Some causal info?

[Steve@3AM]

I'm not schizophrenic, so apologies if this is all known info here.

I found this site and article in looking for other information.

I thought it might be of interest.

it's a science site, but feel free to point out to me if it's junk.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100128142145.htm

[Swamp56]

While testing is a useful thing to do for prevention and treatment even before prodromal symptoms, I question people's desire to go through with the test. I also wonder what doctor would have someone who didn't have schizophrenia or psychosis running in their family actually get scanned as well.

[sorrel]

You can trust that site as far as research validity. I personally have issues, though, with preemptive treatment of schizophrenia -- as it will undoubtedly "catch" some people who don't need to be "caught." I also have issues with animal models of mental illness, although I'm aware that's the best they can do right now. I'm not sure how a rat "acts schizophrenic" and whether that really mirrors human schizophrenia.

[Überpolarbear]

i had never heard of any sort of animal model of schizophrenia so this study seems really interesting to me.

one thing they should have done though is giving antipsychotic to healthy rats too to see whether the positive changes in the brain of "schizophrenic" rats also happen in healthy rats or not. if NOT then it could be then REALLY interesting.

and imo there it's not a really bad idea to give 100 people antipsychotics even if only 90 of them would actually get schizophrenia without. some the new antipsychotics have very few side effects and preventing 90 people from geting schizophrenia is worth giving it to 10 people who wouldnt become psychotic. they wont die or anything. i can see people getting pissed by this but it's my opinion.

[vanderk]

You can trust that site as far as research validity. I personally have issues, though, with preemptive treatment of schizophrenia -- as it will undoubtedly "catch" some people who don't need to be "caught." I also have issues with animal models of mental illness, although I'm aware that's the best they can do right now. I'm not sure how a rat "acts schizophrenic" and whether that really mirrors human schizophrenia.

As above. My take on it is that it is not merely the presence of gene sequences, but rather genes turning on or turning off at critical times. I don't think that prediction by sequencing is ever going to work.

I, too, think very little of animal models of these conditions. Just as an example, a lot of depression research is driven by making mice swim excessively. If that model holds sway I'd like to buy the marketing rights to Michael Phelps' DNA.

[SheilaNZachary]

While I find this research interesting and I wholeheartedly support research into the disease, I cannot imagine insurance companies paying for the type of testing required merely because there is a remote possibility of schizophrenia far into the future.