The problem with studying “schizophrenics”, is that the behavior used to diagnose is a syndrome not a medical condition, therefore all the research leads to nothing. It’s like trying to draw conclusions about everyone with a cough! It is widely understood that the root of the disease may not even be in the brain or nervous system, it may be the immune system or the gut or the endocrine system. The research by NIMH is a start but they need more input from other areas of medicine.
1
'“One of the things that’s really interesting about psychiatric disease is that it’s more heritable than many other diseases,” Dr. Gerstein said.' What is a 'psychiatric disease'? It all smacks of 19th century "genetic" research. The research is looking at various conditions that are known to have quite different etiologies. Anyone who does genetic research on postmortem brains that have been 'diagnosed with disorders' and presents it as being science and objective has not really understood human cognition and existence, nor indeed good science.
The 'Correction' to the article is unfortunately nothing out of the ordinary. As with most of this type of research: have other teams of researchers replicated these findings? Will they ever be replicated? Were these teams building their research on similar research...and so on and so forth?
1
When we rads forecast this at helix-time in 1953, people sneered, "You must be godless Communists!" Godless, anyway.
Somehow,
someway
the brain
does its best
to understand
society,
the world
and
itself.
When the world
or
people
or
your own self
do
not make sense
to yourself -
there
is
trouble.
Find out
what happens
in the brains
of "Normal' People
when suddenly
"nothing makes sense"-
and you
may find
your answers.
3
In my opinion, it is more usefull the fact that now physicians are able to bedside detect from birth any brain degenerative disorder Inherited Real Risk, and remove it by inexpensive personalized Reconstructing Mitochondrial Quantum Therapy. Interestingly, I have recently discovered and described in two papers, a clinical diagnostic method based on Corpus Callosum different neuronal activity. This original and reliable bedside evaluation, starting from birth, is microangiological in nature, and based on Angiobiopathy Theory.
@Sergio Stagnaro: Quant still dubious, tho not impossible.
An informative and clearly written article, summarizing what appears to be the beginnings of a long quest ahead in which relevant, currently unanswered and future as yet unknown relevant questions need consideration.In this trek it would be useful to “caveat”a number of issues which merit consideration.With the advent of AI it is helpful and useful to consider human behaviors, their processes and outcomes, including mental illnesses of whatever types, levels and qualities, as being dynamic, nonlinear multidimensional, “lawful,” stage-enabled,and “bounded”(culture, time, a range of personal characteristics, etc.).The operational process has been consensualized into: caused by, associated with and occurs, without our understanding. Currently, because of gaps in needed information and/or technology.All of this exists within reality’s ever-present dimensions of uncertainties, unpredictabilties, randomness, diversities ( beware of binary banalities) and lack of TOTAL control notwithstanding our efforts; types, levels,qualities, timing.As we move from collecting relevant data, to analyzable information, transmuted into needed understanding of needed implications,outcomes and effective usability,we can be/are confronted by states of unknowability.Knowing the theoretical etiology of a mental disease, and its array of interacting contributions, genes possibly being ONE,and it’s process and prognosis, doesn’t automatically translate into successful planned intervention. To know=?
Members of my family have suffered from bi-polar disorder, depression, paranoid schizophrenia, Alzheimer's, PTSD and brain cancer for generations. A few have attempted suicide. A couple succeeded. A couple went to mental institutions. One has never left. Brain cancer killed a few. The brain is very complicated.
And while I want to be hopeful, I am reminded that this is the 200th year anniversary of a fictional classic novel aka " Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus" by Mary Shelley.
1
How in the world does one study DEAD ('post-mortem') brains to observes "changes in the activity of genes"??
And then, further straining understanding, determine patterns of interaction "at about the time these disorders begin to surface"?? That time is the teens and twenties - and they're looking at, what, a 70-something's dead brain?!?
Hey, I've got a bridge to sell you, too.
Look, I've got a PhD in molecular biology and I've studied patterns of gene expression (in prostate and other cells) and this makes no sense to me. Did they assess *protein levels* immediately after death as a readout of gene activity? And how quickly? 16 brain biopsies - through the skull - were collected and flash frozen with liquid nitrogen within *minutes* of death? Anything longer would be meaningless.
I realize it's difficult to describe in much detail the way experiments were done, but this cries out for more explanation!
We know these papers have to pass muster in peer review, but based on what's given here, I have to say that it makes no sense and I can't even believe it.
Please NYTimes sci writers: If you're going to cover it at all, please give us enough experimental detail that we can find the reported results to be understandable and credible!
