Depression

[Guest guest]

,

Meeting a guy purely for the sake of being in a relationship may have it’s own pitfalls.

I have met many women who are in unhappy relationships & feel that they must remain in these loveless relationships for a number of reasons (Kids, responsibilities

etc).

I am also in your age category & let me say that there are many guys out there looking for a stable & loving relationship.

I didn’t find my own true soul mate until I was well over 40 & had been through a horrible 15 year marriage. In hindsight, I would have preferred to not be in

that relationship & be by myself instead.

Consider that a turn in your life may be just around the corner & having experienced loneliness, will only enhance that relationship.

Hang in there.

Don

________________________________________________

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this e-mail for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of its contents to any other person or persons.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Liberty International Underwriters.

Liberty International Underwriters may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses or unauthorized use and for other lawful business purposes.

________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Hi all"Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception… > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance." I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as "depression is anger turned inward" or depression is a "repression of sexual impulses". The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to "accept what is" or "gets in touch with their anger" and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception. it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my "failure" to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually. Geoffrey"Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception… > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

[Guest guest]

All good thoughts. Thank you for sharing. Its not as simple as a well written

saying. What I got out of the feedback was that I was trying to push my own

depression away. I take with me a new look at acceptance in regard to my own

depression. Secondly that loss hurts and conection to other human beings is most

helpfull. And that sometimes we need to rely on medication and/or therapy when

we suffer from depression. I have been on medication but been off of it for

awhile. I was trying very hard not to go back on it. I will do it. Hard to write

that.

Lastly,that hope is always just around the corner. I just love happy ever after

stories. I wish you all an abundent of happiness each and every day.

Thanks

Lin

> >

> >

> > Good Morning.

> > I just read these statements on a bug free life- " Depression is

> basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you

> surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness

> cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the

> presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> > Sounds good but if you value something and your frustrated from not

> getting what you value then its hard not to be depressed. Like I am

> depressed I am not part of a couple anymore. Some days I have accepted

> it and have grown because of my acceptence to live in the present

> moment. Other days I feel hopeless, alone and tired of pushing the

> thought that it is something I value away from me. Its a lot harder to

> meet somone at my age of 59.

> > Anyway, success at accomplishing or getting something you value takes

> work and movement to the goal. This I understand. I have tried

> everything I know. So when you loose hope of anything being differnet ,

> you get depressed. It's like running out of ways to take action to

> accomplish your values. I am sure there is a lot of things that feel

> that way.

> > The only thing I can get out of this is to learn as much as I can

> abotu dating or coupling as an older women. I need more ways to learn

> this, any ideas anyone? why , how and when..

> > Hope is so much needed for everyone.

> > Lin

> >

>

[Guest guest]

As the observer self we can look at/ feel it / whatever / depression and sit with it observing ,distance from the event/ thoughts or feelings.

Its one thing saying ,but doing is the objective. Riding the bike over and over, for it to become more familiar. Dont ride for a while, get on it again.

Sent from Yahoo!7 Mail on Android

From:

;

To:

<ACT_for_the_Public >;

Subject:

Re: Depression

Sent:

Fri, May 11, 2012 12:52:01 PM

All good thoughts. Thank you for sharing. Its not as simple as a well written saying. What I got out of the feedback was that I was trying to push my own depression away. I take with me a new look at acceptance in regard to my own depression. Secondly that loss hurts and conection to other human beings is most helpfull. And that sometimes we need to rely on medication and/or therapy when we suffer from depression. I have been on medication but been off of it for awhile. I was trying very hard not to go back on it. I will do it. Hard to write that.

Lastly,that hope is always just around the corner. I just love happy ever after stories. I wish you all an abundent of happiness each and every day.

Thanks

Lin

> >

> >

> > Good Morning.

> > I just read these statements on a bug free life- " Depression is

> basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you

> surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness

> cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the

> presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> > Sounds good but if you value something and your frustrated from not

> getting what you value then its hard not to be depressed. Like I am

> depressed I am not part of a couple anymore. Some days I have accepted

> it and have grown because of my acceptence to live in the present

> moment. Other days I feel hopeless, alone and tired of pushing the

> thought that it is something I value away from me. Its a lot harder to

> meet somone at my age of 59.

> > Anyway, success at accomplishing or getting something you value takes

> work and movement to the goal. This I understand. I have tried

> everything I know. So when you loose hope of anything being differnet ,

> you get depressed. It's like running out of ways to take action to

> accomplish your values. I am sure there is a lot of things that feel

> that way.

> > The only thing I can get out of this is to learn as much as I can

> abotu dating or coupling as an older women. I need more ways to learn

> this, any ideas anyone? why , how and when..

> > Hope is so much needed for everyone.

> > Lin

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Geoffrey,

I don't see where there is disagreement between the 2 statements. `

depression is basically a non acceptance of what is' = moment to moment

acceptance alleviates depression. What am I not understanding about your post?

" Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and

you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot

exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of

awareness and acceptance. "

I strongly disagree with these claims.

I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance,………. Geoffrey

Wanda

[Guest guest]

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the

brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if

what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this

thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact

from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health)

website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't

set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving

forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a

comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is

and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot

exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of

awareness and acceptance. "

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not

only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful.

In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem.

In previous times there were such view as " depression is anger turned inward "

or depression is a " repression of sexual impulses " . The harm comes about when

the patient makes all the effort to " accept what is " or " gets in touch with

their anger " and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by

themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the

psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and

psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and

moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me

much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression,

I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem,

and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely

hope I do some day) judging that my that my " failure " to so far reflects my

inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an

understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone

who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent

as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of

poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of

medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite

statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and

certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an

evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its

superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions

such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT

community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the

opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is

and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness

cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence

of awareness and acceptance. "

>

[Guest guest]

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT.  WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A " DISORDER OF THE BRAIN " (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression.  WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT..  Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT.  THAT IS LIKE SAYING " PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY. " WELL DUH. THIS IS VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE? WHAT IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED BUT JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of a loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation may trigger a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or without an obvious trigger.  AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS CAN'T BE THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!!  THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?!  (ANSWER: YES. THAT'S IT).

The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importanceof biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior. 

And I agree with Geoffrey that we should notcast depression as matter of finger waggingand guilt tripping.But if you read carefully it jumps out at youthat the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they know why

depression occurs. They do say  " depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain " but any careful reader can then see that the claimis not backed up by evidence-based statements. 

I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.They explicitly say they don't have solid evidence about causes.If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance of the

brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful scientistI know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence -- even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true someday. 

If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.And it isn't.Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO biological

markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.That is from the psychiatrists.Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain disorder?

They mean to state an assumption.You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is concernedthat same thing is said easily. You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it withfolks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

because it was not a conclusion. Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brainby assumption. If you push folk like this, they would say that environmentalters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of the brain;

trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc. When you say " Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction. " in this context, you seem to be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe otherwise. If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right nowthat is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not have the evidence

and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the cardinal scientific sin of claiming otherwisein the absence of data.

****The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of these things.That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system and bound by context.Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just anapproach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it can do.

I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes, epigenetics,behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex as " depression "

Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusingarguments and ambiguity

- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062 " Love isn't everything, it's the only thing "

hayes@... or stevenchayes@...Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

Blogs: Psychology Today  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mindHuffington Post  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page:  http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., " Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

 

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as " depression is anger turned inward " or depression is a " repression of sexual impulses " . The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to " accept what is " or " gets in touch with their anger " and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my " failure " to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

>

[Guest guest]

Wow! that was good.

Some people are relieved when a psychiatrist say's to a person that they

have a bilogocal illness and it is often genetic running in families.

But try this: I'm 17 years old and 6 month before I was fine chasing

women and having fun with my friends. Then due to an incident I become

seriously depressed but I don't realise I am ill, I just think that I am

bad and useless person. One day I drink a bottle of wine and then I

burst into tears and I realise that I am very ill, so I see my doctor

who sends me to see a psychiatrist. The placebo effect kicks in quite

well after this as I feel lots of hope now as I believe that a

psychiatrist is a psychoanalyst and he we talk me through it.

When I see the psychatrist he asked me loads of questions and then

prescribed me a medicine and say's come back in a month to see how you

are getting on. Well, my despair goes through the rooof as I know that

pills are not going to fix my life long shyness and low self esteem. But

it get's worse, I soon find out that depression is a genetic illness and

that sufferer has something wrong with his brain. Such unfortunate

people are unable to produce enough serotonin, they say, and so often

suffering a life time of misery and depression.

