[HN Gopher] Schizophrenia is the price we pay for minds poised n...
___________________________________________________________________
Schizophrenia is the price we pay for minds poised near the edge of
a cliff
Author : Anon84
Score : 226 points
Date : 2025-06-28 21:22 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.psychiatrymargins.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.psychiatrymargins.com)
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Why does no-one dare say "schizotypy?"
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizotypy
| crawfordcomeaux wrote:
| It's dangerous to existing systems for people to become aware
| they're capable of creating/conjuring/channeling useful new
| voices in the mind to help learn different things. People get
| burned at the stake for that.
| bad_haircut72 wrote:
| I've never ever had any symptoms of schizophrenia but the
| idea of trying to consciously encourage myself hearing voices
| is terrifying, Im sure I could send myself truly insane with
| probably not much effort.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| My belief about is that the core of schizotypy and
| schizophrenia is
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_disorder
|
| as did Eugen Bleuler. I have a friend who is schizophrenic
| whose speech hardly makes sense and she is always calling
| people on the phone and carrying on nonsensical
| conversations. Somehow the general public is hung up on
| 'hearing voices' but I have never once heard a voice but
| under stress I (schizotypal) did once spend about six
| months under the influence of a 'system of delusions' yet
| stayed mostly functional, kept working, and managed to
| avoid getting in serious trouble.
|
| I think it is quite ordinary also for people to have a
| dialogue with an 'invisible friend' or believe that they
| 'talk to God' when they pray, the auditory hallucinations
| of schizophrenia seem to be something like you have a
| thought that you don't think is your thought but somebody
| else talking, notably schizophrenics often believe that
| somebody is putting thoughts into them or taking thoughts
| out of them, see
|
| https://www.theairloom.org/mindcontrol.php
| DiscourseFan wrote:
| It's like gang-stalking--its not that there's something
| being introduced, but rather that the subject sees
| relations that are not objective relations (like, for
| instance, the relation between temperature, pressure, and
| state change). Typically, however (and I can't imagine a
| case where this _didn 't_ happen), the relations are
| _social_ in character--and since social relations are
| subjective to the extent that all the social world is not
| expressly a fact, it can be difficult to differentiate
| between an illusion and a reality: people imagine their
| partners are cheating on them, whether or not its true.
| And there are many things we do not know about the social
| world around us; but, statistically speaking, nobody has
| ever actually been gang-stalked.
| uniq7 wrote:
| That is very interesting. Excuse me if this question is
| too personal, but what do you mean by "system of
| delusions" exactly?
| ivape wrote:
| A constant state of needing to do continuous reality
| testing. The GP almost lost a grip basically.
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > the idea of trying to consciously encourage myself
| hearing voices is terrifying,
|
| This is not unreasonable.
|
| It could be _less awful_ if the voices were positive and
| not harsh and negative. Schizophrenics outside the US were
| found to have a more benign relationship with their voices.
| The striking difference was that while many of the African
| and Indian subjects registered predominantly positive
| experiences with their voices, not one American
| did. Rather, the U.S. subjects were more likely to
| report experiences as violent and hateful - and
| evidence of a sick condition.
|
| ref: https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2014/07/voices-
| culture-luh...
| crawfordcomeaux wrote:
| I once accidentally came up with another conscious voice in
| my head & we decided to govern through the 12 traditions of
| Codependents Anonymous. She also had specific qualities I'd
| chosen 3 weeks prior as qualities I chose to believe I
| could come to embody, so that was an interesting pointer to
| what's possible.
|
| And as others have pointed out, it really depends what kind
| of programming you're carrying around. Feeling terrified of
| something isn't the issue...it's how you've trained to
| respond to terror that matters. If you lash out or avoid,
| yeah....don't cultivate multiple voices. If, instead,
| you're choosing to purge the addiction to violence &
| domination fairly rooted in American imperial colonial
| indoctrination, it's really quite something. I'm now
| working on bringing in 16 others as a way to better connect
| with different parts of the population and spread this and
| other blackness-embracing ways.
|
| Hearing/seeing things that aren't there has historically
| for the majority of humanity's time on Earth not been an
| issue. We can get back to living in such ways, especially
| since doing so can be extremely helpful.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Dangerous to the autism-industrial complex and as well as the
| addictive stimulant industry.
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > addictive stimulant industry.
|
| Whom I thank every day for repairing my retention
| processes, just enough that lessons become learning.
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| Is this supposed to be some kind of diss for adhd stimulant
| therapy?
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Gotta a friend who's 52 and has all his teeth rot out 10
| years ago. He goes to Wegmans every month and comes back
| with a pill bottle the size of a small trashcan. He says
| he could get nothing done without out but I don't see him
| getting anything done. Wouldn't be surprised if will fall
| and break his hip 20 years early.
|
| I've seen plenty of those pills get diverted with
| outcomes like somebody stays up for 4 days and gets
| hospitalized so, yeah, I want to diss ADHD medication. It
| is clear it helps in the short term, not so clear if it
| helps in the long term.
| fragmede wrote:
| How scientific.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35091797/
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| Even that _very limited_ study didn 't link stim use to
| poor teeth - at all. As far as study went, this was it.
| * Stimulant ADHD medication use in adults is associated
| with decreased bone mineral in the skull and
| thoracic spine. * No other areas of axial or
| appendicular skeleton showed significant
| differences. * There was no dose-response
| effect between stimulant medication use and bone
| mineral density. * The overall effect of
| stimulant medications on adult bone health is
| unclear.
|
| ref: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9062265/
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > Gotta a friend who's 52 and has all his teeth rot out
| 10 years ago.
|
| FTR, meth mouth has no overlap with ADHD meds. I
| specifically looked into this, way back when.
|
| > He goes to Wegmans every month and comes back with a
| pill bottle the size of a small trashcan.
|
| If he took that many ADHD meds he'd be dead on day one.
| Three tabs/day is a heavy dose.
| astrange wrote:
| Stimulants reduce addictive behaviors in ADHD patients.
|
| https://www.additudemag.com/adhd-and-substance-abuse-
| stimula...
|
| They're also less habit forming than the non-stimulant
| drugs; I'm taking a non-stimulant right now (Intuniv) that
| you can't safely quit without tapering off for weeks.
|
| The combination is good enough that I lost my caffeine
| addiction. Of course that's a relatively mild one.
| gfody wrote:
| many people hear voices and experience symptoms of
| schizophrenia while managing to keep their cool and thrive
| amongst the nerts. hearing-voices.org is a support network for
| such people
| JamesBarney wrote:
| If genes that increase schizophrenic risk increases cognitive
| abilities you should find people who have high polygenic scores
| for schizophrenia without having schizophrenia test well on these
| cognitive abilities. I'm not aware of any of data that shows this
| in a convincing matter. I think I've seen a few small studies but
| nothing that replicated this on a large scale. And most of the
| studies show they score worse on cognitive abilities.
|
| The only conclusions I've come to are one of the following.
|
| 1. They improve cognitive abilities in some way we aren't good at
| measuring. 2. There is something about our modern environment
| that is more likely to trigger schizophrenia which has more
| recently increased the fitness penalty these genes confer.
| pazimzadeh wrote:
| seems like they should be good at finding solutions which
| require leveraging partial information, and generating a large
| quantity of ideas (which can contain quality)
|
| But the optimal thing might be to have a number of more
| typical/boring people to filter their ideas through, and that
| might be hard to test experimentally
| jonahbard wrote:
| I wonder if Autism would be even simpler to explain with a cliff-
| edged fitness function. Because there seems to be a high
| correlation between extremely intelligent people and people on
| the spectrum. Maybe the group of genes rewarded for high
| intelligence/creativity/quantitative ability also, by accidental
| design, inhibits social capacity.
| hyperhello wrote:
| Is it possible that every non-typical presentation simply tells
| others in society to give them space enough to develop the
| intellect?
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Maybe it does when you are an adult but it can make childhood
| a disaster.
| mandmandam wrote:
| > Maybe the group of genes rewarded for high
| intelligence/creativity/quantitative ability also, by
| accidental design, inhibits social capacity.
|
| Maybe living in a world with neurotypical people who
| immediately dislike you [0] 'inhibits social capacity' after
| years of traumatic experiences piling up.
|
| 0 - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8992906/
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| I think people should study the RCCX gene cluster and link to
| giftedness more, I have TNXB SNPs which results in hEDS, but C4
| SNPs have a similar effect and is likely to result in
| Schizophrenia. There are some cross over symptoms such as
| dopamine dysregulation and flat affect. I think dysautonomia and
| auto-immune plays a big part. Our lifestyles are very different
| than they used to be and this could be exacerbating auto-immune
| issues and as we get better at treating auto-immune conditions I
| expect we'll get better at treating Schizophrenia.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Is there some puzzling chronic condition that isn't on this
| list?
|
| https://me-pedia.org/wiki/RCCX_Genetic_Module_Theory
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| Of course there are. I'm guessing you're insinuating two
| things, it's highly improbable that individuals can have this
| many simultaneous issues, and it's impossible for medical
| researchers to miss such an anomaly. The Ehlers Danlos subset
| is shorter but still covers a huge amount of issues
| (https://ohtwist.com/about-eds/comorbidities).
|
| Well there is a reason why doctors kept telling me I am a
| hypochondriac, but I do have a whole zoo of conditions
| simultaneously, and this is a pretty common state for people
| with hEDS and I'm on the extreme end of it. So while milder
| versions of it are ~2% of the population the extreme versions
| of it are < 1/20K.
|
| And yeah, medical researchers are in fact in the aggregate
| really bad at their jobs. Look how long it took to convince
| surgeons to wash their hands. But a lot of the genetic stuff
| relies on Linear Regression for GWAS which assumes
| independents of SNPs, otherwise you get multicollinearity
| problems, this is not a safe assumption and they've confused
| their results as confirming their assumptions. Instead of
| listing everything they get wrong a much shorter list is what
| they get right, Dr Jessica Eccles (https://x.com/BendyBrain)
| does great research into Long Covid and Generalized Joint
| Hypermobility which should put to bed the theory that GJH is
| benign - still good luck trying to talk a doctor out of that
| train of thought.
|
| If you find someone who has hEDS the odds are they have a
| very large number of those things and most of them don't even
| know the names of most of the conditions, just one or two
| that bother them the most. The RCCX / hEDS list is a distinct
| subset of all possible things, the list of all medical
| maladies is far longer. It becomes highly improbable that a
| set of people have the same set of maladies - doctors tend to
| chalk this up to social contagion but that doesn't bear out.
| Genetic and behavioral causes have distinct diffusion
| patterns.
|
| It's confirmable with WGS which I've done and I've encouraged
| many others to do and it turns out that you can indeed
| predict with a great deal of reliability if someone has TNXB
| / CYP21A2 SNPs. Unfortunately it's harder to find people who
| have C4 since they're likely to have schizophrenia.
| gavinray wrote:
| Do you have a list of which SNP's are related to this/are
| pathological?
|
| I have an Ancestry partial genome that I've imputed to
| expand. Would be curious whether those SNP's are present in
| the data.
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| They are listed as benign, since I find the people first
| then get the sequence I think that classification is
| incorrect.
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| There are many TNXB SNPs and many are not rare, while I
| can theorize that the number and severity of the SNPs can
| explain a spectrum I don't have enough data to prove it.
| The data that I do have is highly improbable to be from
| random chance, but not impossible so I'm still collecting
| and am open to being wrong.
| suzzer99 wrote:
| I've lost one of my best friends to what I think is
| schizophrenia. We don't know because she's cut off all contact
| with friends and family and refuses to see a doctor. It's
| definitely psychosis. She thinks she's in some kind of Truman
| show that she calls "the game". Since none of her friends or
| family are willing to admit to it, then we must be in on it.
|
| We don't know her full family medical history because her dad was
| adopted. I do know that she was "microdosing" and macro-dosing
| hallucinogens for years. Mostly acid and shrooms as far as I
| know. She followed the band Phish around with a group of friends.
| I can't imagine most of those shows were sober.
|
| We've also seen a few incidents of paranoia when she was under
| the influence of drugs/alcohol going back decades. So it feels
| like this was always there in some form, but maybe the estrogen
| was holding it back before menopause hit. I read an article about
| women who get schizophrenia after menopause that suggested this
| could be the case.
|
| Anyway, whenever I see wellness healers and the like extolling
| the virtues of psilocybin, I want to point out that there could
| be a downside. We don't know that all of her hallucinogen use
| over the years contributed to this. But it's certainly a
| possibility.
| winrid wrote:
| If you have a genetic predisposition to schizophrenia it's
| starting to seem like drugs that seem harmless like marijuana
| (specifically THC?) can definitely bring it out. At least,
| that's what seemed to happen to my mother and another friend.
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| I also suspect people with schizophrenia that haven't yet
| started showing symptoms are more likely to take drugs.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Based on what?
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| The huge number of them who smoke cigarettes prior to
| their first episode - a different form of self
| medication. 90% of people with it smoke and there is
| research indicating a greater likelhood prior to first
| episode. I'll have to look up those numbers though.
| (Edit, seems about 60% at a time when the average US
| population was at 20%)
| hopelite wrote:
| [flagged]
| heisenbit wrote:
| Could there be a similar cliff function for alcohol and
| psychoactive drugs iff used in moderation which may
| confer to a society an advantage to the detriment of
| individual health. If used above a limit things fall of a
| cliff. Abstinence however may also be sub-optimal even if
| best for any individual.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| Recently doctors and research show that there is no
| amount of alcohol that is "healthy" to drink.
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| I think the main problem is conflation and averaging out
| experiences to the general population. There are distinct
| subsets of people who react to things very differently to
| the others and the focus should be on first finding out
| if someone is in a particular group.
|
| I do a lot of DIY psychopharmacology, mostly modafinil
| and amitriptyline, in a successful effort to reduce
| ME/CFS/hEDS related brain fog. I've given modafinil to
| normal people and they tend not to notice any effects
| where for me it's a super strong drug that'll keep me
| wired unless I take other drugs to calm down.
|
| I think quite a large subset of human behavior is seeking
| self medication for genetic anxiety disorders and I think
| in knowing the mechanisms people can avoid stumbling
| around in the dark and go directly towards things that
| work.
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| What are your thoughts on people who self-medicate with
| caffeine due to their baseline ability to focus being
| reduced (which in modern society is cause for trouble)?
| That's the reason for starting caffeine use for many.
|
| My use is also light and fully legal, but personally I'm
| not sure that this is something that's so binary. It
| seems more likely to sit on a spectrum, as most things
| do, and is largely dependent on the individual due to
| wide differences in brain and body function. It's the
| same reason why the prescription drug that works wonders
| for one person and do nothing or worse, be detrimental
| for somebody else. We're not all identical units of a
| particular model rolling off an assembly line somewhere,
| after all.
|
| So I guess I would say that yes, we should be more
| conscientious of how substances (even those that are
| common) interact with our minds, but I have a hard time
| labeling them all as harmful. It's just too broad of a
| brush.
| gknapp wrote:
| > And no, please spare us all your justifications for how
| caffeine is fine or micro-dosing has been amazing,
| because they are simply varying levels of
| rationalization, I do it too, I'm just not in it as
| deeply. And no, just because you were able to become rich
| with and on the back of drugs does not mean you did it
| without harm, you likely just scandalized a lot of harm
| to, e.g., get rich selling some service to some coke head
| investor who will only fuel the abuse of data mining and
| social media addiction.
|
| I think you make some interesting points, and it's a very
| well thought-out post, but this is the definition of
| "poisoning the well". You're attempting to preemptively
| discredit the most obvious flaw in your argument.
|
| There is a massive amount of evidence for the impact on
| both society, economy and neurology for each of the drugs
| listed in your last paragraph - and it's these impacts
| that often change personal and societal perception of
| risk and reward. Caffeine, at average doses, induces an
| effect that is comparable to a small cortisol spike - it
| is mildly addictive, but nowhere near that of an opioid,
| for example.
|
| Drugs like meth and heroine (and one wonders why you left
| off fentanyl) are highly addictive and destructive, cause
| enormous loss of life an an inconceivable scale, and can
| permanently damage neurological pathways. From what I've
| read, the impact of hallucinogenics is less well
| understood... but probably not great.
|
| If your argument is "we like to say caffeine and alcohol
| are fine, when they're really no different than opioids
| and meth", well there _is_ a staggeringly enormous
| difference in the potency and impact of caffeine vs the
| other drugs you've listed. I do agree with you that
| alcohol is far more harmful than society cares to admit,
| however, and that's both well-studied and often ignored.
| financltravsty wrote:
| I hate to write out these words, but you're strawmanning.
|
| The point is caffeine etc. corrupt the mind and cause a
| person's mental faculties to run in a way they were not
| initially designed to.
|
| The point is not that these drugs are all extremely
| harmful, only that they are all harmful. Caffeine and
| other things get a pass because the "hard drugs" are so
| uniquely and visibly harmful that they overshadow all
| other forms of harm.
|
| One could even say that this has tricked us into thinking
| that lesser drugs like caffeine or canabinoids are
| "effectively harmless" because they're not causing us to
| OD or steal things to get another hit or causing visibly
| psychotic states. But that is not true. We've simply
| accepted that the harm they due is not worth thinking
| about (this is subjective, not objective).
