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

Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

med.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 339 posts

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#31

Post by Nbox9 »

beaconstudios wrote: post #17

weird how people can often become depressed due to actual real-world experiences like grief or loneliness, but slap a magnet on em and they can go into remission. Makes you wonder whether they'll go into remission for a while and then slip back into depression if the environmental factors are still there. I guess if it can knock you out of a depression where the trigger is no longer present but the trauma persists, t…

> environmental factors

Actually being depressed can worsen environmental factors. Depression can make it hard (or impossible) to maintain work, relationships, hygiene, sleep, diet, and exercise. Losing the things can make the depression worse.

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#32

Post by neom »

jrumbut wrote: post #20
Lammy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this also imply the possibility of the inverse, magnetically making people depressed?

This is a great comment. I've always been a little uncomfortable with the thought of this magnetic treatment in a way I couldn't put into words and this nails it. I'm willing to trust, perhaps naively, that everyone is getting the same Prozac tablets. But how does the skill of the practitioner and maintenance of their magnetic treatment device affect outcomes? It's almost like a surgery, but I'm not sure who's actual…

Magnetic therapy makes me feel sick to my stomach for reasons that have for long been unknown to me. I'm more comfortable with the idea of undergoing electroconvulsive therapy than something that involves magnets. I'm not sure why it bothers me so much, but it does to an unusual degree.

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#33

Post by mlyle »

jrumbut wrote: post #20
Lammy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this also imply the possibility of the inverse, magnetically making people depressed?

This is a great comment. I've always been a little uncomfortable with the thought of this magnetic treatment in a way I couldn't put into words and this nails it. I'm willing to trust, perhaps naively, that everyone is getting the same Prozac tablets. But how does the skill of the practitioner and maintenance of their magnetic treatment device affect outcomes? It's almost like a surgery, but I'm not sure who's actual…

A whole lot of treatments end up refined with time.

The FDA approved treatment is "aim at the middle of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex". Getting more activity and connectedness improves its regulation of overall emotional activity.

This research implies that aiming instead slightly differently and a different dosing regimen may be more effective.

This is no different from any other medical treatment, where we find refinements in how and where to apply basically the same treatment to get better results.

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#34

Post by zitterbewegung »

Lammy wrote: post #15
webinvest wrote: post #2

> “The treatment, known as Stanford accelerated intelligent neuromodulation therapy (SAINT) or simply Stanford neuromodulation therapy, is an intensive, individualized form of transcranial magnetic stimulation. In the study, remission typically occurred within days and lasted months. The only side effects were temporary fatigue and headaches.” > “Twenty-nine people with treatment-resistant depression participated in…

Does this also imply the possibility of the inverse, magnetically making people depressed?

Any study can only imply the outcome of what was observed. The techniques they used required an MRI machine so you aren't going to see magnetic fields wherever you go.

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#35

Post by Benjammer »

jrumbut wrote: post #20
Lammy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this also imply the possibility of the inverse, magnetically making people depressed?

This is a great comment. I've always been a little uncomfortable with the thought of this magnetic treatment in a way I couldn't put into words and this nails it. I'm willing to trust, perhaps naively, that everyone is getting the same Prozac tablets. But how does the skill of the practitioner and maintenance of their magnetic treatment device affect outcomes? It's almost like a surgery, but I'm not sure who's actual…

Do you have the same feelings about radiation therapy for cancer?

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#36

Post by wyager »

neom wrote: post #32
jrumbut wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great comment. I've always been a little uncomfortable with the thought of this magnetic treatment in a way I couldn't put into words and this nails it. I'm willing to trust, perhaps naively, that everyone is getting the same Prozac tablets. But how does the skill of the practitioner and maintenance of their magnetic treatment device affect outcomes? It's almost like a surgery, but I'm not sure who's actual…

Magnetic therapy makes me feel sick to my stomach for reasons that have for long been unknown to me. I'm more comfortable with the idea of undergoing electroconvulsive therapy than something that involves magnets. I'm not sure why it bothers me so much, but it does to an unusual degree.

Human emotional responses to wireless technology, even before the invention of said technology, are very interesting. Check out the wiki page for James Tilly Matthews.

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#38

Post by mlyle »

Benjammer wrote: post #35
jrumbut wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great comment. I've always been a little uncomfortable with the thought of this magnetic treatment in a way I couldn't put into words and this nails it. I'm willing to trust, perhaps naively, that everyone is getting the same Prozac tablets. But how does the skill of the practitioner and maintenance of their magnetic treatment device affect outcomes? It's almost like a surgery, but I'm not sure who's actual…

Do you have the same feelings about radiation therapy for cancer?

It's all a little freaky if you think about it: even in evidence-based medicine, a whole lot of it is people making qualitative determinations and squishy adjustments to treatment, and undoubtedly getting it wrong a whole lot.

Then again, the stuff shows benefits in trial, and presumably we get most practitioners trained up and doing the thing that's the standard of care well enough...

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#39

Post by zitterbewegung »

jrumbut wrote: post #20
Lammy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this also imply the possibility of the inverse, magnetically making people depressed?

This is a great comment. I've always been a little uncomfortable with the thought of this magnetic treatment in a way I couldn't put into words and this nails it. I'm willing to trust, perhaps naively, that everyone is getting the same Prozac tablets. But how does the skill of the practitioner and maintenance of their magnetic treatment device affect outcomes? It's almost like a surgery, but I'm not sure who's actual…

There are drug recalls: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/drug-... which would invalidate your assumption about Prozac tablets.

Re: Experimental depression treatment is nearly 80% effective in controlled study

#40

Post by esyir »

herodoturtle wrote: post #23
mlyle wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small sample size, but: - Building upon mounting evidence of TMS efficacy in patients with severe, intractable depression. - 79%-- 11 of the 14-- no longer meeting diagnostic criteria for depression after treatment, and another was improved. - It's an RCT showing both massive efficacy and statistical significance. (2 of 14 in placebo group entered remission). I know we like to chant "more n"-- but this is very likely…

Thank you for saying this. More n is required, yes, but small n results like this are a noteworthy step in the right direction. There is often good reason why n is small. Statistically significant results like this one pave the way to future experiments with larger n.

I'd also like to chime in on "effect size matters". After all, you don't need particularly large N to conclude that decapitation is going to be fatal.
Post reply on HN