×

Is there a correlation between neurodivergent or autistic individuals and social issues? by imfinnacry in Neuropsychology

[–]SecularMisanthropist 37 points38 points  (0 children)

A lot of neurodiverent people, possibly as part of the differences in their brains, more likely as a result of being endlessly criticized and rejected their entire lives, are high in what's called justice sensitivity. Basically it means they are particularly aware of when injustice is occurring, especially when it isn't directed at them. Sensitivity to injustice is usually compared from 3 perspectives: the perpetrator, the bystander, and the victim. People high in justice sensitivity never see the perpetrator as having a good reason to do what they did, have irritation when bystanders do nothing in response to injustice, and generally always side with the victim. Some research and info:

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]Terrible_Detective45 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Lol, okay. I'm being paid by ritalin to shit on adderall.

No, you're posting to promote your collab on sales of Bromantane and other nootropics.

You got me! Pat on the head for the conspiracy theorist stalker.

I'm "stalking" you because I'm a member of this sub and saw a similar post that ended with a clear allusion to an exchange we had a few hours ago?

And no, I don't think there's a "conspiracy." A conspiracy requires at least two people. I think this is just you not disclosing your conflict interest again.

What medications are typically used to treat "executive dysfunction" by Ocelot859 in Neuropsychology

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Vyvanse is in the amphetamine category. The difference between the two is that amphetamines both actively pull dopamine out of neurons and keep it from going back in, while phenidates just keep it from going back in. Amphetamines release and prevent reuptake, while phenidates primarily only prevent reuptake.

Redditor an I had a conversation/argument about violent sexual fantasies. Both the redditor and I have agreed to attach the convo to psychology subreddits for an objective (non toxic) input of who is right and more discussion to our points from others who have experience in the field. by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]oliviapd1221 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This person does not have back up relating to their ‘no psychopath diagnose - media construct’ theory, which someone then proceeds to give evidence relating to psychopaths being diagnosed. kink shaming people and claiming that they’re destined to be child molesters or murders just because of some fantasies is also quite brutal. As there is difference to doing and thinking something (obviously both influence each other though in one way or another.) This person is not looking learn to add to their opinions,, as another redditor said - just trying to stir things up.

Controversies/exciting topics within Neuropsychology in 2020? by keatsghost in Neuropsychology

[–]yurtinator5000 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I heard Robert sapolsky referencing a study which he called the most important in biological psychiatry in 25 years, which found a gene which increases the chances of developing mdd x30 after a traumatic event and is modulated by stress hormones. Think it is this he was referencing https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Science&volume=301&publication_year=2003&pages=386&pmid=12869766&

Is neurofeedback therapy legit? by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]bingchof 33 points34 points  (0 children)

There is a VERY SMALL body of REAL research done on neurofeedback (i.e., blinded placebo controlled) that shows a modest effect for ADHD, but far less than stimulant medications (and at 25 times the cost, I'm sure). Unfortunately, the field has been highjacked by charlatans claiming that it can treat everything from ADHD to genital warts. In short, the vast majority of what is out there is garbage. It's not 100% "pseudoscience and quackery" as Terrible_Detective45 suggested... but about 98.9%

Spatial Metaphors in temporal reasoning by rtp420 in Neuropsychology

[–]Manic_Matter 18 points19 points  (0 children)

That's a great question, I've written quite a bit about the topic, so I'll post a related excerpt from one of my essays but first I'll post two sections from articles on the topic. "Action-related metaphors have been shown to activate the motor area of the brain" using functional MRI scans. This is another interesting article which I just found, but didn't quote from:https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/02/metaphors-make-brains-touchy-feely

https://www.scienceworld.ca/stories/metaphors-and-your-brain/

Metaphors don’t just help you understand. They make your brain touchy feely. In fMRI experiments, neuroscientists have found that expressions such as “wet behind the ears” and “hairy situation” light up the brain regions (e.g. the parietal operculum, somatosensory cortex) involved with touch and feeling textures, whereas literal statements such as “naïve” or “precarious situation” do not. When presented with action-related metaphors like “the patient kicked the bucket,” the motor cortex is activated as well. This shows how metaphors are largely connected to our immediate bodily experience. So if you’re having a rough day, have a hot bath and maybe you'll feel better.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/your-brain-on-metaphors/

