Author
|
Topic: Study shows placebo effect has physiological component
|
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290
|
posted 25 August 2005 04:46 PM
Study shows brain chemistry link to placebo effect quote: ANN ARBOR, Mich. (AP) — Patients will feel better if they believe they're taking painkillers — even if their doses contain no medication, according to a University of Michigan study. The study, examining the placebo effect, shows that the brain releases chemicals that relieve pain in patients who believe they'be being treated. It is to be published Wednesday in the Journal of Neuroscience. Researchers say the findings could lead to new ways to treat chronic pain. "This deals another serious blow to the idea that the placebo effect is a purely psychological, with no physical basis," said Dr. Jon-Kar Zubieta, associate professor of psychiatry and radiology at the Michigan Medical School. "The mind-body connection is quite clear."
From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290
|
posted 25 August 2005 08:35 PM
quote: There would have to be a physiological basis for the pain relief.
Well now we have something a little more definitive than your hunch - like the actual brain chemistry at work in the PE. As the study states this insight could lead to new and effective pain remedies.
quote: When are we going to start spending health dollars intelligently?
It is quite difficult to tell in advance which lines of research are going to produce beneficial treatments. Perhaps you have some insight you could share? Seems to me studying the complex relationship between the phycological and physiological manifestations of pain and pain relief is a very important subject of research.
From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Grazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10225
|
posted 25 August 2005 08:53 PM
quote: Well now we have something a little more definitive than your hunch - like the actual brain chemistry at work in the PE. As the study states this insight could lead to new and effective pain remedies.
Good point if you mean the actual biochemical pathways. However, this "news" was posted as being the mere fact of a physiological basis (without specifying) which would fall under the rubric of a priori knowledge. quote: It is quite difficult to tell in advance which lines of research are going to produce beneficial treatments. Perhaps you have some insight you could share?
I'd be happy to. We can immediately write off all biochemical psychiatric research for a start, because that's a born loser. quote: Seems to me studying the complex relationship between the phycological and physiological manifestations of pain and pain relief is a very important subject of research.
Well, yeah, I was a little harsh. Of course pain and pain relief are important. I was responding more to the "Hey, there's a physiological basis to placebo!!!" tone of wonderment.
From: tba | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290
|
posted 25 August 2005 09:53 PM
quote: We can immediately write off all biochemical psychiatric research for a start, because that's a born loser.
Just a quick glance around Science Daily's front page would seem to put the lie to that statement. Neurotransmitter orexin tied to pleasure quote: PHILADELPHIA, Aug. 25 (UPI) -- University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine researchers have discovered the neurotransmitter orexin influences reward-processing in the brain.By identifying the relationship between orexin neurons and behaviors associated with reward seeking, drug relapse and addiction, researchers hope to find new treatments for drug addiction.
Anorexia linked to overactive dopamine quote: PITTSBURGH, July 7 (UPI) -- A University of Pittsburgh study says the eating disorder anorexia nervosa may be due to over-activity of a chemical system deep inside the brain.Those with the disorder are driven to be excessively thin but seem unaware of the seriousness of their condition. The study, reported in the journal Biological Psychiatry, found such people have overactive dopamine receptors in the brain's basal ganglia. This brain area is known to play a role in how people learn from experience and make choices. The disorder affects about 1 percent of American women, some of whom die from complications of the disease. The research may point to a molecular target for development of more effective treatments than those currently available.
From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 12:20 PM
quote: Just a quick glance around Science Daily's front page would seem to put the lie to that statement.
On the contrary, a moment's thought would put the stupidity to yourstatement. First of all, neither pleasure nor anorexia are psychiatric disorders. Secondly, before you rush off to gather some more Big Pharma driven "research," consider what I am saying: NO MATTER WHAT CORRELATION BETWEEN BRAIN CHEMICALS AND PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS IS EVER FOUND, IT'S STILL MISGUIDED TO ATTEMPT TO TREAT THE "DISORDER" WITH CHEMICALS. Do you get it, dummy? If someone is depressed and their serotonin drops, should you: (a) Explore how their depression arose; or (b) Medicate them into compliance. The correct answer is A!!!!! For those on the Lower Mainland, MindFreedom British Columbia is holding its opening party at Gallery Gachet in Gastown on September 24th at 7:00 p.m. Everyone is welcome. Psychiatry is a sham. Forced psychiatry is a human rights violation. Join us.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 12:31 PM
quote: Originally posted by Surferosad: Wrong. The correct answer is a) AND b).Yeah, psychiatry is a sham... Are you a scientologist or something. [ 26 August 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]
If the correct answer is A & B then WHY DOES PSYCHIATRY LEAP TO B????????? Yes, indeed psychiatry is a hoax, an evil hoax, perpetrated by Big Pharma, among others. No, I am not a scientologist. I am an activist for the psychiatrically labelled.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 12:41 PM
quote: Originally posted by JimmyBrogan: Umm brain chemistry = behaviour. Understanding the causes and effects of this relationship is an important area of research. Now take a pill Zero and call me when you get a clue.
