Information Technology Label Eraser News

Overlap Visualizer Tool Demonstration Online

As part of my mission to release a lot of free excellent stuff, a demonstration of the “Overlap Visualizer” tool is now online. This tool takes a maximum of two labels and displays a venn diagram with any overlapping or intersecting symptoms. For this demonstration, the labels have been pre-defined as Schizoaffective Disorder (Bipolar Type) and Schizophrenia. The final result of this tool is a newly created label called “Pain” which is produced by removing the labels, merging any duplicate symptoms and preserving the unique symptoms.

Images of the tool in action below:

Link: Overlap Visualizer

Note: There are display issues on smaller screens (sorry will fix asap!).

Information Technology

Free Sample of Upcoming Book (Label Normalization)

Hi All!

Please see below a sample section of my upcoming book on Label Normalization (sample may be updated and book may be different from sample). I am slowly releasing all my knowledge and work on alternative psychiatry and psychiatric computing. Some of my work will be for sale but a lot of it is being given away for free. The book on Label Normalization will be a book for sale however this is a free sample.

Label Normalization is all about removing a lot of the unnecessary data that patients are associated with and in particular, how information technology can facilitate label removal/non-dependence (meaning you don’t have to deal with psychiatric labels anymore). I know that sounds strange but it’s true and so I hope you enjoy this sample and it satisfies your curiosity!

If you like my work, please consider visiting the Donate page. This helps me get my work out and helps in many other ways I appreciate it! Thanks!


Is label non-dependence (label removal) even possible? if so, how?

Verifying whether label non-dependence is possible or not is actually a very simple task. It is actually common sense and can easily be established. A simple example is demonstrated with the depressed mood of depression and the depressed mood of bipolar disorder. Psychiatrists issue anti-depressants for the depressed mood found in both labels. The fruit of a psychiatrist’s work is to offer treatments that target such negative symptoms. But labels such as depression and bipolar disorder are not a necessity when it comes to anti-depressants as they are simply nouns that host a set of symptoms. Anti-depressants will work against the symptoms regardless of whether a patient uses a label or not. In other words, the drugs target the symptoms by manipulating serotonin in the brain and they do this without dependence on a label (obviously). This is because labels are in the domain of language but symptoms and the drugs that are used to treat them are in the domain of medical conditions and chemistry. Without symptoms, labels are useless. Therefore labels are not a requirement in order to manipulate the brains neurotransmitters and thus induce therapeutic outcomes.

Even though label-non dependence is a straight forward and common sense concept, it doesn’t seem to be applied in the real world which is evidenced by the lack of innovation in psychiatry in this regard and the amount of dependence on numerous labels used by both practitioners and patients. But using label non-dependence wisely in an organized and structure manner actually gives birth to a very powerful set of innovations, ideas and technologies. Whilst label non-dependence is a simple concept, to see its full potential and power in action, it is necessary to establish it in an organized way such as using it in combination with information technology. Thankfully, information technology can do very complicated things that we can’t just like a camel can take a traveller through a hot desert. Information technology handles very complicated things in a very simple way.

There are various established scientific classification/categorization models widely in use today that are very applicable to psychiatric disorders. However, the current psychiatric establishment does not utilise such systems in regard to diagnostic classification. These systems when applied to psychiatric disorders clearly demonstrate their ability to facilitate label removal and non-dependence amongst many other powerful benefits. In the world of computing, there are many of these modelling systems and some of them seem very similar, consistent and connected to each other. To begin describing the concept of alternative classification in psychiatry and how such a concept facilitates label removal, I will start with a database design system known as the “Entity-Relationship Model”. I am starting with this modelling system as it gives very good fundamental knowledge on natural classification regardless of the domain.

