This is a good study on CBT vs meds in relapse and recurrence prevention. Note that despite their conservative wording of the results, these data show that if you had to have *temporary* treatment (ie, not for the rest of your life), CBT will have more impact on your future mental health than taking medications, and is no less effective than taking medications for the rest of your life.

Results Patients withdrawn from CT were significantly less likely to relapse during continuation than patients withdrawn from medications (30.8% vs 76.2%; P = .004), and no more likely to relapse than patients who kept taking continuation medication (30.8% vs 47.2%; P = .20). There were also indications that the effect of CT extends to the prevention of recurrence.

Conclusions Cognitive therapy has an enduring effect that extends beyond the end of treatment. It seems to be as effective as keeping patients on medication.

Greetings Jason
Regular exercise is fine (endorphins) and gives one the feeling of being connected, but sadly doesn’t deal with ones DEPRESSION [unresolved issues from ones childhood]. Exercise, whether it be jogging, dancing or working out in the gym can end up being, just another addiction. What happens if one breaks a leg?
PEACE BE WITH YOU
MICKY

My ability to exercise has very little to do with determination, and a great deal to do with being mentally healthy enough to be motivated to get out of the house and do something active, and healthy enough to not be exhausted just by the effort to get out of the house. It’s not something I do through determination, it’s something that mental health allows me to do, and poor mental health does not.

The caveats to such studies are, as you point out, that anyone can take a pill, whereas it takes a lot of motivation, energy, discipline, and *belief* enough to maintain these for someone to develop an exercise routine. Also, since psychiatrists can neither make their patients exercise nor get paid for attempting to do so, well…

So kudos, Resonance, for your own determination. I too find it very hard to get into a routine when I’m already depressed or anxious (or, well, to get out of bed and leave the house, never mind an exercise “routine”), and sometimes it is motivating just to remind each other what a difference it can and does make.

I think that it is rather unfortunate that you have someone trying to be all preachy here on your blog and telling you stuff about yourself that you apparently did not know (magical! divine powers, I’m sure). Anyway, I believe that if someone finds that they can help solve their problems by the addition of religion and faith… well… good for them, but it does not work for everyone or for every problem. So I think debate is cool, but preaching is really self-righteous and all. I, personally do not believe that Jesus loves me and this is for a few reasons… i grew up in a fairly religious household, but have come to not really believe and really question faith and religion. Furthermore, Jesus does not love me because I am Jewish… lol. So there ya go!

You? a DEMON? *That* is pretty funny. What ever happened to “love thy neighbor” and all that crap. As long as a person is moral… well, i tend to think they are not satan or satan’s spawn or whatever…

Don’t waste your time on fanatics. No matter what you say they will just keep arguing. I love it when people always think they are right… awesome.

Be well <3

As for the paper, check out the link I put in my comment…

Michael –

I’d be willing to consider the archival evidence, if it exists. I think I might be even more convinced by a large-scale study that controls for stuff like pre-existing religiosity and family religiosity.

On another note, I share your frustration that articles don’t more frequently report what percentage of participants benefited from a given treatment, as well as the overall group improvement. In terms of theoretical understanding, there’s a big difference between a treatment that cures a small number of people vs. one that gives a slight benefit to most people.

I hadn’t thought about it that way, but very true. Does the variance handle that? I can’t even remember what people are required to report in APA papers now.

I recall that this perspective was also discussed in the Psych Science review article on harmful therapies from last month. The author suggested that we look not only at whether some treatments have negative overall effects, but also at whether some treatments that appear to have null effects are actually helping some people and hurting others.

Ooh. Send it to me if you find it and I’ll post about it. (If you like, you can guest-post about it…)

Both those things are really important methodologically. Maybe I should brush up on methodology and do a series of those posts. It’s not specific to mental illness, but I want to write about science education, too…

And yes, unfortunately, my “process” has to do with your comments on my blog. It is in response to them, about them, and focused on them.

I’m fairly familiar with feelings, having had overly intense ones most of my life that have calmed down with age and medication. (Now I just have normal feelings like other people, and I relish that.) You’re not doing a very good job of provoking feelings in me, though; to be frank, you suck at trolling and I’m guessing you’re pretty new to it. You’ve missed most of my hotbuttons because you’re not very good at guessing what my issues are. You have gotten every single one wrong, in fact. You’ve also gotten my gender wrong, btw.

I’ve had therapy at various times over the years. It’s a good bet that I’ve had more therapy than you had. I’m pleased to see you acknowledging that JESUS CHRIST might not be able to solve everything, though. JESUS CHRIST doesn’t seem to have solved your tendency to say nasty things to other people while telling them how much you love them. That is a tendency that abusers frequently display, btw. Are you projecting your childhood and yourself onto me?

Anyway, it’s been fun, and it’s also been good practice interacting with people who are pissed off at me, in denial, and spamming my blog, without getting upset or taking it too seriously. It’s going to make it easier to deal with people who are saying similarly stupid things, but are much better at provoking strong emotions.

I’m going to shift my energy back to science now, but thanks for the ride.

I’m not very fluent in clinical literature. I think that a lot of clinical studies might do this (e.g., reporting the percentage of participants who improved by a least a minimum number of points on the HAM-D scale). It’s almost unheard of in social psych, though.

I recall that this perspective was also discussed in the Psych Science review article on harmful therapies from last month. The author suggested that we look not only at whether some treatments have negative overall effects, but also at whether some treatments that appear to have null effects are actually helping some people and hurting others. I should review that to see what his specific suggestion was. It was a great article in general.