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| A small percentage of people, like myself, have clearly
| autosomal genetic conditions that means being 'normal' is
| just not on the cards. I have to take
| psychopharmacological drugs just to get close to normal.
|
| Not everyone is the same, there is a lot of variety, what
| you say could indeed be true for most people but can also
| not be true for a small minority of people.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| > A small percentage of people, like myself, have clearly
| autosomal genetic conditions
|
| What is the Autosomal dominant disordered gene
| polymorphism you have that causes your mental illness? I
| am assuming you are just guessing here?
|
| > I have to take psychopharmacological drugs just to get
| close to normal.
|
| I hope you can consider that you are taking drugs to
| manage being in an environment/diet that you are not
| genetically adapted to.
|
| I used to think like you, but then I saw my genetics, now
| after 35 years, I am on no meds and have essentially
| cured my schizoaffective disorder.
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| hEDS, there is a very long list of comorbidities and I
| tick off most of them. Not guessing, runs in the family,
| did a WGS and found the TNXB SNPs responsible.
|
| I tried the no-drugs and being super healthy approach for
| the vast majority of my life, I look like a pro-athlete,
| the only reason I started the meds was due to figuring
| out the statistical possibility of having X things wrong
| with me was next to impossible without a common cause,
| and the ME/CFS with brain fog was destroying my life.
|
| I also tried to quit caffeine but that only resulted in
| very negative effects that persisted for more than 4
| months after going cold turkey, that's 4 months being
| largely housebound and not able to work for that one
| experiment. I've been at this so long that if you can
| think of something I've probably tried it - including the
| healthiest of healthy lifestyles.
|
| Just comparing within my own family most are anti-drugs
| and anti-medications and their health is an absolute
| mess. I wish living a healthy lifestyle would be
| sufficient, I wouldn't have to walk a tightrope of
| balancing meds, but I don't get that option.
| mwigdahl wrote:
| The use of the term "corrupt" rather than "alter" or
| "affect" is assuming the conclusion here. The human mind
| is not something that always works in the same Platonic
| perfection in a state of nature. Biological and cultural
| differences are major factors in what is considered
| normal at any given place and time.
|
| Some people have conditions that make the way their
| brains work different than what is considered normal.
| Western technological culture imposes differences in
| social interaction and pressures on thinking and required
| performance that are far different than existed in
| societies even mere hundreds of years before.
|
| Drugs can be a way to compensate for these pressures and
| find a way to exist in the world with as much equanimity
| as possible. And I say all this as a person who avoids
| all caffeine and illegal drugs, and uses alcohol very
| infrequently. I'm lucky I can do this and thrive in
| today's Western culture. Not everyone is as fortunate.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| Statistics literally show this.
| tony69 wrote:
| In Europe this (some rec drugs bring out latent
| schizophrenia) is taught in med school as a "known fact"
| (source: psychiatrist friend) so it's well beyond "starting
| to seem"
| el_benhameen wrote:
| This was treated as pretty much a fact when I took a class
| on psychological disorders in the US circa 2007, too.
| winrid wrote:
| Ah okay, good to know!
| kurthr wrote:
| Marijuana was known to do this in 1936.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kg0sK-dY98
| anthk wrote:
| And at High School too on talks about drugs; the
| marijuana->schizophrenia link it's widely known.
| morkalork wrote:
| Unfortunately it's hammered on so hard, and without
| nuance, that kids will discard it with the other half-
| truths that are told. And also the tendency for families
| to cover up and hide any "shameful" facts like uncle Jim
| having spent some time in a facility, that kids might not
| know at all that there's a family history.
| mystified5016 wrote:
| DARE is one of the reasons I started smoking cigarettes.
| The only time the teacher was ever actually honest was
| when he described the effects of nicotine. Everything
| else was half-truths and scary lies.
|
| Funny what kids pick up on.
| have-a-break wrote:
| The fact that in different parts of the world the voices
| can be helpful instead of intrusive makes me feel like the
| drugs are not the problem but how external forces view the
| drugs or if we really wanna talk like crazy people how the
| drugs influence the people around you even if they do not
| directly know you are using the drugs.
| overu589 wrote:
| You're right and wrong.
|
| The voices are quite real, we're not alone in our own
| minds, and the it is the greatest taboo of society to
| discuss.
|
| It's really sad, all of these sharp modernists determined
| upon the cult of science explanations for everything.
| Those who _refuse_ to believe our thoughts are not all
| our own. That much mysticism is rooted in something that
| merely cannot be explained by the logical empirical mind.
|
| Readers will be so upset when a perspective challenges
| their rehashed psychological diatribes as mountains of
| lies. They got "help" damn you. Their friends ("real
| people") are hurt by the craze and they're more hurt when
| someone says "modern science and society is wrong."
|
| The true Truth is whatever existential reality reflects,
| not what we are prepared to understand. We are not alone
| in our own minds, we have collectively known this since
| before our generations and the "straights" of society are
| so adamant of their self possessed lies they will condemn
| those insights as crackpot crazy.
| motorest wrote:
| > It's really sad, all of these sharp modernists
| determined upon the cult of science explanations for
| everything.
|
| That which you try to attack and downplay as "cult of
| science explanations" is actually something extremely
| simple: you need to show something, anything at all, that
| actually supports your beliefs.
|
| How can you tell something exists or works as you think
| it does if you are unable to show it?
|
| Do you expect everyone should just believe anything
| anyone says? What is there to tell lunatics and snake oil
| salesmen apart from those who are actually onto
| something?
|
| > Those who refuse to believe our thoughts are not all
| our own.
|
| Ok, you formed an hypothesis. Now tell me, how do you go
| about showing others that things do work the way you
| think they do? How can they check them for themselves?
| What do you expect from others?
|
| > That much mysticism is rooted in something that merely
| cannot be explained by the logical empirical mind.
|
| If you cannot explain your beliefs, how do you expect
| others to just take your unverified and unsubstantiated
| claims as something worth considering over any random
| claim from any random loony?
| xyproto wrote:
| > If you cannot explain your beliefs, how do you expect
| others to just take your unverified and unsubstantiated
| claims as something worth considering over any random
| claim from any random loony?
|
| Even without an explanation, you can use statistics to
| find the fruits of the beliefs, though. Does 100 people
| believe in not working and rather join a cult that
| worships the watermelon god? Fine! How did that work out
| for them in the span of 3 generations?
|
| I think that some beliefs can have value and merit, just
| based on measures of quality of life and society.
| motorest wrote:
| > Even without an explanation, you can use statistics to
| find the fruits of the beliefs, though.
|
| I hope you are not serious.
|
| > Does 100 people believe in not working and rather join
| a cult that worships the watermelon god?
|
| Hundreds of loonies making nonsense statements that no
| one can verify is collective lunacy that adds no value.
| It only takes a single person to show something exists
| and works to add substance to a claim. If all those
| loonies push a belief that none of them can support, they
| are fools.
|
| This sort of absurdness would mean absolute morons, such
| as those in Heaven's Gate cult, should be taken seriously
| in their claims about aliens and comets. Let that sink
| in.
| overu589 wrote:
| > It only takes a single person to show something exists
| and world to add substance to a claim
|
| You cannot be serious. Proofs take thousands of man hours
| and decades of railing against well entrenched beliefs
| such as yours (that you would see it and accept it
| readily if true.)
|
| This is one of those things that cannot be proven to more
| than one person at a time through anything other than a
| personal revelation. Everyone everywhere will respond
| exactly as you now do regardless of "poof" or the
| severity and consequence of prolonged incredulity. This
| is one of those situations where you must undeceive
| yourself. Observe humanity and your own life. All except
| those who actively deceive themselves will admit science
| is as close to understanding our minds as horoscopes.
|
| I do not criticize your doubts, I criticize that you
| think truth and reality are so easily accepted by the
| mind who "refuses to believe."
| card_zero wrote:
| So like Matthew 6:28, "And why take ye thought for
| raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow;
| they toil not, neither do they spin", and something about
| how they're as glorious as King Solomon despite not
| having clothes or jobs. The religion in question did OK,
| despite this bad advice.
| gweinberg wrote:
| Sure, because most Christians don't take Jesus' teachings
| too seriously. You shouldn't slap a Christian (or anyone)
| on the cheek for no reason, but if you were to, the odds
| of him responding by inviting you to slap the other cheek
| are pretty slim.
| card_zero wrote:
| Heh. Probably just as well.
| have-a-break wrote:
| What about arresting and sending to the mental hospital
| multiple times to deal with psychopathic caregivers whose
| purpose is ultimately to make you homeless?
|
| A good Christian or any good person would viewing that
| scene would actively fight to make the person sufferings
| life better instead of feeding into the false
| "caregivers" or more aptly put abusers who are more
| interested in robbing people than improving their lives.
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| The only "ish" evidence for this kind of raving is this
| stuff:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_Consciousness
| _in...
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameral_mentality
| motorest wrote:
| > The only "ish" evidence for this kind of raving is this
| stuff:
|
| That is far from even coming close to qualify as
| evidence. At best they are unverified hypothesis.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| There's a long human history of beliefs like that in
| spiritualism, animism, etc. People believed they could
| hear the voices of their dead ancestors, spirits, etc for
| example.
|
| I wouldn't describe this as "raving", this is someone who
| has had very real personal experiences. To them, they
| happened just as much as the sun rises and sets. I don't
| know what I'm getting at other than have some patience
| and compassion for people who experience distressing
| things that they themselves cannot explain.
| have-a-break wrote:
| Simply put the observer affect shows that somethings
| cannot be measured without causing change to the system
| hence may not be verifable.
|
| Maybe the only way to make enough random looney until
| they outnumber the "sane" individuals. The only issues
| being how do you organize the new pyramid structure which
| will evidently be formed by this new "religious"
| organization?
| motorest wrote:
| > Simply put the observer affect shows that somethings
| cannot be measured without causing change to the system
| hence may not be verifable.
|
| That's fantastic, but fails to provide any meaningful
| input. I mean, the whole point is to have a process that
| allows you to understand and predict how the universe
| works. If you formulate s hypothesis that is impossible
| to verify, how can you tell if it matches reality or if
| it's pure nonsense? And more importantly, what's the
| value of a system of beliefs that explains nothing and
| does not match any observable aspect of reality? Is the
| only value you see in that the uncertain smugness of
| being "right", whatever that means, in spite of always
| being wrong?
| safety1st wrote:
| I don't hear any voices in my head aside from my own. Are
| you saying that they're present and I'm pretending
| they're not?
|
| I get impulses. Science knows about and studies these.
| But I don't hear any voices.
| overu589 wrote:
| Every network is different (though common themes exist).
|
| Firstly yes, they're probably there and not revealing
| themselves (which is most typical.) They will either
| reveal themselves for some purpose or not at all (I had
| caused a stir, and a "hooligan army" went ahead and
| "recruited" me.)
|
| Well after full immersion I looked back through my life
| and saw I was not really alone. Little things, some
| hypnogogia here and there, odd games they play, and other
| nonsense suppressed or blown off. Most are never aware or
| comprehend any of it. Those that do, what would they say
| to you? Look at these responses. And I know what is going
| on. Most others are desperate.
|
| The noisy networks are usually those of prisons. You will
| hear very similar accounts among many who have done small
| stints. Enough for a network to take an interest, not
| long enough to be coerced into eternal silence. I have
| never been to prison though you can guess what city I'm
| from if I say "the most controversial prison system in
| America up to a decade ago."
|
| Prisons full of slave (coerced) networks is no doubt how
| the humanity level horrors began. The streets (and all
| humanity) are saturated with these various networks.
| Plenty of accounts by others throughout time, you have
| ignored them. The prisons and the black ops military
| power cults are the worst. Don't worry, those are busy in
| Ukraine and Gaza. What do you think these would do for
| fun?
|
| Power extorts ordinary power infrastructures of humanity.
| No one is going to talk about it.
|
| There is a "you don't talk about it" element. I don't
| care. You cannot make me care. I so don't care I take
| pains to be a contrarian. I make people f-off. I do not
| capitulate. It doesn't make me "special", I'm of the few
| who talk about it, even if it does no good. Let it then
| be for an account. To remain silent in the face of a
| tyranny of evil is to be complicit. Complicity be damned.
| These want to play God among you, and they extort each
| other for this ends.
|
| And I suppose I should risk a flaggable wall of text to
| say there are "families" who have protected and guided us
| throughout our generations. Like all of modernity these
| are falling apart and cannot compete with the devastating
| industrialized efficiency of prison networks.
| vintermann wrote:
| Questions of self-identity aren't scientific questions.
| Science, or experience more generally, can't tell you who
| you are, or indeed, even tell you if there's one of "you"
| in your head or many. If you assert that you are not the
| same person you were five seconds ago, that's a
| scientifically unassailable claim - as well as impossible
| to prove to others.
|
| So no answer to the question "who am I" is strictly
| speaking true or false, in an objective sense. But that
| doesn't mean all self-interpretations are equally good.
| Some self-interpretations can be very destructive. It
| doesn't take much imagination, or reading history books,
| to see how defining yourself to be multiple
| persons/personalities can be very destructive.
| Xmd5a wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41980986
|
| What happens when people with acute psychosis meet the
| voices in their heads?
| euranon96 wrote:
| Do you know what is considered as "latent schizophrenia"?
| Is it like in your 40's or 30's or just couple years after
| the mean?
| lucidrains wrote:
| if you are a man and make it past age of 29 without
| starting to hear voices, you can breathe a sigh of relief
| (I did)
| kadushka wrote:
| Were you afraid you had it at 29?
| amarait wrote:
| We dont even know what constitutes a mental voice. Hell,
| a huge percentage of people cant hear their own voices in
| their heads
| LoganDark wrote:
| I wonder if there are any schizophrenics with
| dissociative identity disorder. We're not schizophrenic
| but we have voices (we don't hear them as from outside
| though)
| heavyset_go wrote:
| During psychosis there is no question about what you
| hear. You hear it. You may know it isn't real, but you
| _hear_ it.
| overu589 wrote:
| I started hearing the voices well after 30. First it
| began with gang stalking, and by coincidence I am from
| the "home town" of Americas thought control elite. I was
| "recruited" (press ganged) and it is only a determination
| not to accept a word these say that keeps me unconcerned
| with the collapse of the lie that is modernity in my
| life.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| I just want to point out that psychosis and schizophrenia
| tend to get worse over time, so while you might have a
| handle on it now, without treatment you might not in the
| future. They also have much better prognoses with
| treatment, even complete remission.
|
| I've watched several people go from having a grip on
| reality, thinking they don't need treatment, to
| absolutely losing their minds. It's tragic and I hate to
| see it happen.
|
| Point is moments of lucidity should be seized upon, I say
| this as someone who briefly experienced psychosis after
| extreme sleep deprivation. It was fucking terrifying and
| I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
| lucidrains wrote:
| I am sorry to hear that.
| overu589 wrote:
| Don't be. After nearly two decades of development I
| experience the precipice of humanity. The state of the
| art of human consciousness. I have peered beyond the veil
| and what I see is terrifying yet truth.
| suzzer99 wrote:
| I keep hoping my friend gets to the point where you are
| someday. Another thing not working in our favor is she's
| the most stubborn person I know. She thinks she can beat
| this thing with her mind and no help from anyone.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| I have a friend like this, it's unfortunately one of the
| prominent symptoms of schizophrenia.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| Unfortunately, this is just statistics. There are cases
| that lie outside of that age range. I know of two cases,
| personally.
