Quantum mechanical processes, like superposition f.i. and their fields also work in the brain - informationprocessing - , DNA, RNA, enzymes and stimulus conduction
The basis of everything is quantum mechanics and therefore also how molecules work and are constructed. The rapid and efficient functioning of enzymes in the liver, among others, is based on quantum tunneling. Electric fields and, as a result of, ions currents, around and in nerve cells, largely determine stimulus conduction, the stimulus threshold and the effect of proteins, receptors and more. Through tunneling, different molecules can have the same output and therefore the same odor or effect in the brain instead of thinking from proteins with a certain key in cell receptors. Transmission of stimuli between nerve cells happens with several at the same time, since a single synaptic transfer is too uncertain. Even quantum entanglement occurs in ATP, associated with ribosomes that have an RNA background. But there is still a lot of skeptic about this. The reason for spontaneous mutation is tunneling of the known proteins of the DNA. Research shows that brain cells change, among other things, from the DNA during our life.
Our brains create fluctuating electric and magnetic fields, almost immeasurable, yet affecting their functioning. All that makes it so fascinating and therefore so complex. Much old neurological knowledge is not in line with new insights.
But it goes a step further somewhere and that the ions responsible for electrical impulses from and within nerve cells, although they are molecules can in a certain sense also form a superposition and thus stimulate other neuronal networks. If the wave function or the spreading of the molecule and therefore at several locations - superposition - will be present at the same time, but less than a electron due too the size of the molecule. But than can be calculated by the waveform formula based on the Schrödinger equation. So nerve cell stimulation is nevertheless a quantum mechanical process to quickly take several actions and thus processing of information, by simultaneously working multiple stimuli and therefore information in nearby nerve cell networks.
The wonder of psychotherapy and new adjusted experiences.
Many will agree that traumatic experiences are like scars in the brain. But we should not regard this as a decay or death of tissue of neurons. PTSD is a mostly chronic (untreated) and often under diagnosed and treated stress phenomenon in which lower neurological areas and their braincenters take over the control of higher areas that often have a regulatory tasks (orbito-frontal cortex), or regulate attention, planing, reasoning, etc. The miracle of therapy is not so much the theory or how it is done, but how to take away fear and fear conditioning, the brain can form new connections and thus can adjust the dendrite network of our memory so that we are no longer hindered or feeling anxious and thus avoid and also having better expectations and adapted cognition. The essence of healing trauma is the formation of these new dendrites or structures in existing networks of, among other things, the memory. That in traumas and having to live with suppressed memories, fragmentation of memory plays a role may now be clear. Patient HM clearly shows us that the hypocampus is not responsible for the long-term memory. After all, both (left and right hemisphere) were cut away in this patient. This patient still had old long-term memories, but could not form new forms. Dissociation is based on this fragmentation, a process that has hardly any attention within academic circles and within psychiatry. New connections also explain the many theories about learning and conditioning. In this, motor skills or perform an action also play a role. In this way new experiences can arise, which partly replace the old by forming new connections within existing memory networks.
That anxiety and other distressing feelings triggered by, among other things, the amygdala through the production of stress hormones inhibit or prevent the consolidation of new positive experiences shows, research has shown concerning the influence of stress hormones on learning. For too long we have assumed that cortisol is a stress hormone. Studies of veterans in the US showed that they have a low baseline of cortisol in rest those with PTSD. A good cortisol level ensures that we can leave bad experiences behind us. Studies based on the idea that it is a stress hormone are not correct and the studies on links between learning and cortisol have been misinterpreted. It is also time that we include epigenetics how neurons work at the cellular level, therefore, through DNA it forms mRNA that leads to new neuronal connections. Recently I read that the Dutch army is going to use Extacy in therapy, but Extacy also makes the anti-diuretic hormone that gives pressure increase in the brain by water accumulation. Love and thus not fear is the answer, because love connects and love makes oxitocin in the brain. New experiences and thus memories are not just changes in the same synaptic nodes and thus jobs. Our brain is a living and therefore creative tissue, partly due to the formation of dendrites. IT-professionalsf will probably not see this adequately with their self-learning algorithms, because their printed circuit boards on which their computers or CPUs run do not rewrite their copper paths or connections. Their intelligent systems will give problems because they will have the same biasis as our brain if we don’t have a clue what those black boxes do.