Linguistically, when we want to classify or name something we use words like “entity” or “class”. Both these words are heavily used in the computing world. The word entity is simply a noun which refers to anything with distinct and independent existence. The following are examples of entities:

  • Animal
  • Bank Account
  • Cloud
  • Computer
  • Human
  • Etc

The word entity by itself does not indicate any specific thing until someone specifies exactly what the entity is. For example, if someone says, “our universe Is full of entities”, they are simply saying our universe is full of “things” with their own distinct and independent existence. As there was no specification of what entities the speaker was referring to, there is general reference to whatever can be seen in the universe whether it be stars, the moon, plants, animals etc. On the other hand, if someone says, “the sun is a very bright entity”, in that case the entity has been specified as the sun. I mentioned this point of entities, generalization and specification because it is important to know for alternative classification of psychiatric disorders. From what I observe, psychiatry doesn’t use a natural classification system which is why I feel the DSM is a mess and contains a lot of repetition and redundancy. Natural classification however involves general and specific entities and this is easily observable in the natural world.

The use of the word entity is similar to the use of the word “thing”. We use the word thing to give a quick and easy identification, classification or name to something abstract, general, unknown and sometimes even specific. You can actually use it to refer to anything which is what makes it so useful. This talk of entities and relationships is nothing philosophical or an issue worthy of debate, it is proven and based on language, nature and what we see in the observable world. This is why, as mentioned below, the information technology industry has adopted something called the ER model which stands for the Entity Relationship model.

In software engineering, database engineers use something known as an Entity-Relationship model (ER model for short) to aid in database design. The ER model was developed by Peter Chen and published in his 1976 paper “The Entity Relationship Model – Toward a Unified View of Data”. Pictured below is an example of the way entities and their relationships are expressed through the ER model.

In the above image, there are two entities which are Employer and Employee. Right at the top of the entity in dark blue is its title (Employer or Employee). Below the title cell, the attributes for each entity are shown. The top attribute highlighted in light blue is known as a “primary key”. Primary keys are used to guarantee uniqueness as they are what make an entity unique, but such keys are beyond the scope of current discussion. The red line you see between the entities represent a relationship between them. In this case, an employee has a link to an employer because every employee belongs to a certain employer. In the image this is why we see the EmployerID attribute in both the Employer and Employee entities and the red line pointing from the EmployerID in the Employee entity to the EmployerID of the Employer entity (i.e Employee is foreign to Employer but they are associated because every employee is assigned an ID which belongs to and identifies an employer). Yikes! What a mouth full! I know, but it’s not important to know this much technical detail right now so let’s move on.

In the below series of images, I demonstrate another expression of the ER Model except the context relates to psychiatric disorders and label removal (non-dependence). You will therefore see label removal in action. The first image below is known as the pain base class abstraction. This abstraction is basically a simple generalization that describes the nature and anatomy of every psychiatric disorder. It is necessary to display this abstraction first as all the following images stem from it.

The pain base class abstraction above describes the anatomy of every psychiatric disorder at its fundamental level. This abstraction is based on a design language used in the field of software engineering known as UML or the Unified Modelling Language. More specifically, the above abstraction has been inspired by something known as a class diagram which is found within the UML standard. The UML specification contains many different diagrams with class diagrams being one of them. Class diagrams are used to design software systems that are constructed through a design paradigm known as the Object-Oriented paradigm. This paradigm (design standard) has contributed to the establishment of some of the biggest software and web systems that have changed the world.

The image below is a translation of the aforementioned pain abstraction into the ER model standard using psychiatric diagnostic data.

Label refers to psychiatric labels, disturbance is just another word for symptoms and the third entity in the middle is known as an “associative entity”. The LabelDisturbance associative entity connects labels and symptoms and allows major computational manipulation of diagnostic data which will be shortly demonstrated. An object-oriented design such as the pain abstraction does not always translate verbatim (directly) when it enters the entity relationship world. For example, the “communicate” behaviour at the bottom of the abstraction actually represents an abstraction of all possible symptoms for all possible psychiatric disorders. When translating this abstract behaviour to the ER model, the three entities Label, Disturbance and LabelDisturbance are naturally generated. However Label and LabelDisturbance were only generated for convenience to communicate with psychiatric diagnostic data. They are not a necessity in alternative classification.

The above ER model is the basis of a valid database design and so in the following images, I will demonstrate the use of SQL (Structured Query Language) to manipulate psychiatric diagnostic data and do things like remove labels whilst retaining symptoms and thus show how labels are redundant data. Please note, in our sample database, I have only inputted three labels and each label may not contain their full list of official symptoms. This is because my goal is to only demonstrate a concept.

