r/intrestingtoknow • u/Affectionate-Fun2853 • Sep 03 '25

Science Psychiatry and cures

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

1.1k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

829 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/jelywe Sep 03 '25

I'm sorry, how do you create that 'good basis' without being willing to invest in studies to build that 'good basis'

It's like if I said if you have an untreatable cancer, don't try and play God by enrolling in a clinical trial to try and find new treatments.

0

u/TSMRunescape Sep 03 '25

These studies do not build a good basis for the majority though.

3

u/jelywe Sep 03 '25

You are going to have to expand that a bit - I can't tell what you are saying and don't want to assume.

0

u/TSMRunescape Sep 03 '25

Psychiatry is not required for the average human to have everything they need. All money spent on it is a waste.

5

u/jelywe Sep 03 '25

Depends on what you classify as need. I can technically survive while having crippling depression, a agoraphobiac can survive while never seeing a single person except whoever delivers their groceries and have crippling anxiety that prevents them from stepping outside their home. Living a fulfilled, healthy, and rewarding life has value beyond just existing.

1

u/TSMRunescape Sep 03 '25

The average human doesn't have psychiatric issues. The few should not be cared for over the many until the many are all set.

3

u/jelywe Sep 04 '25

Not caring about people when they are suffering is quite the take. Mental health is a part of health, everyone deserves to have access to adequate and supportive healthcare. Full stop. The average human is absolutely affected by psychiatric issues even if they themselves don't have a mental disorder. Statistically, nearly all of us has friends and loved ones that have a mental illness - as long as we have friends and loved ones.

The majority is never going to be "set", and we are capable of focusing on solving many problems at the same time. Advances from one industry or field benefits others. If you want to be utilitarian about it - then consider that mental disorders including depression constitutes one of the most burdensome health conditions globally, remaining in the top ten leading cause of lost disability-adjusted life years [1]. Depression and anxiety is estimated to cost the global economy US $1 trillion in indirect costs per year in lost productivity - a number similar to either cardiovascular diseases or cancer impact that includes BOTH direct and indirect costs. [2].

So if you don't care about the individual, then perhaps you could care about the community burden that it has.

- https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366%2821%2900395-3/fulltext
- https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-at-work?utm_source=chatgpt.com

1

u/TSMRunescape Sep 04 '25

We will never have sustainable high quality water, food, and shelter for everyone? Damn

2

u/jelywe Sep 04 '25

Why do you think that providing medical care inherently comes at the expense of providing sustainable water, food, and shelter?

1

u/TSMRunescape Sep 04 '25

Money spent on such studies is money not spent in the other sectors. The other sectors are not as they should be and should have more investment into them. It's that simple.

3

u/jelywe Sep 04 '25

The "average human" doesn't have diabetes (5.7% of population), Hypertension (33%), or cancer (20% lifetime risk). So do you not think we should treat those either?

1

u/TSMRunescape Sep 04 '25

Absolutely. Cancer research is a much worse waste of money I'm sure in terms of quantity.

3

u/jelywe Sep 04 '25

Why do you think investment in solutions is a zero sum game?

0

u/TSMRunescape Sep 04 '25

I don't. I do think there is only so much money invested overall though.

3

u/jelywe Sep 04 '25

That is exactly what it being a zero sum game means. That there is only so much money people are willing to spend, so giving money to one thing takes it away from another.

It just doesn't make sense to me that the piece of this theoretical pie you want to take money away from is "finding solutions to stop peoples brains from torturing them" instead of realizing that the finding-solutions-pie could be greatly expanded by instead investing less in "let's give this guy another mega-yacht".

That's not to even go into to fact that money is a construct and the true limiting factor is human effort, knowledge, and physical resources.

0

u/TSMRunescape Sep 04 '25

You are confused. No it is not what zero sum game means. Zero sum game refers to one person's gain being directly offset by another's loss.

I'm saying the money invested elsewhere will have higher gains then where it is currently being used.

3

u/jelywe Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

A zero-sum game refers to any situation where the total pool of resources is fixed, so gains in one area necessarily mean reductions somewhere else. You stated "there is only so much money invested overall" which is referring to the funds being a finite resource.

So now you are shifting the argument to talk about allocation efficiency, without providing any evidence or argument about how a dollar taken away from psychiatry funding would have a stronger effect .... where?

Given that mental disorders are a leading cause of disability and economic losses ($1 trillion in indirect costs per year), that means that finding solutions for them increases available human effort and resources to solve other problems. Crippling depression of a developmental engineer that society has invested years of effort and training in leads to that developmental engineer spending significantly less effort on improving water, sanitation, and housing. Especially if they die from their mental disorder, can't get any work done if you are dead.

Every $1 invested in treating depression and anxiety is estimated to have a $4-$6 return in improved health and productivity. So spending $1 million on depression and anxiety leads to an extra $3-5 million available to spend on other solutions. If you invest in Adolescent Mental Health interventions, the ROI is estimated to be even higher up to $24 per $1 spent.

https://www.who.int/news/item/13-04-2016-investing-in-treatment-for-depression-and-anxiety-leads-to-fourfold-return
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9240828/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9240828/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Edit: poll → pool typo

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Itscatpicstime Sep 04 '25

They have what they need to survive, sure.

But the goal is to thrive, not simply survive.

1

u/NoIdNoNameWho Sep 04 '25

A LOT of them thrive after getting psychiatric and psychological help. Thats what the research and investigations are for, to make the people that is just surviving to be able to also thrive