History of PTSD
Shellshock, Soldiers Heart, Battle Fatigue, Railway Spine, Traumatic Neurosis, Combat Neurosis, StacheldrahtKrankheit, Post-Concentration Syndrome, Accident Neurosis, Post-Vietnam Syndrome, Rape Trauma Syndrome, post-Sexual Abuse and Torture Syndrome.
All names for basically PTSD or also called Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Nevertheless, I must point out here that there may be similarities, but also differences, and that the manifestations of shell-shock syndrome were slightly different from today's PTSD. It has much to do with the knowledge of those days and the spirit of that time.
I think Shellshock is probably older than the First World War, because history knows many wars. Stories from ancient scriptures tell it if you read carefully. It those days it wasn't called PTSD, that came later after the impact of the Vietnam War. I still do not understand why traumatic
experiences by doctors (neurologists) and even psychiatrists nowadays are still unfortunately seen as a different diagnosis. Many soldiers with Shellshock were simply executed as being traitors, deserters and neurotic people. And neurotic people were simulants (hysterics) and posers. Perhaps it was thought then that this neurotic expression could be cured by electricity as a conditioning stimuli. It was the joint effort of many veterans of the Vietnam to convince society and the psychiatrists of the serious mental consequences of the Vietnam War. Many veterans were in that context "twisted" men with often sudden images of experiences and daily nightmares. Only then one came with the definition of trauma. But why after three wars? Had they not learned anything and had they not seen the concentration camps? I wonder why .....Only in the third edition of the DSM, one came up with the concept of trauma and PTSD and it was based on trauma in adults and usually based on one event. (Type 1 trauma)
Afterwards there was little progress. Fortunately, there are some changes in the next edition of the DSM and especially in in DSM-5. Change was needed. Especially because child abuse and abuse has other consequences. This is due to the fact that children grow up and are in development. We now know more about developmental psychology and it would be good in that context to also teach a subject such as abnormal developmental psychology at universities. The concept of PTSD has been expanded to include the following categories:
- Complex PTSD (consequences of maltreatment in groups and families)
- Dissociative psychotic PTSD
- Chronic PTSD (due to mental exhaustion and / or no support and often the case with KZ syndrome)
The concept of PTSD must include the following categories:
DSM-5 eliminates the three main symptom clusters of PTSD and comes now with four main clusters.
- Reliving in the form of thoughts, images, nightmares.
- Increased arousel (alertness/ tensen), aggressive or self-destructive behavior,
sleep disturbances and hyper-alertness
- Avoidance, for example avoiding disturbing thoughts, memories,
feelings and situations
- Negative thoughts, moods and feelings. For example, feelings of guilt,
alienation of others, and reduction of interest in activities and an inability to remember certain details.
There will also be a couple of sub-types by:
- Playgroup subtype; Children boy 6 years
- The developmental variant
Will there be a dissociative subtype, for example, when feeling estranged from your body or mind or the experience that the world is unreal, like a dream and disturbed. Professor Onno van der Hart is for a subtype called psychotic dissociative PTSD because many client have PTSD with psychosis.