Part of my problem is GAD, so I worry all the time too, so now I'm

sitting at home overwhelmed with fear that I have something wrong with

my brain and that means I am naturally a very weak and useless person

unable to fully cope with life. Now my self esteem plummets to my lowest

point ever and I feel doomed. The pils don't work -well, it turns out

they hardly ever do on adolescents, but they don't tell me that, so I

just feel even more of a failure

Because I am deteriating badly they give me lithium saying that I a

manic depressive who stays in the depressed half all the time even

though I have never been manic. Now I have just bought a book on

depression and I realise that Bipolar is a psychotic illness and now I

am really freaking it, so much so that I attempt suicide so then they

put me on a major tranquiller to calm me down (from all the fears and

nightmares they had installed into me). This drug could have had me

twitching, wriggling, and sticking my tongue out in a few months time

and this could become permanent. In fact, the bipolar suffers at the

clinic I attend are all wriggling, restless, and shuffling around the

place all the time acting quite mad and I was trully horrified about

what might happen to me - I have no idea that it the drugs that are

making them act like this. Now how was that going to get my confidence

back and help me get a lovely girfriend, what I wanted more than

anything in the world? Fortunatally, I threw the pills away.

So as you can see, psychiatry did everything possible to make me feel

much worse. It is not therapy, it is anti-therapy.

But years after I abandoned psychiatry they still petrified me causing

terror. In the media they would say they had discovered a new gene or

something and I would tear the report out of my newspaper and throw it

in the bin. Then I might email Jay ph in a terrified state - he is

the author of the Gene Illusion -who would kindly email me back saying

it is all BS and put my mind to rest.

Now if only Burns book was out at the time, I would have read that

and would have got filled with hope and then ignored psychiatry, as I do

today. In my library I now have books by Richgard Betall, Doctoring The

Mind, the psychiatrist Joanna Moncrief who wrote the Myth of The

Chemical Cure, and Elliot S Vallentstein, a neurosurgeon, who wrote

Blaming the Brain exposing psychiatries BS. I have many more books too

and nowadays I am very hopefull indeed of finally getting well again.

And now lots of ACT books are part of my library because they offer so

much hope too. It hard work, though, but hope means I keep at it becuase

I know there is a good chance of success. Hey! I can even reprogram my

genes, well, tweak them a little, that's just so mazing.

Kv

-- In ACT_for_the_Public ,

wrote:

>

> I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.

>

> Let's look at the critical part of the

> NIMH site you sent us to

>

> Let me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

> My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,

> but those words are not mine

>

> What causes depression?

>

> Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic,

biological,

> environmental, and psychological factors.

>

> GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

>

> Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD

CLAIM!

> SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES

> DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT. WHAT IS THE

> EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that

> important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to

> communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A

LONG

> STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has

been

> difficult to prove this.

>

> OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT

IS

> NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION

IS A

> " DISORDER OF THE BRAIN " (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER

EVIDENCE?

>

> Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI),

have

> shown that the brains of people who have depression look different

than

> those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in

> mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH,

GOOD.

> REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has

> occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression. WHOOPS. IF

IT

> DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION

THEN

> WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION

OCCURS.

> HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING

DEPRESSED, NOT

> A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

>

> Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME

EVIDENCE!

> WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in

people

> without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING

NIMH.

> YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED

OFF

> EVENT HAT.. Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some

> people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT

BUT

> THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some

genetics

> research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence

of

> several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10

YES,

> BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT. THAT IS

LIKE

> SAYING " PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY. " WELL DUH.

THIS IS

> VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN

> COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE?

WHAT

> IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED

BUT

> JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of

a

> loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation may

trigger

> a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or

without

> an obvious trigger. AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT

> MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS

CAN'T BE

> THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!! THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?!

(ANSWER:

> YES. THAT'S IT).

>

> The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.

> That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importance

> of biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior.

> And I agree with Geoffrey that we should not

> cast depression as matter of finger wagging

> and guilt tripping.

>

> But if you read carefully it jumps out at you

> that the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they

know

> why

> depression occurs. They do say

> " depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain " but any careful

reader

> can then see that the claim

> is not backed up by evidence-based statements.

> I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.

> They explicitly say they *don't* have solid evidence about causes.

>

> If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance

of the

> brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful

scientist

> I know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence

--

> even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true

someday.

> If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,

> depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.

> And it isn't.

>

> Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO

biological

> markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.

> That is from the psychiatrists.

>

> Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain

> disorder?

>

> *They mean to state an assumption.*

>

> You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is

concerned

> that same thing is said easily.

> You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

> But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.

>

> When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it

with

> folks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

> because it was not a conclusion.

> Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brain

> *by assumption.* If you push folk like this, they would say that

environment

> alters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of

the

> brain;

> trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc.

>

> When you say " Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the

universe

> we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a

good

> place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in

the

> long run than believing a comforting fiction. " in this context, you

seem to

> be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

> people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the

> harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe

otherwise.

>

> If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

> It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right

now

> that is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not

have

> the evidence

> and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the

cardinal

> scientific sin of claiming otherwise

> in the absence of data.

>

> ****

>

> The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of

these

> things.

> That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

> Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system

and

> bound by context.

> Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment

and

> behavior is a big part of it.

> Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is

a big

> part of it.

>

> That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

> holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just an

> approach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it

can do.

> I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes,

epigenetics,

> behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

> Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex

as

> " depression "

>

> Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusing

> arguments and ambiguity

>

> - S

>

> C.

> Foundation Professor

> Department of Psychology /298

> University of Nevada

> Reno, NV 89557-0062

>

> " Love isn't everything, it's the only thing "

>

> hayes@... or stevenchayes@...

> Fax:

> Psych Department:

> Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

(775)

> 746-2013

>

> Blogs:

> *Psychology Today*

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mind

> *Huffington Post * http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

>

> If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training

> page:

> http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayes

> or you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

>

> If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information

etc),

> please first check the vast resources at website of the Association

for

> Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org.

You

> have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to

your

> own values.

>

> If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world

wide

> ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list:

>

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

> or the RFT list:

> http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/join

>

> If you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g.,

" Get

> Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that

> conversation go to:

> http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

>

>

> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Stan stealthymangos@... wrote:

>

> > **

> >

> >

> > I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical

imbalances in

> > the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of

it.

> >

> > For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to

know

> > if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing

views

> > on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that

might

> > help sift fact from fiction.

> >

> > The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental

Health)

> > website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

> >

> > The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

> >

> > Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we

inhabit

> > won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place

to

> > start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the

long run

> > than believing a comforting fiction.

> >

> > Cheers,

> > Stan

> >

> >

> > >

> > > Hi all

> > >

> > > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you

accept what

> > is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without

exception…

> > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as

darkness

> > cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in

the

> > presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> > >

> > > I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these

statements

> > not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and

potentially

> > harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental

illness as a

> > moral problem. In previous times there were such view as " depression

is

> > anger turned inward " or depression is a " repression of sexual

impulses " .

> > The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to

" accept what

> > is " or " gets in touch with their anger " and fail to get better they

are

> > then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying,

not

> > accepting without exception.

> > >

> > > it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the

> > psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and

> > psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

> > >

> > > I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion,

> > mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and

ACT in

> > that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in

managing my

> > own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for

the

> > management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get

myself

> > off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging

that

> > my that my " failure " to so far reflects my inability to accept what

is...

> > well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my

family there

> > is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views

to think

> > about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a

full

> > episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who

fails

> > to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise

except

> > for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

> > >

> > > I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very

> > helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous

methods

> > but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before

it has

> > established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as

a

> > panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with

much

> > stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has

> > demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

> > >

> > > Geoffrey

> > >

> > > > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you

accept

> > what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without

exception…

> > > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as

darkness

> > cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in

the

> > presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Is it same principal for all mental states... Chemical fabricated over years of living { bipolar, ocd, depression, e.t.c } now big question does act. Cbt . Others thrrapies with constant use remodel , change chemicals in the brain?

Sent from Yahoo!7 Mail on Android

From:

Stan ;

To:

<ACT_for_the_Public >;

Subject:

Re: Depression

Sent:

Sat, May 12, 2012 4:32:51 AM

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as " depression is anger turned inward " or depression is a " repression of sexual impulses " . The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to " accept what is " or " gets in touch with their anger " and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my " failure " to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

>

[Guest guest]