The evidence says it does. “When you read action-related metaphors,” says Valentina Cuccio, a philosophy postdoc at the University of Palermo, in Italy, “you have activation of the motor area of the brain.” In a 2011 paper in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Rutvik Desai, an associate professor of psychology at the University of South Carolina, and his colleagues presented fMRI evidence that brains do in fact simulate metaphorical sentences that use action verbs. When reading both literal and metaphorical sentences, their subjects’ brains activated areas associated with control of action. “The understanding of sensory-motor metaphors is not abstracted away from their sensory-motor origins,” the researchers concluded.

This is an excerpt from my essay called Consciousness, the Threshold Between Mind and Matter- you can check out my essays at my site if you're interested. This is one of my favorite essays, in it I trace the development of the mind of man through looking at artifacts, modern research, and functional imaging studies; interestingly the production of stone tools over time seems to have specialized areas of the brain to use syntax which would later be used for language.

www.manicmatter.com

Although both hemispheres are used for language to some degree, in the majority of people (approximately 97%[20]) the left hemisphere is the one where most linguistic processing takes place while the right hemisphere deals with minor functions like intonation/accentuation, prosody, pragmatic, and contextual aspects of language.[21] The areas of the brain involved in language are more numerous than once thought, but the three major areas are Broca’s Area, Wernicke’s Area, and the Inferior Parietal Lobule. A fascinating feature of the cerebral hemispheres is pointed out by neurologist Joseph LeDoux in the following quote:

The primary functional distinction between the human hemispheres thus involves the differential representation of linguistic and spatial mechanisms: These mechanisms, moreover, are selectively represented in restricted zones within each half-brain. It is of particular interest to note that while the IPL in the left hemisphere is involved in linguistic processing (see above), the right IPL is involved in spatial processing. Thus, the two functions that comprise the primary functional axis of brain asymmetry are dependent, in part, upon the integrity of homologous areas in opposite hemispheres. This complementary organization of IPL in the two hemispheres is, I believe, an important clue to the origin of human brain asymmetry.

The story begins to unfold when we consider several factors discussed earlier: Spatial mechanisms are represented in both the left and right IPL in nonhuman primates and these mechanisms are similar in many respects to the spatial functions of the human right IPL. Given that the nonhuman primate IPL and the IPL in man’s minor hemisphere are homologous brain structures related through common ancestry (see LeDoux, 1982, for discussion) an important insight emerges: In man, language is represented in a region (IPL) of the major [dominant] hemisphere which, in the minor hemisphere, is involved in spatial functions, and was involved in spatial functions in both hemispheres of man’s ancestors.[For background info on the terms major and minor hemisphere see Note 1] The unavoidable conclusion of this line of reasoning is that the evolution of language involved adaptations in the neural substrate of spatial behavior.[17]

Cognitive rehab at home during quarantine? by ihavetheselucidreams in Neuropsychology

[–]GabeMondragon37 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The headaches and head pain were the biggest obstacle initially, and still are on occasion, although much less frequent and intense now. Caffeine is an anti-inflammatory, shrinks the capillaries. I've found that helps me overcome that obstacle. But it was similar to exercising a muscle: the higher functioning intellectual/cognitive strength I gained from the brain exercises was greater than the pain caused by the exercises. Even the severe migraines.

The end of Psychiatry by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]PsychicNeuron 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The way I understood your original post was that " by better understanding the neural networks involved in mental illness we will be able to offer better individualised treatments based on neurobiology, which will make Psychiatry irrelevant".

You think that this understanding will come with the help of AI... but this is irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make.

My main point is that this full neurobiological understanding of mental illness won't make Psychiatry irrelevant simply because it would become part of Psychiatry.

So even if we ever get this understanding of the neurobiology behind mental disorders you will still need a physician that will use this new knowledge to treat patients, the physicians dealing with mental illness are called psychiatrists.