Many members of the organization tell me that they suffer from a complex form of PTSD. It is to my knowledge not a official DSM-5 diagnosis, in addition to a PTSD with psychoses. PTSD has become known by the effects of the Vietnam War in the US. But abuse - often chronic - or trauma in a family or in a group results in other related complaints. It is often difficult to determine whether complaints - for example, relational or attachment problems - is related to a developmental disorder such as, for example, a personality disorder. We see that these people have all kinds of disorders; dissociative, relational, mood disorders, memory problems, identity, loyalty problems, addiction problems, somatic, identification with the offender and his / her beliefs, loss of hope and self belief system and so on. Rather, I believe that the child developed in the early stage develop PTSD - which is now seen as stress problem - reacts with stress after a traumatic event and by repeated trauma, the power of the abusers and no intervention or protection or support from others at a later age are more sensitive to secondary psychiatric disorders. It is difficult to distinguish coping problems that may be the cause of these related problems in relation from a genetic predisposition or vulnerability.
That we do fall short when we merely see a large group of clients as having the known PTSD diagnosis with comorbide disorders seems more than plausible. But who can see the context and relations in all these related complaints which gives clarity for treatment I call experts. It is difficult for scientists and therapists to see through the many complaints a context. Another point of discussion is the diagnosis D.I.S. that can be seen as a form of CPTSS with mainly dissociative symptoms. Also, they often exhibit a wide range of complaints which are frequently diagnosed as separate disorders. Finally, I think it is good that there is more clarity or should be how these complaints are related and how they interconnect as a context. Furthermore, it is important to see or better recognize how chronic traumatization with often being deprived of support, protection and thus being helpless has a wider and greater effect on people and growing up children. The root of these problems is dealing with all of these experiences and the context how these people or children must cope their experiences often lacking support or protection.
PTSD is not that simple as it looks:
If you see PTSD as a syndrome with a short description of the complaints, it doesn't justify the emotional experiences of those who suffer from it. PTSD as a result of child abuse is fundamentally different and more often complex. People often have to deal with the taboo on sexual abuse, family problems due to loyalty, shame and fear and sometimes other forms of child abuse. It's about the context in which the trauma is experienced and how the child must cope with it. War experiences in that sense are more legitimate. It sometimes seems also the problem of bystanders. Victims also have to deal with that if they speak out openly. (loyalty and disbelieve) Not everyone wants to hear it. Not everyone believes their experiences sometimes. Many therefore feel lonely and misunderstood. It's not as simple as just seeing it as what happened in the past. Explain that to someone else, what it's like to live with a profound experience and to deal with it - especially those victims of the older generation - if bystanders fail to support them. PTSD as a result of childhood trauma is often associated with other problems that come with. The taboo on childhood sexual abuse, although it has become more open and known, many feel abandoned by sometimes just acquaintances, friends and sometimes others.
Try explaining to an employer that you have PTSD or anyone else. It all seems logical, but it is not. It is increasingly in the news, but the accompanying emotions such as alienation and feeling abandoned is for bystanders hard to understand. Refugees face the same problems, who sometimes struggle with their trauma's. It is in that sense to be regarded as a social problem. Children growing up with traumatic experiences, can develop secundairy developmental disorders. This group show more complex problems. It is often difficult to disentangle PTSD if interpersonal difficulties are involved with personality disorders. It is in this sense too complex. The child cannot adapt to the difficulties and the problems it is experiencing. Besides PTSD there may also be symptoms of depression, suicide, interpersonal problems, psychosis, severe lack of trust in the other person may play a role. However if you look at it is good that we look once again at the consequences. The mental health care workers do have cognitive frames that are very developed, but it is considered a serious emotional problem. Children who were severely abused developing behavioral problems are really no more than bad adjustments or coping.
People who have been abused can sometimes later as a parent allow later as a parent that their children be mistreated or abused. Often they choose a bad partner because they think it should be so. What we often see is a pattern repeating. People who were abused often have difficulty indicating what their limits are and sometimes they tend to think well "is must be normal ..." Women and men can go into prostitution or sex trafficking. It is not the case that if one realizes that their children are mistreated or abused that one agrees with the situation, but they dare not speak out and disapprove and take action. Many victims who often forgot their abuse, can sexualize in their behavior.