Thank you for beautiful posts by Kaivey and Steve!Henrik Wow! that was good.Some people are relieved when a psychiatrist say's to a person that theyhave a bilogocal illness and it is often genetic running in families.But try this: I'm 17 years old and 6 month before I was fine chasingwomen and having fun with my friends. Then due to an incident I becomeseriously depressed but I don't realise I am ill, I just think that I ambad and useless person. One day I drink a bottle of wine and then Iburst into tears and I realise that I am very ill, so I see my doctorwho sends me to see a psychiatrist. The placebo effect kicks in quitewell after this as I feel lots of hope now as I believe that apsychiatrist is a psychoanalyst and he we talk me through it.When I see the psychatrist he asked me loads of questions and thenprescribed me a medicine and say's come back in a month to see how youare getting on. Well, my despair goes through the rooof as I know thatpills are not going to fix my life long shyness and low self esteem. Butit get's worse, I soon find out that depression is a genetic illness andthat sufferer has something wrong with his brain. Such unfortunatepeople are unable to produce enough serotonin, they say, and so oftensuffering a life time of misery and depression.Part of my problem is GAD, so I worry all the time too, so now I'msitting at home overwhelmed with fear that I have something wrong withmy brain and that means I am naturally a very weak and useless personunable to fully cope with life. Now my self esteem plummets to my lowestpoint ever and I feel doomed. The pils don't work -well, it turns outthey hardly ever do on adolescents, but they don't tell me that, so Ijust feel even more of a failureBecause I am deteriating badly they give me lithium saying that I amanic depressive who stays in the depressed half all the time eventhough I have never been manic. Now I have just bought a book ondepression and I realise that Bipolar is a psychotic illness and now Iam really freaking it, so much so that I attempt suicide so then theyput me on a major tranquiller to calm me down (from all the fears andnightmares they had installed into me). This drug could have had metwitching, wriggling, and sticking my tongue out in a few months timeand this could become permanent. In fact, the bipolar suffers at theclinic I attend are all wriggling, restless, and shuffling around theplace all the time acting quite mad and I was trully horrified aboutwhat might happen to me - I have no idea that it the drugs that aremaking them act like this. Now how was that going to get my confidenceback and help me get a lovely girfriend, what I wanted more thananything in the world? Fortunatally, I threw the pills away.So as you can see, psychiatry did everything possible to make me feelmuch worse. It is not therapy, it is anti-therapy.But years after I abandoned psychiatry they still petrified me causingterror. In the media they would say they had discovered a new gene orsomething and I would tear the report out of my newspaper and throw itin the bin. Then I might email Jay ph in a terrified state - he isthe author of the Gene Illusion -who would kindly email me back sayingit is all BS and put my mind to rest.Now if only Burns book was out at the time, I would have read thatand would have got filled with hope and then ignored psychiatry, as I dotoday. In my library I now have books by Richgard Betall, Doctoring TheMind, the psychiatrist Joanna Moncrief who wrote the Myth of TheChemical Cure, and Elliot S Vallentstein, a neurosurgeon, who wroteBlaming the Brain exposing psychiatries BS. I have many more books tooand nowadays I am very hopefull indeed of finally getting well again.And now lots of ACT books are part of my library because they offer somuch hope too. It hard work, though, but hope means I keep at it becuaseI know there is a good chance of success. Hey! I can even reprogram mygenes, well, tweak them a little, that's just so mazing.Kv-- In ACT_for_the_Public <mailto:ACT_for_the_Public%40yahoogroups.com>, wrote:>> I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.>> Let's look at the critical part of the> NIMH site you sent us to>> Let me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.> My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,> but those words are not mine>> What causes depression?>> Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic,biological,> environmental, and psychological factors.>> GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING>> Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLDCLAIM!> SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES> DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT. WHAT IS THE> EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that> important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to> communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS ALONG> STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it hasbeen> difficult to prove this.>> OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THATIS> NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSIONIS A> "DISORDER OF THE BRAIN" (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHEREVIDENCE?>> Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI),have> shown that the brains of people who have depression look differentthan> those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in> mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH,GOOD.> REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has> occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression. WHOOPS. IFIT> DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSIONTHEN> WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSIONOCCURS.> HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTINGDEPRESSED, NOT> A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.>> Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOMEEVIDENCE!> WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur inpeople> without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLINGNIMH.> YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKEDOFF> EVENT HAT.. Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some> people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING ITBUT> THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Somegenetics> research indicates that risk for depression results from the influenceof> several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10YES,> BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT. THAT ISLIKE> SAYING "PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY." WELL DUH.THIS IS> VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN> COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE?WHAT> IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSEDBUT> JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss ofa> loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation maytrigger> a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with orwithout> an obvious trigger. AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT> MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THISCAN'T BE> THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!! THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?!(ANSWER:> YES. THAT'S IT).>> The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.> That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importance> of biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior.> And I agree with Geoffrey that we should not> cast depression as matter of finger wagging> and guilt tripping.>> But if you read carefully it jumps out at you> that the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that theyknow> why> depression occurs. They do say> "depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain" but any carefulreader> can then see that the claim> is not backed up by evidence-based statements.> I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.> They explicitly say they *don't* have solid evidence about causes.>> If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalanceof the> brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no carefulscientist> I know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence--> even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be truesomeday.> If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,> depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.> And it isn't.>> Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NObiological> markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.> That is from the psychiatrists.>> Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain> disorder?>> *They mean to state an assumption.*>> You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior isconcerned> that same thing is said easily.> You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.> But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.>> When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue itwith> folks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly> because it was not a conclusion.> Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brain> *by assumption.* If you push folk like this, they would say thatenvironment> alters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter ofthe> brain;> trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc.>> When you say "Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and theuniverse> we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's agood> place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely inthe> long run than believing a comforting fiction." in this context, youseem to> be saying that somehow the evidence shows that> people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the> harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believeotherwise.>> If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.> It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But rightnow> that is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do nothave> the evidence> and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit thecardinal> scientific sin of claiming otherwise> in the absence of data.>> ****>> The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view ofthese> things.> That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.> Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole systemand> bound by context.> Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environmentand> behavior is a big part of it.> Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior isa big> part of it.>> That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or> holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just an> approach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what itcan do.> I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes,epigenetics,> behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.> Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complexas> "depression">> Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusing> arguments and ambiguity>> - S>> C. > Foundation Professor> Department of Psychology /298> University of Nevada> Reno, NV 89557-0062>> "Love isn't everything, it's the only thing">> hayes@... or stevenchayes@...> Fax: > Psych Department: > Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):(775)> 746-2013>> Blogs:> *Psychology Today*http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mind> *Huffington Post * http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd>> If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training> page:> http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayes> or you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com>> If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ informationetc),> please first check the vast resources at website of the Associationfor> Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org.You> have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up toyour> own values.>> If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the worldwide> ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list:><http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join>> or the RFT list:> http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/join>> If you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g.,"Get> Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life" etc) and want to be part of that> conversation go to:> http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join>>> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Stan stealthymangos@... wrote:>> > **> >> >> > I've always believed that depression is caused by chemicalimbalances in> > the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out ofit.> >> > For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want toknow> > if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competingviews> > on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites thatmight> > help sift fact from fiction.> >> > The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of MentalHealth)> > website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg> >> > The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95> >> > Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe weinhabit> > won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good placeto> > start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in thelong run> > than believing a comforting fiction.> >> > Cheers,> > Stan> >> > > > >> > > Hi all> > >> > > "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If youaccept what> > is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY withoutexception…> > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just asdarkness> > cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist inthe> > presence of awareness and acceptance."> > >> > > I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find thesestatements> > not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic andpotentially> > harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mentalillness as a> > moral problem. In previous times there were such view as "depressionis> > anger turned inward" or depression is a "repression of sexualimpulses".> > The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to"accept what> > is" or "gets in touch with their anger" and fail to get better theyare> > then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying,not> > accepting without exception.> > >> > > it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the> > psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and> > psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.> > >> > > I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion,> > mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful andACT in> > that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful inmanaging my> > own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications forthe> > management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually getmyself> > off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judgingthat> > my that my "failure" to so far reflects my inability to accept whatis...> > well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In myfamily there> > is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these viewsto think> > about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in afull> > episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and whofails> > to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wiseexcept> > for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.> > >> > > I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very> > helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previousmethods> > but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go beforeit has> > established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it asa> > panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date withmuch> > stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has> > demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.> > >> > > Geoffrey> > >> > > > "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If youaccept> > what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY withoutexception…> > > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just asdarkness> > cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist inthe> > presence of awareness and acceptance."> > >> >> >> >>

[Guest guest]

Funny Steve just posted this while I was likely simultaneously writing this blog for Facebook and Psychology Today.http://tinyurl.com/GenesBrainsBlog

best, G. 205 Peabody BuildingPsychology DepartmentUniversity of MississippiOxford, MS 38677ph: (best phone academic homepage:www.olemiss.edu/working/kwilson/kwilson.htmalso check outwww.onelifellc.comwww.mindfulnessfortwo.comwww.facebook.com/kellygwilson

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT. WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A "DISORDER OF THE BRAIN" (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression. WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT.. Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT. THAT IS LIKE SAYING "PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY." WELL DUH. THIS IS VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE? WHAT IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED BUT JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of a loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation may trigger a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or without an obvious trigger. AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS CAN'T BE THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!! THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?! (ANSWER: YES. THAT'S IT).

The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importanceof biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior.

And I agree with Geoffrey that we should notcast depression as matter of finger waggingand guilt tripping.But if you read carefully it jumps out at youthat the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they know why

depression occurs. They do say "depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain" but any careful reader can then see that the claimis not backed up by evidence-based statements.

I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.They explicitly say they don't have solid evidence about causes.If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance of the

brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful scientistI know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence -- even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true someday.

If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.And it isn't.Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO biological

markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.That is from the psychiatrists.Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain disorder?

They mean to state an assumption.You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is concernedthat same thing is said easily. You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it withfolks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

because it was not a conclusion. Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brainby assumption. If you push folk like this, they would say that environmentalters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of the brain;

trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc. When you say "Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction." in this context, you seem to be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe otherwise. If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right nowthat is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not have the evidence

and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the cardinal scientific sin of claiming otherwisein the absence of data.

****The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of these things.That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system and bound by context.Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just anapproach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it can do.

I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes, epigenetics,behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex as "depression"

Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusingarguments and ambiguity

- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062"Love isn't everything, it's the only thing"

hayes@... or stevenchayes@...Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

Blogs: Psychology Today http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mindHuffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page: http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., "Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life" etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as "depression is anger turned inward" or depression is a "repression of sexual impulses". The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to "accept what is" or "gets in touch with their anger" and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my "failure" to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

>

[Guest guest]

Who knows: in years to come, scientists may be able to determine precisely that my depression was caused by genetics (10%); my upbringing (37%); a chemical irregularity (13%); and specific life events (40%). Exactly where would that get me? Maybe the door out of depression is not the same door that we came in. To: ACT_for_the_Public Sent: Saturday, 12 May 2012, 6:53 Subject: Re: Re: Depression

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT. WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A "DISORDER OF THE BRAIN" (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression. WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING

DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT.. Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY

CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT. THAT IS LIKE SAYING "PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY." WELL DUH. THIS IS VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE? WHAT IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED BUT JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of a loved one, a difficult relationship, or any

stressful situation may trigger a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or without an obvious trigger. AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS CAN'T BE THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!! THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?! (ANSWER: YES. THAT'S IT).

The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importanceof biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior.

And I agree with Geoffrey that we should notcast depression as matter of finger waggingand guilt tripping.But if you read carefully it jumps out at youthat the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they know why

depression occurs. They do say "depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain" but any careful reader can then see that the claimis not backed up by evidence-based statements.

I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.They explicitly say they don't have solid evidence about causes.If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance of the

brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful scientistI know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence -- even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true someday.

If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.And it isn't.Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO biological

markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.That is from the psychiatrists.Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain disorder?

They mean to state an assumption.You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is concernedthat same thing is said easily. You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it withfolks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

because it was not a conclusion. Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brainby assumption. If you push folk like this, they would say that environmentalters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of the brain;

trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc. When you say "Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction." in this context, you seem to be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe otherwise. If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right nowthat is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not have the evidence

and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the cardinal scientific sin of claiming otherwisein the absence of data.

****The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of these things.That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system and bound by context.Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just anapproach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it can do.

I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes, epigenetics,behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex as "depression"

Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusingarguments and ambiguity

- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062"Love isn't everything, it's the only thing"

hayes@... or stevenchayes@...Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

Blogs: Psychology Today http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mindHuffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page: http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., "Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life" etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as "depression is anger turned inward" or depression is a "repression of sexual impulses". The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to "accept what is" or "gets in touch with their anger" and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my "failure" to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

>

[Guest guest]

Ahhh, the awesome power of words and concepts. I think of human behavior - the human experience - as a continuum. We all fit in there somewhere. What is the norm for a group clustered near one point is not, of course, what another cluster would consider to be normal. A person whose behavior represents an outrider here is centrally normal there. None are intrinsically right or wrong, healthy or otherwise. Perspective.

 I admit to a strong Buddhist influence behind the development of this image, although it is, to me, simply a result of considering the available facts. To develop a statistical norm, however, and then insist everyone should try to fit within it, seems awfully pretentious.

In my mind, it is not possible to lump a bunch of behaviors under the label 'psychiatry' and then despise or worship the label as though it were now an intrinsically existing thing. Nor is it possible to lump a group of human attributes under the label 'normal' and insist all strive to fit this ideal.

D

 

Wow! that was good.

Some people are relieved when a psychiatrist say's to a person that they

have a bilogocal illness and it is often genetic running in families.

But try this: I'm 17 years old and 6 month before I was fine chasing

women and having fun with my friends. Then due to an incident I become

seriously depressed but I don't realise I am ill, I just think that I am

bad and useless person. One day I drink a bottle of wine and then I

burst into tears and I realise that I am very ill, so I see my doctor

who sends me to see a psychiatrist. The placebo effect kicks in quite

well after this as I feel lots of hope now as I believe that a

psychiatrist is a psychoanalyst and he we talk me through it.

When I see the psychatrist he asked me loads of questions and then

prescribed me a medicine and say's come back in a month to see how you

are getting on. Well, my despair goes through the rooof as I know that

pills are not going to fix my life long shyness and low self esteem. But

it get's worse, I soon find out that depression is a genetic illness and

that sufferer has something wrong with his brain. Such unfortunate

people are unable to produce enough serotonin, they say, and so often

suffering a life time of misery and depression.

Part of my problem is GAD, so I worry all the time too, so now I'm

sitting at home overwhelmed with fear that I have something wrong with

my brain and that means I am naturally a very weak and useless person

unable to fully cope with life. Now my self esteem plummets to my lowest

point ever and I feel doomed. The pils don't work -well, it turns out

they hardly ever do on adolescents, but they don't tell me that, so I

just feel even more of a failure

Because I am deteriating badly they give me lithium saying that I a

manic depressive who stays in the depressed half all the time even

though I have never been manic. Now I have just bought a book on

depression and I realise that Bipolar is a psychotic illness and now I

am really freaking it, so much so that I attempt suicide so then they

put me on a major tranquiller to calm me down (from all the fears and

nightmares they had installed into me). This drug could have had me

twitching, wriggling, and sticking my tongue out in a few months time

and this could become permanent. In fact, the bipolar suffers at the

clinic I attend are all wriggling, restless, and shuffling around the

place all the time acting quite mad and I was trully horrified about

what might happen to me - I have no idea that it the drugs that are

making them act like this. Now how was that going to get my confidence

back and help me get a lovely girfriend, what I wanted more than

anything in the world? Fortunatally, I threw the pills away.

So as you can see, psychiatry did everything possible to make me feel

much worse. It is not therapy, it is anti-therapy.

But years after I abandoned psychiatry they still petrified me causing

terror. In the media they would say they had discovered a new gene or

something and I would tear the report out of my newspaper and throw it

in the bin. Then I might email Jay ph in a terrified state - he is

the author of the Gene Illusion -who would kindly email me back saying

it is all BS and put my mind to rest.

Now if only Burns book was out at the time, I would have read that

and would have got filled with hope and then ignored psychiatry, as I do

today. In my library I now have books by Richgard Betall, Doctoring The

Mind, the psychiatrist Joanna Moncrief who wrote the Myth of The

Chemical Cure, and Elliot S Vallentstein, a neurosurgeon, who wrote

Blaming the Brain exposing psychiatries BS. I have many more books too

and nowadays I am very hopefull indeed of finally getting well again.

And now lots of ACT books are part of my library because they offer so

much hope too. It hard work, though, but hope means I keep at it becuase

I know there is a good chance of success. Hey! I can even reprogram my

genes, well, tweak them a little, that's just so mazing.

Kv

-- In ACT_for_the_Public ,

wrote:

>

> I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.

>

> Let's look at the critical part of the

> NIMH site you sent us to

>

> Let me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

> My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,

> but those words are not mine

>

> What causes depression?

>

> Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic,

biological,

> environmental, and psychological factors.

>

> GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

>

> Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD

CLAIM!

> SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES

> DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT. WHAT IS THE

> EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that

> important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to

> communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A

LONG

> STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has

been

> difficult to prove this.

>

> OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT

IS

> NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION

IS A

> " DISORDER OF THE BRAIN " (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER

EVIDENCE?

>

> Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI),

have

> shown that the brains of people who have depression look different

than

> those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in

> mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH,

GOOD.

> REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has

> occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression. WHOOPS. IF

IT

> DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION

THEN

> WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION

OCCURS.

> HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING

DEPRESSED, NOT

> A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

>

> Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME

EVIDENCE!

> WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in

people

> without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING

NIMH.

> YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED

OFF

> EVENT HAT.. Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some

> people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT

BUT

> THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some

genetics

> research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence

of

> several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10

YES,

> BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT. THAT IS

LIKE

> SAYING " PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY. " WELL DUH.

THIS IS

> VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN

> COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE?

WHAT

> IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED

BUT

> JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of

a

> loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation may

trigger

> a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or

without

> an obvious trigger. AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT

> MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS

CAN'T BE

> THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!! THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?!

(ANSWER:

> YES. THAT'S IT).

>

> The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.

> That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importance

> of biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior.

> And I agree with Geoffrey that we should not

> cast depression as matter of finger wagging

> and guilt tripping.

>

> But if you read carefully it jumps out at you

> that the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they

know

> why

> depression occurs. They do say

> " depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain " but any careful

reader

> can then see that the claim

> is not backed up by evidence-based statements.

> I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.

> They explicitly say they *don't* have solid evidence about causes.

>

> If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance

of the

> brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful

scientist

> I know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence

--

> even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true

someday.

> If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,

> depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.

> And it isn't.

>

> Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO

biological

> markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.

> That is from the psychiatrists.

>

> Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain

> disorder?

>

> *They mean to state an assumption.*

>

> You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is

concerned

> that same thing is said easily.

> You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

> But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.

>

> When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it

with

> folks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

> because it was not a conclusion.

> Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brain

> *by assumption.* If you push folk like this, they would say that

environment

> alters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of

the

> brain;

> trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc.

