Comments

1
You'd have to be crazy to support the changes in the DSM-5.
2
@1: So what's objectively worse than IV, and for reasons that have nothing to do with insurance coding? (Serious question)
3
you have an open tag in this post, everything underneath it is goofed.
4
What @3 said, fix this post please.
5
Passed in 2003 this bill mandates that all state facilities must consider the use of fuel cells for uninterruptable power supplies.

http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislati…

It has been written into the RCW.

7
The importance of the NIMH announcement is perhaps being understated here. It's not just that the NIMH isn't happy with the DSM, it's the fact that they are going to start moving their funding away from research projects that are based on DSM diagnostic criteria. In other words, it directly affects who gets money and who doesn't.

As Insel writes, "The strength of each of the editions of DSM has been “reliability” – each edition has ensured that clinicians use the same terms in the same ways. The weakness is its lack of validity." The question is whether the DSM even managed to ensure that clinicians were using the same terms in the same way. And if it doesn't even do that...
8
@6: "rendering them so incredible vanilla as to be absolutely useless"

Of only that were the case. The problem with Gawker sites is that they let in far too much crap and babble.
9
@2 I was actually just making a bad pun.
10
The honeybees thing is kind of old...I suggest this instead: http://www.pnas.org/content/109/19/7481.…
11
Honeybees. Because we have a lot of those to spare ... not.
12
Of course bees can find land mines! Why do you think they're disappearing?

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.