Elena's Legacy. Texts written by Elena, excerpts from texts she liked, her artworks.

Monday, January 29, 2018

Ten Common Myths About Mental Illnesses

Mental illnesses affect everyone in some way. We all likely know someone who has experienced a mental illness at some point. Yet there are still many hurtful attitudes around mental illnesses that fuel stigma and discrimination. They make it harder to reach out for help. It`s time to look at the facts.

Many myths exclude people with mental issues from our communities and create barriers to well-being. If we want to reduce the impact of mental illnesses on our communities, we need to learn the facts and start with our own assumptions and behaviour.

Here are some of the most common myths about mental illnesses:

Myth 1: Mental illnesses are not real illnesses.

Facts: The words we use to describe mental illnesses have changed greatly over time. What hasn`t changed is the fact that mental illnesses are not the regulars ups and downs of life. Mental illnesses create distress, don’t go away on their own, and are real health problems with effective treatments. When someone breaks their arm, we wouldn`t expect them to “just get over it”. Nor would be blame them if they needed a cast, sling, or other help in their daily life while they recovered.

Many myths about mental illness exist. Photo by Elena

Myth 2: People don`t recover from mental illnesses.

Facts: People can and do recover from mental illnesses. Today there are many different kinds of treatments, supports and services that could help. No one should expect to feel unwell forever. The fact is people who experience can and do lead productive, engaged lives. They work, volunteer and contribute their unique skills and abilities to their communities. Even when people experience mental illnesses that last for a long time they can learn how to manage their symptoms so they can get back to their goals. If someone continues to experience many challenges, it may be a sign that different approaches or supports are needed.

Myth 3: Mental illnesses will never affect me.

Facts: All of us will be affected by mental illnesses. Researchers estimate that as many as one in five Canadians will experience a mental illness at some point in their lives. You may not experience a mental illness yourself, but it`s very likely that a family member, friend or co-worker will experience challenges.

Myth 4: Mental illnesses are just an excuse for poor behaviour.

Facts: It`s true that some people who experience mental illnesses may act in ways that are unexpected or seem strange to others. We need to remember that the illness, not the person, is behind these behaviours. No one chooses to experience a mental illness. People who experience a change in their behaviour due to a mental illness may feel extremely embarrassed or ashamed around others. It`s also true that people with a history of a mental illness are like anyone else: they may make poor choices or do something unexpected for reasons unrelated to symptoms of their illness.

Myth 5: Bad parenting causes mental illness.

Facts: No one factor can cause mental illnesses. Mental illnesses are complicated conditions that arise from a combination of genetics, biology, environment, and life experiences. Family members and loved ones do have a big role in support and recovery.

Myth 6: People with mental illnesses are dangerous and violent.

Facts: Some people try to predict violence, so they know what to avoid. However, the causes of violence are complicated. Researchers agree that mental illnesses are not a good predictor of violence. In fact, if we look at mental illnesses on their own, people who experience a mental illness are no more violent than people without a mental illness. Excluding people from communities is linked to violence. And people with mental illnesses are often among those who are excluded. It`s also important to note that people who experience mental illnesses are much more likely to be victims of violence than to be violent.

Myth 7: People who experience mental illnesses are weak and can`t handle stress.

Facts: Stress impacts well-being, but this is true for everyone. People who experience mental illnesses may actually be better at managing stress than people who haven`t experienced mental illnesses. Many people who experience mental illnesses learn skills like stress management and problem-solving so they can take care of stress before it affects their well-being. Taking care of yourself and asking for help when you need it are signs of strength, not weakness.

Myth 8: People who experience mental illnesses can`t work.

Facts : Whether you realize it or not, workplaces are filled with people who have experienced mental illnesses. Mental illnesses don`t mean that someone is no longer capable of working. Some people benefit from changes at work to support their goals, but many people work with few supports from their employer. Most people who experience serious mental illnesses want to work but face systemic barriers to finding and keeping meaningful employment.

Myth 9: Kids can`t have a mental illness like depression. Those are adult problems.

Facts: Even children can experience mental illnesses. In fact, many mental illnesses first appear when a person is young. Mental illnesses may look different in children than in adults, but they are a real concern. Mental illnesses can impact the way young people learn and build skills, which can lead to challenges in the future. Unfortunately, many children don`t receive the help they need.

Myth 10: Everyone gets depressed as they grow older. It’s just part of the aging process.

