Skip to main content

mental health mondays :: oops

thanks very much to dom for alerting me to this fascinating article from salon/ scientific american. for those of you pressed for time, here's a tl;dr version:

"we may have been wrong about that whole lack of serotonin causing depression thing. oops. love, science"

for many years now, psychiatric medicine has relied on the model of the neurochemical imbalance to understand and treat depression and anxiety disorders. and while this particular article only relates to the insufficiency of serotonin reuptake inhibitors as treatment, it's pretty clear that the same thing would apply to drugs that regulate the amount of norepinephrine and/ or dopamine in the brain as well.

the short, over-simplified version is that while drugs that help delay the reuptake of neurotransmitters associated with pleasure and reward do indeed make depressed people feel better, they aren't actually treating depression, at least not its cause. because it turns out that depleted serotonin in the corridors of your noggin is an effect of the fact that your brain is producing fewer neurons and nerve contacts. and that, my friends, is the real reason you're depressed.

it is not uncommon for medicine to start out treating the symptoms of a disease and to gradually move onward to the cause. in fact, it would be anomalous for it to happen the other way. as we observe a disease for longer and understand its progression better, the drugs developed to combat the disease come closer to the epicentre of the death star. most times, we start out just trying to stop the symptoms we see on the surface.

what is surprising is how long its taken for this research to take place. development of drugs to treat major depression, anxiety and other mental disorders has been more or less at a standstill for decades, with "advances" chiefly comprised of tweaks on previous formulas, especially providing long-release versions of existing drugs. to put that in perspective, aids has been identified, grown to an epidemic, its symptoms treated with a variety of harsh drugs, triggered a massive shift in attitudes towards safe sex, had its spread curtailed in the western world and come to be a manageable condition at various stages, all in the time we've been tinkering with prozac. [note :: i am not saying that all aids victims have access to proper treatment or education, only that the potential to eliminate the virus if caught early enough or mitigate its damage to a great degree exists.]

i'm not claiming to know why this is the case. the brain is an unfathomably complicated piece of machinery, as is evidenced by the fact that we discover entirely new things about it virtually every time we attempt to validate anything we actually think we know. check the prescribing information sheet on any psychiatric drug and you'll find a line that says something like "the mechanism of action is thought to be..." science isn't even trying to convince you that it knows how this thing really works. and while testing out the efficacy of a new sinus medication is likely only to result in a more snot/ less snot check sheet, playing around with the inner workings of your brain requires a little more in the way of due diligence. no one wants this stuff rushed to market.

and you certainly can't argue that there's no money in it. the amount of money in psychiatric drugs is staggering. so unless someone offers some pretty convincing proof that cauliflower cures depression, there is probably more than enough financial incentive to do this sort of work.

i am interested to see how long it takes for this research to spur the development of a newer class of drugs, to see if getting our slacking neuron-producers off their butts represents a great leap forward.


as long as you're here, why not read more?

presidenting is hard :: these people are not your friends

hello mr. president! a while back, i promised that i would periodically be giving you some advice on how to do your job, since you seem a little unclear on how everything works. i didn't mean to go so long between missives, but the fact is that i've been busy and you're administration has been in overdrive giving me things to write about. what i've realised is that many of those things are ones i can't help you with: if you or anyone in your immediate circle worked with russians to compromise the 2016 election, that shit is done. robert mueller is going to find that out, because he's the kind of person who looks like the theme from dragnet just automatically starts playing every time he enters a room. so that's your problem. i'm just here to talk to you about what you can do now that you are, by law, the president. because, while chief detective mueller is doing his thing, we all need to live with your decisions. i'm even less happy about that than…

write brain

i was talking to a friend of mine about coffee, specifically about our mutual need for coffee, yesterday and, literally as i was in the middle of a thought, an idea occurred to me that i felt like i had to note. so there i am, scribbling a note to myself that was really just a word salad of related terms, which i later transformed into a weird but more comprehensible note that i could refer to later. [i don't want another beatriz coca situation on my hands.] i feel like this idea isn't a story on its own, but something that i could incorporate into a larger project, which is good, because i have a few of those.

now, of course, i need to sit down and do research on this, because it's become terribly important to me that the details of this weird little idea that i'm planning on incorporating into a larger thing be totally plausible, even though no one but me is ever going to care. i'm increasingly convinced that the goal of every writer is to find someone who will t…

luck of the irish?

i like st. patrick's day. i like the fact that there is a holiday that celebrates celtic-ness and drunkeness at once (you could argue they were pretty close to begin with). in fact, it's probably second only to halloween as my favourite publicly recognised holiday.

so every year, i have to have my little ritual and that ritual involves visiting a pub and partaking of the cheer. i've made attempts at watching parades in various cities, but i've more recently given up that practice because a) eight out of ten times, it's freezing cold and/ or snowing in canada on march 17th and b) the parades seem to consist entirely of trucks carrying people who are as drunk as i would be, if i weren't freezing my tush off watching them. so i've backed off the parade in recent years.

however, a visit to the pub, the longer the better, is still an important thing for me.

next year, however, i'm going to have to plan things a little better.

first of all, i didn't …