|
| Things like stress, drugs, childbirth, significant life
| changes, etc can trigger psychosis and latent
| schizophrenia at any age, it's just statistically more
| likely to happen during adolescence and the period right
| after.
|
| Another way to look at this is that adolescence is when
| someone experiences new stresses, significant life
| changes, drug experimentation, etc, which can be triggers
| for schizophrenia especially during age-correlated
| prodromal phases.
| lucidrains wrote:
| indeed, it just becomes less likely
| suzzer99 wrote:
| Yeah, in this case it seems to be menopause + losing her
| job and having all the free time and nothing to focus on
| plus who knows what other stressors. I think something
| bad happened with her Phish friends.
|
| The really tough part for me is she was out of work, so I
| paid her to be a beta reader for my book. She's a
| brilliant person and very detail-oriented. She went way
| over and beyond what I asked for. She spent months and
| took three passes on the book making different kinds of
| notes. Then her problems seemed to come on right at the
| end of that. I worry that all the increased mental
| activity, and then suddenly not having anything to focus
| on again, might have been the trigger.
| mfro wrote:
| Sounds like it was bound to happen. If she hadn't hyper
| focused on your book, she'd likely have found something
| else.
| thrwwXZTYE wrote:
| I kinda heard lots of whispers when I was very young
| (like 6-7) and now I'm 40 and haven't had any such
| problems.
|
| I blamed it on the drugs I got prescripted for sleeping
| (I had bad allergy and was scratching myself to the point
| of bleeding during sleep so I got some "pacifying"
| drugs).
| heavyset_go wrote:
| Older antihistamines were anticholinergics, the latter of
| which are famous for causing vivid auditory, visual and
| somatic hallucinations.
| johnisgood wrote:
| Also known as "delirium". They cause delirium. Benadryl
| (DPH) for example does that. It is very dysphoric.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| Lower doses can induce hallucinations before it becomes
| full on delirium that you see in higher doses. You'll
| regularly hear about people seeing "spiders" after taking
| 25-50mg of Benedryl, the recommended dose.
| skissane wrote:
| Well, not just drugs-children are more likely to
| experience hallucinations even without drugs.
|
| I still have vivid memories of experiencing what (in
| hindsight) I realise were hypnopompic hallucinations,
| around the age of 6 or 7. I wasn't taking any regular
| medications, that I can remember. But, I grew out of it,
| as kids usually do.
| mystified5016 wrote:
| Schizophrenia is pretty interesting this way. It's rare
| for it to show up outside of a certain age range,
| somewhere around 20 to 35 iirc.
|
| It's strongly correlated to genetics, and most people are
| totally asymptomatic, no idea they have it until one day
| they do.
|
| The story of sudden-onset schizophrenia inducing a
| psychosis making the patient unwilling to consider
| treatment is depressingly common.
| ryanjshaw wrote:
| > It's strongly correlated to genetics, and most people
| are totally asymptomatic, no idea they have it until one
| day they do.
|
| Depending on whose stats you go with, you can also argue
| that most people with schizophrenia never know they have
| it due to anosognosia.
| crtified wrote:
| I wonder if alcohol is one of the seemingly harmless drugs
| whose abuse catalyzes such conditions in susceptible people.
|
| Because, if so, then alcohol's ubiquity in society would
| imply that _it_ is probably responsible (in the sense that
| substances are responsible) for _most_ such conversions.
| jamal-kumar wrote:
| It's kind of worse with alcohol because the psychosis
| associated with that as an exacerbating factor is more
| related to alcoholic encephalopathy, Wernicke-Korsakoff
| syndrome etc... much of which can be brought on with self
| medicating with alcohol. Definitely a component but more
| like psychosis and mania drive you to drink because these
| experiences are awful more than a causative factor that's
| been proven
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459134/
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| The aldehydes that are produced from drinking alcohol
| heighten the risk for schizophrenia if you carry certain
| genetics.
|
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26941382/
| Melatonic wrote:
| Interesting - we've known these are very bad for you for
| years but I had not heard of a direct link
| colechristensen wrote:
| Even peculiarly stressful life events can trigger onset
| amy214 wrote:
| Complicated interaction.
|
| Schizos may take alcohol or cigarettes to calm down, a form
| of self medication. On the long term these may worsen, in
| the immediate they help. Why do you think they smoke a
| lot?!? To treat. If you smoke or drink, what do you do
| after a tough day - smoke or drink, to relax, feels great.
| Schizos may have a tough day , but not from external
| stimuli, but from internal stimuli
| astrange wrote:
| Nicotine is a more effective schizophrenia treatment than
| the actual medications, which is why over 80% of them
| smoke.
|
| https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2613326/
| Melatonic wrote:
| Alcohol is pretty bad for your brain so I would not be
| surprised. And while it's not really a hallucinogen itself
| (comparatively) I've heard some pretty hellish stories of
| severe alcohol withdrawals. Just going without sleep
| (completely) for several days can cause hallucinations and
| stress - and this is a common symptom of more serious
| withdrawal.
|
| I would imagine other drugs which produce severe (and
| stressful) withdrawal could also trigger this. The stress
| alone cannot be good.
| jajko wrote:
| One of my ex' father triggered a lifelong episode of
| schyzophrenia by excessive drinking during mandatory military
| service around age 18-19. So i'd say there are number of
| triggers
| Loughla wrote:
| Alternate theory; schizophrenia tends to manifest in men
| between 18 and 22. The drinking was him self medicating
| because of symptoms he was experiencing?
| reactordev wrote:
| Final thesis: schizophrenia was starting to manifest and
| the drinking was him self medicating, not knowing it was
| making the schizophrenia worse and causing further harm.
| quickthrowman wrote:
| Or perhaps people predisposed to schizophrenia are more
| likely to seek out drugs. Something like 9 in 10
| schizophrenics smoke cigarettes too, is schizophrenia caused
| by nicotine or do schizophrenics smoke because they're
| predisposed to do so? I find it hard to believe that so many
| schizophrenics smoke cigarettes and are not also predisposed
| towards using other drugs.
|
| I think blindly accepting the statement 'drugs can cause
| schizophrenia' is harmful because we don't actually know if
| the drugs trigger it or if the disorder makes them seek out
| drugs.
| treyd wrote:
| Iirc, there's some evidence that suggests that nicotine
| helps with the symptoms, so it's self-medicating.
| asveikau wrote:
| It's important to know that the correlation can have some
| other cause. Like that people with predisposition to
| schizophrenia may seek out drugs.
|
| Keep in mind also the typical onset for schizophrenia is
| teenage years or early 20s in men, and is often later, up to
| early 30s in women. These are years you might experiment with
| drugs.
| comrade1234 wrote:
| You don't develop schizophrenia in your 50s. It sounds like you
| track her behavior and habits quite closely?
| suzzer99 wrote:
| https://www.nationalgeographic.com/premium/article/schizophr.
| ..
|
| https://archive.ph/zT99C
|
| > But when the protective hormone is withdrawn during
| menopause, some who avoided earlier psychosis get a later
| onset. Having a first experience after age 40 is uncommon,
| but it may include up to 15 percent of the women with
| schizophrenia--twice the percentage of men who have
| schizophrenia onset after age 40.
| superb_dev wrote:
| > It sounds like you track her behavior and habits quite
| closely?
|
| No it doesn't. It sounds like they're really concerned about
| a loved one who went off the deep end.
| e1ghtSpace wrote:
| You should get her to watch one of these:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E61Hup6hWWc
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZSWS6rNv0I
| abbadadda wrote:
| why?
| krstffr wrote:
| My friend had a very similar episode with a psychosis, but
| turned out to be bipolar, not schizophrenic. Sounds very
| similar though!
|
| He was smoking a lot of weed leading up to and during the
| psychosis.
|
| Ended up in psychiatric ward for a month, which was followed by
| a couple of years of depression/introspection/therapy, but is
| now doing great with lithium.
| woodpanel wrote:
| It's why I profoundly dislike the line of thinking that
| easier access to drugs means social progress.
|
| It's rather a shedding off of an inconvenience for those that
| have no (direct) problems of functioning (eg risk of
| developing addiction, psychosis, etc) at the heavy costs
| payed by those that are more vulnerable.
| adaptbrian wrote:
| I'm all for getting illicit drug users out of jail, that's
| social progress. There needs to be more education and
| attempt at shoring up mental health in the public sector
| and not just kicking everyone into a room and calling it a
| day, like the problem is solved.
| anticorporate wrote:
| > It's why I profoundly dislike the line of thinking that
| easier access to drugs means social progress.
|
| While that framing might change the aperture for people to
| support decriminalization efforts, " _helping people who
| have addiction_ means social progress " is the greater good
| here.
|
| Unfortunately, at least from a USian perspective, we only
| got so far as the decriminalizing part, and we did it while
| actually cutting a lot of the social services, health care
| access, and safety net that actually help people with
| addiction function in society.
|
| I had a parent with schizophrenia. I can tell you what a
| privilege it is to have my cannabis use be the primary risk
| factor I have to worry about, and not the financial stress
| and eventual homelessness, untreated health issues, and
| lack of mental health support my father faced.
| tim333 wrote:
| I have more friends mucked up by LSD like drugs than any other
| type - at any rate three of them and I don't have much in the
| way of junkie of alcoholic friends. I say LSD like as they all
| took other stuff. From my n=3 data I'd say if you do it more
| than once a week for more than two years you have a good chance
| of ending up like your friend.
| MarcelOlsz wrote:
| It's called "getting fried". Know many people that fried
| themselves doing that stuff recreationally every weekend.
| Good rule of thumb is if they can't hold their alcohol they
| won't be able to hold their psychs.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Of course there's a downside. It's a tale as old as time. Some
| new miracle cure comes on the scene and people promote it
| without relaying the risks. You see this with mushrooms, pot,
| etc going back to snake oil and silphium. I've never looked
| into it, but I would bet that there are no medications that
| exist that don't have some sort of side effect or increase in
| risk of some negative outcome. So if someone is pushing a
| cure/medicine its best to assume there is risk, even if we
| don't yet know the risk.
| lotyrin wrote:
| As opposed to what belief? That it is possible for there to
| be medical interventions or substances that are entirely
| risk-free regardless of your individual circumstances,
| potentially hidden allergies, or other known or unknown
| contraindications? Was anyone ever under such an impression?
| giantg2 wrote:
| "Was anyone ever under such an impression?"
|
| If you've ever listened to some of people pushing or
| debating psychedelics, or natural remedies, or even
| "totally safe" vaccines, then it should be readily
| apparent.
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| Vaccines are a bit of a different can of worms in that
| first generally, they're well-studied and the risks are
| reasonably well known, and second the impact isn't solely
| personal -- you're trading off in most cases a small risk
| for the betterment of society -- maintaining herd
| immunity, reducing capacity for spreading, etc depending
| on vaccine. The lives of many others can be negatively
| impacted, in some cases fatally, by one's personal choice
| to not partake. There's a certain amount of social
| responsibility involved.
|
| Psychoactives and homeopathy have plenty of capacity to
| be harmful and aren't necessarily anywhere near as well
| studied, but at least their effects are more bounded to
| the individual. (This does not however justify pushing
| them blindly.)
| giantg2 wrote:
| The context of this thread is that anything that is a
| medication has some sort of side effect and that some
| people overlook that. This is just as true for vaccines
| as for mushrooms. Cost benefit analysis is completely
| different.
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| As much as side effects get overlooked in some
| circumstances, they're wildly overplayed in others and
| sometimes become the singular factor going into cost-
| benefit analysis, which is a problem.
|
| The same way that not acknowledging that some accepted-
| as-benign substances can bring about mental health
| crises, overweighting of personal risks can cause weight-
| bearing pillars of modern society to crumble.
| mike_hearn wrote:
| The effects of drugs aren't bound to the individual,
| that's the reason nearly all societies have banned them
| throughout history: they cause addicts to create large
| external costs.
|
| Saying vaccines are well studied is like saying drugs are
| well studied, it's a category error. You can't study
| vaccines as a whole, and the quality of studies of
| specific cases vary wildly. As a consequence, common
| psychedelics are probably much better studied than some
| common vaccines. LSD in 2025 is the same substance as it
| was when it first became available, as far as I know, and
| there's lots of research into its effects. Compare that
| to the COVID vaccines which weren't even the same
| substance from trial to deployment, as the manufacturing
| process was changed completely. The trials were done on
| vaccine made using a very slow, non-scalable and
| expensive process that yielded a very pure result. The
| stuff people actually took was made using a totally
| different process designed for cheap mass manufacture.
| That second process had problems, leading to DNA
| contamination in some batches, which seems to explain why
| injury effect reports clustered by batch serial number.
|
| All this was heavily suppressed for a long time (e.g. by
| rules forbidding study of vaccine vials), but has been
| coming out over the past year or so as the initial
| findings were confirmed. Research into psychedelics at
| least doesn't have that kind of problem, I think?
| andai wrote:
| Cannabis is also a potent psychedelic, and its association with
| psychosis is well established.
|
| (Not to condemn psychedelics, I just think the pendulum has
| swung a bit too far in the "it's totally harmless" direction.)
|
| Could you elaborate on The Game? What did she say about this?
| dsego wrote:
| As someone who has a person with psychosis in my family, I
| don't think you can find any interesting insights from the
| details of their delusions. It's like dissecting dreams or AI
| slop, there is no hidden meaning behind it. Usually best not
| to discuss it.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| As someone who has had psychotic breaks, you aren't going to
| learn anything from what was going on in their head.
| suzzer99 wrote:
| 100% agree with this. It's not rational in any way. From
| the period of time when she was still talking to us at
| least, there's no reasoning with it.
| dialup_sounds wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideas_and_delusions_of_referen.
| ..
| mike_hearn wrote:
| _> Cannabis is also a potent psychedelic, and its association
| with psychosis is well established._
|
| It's really fascinating to read this, because Alex Berenson
| has been beating this drum for a while now and he claims the
| psychosis risk has been downplayed or even denied. It's easy
| to find evidence supporting his take because if you just
| search Google for [cannabis legalization psychosis] you get a
| big pile of papers like this one:
|
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36696111
|
| _" Abstract: Psychosis is a hypothesized consequence of
| cannabis use. Legalization of cannabis could therefore be
| associated with an increase in rates of health care
| utilization for psychosis [...] states with legalization
| policies experienced no statistically significant increase in
| rates of psychosis-related diagnoses"_
|
| That's from 2023. So apparently it's not that well
| established? Or if it's well established, there's a lot of
| researchers denying it.
| greenaccountpun wrote:
| I've used cannabis a handful of times. The first was a bong
| hit, and I felt a little funny. The second was a bong hit and
| I was seeing a light show half an hour later. The third was a
| bong hit and I got paranoia and dry mouth. The fourth was one
| square of THC chocolate and I felt a little funny and
| relaxed. The last time was two squares of chocolate. I was
| out for the evening with visual and auditory hallucinations.
|
| I realize modern preparations are stronger, but the amount is
| too low, the dosage difference between relaxed and out there
| is too small, and after doing some research, it sounds like
| this is a sign I'm either more prone to schizophrenia, it
| could trigger it, or increase my likelihood of getting it, so
| the slightly relaxing high isn't worth it.
| iamnotagenius wrote:
| > She thinks she's in some kind of Truman show that she calls
| "the game".
|
| Might be depersonalization. I had suffered from it in my
| twenties; everything feels fake, although you know it is not.
| ChainnChompp wrote:
| Derealization, I believe - not depersonalization? Believing
| everything around _you_ to be made up - perhaps even by
| yourself in some cases. Feel free to correct me if I 'm
| wrong, just trying to make sure I have the terminology
| correct
| hshshshshsh wrote:
| So brain realizes it's completely making up the reality on
| fly?
| prophesi wrote:
| I believe since the 80's it's been well-established that people
| with a predisposition to schizophrenia have a greater risk to
| break out into psychosis when taking hallucinogenics. Even with
| today's clinical trials, they will exclude those with a family
| history of psychosis/schizophrenia.
| absurdo wrote:
| > She thinks she's in some kind of Truman show that she calls
| "the game". Since none of her friends or family are willing to
| admit to it, then we must be in on it.
