Per the study, being off meds is most likely associated with being female, working a paying job, no substance abuse, and a high score on a GAF-F.
The conclusion of the study is, “The finding calls for further investigation on a more individualized approach to long-term treatment with antipsychotic medication.”
So basically, all the study is saying is one size does not fit all when it comes to medication. I think most of us know that already.
There is now WHODAS 2.0. The problem with that for me is sections 2 and 3 , and how to answer if you’re mentally ill but not physically ill. They seem very physically orientated , and IMO should not be used to say a mentally ill person is less disabled than they really are.
The threashold is 18% and of those we aren’t told what % still have symptoms, just that they are managing without medication.
When you’ve got a 1 in 5 chance of being able to live with symptoms it’s not a positive thing. There are many unmedicated and psychotic that live with their symptoms too
Well, in the US at least, no positive symptoms means you don’t have schizophrenia. But it’s the psychosis that destroys grey matter, not negative symptoms. However, just because someone only displays negative symptoms at the time of diagnosis doesn’t mean that they’ll never develop positive symptoms. People diagnosed with schizophrenia simplex are also put on antipsychotics for that very reason. Just because psychotic symptoms are not observed doesn’t mean they aren’t there, no matter how mild they may be.
I didn’t dismiss or downplay anything. I never even suggested that other illnesses and disabilities are less serious or severe. I said that autism, even severe autism, doesn’t destroy grey matter, which it doesn’t, therefore the two can’t be compared in this sense.
a Lack of positive symptoms does not mean you don’t have sz
The specific DSM-5 criteria for schizophrenia are as follows [1] :
The presence of 2 (or more) of the following, each present for a significant portion of time during a 1-month period (or less if successfully treated), with at least 1 of them being (1), (2), or (3): (1) delusions, (2) hallucinations, (3) disorganized speech, (4) grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior, and (5) negative symptoms
For a significant portion of the time since the onset of the disturbance, level of functioning in 1 or more major areas (eg, work, interpersonal relations, or self-care) is markedly below the level achieved before onset; when the onset is in childhood or adolescence, the expected level of interpersonal, academic or occupational functioning is not achieved
Continuous signs of the disturbance persist for a period of at least 6 months, which must include at least 1 month of symptoms (or less if successfully treated); prodromal symptoms often precede the active phase, and residual symptoms may follow it, characterized by mild or subthreshold forms of hallucinations or delusions
Ie you’re saying ASD is not in the same ballpark of disability severity than psychosis/schizophrenia. The way your comment was framed was all too clear. A desire not to compare the two strongly suggests that. It’s like me saying I don’t want to compare most other people’s disability to mine because they have less problems socialising than I do, and in doing so choosing to ignore other aspects of their disability. Refusing to compare ASD and schizophrenia over one aspect, whether there is loss of grey matter or not, is exactly the same .
Okay, you know what? I really don’t feel like having this argument, or any argument, with you or anyone else today. So I’m just going to go ahead and say “whatever.”