It seems to me that all mood disorders are related {long, repost from asd}
Dark Prism
okay, here we have the mood disorders...
bipolar 1
bipolar 2
unipolar depression
cyclothymia
hyperthymia
dysthymia
now, how are they all similar? they all certainly SEEM to be cycling
mood disorders.
how are they different? they all differ in the fact that the CENTER
of the cycle is different, and/or the MAGNITUDE of the cycle is
different.
[this hypothesis is not going to take into account the frequency of
the cycles - that differs from patient to patient, and did not seem
crucial to the hypothesis.]
okay, now - this is text, so i'm going to try to be as descriptive as
possible without using actual graphics....
now, we consider a graph, x is time, y is mood (top = mania, bottom =
deep depression, "0" is "normal"...)
[here i am using the term "amplitude", just for convention, the real
word s/b "wave height"]
cyclothymia has a midline of 0, with an amplitude from 1 to -1....
bipolar 1 has a midline of 0 (usually), with an amplitude from 2 to
-2...
unipolar has a midline of -1, with an amplitude from 0 to -2....
dysthymia has a midline of -1/2, with an amplitude from 0 to -1....
hyperthymia has a midline of 1, with an amplitude from 0 to 2 or
something....
bipolar 2 has a midline from 0 to -1, with amplitude(s) from 1 down to
-2...
is any of this making sense? if so, shouldn't we see if mood
stabilizers like lithium, depakote, and tegretol work for depressed
people?
and shouldn't we stop worrying about "classifications" and instead,
just treat the symptoms with relaxants for the hypers, and
antidepressants for the depressives, and mood stabilizers for
everyone?
just my hypomanic 0.02 from this morning....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dark Prism - My personality refracts darkly through the serotonigenic spectrum.
"There is no dark side of the moon. As a matter of fact, it's all dark."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Ott --- ottthoma (at) pipeline.com - [3 t's in ottthoma!!!]
http://www.geocities.com/~ottthoma -- main site
http://www.geocities.com/~ottthoma/depression/index.html----- depression site
http://www.geocities.com/~ottthoma/depression/sjw.html ------ st. john's wort stuff
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A warning - alb...@mindspring.com is, through many opinions here,
for the most part, a troll. Try to ignore him.
Dick Small
On Mon, 22 Dec 1997 01:13:27 GMT, seem...@pipeline.com (Dark Prism)
wrote:
>
>okay, here we have the mood disorders...
Damn, that was quick!
Now I've got to try to remember what I would have said last time you
posted this if I hadn't left it too late, before it's too late again.
<confused>
:)
Dark Prism
On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 19:22:54 GMT, in alt.support.depression.recovery,
gree...@netcomuk.co.uk (Dick Small) wrote:
[posted and emailed]
>Damn, that was quick!
easy - i searched for it on dejanews, then cut&pasted it...
>Now I've got to try to remember what I would have said last time you
>posted this if I hadn't left it too late, before it's too late again.
use deja, dummy!!! 8P
Dick Small
>
>okay, here we have the mood disorders...
>
I liked this when you first posted it on asd and I still do, it's a
good perception from someone who is attempting a classification from
within the disease rather than from outside.
The problem with all the DSM categories and other ways of classifying
depression is that they don't necessarily lead to the correct
treatment for any particular individual: the generalisations work but
only trial and error seems to fill in the details, why does Prozac
work so well for some people, Paxil for others etc. irrespective of
the actual diagnostic classification?
I've never tried them myself, but I understood that the mood
stabilisers, rather than moving the "centre" of the mood swings, what
you call the midline, rather work by reducing the peaks whereas the
antidepressants work by reducing the troughs, so instead of getting
hold of the midline and moving it you have to work by lowering the
peaks and reducing the troughs until the midline of what's left ends
up roughly where you want it to be.
I know lithium is often, and depakote rarely, used as a "potentiator"
for antidepressants in unipolar, when the moods are always below zero,
that's the only effect they appear to have when no manic moods are
present.
Now let's see, are there any med experts around? The antidepressants
operate on the synapses *between* the neurons by increasing the
neurotransmitters, I thought lithium operated on the transmission down
the neurons themselves by altering the sodium/potassium levels and I'm
not sure of the modus operandi of depakote et al. but I'd like to be
corrected if anyone knows better.
>just my hypomanic 0.02 from this morning....
Next time how about trying to cover ADD and SAD too? Anxiety/panic
also has some relationship to depression. Gawd, it gets complicated
don't it? ;)
--
Dick Small gree...@netcomuk.co.uk
The opinions expressed herein are mine and not those of my
employer, even though I am self-employed.