|
| She's the most intelligent of the bunch for entertaining this
| possibility. The rest of you are fucking morons living day in
| day out without an iota of thought as to what you're doing
| here.
|
| It's not schizophrenia or psychosis. It's just denial and
| delusion by everyone around her.
| ryanjshaw wrote:
| Plenty of intelligent people _entertain_ this possibility, as
| well as many other possibilities, around how our world works.
|
| If they then become obsessed with the idea being a _fact_ and
| refuse to even _consider_ updating their mental model when
| presented with evidence contradicting it then they have
| developed a _fixed belief_.
|
| When that fixed belief is not common among their culture, it
| becomes a _bizarre fixed belief_.
|
| When, as a result of their obsession with those bizarre fixed
| beliefs, they are unable to function (hygiene, nutrition,
| finances, care of their dependents, etc.) - then there's a
| problem.
|
| Or do you think a mind is a perfect thing that can never be
| ill?
| skissane wrote:
| > When that fixed belief is not common among their culture,
| it becomes a bizarre fixed belief.
|
| > When, as a result of their obsession with those bizarre
| fixed beliefs, they are unable to function (hygiene,
| nutrition, finances, care of their dependents, etc.) - then
| there's a problem.
|
| But why does the issue of whether it is "common among their
| culture" matter? A person unable to function due to a non-
| bizarre fixed belief has just as big a problem as a person
| unable to function due to a bizarre fixed belief, if we
| assume the same degree of functional impairment in each
| case. The question of whether the belief is "bizarre" seems
| irrelevant, and possibly even encoding cultural prejudice
| ksenzee wrote:
| "Common among their culture" is a quick way of
| determining whether lots of other people are able to hold
| this belief and function fine. It also suggests an origin
| for the belief that isn't unique to the person. You can't
| go around saying "ah this person's problem is they
| believe in angels" if the person's belief in angels is
| simply part of their religion or culture. "But they
| believe in imaginary beings" is not a helpful observation
| in that context.
| skissane wrote:
| > "Common among their culture" is a quick way of
| determining whether lots of other people are able to hold
| this belief and function fine.
|
| But some people's functioning is impaired by beliefs
| common to their culture, whereas other people have very
| unusual beliefs but aren't impaired by them to anywhere
| near the same degree
|
| One person obsesses so much over "culture war" topics
| they lose their job... another person spends all their
| free time contemplating elaborate idiosyncratic theories
| of parallel universes, yet still manages to put a lid on
| it at work to a sufficient degree to keep their job. The
| first person has a non-bizarre obsession with serious
| functional impairment (they lose their job due to it),
| the second a bizarre obsession but the degree of
| functional impairment is significantly less. So the fact
| that we label one obsession "bizarre" and the other "non-
| bizarre" seems of little relevance
| photochemsyn wrote:
| People who reject in-group socio-economic norms and isolate
| themselves from their previous in-group may or may not be
| mentally ill. If they were in one of those cults that programs
| their members behaviors incessantly, then it's entirely
| plausible that they became sane and escaped from a community of
| insane people.
|
| For example, I've met several people who reported the set of
| symptoms and behaviors you describe - but in their case, 'the
| game' involved the fact they came from a wealthy extended
| family whose entire existence revolved around hanging onto
| their pool of capital and ensuring some rogue family member
| didn't gain control of the capital, which funded all their
| connected lives (including this guy, who was able to travel the
| country and go to music shows solely because of his family-
| linked trust fund). The game they all played was keeping the
| family members that controlled the capital happy, rather than
| going out into the world and finding jobs, making their own
| money, and being self-sufficient.
|
| There's just not enough information in your post to evaluate
| whether the example was escaping from a cult or being
| indoctrinated into another cult, who is sane and who is crazy,
| etc.
| suzzer99 wrote:
| This isn't one of those cases. She had a career and tons of
| friends and now she's shunned everything. Her family lives in
| another state and had zero influence on her life.
|
| But we can't do anything because she still knows how to take
| care of herself and isn't a danger to herself or others. So
| it's just sad.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > I've lost one of my best friends to what I think is
| schizophrenia. We don't know because she's cut off all contact
| with friends and family and refuses to see a doctor. It's
| definitely psychosis.
|
| Schizophrenia is not defined strictly enough that it's possible
| for you to be right or wrong when you say your friend has it.
|
| Here's a discussion of the change in diagnostic criteria from
| DSM-IV to DSM-V, which has the side effect of describing what
| the criteria formerly were and now are:
| https://psychcentral.com/schizophrenia/dsm-5-changes-schizop...
|
| Has your friend seen
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(1997_film) ?
| suzzer99 wrote:
| Yes, I agree with that. I'm just guessing because she's super
| paranoid of doctors. One of the downsides of being in and
| around the wellness community for decades.
|
| I don't know if she's seen The Game, but I do know that she's
| always had a deep insecurity about being the naive one in the
| room, being the one not in on the joke. It seems like this
| thing plays on your worst fears and brings them to life.
| roarcher wrote:
| > whenever I see wellness healers and the like extolling the
| virtues of psilocybin, I want to point out that there could be
| a downside
|
| Anecdotally, I had a friend once who was very into psilocybin
| for its mind-expanding properties. He certainly thought he was
| enlightened and loved to brag about the great understanding
| he'd gained from his trips, but he was one of the more selfish
| and un-curious people I've ever known. It seems to me that
| these drugs create a feeling of having accessed great
| knowledge, but the "knowledge" is just whatever nonsense your
| brain conjures up on the fly, like a dream world that makes
| sense while you're asleep but whose logic falls apart the
| moment you wake up.
| 1propionyl wrote:
| As someone who _has_ gotten a lot out of psychedelics
| therapeutically, you are correct. Psychedelics do not in of
| themselves grant any insight or wisdom beyond perhaps raw
| experiential evidence that our senses are fallible and our
| perception of the world is an artifact of cognition.
|
| Past that, psychedelics are (kaleidoscopic, funhouse)
| _mirrors_. In the hands of a curious and humble person they
| can (in addition to being a lot of fun shared with like-
| minded others) be valuable therapeutic tools for approaching
| firmly rooted hangups, attitudes, etc. In the hands of
| someone like your friend, you get what you observed.
|
| Both are commonly occurring patterns, and if you know a
| person's character even a little well you can usually predict
| how they'll engage with and come out of the experience.
|
| To quote Shulgin,
|
| > The most compelling insight of that day was that this
| awesome recall had been brought about by a fraction of a gram
| of a white solid, but that in no way whatsoever could it be
| argued that these memories had been contained within the
| white solid. Everything I had recognized came from the depths
| of my memory and my psyche.
| roarcher wrote:
| That tracks with what I've heard about people getting
| genuine therapeutic benefits from it, like with PTSD.
| Thanks.
| suzzer99 wrote:
| Yeah the main great insight I got out of doing that stuff was
| to see reality from a different perspective for a while. Kind
| of like travelling and realizing that things you take for
| granted aren't the same in every culture.
|
| But I never felt like I was getting at some deeper meaning,
| and it wasn't something I wanted to keep doing throughout my
| life.
| Throwaway42754 wrote:
| I have schizoaffective disorder, induced by a bad trip from
| marijuana. It was like the 3rd time I had tried weed, and I
| naively took too much.
|
| For me psychosis feels like pattern matching going on extreme
| overdrive, while at the same time memory goes to shit. It's truly
| an awful illness, and what's worse is that the current medical
| treatments are bad. I've been fortunate enough where I can get by
| on a low dose olanzapine, but for many people they simply don't
| work at all.
|
| Even though I'm doing well enough to function normally and hold
| down a good, well paying job, it's impossible to find a partner.
| If I were to have kids, I would have to go through one of the
| embryo prescreening services. I am strongly in support of these
| screening services - the disease is truly horrible.
|
| There has been little progress on treatments for schizophrenia,
| the mechanism of action of these drugs has remained the same for
| decades. The side effects are almost as bad as the disease, which
| is why so many schizophrenic stop taking them. The only novel
| medication recently released is Cobenfy, which I have not tried
| yet.
|
| Personally I am holding out hope that schizophrenia has some
| basis as an autoimmune disease. There was a cancer patient who
| had a bone marrow transplant and ended up being cured:
| https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/opinion/sunday/schizophre...
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| I have family with that.
|
| The most striking thing, is the _absolute certainty_ of the
| thinking. They feel as if their thinking is crystal-clear, and
| that they are the only one that "sees the patterns."
|
| Currently, they're doing well. I know of others, that are not
| so fortunate.
|
| It seems that pot is about the _worst_ thing that a
| schizoaffective /schizophrenic person can use. They are better
| off chewing tabs of acid. I've not used it in about 45 years,
| and I've heard that today's pot is a heck of a lot stronger
| than what I remember.
| pfannkuchen wrote:
| Can I ask how you are sure they haven't had some novel
| insight that you just don't currently understand? Like maybe
| they are bad at explaining but whatever pattern they noticed
| is valid?
|
| I'm not defending them as I don't know any details, I'm just
| curious how you came to be certain about your assessment.
| Avicebron wrote:
| I wonder about this as well...like maybe there's some
| comfort in automatically "diagnosing" someone when they
| might see patterns or think in ways that challenge your
| priors..
|
| EDIT: Imagine being powerful and wealthy and assured in
| your position in the Catholic Church and someone comes
| along and questions geocentricity and says you're wrong.
| It's a pretty easy leap to huffily say well, they are
| "mentally ill, crazy, delusional, paranoid"
| throw18376 wrote:
| all kinds of authoritarian regimes and movements
| certainly do this.
|
| that said... you just have to have a conversation with
| someone experiencing psychosis. it's a totally altered
| state of consciousness, they are sensing and
| understanding the world in a radically different way.
| it's never just an otherwise normal person with a
| nonconformist belief.
| marcher wrote:
| I can't speak for the above person, but what the OP of this
| comment thread said also tracks with my own experience of
| schizoaffective disorder: when I'm psychotic, the pattern
| matching part of my brain goes into overdrive and not only
| does my brain erroneously fill in the blanks in sensory
| input (causing hallucinations), it does the same thing on
| an abstract or logical level with ideas and people. It's
| easy to fall into the trap of paranoid delusion when you
| feel like you're seeing connections between so many
| otherwise benign, disconnected things and events.
|
| I think what really gets me is that despite my constant
| vigilance and skepticism toward my own thoughts, I simply
| cannot talk myself out of how truly real those delusions
| feel when they happen. I can even acknowledge how absurd
| they are, even in the moment, but I can never shake the
| feeling that they're still very, very real. It's so
| maddening. The best I can do is to just not act on those
| thoughts.
|
| Maybe the above person's family is actually unearthing
| valid insights, but if they're prone to psychosis, in that
| state they'll be prone to finding connections,
| associations, patterns, and so on between things in a way
| that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It'll feel very real to
| them in the moment, but when they exit that state (if they
| do) they'll likely be on the same page as others in
| thinking those ideas were a stretch.
| ivape wrote:
| Do you take adhd medication by any chance?
| marcher wrote:
| I used to on and off in the past, but I found it made me
| more prone to mania, so I've since stopped. Why do you
| ask?
| ivape wrote:
| Stimulant induced psychosis is very common. One of the
| major side effects of those medications, just like their
| street cousin, is paranoia.
|
| I don't really believe in the dormant/latent argument
| because once you shift down to the underground (as in,
| entertain all possibilities, even the possibility that
| you share something in common with drug abusers) where
| people abuse drugs, there you can see just how common
| psychosis is.
|
| The drugs fuck people up. Interestingly, after many years
| of laying off the substance, many do find their way out
| of the psychosis.
|
| Many people are actually caught in this trap and don't
| tell anyone because they are struggling between reality
| and their delusions and trying to present a calm face to
| the world. It's often directly the result of the
| substance, but it's allowed to fester in the person due
| to all kinds of reasons ( _"hey, I'm really going to
| confess this is the crazy shit that feels believable to
| me?"_ ). By the time they are done wrestling with reality
| and unreality, often they are left extremely damaged from
| the ordeal psychologically.
| marcher wrote:
| I can't say I've experienced psychosis due to stimulant
| use personally, but I see what you mean. For me it's
| maybe brought on instances of hypomania a few times, but
| I get how it could trigger issues in others, especially
| in high doses.
|
| My instances of psychosis outside of depression/mania
| tend to be triggered by stress. I don't use drugs or take
| any stimulant medications, but they still just happen
| sometimes. It sucks. I'm thankfully not in an active
| episode at the moment, but I do suffer on a daily basis
| from the "negative" symptoms of schizoaffective disorder
| (i.e., the symptoms that take away function, like
| anhedonia, avolition, alogia, etc).
| accidentallfact wrote:
| This is how we got all the "jews" intellectuals and other
| people who fought the evil fascists, angkor, and so on,
| who were "murdering intelligent people".
| kridsdale3 wrote:
| My brother has schizophrenia. He has never met or
| interacted with any jewish people, and lives in a part of
| the world where they have no influence. He still fell
| entirely for online antisemitism and will text me insane
| messages about the typical theories.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| I'm not certain, but, in the case of my family member,
| their "certainty" is that everyone is conspiring to kill
| them. As I am one of the "conspirators," I can assure you
| that they are _dead wrong_.
|
| Also, in my days of yute, I was fairly profligate in the
| use of ... _mind-enhancing chemicals_ , shall we say. They
| basically gave me the same exact certainty and "insight."
|
| Once, I decided to write down the marvelous insight that I
| experienced, while tripping. I wrote a whole bunch of stuff
| in a notebook, and then read it, a couple of days later.
|
| It was pure gibberish. Made no sense at all.
|
| _[EDITED TO ADD] I should say that I had the luxury of
| having two distinct states of mind, including a "control
| state," in which to review the ramblings in the "enhanced"
| state. This is not a luxury that someone suffering from
| schizoaffective disorder has. They have no idea that their
| thinking is off._
| dwaltrip wrote:
| Talk to them for 2 minutes when they are having an episode.
| The effects are not subtle.
|
| It's an extremely debilitating condition.
| sandspar wrote:
| Schizophrenics do sometimes have novel insights. I've
| noticed that schizophrenics tend to be extremely talented
| at coming up with deeply cutting insults. Like, insults
| that will change how you see yourself forever. Something
| about high pattern recognition. Plus an ability to mentally
| "go there", to countenance dark things that other people
| willfully ignore.
| mandmandam wrote:
| > It seems that pot is about the worst thing that a
| schizoaffective/schizophrenic person can use.
|
| This isn't entirely true, and it's a dangerous misconception.
| High THC, low CBD cannabis wouldn't be recommended, but
| that's exactly what making cannabis illegal selects for.
|
| High CBD, low/zero THC cannabis, on the other hand, will
| probably be one of the paths to treatment if we ever get over
| our Reefer Madness and pharmaceutical obsession.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Eh, maybe. I can certainly say that I have "skin in the
| game." Someone very dear to me suffers from it, and it's
| difficult to hear theories from folks that don't have as
| much of a stake.
|
| That's one reason that I have compassion for parents of
| autistic children, that are vehemently anti-vax. I
| completely disagree with their stance, but I know what they
| are dealing with, and the very real fears and stresses that
| they are under.
| mandmandam wrote:
| > it's difficult to hear theories from folks that don't
| have as much of a stake.
|
| It's not a theory that CBD has anti-psychotic properties.
| It certainly _does_ , we just don't fully understand
| _why_.
|
| My theory is that it will someday be part of treatment
| plans; and as someone with skin in the game I would hope
| that you care enough to learn a bit more about it. The
| comparison to anti-vaxxers with autism in the family is
| not appropriate here.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> is not appropriate here_
|
| Actually, if the agenda of pushing CBD therapy applies,
| then it is. I know a number of folks that have autistic
| children, of various levels, from "nerd," to "wheelchair-
| bound." Their parents are usually absolute saints,
| regardless of their political views, or misinformation
| diets, and live in _constant_ pain; making daily
| sacrifices that I don 't think many folks here, can even
| comprehend.
|
| We were discussing a _serious_ mental illness, and, as
| someone that is a caregiver for someone like that, I
| think that my _experience_ is relevant; just as someone
| who believes that their child 's condition was caused by
| something that is really a red herring.
