Anxiety Disorders Discoverable by Blood Test 407
Tomer Yaffe writes to tell us that researchers at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem have discovered a technique to diagnose anxiety disorders with a simple blood test. From the article: "The researchers hope that the anxiety blood test will soon make its way into hospitals and E.R. rooms and give doctors and psychiatrists a quick and precise tool for examining, and eventually treating, these disorders." The team has also set their sights on depression, hoping for a similar technique to detect these types of disorders as well.
Oh wonderful (Score:3, Insightful)
Screening (Score:4, Insightful)
Dangerous (Score:4, Insightful)
The last thing we need are doctors relying even *more* upon tests rather than listening to their patients.
As former OCD, I am concerned (Score:5, Insightful)
I read TFA.
The problem I see with this kind of testing is the cases where the diagnosed individual refuses treatment. The stigma against being labeled as "crazy" is still crushingly huge, and this is a signifigant reason why many people who suffer from emotional disorders refuse to seek treatment. They see it as a sign of weakness, of "not being able to handle things themselves."
So I forsee and fear individuals getting stuck with a (mandatory) needle then being told, "You are anxious", and "You must submit to treatment". The world knows no shortage of elitist M.D.s who hate the notion of a patient not obeying their very learned whim. Why not use the police to force these people into treatment? Perhaps I'm just being paranoid [altheal.org].
Or maybe I'm just anxious...
Re:Anxiety caused by too much caffeine. (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:As a psychologist (Score:5, Insightful)
Should we make everyone "normal"? (Score:2, Insightful)
Note: I'm no a fan of PC (politically-correct) diversity, but do see value in variety to maximize total economic performance across a range of conditions and fields of endeavor.
Re:As a psychologist (Score:3, Insightful)
That said, if such a test were used to identify those suffering from such illnesses, would you as a clinician prescribe such drugs, or would you focus on alternative therapies?
Humanity will be made better by this, I'm SERIOUS! (Score:4, Insightful)
When we eliminate something that wastes the lives of 13% of the population, and if you've ever known someone with an anxiety disorder you'll know how much of their life they waste, won't that improve the human condition more than just about anything else? What's better, is these fixes to mental health improve things throughout society, letting people avoid destructive compulsions and reach their full potential.
Which explains why many psychologists (Score:5, Insightful)
"Fixing" the person is like walpapering a house with collapsed foundations. It'll make the problem invisible... for a while. But unless you fix the foundations, the house will still fall down. Likewise, fixing the foundations alone may prevent further damage, but the inside of the house will still look a wreck.
The job of ANYONE in (or around) mental health is to correct all of the aspects of the mental health problem they are dealing with. A partial solution can be worse than no solution at all, especially if you keep telling the patient that it's all the patient's fault/responsibility.
Establishing a cause, like faulty genes, allows the patient to remedy the underlying problem. Most genetic or biological problems are solvable with the right regemen, but unless you identify those underlying issues, you will NEVER identify the regemen that needs to be followed. And the patient will suffer the consequences of your inaction by deteriorating further. However, such treatment will only ever stabilize a condition. It won't cure it. Curing DOES require the patient to take responsibility for their actions, for their lives and for getting better.
To ask them to take that responsibility whilst their brain is chemically or electically up the spout, though, is about as intelligent as telling the skydiver whose parachute has failed that all they need do is flap their arms faster. Hardware failure requires a hardware solution. Software failure (in this case, the mind of the person) requires a software solution. NEVER assume that hardware will fix faulty software, or software will ever compensate for defective hardware.
Remedy the fault, NOT the fault's owner.
Re:Dangerous (Score:4, Insightful)
No shit, Sherlock. You've just oversimplified the situation, then complained that it was too simple.
This is no different than any other medical test. Patient complains and doctor takes complaints + test results + research + experience to figure out what's going on. Complaints + results don't jive? Well, then more questions, tests, research, querying other doctors.
Re:Who needs tests when we have Tom Cruise (Score:5, Insightful)
In any event, Cruise is a fruitcake who should simply get less media time for his outbursts. Sure, you don't want to put somebody on a pill because they had a bad hair day or are just going through a difficult time in their lives. But my father suffered severe clinical depression for the last twenty years of his life, and no amount of imagination and exercise would ever have reversed that. It wasn't until he was put on one of the early antidepressants that he got his life back, and returned to being the father I had always known. People like Cruise should either get medical degrees and learn some facts, or just shut the hell up. God, that man irritates me.
I hope he eventually suffers from clinical depression. We'll see how long it takes him to give up his Scientological "principles" and get on the proper medication. Maybe he won't
Re:As a psych student (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a test for the chemical indicators of anxiety itself, a positive test would indicate anxiety not the disorder. Anxiety itself is a natural response to certain perceived situations. A disorder would still have to be identified by careful observation and a history of anxiety in situations most people aren't anxious about or anxiety levels that don't diminish in normal period of time after a perceived threat. So, you would need to test over a period of time and perhaps before, during and after exposing a person to some situation that would normally cause anxiety.
Of course, if needles make you anxious, then the test won't tell you anything except who doesn't like needles.
Re:Should we make everyone "normal"? (Score:1, Insightful)
While I would never take this particular test (I've struggled with getting a flu shot in a 20 minute arguement with my doctor, no way in hell I'd willingly get blood drawn), I do agree with it. It's not about "making these people normal", they know they have a problem and they're seeking help for it. Which is why they're having the test taken in the first place.
There is a difference between "risk avoiders" and people with anxiety disorders. The former have that as a characteristic of their personality, which is you, and should not be changed. The latter is from a neurochemical imbalance that this test detects, and let me tell you, the symptoms are terrible and drastically effect your everyday life. For
While I agree with your point of view, I think it's flawed. People aren't being "normalized", and the characteristics that fall into the realm of "anxiety disorder" are a lot worse then you seem to imagine.
