I agree in part, it seems more apparent however that this cursory and throw away philosophy is the trend in modern intellectualism; the idea that in two lines one can convey a sense of authority, provide an accurate and irrefuteable conclusion, and then solve for x.
It is unfairly simplistic, to give people their own soundbites and bolster their already established opinions, when carefully approaching any one of the things listed would properly require an entire volume and much study.
ZH, circa 8 years ago was half decent, lots of conspiracy nonsense but also lots of market rumours, since then it has become a Russian propaganda page full of nonsense.
Definitions are much too narrow, there is so much overlap, ultimately though therapeutic methods don't differ quite so wildly. The handful of conditions he was displaying are common differential diagnoses with very similar treatments.
However, there are stigmas attached to certain diagnoses and not their differentials so some people prefer less negative labels.
In my experience with world class psychiatrists your views are a little outdated, generally the more academic practitioners are much more like Dr Barron.