|
| The real villains, here, are the people that have
| secondary agendas (like legalizing drugs, or pushing
| political agendas), and look at people like us, with
| _very real_ pain, as nothing but pawns, to be used to
| push their agenda _(Think of the children!)_.
|
| CBD, like Blockchain, probably has some valid
| application, but, because it was so unexplored,
| scientifically, it is currently about 75% snake-oil.
| We'll find out what it's good for, over time. The same
| can be said for other drugs, like MDMA, microdose LSD, or
| psilocybin.
| aspenmayer wrote:
| > The real villains, here, are the people that have
| secondary agendas (like legalizing drugs, or pushing
| political agendas)
|
| The _natural_ state of affairs is silence, as plants don
| 't care about humans. The actual history of plant
| illegalization is inherently political, and inextricably
| racist in America due to Nixon.
| mandmandam wrote:
| I agree, except that the racism involved with prohibition
| goes right back to Day 1 with Harry Anslinger [0].
|
| 0 - https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=harry+anslinger+raci
| sm&atb=...
| aspenmayer wrote:
| I agree, except that isn't how you cite sources. What's
| the point of that? I know how to search, thanks. I will
| treat every instance of this kind of "let me Google that
| for you" whether it has Google or not as a native ad and
| will flag. Please cite a source, or don't, but either
| way, stop shilling.
|
| Thanks.
| mandmandam wrote:
| > that isn't how you cite sources
|
| And this isn't an academic paper. If you want to learn
| about Anslinger, so you don't make false claims, my link
| is a perfectly cromulent starting point.
|
| > Please cite a source, or don't, but either way, stop
| shilling.
|
| Not sure you know what shilling means - I trust you can
| google it if you don't? If you do, what is it you believe
| I'm shilling?
| aspenmayer wrote:
| > Not sure you know what shilling means - I trust you can
| google it if you don't? If you do, what is it you believe
| I'm shilling?
|
| The search engine you mentioned is who benefits.
|
| We're both right, actually. I don't disagree with what
| you said, just the needless url you linked. I agree with
| what you said, but Nixon is also responsible for his
| racist words and recordings thereof. There were a lot of
| racists in history.
| mandmandam wrote:
| CBD _has_ an antipsychotic effect. There 's not really
| any debate on that in the scientific community, and I've
| already provided a link. That's not part of some sinister
| agenda to legalize cannabis, it's just stating facts to
| clear up the misinformation which at this point you are
| _willfully_ repeating.
|
| > The real villains, here, are the people that have
| secondary agendas (like legalizing drugs, or pushing
| political agendas), and look at people like us, with very
| real pain, as nothing but pawns, to be used to push their
| agenda
|
| Your assumption that I don't also have personal
| experience, and a stake, and real pain with this issue is
| based on what exactly? Did I miss the part where you
| asked me about my own experience, or does _your_ personal
| experience trump my own for some reason?
|
| I do, in fact, have all three. That has no bearing
| whatsoever on the basic fact that CBD _has_ confirmed
| anti-psychotic potential with particular regard to
| schizophrenia, as was already linked above.
|
| Finally, there's no secret agenda here - cannabis
| _should_ be legalized. It 's just basic common sense and
| decency, for all the reasons I've already stated and
| more. Prohibition doesn't work and we have decades of
| data proving that beyond any doubt.
|
| Have rates of psychosis shot up in states where cannabis
| was legalized? No, according to a massive analysis of
| 63,680,589 beneficiaries followed for 2,015,189,706
| person-months [0]. So please, stop with the reefer
| madness. I'm sorry about your family member but if you
| want to help people you could really try looking at the
| data.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> I do, in fact, have all three._
|
| I don't believe you. If you had, you would have led with
| it, just like I did. I value people that have skin in the
| game. Jenny McCarthy is a big fat pain in the ass, but
| she really does have an autistic kid, is a good mother,
| and has formed her worldview around that.
|
| _> So please, stop with the reefer madness._
|
| WTF? I've never believed that crap in my life.
| Interesting that it's important to you, that I support
| that twisted worldview. You've mentioned it a couple of
| times, so it seems to be something that you're fixated
| on.
|
| I do, however, have _considerable_ experience with the
| fallout from drug use. I have spent my entire adult life,
| helping folks out, who have had their lives shattered by
| it. There are a small percentage of the population that
| can 't handle drugs, and need help to recover from it. I
| do my best to help them out, and don't insist that the
| vast majority of the population change their worldview to
| fit mine.
|
| Personally, I think that pot should be legal everywhere,
| including at the federal level (which will basically kill
| all the "mom and pop" operations out there, so be careful
| what you pray for). I don't use it, and don't care,
| myself. That doesn't make me an enemy.
|
| I'd gently suggest that a professional forum, read by
| many of the most influential people in tech, might not be
| the best place to be a crusader for drug use.
| mandmandam wrote:
| > I don't believe you. If you had, you would have led
| with it, just like I did.
|
| You really can't imagine someone arguing from scientific
| research over their own personal experience?
|
| > Jenny McCarthy is a big fat pain in the ass
|
| Again with the autism/vaccines comparison, again missing
| the point, again doing yourself and your family member a
| disservice.
|
| > WTF? I've never believed that crap in my life.
|
| You keep repeating the claim that there's no therapeutic
| value to cannabis. That's madness, my friend, by the very
| literal definition of ignoring reality.
|
| > don't insist that the vast majority of the population
| change their worldview to fit mine.
|
| That's exactly what you're doing though? You're insisting
| that people ignore the research which I've linked
| multiple times now, and adopt your worldview which is
| based on vague assertions and claims; and you insist that
| anyone would argue the same way as you're doing when
| that's neither true or sensible.
|
| > Personally, I think that pot should be legal
| everywhere, including at the federal level (which will
| basically kill all the "mom and pop" operations out
| there, so be careful what you pray for).
|
| Huh? I can't tell if you're insinuating I'm a drug dealer
| or what your point is here. I'm certainly not the one who
| made this debate about whether cannabis should be legal
| or not; I just pointed out that prohibition made it much
| more dangerous to consume.
|
| > I'd gently suggest that a professional forum, read by
| many of the most influential people in tech, might not be
| the best place to be a crusader for drug use.
|
| As has been pointed out by people above, you're the one
| on the crusade here. My point, which I've repeated many
| times now, is that CBD has shown potential to help people
| vulnerable to psychosis and schizophrenia. I don't know
| why that triggers you so hard, or why you can't engage
| with the research which shows that very clearly, but I
| wish you the best all the same.
| talentedcoin wrote:
| The one paper you keep shopping around here does indeed
| affirm that CBD may have some neuroprotective properties.
| That doesn't change the fact that for the vast majority
| of people susceptible to schizophrenia or psychosis, that
| cannabis (always a mixture of THC and CBD in its natural
| state) is dangerous for them and can trigger mental
| issues. You can feel superior or more intelligent than
| others as much as you like, but that will not change this
| fact. You are getting a negative reaction from people who
| know this because we have been negatively affected by it,
| either ourselves or people we know. If you yourself
| "engage with the research" beyond your tunnel vision, you
| will see that the link between cannabis and mental issues
| is pretty well established by this point. In fact,
| refusal to acknowledge downsides of cannabis use is one
| of the hallmarks of cannabis use disorder. Pluck the beam
| out of your own eye.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| Legal competition had lead to much higher concentrations of
| THC than was normal in the bad old days of smoking Mexican
| brick weed, not to mention the pure accessibility of buying
| 96% THC vapes wherever you go in unlimited amounts as
| opposed to being happy you could get your hands on an
| ounce.
| talentedcoin wrote:
| "Dangerous misconception"? Get out of here with that.
| Cannabis is dangerous for schizoaffective people. Why are
| people that smoke pot so tiresome about this? Just accept
| that it's not good for everyone!
| mandmandam wrote:
| > "Dangerous misconception"? Get out of here with that.
|
| I will not.
|
| The demonization of cannabis has led directly to it
| becoming high THC and low CBD, as I said. It also has
| lead to it often being tainted with all manner of
| adulterants, from ketamine to glass beads to plaster dust
| to worse.
|
| > Cannabis is dangerous for schizoaffective people.
|
| CBD is a leading target of research for it's anti-
| psychotic properties; and if you don't know this it's a
| complete mystery to me why you feel entitled to weigh in.
|
| And it's not even the only compound in cannabis that is
| being investigated; there are others with anti-psychotic
| and synergistic potential.
|
| > Why are people that smoke pot so tiresome about this?
|
| What if what I'm saying might be true, and you're dead
| wrong to accuse anyone who disagrees of being a 'tiresome
| stoner'?
|
| ... Because, in fact, it may well be [0].
|
| > Just accept that it's not good for everyone!
|
| If it's not for you, that's fine; but the wilful
| ignorance around cannabis over decades has caused far,
| far more harm than cannabis ever has.
|
| Can you accept that it will may well have a role in
| treating "psychosis, in general and schizophrenia, in
| particular" [0]?
|
| 0 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22716160/
| mikeweiss wrote:
| "High CBD will probably be one of the paths to treatment"
|
| On what exactly are you basing that off of? Vibes?
| dakom wrote:
| I wouldn't dismiss personal anecdotes any more than I'd
| dismiss someone claiming they saw something in a
| reputable journal but can't remember the citation.
|
| In other words, yeah, don't just believe it at face
| value- but if you have good reason to trust the source,
| it's worth considering and checking into further.
|
| In this case it's not just one individual but many people
| saying that THC and CBD are almost opposites if
| eachother, for example in how they affect anxiety.
|
| Definitely worth proper research imho, could lead to
| medication that has more of the pros and less of the cons
| mandmandam wrote:
| Not trying to be glib, but this is a genuine lmgtfy
| moment.
|
| https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=cbd+antipsychotic&atb=v3
| 40-...
| mikeweiss wrote:
| No it's not. The poster should have referenced some
| sources. CBD has been touted as a miracle drug for over a
| decade now and it seems mostly like a fad at this point.
| But also it's not well regulated so it's easy for
| unscrupulous companies and individuals to profit from
| misleading marketing around it.
| mandmandam wrote:
| > The poster should have referenced some sources.
|
| Who, me? ... Why? It's very well known and established
| that CBD has antipsychotic properties.
|
| And if you don't know, that and don't bring any evidence
| against it, then why claim otherwise before like, doing a
| simple search to check your priors?
|
| In any case, I've provided multiple citations elsewhere
| in this thread, and a whole bunch more come up on the
| linked search results. This isn't hidden knowledge or
| anything.
|
| > CBD has been touted as a miracle drug for over a decade
| now
|
| That's a separate issue.
|
| > it seems mostly like a fad at this point
|
| If you click the link you can see that isn't true.
|
| > also it's not well regulated so it's easy for
| unscrupulous companies and individuals to profit from
| misleading marketing around it.
|
| That's a separate issue.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| >It seems that pot is about the worst thing that a
| schizoaffective/schizophrenic person can use. They are better
| off chewing tabs of acid.
|
| from the guys I knew who chewed the tabs of acid and had
| evident schizophrenic problems, I don't think so.
| accidentallfact wrote:
| Exactly. This well matches my hypothesis about how the brain
| works.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44347211
| ashoeafoot wrote:
| It also makes you near unemployable as stress triggers the
| paranoia/psychosis.
| sandspar wrote:
| Not for everyone. Many schizophrenics find their work calming
| and grounding.
| wycy wrote:
| Why do you need to do embryo pre-screening for something that's
| not genetic? Or do you think it still _is_ genetic despite also
| thinking you know the specific trigger in your case?
|
| Edit: are you thinking it's genetic, but exacerbated by weed?
| jjallen wrote:
| Everything is at least partially genetic.
|
| We have a friend whose sister has it and she went to genetics
| counselors before having kids.
|
| They told her that because her sister has it that her kids
| had a 20% likelihood of developing it. Obviously 20% is way
| higher than normal.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Be sure you understand what this means. 20% higher chance
| (of a 1% baseline) is vastly different from a 20% chance.
| jajko wrote:
| I think its pretty clear which case is being discussed.
| 20% increase in chance is not something to generally
| worry about.
| jjallen wrote:
| This is through the grapevine. I thought they said 20%
| likelihood, not 20% higher likelihood. But this isn't me
| and I don't know the numbers well.
|
| I do know that this woman chose to not use her own eggs
| for their child. And you would think that going from
| 1-1.2% would not make you do that. Perhaps there is
| another variable involved that I am unaware of. Her
| sister developed it after their parents divorce in her
| 30s fwiw.
| lazyasciiart wrote:
| That is much, much higher than I am aware of - and my
| mother's sister has schizophrenia so I did look this up a
| while ago. And the outcome so far is 0 cases in 25 nieces
| and nephews, all of us in our mid twenties or older.
| Throwaway42754 wrote:
| From my understanding of the science, weed can trigger
| schizophrenia in the genetically predisposed. Schizophrenia
| can be triggered by other environmental factors, so the
| embryo screening makes sense to lower the risk of the child
| getting it as well.
| robocat wrote:
| > I am holding out hope that schizophrenia has some basis as an
| autoimmune disease
|
| From article: Increasingly, researchers
| consider schizophrenia to be a "meta-syndrome," encompassing
| multiple symptom dimensions/clusters and arising from
| intersections of diverse underlying mechanisms
|
| So while autoimmune might be the cause for some people, other
| people have other causes?
|
| As humans we look for a simple A therefore B story. Even then
| most people in my experience are either (a) poor at spotting
| cause and effect or (b) go into denial e.g. many political
| arguments
|
| > kids, I would have to go through one of the embryo
| prescreening services
|
| Have to? Do you mean you would want to? Or is there some
| compulsory force where you are?
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| I have schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type as well. And man
| when I have anything with THC in it I'm a basket case. Worst
| psychosis in my life.
|
| He might be interested in looking up THC, glutamate and
| schizoaffective disorder. Here's a good start.
|
| https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-019-0374-8
| petra wrote:
| Interesting link, thank you!.
|
| One other possible immune system link is the relationahip
| between the parasite toximoplasis gondii to schizophrenia.
|
| If I'm not mistaken that's the paper about that:
|
| https://dbc.wroc.pl/Content/39095/PDF/1031.pdf
| andoando wrote:
| Interesting, I had some really bad experiences with weed and
| the pattern matching thing strikes out to me as on these trips
| I experienced a ton of visual geomtric shapes and came to
| believe our intelligence is based on pattern recognition and
| spent 5 years, not to much avail, trying thinking about them.
| damion6 wrote:
| Schizophrenia is genetic. So you're born with it. This makes zero
| sense. Maybe you mean shizo-effective which usually has to do
| with traumas.
| 11217mackem wrote:
| Nobody is born with schizophrenia.
| thephyber wrote:
| Parent most likely meant you are born with the predisposition
| for it to present when it usually does.
| 11217mackem wrote:
| ~10%
| 11217mackem wrote:
| I also happened to have a schizophrenic father. So I looked
| into this one a little bit :D
| timewizard wrote:
| Induced schizophrenia is well known. Your brain is not a
| machine. It's several independent chunks of meat that were
| assembled in situ. There are more failure modes than
| operational modes.
| sakoht wrote:
| The odd thing is that among identical twins when one has it the
| other has it roughly 50% of the time. Which suggests that
| having the generic basis still requires something external, and
| it is common but not too common.
| K0balt wrote:
| Random layperson musing:
|
| I wonder if schizophrenia (or perhaps psychosis) could be in some
| way analogous to the LLM temperature function becoming
| disregulated?
|
| I mean, what is the extreme opposite of psychosis? If it is
| matter of degree, which it seems to be, then there is probably a
| tuning mechanism. Perhaps too little and you fail to account for
| factors that might not be apparent but might be guessed or
| inferred, too much, and too much seems plausible.
|
| If so it would be possible to have a great deal of different
| "causes" given the tight and complex coupling of biological
| mechanisms.
| jackcosgrove wrote:
| There was a theory that autism and schizophrenia were opposite
| ends of a spectrum, but it's fallen into disfavor. The theory
| went that autism produces mechanical, rigid thought patterns
| while schizophrenia takes free association too far.
|
| I think it is possible to be diagnosed with both schizophrenia
| and autism which is why the theory is not considered anymore.
| K0balt wrote:
| Interesting. I wouldn't have intuited autism as being on the
| opposing end of psychosis, really, at least not based on my
| experience of both in my family.
