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

Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

sciencedaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 109 posts

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#61

Post by anthony_romeo »

phkahler wrote: post #48

>> Previous studies have led researchers to believe that individuals with social anxiety disorder or social phobia have too low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin. A new study, however, shows that the situation is exactly the opposite. It's stuff like this that is destroying the reputation of science in general. I know it's one thing to "lead to believe" and another to "show that", and perhaps that's what happe…

It's a good thing that science can change. This is what distinguishes science from dogma.

The problem is not these supposed 'reversals', but rather how this information is being reported. Pop-science media reports modest studies as absolute truths to catch eyeballs. When one study merely suggests research in one direction, it's emblazoned as fact on the tabloids.

In the example you identified: "Fatty food is bad - no it's good" the issue is not the studies flip-flopping. Rather, it's a problem of regular people taking what are likely modest reports way too far and massively integrating them into their daily lives, without ever reading the study and understanding the context or scope of it. A study indicating that, say, there may be health problems associated with consuming excess saturated fat seems to compel people to follow no-fat diets. So I'd argue that the bigger problem is people reading oversimplified reports of scientific information

I mean, I'm not terribly familiar with this field, but the study itself indicates that whether high or low serotonin levels were contributory was "a matter of debate" and that "only a few studies have used molecular neuroimaging to examine serotonin dysfunction in SAD directly."[1] So this doesn't appear to be a reversal at all, but rather a study which helps clarify the role of serotonin in SAD.

[1] http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=23197...

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#62

Post by PaulHoule »

sramsay wrote: post #54

I really think we're dealing with some very complicated biochemistry here. I have never seen a single psych drug, the PI sheet for which did not begin, "The exact mechanism of action is unknown" (or words to that effect). And that includes very old drugs like Lithium. Obviously, these drugs can provide relief for people suffering from various kinds of mental disorders. Most of them target serotonin, norepinephrine, d…

Note there are at least 14 known serotonin receptors:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-HT_receptor

and this is responsible for the rich pharmacology of serotonin-affecting drugs such as the SSRIs, hallucinogens such as LSD, and MDMA which delivers an entirely different experience, atypical antipsychotics, antimigraine drugs, anti-emetic drugs such as Ondansetron, etc. It doesn't matter "how much" serotonin you have as where it is. Note that serotonogenic drugs have radically different modes of actions such as agonist, antagonist, partial agonist as well as the reuptake inhibitors, and that many serotonin receptors are actually autoreceptors on the other side of the junction which suppress the production of serotonin at the terminals.

Personally I think of the SSRI drugs as "antineurotics" and what they seem to do is help me keep compensated under stress. That is, rather than going to pieces, I stay rational under provocation. This might be why Scientology hates SSRIs so much, because it really does seem to make your "reactive mind" much weaker.

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#63

Post by platz »

jgroszko wrote: post #60
phkahler wrote: post #48

>> Previous studies have led researchers to believe that individuals with social anxiety disorder or social phobia have too low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin. A new study, however, shows that the situation is exactly the opposite. It's stuff like this that is destroying the reputation of science in general. I know it's one thing to "lead to believe" and another to "show that", and perhaps that's what happe…

I think a lot of the harm comes from people treating science as some sort of monolithic entity. Science says X! Science says Y! When really it's more like some scientists over here have found some evidence for X, some over here did some work that points to Y. It's neat that mainstream enthusiasm for science has grown so much in the last few years, but it seems like a lot of times this kind of treatment oversimplifies…

Don't forget the Science community itself is always shouting "Trust us, we're impartial scientists, don't ignore us!". Some scientists over here have found some evidence for X, and the media that cover their story, REALLY want you to believe their story. You can't treat the Science community as impartial here.

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#64

Post by jepsen »

tvm wrote: post #35
glasz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

honest question: is that phobia a real problem for you? or did somebody tell you it is?

Honest answer: Yes a serious problem. Two years ago I've had panic attack in the elevator and I was just technically unable to go into office where I worked (I've had a good job and I was content there). Doing ordinary things like groceries, etc. was terribly hard. Went through brain CT, EMG and some other tests and after some months psychiatrist gave me F40.2 (social phobia) stamp. Went through various medications t…

Been there, 4 years of constant panic attacks. Last 2 years have been great, and the solution was simple. Exercise. I still feel the symptoms now and again. I've merely refactored my programming.

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#65

Post by tvm »

sramsay wrote: post #59
glasz wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thanks. crazy situation. don't get me wrong, i'm just naive, but would using headphones (listening to music), not looking at people and closing the eyes in the elevator work?