The following SQL statement retrieves all three labels in the database with their symptoms in the adjacent column:

In the next query, we will query the database and request all labels with their symptoms again, but this time also show the associated abstract pain class that the symptoms (disturbances) derive from and are linked to. Recall that all symptoms (disturbances) were abstracted under the communicate behaviour of the pain abstraction. Therefore, the next query must show a link to the pain abstraction which possesses the communicate attribute.

The reference to the Pain abstraction shown in the previous result set is made possible because the abstraction is logically associated with symptoms (disturbances) as indicated in the ER model below:

If you didn’t understand where the pain abstraction is in the above image, it’s within the class and class property entities which you will understand through the images below:

The following query extracts the pain class from our database.

The “ClassProperty” entity in our database holds the remaining details of the pain abstraction class. To retrieve those remaining details, we need to send the following query to the database:

Now it’s time to get into the exciting stuff. How do we officially separate (decouple) psychiatric labels from symptoms and thus induce label non-dependence whilst still retaining a patient’s association to a medical condition? And how do we ensure this happens in an organized and safe way that is governed by an established science? We simply send the appropriate query to the database.

First recall result set 2 again pictured below:

In our new query, like in the query that produced result set 2, we will again request the database to return the symptoms associated with the three labels schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and OCD. But this time however, we will hold all the symptoms under the pain class abstraction and discard the labels the symptoms are associated with. We can do this without any loss to the patient because as mentioned earlier, disturbances (symptoms) naturally derive from the pain abstraction’s communicate behaviour. Please see the below query and result set:

As can be seen above, the labels schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and OCD have become disconnected to their symptoms (label-symptom decoupling) and have been generalized under a single category called “Pain”.

The main goal of a practitioner towards a patient in psychiatry is to offer effective treatment to hopefully assist them in achieving a normal and healthy life. For this to occur, practitioners target and treat the symptoms that ail their patients. The images above demonstrate the achievement of label non-dependence which is indicated by the absence of labels in the result set. From a treatment perspective, based on the result set, a practitioner can still target and treat the patient’s ailment as the symptoms have been retained despite the labels being removed. The retained symptoms are the values situated in the DisturbanceName column. 

The pain class naturally defines, at a more general level, what type of entity a disturbance is. This is how it is able to replace/discard the labels in the result set above. Symptoms in other words are a type of pain but at a more granular and specific level. The moment someone starts talking about symptoms, they are simply discussing the details of a type of pain. There is no loss of quality by applying this new classification system to psychiatric diagnostic data. Rather, on the contrary, it is the application of a more natural and powerful classification system already in high use elsewhere in the business world.

The following image highlights the link between the pain abstraction and the symptoms displayed in the above result set. I have highlighted the communicate behaviour property as this is where symptoms are held.

Our ER model is at the same level of our query and result set. Therefore, to provide a visual on how the result set was achieved, the below image is the ER model view of the relationship between the Pain class and symptoms.

The question may arise, “don’t labels allow us to differentiate between symptoms? isn’t that their whole purpose? doesn’t that prove that we need them?”. It’s a good question, I mean that’s why labels are there, they are names given and attached to a set of symptoms that the psychiatric establishment consider a distinct and independent medical condition. My response is that my goal in writing this section was to prove a point and to demonstrate that labels are not a necessity. Labels not being a necessity opens up a whole new world of opportunity in regard to treatment, the way patients and practitioners see things, and progress in the industry of psychiatry.

Consider the two tables below. One shows OCD as psychiatry views it and the other shows essentially the same thing but without the label. This clearly demonstrates that labels are not a necessity and patients have the liberty to lose their attachment to them.

Regardless, the object-oriented paradigm accommodates the need for distinction very powerfully as it is a natural classification system. Concepts such as sub classes, inheritance and polymorphism may be some further reading for you if you would like to know more. I myself acknowledged in my own psychiatric classification system that there was indeed some need for distinction and to go into more details. Again, as mentioned above, my intention behind this discussion was to provide a brief introduction to the concept of label non-dependence. To demonstrate label non-dependence simply, via the object-oriented paradigm and information technology, I didn’t need to go further than the pain class abstraction as it is the fundamental base description of every psychiatric disorder. Using more than the pain abstraction to explain label non-dependence would have made it harder to understand and would be considered overkill. The fact that it was sufficient for me to use the pain abstraction to get the point across also demonstrates the power of the object-oriented paradigm as a natural alternative to psychiatry’s DSM as I was able to use a simple high abstract view of disease together with symptoms that are more granular and this is because of the natural connection between the two extremes.

