From brain scans, to genetic heritability from twin studies , to animal research, to basic blood work (http://www.Medicalnewstoday.Com/articles/282898.Php) schizophrenia has been repeatedly demonstrated to be a real, organic brain disease. This isn't even something up for debate any longer; it is a matter of scientific fact, and anyone who doubts its validity at this point is either foolish, biased, or ignorant of the abundance of scientific evidence supporting its existence.
Schizophrenia is a mental illness just as bi-polar disorder and depression are. Medication is imperative to help a person that suffers from schizophrenia live a normal life. Without the diagnosis of mental illness, insurance companies, Medicare and Medicaid will not pay for treatment or medication. A diagnosis of schizophrenia is as valuable as a diagnosis of cancer. It opens doors for assistance, treatment, support and medication.
Yeah, schizophrenia is a valid mental health diagnosis. It is one of the most easily-noted mental illnesses, and has more literature than most other ailments, mental or otherwise. There are, of course, varying degrees of schizophrenia, but the same could be said for multiple sclerosis, cancer, Parkinson's disease and the common cold.
Yes, schizophrenia is a valid metal health diagnosis, which is why psychiatrist support the concept so strongly. Schizophrenia is broken down to a person simple having issue telling the difference between reality and imagination. This is a very real issue that people develop, or are born with. People have an issue with labeling it as a metal health diagnosis because they can't see it. Proof and evidence is a real hard pill to swallow when it comes to mental illness anyways. Every year, they develop test to more accurately pull out certain functions of the brain and analyze them as a way to getting closer to showing proof for an invisible diagnosis.
Yes, this is a very serious medical issue, and if diagnosed people with this illness need to be treated. The brain of people with this sends wrong signals, and the people will see and think things that they normally would not. It is hard to live a normal life with it.
Schizophrenia is a valid mental health diagnosis. An individual with schizophrenia has clear symptoms. The criteria for schizophrenia diagnosis and subtypes are outlined in the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders." It is a diagnosis for which a treatment is prescribed, much like depression, bipolar disorder, or anxiety disorder.
For a clinical entity to be a disease, you have to prove that objective criterions of diagnostic are met (inter-rater reliability) and 97% can be argued to be too low. Validity is whether or not this diagnostic, in the natural setting (NO contact with medicine), induces life expectancy shortages (typically), and this is not proved, as research on schizophrenia almost always concerns people that went through coercive structures. Moreover, for prophylactic program detection (which is where the medical focus currently is on), with a prevalence of 1%, you need diagnostic precision an order of magnitude greater than 99% (google up "confusion matrix"), which is clearly not met as inter-rater reliability alone (not to mention validity) is at best 97%. What can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence. So no, schizophrenia as a clinical entity cannot qualify as a disease. Moreover, even if it were a disease, NO treatment is justified (let alone coerced) if it does not PROVABLY lead to better outcomes. This assertion is not supported, and largely disproved by evidence of long-term cohort studies showing better outcome with schizophrenics who have broken off from medicine as a whole than with schizophrenics who have willingly or unwillingly stuck with it (which is rather bleak nonetheless, but rather telling of the mess of the situation).
No comment has reported proof of validity of the diagnostic. Validity is the following criterion: Are you able to diagnose with reliability (close inter-rater agreement) a condition based on objective facts that statistically leads to bad life expectancy outcomes (statistical significance is required, and the stronger the better) in a context where NO medical intervention whatsoever did occur. Good luck trying to prove that: there is no such comprehensive proof (at best fragments of proofs that are done on inadequate contexts or hypotheses). What can asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence. Moreover, if schizophrenia hits 1% of the population, then the required precision of the diagnostic procedure MUST be an order of magnitude more precise than 99% for early intervention procedures (google up "confusion matrix"). Moreover, successfully labelling something as a disease is NO reason to treat it if you do not have PROOF of better outcomes when treated. Evidence is here to suggest that this is not the case. Whether or not schizophrenia is a disease, there is no evidence to support treating it. And what can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence.