First test kind of its kind looks for biomarkers for the mental illness
Article Source: msnbc.com
from:msnbc.comNew blood test may help detect schizophrenia
Seeded on Fri Oct 15, 2010 5:09 PM EDT (msnbc.com)
- msnbc.com sites & shows:
- TODAY
- Rock Center
- Nightly News
- Meet the Press
- Dateline
- Morning Joe
- Hardball
- Ed
- Maddow
- Last Word
- msnbc tv
Leave a Comment:
At least it would stop the BS myth some pharm-corp created that its the fault of marijuana...when in fact IT HELPS treat it.
This is great. My ex husband is in denial, now, maybe he can get some help, becasue he will know he has it.
You just have to convience ALL those voices in his head that he has it. Majority rules.
The medical establishment will use this new and really unproven test as justification to prescribe anti-psychotics to younger children even before symptoms of this disorder manifest themselves. I hate to bring in a negative to something that could become very beneficial, but the love of money is the bottom line here in the big business of mental illness. If you have a young one, don't be fooled into believing that this class of drugs is your child's only hope. These medications are helpful to many mentally ill persons, but the side effects are permanent and therapy needs to be used in combination with these medications. Just use caution and get a second and third opinion.
You could have made your point by not even typing your first two sentences. I say this because mental illness isn't a big business in the way it is portrayed (medical business is predominately insurance company driven, and insurance companies do not cover most mental illnesses... in fact, most unnecessary medication can be tied to the fact that insurance companies require a certain diagnosis for any coverage at all....).
In any case, many people do indeed forget (or not absorb) that most medication is meant to be used (in pharma language) "under supervision". This is intended to mean in conjunction with therapy. In addition, therapy can be tried sans any medication at all. Of course, the ultimate disclaimer is coverage... but as far as common perception goes, therapy, whether in conjunction or prior to medication, needs more accentuation.
I told you so. We're all a chemical soup. Schizophrenia has been known to be genetic for many years, which is why it runs in families, skipping some, sparing others; and, also, skipping generations. Genetics will someday cure ALMOST all ills.
Thank God I hope people will use this instead of just making excuses for behavior.
If you have found the markers and still can't cure it, you are still left with the horrors of the disease.
Scientifically discovering the causes, of something there is no cure for, means in the final analysis, very little for the people, who are predisposed to, becoming ill anyway.
This is very positive news. Genetic blood testing should be done more often than it is.
I'm 58 and for several years I've been struggling with my physician over various health conditions that he has been unable (and/or unwilling) to figure out. Well in June 2010 I abandoned my regular physician of 17 years and went to a Naturopathic physician. Within in a month after an extensive health history review my new physician did a complete CBC and a genetic blood test on me that found I have a genetic disorder called hemochromatosis. Had I continued with my regular physician who refused to go beyond the "text book" practices, within a few short years I would probably be dead!!!
The most exciting aspect of my results is the rest of my family has now been tested and have been able to get the proper care they needed. My sister has been able to stop all the prescriptions she was being given because once the hemochromatosis was treated all the other ailments she had disappeared which is what happened to me as well.
Genetic blood testing is very valuable and should be done more often than it is. So if your physician follows "text book" practices and only treats you for todays "buzz words," i.e., diabetes, cholestrol, heart disease, etc., then you are not getting the care you deserve. You owe it to yourself and your family, and if your physician doesn't feel it necessary then find one that does. Once I did it saved my life and it could save yours as well.
Schizophrenia is a really destructive disease. It's not just the odd behavior and hallucinations, but the fragmentation of a once intact self and frankly, dementia-like features that are so distressing to see in a young person.
I lost a cousin to schizophrenia in his 18th year of life. If we'd had this test available and could have pre-medicated him to avoid that first psychotic break, it would have prevented enormous suffering to our family and ultimately, cost to society.
It's a bad disorder and I favor this sort of testing if you have the genes in your family.
Long ago I used to work in a mental hospital, and to see these poor people suffering - and the teenagers that were afflicted and the hopelessness that their families had for any kind of relief; I welcome any and all testing, trials, medications, or vaccinations that can stop the physical destruction of the brain that brings all of the horrible outward manifestations of schizophrenia.
There isn't currently nor has there ever been a biological test to identify ANY mental illness diagnosis.
Any attempt to claim such a test exists, much less WORKS is pharma & APA spin and CAN'T be substantiated by science.
This particular "study" was commissioned and funded by the Rules-Based Medicine biotech firm and far from science is nothing more than a press release for their recently released product "Veri-Psych".
As I said, spin meant to publicize a recently IPO-ed biotech firm's product.
The APA is not even close to the same thing as a pharma company. Stop lumping things together that don't make any sense.
The APA is the legislative lobby for pharma's delivery system-the psychiatric industry.
#WAKEUP&SMELLTHEPHARMA
from the APA mission statement
The well known and documented cozy relationship between APA members and drug companies, who promote their products by paying APA members to "lecture" their colleagues on the wonderful-ness of pharma psychiatric medications, or for just plain writing as many prescriptions as they can, has been the cause of record breaking government fines just this year alone.
Outdoing the previous years record breaking fines. The legislative arm of the APA is soley responsible for including "the Mother's Act" in the recently passed Health Care Reform act. The Mother's Act is little more than an attempt by the pharma and psychiatric industries to legislate an entirely new generation of customers WHILE STILL IN THE WOMB- without permission or informed consent.
Many APA members & governing board members sit on pharma company boards of directors as well, own patents and stock in pharma companies, or are funded by pharma companies to publish such rubbish as the article/press release/product rollout above.
You are a complete fool. Now, I reserve insults for those who actually earn them... rest assured, you have.
The APA is as much pharma as the MLA (and if you have no idea what I am talking about, then here is your first sign you are out of your league). The APA doesn't sell a single thing... it oversees a professional documentation format and compiles new versions of the DSM. Nothing about it has anything to do with pharma... pharma studies are conducted by pharma companies. If you knew anything about anything relevant, you'd know that it is APA sanctioned studies that REFUTE sham pharma policies. You can't call the sky green and make it magically so.... just like you can't claim the BS you cannot back up (because it is far from reality)... now can you?
Nice try-
and just for giggles lets start with this, so you're claiming the APA (American Psychiatric Association) and its membership have no ties to pharma companies? They don't/haven't created ghost written "reviews", "study findings", withheld negative testing results, or been any party to pharma funded front "consumer advocacy" groups? The APA hasn't lobbied, on behalf of pharma (and themselves) federal and state legislatures to put forth laws and regulations changes which have benefited their members financially?
and these are just since January 2010 (mostly).
Please tell me NONE of the subjects in these articles are APA members.
Please.
#REALLY!?!
Take2la, I agree there is a whole lot of pharma involved with the APA, however, as far The Mother's Act, being that it's for postpartum depression, how exactly is that "legislating new customers in the womb"?? The mothers being treated already had their babies, unless you're assuming new mothers make a regular practice of getting pregnant within weeks of childbirth. Usually doesn't happen that way...
And the study itself? The implications are, in fact, that psychiatric drugs don't treat the underlying illness at all, because most of the biomarkers have next to nothing to do with the brain and a whole lot to do with things like susceptibility to cancer, immunity, and inability to process various minerals or vitamins properly. That this implication is omitted from the media reports and the study itself may well have something to do with pharma; or, maybe the researchers are so specialized in their studies that they simply could not think that far outside the box.
Because the Mother's act specifically outlay's guidelines AND funding for mothers to be "screened" PRIOR to giving birth. In the case of mothers advised to take PAXIL during pre-term trimesters, their babies, THOUSANDS, were born with heart birth defects-
Newsvine - Lawyers Site Offers News And Information About Paxil ...
and
Newsvine - Glaxo used ghostwriting program to promote Paxil
Agreed. My point about this article in that regard is this. How can anyone "identify biomarkers" when they haven't/can't in any way biologically identify "THE DISEASE" in the first place.
They could GUESS. Similar to guessing the biological differences in a single blade of grass from every other blade of grass on the planet.
I find it highly dubious and doubtful that after more than 100 years of research, all of a sudden a recently IPO-ed company has "discovered" a blood test to verify mental illness.
I guess I'll wait and see but I'll tell you this much. The company had better provide scientific proof of the process beyond colored MRI's and CAT scans of the brian. They better give their data over to independent scientists and labs to duplicate their "findings" multiple times. If they don't/won't-
It's nothing more than ADVERTISING pet rocks.
When I have more time, I'd be glad to breakdown the entire list. However, your first article is about the dangers of ghostwriting which was raised as an issue during the peer review process... meaning that the APA raised the issue in the first place and your first link DISPROVES your own sentiment. You still don't seem to understand what the APA even is.
As I said, if you insist when I have more time I will examine your whole list. Although, if all are as bad as your first, you seem to associate pharma practices with anything that has the "P" portion of APA attached... never mind who the people who objected were, you come off as not seeming to care.
Oh, well, why don't you enlighten me then-o supra
when you have the time of course from spinning class
This is quite an interesting study if you go and take the time to read it. The statistics are sound, but the conclusions that can be derived meander quite far from the original hypothesis of linking genetic markers to mental illness.
For example, going through the list of biomarkers, they are all linked to things like cholesterol levels, immunity (a HUGE factor in mental illness, based on their test), tumor growth, and in some cases linked to particular minerals or vitamins like calcium or iron. Almost none of the biomarkers are directly linked to brain function, except in indirect ways mediated by expression of these genetics throughout the body. So one interesting hypothesis that could come from this study is that, in fact, all mental illness is a result of physical dysfunction, rendering the mind/body divide inherent in the practice of psychiatry completely obsolete - and rendering the whole neurotransmitter theory of mental illness suspect. At best, treating neurotransmitter levels is treating a surface symptom of physical illness, and it would explain a lot of why the effects of psychiatric drugs are so variable and why many people diagnosed with mental illness have to go through a dozen drugs before they find something that alleviates symptoms without unwanted side-effects. I would love to see more research on these particular biomarkers and their effects on mental illness, as it will involve having to treat the body and the brain together.
and this procedure is new how..? they drew my blood when i was 13 to help with the tests and now it makes the news about blood testing working. i dont get it..
btw isnt getting diagnosed with this at the age of 13 really young for a female? ive read that they usually get it in their 20s.....
SAFE HARBOR-
Links to doctors (who HAVEN'T been paid off by pharma companies) who help people get off psychiatric drugs & treat people without psychiatric drugs