An actual panic attack is completely and totally devastating. The entire fight/flight system goes haywire, and people think they're about to die. It's even possible to start hallucinating. Lots of sufferers wind up in the ER absolutely convinced they're having a heart attack. What's worse, this can lead to a whole range of phobias (I'm in the middle of this theater. What if I have an attack? Then you start having one…

Yes, the main deal is that the fight/flight system gets triggered too often, even in inappropriate situations. The result is devastating.

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#66

Post by Rainymood »

phkahler wrote: post #48

>> Previous studies have led researchers to believe that individuals with social anxiety disorder or social phobia have too low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin. A new study, however, shows that the situation is exactly the opposite. It's stuff like this that is destroying the reputation of science in general. I know it's one thing to "lead to believe" and another to "show that", and perhaps that's what happe…

>But every time the accepted explanation does a 180 science dies a little bit

So let's just keep the earth flat then, shall we ;)

This is the beauty of science. If a report on memory that claims X and then another scientist is unable to replicate their results X, what can we say about the validity of X?

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#67

Post by andrewtbham »

phkahler wrote: post #48

>> Previous studies have led researchers to believe that individuals with social anxiety disorder or social phobia have too low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin. A new study, however, shows that the situation is exactly the opposite. It's stuff like this that is destroying the reputation of science in general. I know it's one thing to "lead to believe" and another to "show that", and perhaps that's what happe…

I suspect the reason for the reversal is the accessibility of new tools, namely the PET scan. Whereas in the past, the results were probably based on polling people about their anxiety levels while on SSRIs.

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#68

Post by syntheticnature »

phkahler wrote: post #48

>> Previous studies have led researchers to believe that individuals with social anxiety disorder or social phobia have too low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin. A new study, however, shows that the situation is exactly the opposite. It's stuff like this that is destroying the reputation of science in general. I know it's one thing to "lead to believe" and another to "show that", and perhaps that's what happe…

Every time something like this comes up I think of this: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?n=1174

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#69

Post by weland »

phkahler wrote: post #48

>> Previous studies have led researchers to believe that individuals with social anxiety disorder or social phobia have too low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin. A new study, however, shows that the situation is exactly the opposite. It's stuff like this that is destroying the reputation of science in general. I know it's one thing to "lead to believe" and another to "show that", and perhaps that's what happe…

I see a lot of positive reactions to how happy we should be that science changes. I mean, look how long it took us to get out of the dark ages, right?

But no, the liberality of changes like this one is what separates fluff science from actual science. There is a vast chasm of difference between stuff like this one and, say, aether theories.

People who came up with aether theories were the brightest of their ages. That is really the best they could come up with -- and the reason why it took us so long to disprove aether-based theories was that they had some bloody solid science behind them -- at least back in those ages. People were unable to come up with anything better because, for a very long time, they lacked both theoretical and experimental tools with which to conclusively prove (or disprove) their hypotheses.

We needed significant developments in mathematics, fluid mechanics and optics in order to test these theories, and we needed special relativity to come up with something better.

Whereas claims like the one this article refutes need only a correct application of double-blind testing and not falling into well-known (at least to statisticians) traps in order to be tested.

The fact that we have 180 degree spins in understanding such matters every six months is not a testament to how modern science cares only about truth. It's a testament of how important it is to publish papers.

Re: Individuals with social phobia have too much serotonin

#70

Post by primroot »

anthony_romeo wrote: post #61
phkahler wrote: post #48

>> Previous studies have led researchers to believe that individuals with social anxiety disorder or social phobia have too low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin. A new study, however, shows that the situation is exactly the opposite. It's stuff like this that is destroying the reputation of science in general. I know it's one thing to "lead to believe" and another to "show that", and perhaps that's what happe…

It's a good thing that science can change. This is what distinguishes science from dogma. The problem is not these supposed 'reversals', but rather how this information is being reported. Pop-science media reports modest studies as absolute truths to catch eyeballs. When one study merely suggests research in one direction, it's emblazoned as fact on the tabloids. In the example you identified: "Fatty food is bad - no…

> So I'd argue that the bigger problem is people reading oversimplified reports of scientific information.

And what about the AHA[1] and other policy makers and shapers? What leads them to make recommendations based on weakly established conclusions?

I think the pressure to deliver, and the lack of generalist knowledge are somehow involved here. In the case of food and drugs, I would also blame elitism.

[1] http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/NutritionCenter...

Post reply on HN