Behaviorism and Mental Health

Alternative perspective on psychiatry's so-called mental disorders | PHILIP HICKEY, PH.D.

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Tell Your Story
  • Submit Your Story
  • Moderation Policy

Neuroleptics and Brain Shrinkage

June 29, 2013 By Phil Hickey |

Joanna Moncrieff, MD, has an article up on Mad in America.  It’s called Antipsychotics and Brain Shrinkage: An Update, and is dated June 19.  Joanna Moncrieff is the author of The Myth of the Chemical Cure, a widely-read book which challenges the entire concept of mental illness.  In the book Dr. Moncrieff also makes the point that the brain shrinkage associated with a “diagnosis” of “schizophrenia” is in fact caused by the neuroleptic drugs, and is not, as psychiatrists claim, a consequence of the so-called illness.

The current paper updates the arguments, and was written specifically to address a re-assertion of the old dogma that it is the “schizophrenia” that causes the brain shrinkage.  Here are two quotes:

“These researchers seem determined to prove that ‘schizophrenia’ causes brain shrinkage, although their data simply cannot establish this, as none of their subjects seem to have gone without drug treatment for any significant length of time. So even though their recent analysis once again confirms the damaging effects of antipsychotics, they conclude that the results demonstrate the need to make sure patients take, and do not stop, their antipsychotic medication.”

“People need to know about this research because it indicates that antipsychotics are not the innocuous substances that they have frequently been portrayed as. We still have no conclusive evidence that the disorders labeled as schizophrenia or psychosis are associated with any underlying abnormalities of the brain, but we do have strong evidence that the drugs we use to treat these conditions cause brain changes.”

And remember, these drugs are now being given to children as young as 2 years of age.

Dr. Moncrieff refers to an animal study, and summarizes the findings as follows:

“After 18 months of treatment monkeys treated with olanzapine or haloperidol, at doses equivalent to those used in humans, had approximately 10% lighter brains than those treated with a placebo preparation.”

You can see an abstract of the original study here.

People, of course, aren’t monkeys, and we need to use appropriate caution in applying the results of animal research to people.  But 10% seems an enormous amount of tissue loss, after such a relatively short exposure time.  People are often given these drugs for years, and are usually strongly discouraged from coming off them.

Dr. Moncrieff’s article is detailed, and well worth reading.

 

Filed Under: A Behavioral Approach to Mental Disorders Tagged With: neuroleptics

About Phil Hickey

I am a licensed psychologist, presently retired. I have worked in clinical and managerial positions in the mental health, corrections, and addictions fields in the United States and England. My wife Nancy and I have been married since 1970 and have four grown children.

 

Recent Articles

  • AND FINALLY
  • RESPONDING TO DR. MOREHEAD’S SECOND ATTACK ON ANTI-PSYCHIATRY
  • DR. PIES STILL TRYING TO EXCULPATE PSYCHIATRY FOR THE CHEMICAL IMBALANCE THEORY OF DEPRESSION
  • RESPONDING TO DANIEL MOREHEAD, MD,  PSYCHIATRY’S LATEST CHAMPION
  • PROBLEMS AT A COLORADO MENTAL HEALTH CENTER
  • THE ENIGMA-MDD PROJECT: SEARCHING FOR THE NEUROPATHOLOGY OF “MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER”
  • ILLNESSES OR LOOSE COLLECTIONS OF VAGUELY DESCRIBED PROBLEMS?
  • WHY IS PSYCHIATRY SO DEFENSIVE ABOUT CRITICISM OF PSYCHIATRY? Part 2
  • WHY IS PSYCHIATRY SO DEFENSIVE ABOUT CRITICISM OF PSYCHIATRY? Part 1
  • ADDRESSING THE SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF MENTAL HEALTH – OR PERHAPS NOT

The phrase "mental health" as used in the name of this website is simply a term of convenience. It specifically does not imply that the human problems embraced by this term are illnesses, or that their absence constitutes health. Indeed, the fundamental tenet of this site is that there are no mental illnesses, and that conceptualizing human problems in this way is spurious, destructive, disempowering, and stigmatizing.

Disclaimer

The purpose of this website is to provide a forum where current practices and ideas in the mental health field can be critically examined and discussed. It is not possible in this kind of context to provide psychological help or advice to individuals who may read this site, and nothing written here should be construed in this manner. Readers seeking psychological help should consult a qualified practitioner in their own local area. They should explain their concerns to this person and develop a trusting working relationship. It is only in a one-to-one relationship of this kind that specific advice should be given or taken.

Privacy Policy

Popular Topics…

ADHD akathisia alcohol alcohol/drugs antidepressants antipsychotics anxiety benzodiazepines bipolar books worth reading case study chemical imbalance theory conflict of interest dealing with problems of daily living dementia dependence depression drug DSM DSM-5 ECT expansion of psychiatric turf IF THEY'RE NOT ILLNESSES WHAT ARE THEY? involuntary commitment Mad in America major tranquilizers myth of chemical imbalance myth of mental illness neuroleptics over-medicalization of everyday life parenting pharmaceutical industry placebo posttraumatic stress disorder Psychiatric "spin" research corruption schizophrenia shock "treatment" side effects somatic symptom disorder SSRI's suicide survivors of psychiatry tardive dyskinesia violence

© 2009–2023