Listen, dipshit, I know as much about this subject matter as anyone alive today. Brain chemistry = behaviour absolutely. Also equals perception and feeling. Duh. You miss the point! Cause and effect!!! The chemicals don't magically change without a reason. Get a fucking grip.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 12:52 PM
quote: Originally posted by JimmyBrogan: So craphead if behaviour is a direct result of brain chemistry why should this not be researched?
Because, asshole, Big Pharma is pulling the wool over our eyes. Behaviour, all emotions, all perceptions are indeed wrapped up in brain chemistry and research on how that all works is obviously good. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE DOING! They're trying to link biochemicals to socially constructed diseases and "fix" them.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
dano
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4274
|
posted 26 August 2005 12:53 PM
I'm glad we're name calling , however, Zorro has a point. quote: WHY DOES PSYCHIATRY LEAP TO B?????????
Cause they are misguided... all I can say. My mom has suffered half her life from depression. She has been on Paxil for a good part of that time. She'll agree 100% that it needs to be A AND B.... if you just do B, then the problems will persist and you will be screwed over on the long run. It's a major problem. Now whether we can work without the B is another question. I do believe that often we can work without the B if we work at it early enough. Without Paxil however, my mom would probably be dead by now. Now Paxil is a crappy ass drug that I hate... Just 2 years ago she tried getting off it and she went crazy sick and entered a massive depression period and her doctor had no other choice but to put her back on it and even then it took a while to stabilize... THAT is another debate and it sucks big time. Shes done a lot of councelling over the years, but the help just isn't there, or very rare... hence our health system sucks badly when dealing with mental illenesses (thats just one thing that sucks...)
From: Gatineau, Qc | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 12:57 PM
quote: Originally posted by Surferosad: So Big Pharma are evil (I'm not disagreeing) therefore all psychiatry is crap. Give the man (woman, person, whatever) the Nobel prize for medicine!
If you can't follow an argument, please keep your asinine comments to yourself. Psychiatry is shit, even without Big Pharma.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:07 PM
quote: Originally posted by Surferosad: Ok... Why is that, wise guy? Share your wisdom with us, oh great anti-shrink crusader! Why is psychiatry "shit"?
Biomedical psychiatry is based on an unproven theory involving chemical imbalance. The alleged imbalance is not measurable. Likewise, "balance" is not measurable. Psychiatry relies on the DSM IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) which categorizes pretty much all unwanted human behaviour into psychiatric disorders. Psychiatrists then treat these disorders with chemicals. In many cases, these chemicals are habit-forming and dangerous. Even worse, psychiatrists have been given the legal authority to force-drug and force-electroshock.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Surferosad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4791
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:21 PM
quote: Originally posted by Zorro: Anyway, a Nobel prize in psychiatry is a hollow honour. Moniz, the guy who witnessed pigs being stunned with electricity prior to slaughter and decided it would be good to try this on psychiatric patients, won the Nobel.
Egas Moniz received the Nobal prize in 1949 for work he had done in the 1920's and 1930's. Lets just say that things in the psychiatric and psychological sciences are not quite the same anymore. [ 26 August 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]
From: Montreal | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:21 PM
quote: Originally posted by Surferosad: You are picking and choosing a bunch of bad psychiatric practices and then generalising them to the rest of the science. People who go "some blacks are bad, therefore all blacks are evil" perpetrate the same kind of fallacy.
Not picking and choosing. All of these things happen routinely on psych wards throughout North America. I'm not generalizing to science, not even to medicine, just to the fraud that we call psychiatry.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:22 PM
quote: Originally posted by Surferosad: Egas Moniz received the Nobal prize in 1949 for work he had done in the 1920's and 1930's. Lets just say that things in the psychiatric and psychological sciences are not quite the same anymore.
You're right. They're even worse.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Surferosad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4791
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:22 PM
quote: Originally posted by Zorro:
Not picking and choosing. All of these things happen routinely on psych wards throughout North America. I'm not generalizing to science, not even to medicine, just to the fraud that we call psychiatry.