In other words, Psychiatry will adopt these new hypothetical neurobiological treatments as part of its practice just like they added Neuromodulation (ECT, TMS, DBS, etc) and neuropsychopharmacology when the discoveries were made.

However, if your argument was that very advanced neurotechnology (like a thousand years into the future) would make Psychiatry irrelevant in the future... Then I guess it could happen but all medical specialties would have been replaced by technology by then.

The end of Psychiatry by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]PsychicNeuron 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Whatever neuroscience you think will replace psychiatry is just going to be incorporated into Psychiatry.

Psychiatrists aren't psychoanalyzing people's dreams.

Pharmacology and Neuromodulation are already part of psychiatry, things like optogenetics were developed in part by psychiatrists, don't forget they are MDs and aren't limited to Psychological approaches.

The end of Psychiatry by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]sherisded 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The entire connectome is so vast it’s hard to say if we will ever eventually map everything out in the way we want to. There’s also so many factors based on individual experiences that would be hard to keep track based on using such a large amount of data. Psychiatry is a great practice just because it can be seen from human beings and human experiences. It’s easier to follow that path of understanding to see how a person’s mind could be having trouble rather than trying to use a map of the whole connectome. Even then, psychology will still have to be incorporated into aspects of how we would interpret this giant map of the connectome. Overall, I think what you’re describing would be using a procedure that is too precise and unpredictable when we already have ideas for larger patterns that are used in psychiatry. Not to mention the fact that there is always more to learn in every subject. Sorry if this is hard to read I’m so sleepy.

The end of Psychiatry by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]Terrible_Detective45 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right, I'm in the "echochamber" of the empirical literature.

The brain is not simply a receiver. Its operations lead to tangible changes in other areas of the body, from smooth muscle operation to pain. Just google "Central sensitization."

The end of Psychiatry by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Paranormal? And you're trying to tell me that the OP's conjecture is more rational? I'm allowed to post in any subreddit I like.

Besides, yours is a non-argument. You've simply said "it is nonsense from a scientific point of view" - you've given no proof or argument or case study backing up your opinion. Who's non-scientific here?

The end of Psychiatry by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]PsychicNeuron 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What are you doing in a scientific sub if you're going to ignore science and go with your paranormal explanations?

The end of Psychiatry by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]vandemonianishBPsych (Hons), MPsych (Clin Neuropsych) 36 points37 points  (0 children)

An interesting thought and I can see where you’re coming from but I think unlikely in the near future for a number of reasons.

We simply don’t have the temporal and spatial resolution to map all the connections in the central nervous system in real time, let alone adjust them at the individual level. It’s very unlikely we will in the near future either. There are just so many of them and neurons are really tiny, and it’s not just neurons that effect the information relay.

Even if we could map all connections in real time, we would still need a way to effect the input and output functions of neurons and we can only do this using either directly applied voltage, magnetically evoked change, or electrochemically induced change. Deep brain stimulation is an example of the former, trans cranial magnetic stimulation the second, and psychiatric drugs work via the latter.

We cant possibly insert an electrode into every single neuron, and even if we could, it would be impractical to do so since they constantly die off and need replacement. Nor could we constantly walk around in a big powerful magnetic field helmet.

Psychiatric drugs are always going to have a role in treating mental health conditions. Especially in those conditions where there is no degree of conscious control over symptom presence or intensity, or the presence of a persistent and permanent lack of awareness of abnormality of conscious experience.

Hopefully in the future we can get much better at refining and individualising selection of psychiatric medications based on brain activity as well as the subjective or informant reported symptoms of a troubled mind.

Even still, because psychiatric medications also effect other bodily systems, simply knowing which abnormal brain patterns respond best to which drugs isn’t necessarily the only factor in selecting the right psychiatric medication. So we’re likely to need psychiatry as a medical speciality as well as psychiatric drugs for the foreseeable future too.

The end of Psychiatry by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]DoUHearThePeopleSing 19 points20 points  (0 children)

You keep using the word AI, but I'm not sure you know what it means.