Facts: Depression is never an inevitable part of aging. Older adults may have a greater risk of depression because they experience so many changes in roles and social networks. If an older adult experiences depression, they need the same support as anyone else.

No one should expect to feel unwell for ever. People do recover from mental illnesses. Illustration: Clear Mind by Megan Jorgensen.

Love and Oxytocin

Love is all around us. However, not all the love we see is romantic love. Psychologists and other researchers alike try to elucidate romantic love. Why does it happen? Which are the neural correlates or neuronal substrates of romantic love? Neurohormones oxytocin and vasopressin have been implicated in the formation of long-term monogamous bonds. For example, see prairie and mountain voles.

Further, empathy is an important part of human relationships. Empathy is defined as the ability to feel or experience another’s internal states emphatically. In other words, it goes back to understanding the other person. Understanding, trust, communication and empathy all represent key ingredients in the formation of long-term relationships. However, how we react to others, and particularly how we interact with new lovers may be predicted by our genes.

Love is around us... Photo by Elena

For example, a genetic study showed the neurobiology of at least one emotional parameter: empathy. Thus, Schneiderman et al. (2013) argue that romantic relationships may be mediated by an oxytocin related gene. Furthermore, while conferring both advantages and disadvantages to psychological, and at times even physical health, it is difficult to overlook the importance romantic attachment plays in people’s lives. Most songs and movies have at least some component centering on love. Still, the researchers isolated a gene which may be responsible for quality of early stage relationships by mediating oxytocin.

Communication and trust have been countlessly cited as predictors of marital and relational satisfaction. Notwithstanding, communication is a diverse and complex subject altogether. To illustrate, much of communication is non-verbal. Facial expressions, tone of voice, body language and even the way we dress all convey a message. To make a long story short, in communication, a sender encodes and sends a message, which is then received and decoded by the receiver. Clearly, communication break-downs occur in many situations. Also, happy couples differ greatly in their communication patterns from unhappy ones. Needless to say, couples can always seek couple counselling to improve their communication styles.

IQ and the Brain

Intuitively, as evidenced by the saying “big brains”, there is a relation between brain morphology and intelligence, at least as measured by IQ (Intelligence Quotient) tests. The better known such assessments are WAIS and WISC i.e. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Adults and Children, respectively.

Further, Alfred Binet was the first to have thought of such operationalization, and developed an initial test to facilitate children’s scholastic placement. Criticisms of intellectual quotient results have ranged from their correlations with SES (SocioEconomic Status), bias against certain groups, to failure to predict success and occasional overlook of traits that may qualify as intelligent. Also, IQ averages in the general population follow a normal distribution.

But what do neuroscientists have to say on the topic? The present short essay attempts to answer this question by first turning to Johnson et al. (2008). Thus, applying VBM (Voxel-Based Morphometry) and comparing brain gray and white matter volumes as related to numerical results, the researchers found robust correlations. Consequently, differences in brain structure may reflect variety in sharpness, suggesting neuroanatomical underpinnings as clarification, at least for non-mathematically assessed cognitive capacities. In addition, the authors insist that their data support a previously established model (Carroll, 1993) of cognitive abilities operating on both a general and a task specific basis.

By the same token, gray as well as white matter volumes have been linked to intelligence As a brief aside, gray matter consists of neural bodies called soma, whereas white matter encompasses cellular projections, called axons. Axons are myelinated (myelin is a fatty substance speeding transmission), which is why they result in lighter color.

Along these lines, while confirming the association between cerebral architecture and IQ, Li et al. (2008) went further to investigate specific relationships. So, they write that COMT va1158met (gene variant) acts on the association between brain white matter and IQ. Their findings support the notion that COMT val158met influences quick wittiness. Hence, the work adds to the body of knowledge linking genetics to intellect dissimilarities in the general population.

Finally, regardless of how persistent are rankings of IQ scores (they do increase in most individuals overtime, but retain proportion) and high accuracy in scholastic achievement foreshadowing, other measures have been proposed as alternatives. One such illustration is EQ or Emotional Quotient.

References:

Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, W., Jung, R. E., Colom, R. and Haier, R. J. (2008). Cognitive abilities independent of IQ correlate with regional brain structure. Intelligence, 36: 18-28.
Li, J., Yu, C., Li, Y., Liu, B., Liu, Y., Shu, N., Song, M., Zhou, Y., Zhu, W., Li, K. and Jiang, T. (2008). COMT Val158Met modulates association between brain white matter architecture and IQ. American Journal of Medical Genetics: Neuropsychiatric Genetics, Part B, 150B: 375-80.