They openly seems to be a willing victim. Revictimization is a increased risk. Victims are accustomed to that attention and care is partly sex. Here one gets emotionally entangled. What we also see is that the history of abuse in relationships give rise to domestic violence, beating and other related problems. Emotionally, people often deny that they have pain, victims are those who deny or flatten their feelings. Sometimes one feels simply no pain or grief anymore. It is known that victims may have no present memories even after years. It is often accompanied with alcohol- or druguse to experience some relaxation. But this may be the beginning of an addiction.
The problem with the psychotic symptoms is often that, on the one hand, clients or lay have a different opinion about the cause of psychoses than clinicians. Often one places the cause under the schizo-spectrum, such as, for example, schizophrenia. Research into this chicken-egg problem or knowing what came first trauma or psychosis sensitivity will not happen soon, because most believe that the cause is a biological and or genetic one. It does not matter for therapy, but it is important when it comes to a prognosis and to some extent also the expectation of the client. Several researchers consider the causality of trauma and psychosis important. It must be clarified. Freud also wrote in his works over the hysterical psychosis and Professor Onno van der Hart. (Dissociative psychotic PTSD)
Considering the psychosis of these clients it is remarkable that there is some sense of reality and that the psychoses take only a couple of hours. Also many develop psychosis later in live. Unlike people with schizophrenia which often develop their first psychosis in early adulthood . Furthermore the recovery of people with schizophrenia takes several weeks, instead of a couple of hours. Longitudinal research or monitoring victims is important. But whether one sees the need for such a study is questionable as the biological or genetic basis is already fixed. But true science goes out of negating a thesis. If the thesis is tenable and can not be refuted, then the theorem correct. You can ask yourself if the causality clients see in their experiences is so different from the actual. Besides it has taken a long time researchers, clinicians and social workers acknowledged that traumatic experiences can lead to psychosis. But you can ask the question if it is genetic, why it often happened until later in life. Why not earlier? But perhaps as Jim van Os once said in the following statement might be the answer. Jim made it clear that an anthropologist observed the work of clinicians how they came to a diagnosis. Notable was the conclusion that it was a kind of dichotomy. On the one hand, the severe psychiatric diseases such as psychosis, and on the other hand, the milder the psychological syndromes. The former had to be biological because it was serious and the latter a psychological cause because it was not that serious. Furthermore, it is unfortunate that clients with PTSD and psychosis are excluded of research into the effects of treatment and that the diagnosis of schizo-affective disorder is made more frequently than the diagnosis of PTSD. It is not so popular in mental health care.
Freud had already discussed it in his works. He described how traumatic contents plunged into a psychosis and called it the "hysterical psychosis". Also, Prof. Onno van der Hart describes the dissociative psychotic PTSD and further more Wilma Bouvink describes in her stories, among others "Who carved psychosis in my body." It strikes me how clinicians and scientists see the causes of psychosis as something biological and genetic. One can't accept that psychological distress or misery may be a cause of psychosis.
One accepts that trauma can cause a psychosis, but at the same time agrees that there should be a genetic susceptibility underlying it. Thus, the circular reasoning is round and must be and will be something genetic or biological. Claiming that circumstances may can make you crazy is actually throwing the cat among the pigeons of the scientifically trained clinicians. But it is remarkably that people who suffer from traumatic experiences, and especially those with severe psychosis is that the narrative of their psychosis are not as weird as those suffering from schizophrenia.
The placebo effect
It may be - not among experts - a misunderstanding that a placebo has no physiological effect on the receptors of cells. Remarkably, a placebo has often the same, but a lesser effect on the treatment, therapeutically or mainly medical. In RCT's placebo's are often used to discount the placebo effect in terms of impact and often a RCT is the combination of a treatment group, a placebo group and a waiting list group. But only using placebos without the client knowing it is still a exception. Therapeutically and every doctor knows intuitively that sincere attention sometimes is the solution to a problem,
a placebo can often be the nonverbal accepting attitude of the therapist or the atmosphere of the treatment room. But physiologically it would be very interesting to find out how the brain by creating expectations can make molecules by means of an inert substance that often contributes to the recovery. Often the concept of "treatment as usual" is used to measure the effect of a real treatment. Yet attention alone is sometimes therapeutically, but also the expectation of the client.
