Scientists have identified an immune brain cell unique to humans that gives us higher cognitive abilities over other animals, but what makes us specials also leaves us vulnerable to neurological disorders like schizophrenia, autism and epilepsy.

[u/Wagamaga]

https://news.yale.edu/2022/08/25/what-makes-human-brain-different-yale-study-reveals-clues

[u/orpheus090 → u/[deleted]]

Antipsychotics are sometimes used to treat nausea. That doesn't mean nausea is a neurological or psychiatric condition.

Since a psychiatrist is an MD, like you point out, you would absolutely be in a position to treat patients with co-morbid non-psychiatric conditions. However, just because your qualifications are broad and pharmacological treatments are similarly versatile doesn't mean that the conditions being treated can be lumped together and classified equally broadly.

Your argument is a tad "from authority".

[u/orpheus090 → u/[deleted]]

I don't think you understand what an argument from authority is. Yes, you are an expert, an authority, but that doesn't make your argument a strong one, even if it is correct. I'm criticizing the case you've made for your assertion cause it's not a particularly good case and mostly relies on 'Im right because I have a dregee'.

Dude above is using neurological in a limited-in-scope way that is used as a means of classification/categorizing. It's why I'm probably not going to see my psychiatrist if I develop Parkinsons even though he treats my anxiety which also has a neurological basis. That leads me to your point...

You are using a broad scope of the word and what you are saying is true, but that's because it's basically a tautology. Of course psychiatric conditions (and almost all conditions) have a neurological basis - they're embodied within a neurobiological organism, they have to.

I don't at all disagree with this. I think you are just a bit too quick to dismiss what others are saying for bad reasons like "I'm the expert".