Dark Prism
On Sun, 04 Jan 1998 20:47:21 GMT, in alt.support.depression.recovery,
gree...@netcomuk.co.uk (Dick Small) wrote:
>The problem with all the DSM categories and other ways of classifying
>depression is that they don't necessarily lead to the correct
>treatment for any particular individual: the generalisations work but
>only trial and error seems to fill in the details, why does Prozac
>work so well for some people, Paxil for others etc. irrespective of
>the actual diagnostic classification?
right - they classify by symptoms, not actual state of mind.
>I've never tried them myself, but I understood that the mood
>stabilisers, rather than moving the "centre" of the mood swings, what
>you call the midline, rather work by reducing the peaks whereas the
>antidepressants work by reducing the troughs, so instead of getting
>hold of the midline and moving it you have to work by lowering the
>peaks and reducing the troughs until the midline of what's left ends
>up roughly where you want it to be.
right - i'm BP2, so depakote is reducing the "amplitude of the curve,"
while paxil is taking the low baseline from there and elevating it to
normal.
>Next time how about trying to cover ADD and SAD too? Anxiety/panic
>also has some relationship to depression. Gawd, it gets complicated
>don't it? ;)
yes, it does - and i could never (imho) comment on ADD and SAD because
i don't have them. that's part of my insight - i need to have them.
as for anxiety/panic, it seems that i do - untreated, at the moment -
pdoc has upped my paxil in hopes of getting it to help on the anxiety.
worried about it triggering more mania, though.
Dick Small
On Sun, 11 Jan 1998 15:28:20 GMT, seem...@pipeline.com (Dark Prism)
wrote:
>On Sun, 04 Jan 1998 20:47:21 GMT, in alt.support.depression.recovery,
>gree...@netcomuk.co.uk (Dick Small) wrote:
>
>>The problem with all the DSM categories and other ways of classifying
>>depression is that they don't necessarily lead to the correct
>>treatment for any particular individual: the generalisations work but
>>only trial and error seems to fill in the details, why does Prozac
>>work so well for some people, Paxil for others etc. irrespective of
>>the actual diagnostic classification?
>
>right - they classify by symptoms, not actual state of mind.
Which I suppose looking in from the outside is all they can do.
Trouble is, the classification isn't predictive.
If you find a plant you don't recognise you can "key it out" by
following a series of questions in the key "is it hairy? if yes GOTO
14, if no GOTO 29. . ." which should lead you to a correct
identification. If you then want to grow it you can read what
conditions it prefers.
The depression classification seems to go through the same keying
process. But what's missing is the growing instructions, which at the
end of the day is the important bit.
>>Next time how about trying to cover ADD and SAD too? Anxiety/panic
>>also has some relationship to depression. Gawd, it gets complicated
>>don't it? ;)
>
>yes, it does - and i could never (imho) comment on ADD and SAD because
>i don't have them. that's part of my insight - i need to have them.
Yes, good point. There are interractive effects between a lot of
different conditions though, I suppose the problem is anyone suffering
from *all* of them would be in no state to produce any form of
classification. :(
>as for anxiety/panic, it seems that i do - untreated, at the moment -
>pdoc has upped my paxil in hopes of getting it to help on the anxiety.
>worried about it triggering more mania, though.
Yes, that's what I mean about the interractions. Changing something
over here may affect something over there. It's that damn chaos thing
again, maybe the system as a whole just isn't predictable.
--
Dick Small di...@greensand.demon.co.uk
---
If I'd wanted another Tory Government I'd have voted for one
Dark Prism
On Thu, 15 Jan 1998 18:42:42 GMT, in alt.support.depression.recovery,
gree...@netcomuk.co.uk (Dick Small) wrote:
[posted and emailed]
>If you find a plant you don't recognise you can "key it out" by
>following a series of questions in the key "is it hairy? if yes GOTO
>14, if no GOTO 29. . ." which should lead you to a correct
>identification. If you then want to grow it you can read what
>conditions it prefers.
when what REALLY should be done is genetic classification - inside,
not outside - to make a metaphor with psych disorders.
>Yes, good point. There are interractive effects between a lot of
>different conditions though, I suppose the problem is anyone suffering
>from *all* of them would be in no state to produce any form of
>classification. :(
LOL!!!!
>Yes, that's what I mean about the interractions. Changing something
>over here may affect something over there. It's that damn chaos thing
>again, maybe the system as a whole just isn't predictable.
yep. ah, well....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dark Prism - My personality refracts darkly through the serotonigenic spectrum.