Experiencing trauma as a child increases the risk of schizophrenia
Who experienced trauma during his youth, has in later life a greatly increased risk of psychosis and schizophrenia. This evidence from a large international study by researchers from the Netherlands (Maastricht University), Great Britain (University of Liverpool and University of Manchester) and New Zealand (University of Auckland).
Prof Jim van Os
They also argue that schizophrenia is not a genetic disease, but is caused by a combination of environmental and hereditary factors. The impact of childhood trauma on schizophrenia has long been a topic of debate in psychiatry. To put an end to this discussion, the researchers have reconsidered data from all research into the effects of abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, death of a parent and bullying in schizophrenia. Not only showed that there is a link, but that childhood trauma nearly triples the risk of schizophrenia. The researchers suggest that schizophrenia is not a genetic brain disease, but results from an interplay between genetic and environmental factors. Trauma and traumatic experiences have a big impact, but other, already known environmental risk factors, such as belonging to an ethnic minority, growing up in an urban environment and cannabis use increases the risk of psychosis and schizophrenia. These findings underscore that schizophrenia can be considered a social disease, which is caused by a combination of our environment and genetic factors, according to the researchers.
Genes, epigenetics and trauma
Watson who discovered DNA assumed - many might not know it - that there must be more than genes and DNA. Jim van Os agrees doing research on environmental factors and genes involved in many diseases, that in particular the methylation of histones the DNA which is wrapped around it determines how genes are turned on or off and thus contributing to the development of many disorders. It makes sense because if genes were the whole story than a baby with psychotic genes would fairly quickly exhibit psychotic symptoms. In this case environmental factors causes a disorder to develop in a person at a given time at a later age due to a gene or genes turned on. Turning off genes may explain in case of a depression that should contribute to cure can explains why sometimes a depression is often difficult to cure. It may also explain why antidepressants often take al long time to work, while neurological research shows that the level of 5-HCT has already become normal. Talking about genes, it turns out that genetical research shows that the deeper you delve into the variety and therefore the combined shared genes responsible for psychotic symptoms that we should be talking about hundreds of genes working together. A landscape of genes also shared by many healthy people. (See Nememis 1 and 2 research and Jim van Os) In nature epigenetics controls the expression, for example, the color of the wings of a butterfly when the environment changes. There were white colored butterflies that got dark wings during the industrialization of England because of smog. Because birds saw them less good, they survived. PTSD can make clients through the mother or father through epigenetic transmission of a stress response in
the mother or father which is not genetical make them later more susceptible to stress. So therefore the stress respons can go from mother to child and so on. Lamarck was ridiculed by neo-Darwinists who presumed that the environment also arranged the transfer of properties was in that case partly right. But he and the neo-Darwinists knew nothing in those days how the expression of genes is regulated by epigenetics.
I expect a lot from this new branch of science and the pharmaceutical industry has developed some drugs in the field of treating some types of cancer by turning genes on or off again. I expect new medicines in the coming decades in which many psychiatric disorders with proven genetic predisposition can turn off the expression. Anti psychotics in that sense never has been a cure. Another new branch of science that can explain much more is that of quantum mechanics and biology. It is found that quantum-tunneling in DNA in humans is responsible for mutating the DNA, and even that protein structures in the brains that provide data transfer by means of tunneling. As a result, nerve cells are based on que-bit information and that explains how brains work quickly with probabilities. The old computer models that explain language development by connectionism therefore are so passé. Finally, another interesting fact which conclude that DNA can not code for brain development and thus dendrite formation, but is done by genes that give simple instructions, such as the degree of trunking. This rate determined by genes may also explain why the prefrontal cortex is less well developed in people with schizophrenia or just has too many connections with other areas for some disorders. Epigenetics regulates the expression and thus the cell differentiation, the development of the brain and the formation in interaction with the environment as presumably a feedback-loop.