9
@Ambient Kestrel, thank you for your response, especially regarding the state of the brain when studied. Stories should include the experimental detail and context. My late husband's brain was donated (after his death mind you) and the results were surprising and useful to scientists and neurologists.
@Ambient Kestrel . Yet researchers routinely analyze DNA from tissue thousands of years old and draw conclusions about the organisms that they were taken from. You know a lot more about this than I do but I think this article does a good job of explaining how limited this analysis is, and how far there is to go to validate this kind of testing, and leaving open the possibility that it will have no practical use.
1
If you're curious about the methods, maybe you should read the papers and their supplements. The authors of this article have embedded links to the studies discussed in the text.
Science journalism is hard. You can't expect it to communicate the entire content of a lab's project: that's what scientific journals are for.
1
It could be a combination of genetic inheritance along with environmental exposure triggering it and or some things could be behavioral by being exposed to said behaviors early on by a caregiver? Quite possibly a combination of all factors. I think there is much more to understanding mental disorders and it will probably require a complete absense of bias to ever truly grasp it.
3
This is exciting research. I hope this eventually leads to some practical treatment and not just a genetic test.
1
I suspect there are many additional substances involved in transmission of information in the brain besides the known neurotransmitters, hormones, etc. I hope someone is looking for that. My guess is there are substances made by other organs and receptors for those substances that haven't been identified. We discovered bacteria not that long ago in the grand scheme of things.
3
We know that having three copies of Chromosome 21 (aka "trisomy 21" aka "Down Syndrome") has serious effects on many traits & characteristics. Among these are cognitive functions. In the gene network map accompanying the article is shown a single gene on Chromosome 21 detected by the Gerstein studies. What might be interesting to see is whether having three versus two copies of this exact gene is correlated with Down Syndrome patients' cognitive problems. There are other chromosome mapping studies re. Down that will be illuminating to look up.
3
So the story boils down to this: At some date far in the future, brain scientists might be able to begin piecing some of this preliminary data together with an eye toward creating testable hypotheses at a still farther date in the future, in an effort to determine whether or not so-called neuro-psychiatric diseases have an organic basis in brain biology and/or genomics.
At that point other brain scientists, presumably, would begin trying to develop interventions which might be used to 'target' these so-called neuro-psychiatric diseases for 'treatment' at an even farther date in the future.
However, at the present time there's no valid proof of any connection whatsoever between the human genome and these putative neuro-psychiatric diseases. Nor is there even a consensus inside the medical establishment about what schizophrenia is or whether the word denotes an actually existing phenomenon.
I would suggest that this demonstrates how implacably determined and expensively invested the psychiatric industry is in generating some kind of scientific validation - which has eluded it for over a century - of the very assumptions that its own reason for being depends upon. They have assumed the the existence of the very thing that they are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to search for: a genetic-biological basis for so-called psychiatric disorders.
9
@James Mullaney
"I would suggest that this demonstrates how implacably determined and expensively invested the psychiatric industry is in generating some kind of scientific validation - which has eluded it for over a century - of the very assumptions that its own reason for being depends upon."
I would argue the same about any major advancement in medical science-- scientific validation eludes it.... until it doesn't. Think about how many centuries passed without us understanding the electrophysiology of the heart. Should we have just abandoned efforts because prior attempts to explain it were fruitless? This defeatist attitude is by nature anti-scientific.
4
@HR: The quest to find genetic errors in the brain and devise interventions to 'correct' them is not only a wild-goose chase: It's an act of tragic hubris based on the false premise that the self-understanding of Homo sapiens sapiens is so advanced that we have identified the limits of our own potentiality. For example, 'eccentric behavior' must be a sign of an obsessive-compulsive disorder. It couldn't possibly be the case that the individual in question is a gifted and inspired philosopher who is trying to adjust to a new understanding of reality that will soon be a boon to the whole world. The Greek philosopher Socrates, who was sentenced to death by hemlock for corrupting the morals of Greek youth, comes to mind. Or take that disheveled-looking cat named Albert. He's been overheard proposing that time is actually the fourth dimension of space. Well, we all know that that isn't true. So Albert gets a diagnosis and an intervention, possibly a very harmful and intrusive one. What about this German weirdo, Ludwig? He's been suffering from auditory hallucinations: you know, heavenly string quartets, choirs of angels, that sort of thing. Oh dear. Well, we know what causes that 'disorder' and what drug to give him to make it go away. Goodbye to Plato's Republic, the Theory of Special Relativity, and the String Quartet in C minor.
The psychiatric-pharmaceutical industrial complex is ruled by a materialist paradigm that precludes innovation, insight, inspiration, and genius.
