Social ugliness, health economics, research, antipsychotics and dementia

Its a good thing that most doctors are blind to what they're doing.

Antipsychotics proved to be useful for the 'treatment' of challenging
behaviour assoicated with dementia just as they are useful for
'treatment' of many forms of social ugliness...I mean mental illnesses.
These individuals didn't have a schizophrenia diagnosis. They are not
experiencing psychosis. However their behaviour can be treated in the
same way the it is treated through use of high dose antipsychotics in
acute wards.

This created the research opportunity to assess the impact of on life
expectancy of antipsychotic drugs. Previously this was impossible
because standard clinical practice is antipsychotics for psychosis and
schizophrenia. There is an established reduced life expectancy with the
condition and it was assumed that the whole of this effect was through
the condition.

In one study on people who were very close to death the impact of
treatment with low doses of antipsychotic medication was around 50%.
Doctors are killing their patients because of their challenging behaviour.

The problem is that according to health economics this is a good result.
The cost of physical healthcare for these patients would be high and the
distress caused to doctors was is also high. The cost saving from the
reduction in life expectancy combined with the increase in quality of
life for doctors will be enough to ensure that antipsychotics will
continue to be used to 'treat' people with dementia.

There may be other reasons why antipyschotics will continue to be used
to treat social ugliness and kill people quicker when there is evidence
like this. No one gives a shit about another dead dementia patient.
Everyone's too busy fannying about with words.