idea. Yes, animals have biological responses to stress-causing events, but that does not mean that the cause is biological. Again, serious study of the subject would not allow such misunderstandings. J. LeDoux, whom you reference, does not even take up PTSD as a primary subject in The Emotional Brain, and psychopathology is certainly NOT his expertise. If the Wikipedia article on PTSD is to do anything it should at least reflect the central positions of the professionals who deal daily with PTSD. It is not reasonable to suppose that people come here hoping to read second-class comment and ideas, is it?
TomCloyd (talk) 08:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Danny Ludkin???

Who is Danny Ludkin? I assume this is a prank. Threw me a bit when I first read it... Very odd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.149.149.225 (talk) 13:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

"Posttraumatic..." spelling disputes (again)

Post traumatic OR post-traumatic. Not like that!--207.96.174.66 (talk) 19:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Call me lazy or whatever, as explanations for why neither a hyphen nor a space are used in the title appear in this and previous talk pages, but the double-"t" does make the name of the condition seem awkward. 88.104.215.121 (talk) 20:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Posttraumatic Cult Disorder

I've read today on German Wiki, that it is a side-form of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and concerns formerly victims of sects and cults. Is there anybody who has got experiences with that theme or could advice literature about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.235.246.241 (talk) 17:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard of this "disorder". It is most certainly not recognized by any professional body in psychology, psychiatry, or social work. (I'm a professional psychotherapist specializing in PTSD; I do keep up on such things). PTSD can arise from all sorts of events or situations. To focus on them is to miss the point. It is the person's EXPERIENCE of them which causes the psychological trauma, which, if of sufficient magnitude and duration, will qualify someone for a PTSD diagnosis. Laypersons often get quite confused about this. Again - it's not the situation, but the experience, which causes the problem. We need to pay attention to the latter, not the former.
TomCloyd (talk) 07:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Removed MAO genetics sections

I removed the following:

"A functional polymorphism in the monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene promoter can moderate the association between early life trauma and increased risk for violence and antisocial behavior. Low MAOA activity is a significant risk factor for aggressive and antisocial behavior in adults who have been victimized as children. Persons who were abused as children but have a genotype conferring high levels of MAOA expression are less likely to develop antisocial symptoms. These findings help explain why not all persons who have experienced early childhood trauma victimize others."

This is relevant to trauma but not really to PTSD. Might be more at home in an article on psychological trauma, child abuse, or maybe antisocial personality disorder, but not here I don't think. The references this passage cited are: [1] [2]

-Zefryl (talk) 05:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Forgive me if people have already said that they have, but... Has anybody here had PTSD. I have, when I was attacked outside University. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.5.165.126 (talk) 15:38, 13 December 2008 (UTC)