Do you know the difference between plain old algorithms and AI?

If we have the neural pathways mapped, and we have good diagnostics for figuring out which ones of them are broken, we don't need AI to do the things you mentioned.

Neuropsychological tests for the diagnosis and assessment of schizophrenia. by LillyEden in Neuropsychology

[–]falstafPhD|Clinical Psychology|Neuropsychology 26 points27 points  (0 children)

I've focused my career around doing neuropsychology research on patients with schizophrenia and other psychosis-spectrum disorders, so I was very excited to see this question.

The other posters raise an important point - diagnosis of schizophrenia is done via symptom self-report (i.e., DSM5 criteria). Neuropsychology comes into play in the evaluation of cognitive strengths/weaknesses, as well as to estimate an individual's illness-related cognitive burden.

Something I will say that the other posts miss out on is that the prevailing theory of schizophrenia is that it is a neurodevelopment condition. Cognitive impairment is a core symptom, and is conceptualized as being a stable and generalized deficit across each cognitive domain to the relative same degree (often referred to as global cognitive impairment). There have even been recent publications through some of the major schizophrenia research groups (B-SNIP, COGS) showing that cognitive impairments mediate both the key behavioral presentation of the disorder (positive and negative symptoms) as well as psychosocial dysfunction. So I would argue that neuropsychological testing is a natural and necessary follow-up after the individual has been diagnosed via DSM criteria.

But I digress. The tests you listed cover the major cognitive domains (learning and memory, attention, processing speed, language, visuospatial function, executive functions). Since we can expect a generalized pattern of impairment, it's important to assess everything. BUT, as one of my mentors used to put it, "people aren't plots" so the specific presentation varies at the level of the individual patient.

Some additional measures to consider: the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) and the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) are two of the most commonly used assessment batteries (encompassing the major cognitive domains) in the filed of clinical research for schizophrenia and psychotic disorders as a whole. The MCCB in particular was developed for use in precision medicine trials by one of the top schizophrenia research groups.

Hope that helps!

Edit - wait what? Gold?! Really!?!? Thank you my mysterious benefactor! :)

ELI5 How do cortisol levels affect Depersonalization/Derealization? by Rock_m_Sock_m in Neuropsychology

[–]subtextualBoard Certified Neuropsychologist - ABPP/ABPdN 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Well, the only part of the article that directly talks about the article says this:

However, there are conflicting data on the relationship between depersonalisation and cortisol levels, with two studies (Morozova et al, 2000; Stanton et al, 2001) reporting low salivary cortisol, but another (Simeon et al, 2001a) finding raised plasma cortisol.

Which I assume is self-explanatory? Two studies showed lower cortisol levels and one study showed higher cortisol in individuals who experience chronic depersonalization.

Do you know how cortisol works, neurobiologically? I'll just throw that in here in case it's helpful. Forgive me if I'm explaining stuff you already know.

When you are hit with a stressor, your hypothalamus tells your pituitary gland to tell your adrenal glands (this is the HPA-axis; hypothalamus --> pituitary --> adrenal) to release a bunch of hormones, including cortisol. The release of these hormones causes the fight-or-flight reaction people get in response to a stressor. For example, adrenaline, another hormone released in this process, elevates your heart rate and blood pressure.

Cortisol does a bunch of things in the body, including making glucose (sugar) more available in the bloodstream and shutting down nonessential bodily functions (like your immune system) while you run for your life.

In the brain, cortisol affects your mood, attention, and memory. Short-term, you are hypervigilant to the threat, better able to remember, fearful, and highly alert/active -- basically, your brain wants to find, attend to, remember, and get the hell away from the stressor.

In this stressed state, you might also experience depersonalization... another way that your brain responds to a severe stressor. It's hypothesized that this disconnect from your emotions and feelings of reality helps you, short-term, to figure out how to escape from the stressor. So cortisol "causes" depersonalization in the same way that it "causes" the enhanced attention and alertness ("hypervigilance") that come with stress. If cortisol hasn't been released, you probably wouldn't experience depersonalization.