"The brain; everyone slightly different"
We have long thought that brains don't change once it is fully grown. But nowadays we know that it is not the case. Brains are plastic or flexible and there are individual differences, even between genetically identical twins. As an internist knows that a organ often differs for each patient so does a neurologist. It's not so that brains all look the same as neat anatomy pictures in books shows. Structures exhibit in general many same structures and fortunately these abnormalities or differences are not so great that a neurologist would be surprised if he could see my brains using PET or fMRI. That death of nerve cells always leads to permanent damage need not be so, that depends on the kind of nerve cells or structures. It is known in songbirds that their hippocampus reduces and grow back depending on the season and by means of learning a birdsong. Also the idea that we use only 10% of our brain is not true and that intelligence is visible. It's got more to do with the speed of information. Besides what is called intelligent in western countries is not so in other cultures. Our behavior has to do with anticipating situations. We constantly make inferences - even subconsciously - about thoughts, situations and feelings. Our brain must make sense off it all. Being intelligent also means to be creative in situations and quick thinking, sometimes impulsive, but also being socially and emotionally creative. Higher brains functions takes over when driving or cycling present us suddenly with new situations. Lower brain functions are good in automatic modes of behavior and even lower for control of autonomic functions. We are not so much designed for multitasking or doing many things the same time, but more to be attentive. Imaging studies such as PET and MRI are temporary. Someone who has been cured of depression exhibited a different functional image than when he was depressed. As a computer is more than just simply hardware, our brains are more than only gray and white matter, and not without contact with other parts of the body and the environment. When we don't feel well, our behavior such as watching a movie can change the
chemical balance in our brain.The reason why it is important why we should acknowledge differences in the brains next to sexual is because of the effect of medication we call psychotropic medication. Drug research is done particularly in men, because women have too many variable factors (hormonal mainly). Women often differ in the effects of medication. I have nothing against medication, they are often necessary, but psychotropic medication adjust the chemical effect in a very broad way. What I object to is to prescribe medication even when psychological treatment has an equal or greater and more lasting effect. Sometimes it is a temporarily necessity, but what is more often the case that clients remain on the same doses for decades as was needed during a crisis. What many do not know is that brains control the sensitivity to psychotropic medication by up- or down-regulation of the synapsis. During treatment temporarily use can be helpful, but we must take into account the individual differences in liver activity, and therefore the age. Older people can suffer from blood pressure reduction while using antidepressants and thus the risk of falling. Back to our brain: "practice makes perfect" and "hope springs eternal" and inspiration and curiosity leads to insights.
Is everything genetical?
We as most people do as we meet a person we presume that the color of the skin or hair and even eyes must be genetical. That's true, but we aren't if it is about personality, behavior, character or traits. We assume too quickly that any certain observable traits or remarkable behavior must be also genetical. But we forget that our DNA has a great part of junk DNA and also that the origin of behavior, our brain can't be the consequence of DNA because if the development of each neuron and its connections to others should be genetically coded, our DNA has not enough amino-acids to code for it. Why can't most people see or even scientist that how the brain develops and makes connections is a result of experience and thus nurture. Genetics only tell us what it can do, it creates boundaries, simple instructions that tells neurons what the boundaries are in this development. How the brain and our personality is developed is not according to a genetical blueprint. Experience shapes ourselves and thus the brain. What we often do and how we often react translates itself in neurological pathways, neuron connections and thus structures and even growth of neurons. Therefore psychiatric disorders can also be a consequence of experience that
translate itself to such structures in the brain which develops into a source of the disorder. But as it is a result of a consequence of maladaption it also is a promise of cure. We can make by means of consequent learned other behavior that the brain learns and shape itself otherwise. In short as we must see the brain as a organ that can adapt, we can also adapt to psychiatric problems. It only takes time. Finally scientists often compare the brain to how a PC operates, we have a program that runs according to a circuit board with many copper wires and CPU's or chips. But we often don't mention that that a brain can rewire itself or make new "wires". Thus not only can the program adapt itself but also the wiring. Is that not a promise of hope or isn't? We can start by adapting our thoughts to start to think in other way's or seek out what is or should also be the case of our assumptions. Try to think openly and seek the truth by doubting our assumptions and you will find out how it isn't and be free in questioning what others think or tell us what the facts are. A free mind is also the way of being a free person in intellect. A free mind always seeks the boundaries of the truth and thus translate itself in what we are.
