Hoi,

We are talking DSM. When the DSM had never called something a disease and never had a consistent presentation. When there is a lot of literature showing how that something is NOT a disease, why persist on what has always been wrong in any which case?

Thanks,

GerardM

On 14 May 2016 at 17:16, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
<nemowiki@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gerard Meijssen, 14/05/2016 15:39:
>>
>> When an external ontology says that something is a disease and the DSM-5
>> says it is not. There is a huge problem.
>
>
> Until recently DSM called homosexuality a disease, we must live with
> conflicts.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders#DSM-III-R_.281987.29

In which case this fact is deprecated because there is a later release
which contradicts it.
We can not just omit a fact because it is 'wrong' now.

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata