Is the statement 'Depression is a medical illness that......' a begging the question logical fallacy?

Many supposedly authoritative mental health sources state that depression is a medical illness, or a brain disorder, and follow this with a whole series of statements that are dependent on this first premise being true, as it is so regularly assumed to be. It isn't true (I've researched this in great detail).

For example, 'Depression is a medical illness that presents with.......and causes.........'

This is certainly logically fallacious. I'm thinking, begging the question logical fallacy? If not that,what other(s) might it be?

Thank you.

It is just a claim, just like "Bigfoot is a monster that lives in Oregon" is a claim. Begging the question requires either a question or an argument where the claim is assumed to be true. For example:

"Since depression is a medical illness, why isn't it covered by insurance?"

or

"Depression should be covered because it is a medical illness."

Just claiming that the consensus of many mental health professionals is untrue is not an argument, nor is randomly determining or tailoring a fallacy from a pre-existing list a valid response. You have the responsibility to offer evidence. Just declaring holes-bolus that you've researched a subject is not sufficient. You also would have to provide your own credentials in the medical field, or at least some background, eg.

I've battled with depression my entire life and I've found the medical community to be woefully misguided. Here's why:

Your also have to determine a flaw in their reasoning, as well as an inherent deception in the claim which you neglect to do. You just simply declare it untrue.

It made me think of the troubadour in Monty Python and the Holy Grail who abuses the cowardly Sir Robin in song and verse, and Sir Robin can only feebly complain: No, I did not. S'not true! Didn't happen that way.

I'm not quite sure where you're headed with your example. Is this your response or their postulation?

'Depression is a medical illness that presents with.......and causes.........'

Which might be an example of a False Cause Fallacy:

False cause
Correlation is when two things occur together. Causation is when one thing causes another thing. To commit the false cause fallacy is to mistake correlation for causation. When A and B occur together, it’s certainly possible that A caused B, but it’s also possible that B caused A. Or that they were both caused by something else. Or that it’s a total coincidence that both A and B have been occurring together.

But without a question or argument it is exactly as Dr. Bo describes it.

Postscript: By way of synchronicity. This discussion by Johan Hari on TED just came through my email:

Johann Hari challenges the way we think about depression
By TED

Author Johann Hari offers a deeply personal and surprisingly uplifting perspective on how to tackle depression. We're doing a TED Interview survey! If you have a few minutes, we'd love to know your thoughts on the show. Find it at surveynerds.com/tedinterview

Medical professionals have the expertise to define illness. That doesn't always mean that they are right. But I don't see a logical fallacy here.

As I read it, your assertion has to do with "medical", as opposed to "mental", and you may have yourself on the horns of a dilemma. For my part, I see a distinction without a difference, perhaps the fallacy of false dilemma.

As others have stated, you need to make your case, at least by credentials (not enough for me), and somehow establish the dilemma - if that's what it is - to show how the brain is fully functional "medically", but defective/ill "mentally" anyway.

As it might involve the brain/mind discussion, it will be hard.

If your point concerns the word "illness", your work is Sisyphusian imo.

on an emotional level, I appreciate how deeply you've immersed yourself in this study, and, indeed, how passionately and painfully it must be to see the mainstream consensus go on with its industrial obduracy.

Dr. Bo’s expertise in this field is much greater than my own and so I would naturally defer to him rather than bother with my blather.

I will say this though, even if your argument is not quite ready, or your frustration level is at a tipping point. Keep on! Gather the evidence and present the science as it is. I’ve know a few such passionate innovators in my life and though they are decried and dismissed as troublemakers they have emerged to be right and ahead of their time. You just have to get the argument down to a science.

I am a neuroscientist. Clinical depression IS a medical illness. There is no logical fallacy there. It has measurable neural correlates. You clearly have NOT researched this well.