>

> When you say " Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the

universe

> we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a

good

> place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in

the

> long run than believing a comforting fiction. " in this context, you

seem to

> be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

> people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the

> harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe

otherwise.

>

> If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

> It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right

now

> that is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not

have

> the evidence

> and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the

cardinal

> scientific sin of claiming otherwise

> in the absence of data.

>

> ****

>

> The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of

these

> things.

> That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

> Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system

and

> bound by context.

> Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment

and

> behavior is a big part of it.

> Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is

a big

> part of it.

>

> That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

> holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just an

> approach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it

can do.

> I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes,

epigenetics,

> behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

> Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex

as

> " depression "

>

> Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusing

> arguments and ambiguity

>

> - S

>

> C.

> Foundation Professor

> Department of Psychology /298

> University of Nevada

> Reno, NV 89557-0062

>

> " Love isn't everything, it's the only thing "

>

> hayes@... or stevenchayes@...

> Fax:

> Psych Department:

> Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

(775)

> 746-2013

>

> Blogs:

> *Psychology Today*

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mind

> *Huffington Post * http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

>

> If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training

> page:

> http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayes

> or you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

>

> If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information

etc),

> please first check the vast resources at website of the Association

for

> Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org.

You

> have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to

your

> own values.

>

> If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world

wide

> ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list:

>

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

> or the RFT list:

> http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/join

>

> If you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g.,

" Get

> Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that

> conversation go to:

> http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

>

>

> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Stan stealthymangos@... wrote:

>

> > **

> >

> >

> > I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical

imbalances in

> > the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of

it.

> >

> > For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to

know

> > if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing

views

> > on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that

might

> > help sift fact from fiction.

> >

> > The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental

Health)

> > website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

> >

> > The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

> >

> > Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we

inhabit

> > won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place

to

> > start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the

long run

> > than believing a comforting fiction.

> >

> > Cheers,

> > Stan

> >

> >

> > >

> > > Hi all

> > >

> > > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you

accept what

> > is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without

exception…

> > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as

darkness

> > cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in

the

> > presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> > >

> > > I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these

statements

> > not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and

potentially

> > harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental

illness as a

> > moral problem. In previous times there were such view as " depression

is

> > anger turned inward " or depression is a " repression of sexual

impulses " .

> > The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to

" accept what

> > is " or " gets in touch with their anger " and fail to get better they

are

> > then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying,

not

> > accepting without exception.

> > >

> > > it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the

> > psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and

> > psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

> > >

> > > I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion,

> > mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and

ACT in

> > that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in

managing my

> > own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for

the

> > management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get

myself

> > off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging

that

> > my that my " failure " to so far reflects my inability to accept what

is...

> > well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my

family there

> > is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these v-- Darrell G King, RN, CASAC-TRochester, NY, UShttp://darrellking.com

DarrellGKing@...

[Guest guest]

Awesome.D

 

Who knows: in years to come, scientists may be able to determine precisely that my depression was caused by genetics (10%); my upbringing (37%); a chemical irregularity (13%); and specific life events (40%). 

 Exactly where would that get me?   Maybe the door out of depression is not the same door that we came in. 

To: ACT_for_the_Public

Sent: Saturday, 12 May 2012, 6:53 Subject: Re: Re: Depression

 

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT.  WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A " DISORDER OF THE BRAIN " (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression.  WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING

DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT..  Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY

CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT.  THAT IS LIKE SAYING " PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY. " WELL DUH. THIS IS VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE? WHAT IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I

-- Darrell G King, RN, CASAC-TRochester, NY, UShttp://darrellking.comDarrellGKing@...

[Guest guest]

Thanks for this, - the occasional reminder of mop any on the trail is welcome.D

 

Funny Steve just posted this while I was likely simultaneously writing this blog for Facebook and Psychology Today.http://tinyurl.com/GenesBrainsBlog

best, G. 205 Peabody BuildingPsychology DepartmentUniversity of MississippiOxford, MS 38677ph: (best phone 

academic homepage:www.olemiss.edu/working/kwilson/kwilson.htmalso check outwww.onelifellc.com

www.mindfulnessfortwo.comwww.facebook.com/kellygwilson

 

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT.  WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A " DISORDER OF THE BRAIN " (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression.  WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT..  Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT.  THAT IS LIKE SAYING " PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY. " WELL DUH. TH

-- Darrell G King, RN, CASAC-TRochester, NY, UShttp://darrellking.comDarrellGKing@...

[Guest guest]

Geoffrey, I couldn't agree more. Reductionistic just-so stories about what a certain type of mental distress "means" are really unhelpful.Jim

Hi all"Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception… > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance." I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as "depression is anger turned inward" or depression is a "repression of sexual impulses". The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to "accept what is" or "gets in touch with their anger" and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception. it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my "failure" to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually. Geoffrey"Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception… > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

[Guest guest]

I appreciate this post a lot, . I also appreciate Stan for posting this and getting the discussion started. All good. If I were Stan, I would feel a bit attacked. I'm a bit surprised at your first sentence, which sounds challenging in a critical sort of way. Perhaps you didn't mean it that way, and maybe he didn't take it that way. The poor spelling and bad English make me think you weren't at your best when you wrote this. I suspect it's an issue that gets your ire up. And rightly so.For what it's worth - and that's probably not much : )HelenaTo: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 1:53:03 AMSubject: Re: Re: Depression

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT. WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A "DISORDER OF THE BRAIN" (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression. WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT.. Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT. THAT IS LIKE SAYING "PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY." WELL DUH. THIS IS VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE? WHAT IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED BUT JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of a loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation may trigger a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or without an obvious trigger. AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS CAN'T BE THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!! THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?! (ANSWER: YES. THAT'S IT).

The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importanceof biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior.

And I agree with Geoffrey that we should notcast depression as matter of finger waggingand guilt tripping.But if you read carefully it jumps out at youthat the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they know why

depression occurs. They do say "depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain" but any careful reader can then see that the claimis not backed up by evidence-based statements.

I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.They explicitly say they don't have solid evidence about causes.If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance of the

brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful scientistI know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence -- even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true someday.

If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.And it isn't.Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO biological

markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.That is from the psychiatrists.Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain disorder?

They mean to state an assumption.You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is concernedthat same thing is said easily. You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it withfolks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

because it was not a conclusion. Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brainby assumption. If you push folk like this, they would say that environmentalters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of the brain;

trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc. When you say "Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction." in this context, you seem to be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe otherwise. If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right nowthat is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not have the evidence

and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the cardinal scientific sin of claiming otherwisein the absence of data.

****The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of these things.That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system and bound by context.Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just anapproach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it can do.

I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes, epigenetics,behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex as "depression"

Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusingarguments and ambiguity

- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062"Love isn't everything, it's the only thing"

hayes@... or stevenchayes@...Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

Blogs: Psychology Today http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mindHuffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page: http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., "Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life" etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as "depression is anger turned inward" or depression is a "repression of sexual impulses". The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to "accept what is" or "gets in touch with their anger" and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my "failure" to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

>

[Guest guest]

Email is hard to do in a way that conveys emotion.My spelling errors etc come from speed, not upset.I'm not mad at Stan (I hope you know that Stan! If not, my apologies) though I admit the frame

" accept the truth " versus " delusion " is frustrating when that frame isbased on an absence of data. But I can't blame normal folks for that -- what is a normal person to do?

Jeez here you have the federal government,entire professions, and huge industrial interestspushing a line on the public ... but it is a) beyond theevidence, and the claims are worded so that it is

really hard to detect that.If Stan was a scientistI might be poking at him (just in an intellectual sense).But not normal folks. I do not know if the " brain disorder " claim is true or false

in a literal, causal sense. I suspect it is false; lot of folks assume it is true.But what I know for certain is that the current evidenceis far from the level needed to say it is true. And even those who assume it is

true, do not themselves yet claim it is empirically true.They hint, intimate, suggest etc. But they do not make hard and fast claims.So pretty much the whole science universe agrees it is not

yet empirically established in a causal senseGiven that, it kind of odd that a large section of the public(perhaps the majority) believe what no scientists yet can prove.

That is not the fault of the public. It is a product of a nexus of interestsand frankly, yes, some of their hands are not clean IMHO.- S C.

Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062 " Love isn't everything, it's the only thing " hayes@... or stevenchayes@...

Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be): Blogs: Psychology Today  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mind

Huffington Post  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phdIf you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page: 

http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., " Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

 

I appreciate this post a lot, .  I also appreciate Stan for posting this and getting the discussion started.  All good.  If I were Stan, I would feel a bit attacked.  I'm a bit surprised at your first sentence, which sounds challenging in a critical sort of way.  Perhaps you didn't mean it that way, and maybe he didn't take it that way.  The poor spelling and bad English make me think you weren't at your best when you wrote this.  I suspect it's an issue that gets your ire up.  And rightly so.

For what it's worth - and that's probably not much : )Helena

To: " ACT for the Public " <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 1:53:03 AMSubject: Re: Re: Depression

 

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT.  WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A " DISORDER OF THE BRAIN " (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression.  WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT..  Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT.  THAT IS LIKE SAYING " PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY. " WELL DUH. THIS IS VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE? WHAT IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED BUT JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of a loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation may trigger a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or without an obvious trigger.  AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS CAN'T BE THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!!  THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?!  (ANSWER: YES. THAT'S IT).