Distinction and separating conditions are another topic of discussion. Differences are obvious though, for example, the symptoms of social anxiety disorder are clearly different to what is understood to be obsessive compulsive disorder. But that doesn’t mean a generalized label of “Pain” isn’t a valid title for both. It is naturally a valid title which is why a practitioner could work with such information. The only distinction is at the symptom layer.

Information Technology News

Label Normalization Engine Prototype Demonstration Live!

Hi everyone, I am pleased to announce a demonstration and prototype of the Label Normalization engine is now live. Click here to access it. The demonstration is very basic but we wanted to put up something live so people can play around and get a taste of the engine and what’s to come.

The goals of the Label Normalization engine include:

  • Label loss (Patients no longer have to depend on psychiatric labels)
  • Diagnostic data simplification (for example the removal of redundancy like duplicate symptoms)
  • Multi-label removal (label loss for multi-label diagnosis)
  • Communication of treatment principles outside of pharmaceuticals such as exercise but also principles/actions that encourage positive and natural neurotransmitter activity
  • Much more
Information Technology Schizophrenia

Psychiatric Label Normalization (experimental label loss)

Hi All,

I mentioned earlier today that I have started working on the Label Normalization engine again as I have some free time right now. Regarding this you can view the below YouTube link for a video demonstration of label normalization in action:

The Label Normalization engine (experimental patient label loss using information technology)

The description from the video is as follows:

In this video you will see a project I am working on demonstrating a concept I developed called “Label Normalization”. Label Normalization is in its early stages and my hope is to evolve it over time. The end goal is to achieve complete label loss (patients no longer have to deal with psychiatric labels) and I also hope to generally bring more innovation into the domain of Psychiatry.

In this video, a mock case of a patient being diagnosed with multiple labels has all their labels removed and the duplicate and redundant symptoms are cut out also (this is a mock case so I don’t think normally a patient will be diagnosed with multiple schizophrenic spectrum ailments). The end result is the removal of 26 symptoms (termed by me as disturbances) and 6 labels. The remaining essence of the patient case remains offering a simpler problem to target and solve.

I have developed a new science called “Psychiatric Computing” and this video is based on this science. Psychiatric Computing is the utilization of concepts and technologies found within computer science and information technology such as object oriented programming, UML and Structured Query Language. My goal with Psychiatric Computing is to move the field of Psychiatry forward using creative thinking and technological innovation.

I understand that there is a lot more to consider when processing psychiatric labels such as the concept of duration/time with the content of a disorder. However this is a developing project that I will be working on and perfecting with time.

Information Technology News

Label Normalization Engine Update

Hi All,

I’m working on the Label Normalization engine again. I am currently inputting labelling and symptom data into the web application database. I will be starting with the group “Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders” only to test the system and will provide further updates as soon as possible.

The disorder group mentioned above to be tested will consist of the following disorders:

  • Schizotypal (Personality) Disorder
  • Delusional Disorder
  • Brief Psychotic Disorder
  • Schizophreniform Disorder
  • Schizophrenia
  • Schizoaffective Disorder
  • Substance/Medication-Induced Psychotic Disorder
  • Psychotic Disorder Due to Another Medical Condition
Information Technology

Label normalization experiment update

User input field for label converted to text input auto complete instead of drop down menu. Reads and searches through list of labels upon entering only minimum amount of characters. This was done for ease of use. Also I think this may be more user friendly for mobile/smaller devices. See below:

The three links above are bigger images of the above photos

Information Technology

Label normalization experiment (label loss and ailment simplification)

Upcoming label normalization experiment:

Dear followers, you may remember my label normalization function post recently that would take a set of given labels and their symptoms, remove the labels and any duplicate symptoms and only leave the remaining essence of the patients problem (assumed) in the form of the remaining symptoms. I appreciate feedback on my efforts to support and verify whether my work is accurate and so am open to suggestions from the observations of others.

