I stand by that. In fact, historically whenever they did this they caused a lot of harm.
I would beg to disagree: "The DSM is a bunch of nonsense. As long as [...], itβs worthless."
> DSM when not providing the underlying physical processes is worthless.
And when does the DSM ever provide the "underlying physical process"? It certainly doesn't for ADHD or any other chapters I happen to have read, which would make them worthless according to your criteria despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
And while I haven't read all 1000 pages of the DSM because it's not exactly my idea of a good time, I don't think it provides that kind of information in any chapter because we simply don't understand these disorders to that extent, as your original comment correctly observed.
Because they looked at clusters of symptoms, rather than actual causes.
Precisely my point.
As for ADHD etc; you do realise they changed the treatments and clustering precisely because of insight in physical processes?!