Thursday, March 11, 2010
Pathologising everyday life
It is looking increasingly certain that the trend to classify everyday behaviour as abnormal will intensify further. Proposed changes to the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) unveiled last month would widen the definition of psychiatric disorders substantially. If the proposals are adopted when the enormously influential reference work is published in 2013 more people than ever will be defined as mentally ill.
According to an article in the Washington Post:
“Children who throw too many tantrums could be diagnosed with ‘temper dysregulation with dysphoria.’ Teenagers who are particularly eccentric might be candidates for treatment for ‘psychosis risk syndrome.’ Men who are just way too interested in sex face being labeled as suffering from ‘hypersexual disorder.’”
It goes on to quote Christopher Lane, the author of Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness, as arguing that "They are close to treating the children like guinea pigs. I think that's appalling and outrageous.”
Meanwhile, an article in Science notes that:
“proposed revisions for the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders include for the first time "behavioural addictions"—a change some say is long overdue and others say is still premature. So far, only one behaviour has made the cut: gambling, which under the new proposal would join substance-use disorders as a full-fledged addiction.”
The new proposals to further pathologise normal behaviour only confirm what already looked likely to be the trend. In my blog post of 26 July 2009 I already cited an article by Christopher Lane warning that this was likely to happen.
Back in 2008 I also reviewed a book for spiked which showed how this trend was already underway. The Loss of Sadness: How Psychiatry Transformed Normal Sorrow Into Depressive Disorder, by Allan V Horwitz and Jerome C Wakefield is a key book on the subject.
According to an article in the Washington Post:
“Children who throw too many tantrums could be diagnosed with ‘temper dysregulation with dysphoria.’ Teenagers who are particularly eccentric might be candidates for treatment for ‘psychosis risk syndrome.’ Men who are just way too interested in sex face being labeled as suffering from ‘hypersexual disorder.’”
It goes on to quote Christopher Lane, the author of Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness, as arguing that "They are close to treating the children like guinea pigs. I think that's appalling and outrageous.”
Meanwhile, an article in Science notes that:
“proposed revisions for the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders include for the first time "behavioural addictions"—a change some say is long overdue and others say is still premature. So far, only one behaviour has made the cut: gambling, which under the new proposal would join substance-use disorders as a full-fledged addiction.”
The new proposals to further pathologise normal behaviour only confirm what already looked likely to be the trend. In my blog post of 26 July 2009 I already cited an article by Christopher Lane warning that this was likely to happen.
Back in 2008 I also reviewed a book for spiked which showed how this trend was already underway. The Loss of Sadness: How Psychiatry Transformed Normal Sorrow Into Depressive Disorder, by Allan V Horwitz and Jerome C Wakefield is a key book on the subject.
Labels: affluenza, happiness, spiked
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Speedy ambition
A great example of ambition from Chinese railways as shown in an article on the American ABC news website:
“China is negotiating to extend its own high-speed railway network to up to 17 countries in 10 to 15 years, eventually potentially connecting London with Beijing and then on to Singapore.”
Evidently at its maximum speed of 344 km (215 miles) per hour the train could get from Beijing to London in two days.
“China is negotiating to extend its own high-speed railway network to up to 17 countries in 10 to 15 years, eventually potentially connecting London with Beijing and then on to Singapore.”
Evidently at its maximum speed of 344 km (215 miles) per hour the train could get from Beijing to London in two days.
Labels: Asia, china, technology, transport
Ferrarit mindenkinek
For those of you who missed it, an interview with me on Ferraris For All was broadcast on Hungarian public radio on Monday. It is available to listen to on the internet but it is in Hungarian.
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
1,000 blog posts
I find it hard to believe but I have written 1,000 posts since I first started blogging on 16 July 2006. Evidently my favourite subjects are, economics followed by environment, development, consumption and America.
I am hoping that within a few weeks I will transfer to a totally different website. If anyone has any suggestions for features you would like to see now is the time to let me know.
I am hoping that within a few weeks I will transfer to a totally different website. If anyone has any suggestions for features you would like to see now is the time to let me know.
Monday, March 08, 2010
Me on Dubai assassination
Nothing to do with growth scepticism but readers may be interested in my spiked article on why assassination plays a central role in Israeli society. A long time ago, before I started writing about economics, I used to write about the Middle East.