DSM-5; everyone sick?
Many clients complain that the psychiatry classifies them into boxes or disorders, which works stigmatizing in their opinion. What is wrong and where does this discussions come from. It seems to polarize. On one side we see a kind of convinced attitude to apply the DSM-5 as a standard to diagnose clients, such as (Dutch) health care offices by means of the Dutch DBC (diagnosis-treatment-model) model and a on the other hand those who see many objections. In addition to the DSM there is another classification model, that of ICD of the WHO. Classification systems were set up as a kind of consensus about what they saw as a combination of symptoms called a syndrome or disease. This was necessary because a psychiatrist for example in a town in a country f.i. Amsterdam made a different diagnosis than a psychiatrist for example in Groningen based on the same symptoms. Also for the sake of reliable research there was a need for consensus and clarity in what was seen as a diagnosis. There are a number of disadvantages in using the DSM and this is the general assumption that an illness is a entity which stands alone that can be demonstrated by means imaging techniques such as fMRI or PET scan study. That there must be something wrong in the brain of psychotic and depressed people stands for a reason.That it must be genetically on the other hand also. The problem therefore that it must be shown in our brain, we certainly will, but we have failed until now due to lack of prove, because current technology can't yet we assume or we see the convincing PET or fMRI pictures as solid prove. Basically my brain must differ. Studies have been known - women only - which showed abnormalities of the hippocampus. Unfortunately, done with small populations. Only healthy people do not have those genes, only the recorded patients in psychiatric wards
A large survey such as (Dutch) Nemesis 1 had to be done again because they could not believe the results or data, which showed that a lot of healthy people who had no relationship with psychiatry had also psychotic symptoms. Nemesis 2 showed exactly the same results. Concerning genes, the deeper we delve into genetics causing psychosis it appears that this spectrum of genes also is found in "normals". With conviction pharmacy was looking for a kind of bio-marker for many disorders, including psychosis. But still no one has found any and the question is whether we will find one. That psychosis sometimes are also more common in people who have no problems with it we tend to ignore. That psychoses also occur in somatic diseases such as Alzheimer's disease is also not often mentioned. Yet psychiatrists remain stubbornly thinking that the cause must be biochemical (neurotransmitters) or visible abnormalities of neurons. This reductionist thinking in abnormalities or genes muddied the picture in particular that epigenetica may occasionally be responsible, in particular that the brain is not separate from its environment and that in itself brains simply are the hardware of the psyche. A Dutch brain scientist Dick Swaab used the locked-in syndrome as proof that "we are our brain". But a fetus and later the child brain developing as a locked in brain can never develop like a normal brain. Our brains has been developed due to interaction with our environment. Why else have our brains contact with so many organs and limbs in our body. Someone who learns to play the piano shows a different fMRI image after five years playing. Our brains are not static, it is a organ that communicates and also learns by forming new neuronal connections. Returning back to DSM or ICD, well there seems no alternative. It's more important that psychiatrists also begin to listen more open-minded and understanding. New ideas are welcome and needed. But above all notice what clients tell us and how it relates to their complaints. Also we will see that many problems are time-bound and can not be lumped. Looking at diseases or disorders as a self-contained entity, as a result of marked abnormalities in the functioning of the brains is doubtful as has been demonstrated in meta research. But a large group remains desperately searching for these abnormalities proven by convincing images. What might be an idea is to do a large worldwide study, a meta-study of the correlation of symptoms and reliability. Likewise, we need to understand PTSD and its symptoms better and which symptoms are characteristic and how they relate. These findings should be translated into neurological insights. Doubt is the foundation of science.