The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importanceof biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior. 

And I agree with Geoffrey that we should notcast depression as matter of finger waggingand guilt tripping.But if you read carefully it jumps out at youthat the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they know why

depression occurs. They do say  " depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain " but any careful reader can then see that the claimis not backed up by evidence-based statements. 

I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.They explicitly say they don't have solid evidence about causes.If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance of the

brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful scientistI know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence -- even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true someday. 

If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.And it isn't.Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO biological

markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.That is from the psychiatrists.Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain disorder?

They mean to state an assumption.You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is concernedthat same thing is said easily. You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it withfolks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

because it was not a conclusion. Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brainby assumption. If you push folk like this, they would say that environmentalters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of the brain;

trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc. When you say " Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction. " in this context, you seem to be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe otherwise. If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right nowthat is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not have the evidence

and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the cardinal scientific sin of claiming otherwisein the absence of data.

****The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of these things.That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system and bound by context.Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just anapproach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it can do.

I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes, epigenetics,behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex as " depression "

Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusingarguments and ambiguity

- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062 " Love isn't everything, it's the only thing "

hayes@... or stevenchayes@...Fax:

Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

Blogs: Psychology Today  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mindHuffington Post  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page:  http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., " Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

 

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as " depression is anger turned inward " or depression is a " repression of sexual impulses " . The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to " accept what is " or " gets in touch with their anger " and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my " failure " to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

>

[Guest guest]

,

Thank you for your excellent reply. Your detailed analysis of the NIMH article

has helped me become a more careful and critical reader.

When I first read your post, I felt you were challenging what I said, not

attacking me personally. I like having my beliefs challenged and scrutinised.

That way, I can see whether they hold up or not. If they do, then good, I'll

hang onto them for now. If they don't, then even better, because I have the

opportunity to replace them with something more accurate.

Re my last paragraph, where I said:

" Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't

set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving

forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a

comforting fiction. "

I meant it in a general sense, and I wasn't speaking about depression in

particular. Looking back on it now, I think I could have phrased it better.

Cheers,

Stan

> >> >

> >> > Hi all

> >> >

> >> > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept

> >> what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> >> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness

> >> cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the

> >> presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> >> >

> >> > I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements

> >> not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially

> >> harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a

> >> moral problem. In previous times there were such view as " depression is

> >> anger turned inward " or depression is a " repression of sexual impulses " .

> >> The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to " accept what

> >> is " or " gets in touch with their anger " and fail to get better they are

> >> then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not

> >> accepting without exception.

> >> >

> >> > it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the

> >> psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and

> >> psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

> >> >

> >> > I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion,

> >> mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in

> >> that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my

> >> own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the

> >> management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself

> >> off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that

> >> my that my " failure " to so far reflects my inability to accept what is...

> >> well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there

> >> is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think

> >> about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full

> >> episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails

> >> to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except

> >> for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

> >> >

> >> > I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very

> >> helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods

> >> but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has

> >> established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a

> >> panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much

> >> stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has

> >> demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

> >> >

> >> > Geoffrey

> >> >

> >> > > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept

> >> what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> >> > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as

> >> darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in

> >> the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> >> >

> >>

> >>

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Super ... thanks for soothing that worry of mine- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062

" Love isn't everything, it's the only thing " hayes@... or stevenchayes@...

Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be): Blogs: Psychology Today  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mind

Huffington Post  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phdIf you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page: 

http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., " Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

 

,

Thank you for your excellent reply. Your detailed analysis of the NIMH article has helped me become a more careful and critical reader.

When I first read your post, I felt you were challenging what I said, not attacking me personally. I like having my beliefs challenged and scrutinised. That way, I can see whether they hold up or not. If they do, then good, I'll hang onto them for now. If they don't, then even better, because I have the opportunity to replace them with something more accurate.

Re my last paragraph, where I said:

" Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction. "

I meant it in a general sense, and I wasn't speaking about depression in particular. Looking back on it now, I think I could have phrased it better.

Cheers,

Stan

> >> >

> >> > Hi all

> >> >

> >> > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept

> >> what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> >> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness

> >> cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the

> >> presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> >> >

> >> > I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements

> >> not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially

> >> harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a

> >> moral problem. In previous times there were such view as " depression is

> >> anger turned inward " or depression is a " repression of sexual impulses " .

> >> The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to " accept what

> >> is " or " gets in touch with their anger " and fail to get better they are

> >> then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not

> >> accepting without exception.

> >> >

> >> > it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the

> >> psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and

> >> psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

> >> >

> >> > I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion,

> >> mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in

> >> that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my

> >> own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the

> >> management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself

> >> off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that

> >> my that my " failure " to so far reflects my inability to accept what is...

> >> well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there

> >> is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think

> >> about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full

> >> episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails

> >> to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except

> >> for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

> >> >

> >> > I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very

> >> helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods

> >> but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has

> >> established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a

> >> panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much

> >> stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has

> >> demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

> >> >

> >> > Geoffrey

> >> >

> >> > > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept

> >> what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> >> > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as

> >> darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in

> >> the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

> >> >

> >>

> >>

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

THANK YOU Your reply has punched the suicide devil of mine in the face.I was conceived by a woman who didn't want the pregnancy, but was born due to her dysfunctional mind. From there, my suffering snow balled till I last hit rock bottom few weeks back where I had given up on Psychiatry and Psychotherapy from a local hospital. One final desperate effort lead me to a psychologist associated with a volunteer welfare org, who saw me pro bono, where I was formally introduced to ACT.Albeit the negative environment factor, ACT may save my life from my long held conviction to deploy my devil if I am not able to rescue myself (from depression, or/and PTSD, anxiety disorders, addiction disorder), given my belief that contentment and happiness be achieved through absence of disorders.Although few can empathize with the torture of functioning at a level restricted by mental disorders, your writings and your work gives hope to anyone seeking freedom don't have to die just yet.LOVEACT> > >> > > Hi all> > >> > > "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what> > is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…> > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness> > cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the> > presence of awareness and acceptance."> > >> > > I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements> > not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially> > harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a> > moral problem. In previous times there were such view as "depression is> > anger turned inward" or depression is a "repression of sexual impulses".> > The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to "accept what> > is" or "gets in touch with their anger" and fail to get better they are> > then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not> > accepting without exception.> > >> > > it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the> > psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and> > psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.> > >> > > I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion,> > mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in> > that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my> > own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the> > management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself> > off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that> > my that my "failure" to so far reflects my inability to accept what is...> > well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there> > is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think> > about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full> > episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails> > to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except> > for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.> > >> > > I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very> > helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods> > but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has> > established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a> > panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much> > stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has> > demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.> > >> > > Geoffrey> > >> > > > "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept> > what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…> > > > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness> > cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the> > presence of awareness and acceptance."> > >> >> > > >>

[Guest guest]

wrote:

" So pretty much the whole science universe agrees it is not

yet empirically established in a causal sense

Given that, it kind of odd that a large section of the public

(perhaps the majority) believe what no scientists yet can prove.

That is not the fault of the public. It is a product of a nexus of interests

and frankly, yes, some of their hands are not clean IMHO. "

So glad to hear someone else, who's in the public eye, saying this....kinda

feels like shouting into the wind when you're one of the 'little guys'.

I think one explanation about so much being swallowed by the general public by

the scientists is because of the way the neural pathways form around perceived

authority figures in our infancy due to the parenting styles of the past and the

culture (well, at least in white western culture which is the only one I feel I

can speak for personally)....and many scientists happily exploit this view of

themselves as 'perceived authority figures' by the general public.

Cheers

[Guest guest]

hi WandaI agree. I do practice total acceptance of low symptoms of depression anxiety and any other type of symptom that may emerge which gives me stability. Best wishes from FrancisTo: ACT_for_the_Public From: wandarzimm@...Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 19:44:08 +0000Subject: Re: Depression

Hi Geoffrey,

I don't see where there is disagreement between the 2 statements. `

depression is basically a non acceptance of what is' = moment to moment acceptance alleviates depression. What am I not understanding about your post?

"Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

I strongly disagree with these claims.

I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance,………. Geoffrey

Wanda

[Guest guest]

I might as well put it out there (here). I have been kicking myself a lot for writing that critical post to you, . I don't know why I get so confrontational at times, only to regret it later. It happens when I'm struggling with something or facing a crisis of some sort. It seems to help soothe me emotionally to lash out (for a moment). There may have been a modicum of truth in my post to you - it initially did surprise me that you seemed to be challenging Stan - but what the hell - that is a good thing and what he appreciated, as do I - but I blew it all out of proportion. So, once again, I find myself facing the blackboard with my nose planted in the circle the teacher drew on the board as punishment for kids who "act out" (and yes, that actually happened to me in grade school, LOL). I can only apologize and hope that you, in your generous spirit, will forgive me and let me get my nose out of the shame circle.HelenaTo: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 5:33:17 PMSubject: Re: Re: Depression

Email is hard to do in a way that conveys emotion.My spelling errors etc come from speed, not upset.I'm not mad at Stan (I hope you know that Stan! If not, my apologies) though I admit the frame

"accept the truth" versus "delusion" is frustrating when that frame isbased on an absence of data. But I can't blame normal folks for that -- what is a normal person to do?