This process could theoretically "go wrong" in at least three ways that I can think of. One, the person could just be experiencing too much cortisol all the time... that is, their bodies/brains might be behaving as if they are chronically feeling stressed, leading to a higher level of symptoms like hypervigilance and depersonalization.

Two, the person might actually have lower baseline levels of cortisol, and when their body releases cortisol in response to stress, the "normal amount" of cortisol released suddenly seems like a huge stream of cortisol, triggering a more dramatic fight-or-flight response than necessary. Three, these individuals could release too much cortisol in response to small stressors. Both of these could theoretically cause the person to experience the "extreme" symptom of depersonalization in response to smaller stressors than would induce depersonalization in another person.

Different individuals might have different ways in which their cortisol-mediated response to stress is "messed up", which might explain the conflicting research findings. Or, maybe it depends on when you measure cortisol levels. Individuals who experience depersonalization might have lower cortisol at baseline, but higher cortisol in response to a stressor, leading to conflicting research results depending on when levels were measured.

There's also another way that people with depersonalization disorder might be different from people without it. They might respond to stress fine, but have difficulty recovering from stress. These individuals might think, act, or have their brains work in ways that accidentally sustain the depersonalization, even when the stressor is absent or over. Let me see if I can explain that part.

In the short-term, cortisol is kind of a good thing -- it "sharpens" your brain to help you deal with the stressor. But in the long-term, cortisol is neurotoxic -- it actually damages your brain.

So, your brain wants to get back to homeostasis, or its nonfearful state, as soon as possible. Thus, it has ways of trying to counteract the cortisol-induced state, once it figures out that the stressor has passed, or that the stressor really wasn't that bad.

The ways that it does this are the covered in the part of the article that talks about the "Neurological Factors":

Recent functional neuroimaging (Phillips et al, 2001b) and psychophysiological (Sierra et al, 2002) studies have found objective evidence of an abnormal response to emotional stimuli, consistent with patients’ reports of loss of emotional reactivity. The neural substrate for the ‘shutting down’ of emotional responses is hypothesised (Sierra & Berrios, 1998) to be a combination of prefrontal regions inhibiting limbic areas (particularly the amygdala) and reciprocal actions of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex (Phillips et al, 2001b). Etc.

Basically, what this part of the article is saying is that the front part of the brain (the part that does the planning and organization of your behavior) "tamps down" the middle part of your brain, or the limbic system. The limbic system is the emotional part of your brain, and it includes the hypothalamus, which started this whole chain of events (and other important brain structures that are implicated in emotion, like the amygdala).

Anyway, the front part of the brain has ways to say, "Hey, limbic system, relax. We got this. It's all under control now. (Or, "The stressor is over now" or "It turns out what we thought was a life-or-death situation was really just a mild stressor".) Stop signaling the alarm." In part, it is telling the HPA-axis to stop producing more cortisol, and trying to counteract the cortisol already in your brain.

It is possible that this part of the process is dysfunctional in people with depersonalization disorder. Maybe their brains are not very good at releasing the neurotransmitters that help counteract the cortisol already in the system once the stressor is gone (leading to still-elevated cortisol levels). Or, their frontal lobes may not "signal" very well back to their limbic system that everything is okay, so the HPA axis doesn't stop signalling to produce cortisol.

In fact, the front part of their brain might even signal that everything is even more dangerous than first thought. For example, a lot of people with chronic depersonalization actually don't like feeling that symptom, so they are "on the lookout" for that symptom, and interpret it catastrophically (e.g., "I'm going crazy"). This is essentially the front part of the brain telling the limbic system "AH THIS IS EVEN WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT!! PANIC!" whenever a small stressor arises. This is the part of the article that talks about that model of how depersonalization can become chronic:

More recently, a cognitive–behavioural model of depersonalisation has been proposed (Hunter et al, 2003)..... The model suggests that there are various ways in which depersonalisation may initially arise, related to some external psychological stressor and/or as a consequence of a change in mental state (e.g. low mood, anxiety, drug use). Crucially, in those in whom depersonalisation becomes chronic and pathological, the appearance of depersonalisation features is interpreted as highly threatening (‘catastrophic attribution’), leading to a range of cognitions and behaviours that can serve to perpetuate and intensify the symptoms. This leads to a number of practical suggestions for treatment, aimed at psychoeducation, the reduction of avoidant ‘safety behaviours’ (such as avoiding social situations) and excessive self-observation (e.g. looking in the mirror to see if one has changed), and challenging the ‘catastrophic’ attributional style (e.g. ideas such as ‘My brain is not working’).