And I should take your word for it, right? [ 26 August 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]
From: Montreal | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:24 PM
quote: Originally posted by Surferosad: I should take your word for it, right?
Of course not. Read these, if you want more info: Bob Whitaker's "Mad in America" Irit Shimrat's "Call Me Crazy" Peter Breggin's "Toxic Psychiatry" Thomas Szasz's "The Myth of Mental Illness" There is tons of stuff out there. Knock yourself out. Read your local Mental Health Act. Visit a mental hospital. See for yourself. Come to MindFreedomBC's opening party. Open your eyes.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:29 PM
Let me show you lower than the filth on the bottom of my shoe how this thread could have gone if you were not quite so angry.Zorro: You know Jimmy the kind of research you linked to has often been used in the past by big pharmaceutical companies for treatments of questionable psychiatric disorders. This kind of behaviour research is a key part of their profit strategy. Jimmy: I completely agree. Pharmacuitical companies have a long record of criminal profiteering from phychiatric drugs of questionabale value. I was merely responding to Grazer's assertion that researching the biochemistry of behaviour is a dead end. It can and has led to many advances, as could the lines of research I linked to. And then we could have had a debate about how to determine appropriate lines of research or some such.
But maybe this has been more fun.
From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:32 PM
quote: Originally posted by JimmyBrogan: Let me show you lower than the filth on the bottom of my shoe how this thread could have gone if you were not quite so angry.Zorro: You know Jimmy the kind of research you linked to has often been used in the past by big pharmaceutical companies for treatments of questionable psychiatric disorders. This kind of behaviour research is a key part of their profit strategy. Jimmy: I completely agree. Pharmacuitical companies have a long record of criminal profiteering from phychiatric drugs of questionabale value. I was merely responding to Grazer's assertion that researching the biochemistry of behaviour is a dead end. It can and has led to many advances, as could the lines of research I linked to. And then we could have had a debate about how to determine appropriate lines of research or some such.
But maybe this has been more fun.
Listen, snotball I'd be embarrassed to wipe on a Kleenex, I wouldn't have got so angry if you didn't come off sounding so arrogant. We could try again, though. I'm concerned that otherwise fine research will be bastardized by Big Pharma. Have you got anything to add there, Jimmy, my friend?
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:38 PM
quote: Originally posted by Surferosad: But at their base, they're essentially the same science!
No, they are utterly different! quote: Psychologists also use the DSM IV for diagnostics.
Yes, but they don't have the authority or the inclination to medicate for these "disorders." quote: The only difference between a psychologist and a shrink is that a shrink can prescribe medicine!
No way. Hugely different approaches to emotional suffering. The biggest difference is that psychiatry is covered by the Medical Services Plan while psychology is not, which is exactly backwards from how it should be. quote: And, in case you didn't know, there are psychologists who are pushing to have the right to prescribe!
In Canada? No, I didn't know.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 01:47 PM
quote: Originally posted by skdadl: Interesting, Tape.One real and ongoing problem with a lot of medical research is that medical researchers and doctors are not usually very well trained in either statistics or logic. So they build up a lot of data, but who knows whether to trust the ways they interpret it?
Another issue is that a lot of research is paid for and directed by pharmaceutical manufacturers. Evidence against their drugs is distorted or suppressed. GlaxoSmithKline, for instance, chose not to report the suicide of one of their test subjects. They said it was a "trade secret."
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290
|
posted 26 August 2005 02:03 PM
quote: Have you got anything to add there, Jimmy, my friend?
Oh it was definitely better the other way. No worries Zorro. skdadl I'm no expert but I thought there were some very effective treatments for schizophrenia and bi-polar disorders. Nothing like a panacea but effective nonetheless. I'm very uncomfortable being put to defend psychiatry. I find it to have been mostly a psuedoscience akin to economics or sociology. But the study of brain chemistry and genetics and how their interrelationship informs our behaviour is very promising. It's like real science. I'm advocating basic understanding as opposed to anything practical. The practical will evolve from the higher level of understanding. [ 26 August 2005: Message edited by: JimmyBrogan ]
From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 02:42 PM
quote: Originally posted by JimmyBrogan: Oh it was definitely better the other way. No worries Zorro.
You know, it really was. So, asswipe, listen up. quote: skdadl I'm no expert but I thought there were some very effective treatments for schizophrenia and bi-polar disorders. Nothing like a panacea but effective nonetheless.