| bottom999mottob wrote:
| I think your LLM temperature analogy is interesting in this
| deprecated dichotomy between autism and schizophrenia.
|
| One Youtuber Jreg used a breadth-first search
| (schizophrenia) vs depth-first search (autism) analogy when
| comparing the the two, but I think your temperature analogy
| is more apt. Higher temperature results in more
| disorganized thoughts like schizophrenia. And if you buy
| into the idea that the root of most schizophrenia is
| thought disorders, then this analogy implies that dialing
| up temperature corresponds to more signs of psychosis
| through speech
|
| My experience with many friends on the autism spectrum is
| that their speech tends to be more scripted, but I
| certainly don't think autism and psychosis are mutually
| exclusive.
| accidentallfact wrote:
| They are. Autism is normal, and neurotypicality is simply the
| socially acceptable/expected level of insanity.
|
| I know I have unconventional beliefs, but the reason is the
| opposite of what people describe here. There are no patterns
| and commonly accepted beliefs seem unjustified, and crazy. So
| I need to find my own answers, but it's difficult. I think
| that people used to be more like this until recently, and
| people messed it up because iron is toxic, and heavy metals
| belong in the brain. I become more and more like this as I
| keep taking them, and it's better. I admit my IQ has probably
| dropped, but it's better this way.
| subpixel wrote:
| Schizophrenia can coexist with extreme levels of intelligence and
| lucidity.
|
| A schizophrenic member of my family argued in divorce court that
| her husband, a leading physician at one of the most famous
| medical institutions in the world, was secretly involved in
| outrageous nefarious activities.
|
| The stories were all fiction but she was so convincing that the
| judge awarded her a ruling in the divorce that ruined her husband
| financially and took an emotional toll.
| blueprint wrote:
| I wouldn't exactly call it intelligent to lie to a court ;)
| Perhaps another descriptor would be more precise? For that
| matter, can one be "truly lucid" if one lies in such a manner?
| barrenko wrote:
| Lucidity is a feeling let's say. And the stuff you feel it
| "about" does necessarily mean that the stuff is legit.
|
| Or to quote Moby Dick ~ "Human madness is oftentimes a
| cunning and most feline thing. When you think it fled, it may
| have but become transfigured into some still subtler form..."
| sethammons wrote:
| People lie in court all day every day. If you think everyone
| is being honest, you are delusional and must not be truly
| lucid.
|
| Note, I don't question your lucidity. But hope it shows the
| fallacy of your logic train.
| ryanjshaw wrote:
| People with schizophrenia are often not lying, they really
| believe the bizarre things they say. How do _you_ know what
| your brain is telling you is true?
| renewiltord wrote:
| An alternative explanation is that the judge was stupid.
| __turbobrew__ wrote:
| Terry Davis was a genius despite having schizophrenia.
| alganet wrote:
| Completely anectodal:
|
| Right after the time I was diagnosed (~36), I started to become
| weirdly good at some stuff.
|
| Music, for example. I've been playing for almost two decades and
| couldn't progress after a certain level. This changed almost
| overnight, and I started to learn new instruments very quickly
| (now I play guitar, bass, drums and piano). I'm not a genius at
| them, it's not what I'm trying to say. It's just that the pace at
| which I learn is very different from when I was younger, I can do
| things I never imagined being able to do.
|
| Somehow, I also acquired some ambidextry. This might be due to
| learning the instruments. I now can write with both hands (not at
| the same time, dominant hand is still faster and more acurate). I
| also developed a second, completely different handwriting (now I
| have two "fonts" I can use naturally).
|
| I got worse at dealing with people. Everyone seems to be in a
| haze from my point of view, and it discourages any kind of
| meaningful relationship. I can pretend though.
|
| I am highly skeptical of the idea that any genetic component is
| involved in all of this (my father was ambidextrous though, but
| he acquired it in childhood), it seems purely psychological. I am
| also skeptical about the stereotypical triggers people often
| associate schizophrenia to.
|
| Last year I was reading about Havana Syndrome. That was the thing
| that most resonated with the kinds of psychotic events I had.
| Weird sounds and voices that seem to come from nowhere,
| dizziness, balance problems, insomnia, headaches. By the time I
| got to a doctor, these effects were not there anymore (they last
| a very short time, at least for me). I was diagnosed by
| describing them to the psychiatrist. Since the first episode, it
| has happened again a handful of times. I have learned since that
| Havana syndrome is not a thing anymore, but there are no official
| explanations other than "it's likely to be psychogenic". I also
| wouldn't qualify for it (apparently, only diplomats and spies had
| it).
| jongjong wrote:
| Could be age related. I could never play a musical instrument
| until my mid thirties. Nobody in my family could. My wife found
| a Ukulele which was left on the side of the road and which was
| in good condition and took it home. I started playing just
| randomly tugging strings to understand the sounds and I kept
| doing that maybe 10 to 30 mins a day for about 2 months and the
| tunes became less and less random and now I can improvise full
| 1 to 2 minute melodies on the spot with multiple strings.
|
| I don't need to plan the melody ahead of time I just pick a few
| notes that go well together then I pick some starting notes and
| I just intuitively know how to join them together into a full
| piece. It's like when I play some notes, my fingers themselves
| resist certain bad notes and whatever note I end up choosing
| (high pitch or low pitch) seems to work out every time.
| alganet wrote:
| I had a guitar since I was 16, and never gave up trying to
| learn. I reached a plateau very quickly (knew some chords,
| simple songs), and could never go past it. I then spent
| almost 20 years in that plateau.
|
| Then, suddenly, it all started to click. I was reharmonizing,
| writing my own lines, improvising, soloing. It was uncanny. I
| moved to other instruments at similar speed, stuff I never
| played before. It became so easy.
|
| I heard many times that once you age, you lose some ability
| to learn music. What made this experience so jarring was that
| I experienced the exact opposite.
|
| Maybe this thing that you have to start young is all bullshit
| (probably what's going on here), and before I had some kind
| of block. I can't explain what that block was though.
| pfannkuchen wrote:
| Did the diagnosis perhaps relax some defensive structure in
| your mind which freed up an ability to tolerate the
| discomfort of actually identifying what you need to
| improve?
| alganet wrote:
| I don't know. It seems too vague of a description.
|
| On the guitar, I did some identifying and learning.
|
| On drums though, I just sat there and in a matter of
| months I was able to play to a lot of songs. I was doing
| polyrhythms, for example, before I knew what polyrhythms
| were.
|
| Possibly, this is nothing extraordinary and fits the
| overall learning curve for the general population (I'm
| assuming lots of people do polyrhythms without knowing
| them). Which means that before the first episode, I was
| below that general curve of learning music (slower than
| everyone else would learn), then something changed right
| after such episode.
|
| Since I'm on HN, let's use a computer analogy: I would
| describe it as upgrading a PC to new hardware, things
| felt smoother. The world of music (and arts in general)
| felt higher resolution, faster, more responsive to my
| actions.
| Nevermark wrote:
| > I am highly skeptical of the idea that any genetic component
|
| Something can still be (weakly or strongly) genetic, but not
| inherited in any direct way. I.e. due to a particular mix of
| genes.
| alganet wrote:
| The kinds of genetic claims people usually make about
| schizophrenia are of the hereditary kind (including the post
| article), not random mutations.
|
| I attribute this to how the illness is researched: finding a
| genetic factor would be a major breakthrough, so lots of
| people do studies on that, and eventually force their way
| into a discovery that represents a narrow subset of the
| illness but ultimately fails to explain it. It's all over the
| place.
|
| This makes me extra skeptic regarding the validity of some of
| these studies.
| sandspar wrote:
| If you scan Wikipedia's "Famous people with schizophrenia"
| article, as in people whose talent was so exceptional that they
| could succeed despite their disadvantages, most of the people
| on the list are musicians.
| daft_pink wrote:
| After reading this article, I'm really curious how you would
| model all kinds of other reproduction reducing behaviors that
| have become popular in recent years and how they many generations
| it will take them to be squeezed out of our culture. Like say
| taking care of a pet instead of having a kid in Korea.
| sandspar wrote:
| One plausible explanation is that birth and childhood have
| become much less dangerous. Before 1900, children with poor
| genes died; since 1900, children with poor genes survive and
| have children of their own.
| rixed wrote:
| My understanding of high child mortality rates in the past is
| that it has little to do with genetics, and more to do with
| infectious diseases and poor hygiene.
| zingababba wrote:
| Julian Jaynes' theory is always interesting to think about. I
| self-diagnosed myself as schizophrenic in my late teens and I
| still stand by my diagnosis 20 years later. I do believe it is a
| spectrum though and the degree to which one is schizophrenic is
| not static, and I don't think it's even necessarily a bad thing.
| anonymars wrote:
| I assume you mean the bicameral mind / consciousness?
| absurdo wrote:
| As expected a lot of the comments here are anecdotes. I'm
| assuming there exists a class of highly technical articles that
| get posted regularly that incite ancillary discussion, but no
| real contribution involving the article.
|
| For me, I don't like that this is about a mathematical model. I
| don't want a mathematical model. I like the theory, and I think
| it's interesting. I don't need further digressions into a model.
| I want to see the real thing. Prove it, replicate it, codify it.
| bettercallsalad wrote:
| As someone who is currently dating someone with history of
| psychosis, I have vested interest.
|
| 90% of the time she is truly the most amazing, compassionate,
| full of life and thoughtful person one can ever meet. Then there
| are times when it's truly awful. She can barely sleep at all,
| leaves house without telling anyone seemingly thinking the
| presence of third person around. And she strongly feels others
| around are judging her hard, giving non verbal communication.
| It's truly awful.
|
| I didn't know to the full extent her symptoms when we started
| dating. But one thing that was clear was she could barely sleep
| at night. Or sleep too long. There was no "normal sleep cycle".
|
| Over the time, some triggers are noticeable. Places with crowds,
| bright lighting, or sometimes stress at work. Aripaprazole so far
| seems to be holding up, no one knows for how long. I hear meds
| become resistant at some point. I don't know what future holds.
| Kids are probably not an option. Although she very much wants it.
| Natsu wrote:
| Did you ever check for sleep apnea? The tests for it can be
| done at home now if anxiety would otherwise be a concern.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| I have schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, and I just wanted
| to acknowledge and thank you for staying with your partner.
| I've never been able to get someone to stay through my illness
| with me through my life. But that's probably because I am man.
|
| I was on so many meds. I can't even count them. Now I'm not on
| any, and I consider myself essentially cured after living with
| it for 35 years.
|
| If she has triggers, that means she does not have a disease ,
| it means she's a different person that sensitive to different
| things. If someone who carries the celiac risk genetics, never
| eats wheat they never get celiac disease. If your partner was
| never exposed to triggers, you would never know she had a mood
| disorder. Do you see what I mean?
| bettercallsalad wrote:
| Thank you for sharing your journey! Most difficult part of
| this relationship has been to have her not worry about me
| leaving her because of her symptoms. Communication is the
| key. The only thing that can get tiring is when sleep
| schedules are so messy, and I have to go to work in the
| morning.
|
| If you don't mind sharing, what was your progression towards
| being cured? Did you do anything different lifestyle wise? I
| have consulted many psychiatrists but the general consensus
| seems to be that the management is the only option.
|
| I am also somewhat concerned about the genetic component of
| it. The general feedback I received from pedestrians is most
| meds are not safe during pregnancy and postpartum episodes
| are very likely. And the risk of passing down is also about
| 10-20%. Her dad's sister also seemingly had it.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| First, I'm sorry if there's any typos I am doing speech to
| text on my iPhone writing this and it's early in the
| morning.
|
| There are many psychiatrist that have different viewpoints,
| for example I've talked to many who see purines as a
| problem and then you have the whole keto/mitochondrial
| doctors. There are many psychiatrist that will never change
| their minds about mood disorders because why do they have
| to?
|
| I should add as well that there are so many things out of
| my control that are triggers that I still carry Klonopin
| with me just in case. It's the one thing that can stop my
| psychosis in a heartbeat. I think the glutamate GABA
| balance is extremely important and unlooked with a lot of
| mental illnesses. Glutamate are a big trigger for my
| psychosis.
|
| To me, and I think this can be true for anyone, it's all
| about connecting the dots between the triggers and not only
| mood symptoms, but physical symptoms as well. But obtaining
| my genetics and also learning about genetics over a 10 year
| period helped me tremendously. I knew it was in my family
| because my mother, my brother and my nephew, including
| myself all had extremely similar experiences and also
| suicide attempts.
|
| The first thing is, I could not have done this if I did not
| stop my medication. I'm not recommending anyone stop their
| medication's but it's going to be really hard to find
| things that affect glutamate, dopamine and serotonin if
| you're taking these drugs at the same time. But being on
| the same drugs my mother was o 50 years ago did not seem
| logical to me. And then I started hearing stories about
| people recovering from mental illness, real stories. Then
| my nephew hung himself at 13 and that changed everything. I
| knew it was genetic so I knew that's the direction I had to
| go to investigate what was going on with my family.
|
| So I got to know my mother side of the family a bit better
| both genetically and from stories. It definitely came from
| my great great grandmother side and it turns out while we
| all thought that side of the family was Polish, they were
| actually from Finland.
|
| For myself, my gut was a big indicator and clue. I've had
| IBS-D really bad since I was a child. I managed on my own
| to find foods that were triggers, but it was not until I
| discovered I was a FUT-2 non-secretor that thing is really
| changed. Only 20% of Europeans carry this gene so I knew it
| was important
|
| https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9301175/
|
| Eating a diet heavy in Fucose (not fructose!) fixed my gut.
| Seaweed, mushrooms, etc.
|
| This was not a cause of my schizoaffective disorder, but it
| definitely was a trigger. When my gut was bad, I was bad.
| But there were a lot of times when my gut was good and I
| was bad as well. So I kept looking for triggers.
|
| Then there was the early heart attacks in my family and my
| hyperlipidemia. In my genetics, I saw that I had genes that
| were more like people who were the Inuit when it comes to
| poly unsaturated fatty acids. At this time, I was a
| vegetarian. With all the research about how omega-3 helps
| with heart disease I decided to eat more like an Inuit and
| what do you know, my cholesterol totally reversed. LDL down
| and HDL from 30 up to 54. Plus, I was feeling much more
| stable. Don't underestimate how omega-3 can control
| receptor function.
|
| Both my mother and I also had what is called multiple
| chemical sensitivity. I don't really like that name but
| that's what I'm left with. It's essentially a sensitivity
| to a lot of aldehydes. The story here is kind of long and
| complicated so I'm not gonna go too much into the genetic
| details but I'm just showing you another of several
| triggers that helped me find out what was going on. A lot
| of foods have aldehydes, aldehydes impact flavor of foods
| and food manufacturers add aldehydes to foods as well as
| add glutamate and purines to increase our taste but
| sensitivity to flavors.
|
| And then we could talk about air pollution. Another big
| trigger. My grandparents lived in Manhattan and every time
| we went back there I would feel worse. I even tried to work
| in Manhattan for a year and that did not end well.
|
| Alcohol is complicated. At the front end, it brings me
| really really big relief. But I could never drink too much
| because it gave me a really bad fatigue in the end. It
| turns out that the calcium ion channel blocking effects of
| alcohol are great, but the aldehydes alcohol creates just
| make me feel worse in the end.
|
| So I just started avoiding those foods and eating Whole
| Foods that are people in a cold climate would eat, and they
| went away a bunch of more of my triggers.
|
| And then there was heat. Heat is the number one trigger for
| me. And for some stupid reason, I moved to North Carolina.
| Since I ended up homeless because of this and living in a
| van, I was able to move to different climates to different
| places and also found not only the cold weather, but high
| altitude were triggers.
|
| see the problem with all this is my mother married an
| Italian man. So instead of eating a more Polish/Finnish
| diet we were eating in Italian diet having a carbohydrates
| and red meats and little fish. This was the worst diet for
| me.
|
| I do take some supplements and two supplements. I've been
| tested deficient in, and that helped me are zinc and B6.
| When I say these supplements help me, I mean they
| dramatically make me feel different when I'm am low I them
| and when I supplement with them. And magnesium is another
| one.
