Adam Blatner

“Co-morbidity” is the way several things could be off or wrong, and it’s t’s the rule rather than the exception! More, there aren’t just one thing else that goes wrong, but many!: One person is intellectually limited and obsessive, another is narciss-istic and pushy—there may be several factors at play. This is even more so when thinking ab0ut the way people are put together. The trouble with the mental health "establishment" is that they kowtow to the accepted science of the moment, that all things being equal, such and such is so. The trouble is that all things are rarely equal, and the impact  of the differences are important. In other words, the problem with research is that they think that diagnoses are simple!

But psychopathology is not just one thing. There are co-morbidities. So limited-ness in one area make a big difference in another area. A person weakened by malnutrition and anemia may not respond well to a medicine that would be effective with an otherwise healthy person.  Similarly, a person with good "ego-strength" may respond differently than a person with poor ego-strength.

Ego strength correlates roughly with how much one has accomplished, though there are holes in the system. But the point is that people who just don’t have that much going for them will show little response to therapeutic interventions that are quite therapeutic with others. It’s not that the therapeutic intervention is therapeutic across the board.

There is an accepted concession to not question the assumptions of the research-ers, but not doing so is to operate blindly. The assumption that if it were any good it would obviate the need for this, but that assumption is naive.