Jeez here you have the federal government,entire professions, and huge industrial interestspushing a line on the public ... but it is a) beyond theevidence, and the claims are worded so that it is

really hard to detect that.If Stan was a scientistI might be poking at him (just in an intellectual sense).But not normal folks. I do not know if the "brain disorder" claim is true or false

in a literal, causal sense. I suspect it is false; lot of folks assume it is true.But what I know for certain is that the current evidenceis far from the level needed to say it is true. And even those who assume it is

true, do not themselves yet claim it is empirically true.They hint, intimate, suggest etc. But they do not make hard and fast claims.So pretty much the whole science universe agrees it is not

yet empirically established in a causal senseGiven that, it kind of odd that a large section of the public(perhaps the majority) believe what no scientists yet can prove.

That is not the fault of the public. It is a product of a nexus of interestsand frankly, yes, some of their hands are not clean IMHO.- S C.

Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062"Love isn't everything, it's the only thing"hayes@... or stevenchayes@...

Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be): Blogs: Psychology Today http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mind

Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phdIf you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page:

http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., "Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life" etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

I appreciate this post a lot, . I also appreciate Stan for posting this and getting the discussion started. All good. If I were Stan, I would feel a bit attacked. I'm a bit surprised at your first sentence, which sounds challenging in a critical sort of way. Perhaps you didn't mean it that way, and maybe he didn't take it that way. The poor spelling and bad English make me think you weren't at your best when you wrote this. I suspect it's an issue that gets your ire up. And rightly so.

For what it's worth - and that's probably not much : )Helena

To: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 1:53:03 AMSubject: Re: Re: Depression

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT. WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A "DISORDER OF THE BRAIN" (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression. WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT.. Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT. THAT IS LIKE SAYING "PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY." WELL DUH. THIS IS VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE? WHAT IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED BUT JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of a loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation may trigger a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or without an obvious trigger. AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS CAN'T BE THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!! THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?! (ANSWER: YES. THAT'S IT).

The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importanceof biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior.

And I agree with Geoffrey that we should notcast depression as matter of finger waggingand guilt tripping.But if you read carefully it jumps out at youthat the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they know why

depression occurs. They do say "depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain" but any careful reader can then see that the claimis not backed up by evidence-based statements.

I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.They explicitly say they don't have solid evidence about causes.If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance of the

brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful scientistI know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence -- even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true someday.

If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.And it isn't.Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO biological

markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.That is from the psychiatrists.Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain disorder?

They mean to state an assumption.You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is concernedthat same thing is said easily. You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it withfolks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

because it was not a conclusion. Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brainby assumption. If you push folk like this, they would say that environmentalters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of the brain;

trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc. When you say "Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction." in this context, you seem to be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe otherwise. If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right nowthat is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not have the evidence

and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the cardinal scientific sin of claiming otherwisein the absence of data.

****The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of these things.That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system and bound by context.Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just anapproach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it can do.

I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes, epigenetics,behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex as "depression"

Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusingarguments and ambiguity

- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062"Love isn't everything, it's the only thing"

hayes@... or stevenchayes@...Fax:

Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

Blogs: Psychology Today http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mindHuffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page: http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., "Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life" etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as "depression is anger turned inward" or depression is a "repression of sexual impulses". The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to "accept what is" or "gets in touch with their anger" and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my "failure" to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > "Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance."

>

[Guest guest]

Not to diminish the moment, but just to be honest, I saw the post as courageous and helpful. When I saw your commentI re-read the post I wrote and saw poorly wordedsentences that could be misread etc. It pushed me to think

more deeply. Worthwhile.Plus, you raised the issue responsibly -- just askingme to look at it by a nice bit of perspective taking( " if I were Stan I'd feel ... " )

On this listthat is a great thing to have out thereespecially when the so-called experts are posting.Part of the space we are creating together is one that is

open, aware, accepting of diversity, and focused on whatworks. WE are doing that. In that space all responsible voices are welcome and no one gets to be the boss, or the " authority, "

or the " one who knows. " We are all just Bozos on this bus.When you put yourself out there responsibly you arecreating that space. When Stan says " hey wait a minute " and

posts an NIMH link, he's creating that spaceI've watched this list for a long time .. reading almost every one of thetens of thousands of posts over the years of its existence. 

I'm regularly blown away by the courage and humanity of the list.I like to think that this space we create is itself helpful.It is a projection of the psychological flexibility model into a group context.

Struggling with behavioral problems can create such shame, isolation, and disempowernentthat we feel almost like alien creatures on the planet --when the actual truth is that we are just swimming inside

the human condition. We are not special in oursuffering -- humanity itself suffers. When wespeak out in a way that takes responsibility andis self-empowering, it models something profound.

Even this last one ( " hey, I'm kicking myself " ) was very nice on that front.More of that same space.So thanks for that ... to you and to all. It is great to be lifted up by the

reality of being human on this Mother's Day- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of Nevada

Reno, NV 89557-0062 " Love isn't everything, it's the only thing " hayes@... or stevenchayes@...

Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be): Blogs: Psychology Today  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mind

Huffington Post  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phdIf you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page: 

http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., " Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

 

I might as well put it out there (here).  I have been kicking myself a lot for writing that critical post to you, .  I don't know why I get so confrontational at times, only to regret it later.  It happens when I'm struggling with something or facing a crisis of some sort.  It seems to help soothe me emotionally to lash out (for a moment).  There may have been a modicum of truth in my post to you - it initially did surprise me that you seemed to be challenging Stan - but what the hell - that is a good thing and what he appreciated, as do I - but I blew it all out of proportion.  So, once again, I find myself facing the blackboard with my nose planted in the circle the teacher drew on the board as punishment for kids who " act out " (and yes, that actually happened to me in grade school, LOL).  I can only apologize and hope that you, in your generous spirit, will forgive me and let me get my nose out of the shame circle.

HelenaTo: " ACT for the Public " <ACT_for_the_Public >

Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 5:33:17 PMSubject: Re: Re: Depression

 

Email is hard to do in a way that conveys emotion.My spelling errors etc come from speed, not upset.I'm not mad at Stan (I hope you know that Stan! If not, my 

apologies) though I admit the frame

" accept the truth " versus " delusion " is frustrating when that frame isbased on an absence of data. But I can't blame normal folks for that -- what is a normal person to do?

Jeez here you have the federal government,entire professions, and huge industrial interestspushing a line on the public ... but it is a) beyond theevidence, and the claims are worded so that it is

really hard to detect that.If Stan was a scientistI might be poking at him (just in an intellectual sense).But not normal folks. I do not know if the " brain disorder " claim is true or false

in a literal, causal sense. I suspect it is false; lot of folks assume it is true.But what I know for certain is that the current evidenceis far from the level needed to say it is true. And even those who assume it is

true, do not themselves yet claim it is empirically true.They hint, intimate, suggest etc. But they do not make hard and fast claims.So pretty much the whole science universe agrees it is not

yet empirically established in a causal senseGiven that, it kind of odd that a large section of the public(perhaps the majority) believe what no scientists yet can prove.

That is not the fault of the public. It is a product of a nexus of interestsand frankly, yes, some of their hands are not clean IMHO.- S C.

Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062 " Love isn't everything, it's the only thing " hayes@... or stevenchayes@...

Fax: Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

Blogs: Psychology Today  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mind

Huffington Post  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phdIf you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page: 

http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., " Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

 

I appreciate this post a lot, .  I also appreciate Stan for posting this and getting the discussion started.  All good.  If I were Stan, I would feel a bit attacked.  I'm a bit surprised at your first sentence, which sounds challenging in a critical sort of way.  Perhaps you didn't mean it that way, and maybe he didn't take it that way.  The poor spelling and bad English make me think you weren't at your best when you wrote this.  I suspect it's an issue that gets your ire up.  And rightly so.

For what it's worth - and that's probably not much : )Helena

To: " ACT for the Public " <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 1:53:03 AMSubject: Re: Re: Depression

 

I'm not sure what you think these things say Stan.Let's look at the critical part of theNIMH site you sent us toLet me walk through it. My comments are in caps, in Green.

My attempt to focus a critical eye on what they say is in yellow,but those words are not mine

What causes depression?

Most likely, depression is caused by a combination of genetic, biological, environmental, and psychological factors.

GEE, WHAT IS LEFT OUT? THAT IS A TRUISM ... BUT IT TELLS YOU NOTHING

Depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain. WELL THAT IS A BOLD CLAIM! SOUND LIKE A REAL CAUSE. GREAT IF TRUE. WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT CAUSES DEPRESSION ... AND YOIU EVEN TITLED THE SECTION BY THAT.  WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR IT? Longstanding theories about depression suggest that important neurotransmitters—chemicals that brain cells use to communicate—are out of balance in depression. HMM. I KNEW IT WAS A LONG STANDING THEORY. BUT IS IT PROVEN? ARE YOU SAYING IT IS? But it has been difficult to prove this.

