Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

psychologytoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 281 posts

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#71

Post by TeMPOraL »

smegel wrote: post #66
TeMPOraL wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree about the way this choice is painted. It's never "just changing circumstances" - people who have problems that directly caused by something in their lives will stumble upon the solution by sheer luck. We should actually be grateful that there are pills that for many people can insta-cure or significantly reduce the symptoms of depression. It means they get a shot at much better life in exchange of having t…

> I'm happy every time we can find a pill for solving a problem - because the pill actually works If a woman is depressed because she is stuck in an unhappy marriage with a man she doesn't love...and she then pops a pill and becomes "happy"...I am not sure that meets my definition of "works".

We have a solution for that already - it's called "divorce". But this is a very bad example overall, because there's insane amount of complexity hiding under the phrase "doesn't love". Love is a very complicated amalgamate of emotions that routinely escapes comprehension of otherwise healthy people. What do you mean she "doesn't love" her husband - did the relationship between them dried out? Did she get bored? Did they marry on emotional high with no stronger bond being formed between them? Maybe the husband is abusive?

To solve that seemingly simple example case one needs to inspect the exact reasons for the problem. And hell, for some of the particular issues there may even be a pill and I'd be totally happy about it.

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#72

Post by fucking_tragedy »

Kenji wrote: post #47
fucking_tragedy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are suicidal ideation/attempts and 'successful' suicides explained by this hypothesis?

The agony is so horrible that the depressed deludes himself into thinking that death is the only way out.

If agony is the motivating factor, why are the rates of suicide for people experiencing chronic pain (5%) not as high as the depressed (15%)?

If the answer is that they come to the conclusion of suicide because they are deluded by depression, it comes back to the question in the OP: how does the grandparent's hypothesis explain the symptom of suicidal ideation/acts in depression?

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#73

Post by jolux »

pessimizer wrote: post #37
darkclarity wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I got out of those sorts of issues was by noticing that the medical system is inadequate. It is geared towards hiding symptoms with drugs - to get people back into work, even if those people are a mess inside. It's all down to personal responsibility. You have to find the drive inside to constantly push. To forget the victim mentality that society encourages. To fix one problem at a time. To fight the hellish…

I get how authoritarian pill pushers turn people into libertarian bootstrap people, but just because your depression isn't chemical doesn't mean it's your fault, or that there's anything that you can ultimately do about it by yourself. My problem with the pills is that they don't work, because they're targeted at a made-up disease. That the disease that current practice has lumped people into is made up doesn't mean…

It's never talking to people _or_ drugging them though. Since when do psychiatrists send you off with a prescription for Prozac and then never see you again?

Answer: they don't. Major depression is treated with drugs and therapy. And it's the combination of both that helps. Rarely if ever are patients given drugs so the psychiatrist can avoid giving them therapy.

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#74

Post by fucking_tragedy »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #55
haberman wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a purely mathematical perspective, how would evolution ever select for a trait that causes someone to destroy themselves for the benefit of others? It seems like any characteristic that prevents the individual from reproducing is by definition not selected for. But I could be misunderstanding something. Maybe it could work in the case of people who are already parents. Favoring the group could increase the likel…

It's easy to make evolutionary just-so stories and they're usually worthless anyway, but here's my attempt at one: as an animal, if you reach a certain age and are not already a parent, it means you're deficient. It's better for the gene pool if you die without reproducing. If you're a parent and you did all that was needed for the offspring to survive the early development period, you're no longer needed and probabl…

How does this explain the higher rate of suicidal ideation/actions in depressed adolescents who are at their biological prime for reproduction?

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#75

Post by haberman »

This is one reason that the famous Hyperbole and a Half entries describing depression were always so surprising to me. The first entry starts like this:

> Some people have a legitimate reason to feel depressed, but not me. I just woke up one day feeling sad and helpless for absolutely no reason.

http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2011/10/adventures-in-...

http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2013/05/depression-par...

If this article is true, the Allie just hadn't figured out what the underlying issue was yet. Or what she went through was something else entirely.

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#76

Post by tbirdz »

haberman wrote: post #62
tbirdz wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The individual would still have other relatives who would pass on the genes, like sisters, brothers, other family members. If the individual's sacrifice helps the group survive, their genes would be passed on in those relatives. Also note that the gene would only be activated under a certain set of circumstances, so individuals could have the "self-sacrifice" gene and pass it to their children, even if they never enc…

That explanation doesn't make sense to me. Your brothers/sisters etc. have similar genes, but they don't have your genes. The theory of evolution is that the most fit genes propagate. So if your brothers/sisters propagate but you don't, then your brothers/sisters genes (along with whatever mutations they might have) are being selected over yours, just as if you had some mutation that made you overall less fit.