Therapy and its developments
For a long time psychoanalysis was the doctrine of the mental health care. It was like a form of religion you should make your own, a kind of higher philosophy about human behavior and its roots. But scientifically there were many snags and especially the theory concerning neuroses has never actually been scientifically proven. Now the doctrine as it seems are the evidence-based therapies. Preferably short-term, often with medication. It is good that we look at the efficacy, but too much leads mainly through the DBC (diagnostic-treament-model) model to a new form of doctrine. Clients often complain that they are put in diagnostic boxes. It has to be efficient and effective. But the theory must certainly be tested, as well as that the theory of CBT has some disadvantages. One is the basis of CBT, which is conditioning. The latest knowledge of neuroscience is that one must think of systems that operate according to networks and so we need to think more in network processes, besides conditioning processes. I think particularly of effective therapies such as those based on meditation and Buddhism according to process theory and thus flow of energy and knowledge or awareness. Perhaps conditioning is at the base, but the theory concerning conditioning needs improvement and perhaps understanding how conditioning processes works on neuron level. Each neuron is an individual processing unit. A beautiful statement I remembered is the following. "If the brain were simple, we would understand it, but if we were that simple we would not exist" Nowadays we know a lot more and we must continue. But that requires essential research. Who has a theory about human behavior and thus disorders, which seems to work in every therapy and can withstand criticism may win the Nobel Prize. I think classical conditioning mainly regulates the more primitive parts of our brain, like reflexes and control systems and that operant conditioning refers primarily to our primate brain and behavior around emotions, desires and needs. What is needed is a theory that forms a framework or model for habituation, classical and operant conditioning. So we could better understand how regulatory systems such as the cortex works.
Yet we also need to think about how the processes of Bottom up and Top-down regulation is functioning. Neurological research is needed but our brain has also led us to art, love, poetry, etc. It is more than a tissue that wants to keep itself alive. But being astonished ensures that we don't tend to think in terms of biological reductionism. But there are so many therapies and theories. It should always be human and that clients will always give meaning and purpose to their existence according to their problems. So here empathy according to Carl Rogers fits in. But if we continue in businesslike and proven protocols after psychoanalysis, we miss something important. It would be interesting to have an anthropologist look at the practices of therapists and look for the corresponding active ingredients of therapies. But thinking that I mean that evidence-based therapies are in essence wrong, miss my point.
Complex PTSD; the need for a new concept
Symptoms are divided into six clusters in the new DSM-5
1 Change in regulation of affect and impulses
modulation of anger
preoccupation with suicidal thoughts
difficulties with the modulation of sexual contacts
excessively risky behavior
2 Change of attention and awareness
gradual dissociative periods and depersonalization
3 Change of self-perception
guilt and feel responsible
nobody understands me
4 Change in relationships with others
becoming a offender
6 Change in meaning
despair and hopelessness
loss of previous stable beliefs
The problem with a group of clients in the mental health care is that they often have a broad cluster of complaints, we diagnose as separate DSM-5 syndromes. You can ask yourself which disorder should be treated first if there is a complex labeling of disorders. For example, should you address the underlying traumatic experiences or the present addiction or personality disorder. Still, the epicenter is the many experiences of child abuse which express themselves in a complex picture. It has to do with how the client usually copes and be means of emotion regulation deals with his experiences. Often alongside abuse there may be other problems. Think of emotional neglect or stigma. The mental health is often reluctant in dealing with this these complex issues, one doesn't know how to handle it.