captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Isn’t this like the first thing psychology found out?
While it certainly isn’t news to us today, every additional observation that supports a theory is valuable, especially for theories about deep-rooted and hard-to-prove causality.
We can’t just go out traumatizing children “for science” to find out what the incident rate of mental health as it relates to different traumas.
It’s basically an academic disagreement between two schools of thought. The behaviorist like models in psychology can be at odds with the biochemical imbalance model of psychiatry.
Studies like this help expand treatment options since the biochemical imbalance theory has gained significant popularity and awareness in recent years. Not everyone struggling has a chemical imbalance and not all mental illnesses are caused from trauma. Some have both. Nuance is king with sort of issue
Full agreement. I seem to have biochemical and trauma based issues myself. I can’t medicate the pain away, but my adhd requires a holistic, chemicals included, response.
I thought the Diatheses stress model was pretty well accepted? It’s kind of a mixture of both.
Its fairly well accepted in psychology circles. It’s taught in psychiatry as well since there is overlap. However it seems a lot of psychiatrists(depending on the school and professor of course) tend towards the biochemical imbalance theory.
It’s partially due to criticisms(some deserved, others not so much) that psychiatry isn’t a valid science and in attempts to thwart those accusations the psychiatry school of thought has heavily leaned into neuroscience/chemical imbalance theory and veered away from psychology. IMO psychiatry functions best for patients as a combination of both.
This is just my observation though, so take that as you will.
Seriously! I thought we’d figured everything out already! Why are scientists still trying to learn things?
SharkEatingBreakfast@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
Further studies legitimize claims made about these kinds of things.