This post is to inform my followers that there will be an upcoming major label normalization experiment with a large amount of disorders in the DSM. This will be done to demonstrate the power of the label normalization engine and the benefits in the use of database science and psychiatry combined. It is unsure whether this experiment will be successful however with trial and error it is my goal to develop an engine that effectively allows a patient to lose their labels and the redundant additional baggage that comes with labels such as duplicate symptoms in a multi diagnoses. I am seeing signs already of what I personally believe to be progress towards label loss which has sparked my curiosity to further develop this engine.

I intend on making this function available globally for free.

Below is an update of the Simplifier (normalize) function with more labels added. I am currently trying to add as many labels as I can for the experiment and also get the associated symptoms.

General Health Information Technology Mental Health Random Insights

“What’s wrong with me?”

There was recently a question somewhere outside of my blog where I also post where the questioner was basically complaining that they don’t know what’s wrong with them and their doctors can’t seem to figure it out and just throw meds at them. This may be a common experience. Below you will find my reply which includes elements of some of my insights I gathered after some time and also how innovation in psychiatry is lacking but if done can help when things get complex. The answer I posted now begins:

Answer: If this has been going on for a while I strongly consider looking for answers outside of typical psychiatry (which is decades old). This is what I did and I have learnt what I believe to be incredible stuff. In fact so good, I have pioneered my own alternative psychiatric sciences. This I did due to having some unsatisfactory experiences with modern day psychiatry.

Something that I developed was the relationship between the human anatomical structure and psychiatric symptoms (I will explain this). If you are lost as to what is behind your psychiatric ailment, first understand this simple principle: “All negative psychiatric expressions (or symptoms if you prefer) are simply due to a collection of negativity in one or more of the components in your human anatomical structure”. Now, what is your “human anatomical structure”?

They are as follows:

Human essence bodies:

  • The mental self
  • The emotional self
  • The physical self
  • The non-physical self (where dreams and things like hallucinations manifest)


The dimensions of wellness:

  • The financial dimension
  • The social dimension
  • The occupational dimension
  • The environmental dimension
  • The intellectual dimension
  • The Islamic dimension (this applies to me as I’m Muslim)

In simple terms, if you don’t know what’s wrong with you, the above is your human anatomy and psychiatric ailments are caused by a collection of negativity in one or more of the above. So put your notice filter on and try and detect where the negativity is collecting and respond accordingly. This is a way of narrowing down your problem. When problems are complex, we break them down.

Another thing I will demonstrate is the power of looking for answers outside of typical psychiatry. In the world of modern psychiatry they don’t have an innovation culture. This is something I am trying to change. The below I developed after much research, contemplation and work. I am the first one in my awareness to connect database science to the world of psychiatry. What I demonstrate below is something I call “label normalization”. This may be something for you to keep an eye on as my aim for this function is to simplify a patient’s diagnosis, treatment and remove from them as much complication from whatever labels they accumulate.

This web application will be called “Label Explorer”. What follows is a few images of label normalization with a description of what you see in the image:

  • The user navigates to the label simplification section of Label Explorer and opens the label selection menu and chooses the labels to be added to the processing list
  • The user selects 6 labels to be processed/simplified
  • The user selects “normalize” as a simplification method and clicks “Start!”
  • The user has their chosen labels processed and simplified (normalized) by the application and is provided with a results page. I am still in the process of analyzing what I have done but so far it seems the user/patient has just lost all their labels and any duplicate symptoms that were found in multiple labels if they had multiple diagnoses. The user/patient is now dealing directly with the remaining symptoms only which is basically the essence of whatever is going on with them. If they had multiple conditions they have been incredibly simplified. There are two images of this below as I had to do it in two parts because the result page is long.

The reason I mention all of this is because there is so much more that can be done in the world of psychiatry but funding isn’t going there. I believe the future of psychiatry is in the hands of private entities and startup culture/innovation which is what I have initiated (possibly I am the first one). What I am doing is just the tip of the iceberg and I have a lot more to do.

Information Technology

App for Simplifying all Disorders

If you can remember a couple of posts back I mentioned the “Pain Class Abstraction I came up with that basically generalizes all Disorders into a single Pain class. I came up with that with a lot of thinking and I used concepts from computing science. The Pain Class Abstraction basically simplifies all Disorders into a general disorder. I was able to do this because many disorders share the same symptoms so I thought to myself why not make things more simple and connect what is common. By doing this I removed a lot of redundancy. You can find the post here.