OH, I SEE. SO THERE ARE LONG STANDING THEORIES BUT NO PROOF. GEE, THAT IS NOT TOO HELPFUL. BUT IT THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST SAYING THAT DEPRESSION IS A " DISORDER OF THE BRAIN " (WHATEVER THAT MEANS). IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE?

Brain-imaging technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have shown that the brains of people who have depression look different than those of people without depression. The parts of the brain involved in mood, thinking, sleep, appetite, and behavior appear different. OH, GOOD. REAL EVIDENCE. But these images do not reveal why the depression has occurred. They also cannot be used to diagnose depression.  WHOOPS. IF IT DOES NOT SAY WHY, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN USE IT TO DIAGNOSIS DEPRESSION THEN WHAT DOES IT MEAN? I THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS ABOUT WHY DEPRESSION OCCURS. HECK MAYBE THE IMAGING DIFFERENCES ARE THE EFFECT OF GETTING DEPRESSED, NOT A CAUSE OF GETTING DEPRESSED.

Some types of depression tend to run in families. AH, MAYBE SOME EVIDENCE! WHAT DOES THE FAMILY PATTERN MEAN? However, depression can occur in people without family histories of depression too.9 GEE, YOU ARE WAFFLING NIMH. YOU DID NOT TELL ME WHAT THE FAMILY HISTORIES MEAN AND THEY YOU BACKED OFF EVENT HAT..  Scientists are studying certain genes that may make some people more prone to depression. GEE, I'M GLAD THEY ARE STUDYING IT BUT THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE?. Some genetics research indicates that risk for depression results from the influence of several genes acting together with environmental or other factors.10 YES, BUT THAT IS TRUE OF ALMOST ANY TRAIT. GENES PLUS ENVIRONMENT.  THAT IS LIKE SAYING " PEOPLE ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES WITH A HISTORY. " WELL DUH. THIS IS VAGUE STUFF. PLUS YOU JUST SAID A BUNCH OF GENES CARRY A RISK IN COMBINATION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. A RISK. IS A RICK AN ACTUAL CAUSE? WHAT IF THE GENE JUST MAKES ME UGLY AS SIN. IF I WAS UGLY I'D BE DEPRESSED BUT JSUT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD TREAT ME BADLY. In addition, trauma, loss of a loved one, a difficult relationship, or any stressful situation may trigger a depressive episode. Other depressive episodes may occur with or without an obvious trigger.  AAAAGH. IN OTHER WORDS, PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING! IT MIGHT HAVE A TRIGGER OR NOT. AND, SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. SURELY THIS CAN'T BE THE END OF THIS SECTION. IT IS!!  THAT'S IT?! NIMH, THAT'S IT?!  (ANSWER: YES. THAT'S IT).

The ACBS universe is composed of hard nosed scientists.That's who we are. And I will not back down one bit on the importanceof biology (good, solid biology) in understanding behavior. 

And I agree with Geoffrey that we should notcast depression as matter of finger waggingand guilt tripping.But if you read carefully it jumps out at youthat the NIMH writers here are not actually making a claim that they know why

depression occurs. They do say  " depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain " but any careful reader can then see that the claimis not backed up by evidence-based statements. 

I did not remove any words (I just added mine). Read it.They explicitly say they don't have solid evidence about causes.If you believe Stan that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance of the

brain, that is your right ... but please do know that no careful scientistI know of makes that claim as a proven matter of scientific evidence -- even those who believe that is almost certainly likely to be true someday. 

If they did know that depression was due to a chemical imbalance,depression would no longer be a syndrome ... it would be a disease.And it isn't.Read the DSM V workgroup statement on this. They say there are NO biological

markers of ANY disorder that are both specific and sensitive.That is from the psychiatrists.Then what do they mean by that statement that depression is a brain disorder?

They mean to state an assumption.You can go throughout the NIH and see that whenever behavior is concernedthat same thing is said easily. You can go to NIDA and read that substance use is a brain disease etc.

But the the evidence will not be claimed to be causal.When this way of speaking started (10-15 years ago) I used to argue it withfolks and it soon became clear that any argument was silly

because it was not a conclusion. Rather they meant that abnormal behavior is caused by the brainby assumption. If you push folk like this, they would say that environmentalters the brain; genes alter the brain; family history is a matter of the brain;

trauma affects the brain; etc etc etc. When you say " Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction. " in this context, you seem to be saying that somehow the evidence shows that

people are depressed due to the causal impact of genes and brains (the harsh truth I guess) and it is a comforting fiction to believe otherwise. If that is what you think science demands you believe, I disagree.

It does not demand that. Someday it may ... or it may not. But right nowthat is not what they are saying. Its an assumption, but they do not have the evidence

and since they are good scientists they do not actually commit the cardinal scientific sin of claiming otherwisein the absence of data.

****The reason ACBS is called ACBS is that we take a contextual view of these things.That is a less mainstream view, but it is serious and evidence-based.

Yes, genes and brains are important -- but as part of a whole system and bound by context.Genes can be turned on and off, and guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

Brains develop. And guess what does that? Environment and behavior is a big part of it.

That is not a matter of blaming people who are depressed or

holding out ACT or anything as a panacea. CBS is just anapproach to science ... and it will succeed or fail based on what it can do.

I'd say we have a lot to learn and we shall see how genes, epigenetics,behavior, and environment interact based on real hard won evidence.

Could take multiple decades or even centuries for something as complex as " depression "

Meanwhile normal folks have to live with a lot of confusingarguments and ambiguity

- S C. Foundation ProfessorDepartment of Psychology /298University of NevadaReno, NV 89557-0062 " Love isn't everything, it's the only thing "

hayes@... or stevenchayes@...Fax:

Psych Department: Contextual Change (you can use this number for messages if need be):

Blogs: Psychology Today  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-out-your-mindHuffington Post  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-c-hayes-phd

If you want my vita, publications, PowerPoint slides, try my training page:  http://contextualpsychology.org/steve_hayesor you can try my website (it is semi-functional) stevenchayes.com

If you have any questions about ACT or RFT (articles, AAQ information etc), please first check the vast resources at website of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS): www.contextualpsychology.org. You have to register on the site to download things, but the cost is up to your own values.

If you are a professional or student and want to be part of the world wide ACT discussion or RFT discussions, join the ACT list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy/join

or the RFT list:http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/relationalframetheory/joinIf you are a member of the public reading ACT self-help books (e.g., " Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life " etc) and want to be part of that conversation go to: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/join

 

I've always believed that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that we can't always think or accept our way out of it.

For me, however, believing something is true isn't enough. I want to know if what I believe is actually true. So, after reading the competing views on this thread, I did some research and found a couple sites that might help sift fact from fiction.

The first is an article on the NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) website: http://tinyurl.com/cg8ssg

The second is longer and more in-depth: http://tinyurl.com/cjyk95

Knowing the hard cold facts about ourselves and the universe we inhabit won't set us as free as we want to be but, for me, it's a good place to start. Moving forward knowing a harsh truth is more likely in the long run than believing a comforting fiction.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi all

>

> " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

>

> I strongly disagree with these claims. I Actually find these statements not only personally patronising but think it is simplistic and potentially harmful. In every era there reappears a view that sees mental illness as a moral problem. In previous times there were such view as " depression is anger turned inward " or depression is a " repression of sexual impulses " . The harm comes about when the patient makes all the effort to " accept what is " or " gets in touch with their anger " and fail to get better they are then blamed by the therapist or by themselves for not really trying, not accepting without exception.

>

> it also reflects an ongoing struggle between two professions: the psychotherapists and clinical psychologists of one hand and psychopharmachologically oriented psychiatrists on the other.

>

> I personally have found moment-to-moment acceptance, defusion, mindfulness and moving towards well defined values very helpful and ACT in that way has given me much hope in my life and very useful in managing my own anxiety and depression, I still am taking three medications for the management of my depressive problem, and whether I eventually get myself off those medications (which I genuinely hope I do some day) judging that my that my " failure " to so far reflects my inability to accept what is... well saying it is unhelpful is rather an understatement. In my family there is much depression. I would challenge anyone who holds these views to think about what it is like to have nursed an a parent as an adult in a full episode of melancholic depression with delusions of poverty and who fails to respond to any attempt - psychotherapy wise of medication wise except for ECT to tread carefully before making such trite statements.

>

> I view ACT as a new direction in psychotherapy which appears very helpful and certainly I have found it more beneficial than previous methods but as an evidence-based therapy it has a lot of work to go before it has established its superiority. And we certainly should not view it as a panacea for conditions such as depression. No therapy to date with much stronger evidence than the ACT community has provided so far has demonstrated such effectiveness - quite the opposite actually.

>

> Geoffrey

>

> > " Depression is basically a non acceptance of what is. If you accept what is and you surrender to whatever is coming FULLY without exception…

> > > Then it becomes an impossibility to be depressed... Just as darkness cannot exist in the presence of light, depression cannot exist in the presence of awareness and acceptance. "

>