My process is slow

A dear friend of mine wanted rid of the aspect of her personal experience which she wanted removed. She wanted psychosis ended. She wanted a nornal experience of consciousness.

I won't divulge any more than this except about me.

Initially I provided her with a link to alternative treatments for psychosis. There's a great site I should link to when I'm at a pc.

Her psychiatrist wanted to help her. So he tried different meds and high levels. She's very sedated now. I don't know how she is.

What evidence does a doctor need to do better than switching meds and using high doses? Perhaps a systematic analysis which looks at the effect of a broad range of treatments for psychosis but only at the sub factors of delusions and hallucinations...but I'm just an addict.

What would I know? It took me months to realise this important bit of the evidence base was missing.

2 years...maybe more...looking for the argument which would change NICEs schizophrenia guidelines. The one thing I have, apart from the other stuff and perhaps more importantly than the other stuff, is this one important research question.

It is not my idea nor ever has been. It is my friend's idea because it was the thing which answered her need.

It takes me ages. Someone else must have thought about this. It is why I have to keep asking and searching. Half a century of psychiatry is stupid but not so stupid that this research question above all others which doctors asks hasn't been asked.

After all...they know what patients want from treatment and expect...right? Isn't this what a large proportion of the research which informs clinical practice all about - what patients want?

Of course it isn't about what patients want. That's clear. But there still must be a load of funding for what patients want? You know...to fund all that research into treatment outcomes which patients and the public expect?

So I'm slow and I admit my failings. It takes months of work to write a good rant!