Scientists used to believe that the brain was sterile, but a recent discovery found the presence of harmless bacteria in the brain. The brain, like the gut, may have its own microbiome, or the two may even work in tandem.
https://www.livescience.com/64098-bacteria-brain-microbiome.html
The research is still preliminary, but I wonder if it will open up new avenues in the treatment of mental health disorders. Fascinating stuff!
See here for an interesting interview with the researcher:
http://nautil.us/issue/66/clockwork/are-there-bacteria-in-your-brain
1
The human brain is the most complex structure in the known universe. 100 billion cells are each wired to thousands of their compatriots in ways that produce our memory and intelligence, all while consuming about 20 watts of power.
Understanding brain function could dramatically improve artificial intelligence efforts. (Leaving aside whether that’s really in humanity’s best interest.) In that effort, a unique, even essential lens into brain function is the detailed understanding of brain diseases.
It’s probably no surprise that such a complex organ has extremely complication disease mechanisms. But the more we know, the better our targeted treatment options should become.
6
Now I may be able to figure out what is wrong with my crooked business partner.
3
@DENOTE MORDANT
You're really just adding to the stigma of mental illness with your comment. Crooked business partner? The handful people I know with mental illness are accomplished lawyers, policy makers, scientists, and programmers as well as intelligent, kind college students navigating adulthood. Some of them are brave enough to tell their friends and colleagues about their illness, others choose to hide it from ignorant people.
So yeah, please stop confusing bad people with people that have medical conditions.
4
the outside NUMBERS represent chromosomes (not letters)
It's reasonable to wonder if there are limits to what we can understand about the brain, which is not just the most complex organ in the body but the most complex thing in the known universe. 110 billion neurons, trillions of connections, somewhere up to 100 neurotransmitters, dozens of dynamically active circuits. As someone once observed, if the brain were simple enough for us to understand, we'd be too simple-minded to understand it.
And then there's the the fact that the effects of genetics on the brain may be powerful but are also extremely indirect. The problem is likely to be orders of magnitude more difficult than looking at the blueprints for an international airport and trying to predict which particular pipe in the plumbing system is likely to fail first. The current gene-brain mapping project is certainly worth doing, but we should not expect easy quick answers.
5
Not all psychoses are genetic. Some at least are autoimmune conditions. Far too little is known about those. And unless an autoimmune origin is excluded, the genetics are useless and potentially point in the wrong direction.
2
So is your argument that autoimmune diseases are not related to genetics, not the case at all.
@Kara Ben Nemsi
Remission of lifelong schizophrenia in some patients who have received bone marrow transplants, is perhaps an example. The reverse also--induction of schizophrenia in recipients.
2
“In another report, investigators delivered a clearer picture of brain development over the human lifetime. The brain is continually adapting, or “rewiring,” itself through life, particularly in utero and through adolescence, generating an ever-transforming genetic, cellular and genetic landscape that had defied the tools of modern science.”
We know how critical the first 18 years of life are for brain development yet we continue to defund educational and social programs opting instead for a bloated military budget or tax cuts for the most wealthy.
As the wealthiest nation in the world, we should have the best free public education system that is equitable and free for all. And most importantly, it should start with free, evidence-based early childhood education programs for our youngest children. We also need to pay our early childhood educators (all educators, really) a living wage. Their work is our future.
35
Ain’t gonna happen until the Middle Eastern nations cure themselves.
Out of respect, please:
1. Find an alternate to the crime scene analogy.
2. Surely we have progressed sufficiently to expect person-first language. This is especially important from people within the field. "Schizophrenic people" is not acceptable.
3. The definition of normal is based on the majority. I am not discounting the reality or the damage that can result from these types of neurological differences.
However, before working to eradicate or mitigate them (which, again, I am not saying is not worthwhile), let's please at least consider and address the underlying, complicated ethical issues, and acknowledge that beauty is also possible and identity comes into play.
These genes and divergences are part of real human beings.
Respect before eradication, please.
7
@SZ I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that most Schizophrenic people would be happy if a "cure" for their disease existed.
While we wait for that day to come, it's really exciting to have researchers gaining a better understanding of how the complicated systems in the brain work.
6
@SZ I wholly agree with you here, and come to think about it, the science of biology and medical practices based upon it has, since the 17th/18th centuries, treated the body like a machine that can be tuned with math. Hmmmm. Not so sure that works so well in terms of treating real human beings. Also, the normal is contrasted to the pathological, rather than the latter being just another case of the former- certainly a different and perhaps useful model in the case of psychiatry. I have to wonder what functions eliminating many mental illnesses really serve, and what structures of our society would benefit. Do these folks want to eliminate human emotions, or control them insinister way? I don’t know.
1
@Chris
See #2 above.
1