I agree smartness isn't sufficient for a cure, and sometimes drugs are necessary, but neither is just "talking to someone" which is what Befrienders states: "We work worldwide to provide emotional support, and reduce suicide. We listen to people who are in distress. We don't judge them or tell them what to do - we listen." I'm certain what they do is a good idea but I think it's just a cached piece of advice that works well for most people.
If you can talk to the right person, then sure, it's going to help more than talking to yourself. The right people are few and far between even among paid therapists, some of which are paid commissions on how many drug prescriptions they give, and a random person is incredibly unlikely to be the right person. Where smartness comes in handy is that a smart person can do the relevant research for their particular case.
My own opinion is that a lot of the "best practices" and so on are aimed mainly at extroverts, and similarly educational practices are aimed at whatever majority group of student-types you can describe there. (Techniques hackers would love in school don't seem to work well on the general population.)
No, just no. Having a sympathetic person listen and provide good advice can be extremely valuable. And these things do not require anything but the attention of someone who cares, who maybe has gone through the same thing. These people are not few and far between, and they are not random.
Also, therapists cannot prescribe drugs. No one with the ability to write a prescription calls themselves a therapist. And I seriously doubt that anyone who can prescribe drugs gets paid a commission for doing so. That would almost certainly be considered a massive ethics violation.
Sorry about the wrong term, though I think it was clear from context. s/paid therapist/psychiatrist practicing psychotherapy/.
If you don't believe the medical industry suffers from the same problems as the political industry, with "sales reps" taking on the roles of "lobbyists", you should do some googling. Here's a nice database: http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/
There's a lot of difference between a therapist and a psychiatrist. There's even more difference between getting paid on commission and being wooed by lobbyists. Having doctors influenced by lobbyists is almost certainly a negative overall, but it's nowhere close to having doctors literally paid on commission for writing prescriptions.
"As part of that promotion, Allergan provided kickbacks to doctors in the form of cash, travel, and meals and held seminars instructing physicians on how to bill Medicare for off-label procedures. "
If the FBI prosecutes for it, it doesn't really count. That's kind of like saying you can't eat at a restaurant because some chefs poison their customers. Sure, but it's illegal and not the typical state of affairs.
I don't believe that kickbacks are common (I'll change my stance if evidence shows that they are wide-spread), even for on-label uses. I'm pretty sure they're still considered a serious ethics violation and probably illegal.
A slightly different twist: a friend of mine is a pharmacist and he was decrying the end of free lunches provided by pharma companies after he finished first year (a few years ago). The influence of drug companies may exert is a recognized problem, even where it doesn't take the cash for prescription model (that I agree with you is probably illegal but I haven't looked into it). I do think it's likely though that there are creative ways out there that drug companies have come up with to encourage prescriptions.
If you can talk to the right person, then sure, it's going to help more than talking to yourself. The right people are few and far between even among paid therapists, some of which are paid commissions on how many drug prescriptions they give, and a random person is incredibly unlikely to be the right person. Where smartness comes in handy is that a smart person can do the relevant research for their particular case.
My own opinion is that a lot of the "best practices" and so on are aimed mainly at extroverts, and similarly educational practices are aimed at whatever majority group of student-types you can describe there. (Techniques hackers would love in school don't seem to work well on the general population.)