Re: Actually a valid point (Score:3, Insightful)
Like so many other "discoverable" attributes, this could easily backfire. If an employer/insurer is ever in such a position to perform a blood test of any kind, there's not a whole lot sitting between your sample, and them acquiring a lot of extra information about you.
Re:As former OCD, I am concerned (Score:3, Insightful)
I can see this being the case for many types of mental illness, such as schizophrenia, but anxiety disorders are a little different. People come into the emergency room absolutely convinced that they are dying or having a heart attack or really going full-blown crazy. They know something is wrong, and the overwhelming majority of them will be very relieved to hear the doctor say "You're not dying. You're not going crazy. You have a treatable condition called generalized anxiety disorder. We can start working on it right now if you'd like."
If anything I'd worry about some patients might feel a little let down, having something as mundane as "generalized anxiety disorder. For them, instead of calling it "generalized anxiety disorder" I would call it "Barris's Anxiety Disorder" or some other made-up name---that way it sounds like they're fucked up in a particular way, rather than just generally fucked up. They'll feel special, hell, even brag to their friends. Either way, as long as they seek treatment they'll be happier.
Re:Which explains why many psychologists (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Which explains why many psychologists (Score:1, Insightful)
We used to say that kind of thing about ulcers - that they needed to be attacked with medications to control gastic acid, huge changes in diet, stress control, very often surgery... Then we found out nearly all ulcers are caused by a simple bacterial infection. A round of the right antibiotic and they go away. See the recent Nobel.
When discussing a disease and I see all sorts of handwaving about how there are so many factors, and everyone is different, and there are 80 different potential causes and treatments... I tend to think it's just a disease we don't understand very well yet. Yes, psychological disorders are probably more complex than many other diseases, but generally I think the science of the mind is largely undiscovered and many times we're just poking around in the dark.
Re:As a psychologist (Score:2, Insightful)
(Apologies for the AC but I'd already moderated on this thread when I saw your comments)
Ultimately, you get to decide how to manage your patients, and if they're comfortable with your approach, so be it. From my standpoint though, this is patronizing and if I ever found that my doctor was intentionally obscuring information to protect me, I'd walk out the door and would never come back. Actually, over the past 15 or so years, I have left two doctors over trust issues but for different cause (they weren't obscuring information; they were just BSing and they admitted it when I called them on it). Anyway, not faith building experiences. I assume you don't tell your patients that this is your modus operandi up front? I have a hard time imagining them trusting you afterwords.
Anyway, I agree that neurochemistry is in its infancy, and I also agree that science often gets over sold, to the detriment of the credulous. No harm in teaching patients due skepticism. But that's a separate issue, apart intentionally deceiving one's patients for their supposed good.
Re:As a psychologist (Score:1, Insightful)
As somebody with General Anxiety Disorder [mentalhealthchannel.net] I'm a firm proponent of using drugs to treat anxiety. I've found both Buspar and the occasional Xanax very helpful. Neither is the only solution, but both have been very useful in showing me how my life could be different, giving me incentive to do the rest of the work. I aim to taper off both eventually.
A note to my fellow programmers and sysadmins: in retrospect, I think there's a much higher incidence of GAD in our ranks than in the general population. Why? Because being over-anxious helps us to be hyper-responsible about the details, but the in-control-of-your-own-world aspect of computers provides a safe, predictable environment that is very soothing.
If you have a hard time relaxing, if you tend towards obsessiveness, if you are a pack rat, if you are known to snap at people, and if you are hyper-responsible in some things but sometimes freak out and utterly avoid others, it's worth talking to somebody about GAD. All of that was true about me, and all of those things are better now. A month-long trial of Buspar was like a light coming on: Aha! This is how other people are!
In the two years since, here are the non-medication things I do to help:
All this has changed my life greatly for the better.
Re:Which explains why many psychologists (Score:1, Insightful)
Sounds like you've been scammed by some snake-oil amateur. In real Cognitive Behavioral Therapy your therapist will encourage you to avoid dwelling on past relationships and traumas, and will instead focus on your here-and-now, giving you advice, insights and homework for how to deal with situations now. Talking about past relationships and traumas may be useful in the beginning, but only to help with the diagnosis, and after that perhaps occasionally if you feel a need to talk about it, but she'll gently steer you away from dwelling too much on such things. In real Cognitive Behavioral Therapy the main focus is your present.
Disclaimer: I'm no expert, I just have some kind of anxiety problem myself, and a good therapist.
and listen to him talk about his support for the gay boys of SD.
To me that sounds extremely unprofessional! A real therapist will focus on you, and will definitely not burden you with other people's problems, or vent his own feelings, or whatever he's doing.
Maybe it would be a good idea for you to look for another therapist, this time checking credentials carefully, asking around for recommendations, and so on.
In addition to professional expertise it's also a matter of "personal chemistry", spontaneous connection and trust. A therapist who is perfect for one person may be much less useful to another, simply because of this spontaneous connection.
Good luck.
Re:As a psychologist (Score:3, Insightful)
And mostly clueless.
Medications are useful when prescribed properly. And no amount of therapy will help severe depression. Granted, getting the proper medication and dosing can be difficult. And if you think medication is costly, it is often cheap compared to therapy....
"And I absolutely doubt the abilities of a doctor who speaks to a patient for only an hour a week then gives a few pills."
That, btw, would be excellent medical care. Hell, an hour a month would be good...
Of course, I wouldn't want to get any medication from any pharmacy you work in. I have severe doubts about your abilities from your lack of knowledge about competent medical care....