|
| So now I try to live like a Sami. I ate a lot of seafood,
| salmon, mackerel, oysters, mussels and wild game meets. I
| say low latitudes in cold climates. And I also avoid
| polluted cities.
|
| Now that's gonna sound depressing because I know that not
| everyone can do what I did, live in an van and move
| somewhere that fits them genetically. But that's the truth
| of the matter. In my humble opinion, they have the idea of
| mental illness all wrong. It is a disease more like an
| allergy than a mental illness. There is an environmental
| trigger that causes a reaction. And make no mistake I think
| for the majority of us, including myself, it is an immune
| disorder and not a nervous system disorder in a fundamental
| way. For example, I've had very low white blood cell
| counts, but also showed signs of lupus that they were
| always testing me for. They also kept testing me for HIV
| because of my symptoms in white blood cell counts.
|
| And then the doozy was when I had COVID-19. Both times I
| caught it I had the worst psychosis in my life. For some
| reason, no one finds this interesting not even my doctors.
|
| Edited to add
|
| I want to add this in a shorter post cause I can't believe
| I didn't bring it up.
|
| The first thing I would do was get all of her nutrition
| levels, tested, and ruled out as causes. There are several
| tests you can get without a prescription.
|
| The first important one is a hair mineral test. But getting
| a full iron panel, zinc, B6, homocysteine, B12, methyl
| malonic acid, serum amino acid test, and of course, a
| complete CBC with differential and metabolic panel. Keeping
| track of the last two were really important for me. I
| noticed my white blood cell count changed when I was in
| different locations. For example, my white blood cell count
| was consistently higher in North Carolina than it was when
| I was in Washington state.
|
| As an example, I had a friend who was on Prozac since she
| was 18 and she was now 48. I looked at her blood test and
| it was clear she had anemia. They did an iron panel and her
| serum ferritin was only three. It turned out they were
| treating her lifelong anemia with SNRI's and
| antipsychotics.
| barrenko wrote:
| Thank you so much for writing this.
|
| The thing about treating it all as some sort of an
| allergy makes sense for me since connecting some ideas
| from Gabor Mate about the immune system.
|
| And the covid triggering a phychosis like state rings
| true for me as well (not that I need to corroborate what
| you are saying, once you know you know). One of the worst
| trips I've had was "just" having covid during the summer.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| You're welcome.
|
| Yes, people underestimate how stress effects the immune
| system and why it is so hard for people to see this link
| even when they can become fatigued, depressed and
| irritable when they have a cold.
|
| They have investigated me for some sort of primary immune
| deficiency and found low T cells but they said they were
| "not low enough to cause problems".
|
| When I had COVID I was running around this small town
| hiding from people and taking pictures of the, texting
| them to my friend as evidence they were following me and
| spying on me, and picture of my van and how people were
| messing with it. They I thought she and her family were
| in on the conspiracy. She finally convinced me to take a
| klonopin and I came out of it enough to take some more
| and it was done. The next day I had a fever and COVID. So
| it was weird that both time sit preceded my physical
| illness.
|
| Sending love to you and your partner and hoping she can
| stay curious about why she is ill.
| johndevor wrote:
| I lost my brother to suicide in a similar situation.
| Thanks for writing this and I hope it helps others stuck
| on the med treadmill.
| Xmd5a wrote:
| >Most difficult part of this relationship has been to have
| her not worry about me leaving her because of her symptoms.
| Communication is the key.
|
| Every comment you're making in this thread confirms her
| fears and delusions. Whether or not she was right initially
| doesn't matter anymore since the situation has now been
| bootstrapped. If she can't quite tell in which way you're
| being dishonest, she has the certainty that she eventually
| will. And here you are, committing a violation of intimacy,
| taking strong advice from blind strangers to whom you are
| confiding the destiny of your relationship. You have just
| put on your shoulders as much, if not more, weight than you
| wanted to get rid of when you started commenting, and you
| will leak it through non-verbal communication, 100%.
| Looking at it a second time, it seems there is as much
| self-fulfilling prophecy in your behavior as in hers. As
| you complain about her paranoia behind her back, you are
| judging her hard and stockpiling the very weapons of
| silence she's complaining about.
|
| You're nonetheless as captive to the situation as she is:
| the idea of psychosis, even though it may well be correct,
| is what allows you to deflect her delusions before they are
| funneled back to her in the very terms she anticipated - it
| is also what binds you to her, her delusions, and your
| reaction which confirms them. You're not just commenting on
| your situation; you're calling for help.
|
| Your dilemma is that her psychosis allows you to define the
| problem and helps you enact your decision, but at the cost
| of painting you as an asshole when you look in the mirror.
| This is why you're getting so many replies; this is what
| makes these situations so interesting. Intuitively, every
| poster has understood this and given you justifications for
| dumping her or for accepting that you're an asshole. I hope
| to have given you the tools to see yourself as part of the
| problem and to consider breaking up as the ethical thing to
| do.
|
| I believe she can be fixed, though. This requires
| acknowledging and letting her know that no matter what you
| do, you're under the spell of her pre-traumatic stress
| disorder, and you're bound to confirm it. So why not stuff
| her mouth shut with your passion to prevent her witch's
| tongue from twisting disharmony into reality, and own her
| as a slave in retribution?
| achierius wrote:
| > If she has triggers, that means she does not have a disease
| , it means she's a different person that sensitive to
| different things
|
| This is not the medical consensus. Schizophrenia, along with
| many other mental disorders, are _well known_ to have a
| complex interplay with not only background genetic /chemical
| factors, but also the psychological conditions of the patient
| -- stressors like homelessness, drug use, and lack of sleep
| very much _can_ trigger psychotic episodes. Suggesting
| otherwise is to suggest that a sick person _not_ get care
| that they very well may need.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| > homelessness, drug use, and lack of sleep very much can
| trigger psychotic episodes.
|
| Yes, I don't understand your disagreement, that's the point
| I was making. That for some of us these things will cause
| schizophrenia for others. Maybe some other illness like
| lupus. The problem isn't the gene. The problem is the
| environment. If you're not homeless, don't use drugs and
| get good sleep And you don't get schizophrenia, an we say
| schizophrenia is a disease? Or is it a symptom of
| environment that is not fitting for the individual?
|
| And in fact, schizophrenia is not a disease, it's
| classified as a disorder.
| lazyasciiart wrote:
| The disease or disorder is always present, the _symptoms_
| can come and go. Someone allergic to peanuts is allergic
| to peanuts whether or not they have eaten some this week.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| But you see I only care about the symptoms. And the
| symptoms are used to classify disorders. No symptoms, no
| disorder.
|
| You can carry all these jeans and not be exposed to any
| trigger and would never know you had the disorder so can
| you call it disorder if you have zero symptoms?
| pinkmuffinere wrote:
| > Kids are probably not an option
|
| I'm assuming this is due to life complexity? If it's generic
| fear, you could consider adopting (although that also has the
| potential to be difficult in it's own way).
|
| Also wanted to +1 to the other comment, you seem like a
| wonderful person, thankyou for making the world a better place.
| I hope I "grow up" to be like you :)
| brailsafe wrote:
| Even if you love someone and can manage _your_ life with
| them, it 's important to consider how that'll play out with
| even a little bit more pressure placed on a situation that
| thrives on stability. Kids are not a little bit of pressure,
| and if there's a possibility their mother (or adopted mother)
| will disappear for periods of time unpredictably, it would
| make an already extremely demanding obligation that much more
| tenuous.
| lazyasciiart wrote:
| Disappearing unpredictably is one of the less harmful ways
| it might show up. Imagine having a parent who you literally
| cannot trust to _recognize_ how to care for you. My aunt is
| schizophrenic and was not diagnosed until late (as seems to
| be common, she moved away from family and friends to get
| away from interference). Her kids were 13 through 5 when
| she was diagnosed and had serious trauma.
| brailsafe wrote:
| Yep, I have an older friend who'd grown up with a
| schizophrenic mother who he's had lifelong trauma from.
| It's a bit horrifying. Incidentally it seems like the
| genx and beyond in my life never grew up with a framework
| for either identifying or addressing even something as
| common as clinical depression or ADHD, let alone the more
| potentially externally destructive ones like borderline,
| bipolar, schizophrenia. Seemed like they carried on to
| raise their kids with a sort of hope that if they ignore
| it, it'll eventually go away.
| heresie-dabord wrote:
| > Kids are probably not an option. Although she very much wants
| it.
|
| Like many (but not all) people, my bias is love of children.
| But extend that love to your dearest future hopes. A marriage
| will be a serious test of commitment and stable teamwork every
| day -- for decades. Otherwise it is likely to crumble and the
| children will be victims too.
|
| Even as an optimist, I will say to a HN brother... there are
| short hikes, but for the longest you choose your ascent, your
| kit, and the weather conditions.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| She will break down, then she'll get strong meds and she'll
| change unrecognizably. Think twice before making a long
| relationship with this person. You'll get a lot of stress and
| eventually she'll change drastically.
|
| Schizophrenia has a strong genetic component, so think twice
| about making a children as well.
| anonnon wrote:
| Please don't downvote or flag this person unless you have a
| family member (or better, family member _s_ ) with
| schizophrenia.
| kridsdale3 wrote:
| I have family with diagnosis. I upvoted the comment.
| pier25 wrote:
| That sounds like my mother (except for the "90% of the time"
| comment). I can tell you from experience it would be a bad idea
| to have kids, even adopting.
| dimal wrote:
| This is a shot in the dark, but there is a lot of excitement
| right now about treating schizophrenia and bipolar disorder as
| a metabolic issue. Some people are seeing complete remission,
| without medication. This isn't a quick easy recommendation to
| just go off meds and go keto, but for some people that
| apparently has worked. Chris Palmer M.D.[0] is one of the main
| people driving it.
|
| [0] https://www.chrispalmermd.com/chris-palmer/
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| Is there a reason to go off the meds when starting keto? If
| the meds are only mostly effective, and then a keto diet
| makes them _very_ effective, then I might be inclined to go
| off the meds - but only if it stacks like that.
| sakoht wrote:
| The article suggests a possible model where the schizophrenia is
| an extreme linear progression. But the inability to find a
| culprit genes suggests something more complex. It is possible
| that there are is a group of genes that all have variations that
| confers benefit, but when those variations are all together
| negative effects occur. That makes the positive variants overall
| beneficial, and keeps them in the gene pool. This is why it is
| dangerous to presume that when we correlate genetic variants with
| disease and then presume they should go away. In fact, nearly any
| inherited disease that has survived may be conferring value to
| other individual when in proper partnership with other genetic
| profiles.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| This is true for every population. For instance, the price of
| protecting many African populations from malaria is sickle cell
| disease.
|
| But I think environment plays a bigger role in modern society
| to increase the risk of mood disorders than genetics alone.
| discoutdynamite wrote:
| For your consideration: the theory of "Positive Disintegration"
| developed by Kasimir Dabrowski does help to explain the capacity
| and reality of schizotypal disorders. The easiest way to explain
| it, is that human brain potential for "over-excitation" leads to
| personality development; this is natural and human. The stages of
| personality development are not guaranteed to succeed and proceed
| correctly. Most cases of schizophrenia may be a result of failed
| re-organization, or a failure to develop the final, executive,
| function. In cases of "arrested development," this process may be
| delayed till later in life. This is the so-called mid-life-
| crisis, which also can fail, and then you get adult onset
| schizophrenia. This is all emerging research thats usually locked
| up in foreign language journals. Almost no medicine to be sold
| here, AMA and APA are not interested...
| boston_clone wrote:
| Very worth it to read the follow up research paper that moves
| away from this cliff-edge hypothesis, highlights other
| ambiguities, and attempts some self-correction.
|
| https://www.psychiatrymargins.com/p/the-evolutionary-genetic...
|
| In any case, a fascinating read and well-worth it to explore the
| linked citations, especially by Crow and Nesse.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| The problem with this whole line of thought is that the human
| _environment_ since the neolithic period has changed.
|
| It also does not take into account the huge amount of human
| relocation that's taken place over the last 200 years. For
| example, we have a large number of Africans that are now living
| in climate that are much colder than what they evolved to live
| in. The same as truth for northern Europeans, who lived in cold,
| cloudy climate now living in sunny, warm climates. Does anyone
| hear really think that that wouldn't affect the populations
| mental health?
|
| We know schizophrenia genes are almost always risk genes, meaning
| their polygenic, or they don't cause schizophrenia, and everyone
| who carries the genetics. There are a very few number of cases of
| people who carry genes that directly caused schizophrenia.
|
| So it's quite possible that schizophrenia did not exist as
| frequently as it does in the modern world, a world filled with
| pollution, stress, drugs, aldehydes, bad food, and on and on and
| on.
|
| But let's just take migration. It is a well-known risk factor for
| schizophrenia. See the paper below.
|
| https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/appi.ajp.162.1....
|
| So no schizophrenia is not the price we pay for mine poison near
| the edge of a cliff, it's the price we pay for technology. The
| technology that enabled not only all the wonderful things to get,
| but also all the horrible things that come with it.
|
| I had schizoaffective disorder, and I have essentially cured it.
| But I really can't say it's a cure because what was happening was
| there was a Mitch match between my genetics in my environment.
| It's like curing yourself from celiac by not eating wheat. Celiac
| is only a disease if you eat wheat.
|
| So I am one of these involuntarily relocated people because of
| capitalism. My great great grandparents on my mother side were
| Sami and I still carry those genetics. Changing my environment
| and changing my diet changed my life. Frankly, I'm tired of these
| articles saying that there's no cure for mental illnesses and
| it's just a price we pay.
| bottom999mottob wrote:
| I'm curious how you've cured your schizoaffective disorder?
| Diet?
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| I've made a very long reply to another comment that explains
| everything. As well as I can at least.
| barrenko wrote:
| This is personally interesting to me, as I am the first
| generation of my family that is not semi-nomadic (not sure
| about the exact term in English). When you say you've cured it
| - did you move somewhere more adequate or you did you stop
| moving?
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| I believe my sensitivities came from a semi-nomadic people,
| but northern European cold climate, so I generally focus on
| staying in cooler climates.
| barrenko wrote:
| Mine are from south-eastern Europe and I have been ignoring
| the longing for my mountain for so long, I've figured
| everyone longs for their habitat anyways so it's not that
| special.
|
| We also have a lot of mental health issues in my family
| since the switch to "civilization", not sure that any one
| of us is totally sane.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| I think many people are suited just fine to handle all
| this pollution and stress and stationary living. The
| farmers have taken over the world and they have left us
| hunter/gatherers to struggle.
| barrenko wrote:
| I am of the same mind, need to get a van it seems :).
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| X
| drgo wrote:
| Is it possible that the pro-schizophrenia genes persist because
| they offer other (non-neurological) benefits, e.g., lower risk of
| cancer? Siblings of patients with schizophrenia are less likely
| to develop cancer, and in several studies these patients had
| lower risk of developing cancer despite higher prevalence of
| smoking.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| There's no such thing as a "pro schizophrenia genes". There are
| only genes that increase the risk of schizophrenia, and this is
| probably due to environmental variables.
|
| Exchanging a risk for cancer for a risk of schizophrenia is not
| a win-win situation. You're just switching one set of risk
| genes for another.
| ekaryotic wrote:
| >Exchanging a risk for cancer for a risk of schizophrenia is
| not a win-win situation But it can be though. Consider a
| population that works with carcinogens like coal. due to
| capitalist class structures, they cannot leave their
| occupation, so a gene that would increase their survivability
| would be a great help.
| dustbunny wrote:
| Schizophrenia is far more likely to prevent you from
| reproducing than cancer, because schizophrenia hits way
| earlier.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| Yes, this is what I was going to comment, and adding that
| it was funny they used a coal miner as an example since
| my family side that has the mood disorders were all coal
| miners in central PA.
| 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
| > There are only genes that increase the risk of
| schizophrenia
|
| I think that's what GP was saying?
|
| > You're just switching one set of risk genes for another.
|
| I think... that's what GP was saying?