The most fit genes propagate, not the most fit individuals. Your siblings have many of the same genes that you have. Say there is a gene A that will result in some individuals not reproducing, but will result in more members of their group reproducing. Now say there is 1 group where the members of the group have gene A, and another group where the members don't have gene A. Over time the group with gene A will reproduce more than the group without A, resulting in more copies of A in the general population.

Even if some individuals in the group do not reproduce, their relatives in the group do reproduce. So say 1 person self-sacrifices and does not reproduce, and as a result of their sacrifice 10 others in the group survive and reproduce that would not have been able to if the first individual had not self sacrificed. The family all has gene A, so this results in a net gain of 9 individuals with gene A. So the amount of people with gene A increases, even though some individuals with gene A potentially do not survive and reproduce.

If you want to learn more about this kind of thing, look into "Selfish Gene Theory".

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#77

Post by TeMPOraL »

fucking_tragedy wrote: post #74
TeMPOraL wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to make evolutionary just-so stories and they're usually worthless anyway, but here's my attempt at one: as an animal, if you reach a certain age and are not already a parent, it means you're deficient. It's better for the gene pool if you die without reproducing. If you're a parent and you did all that was needed for the offspring to survive the early development period, you're no longer needed and probabl…

How does this explain the higher rate of suicidal ideation/actions in depressed adolescents who are at their biological prime for reproduction?

I don't know. Except maybe that biologically they're supposed to have children instead of sitting in school and waiting for marriage, home and a job.

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#78

Post by Domenic_S »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #68
Domenic_S wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you misunderstood the Chief; CBT is the gold standard for treating anxiety-related disorders. See this meta-analysis: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3263389/

The interesting thing IMO is that CBT is actually about totally ignoring the "underlying reasons" of your problem, and instead it's about literally hacking your mind to deal with the symptoms. Drugs are a hardware solution, CBT is a software solution, and all that searching for problems in your life is mostly attempts at patching up datasets provided by third parties.

Sort of... it's learning to recognize when your brain starts looping and giving you the skills to be able to hit ctrl + c, while at the same time teaching you how to not write loops in the first place.

GAD and PTSD and all that spectrum are coping mechanisms, they're just maladaptive. CBT teaches you how to cope productively.

(personal opinion incoming), I think a person can get to the point where they need an SSRI as a stepping stone to even have the energy/capability to benefit from CBT, then they learn adaptive behavior, then they can dump the SSRI and let their new skills handle day-to-day life.

The "underlying reasons" are only useful inasmuch as you know what to look for so you can proactively start coping/remove yourself from maladaptive situations, but IMO most people try way too hard with the "why" stuff. The only thing that matters is "what now?"

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#79

Post by smegel »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #71
smegel wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm happy every time we can find a pill for solving a problem - because the pill actually works If a woman is depressed because she is stuck in an unhappy marriage with a man she doesn't love...and she then pops a pill and becomes "happy"...I am not sure that meets my definition of "works".

We have a solution for that already - it's called "divorce". But this is a very bad example overall, because there's insane amount of complexity hiding under the phrase "doesn't love". Love is a very complicated amalgamate of emotions that routinely escapes comprehension of otherwise healthy people. What do you mean she "doesn't love" her husband - did the relationship between them dried out? Did she get bored? Did t…

> We have a solution for that already - it's called "divorce".

And we can't extrapolate that to "just change the things in your life that are making you unhappy", because?

I understand there are some life circumstances that are difficult to change or rectify. And that sometimes medication might help people cope with difficulties in their life. But let's not pretend that is about mental illness - these people are healthy, their symptoms of depression are a healthy response to negative circumstances - and medication in this case is a palliative aid, not a cure to a disease or malfunction.

Re: Anxiety and Depression Are Symptoms, Not Diseases

#80

Post by balfirevic »

haberman wrote: post #62
tbirdz wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The individual would still have other relatives who would pass on the genes, like sisters, brothers, other family members. If the individual's sacrifice helps the group survive, their genes would be passed on in those relatives. Also note that the gene would only be activated under a certain set of circumstances, so individuals could have the "self-sacrifice" gene and pass it to their children, even if they never enc…

That explanation doesn't make sense to me. Your brothers/sisters etc. have similar genes, but they don't have your genes. The theory of evolution is that the most fit genes propagate. So if your brothers/sisters propagate but you don't, then your brothers/sisters genes (along with whatever mutations they might have) are being selected over yours, just as if you had some mutation that made you overall less fit.

It's called kin selection and I think it's generally accepted within scientific community to be a real phenomenon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection

Post reply on HN