Mania-Depression-OCD-Anxiety - how I love a fully-rounded life!!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Ott --- ottthoma (at) pipeline.com - [3 t's in ottthoma!!!]
www.geocities.com/~ottthoma -- main site
www.geocities.com/~ottthoma/depression/index.html----- depression site
www.geocities.com/~ottthoma/depression/sjw.html ------ st. john's wort stuff
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A warning - alb...@mindspring.com is, by many opinions, a troll. Try to ignore him.
Dick Small
On Sun, 18 Jan 1998 21:47:35 GMT, seem...@pipeline.com (Dark Prism)
wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Jan 1998 18:42:42 GMT, in alt.support.depression.recovery,
>gree...@netcomuk.co.uk (Dick Small) wrote:
>
>[posted and emailed]
>
>>If you find a plant you don't recognise you can "key it out" by
>>following a series of questions in the key "is it hairy? if yes GOTO
>>14, if no GOTO 29. . ." which should lead you to a correct
>>identification. If you then want to grow it you can read what
>>conditions it prefers.
>
>when what REALLY should be done is genetic classification - inside,
>not outside - to make a metaphor with psych disorders.
Oh, old Linnaeus didn't do too bad. The genetics are expressed in
fairly identifiable ways, I don't think there have been too many
surprises in the fields of flowers and birds as the genetics are
studied, just the details have been clarified as to what is more
closely related to what.
But it's still possible for two people both suffering from depression
to have competely different sets of symptoms and yet both be
responsive to the same drug.
Hmmmm <ponders behavioural genetics. . .>
Dark Prism
On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 18:51:32 GMT, in alt.support.depression.recovery,
gree...@netcomuk.co.uk (Dick Small) wrote:
>Oh, old Linnaeus didn't do too bad. The genetics are expressed in
>fairly identifiable ways, I don't think there have been too many
>surprises in the fields of flowers and birds as the genetics are
>studied, just the details have been clarified as to what is more
>closely related to what.
>
>But it's still possible for two people both suffering from depression
>to have competely different sets of symptoms and yet both be
>responsive to the same drug.
>
>Hmmmm <ponders behavioural genetics. . .>
i'd bet that we'd find, once the "behavioural/upbringing/cognitive"
problems are taken care of, it will be much easier to diagnose and
treat patients when humanity has an effective map of the human genome
and it's relationship to neurochemistry.
Dick Small
On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:14:05 GMT, seem...@pipeline.com (Dark Prism)
wrote:
>On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 18:51:32 GMT, in alt.support.depression.recovery,
>gree...@netcomuk.co.uk (Dick Small) wrote:
>
>>Oh, old Linnaeus didn't do too bad. The genetics are expressed in
>>fairly identifiable ways, I don't think there have been too many
>>surprises in the fields of flowers and birds as the genetics are
>>studied, just the details have been clarified as to what is more
>>closely related to what.
>>
>>But it's still possible for two people both suffering from depression
>>to have competely different sets of symptoms and yet both be
>>responsive to the same drug.
>>
>>Hmmmm <ponders behavioural genetics. . .>
>
>i'd bet that we'd find, once the "behavioural/upbringing/cognitive"
>problems are taken care of, it will be much easier to diagnose and
>treat patients when humanity has an effective map of the human genome
>and it's relationship to neurochemistry.
Be easier to stop them (=us) breeding. Science always has a downside.
:(
As someone said about gays, "For people who don't breed, where do they
all come from?"
This is what worries me about genetic research, the clueless fuckwits
called governments may use certain results to push eugenics, not
looking at the whole picture.
Sickle cell anemia is a dreadful disease. It has simple genetics,
inherit one gene, you're a carrier, inherit two, you develop the
disease and may die young. However, being a carrier gives you immunity
to malaria.
I suspect depression is considerably more complicated, there's little
doubt that bipolar has a strong genetic link, it's weaker for
unipolar. Given it's what, two or three times commoner in women (some
of that may be due to underdiagnosis in men but certainly not all)
maybe there are a set of genes involved, some exclusive to the
x-chromosome. Maybe when you've got the full set you're full blown
bipolar, different forms of depression are associated with different
collections of the relevant genes, also maybe associated conditions
like alcoholism, OCD, anxiety/panic, ADD. . .of course the inherited
factor only gives you a *predilection* for depression, there's an
interraction with the behavioural/cognitive/upbringing stuff too.
Maybe there's an evolutionary advantage to carrying *some* of the
genes, otherwise the thing would presumably have died out long ago.
Creativity? There does seem to be a higher than average proportion of
creative depressos (likewise homosexuals, likewise left handers). It
may make sense to stamp out certain genetic material, it's been done
before, it's still happening in Rwanda. It may make sense to our
Rulers that is, it should *never* make sense to us.
Yes, it would be great to map the genetics and use the information
wisely, I'm not optimistic enough that it will happen that way.
Or is that the depression speaking? :)