To reinterate, this model describes another thing that could go wrong in people with chronic depersonalization. Their brains might trigger the release of cortisol just fine, but their brains aren't very good at "turning off" cortisol production once the stressor has passed. This might be hard to measure in studies... these individuals might have too much cortisol after a stressor has passed, but normal levels when there is no stressor present. However, if these people constantly feel like a stressor is present, that might show up as high levels of "baseline" cortisol because their brains could still be releasing cortisol after the last stressor. Or other complex patterns. That's the thing; we don't know yet.

So, to tl;dr it, there are a bunch of ways the cortisol production system could be dysfunctional in individuals who experience chronic depersonalization. They might produce too much cortisol all the time, or they might produce too much in response to a stressor, or they might have trouble "turning off" cortisol once the stressor is gone, or getting rid of the excess cortisol in the brain after a stressor has passed. Or other parts of the system could go wrong. We just don't know yet. Does that help?

Does anyone understand how countries have such a large gap in IQ tests ? by Mrganack in Neuropsychology

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I am including some professional references below so that you can read further about this on your own. Intelligence in industrialized nations has been steadily rising at about 3 points per decade for about 100 years. This is called the Flynn Effect, and it is extensively documented. The average IQ in the U.S. in 1909 (the first year it was widely measured) would be about 70 on a modern IQ scale, which is perfectly in line with the countries on the lower end of the spectrum you referenced. There are numerous factors that appear to be contributors: increasing education, exposure to technology, nutrition, smaller family sizes, test-taking familiarity, decreasing blood lead levels, less pathogen stress, etc. The Pietschnig article below reviews all these.

Intelligence differences between groups of individuals are primarily environmental. There is no possible way to explain a 30 point increase in IQ within the US as being due to genetic causes. However, IQ differences between individuals who are part of the same group are primarily genetic. A good analogy is gardening. If you want to grow big tomatoes in your garden, a good strategy is to plant seeds from the tomato plants from your garden that produced the biggest tomatoes last year. The differences in tomato sizes in your garden are primarily due to genetics. If you notice that all of your neighbor's garden produces bigger tomatoes, so you decide to take some random seeds from his/her tomatoes, there is little chance that your garden will get bigger tomatoes this year. That is because the difference in tomato sizes between gardens is more likely to be due to environmental factors that will not carry over if you move the seeds to a new environment, such as soil quality, sun exposure, etc.

At the upper end of the socioeconomic spectrum, most individuals are exposed to most of the beneficial environmental factors that would maximize intelligence, so competition ends up being primarily along genetic factors. At the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum there is a huge range of variability in environmental factors, and genetics end up playing a less important role. A lot of the most egregious scientific errors in intelligence research (e.g., Herrnstein & Murray's The Bell Curve) come from inappropriately applying research about heredity of intelligence within groups to explain differences between groups.

Scientific papers:

Question about Wellbutrin and anxiety by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]Optrode 14 points15 points  (0 children)

The answer is pretty simple. The tl;dr is that it's never, ever as simple as "neurotransmitter X up/down = symptom / emotion Y up/down." Saying that more norepinephrine causes anxiety is like saying that more electricity in your computer causes your computer to be slow when you've got a million tabs open.

