Amusing Video - Is Psychiatry "Supernatural" ?

It's an old story. A number of people, some of which very educated and informed, call Psychiatry a "pseudo science". Even celebrities like Tom Cruise are of the same opinion. Why is this so? Here is a short video that will quickly and thoroughly illustrate the background of it.

Recently, someone turned my attention to this funny short video on YouTube and we both found it thought provoking. Why? Real, professional psychiatrists, just outside the 2006 American Psychiatric Association Convention venue admit that they can't prove any of the psychiatric illnesses with any chemical or biological test. All the "chemical imbalances" that are supposed to be the cause of mental illnesses (and thus cured with medications) can not be scientifically proven. They also admit that their rate of curing people is not considerable (and I just spent one full minute considering which word to use in order to put this nicely since most of them admit curing zero to one patient). Here is the video:

I find it funny because, analogue to what we see here, all things related to paranormal are routinely dismissed because "there are no final scientific proofs". Yes, there are some studies that have shown improvements in patients who have been prayed for. Yes, there were experiments similar to that with Worrall couple and other studies which came to conclusion that there is something to telepathy, psychokinesis and similar occurences, but nothing final and repeatable.

Well, as we can see - same goes for psychiatry. If all shrinks have results like those in the video - then they have nothing final. Just "we lock 'em up if they are dangerous, or pump them with tranquilizers if they are still functional" and call it a science. Don't make fuss about such details like not really being able to cure people.

I must admit that until I saw this I had a much better opinion about Freud & his contemporary followers. Successfuly healing one patient in a few dosen is enough to be called a doctor? Was that one healing really their doing or accidental / spontanoius regression of a problem then?

Where are the skeptics with their "this result is below statisticaly significant number and can be considered a random chance event"? It is extra funny when you realize that spiritual healers and village witch doctors actually have better healing averages than these guys. For example, abilities of Natasha Demkina certainly demonstrated much better percentage score than zero or none but some skeptics still called her a "fraud". Did anyone ever see them saying the same for the guys in this video? Of course not. Isn't this called "double standards"?

What the problem of psychiatry is - I don't know. I am grateful to say that I don't have any insight into it nor does it interest me. However, I think this video clearly shows that they have very poor results. Not even to mention police "profilers" who have yet to boast one single arrest based purely on their work. Just google around for a complete miss they made with "psychological profile" of a Unabomber.

So why don't the skeptics ever take the shrinks under the magnifying glass? Apparently they are not interested in them. Only in "supernatural". At this point I think it becomes clear what the problem is. It's the implications of that "super" prefix that bug some people. That is why the above mentioned Natasha gets called a "fraud" when she gets 4 out of 7 tests subjects right by "supernatural" means, but when psychiatrists with years of experience admit curing 0 to 1 patient - they are OK. Why? Because results apparently do not matter to some people, as long as one doesn't suggest anything "supernatural".

The silent paradox, which many people are not aware of, is that many people in occult waters also do not use the term "supernatural". This is because they believe that there is nothing really "super" about it and that all such occurencies are results of some currently unknown natural forces that connect mind with matter. Science can not yet put a finger on them but people have noticed them and talked about them for centuries.

There is lesson to be learned here. Psychiatry may not have a firm grip on the conditions they are studying and trying to cure, but at least they are trying to identify some patterns and circumstances that are common to patients with similar symptoms. That at least leads to some scientific progress in their field.

On the other hand the "supernatural" field is full of shady characters making exaggerated claims knowing fully well that all psychic abilities have problems with repeatability. They need exploring. Advertising them as something reliable and ready-to-use is at best overly optimistic and just gives a bad name to everyone who gets involved with them, even at the level of research.