SteveP wrote:It is also worth noting, that schitzophrenia is a chronic illness by nature
The most extended study on Schizophrenia until now is Martin Harrow 15 years outcome study. (It’s the only one of this kind)
And the result contradicts everything you wrote. http://www.accessibilitynews.ca/cwdo/ac ... health=126
Also take a look at this:
"The first World Health Organization study that compared schizophrenia outcomes in "developed" and "developing" countries was called The International Pilot Study of Schizophrenia. It began in 1968, and involved 1202 patients in nine countries. At both two-year and five-year follow-ups, the patients in the poor countries were doing much better. The researchers concluded that schizophrenia patients in the poor countries "had a considerably better course and outcome than (patients) in developed countries. This remained true whether clinical outcomes, social outcomes, or a combination of the two was considered." Two-thirds of the patients in India and Nigeria were asymptomatic at the end of five years. The WHO investigators, however, were unable to identify a variable that explained this notable difference in outcomes.
The second WHO study of this type was called the Determinants of Outcome of Severe Mental Disorders. It involved 1379 patients from 10 countries, and was designed as a follow-up study to the International Pilot Study of Schizophrenia. The patients in this study were first-episode patients, and 86% had been ill fewer than 12 months. This study confirmed the findings of the first: two-year outcomes were much better for the patients in the poor countries. In broad terms, 37 percent of the patients in the poor countries (India, Nigeria and Colombia) had a single psychotic episode and then fully recovered; another 26.7% of the patients in the poor countries had two or more psychotic episodes but still were in "complete remission" at the end of the two years. In other words, 63.7% of the patients in the poor countries were doing fairly well at the end of two years. In contrast, only 36.9% of the patients in the U.S. and six other developed countries were doing fairly well at the end of two years. The researchers concluded that "being in a developed country was a strong predictor of not attaining a complete remission."
Although the WHO researchers didn't identify a variable that would explain this difference in outcomes, they did note that in the developing countries, only 15.9% of patients were continuously maintained on neuroleptics, compared to 61% of patients in the U.S. and other developed countries
Also, one of the psychiatrist who is a member of White House mental Health commission, is an ex-schizophrenia pacients (which in your unfounded opinion, is "chronic":)http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/496394http://akmhcweb.org/recovery/My_Story.htm
But the most serious proves and data’s come from Finland (Open Project), where a new approach has virtually eliminated new cases of schizophrenia from developing in West Lapland, in a population of 72,000 over a 10 year period. Their use of medication and hospitalization is about 20% that seen in other industrialized countries! There are enough studies on this already:http://www.power2u.org/alternatives-to- ... ation.html
Obviously, to stop the medication of a patient, who has taken them for months and years it's stupid! It could take years to stop them completely, working with a psychiatrist, because of risks of Neuroleptic-Induced Supersensitivity Psychosis, etc, and then, you should replace them with other kinds of treatments (for example finish system, which until now is by far the most efficient in the world, if you consider the results), until full recovery. And of course, not in all cases, there is the possibility of complete recovery.
Maybe you just study more, and to study the facts