If schizophrenia/bipolar/depression can't be found in an autopsy does it really exist?

If schizophrenia/bipolar/depression can't be found in an autopsy does it really exist?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sluggish_schizophrenia
broadinstitute.org/research-highlights-schizophrenia
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...

It is, thought. Note that having evidence is different than having proof.

Brainwaves=life
You take away life, you can no longer observe brainwaves. You could be completely brain-dead but still have a completely normal body and still be physically dead. So ofc you can't measure these ailments in bodies.

Schizophrenia can't be reliably detected in a living person anyway so what's your point?

If schizophrenia / bipolar disorder / depression were actual brain problems they'd be treated by a neurologist.
Part of the standard procedure for diagnosing someone with a psychiatric condition involves *ruling out* medical conditions, meaning despite what psychiatrists will say to try to make themselves sound more like a real medical practice they themselves are fully aware of the distinction between medical conditions and psychiatric concepts.

Yes, you can, ever heard of an fMRI?

Oh you mean that thing that's not actually used in the diagnosis of schizophrenia?

>You can diagnosis schizophrenia with an MRI

As there are multiplicities of types of cancer, perhaps there also exists multiplicities of types of schizophrenia. For example: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sluggish_schizophrenia

If intelligence cannot be found in an autopsy, does it really exist?

if we can't see atoms in a microscope do they really exist?

>we can't see atoms in a microscope
But that's wrong.
But that was already addressed:

It can be found though. You can easily detect the size of a person's brain with an autopsy.

When cancer is diagnosed we usually have X-rays, CT scans, MRI scans, PET scans, ultrasound tests, blood tests, endoscopies, biopsies, all sorts of things. But for some reason mental illness doesn't require any of those things for a diagnosis. If you're going to lock people up on "medical grounds" at least have some evidence.

>If you're going to lock people up on "medical grounds" at least have some evidence.
I think they should just go in the opposite direction and stop pretending it's "medical."
In my opinion anyway there should be options available to involuntarily commit a crazy person since it totally is possible to have a raving lunatic running around making noise and bothering everyone else. But I wouldn't pretend that person has a brain problem (unless they do have a brain problem as in a real neurological condition that wouldn't be treated by a psychiatrist in the first place).
Just because you have a program behaving in a way you don't want doesn't mean there's anything wrong with your physical computer.

>It is, thought.
Why?

I'm 80% sure you can estimate that someone has schizophrenia based on the abnormalities in a brain scan.

Let's say you have two coins, one biased and one regular, such that the biased one never gives tails.

You choose one of the coins, not knowing which one it is, and toss it 100 times. You get 100 times heads. This does not prove that your coin is the biased one, but it certainly is evidence for it.

Hi Friends,
there is a field of pathology called molecular pathology. Schizophrenia is now understood better, in that there is evidence supporting the idea that cleavage of synapses by an overactive complement protein isoform is responsible. The postulate in the OP is partially incorrect, as you may know a shrunken brain is evident in later stages of schizophrenia.

broadinstitute.org/research-highlights-schizophrenia

Psychiatrists seeing many people with similar deluded behaviors has led to them being classified in to different illnesses. Does happiness/normality not exist because you can't find it in an autopsy? You are asking more of a philosophical question than a scientific one.
Psychiatrists don't use MRIs in diagnosing schizophrenia. they go based off of behavior and experiences that the patient describes. I would conjecture that the brain scans of a schizo are pretty different from normal, but it is impractical for diagnosis.
The behaviors, thoughts, and perceptions of someone with psychotic illness can vary a lot, but the main indicator of someone being schizophrenic is chronic deluded thinking. It warps you in to thinking the most bizarre shit without having a shred of real evidence. The thing about "reliable detection" not existing is true. A lot of the times, psychiatrists don't diagnose someone "officially"; they will just look at the behaviors of a patient and see which illnesses they fall under. Usually someone's mentally ill behaviors don't fall cleanly in to a single illness. You can see this in personality disorders, which get lumped together in to cluster A, B, C etc.

From personal experience, my psychiatrist said I fell under "acute psychotic disorder" and "bipolar disorder". There was never a formal diagnosis, but it was based on the loony shit I was saying and my erratic mood swings. That's the best they can do. Examine behavior and give you drugs based on what tends to improve the condition.