Anyway, I am working on an app to apply the logic in that post and here is my first picture below. I think my theory was correct because I am indeed applying the simplified logic in a useful way.

As an assumed use case, the user would select “Response Method” and then select a symptom in the communicate drop down menu. When they click submit they would be provided with a list of all possible treatments even non-drug ones that are established in the scientific community.

Now many disorders share the same symptoms but because of my generalizing there is no need for listing multiple disorders with the same symptoms. As you can see instead I abstracted out the symptoms into a single “Communicate” attribute to remove the redundancy.

I hope this is of interest to anyone.

Information Technology Mental Health

Simplifying Psychiatric Disorders with Computing Science

People like Dr Peter Breggin who knows about what happened before the pharmacological revolution and Robert Whitaker are reformers of this industry. I hope one day I can reach that status too because this topic is close to my heart and we need people who care enough to reform things. Especially for the children.

I come from an information technology background and I try to apply those concepts to Psychiatry and I have had some success in simplifying some of the mess. There are modelling languages in computing science such as the Unified Modelling Language and the object oriented thought process. There is another one called the entity relationship model. I used these languages to develop generalizations and apply them to Psychiatry to simplify the over-complication in it.

One such generalization that I think took me over a year of contemplation I call the Pain class abstraction. If you are into art you will know that abstract things whether it’s in art or in other spheres of life make you think and provoke thought. They can be used to solve problems.

My pain abstraction states that every Disorder derives from one general disorder (pain). Why? because simply they are all a form of pain. In this way I simplified all disorders. Now pain has attributes and behaviours and because all Psychiatric labels are a form of pain I was able to generalize them. Check the picture below:

The Pain class abstraction developed using the Computing Science world

All Psychiatric Disorders in the DSM fall under and derive naturally from the above Disorder.

Let’s use the above pain abstraction as a template and fill it with Bipolar Disorder. Let’s consider my own case as of current.

Pain: Bipolar Disorder

Initiator: Myself

Initiation Method: Trauma

Responder: The people involved in responding are Psychiatrists, myself, family etc

Response Method: Very broad: mood hygiene, sleep hygiene, Sodium Valproate, diet, vitamin d, trigger prevention, stress management etc

Subject: Who was impacted by this form of pain? Myself

Manifestation Subject: Where does this pain manifest? It cannot be detected anywhere in the body so it goes under the category of Non-physical ailments. Therefore it manifests non-physically. I experience it, others don’t. It also gives thought to the fact that because it can’t be detected, it has made me realize that external entities contribute to my Bipolar such as societal stress.

Time period: How does this form of pain relate to the dimension of time? Is it intermittent? Is it a permanent illness? etc. Bipolar is known as the phantom disease because it’s symptoms can be regular or unpredictable and even disappear for years at a time. By generalizing the time aspect of Psychiatric labels we can do more than what is being done now in Psychiatry. Instead of saying and sticking onto the idea that Bipolar is a life long illness, we can say things like, “since it is known that this disorder can be intermittent and disappear for many years, can we really say it is incurable? how about we look deeper into the cases where symptoms didn’t return.”

Communicate: The bottom attribute “communicate” is a behaviour of pain. So how does bipolar communicate? This basically comes down to the symptoms (mania, depression etc)

Doing what I did above is useful because it has the power to help with quality control and error checking. By that I mean if new disorders come up in the future, we can have such abstractions act as a filter to aid in a form of control to prevent over-complication or inconsistencies. Unfortunately the DSM in my opinion is an unstable and changing document that in spite of the repeated revisions, is not doing much to lower our epidemic because if it was then statically this epidemic would be getting better but it’s getting worse.

We have been flooded by new diagnoses in the past and now Autism so when will it end? It’s time for a rethink in the way we do things. I am now working on a project to apply some of what I have learnt from Computing Science to simplify Psychiatry further in a way where users can engage with my website and use apps to simplify a lot the mess that is occurring because we need more practical stuff not just theory.

I hope that makes sense and so any feedback is appreciated.