The American Psychological Association [APA] has a very small problem, it is called AI therapy. But the APA has a major problem, it is called how the mind works or what exactly mental health is, in the brain.
There is nothing better that the APA can offer society than explaining how the human mind works, especially to define it, by components and mechanisms in the brain, even theoretically.
The APA wrote, “Our mission is to promote the advancement, communication, and application of psychological science and knowledge to benefit society and improve lives.”
“We do this by: Utilizing psychology to make a positive impact on critical societal issues.”
“Elevating the public’s understanding of, regard for, and use of psychology.”
“Preparing the discipline and profession of psychology for the future.”
“Strengthening APA’s standing as an authoritative voice for psychology.”
What are emotions? What are feelings? What exactly is a depressive episode differently from when there isn’t one? What are the most important components in the cranium for mental health? To leap from labels and descriptions to mechanistic displays or explanations?
AI Therapy
There is a June, 2026 report from the APA, Patients are bringing AI to therapy, stating that, “As millions of people engage with generative AI to assist with their work, their personal lives, and their mental health, APA surveyed more than 1,200 licensed psychologists in the U.S. who are directly involved in patient or client care to understand how this reliance on AI is affecting mental health care.”
“The survey found that a vast majority of psychologists (77%) have spoken with patients who have used AI for support, engagement, or other reasons.”
“Though few psychologists reported their patients using chatbots in unhealthy ways, more than a third (36%) said they noticed their patients developing a level of dependency on a chatbot and 15% talked about or noticed their patients developing distorted thinking or delusions related to a chatbot.”
There is a November, 2025 health advisory by the APA, Use of generative AI chatbots and wellness applications for mental health, with the following recommendations, “Do not rely on GenAI chatbots and wellness apps to deliver psychotherapy or psychological treatment. Prevent unhealthy relationships and dependencies between users and Gen AI chatbots and apps. Prioritize privacy and protect user data.”
“Protect users from misrepresentation, misinformation, algorithmic bias, and illusory effectiveness. Create specific safeguards for children, teenagers, and vulnerable populations. Implement comprehensive AI and digital literacy education. Prioritize access and funding for rigorous scientific research of GenAI chatbots and wellness apps.”
Electrochemical Psychiatry
The APA should recognize that as soon as AI chatbots came on the scene, with the ability to cater to aspects of therapies that include, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy [CBT], Commitment Therapy [ACT], Dialectical Behavior Therapy [DBT], and psychodynamic therapies, that it is no longer possible to just rely on labels and descriptions for recommendations to be effective against AI therapy.
Simply, there is a lot that AI can do, that looks like what therapists do, that might make users accept the AI outcome. So, how exactly can people be sure human therapists are better, if some have reported positive outcomes with AI?
The APA is urging caution against using AI for therapy, saying there is a difference between human therapists and chatbot, but what happens in the mind of users that makes that clear?
How is a human therapist better? This means that the cues in the mind of the therapists can be displayed, at least conceptually, and have the display show how the therapist makes a better inference than AI — which does not absorb the extent of unexpressed information.
This is possible if the APA devolves into electrochemical psychiatry. Simply, electrical and chemical signals are known to be active, as neurons carry out functions, in the brain, for human life and experiences.
This means that it is feasible to explain how the human mind works using electrical and chemical signals. This leap, even conceptually, can give the APA a new mission to make advances, even as mental disorders and addictions continue to spread into different forms and continue to be perplexing.
The APA has the annual convention from August 6 – 8, 2026. There is no better priority than to seek out what the human mind is or to redefine mental health.
For example, mental health, conceptually, is defined as the zone — within certain averages, per moment of the collection of all the electrical and chemical signals, with their interactions and attributes, in sets, in clusters of neurons, across the central and peripheral nervous systems — with a functional balance of mind and experiences, for social and occupational objectives.
A mental illness is an aberration from this signal’s alignment.
Emotions are sets of signals, with a certain angular displacement that bend [so much] they are sometimes much more tangled than memory sets.
Feelings are similar to emotions in angular configuration architecture, just that they have sequences or paths into bodily functions. Simply, like pain, the interpretation in the brain is a momentary further bend in a direction, just like cold, heat or thirst, but once it is mitigated or solved by an input, there is a reversal, conceptually. This bodily base makes it easier to solve feelings, sometimes, than emotions.
This can be accelerated fast using the postulation in Conceptual Biomarkers and Theoretical Biological Factors for Psychiatric and Intelligence Nosology.
iStock image