Cogito ergo sum is Latin for: I think, therefore I am… The phrase was coined by mathematician Rene Descartes… Illustration : Megan Jorgensen.

Interpersonal Attraction

Psychologists, especially social psychologists, have long pondered the question of attraction and relationships. Sure, there have been theories on attachment and trust (Mary Ainsworth and Erik Eriksson, respectively), beauty standards (WHR – waist to hip ratio, complexion, gender differences), but what is it that attracts human beings to one another?

Is this picture not of the most beautiful woman in the world? Angelina Jolie, Aishwarya Rai and Megan Fox have all been designated as the most gorgeous women in the world at some point. Coincidentally, all three actresses have dark hair and light eyes. Regardless, ladies with dissimilar looks, such as Claudia Schiffer, Monica Belucci, Kim Tae-hee, Halle Berry and Lindsay Lohan (who often changed hairdos and appeared to wear contact lenses) have similarly been named as world’s beauty queens. One saying comes to mind: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Despite this, physical attraction has been cited as a factor in choosing partners, friends and, ironically enough, even in determining an expert’s credibility. Image: Copyright © Megan Jorgensen (Elena)

To answer the question, researchers have as usual turned to scientific methodology. Thus, conducting several studies, they have found that at least in the realm of friendship bond formation, liking depended on proximity. The result was documented in a study were students became friends with those living closest to them in dormitories (college dorms). Also, the literature is full of examples suggesting that friendships are more likely to spring from similarity in interests, background, values and intelligence. Who knows, maybe opposites fail to attract after all…

But, what about romantic bonds? Does the association stand? According to research, it seems so. Marriages are said to often bring together individuals of, likewise, the same backgrounds, the same education and the same age.

Still, psychology may not apply to every single romance or friend group or pair out there, but there seems to be a consensus that people tend to like those who like them. A further question is raised by such a statement, why then do so many believe that it is wise to play hard to get?

Intelligence – Neural Correlates

By Dr. Megan Jorgensen

Intelligence is a significantly broad topic, and can thus be approached from different angles. On the one hand, Lefebvre (2011) maintains that innovation constitutes an ecological measure of intelligence in the wild. Along these lines, behavioral flexibility would allow animals to cope with their environments. However, the author also proposes that cognition should be viewed in general terms, rather than in modular, despite some components definitely being domain-specific. Interestingly, tool use may correlate with brain size. For example the New Caledonian crow, the non-human most apt at using tools, has a proportionately larger brain than its avian close relatives.

On the other hand, Geake (2011) centers on educational neuroscience and proclaims, “our brains did not evolve to go to school” (44). Interestingly, the researcher suggests that analogy making is central to acumen. Although the author introduces a distinction, since in creative thinking, fluid analogizing takes center stage. Therefore, more than one right answer is possible. Further, the experimenter found a correlation between the process and verbal IQ. IQ scores, despite being disputed as an absolute representation of sharpness, are a good predictor of academic performance. Again, the writer stresses that several brain areas are involved in higher cognitive processes, even though the frontal and parietal lobes have consistently been implicated. Further, Brodmann areas have similarly been indicated in the literature as candidates for explaining differences in astuteness between persons (Deary et al., 2010).

Finally, one must also keep in mind that the capability may be subdivided into several components, such as vocabulary, processing speed, memory, spatial ability and reasoning. However, general intelligence or ‘g’, means that those who perform well in one domain usually perform well across the board. Such a situation renders difficult defining neural correlates of intelligence, since even on domain specific tasks, level of g is important; g may compensate for any lack of ability – consequently – it’s hard to separate the parts from the whole.

To conclude, the idea that intelligence is highly heritable (genetically programmed) started with Galton’s paper in the 19th century. Also, national IQs have risen over time, at least in Western societies in the 20th century, a phenomenon dubbed the Flynn effect. Lastly, another significant theory on the topic (Multiple Intelligences) comes from Gardner, but lies outside the scope of the present short essay.

References:

Deary, I. J., Penke, L. & Johnson, W. (2010). The neuroscience of human intelligence differences. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 11: 201-11.
Geake, J. (2011). Position statement on motivations, methodologies, and practical implications of educational neuroscience research: FMRI studies of the neural correlates of creative intelligence. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43 (1): 43-7.
Lefebvre, L. (2011). Opinion piece: Taxonomic counts of cognition in the wild. Biology Letters: Animal Behaviour, 7: 631-3.