The Most Important Psychiatrist of our Time
The Most Important Psychiatrist of our Time
December 17, 2010 was a special day in the history of psychiatric diagnosis. Bob Spitzer retired after a remarkable 52 year career. The event was celebrated in a warm and wonderful conference held in his honor at Columbia University-- where Bob has worked for the past 52 years. Dozens of Bob's colleagues and students gave speeches describing his powerful influence on our field and his personal impact on our lives.
Without doubt or peer, Bob has been the most important psychiatrist of our time. Freud and Adolph Meyer were the greatest influences on American psychiatry during the first part of the twentieth century. But Spitzer replaced them in 1980 with the publication of DSM-III. And he will remain the central figure until we can eventually go beyond his method of descriptive diagnosis with biological tests and a deeper understanding of the manifold causes of psychopathology.
Unfortunately, this will be a painstakingly gradual process lasting many decades. Certainly, the remarkable neuroscience revolution is revealing the secrets of our nature, but it has at the same time taught us how complicated and heterogeneous are the causes of mental illness. There is no one schizophrenia-- the clinical picture we describe with this term may be caused by hundreds of different underlying causes. Describing psychiatric disorders clearly is a blunt but useful instrument in diagnosis and treatment- - the best we can do until we understand them on a much deeper and more detailed level. And Bob has been and will remain our master describer.
Before DSM-III, psychiatric diagnosis was in a sad state, and with it psychiatry. Two clinicians seeing the same patient often did not agree on the diagnosis. This embedded a kind of randomness in treatment selection and was an insurmountable obstacle to meaningful research. Bob had the vision, technical know-how, diplomatic skill, energy,and stubbornness to single-handedly turn an entire profession around on a dime. He replaced idiosyncratic, impressionistic, unreliable psychiatric diagnosis with precise, systematic criteria sets that (at least under optimal conditions) could produce high levels of diagnostic agreement. This facilitated clinical work, was essential for research, improved education, and brought some sense to forensics.
Perhaps even more significant, Bob and DSM-III helped to save psychiatry as a medical specialty. The previous lack of a proper diagnostic system had set psychiatry adrift-- lurching toward hermeneutics and away from healing. DSM-III anchored psychiatry back to medicine and science. Before it, psychiatric diagnosis was ignored and virtually useless. Now it was the center of every clinical, research, teaching, forensic conversation. Psychiatric research had lagged medicine-- now it is the second best funded (after internal medicine) in most medical schools.
DSM-III was also a surprise runaway best seller and an unexpected cultural phenomenon. Millions of copies of DSM have been sold--far more than the total number of clinicians. The DSM's became a useful vehicle of self-diagnosis (and perhaps a not so useful topic of cocktail party patter and of name calling in family squabbles). DSM-III also changed the way we see ourselves--many people previously preoccupied with understanding their unconscious motivations now focused on understanding their psychiatric disorder.
Not all of the impacts have been positive. As with every revolution, there has been an unfortunate overshoot. In the hands of naive biological reductionists, the DSM categories have sometimes been oversold as diseases and worshiped as false icons. The availability of a clear diagnostic system has furthered the massive marketing efforts of drug companies to "sell the ill" in order to "peddle the pill." Often, we have lost sight of psychological meanings, of the importance of the doctor/patient relationship, of the enormous beneficial power of tincture of time and placebo. But most of the blame comes from how DSM is used, not how it is written. Overall DSM-III was the single most useful,influential, and progressive step forward in psychiatric diagnosis since the first modern system developed by Pinel 200 years ago.
Bob has had another lesser known, but no less important, impact on our society. In the early 1970's, he was instrumental in eliminating homosexuality from DSM-II, refuting the notion that sexual orientation is a concern of psychiatry. Psychiatry's recognition that homosexuality is not illness played a key role in the subsequent expansion of societal respect and civil rights. Bob's efforts were fundamental to the process leading to the recent landmark repeal of the military's discriminatory "don't ask/don't tell" policy.
Bob has retired from Columbia, but not from his tireless, and often lonely efforts, to preserve the integrity of our diagnostic system. He was the first to realize that DSM-5 was badly launched with unnecessary confidentiality agreements and stealth minutes. He asked me to join his protest to pry open the process before it clammed shut. To my shame, I refused to help and left Bob to stand alone as the sole voice of reason and experience as the disaster began to unfold. Why the cold shoulder? I was simply too lazy, too disengaged, too wary of controversy. Sorry, Bob. Perhaps a more concerted early joint effort could have helped. But we now are in it for the duration and will both keep trying to bring common sense to process that has so far been remarkably insulated from it.