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| >> You're just switching one set of risk genes for another.
| > I think... that's what GP was saying?
|
| If you are switching one low survival gene for another
| there is no net benefit.
| lazyasciiart wrote:
| You're begging the question, They asked _is there_ some
| unnoticed survival benefit.
| lokar wrote:
| The benefit must be to reproduction. Cancer generally happens
| after peak reproductive years.
| voidhorse wrote:
| The cliff theory is an interesting one. I don't have any kind of
| schizo propensity, to my knowledge, but I did, for a brief period
| of my life, have what I call a "firemind" experience.
|
| During that period I spent an _unhealthy_ amount of time alone. I
| also spent _tons_ of time reading. During that time the ability
| of my brain to free-associate seemed to absolutely _explode_. I
| felt like I could see a pattern or form a connection between
| almost _anything whatsoever_. I read symbolism in everything. The
| few times I did see friends during that time, I remember them
| being kind of shocked at the callbacks, linkages, etc. that I was
| able to fire off instantaneously at the board game table.
|
| My brian no longer works like this. I underwent several lifestyle
| changes and it seemed to really rewire me. I'm much more logical
| in my thinking now, but it's taken practice, and the shift was
| gradual. Every now and then I kind of miss the "semiotic
| aptitude" I had in those days, but I wonder if I was really just
| teetering on the edge of a cliff. Maybe a few more months of
| isolation would have pushed me over the edge.
| boardwaalk wrote:
| Though it doesn't mention it by name exactly, I think a related
| idea for systems that are optimized close to a point of phase
| change is "the edge of chaos"
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_of_chaos
| gsf_emergency_2 wrote:
| Trading stability for agility, basically?
|
| https://www.humanfactors.lth.se/fileadmin/lusa/Sidney_Dekker...
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| >The persistence of schizophrenia is an evolutionary enigma
|
| how much schizophrenia is actually going to manifest in peak
| procreating years?
| throw-qqqqq wrote:
| I have two relatives with schizophrenia. Both had onset in
| their mid 20s.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| yeah but a sizeable part of the discussion here has been
| about women with menopause starting to show schizophrenic
| behaviors. So that might be a significant amount of the
| schizophrenic cases in the population.
| throw-qqqqq wrote:
| > So that might be a significant amount of the
| schizophrenic cases in the population
|
| I dont think they are. Most are diagnosed in their teens or
| early twenties. Women slightly later than men.
|
| Women diagnosed in their menopause are not a majority of
| diagnosed schizophrenics; far from.
|
| I understood that part as merely a curiosity.
| rozab wrote:
| Reproductive fitness does not end as soon as offspring are
| born. Maximising the likelihood of genetic continuation is a
| lifelong endeavor.
| cageface wrote:
| Maybe this could explain why mental illness & creativity seem to
| be so closely related? Just as one example, James Joyce's
| daughter was schizophrenic.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| Mental illness and creativity are not closely related. There is
| correlation but mental illness is not required for creativity.
|
| According to Wikipedia, creative people are 25% more likely to
| have a mental illness.
|
| As for why so many bipolar people are famous, manic episodes
| can be very productive.
|
| For myself, being bipolar has given me several lifetimes of
| perspective to inform my writing.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity_and_mental_health
| andrewflnr wrote:
| > Mental illness and creativity are not closely related.
| There is correlation
|
| What do you think a correlation is if not a relationship? No
| one said it was "required".
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| Yeah. I wasn't clear. I do not believe that 1 and 1.25 is
| considered "close".
|
| There's absolutely a correlation, enough to be causation.
| But it doesn't make mental illness a primary factor in
| creativity in modern society.
| woodpanel wrote:
| Interesting article. Also a good amount too high above the
| paygrade for me to decipher all concepts in it, but as someone
| who had close contact with schizophrenics a lot, I was missing
| one aspect in particular:
|
| All schizophrenics I know didn't start as obvious psychopaths,
| but rather have their personal ,,cliff" usually around an age
| associated with hormonal changes (eg early twenties, menopause).
|
| So in other words the negative selection effects aren't there
| until after reproduction.
| storus wrote:
| Isn't it due to synaptic pruning going wrong, a sort of off-by-
| one error of a gene tagging synapses for deletion?
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| Genetics is messy - as I understand it most genes don't code for
| a single thing, so assuming evolution is "selecting for
| schizophrenia" that only implies that there is an evolutionary
| benefit to some of the things controlled by the same gene(s) that
| control schizophrenia, that outweighs the disadvantage of
| schizophrenia.
|
| Homosexuality is interesting from this perspective too - common
| enough that evolution has to be selecting for it, yet basically
| fatal to reproduction, so what are the benefits that evolution is
| selecting for? Is it advantageous to groups, or maybe the same
| genes confer an individual benefit to non-homosexuals?
| no_wizard wrote:
| I always wondered if it was natures check on overpopulation. I
| know that is controversial to say, but it seems most fitting on
| its face
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| My best guess it that there is a societal/group benefit in
| reducing aggression (maybe not unrelated to they way our
| closest DNA match, Bonobos, function).
|
| I don't think we're at the point yet, and certainly not in
| last few million years of evolution, where overpopulation is
| an issue, and since evolution is all about (collectively)
| creating the largest next-generation population, this isn't
| the way I would expect to see increased competition for
| resources to play out.
| missedthecue wrote:
| Do rural populations have lower rates of homosexuals as a %
| of offspring? How would nature "know" we are overpopulated
| and bias towards homosexuals?
| Fraterkes wrote:
| For evolution to "select" for homosexuality, wouldn't it have
| to be hereditary in large part? As far as I can tell, to the
| extent that theres any evidence for that the effect of genes on
| sexuality is kinda limited
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| Male vs female differences, including differences in typical
| sex-specific sexual attraction, are obviously genetic, even
| if we've yet to figure out all the specifics (where are the
| male's "curve detector" genes, etc).
|
| Do men and women both have the coding for male/female
| attraction, with one typically disabled ? This perhaps seems
| most likely, in same way both sexes have nipples, etc.
| Without knowing exactly how this all works we can only
| speculate how male/female genes can combine to create same-
| sex attraction. Obviously it's not so simple as inheriting a
| gay gene from one of your parents!
| throw4847285 wrote:
| > Male vs female differences, including differences in
| typical sex-specific sexual attraction, are obviously
| genetic
|
| Typical is putting in a lot of work in that sentence. I
| could rephrase it with the same truth content and make it
| much more ambiguous.
|
| "Many phenotypical sexual differences in humans are
| obviously genetic. Some very common differences in sex-
| specific sexual attraction are likely genetic as well. For
| large swaths of sexual attraction, we have absolutely no
| evidence of a genetic link."
|
| What's funny is that the one example you facetiously picked
| (a curve detector) is extremely culturally dependent.
| Trying to tie elements of human sexuality to evolutionary
| just so stories is usually pseudoscience. When we start
| isolating genes for the things that we think of as natural,
| if we ever do, I bet you $100 the mapping from our social
| experience of these traits to some kind genetic reality is
| muddled to the point of total detachment.
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| > What's funny is that the one example you facetiously
| picked (a curve detector) is extremely culturally
| dependent.
|
| Actually, it wasn't intended as facetious! I'd bet money
| that male attraction to females is indeed based on curve
| and jiggle detectors! If not this, then what - it has to
| be based on some (simple, perceptual) physical
| characteristics. I realize that female ideals vary a lot
| between cultures, and time periods, but the differences
| are more about things like fat percentage and
| distribution than the underlying characteristics that
| visibly differentiate men from women.
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| > Some very common differences in sex-specific sexual
| attraction are likely genetic as well. For large swaths
| of sexual attraction, we have absolutely no evidence of a
| genetic link
|
| Sure - it seems there may be a large degree of imprinting
| as well, but homosexuality does seem to be an important
| special case given that it typically means lack of
| descendants. Of course evolution is really about sub-
| populations and gene-pools, not individuals, and it seems
| there has to be some benefit at that level otherwise this
| trait would have been out-competed in the population.
| skissane wrote:
| > but homosexuality does seem to be an important special
| case given that it typically means lack of descendants
|
| For much of human history, that has been false. In many
| societies, there has been strong pressure to
| (heterosexually) marry, arranged marriages - with the
| result that most individuals with a homosexual
| orientation end up participating in heterosexual
| reproduction-so homosexuality is much less of an
| evolutionary disadvantage than you'd assume.
|
| Modern Western society puts great emphasis on marrying
| for love, marrying on the basis of actual attraction
| rather than social pressure or political calculation,
| being "true to yourself" - and in such a society, a
| homosexual orientation does significantly reduce the odds
| of participation in classical heterosexual reproduction.
| But modern Western society isn't _normal_ in world-
| historical terms, what we consider "normal" is actually
| rather novel
| KittenInABox wrote:
| > Homosexuality is interesting from this perspective too -
| common enough that evolution has to be selecting for it,
|
| Are we sure this is the case? I think it's more like
| homosexuality isn't extremely selected against on a population
| level. Evolution doesn't really select for, more like evolution
| is a process in which least-viable-specimens are killed off for
| their environments. It could very well be that a small number
| of homosexual specimens are simply irrelevant to evolutionary
| fitness.
| renewiltord wrote:
| The article's first paragraph has some alternative factors in
| selection
|
| > _Traditional evolutionary hypotheses, such as those invoking
| kin selection, mutation-selection balance, and evolutionary
| mismatch don't quite explain this._
|
| There's lots of explanations here but one that is often
| mentioned is "kin selection". If you increase evolutionary
| fitness of nephews, nieces, etc. There's many others, some of
| which apply here and others which don't.
| natnat wrote:
| This reminds me of the "Natural engagement pattern" sketch that
| Mark Zuckerberg made about facebook content back in 2018:
| https://www.facebook.com/notes/751449002072082/
|
| Content gets more engagement as it gets closer to the "policy
| line" of getting banned, and in a competitive information
| environment (an engagement maximizing algorithm) you end up with
| a lot of content close to the border of what's allowed.
| aspenmayer wrote:
| Facebook is hostile to archive sites, so I am quoting this link
| for discussion purposes:
|
| https://pastebin.com/S4bWZpma
| Mistletoe wrote:
| > Let's say schizophrenia is associated with a 50% loss of
| reproductive fitness in 1% of the population (and there is no
| offsetting benefit in the rest of the population), then it would
| take roughly 180 generations to cut the rate in half and about
| 560 generations to reduce it to one-tenth of its original value
| (Mitteroecker & Merola, 2024). We've had a comparable number of
| generations since the Neolithic era, but as far as we know, the
| prevalence of schizophrenia has not decreased in the manner
| anticipated.
|
| What if the number we experience now IS 1/10 of what it used to
| be? Would explain a lot of religious talking to God in the past.
| scotty79 wrote:
| Do you think schizoid personality disorder has actually anything
| in common with schizophrenia, apart from aptitude and even
| preference for social isolation?
| tempestn wrote:
| This is fascinating, and makes me wonder if human intelligence
| itself is such a cliff edge trait. For most of human history our
| advanced intelligence has obviously been a benefit, but now we
| see, as people and societies become wealthier and better educated
| (both correlated with intelligence), their reproduction rates
| drop precipitously. Perhaps we've overshot the intelligence cliff
| and evolution is now gradually pulling us back. (Evidence of this
| would be less intelligent people having more children on average
| than more intelligent ones.)
| staunton wrote:
| Humanity is changing so quickly nowadays, biological evolution
| most likely doesn't matter at all anymore, at least for the
| kind of questions and time scales you're discussing.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| Humanity is still subject to evolutionary pressures. We are
| "natural" and what we do is "natural", and if something like
| our environment were to drastically change as an evolutionary
| pressure, selection would absolutely happen.
|
| Consider a change in environment where, for example, oxygen
| levels drastically drop. That might make living at altitude
| deadly for those who don't have genetic adaptions to high
| altitude living.
|
| As an extreme example, in ~500 million+ years when the sun
| starts expanding, you can bet natural selection will finish
| off non-extremophiles that aren't living deep within the
| Earth.
| staunton wrote:
| Sure, I never claimed otherwise.
|
| What I'm saying is that evolution matters across large
| timescales. By contrast, I believe the topics I was
| commenting on concern timescales where effects of
| biological evolution are negligible compared to the effects
| of _memetic_ evolution.
|
| Thus, biological evolution doesn't matter at all for
| predicting what will happen (or is happening right now) to
| humanity, unless predicting so far into the future as to be
| completely futile speculation (imagine someone 200 years
| ago wondering how biological evolution might affect
| humanity during the next couple thousand years).
| varjag wrote:
| There is no evidence people are measurably more intelligent now
| than two-three decades ago.
| _ink_ wrote:
| I think there is evidence:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
| tempestn wrote:
| Yes, the genetics wouldn't have significantly changed over
| such a short period, but the environment has.
| staunton wrote:
| Genetics isn't all that matters. Things like malnutrition
| (and a lot more things) very much also do.
| sheiyei wrote:
| I think the point is that the evolution of human
| intelligence reached a point that enabled us, over
| evolutionarily short timescales, to develop an
| environment (social structures etc.) that broke evolution
| as it was - the meaning of "fittest" is now rather
| arbitrary in human context.
| Animats wrote:
| _" The persistence of schizophrenia is an evolutionary enigma. It
| is a disabling psychiatric condition that reduces the likelihood
| of having children, and yet it has roughly 1% lifetime prevalence
| worldwide. Traditional evolutionary hypotheses, such as those
| invoking kin selection, mutation-selection balance, and
| evolutionary mismatch don't quite explain this."_
|
| Much the same could be said for gayness. If it were genetic, it
| should have been eliminated by evolution by now. Which suggests
| that it's not.
|
| There are some differences in incidence of schizophrenia in
| populations.[1] Birth order matters, slightly, with prevalence
| higher for firstborns. (This is the reverse of homosexuality and
| left-handedness.) Migrants have higher rates of schizophrenia
| than non-migrants. Women vs. men, about the same. Rural vs.
| urban, about the same.
|
| What the original paper suggests is that they didn't discover
| anything significant. It's more like a discussion of feedback
| control problems near a cliff, but by people who don't know about
| that part of control theory.
|
| The title is overly dramatic for the results.
|
| [1]
| https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/jo...
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| > Much the same could be said for gayness. If it were genetic,
| it should have been eliminated by evolution by now. Which
| suggests that it's not.
|
| There are very plausible explanations for the genetic basis of
| gayness. One is that being gay is essentially a "byproduct" of
| higher fecundity in women - I'd have to search for the study,
| but gay men with sisters tend to have sisters with more kids
| than the norm.
|
| The other is the "guncle" hypothesis (which is related to the
| previous one). While gay men and women do not have their own
| biological children (at least through gay relationships), they
| are able to spend additional resources on their nieces and
| nephews. Anecdotal obviously, but it certainly worked this way
| in my family. As a guncle I helped pay for my niece's education
| (and was happy to do so because I don't have to care for
| children of my own ).
| yorpinn wrote:
| "My intuition doesn't explain something, therefore my prejudice
| is justified." Evolutionary psychology functions better as a
| tool to present one's prejudices as neutral and without
| ideology or politics than it does for explaining the world.
| ninetyninenine wrote:
| Homosexuality is a similar prevalent trait.
| janalsncm wrote:
| > They computed a polygenic risk score for schizophrenia for each
| participant, calculated by summing the weighted effects of
| thousands of risk alleles.
|
| I am not an expert by any means, but this analysis only makes
| sense if we assume there is a strictly linear relationship
| between alleles. It will not capture nonlinear relationships.
| 8bitsrule wrote:
| R.D. Laing was saying the same things 50 years ago.
|
| " We must remember that we are living in an age in which the
| ground is shifting and the foundations are shaking. I cannot
| answer for other times and places. Perhaps it has always been so.
| We know it is true today. In these circumstances, we have all
| reason to be insecure. When the ultimate basis of our world is in
| question, we run to different holes in the ground; we scurry into
| roles, statuses, identities, interpersonal relations. We attempt
| to live in castles that can only be in the air, because there is
| no firm ground in the social cosmos on which to build."
|
| "Sanity today appears to rest very largely on a capacity to adapt
| to the external world -- the interpersonal world, and the realm
| of human collectivities. As this external human world is almost
| completely and totally estranged from the inner, any personal
| direct awareness of the inner world already entails grave risks."
| r33b33 wrote:
| If you have caution and paranoia about potentially being
| schizophrenic, does that mean it's less likely to manifest due to
| extreme self-awareness? I have been diagnosed with BPD, psychosis
| (sometimes) and depression, but I think I'm too aware when it
| comes to shizhophrenia.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-29 23:01 UTC)