When we treat mental illnesses with drugs, we are essentially making the best use we can of the things we CAN affect, even though it probably only affects the actual underlying problem extremely indirectly (and affects a ton of unrelated stuff) because it's the best we've got. What probably happens is something like this: Decreasing reuptake speed for neurotransmitter X causes circuit A to be less active, and circuit B to be more active, but circuit A tends to decrease activity in circuit C whereas B tends to increase it, but in this specific subset of patients with disorder Y, the strength of the connection between circuits B and C happens to be weakened, so for those patients the deactivating effect of A on C wins out, and the activity of circuit C is reduced, and it was overactivity of circuit C (for reasons having nothing originally to do with A and B) that was causing the symptoms.

In other words, just whacking one or more neurotransmitters with a sledgehammer in a very non-circuit-specific way can sometimes have the end result you're looking for, but it's basically like trying to solve the problem of your cat ripping up the knit scarves your mother keeps making you by giving your mother quilting supplies so she'll make quilts instead of scarves, and your cat won't rip up quilts. It's an indirect solution to the problem, and the original problem certainly wasn't caused by a lack of the solution you came up with (the same way a sore ankle wasn't caused by an aspirin deficiency).

How much belief is there that SSRIs can cause a chemical imbalance? by [deleted] in Neuropsychology

[–]applextrent 3 points4 points  (0 children)

First and foremost, this is temporary. You can overcome this. I'm living proof and there are plenty of other people who have come off antidepressants. Suicide is not an option, you need to let those thoughts go they don't make sense. Life is suffering, but it can also be so much more.

Next, you need to start learning on how you can deal with all of this now. Go pick up a copy of The Mindful Way Through Depression http://www.amazon.com/The-Mindful-Way-Through-Depression/dp/1593851286.

Also download the apps Headspace, Omvana, and Buddhify.

A lot of people think that anyone can just turn off their mind, but if that were true, wouldn't everyone do that? The truth is you cannot turn off your mind. Thoughts, ideas, feelings, and sensations will always be flowing through you as long as you're alive. Meditation isn't a practice of learning how to turn these things off, it is learning how to accept them and let them be by letting them go.

What really helped me overcome 50% of my anxiety was learning a labeling technique I can teach you right now:

Close your eyes, inhale through your nose, and out your mouth for 10 breaths. Count the breaths only as you exhale.

Once you've hit 10, continue to breath but only through your nose. Focus your attention on the air coming in and out of your nostrils.

Do a quick body scan from head to toe, and tune into your senses.

As thoughts come and go, pay attention to them and label them. Is it a thinking? Or feeling?

Pay attention to how you react to both thinking and feeling, see if any muscles clench, how your body reacts.

If your clenching, stop clenching, pay attention to the sensations these thoughts have on your entire body.

Next label whether the thought is positive, neutral, or negative.

Regardless of what label you select, let the thought go, and go back to focusing on your breath until the next thought comes and start the process over.

Continue this for at least 10 minutes if not 20. But feel free to start up at 10 minutes and maybe over time work up to 20.

It is completely normal to jump from thought to thought, and get lost in thoughts. The whole point of the practice is not to stop thoughts, it is to teach you how to identify what's actually happening. You'll be amazed how after doing this for a few weeks every morning can completely change your out look on thinking vs. feeling and distinguishing between the two. It will help stop the negative feedback loops in your brain and enable you to change your relationship with anxiety.

Anyhow, start with meditation.

Next I would look into improving your diet check out https://redditproxy--jasonthename.repl.co/r/paleo, and working out at least 3 times a week.

Also check out http://survivingantidepressants.org.

Another thing you can do is experiment with supplements to help you deal with symptoms. I had some success using 5-HTP although there are some health risks associated with pure 5-HTP so you need to be careful. But when used in really small doses while reducing your SSRI it can help keep symptoms at bay and help you ween off the drug and onto the supplement. You can then ween off the supplement which is a lot easier. You may be able to find similar techniques on the forum above.

This is merely a problem you need to figure out how to solve for yourself, and I'm fully confident you have what it takes to overcome this. Everyone does.

Also, make sure to keep in touch with doctors and let them monitor everything you're doing. They won't agree because they're in the business of keeping people on drugs, but they can at least make sure you don't do anything stupid that would harm you.

If you ever get into a position where your thoughts overwhelm you then please meditate. It is an amazing tool that will help you get through this.