In closing, let's take a look at who are the great names in psychiatric diagnosis during the past 2500 years. The short list would indisputably have to include Hippocrates, Galen, Sydenham, Pinel, Kraepelin, Freud, and Spitzer. Not bad company. Way to go, Bob.
DSM is old-hat: we all know that we need now is to move on and find what causes mental illnesses--to explain their origins, because we already have good descriptions, due to Rob Spitzer's comprehensive but of course non-explanatory diagnostic criteria. I disagree with Allen Frances that it will take decades to move beyond mere description, to a deeper understanding of mental illness. I have already sent Allen a detailed explanation of the origins of common mental disorders, that took me 20 years of intensive study to work out: fatty maternal diet causes anxiety in the offspring, due to maternal cortisol breaching the placenta, and epigenetically programming a permanently activated HPA stress axis; an anxious subject exposed to similar dietary fats (meat and dairy fats, bakery fats, chocolate) soon becomes depressed, due to brain oxidation and pro-inflammatory cytokines; Harmless Eccentricity (Schizotypy) and Benign Unipolar Hypomania (e.g. Teddy Roosevelt) are pure phenotypes that only turn into psychosis (Schizophrenia, Bipolar) when combined with diet-induced congenital anxiety, and/or personal fatty diet. ADHD and Alzheimer's can be traced to refined seed oils, which are low in vitamin E. Autism is often a mild phenotype--as seen among parents--but increasingly aggravated by maternal dietary fat or refined oils, which add anxiety, low IQ and ADHD to the picture. Allen's comment on my extensive dietetic research was "I'm not so sure that diet will provide an easy solution." Well, all I can say is that it sure works in my patients: I use strict low-fat diet, plus Inositol supplement for isolated or co-morbid anxiety (seen in almost all Bipolar 1 cases, in 50% of Bipolar 2 cases, and in up to 2/3 of scz cases). I have completely cured nearly 3000 cases of anxiety and unipolar depression, and I am seeing impressive improvements in a number of bipolar and scz patients, most of whom have reduced or given up their brain drugs, especially lithium. One of my scz cases is now working as a senior accountant. I rest my case.
Dr Peers, are you published? I would love to read more of your research.
Hi Tammy, Thanks for your interest--just send me your email address, mine is info@drrobertpeers.com--and I will forward to you a whole bunch of carefully composed info-mails on diet and psycho-brain disorders. I am preparing papers for submission to peer-reviewed journals, so this stuff will get published in 2011. The news is simple: every doctor, and every psychiatrist--indeed, every psychologist, too--should be a dietitian, who understands and strongly recommends a simple low-fat diet (which prevents brain oxidation and inflammation), accompanied by Inositol supplement to treat any anxiety. The Inositol is also found in grains, nuts, legumes and citrus: it gets weight off, is anti-diabetic, and has major anti-ageing properties. The results I see in my patients are fabulous. I am not the first non-wacky science-minded clinician to use such a diet to alleviate mental disorders---I take my hat off to British "psychological medicine"consultant, Dr Charles Mercier, who realized how fatty was the diet of his neurotics, depressives and psychotics, back about 1910, in London: he managed to get some of his out-patients to reduce their fat and butter, and he claims this was extremely helpful in reducing their symptoms and their suffering--"All but one recovered or very greatly improved when their diet was rectified". He wrote a paper in The Lancet in 1916: "Diet as a Factor in the Causation of Mental Disease"--100 years ahead of his time. I will send a copy to Allen Frances, who wistfully dreams of 100 different drugs, in 20 years time, to treat 100 different Weakly Acting Genes in schizophrenia--genes that, unknown to him, normally determine only Mild Schizotypy (that we don't treat), that only turns to full-blown psychosis when maternal and individual diets are fatty. My advantage over the good Dr Mercier is that I have a body of knowledge on Essential Fatty Acids to help me work out how sat fats cause faulty cell membranes, leading to pre-diabetes and inflammation, factors which a) cause anxiety in the offspring of high-fat pregnancies (maternal diabetes also raises SCZ risk to offspring SEVEN-FOLD); and b) also convert an anxious brain into a depressed one. SIMPLE!!!!!!!
There are so many psychiatrists no longer with us who also deserve that honor, with Jerome Frank, Lewis Wolberg, and Les Havens being among them. Don Nicol, M.A.

I share Al's well-founded admiration for Bob Spitzer, and wish both Bob and Al a happy and productive new year! --Best regards, Ron Pies