Posted by SLS on March 19, 2006, at 22:19:58
In reply to Re: Never thought I'd hear this....., posted by JahL on March 19, 2006, at 22:00:19
Hi JahL.
This schema is not at all official. However, it is accepted among some authors and is derived from the work of Young and Klerman (1992).
http://www.mentalhealth.com/rx2/bp-can1.html#Head_3
I think Hagop Akiskal, MD promotes a similar classification system.
- Scott
> > One proposed scheme:
> >
> >
> > THE BIPOLAR SPECTRUM
> >
> > BIPOLAR I: Both mania and major depression
> >
> > BIPOLAR II: Major depression and hypomania
> >
> > BIPOLAR III: Cyclothymia. Mild depression and hypomania
> >
> > BIPOLAR IV: Depression and usually no mania. Mania may be triggered by some antidepressants.
> >
> > BIPOLAR V: Depression and no mania. Some blood relatives have had mania
> >
> > BIPOLAR VI: Mania and no depression
> >
> >
> > http://www.bipolarworld.net/Bipolar%20Disorder/Diagnosis/dis.html
>
> Thanks Scott.
>
> It took me three years to have my dx recognised (I had always known what it was) - the main reason being my illness doesn't match any of the traditional descriptions of Bipolar - and I had a particularly nasty response to Lithium. Anything with 5HT action can get me switching however. So I guess I'm BP IV. Cool.
>
> How 'official' is this scheme? Can I go and impress pdocs by quoting a dx they've never even heard of (this is England remember)?
poster:SLS
thread:620137
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060315/msgs/622302.html