No! No!! No!!! Treatment is no more effective than it was in the time of leeches and beatings. Schizophrenia is treated with so-called anti-psychotics. This is a farce. There is no such thing as an anti-psychotic. What they really are is major tranquillizers. They "work" by suppressing the central nervous system. They may lessen hallucinations, etc. but they also take away your ability to think and feel. This is why over-medicated patients stare at the walls and drool -- because they CAN'T do anything else! Antipsychotics (even the newer atypical antipsychotics) cause tardive dyskinesia, a devastating and permanent neurological disorder, in somewhere between 15% and 50% of long-term users. Bipolar disorder is treated with mood stabilizers, antidepressants and electroshock. In many cases (including mine), bipolar is actually caused by antidepressants. Again, these drugs may have an effect but the cost is unbearably high.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
chubbybear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10025
|
posted 26 August 2005 03:17 PM
quote: Originally posted by Surferosad: But at their base, they're essentially the same science! Psychologists also use the DSM IV for diagnostics. Psychologists often work in tandem with shrinks! The shrink prescribes and the psychologist counsels! The only difference between a psychologist and a shrink is that a shrink can prescribe medicine! And, in case you didn't know, there are psychologists who are pushing to have the right to prescribe!
Do you think! You could use! A few more! Exclamation points! All right, I agree that all science is worthy of intelligent skepticism, including psychiatry and psychology. But pointing to unverifiable accusations about ongoing abuses like "one flew over the cuckoos nest" simply isn't going to convince anyone. I would like to see a little more substance. And even if you could find significant abuse within psychiatric hospitals, what does that have to do with patients in private offices? If some medications are harmful, and some certainly are, why is all medication harmful? For me, effexor has been a life saver. For another, it may be a misery. Criticism is good, but messianic fervency reduces credibility.
From: nowhere | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 03:28 PM
quote: Originally posted by chubbybear: But pointing to unverifiable accusations about ongoing abuses like "one flew over the cuckoos nest" simply isn't going to convince anyone.
Wow! Unverifiable? Are you kidding me? It happened to me! I saw it happen to others! What the fuck are you talking about? quote: I would like to see a little more substance. And even if you could find significant abuse within psychiatric hospitals, what does that have to do with patients in private offices?
Everything. The biomedical model has been swallowed by the public -- hook, line and sinker -- that's what leads to abuse of the mentally ill. quote: If some medications are harmful, and some certainly are, why is all medication harmful? For me, effexor has been a life saver. For another, it may be a misery. Criticism is good, but messianic fervency reduces credibility.
I'm glad it works for you. Now, how would you feel if it was forced upon you? If you weren't allowed out of a lock-down unit before you agreed to take it? "Messianic fervency"? Pretty hard to stay cool when you're life's being threatened. As a member of our First Nations, you shock me with your lack of empathy.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Zorro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10242
|
posted 26 August 2005 03:38 PM
Seems the Supreme Court of BC just verified some of those unverifiable accusations:***** Stephen Mullins v. Vancouver General Hospital Stephen has won his case! Yesterday the Supreme Court of B.C. awarded him $15,000 damages and costs for false arrest, false imprisonment and assault. The Court found that, suffering a panic attack brought on by family deaths and business pressures and going to VGH for help, Stephen was wrongfully seized and beaten by VGH security people, locked in a prison-like cell and drugged to unconsciousness without being examined by doctors who signed false Certificates after he was detained and imprisoned. Unfortunately the trial judge rejected arguments that Stephen's constitutional rights were breached by the precipitate and negligent acts of the defendants. In effect, bank robbers, child rapists and murderers have more rights than honest, law-abiding citizens who suffer emotional upset or more serious mental illness. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms purports to require that everyone who is detained or imprisoned be informed of the reason for the seizure and of the right to talk to a lawyer and he must promptly be given the means of calling a lawyer. Doctors at the trial testified they never inform a patient of the lawyer rights and frequently they don't explain why he is being locked up. One doctor testified that he personally does this to from one to five people every working day at VGH. The Judge in Stephen's case held that since I - a lawyer - showed up at the hospital four hours after Stephen was knocked out, no harm had been done by failure to let him call me before he was seized. This will be of great comfort to the police who will be able to beat confessions out of suspects before complying with the Constitution. I am very proud of Stephen in this matter. Knowing that by bringing his case before the public, he might be branded a "lunatic" by the illegal actions of the doctors and the hospital, he showed great courage and determination in standing up to the opposing forces of the medical field, the Government of B.C. and the B.C. Schizophrenia Society (at times eight lawyers) who strongly supported the misconduct of the Defendants. Hopefully his success may save other innocent people from the brutal and thoughtless practices of doctors, hospitals and security staffs evidenced in this case.
From: Central Saanich | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|