>You choose one of the coins, not knowing which one it is, and toss it 100 times. You get 100 times heads. This does not prove that your coin is the biased one, but it certainly is evidence for it.
Are the results of 100 coin flips not evidence?

What a crooked coin...

It doesnt, it was invented by (((doctors))) as an excuse to make population elen less capable by selling them debilitating drugs.

What do you want to find? A part of the brain labeled "schizophrenic inducer". Right now our best idea is over stimulation of dopamine. This is why we give drugs that downregulate dopamine. They seem to work well when they actually take it. This is evidence that, even though we're pretty shit at even diagnosing schizophrenia/ bipolar disorder, it is biologically based, and not some lifestyle choice.

Usage of antipsychotic medications = Shrunken brain

Anti-dopaminergics are also known as the "major tranquilizers" for a reason. That reason being they were administered to keep crazy people druggy and sedated. Which I don't think is very good evidence dopamine is causing problems so much as good evidence you can sedate people in general by blocking dopamine.
Other old school name has the same connotations to it: neuroleptic, as in:
Neuro- = nerves
-leptic = taking hold of

Okay, while that is true, it doesn't mean that schizophrenia isn't "real". Anti psychotic medications do help with the positive symptoms of schizophrenia. I'm just trying to show OP that schizophrenia "exists".

I'm not convinced mental illness is "real" in the sense of there being any sort of physical problems with the brain.
I think you can explain them pretty well in terms of maladaptive behavioral routines alone.
They'd still be "real" in the sense that there are people who behave in crazy ways and should probably be sedated and even hospitalized in some cases, but I don't think there's as much reason to believe these are literal physical / medical problems as the modern general consensus suggests.
Biggest objection to this would probably be the existence of hallucinations since that seems like a clearly involuntary, abnormal, and harmful phenomenon mediated by the brain. But I'd point out that plenty of normal people have mild hallucinations at least some of the time, particularly with sleep deprivation (e.g. you might start vividly seeing things you're thinking about while lying in bed after having been up a couple nights in a row). And if people diagnosed with "schizophrenia" fall into a vicious cycle of noticing mild hallucinations and freaking out about it so that they're in a feedback loop of panic, insomnia, and increasingly intense auditory or visual hallucinations, then they could end up having some seriously strong / out of the ordinary mental symptoms even though their brain might be perfectly fine.

And to further clarify, I think all of today's "schizophrenic" population could probably be roughly divided into two groups:
A) A group with the behavioral mechanism I described here:
And
B) A group with undiagnosed neurological conditions misdiagnosed as "schizophrenia," e.g. temporal lobe epilepsy.

Schizophrenia IS sleep deprivation. 100% of people with schizophrenia were found to have disrupted sleeping phases.

This is the kind of dumb shit only a psych major would post.

> you cant find evidence of Long QT in an autopsy, it doesnt exist

>i can't see it with my eyes, therefore it must not exist

>there should be options available to involuntarily commit a crazy person
Yeah, they should call it "sectioning" or something like that....

>Are the results of 100 coin flips not evidence?
He literally said they were just that (but not proof)!

>He literally said they were just that (but not proof)!
Then what does it have to do with the claim about an absence of evidence?

But I've been up for days at a time and at least remained aware of reality. I would have odd thoughts and tangents but knew they were just that.

You'd have to be talking a severely disrupted sleep cycle to account for the effects of being awake for (for argument's sake) 100+ hours of sleep deprivation.

???
I didn't say those options didn't exist. I said they're good options that we should still have and that don't depend on insisting schizophrenia is a literal brain disorder.

So it was demons after all.

That's not intelligence though. Intelligence, like schizophrenia, is a higher abstraction. This is the point the poster you replied to is making.

I had schizophrenia diagnosed in the hospital basement with an ancient high powered x-ray machine.
Doctor Managerie prescribed weekly intensive deep tissue throbbing prostate massage which made me ejaculate the demons out which he’d catch in his mouth.

Shit was gay as fuck but after three years and another x-ray exam the schizophrenia is gone!

Whenever I see the doctor we take turns sponge bulbing each other’s prostate.

This.

Ameritards are so fucking stupid. I can't believe they actually have to PAY for healthcare that doesn't use the elder arts of gentle prostate suctioning.