Labels: spiked
Sunday, March 07, 2010
For the record
The incorrect claim in last Friday's BBC World programme that I am a former Financial Times (FT) correspondent made me think that, for the record, I should correct some other misconceptions about my biography. Below I list the main ones I have come across and outline how I think they arose.
* The claim that I am a former FT correspondent to my knowledge first appeared on the entry for Cowardly Capitalism, my book on global finance, on Amazon.co.uk. In fact I did work for the FT group, as the editor of a specialist newspaper called Investment Adviser, but not as a correspondent for the FT. I have, however, contributed freelance articles to the FT.
* I am not now nor have I ever been a “professional investment adviser” as also claimed on the Amazon.co.uk site (although I think this originated with Wiley, the publisher of Cowardly Capitalism). I did, as mentioned above, once edit a newspaper called Investment Adviser.
* I am not an economist although I have written extensively about economics. I call myself an economics writer rather than an economist.
* I have never written for the Morning Star – a newspaper once linked to Britain’s official Communist party. In fact I worked as a writer for Morningstar; a Chicago-based global company which provides information on investment funds and stocks.
* The claim that I am a former FT correspondent to my knowledge first appeared on the entry for Cowardly Capitalism, my book on global finance, on Amazon.co.uk. In fact I did work for the FT group, as the editor of a specialist newspaper called Investment Adviser, but not as a correspondent for the FT. I have, however, contributed freelance articles to the FT.
* I am not now nor have I ever been a “professional investment adviser” as also claimed on the Amazon.co.uk site (although I think this originated with Wiley, the publisher of Cowardly Capitalism). I did, as mentioned above, once edit a newspaper called Investment Adviser.
* I am not an economist although I have written extensively about economics. I call myself an economics writer rather than an economist.
* I have never written for the Morning Star – a newspaper once linked to Britain’s official Communist party. In fact I worked as a writer for Morningstar; a Chicago-based global company which provides information on investment funds and stocks.
Top UN panel savages me on green economy
Most people find watching themselves on video odd but this item from BBC World television (only broadcast outside Britain) is truly weird. It holds me up as a critic of the “green economy” (which is fine) only to have me knocked down by a top panel at a United Nations conference in Indonesia including a Nobel peace prize winner, the head of the United Nations Environment Programme, the Indonesian trade minister and the Norwegian environment minister. Sadly I was filmed in London rather than Bali and I had no chance to reply to the critics.
Labels: development, economics, environment
Saturday, March 06, 2010
Excellent new American blog
A great new blog for anyone interested in American politics, economics or culture. The American Situation is run by Sean Collins, a fellow spiked contributor and a native New Yorker.
Thursday, March 04, 2010
On missing baby girls
In 1990 Amartya Sen, who has since won the Nobel prize in economics, wrote an article in the New York Review of Books arguing there were 100m “missing” baby girls in the third world. From an examination of statistics that many baby girls in poorer countries died as a result of poorer medical care or even deliberate infanticide. It is strange that two decades later the same story should make the cover of the Economist with both the lead editorial and a substantial feature.
It is of course right that girls should have the same access to public health resources as boys and that men and women should have equal rights. However, something odd is going on with the recent heavy emphasis by establishment figures on gender equality in poorer countries.
As I argued in my recent spiked review defending abundance something odd seems to be going on. The aspiration to achieve material equality between the rich countries and the poor has become subdued. Instead there is a widespread discussion of gender inequality - and this in turn is often understood in terms of the authorities intervening in family life to stop men abusing women.
As a result tackling inequality is redefined as a problem of male abuse rather than one of a lack of economic development. From this perspective the relatively recent mainstream preoccupation with gender inequality is more problematic than it first appears.
It is of course right that girls should have the same access to public health resources as boys and that men and women should have equal rights. However, something odd is going on with the recent heavy emphasis by establishment figures on gender equality in poorer countries.
As I argued in my recent spiked review defending abundance something odd seems to be going on. The aspiration to achieve material equality between the rich countries and the poor has become subdued. Instead there is a widespread discussion of gender inequality - and this in turn is often understood in terms of the authorities intervening in family life to stop men abusing women.
As a result tackling inequality is redefined as a problem of male abuse rather than one of a lack of economic development. From this perspective the relatively recent mainstream preoccupation with gender inequality is more problematic than it first appears.
Labels: development, inequality, review, spiked, women
