PTSD isn't the result of a single area of the brain, just like it isn't due to a single neurotransmitter (which is why only some people with PTSD will get any relief with SSRI or SNRI therapy. Also, the human brain has a tremendous range over what is normal - think of human faces, how amny different looking ones there are and the relative size of noses, eyes, ears, and such. Such is hippocampal volume. Treating PTSD however has been shown to increase the size from baseline to 6 months of targeted therapy.
New research looking at PET are designed to look at receptors that you can't see any other way except by PET. They use healthy controls matched against the PTSD patients. The way brain fields light up is quite different between controls and PTSD patients. I've actually participated in a PET study looking at CB1 receptors. There are two experimental drugs currently only for animal use that selectively attach CB1 receptors - when those become available, I'll sign up. It has only been a year since I received a proper diagnosis. I've been treated for ulcers, depression, irritable bowel, migraines, fibromyalgia, hypertension, seasonal affective disorder, premenstrual dysphoric disorder, social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, panic attack disorder. It is all just PTSD.
Because I'm an anesthesiologist, I know it is important for people to participate in research - that is how we make strides in medicine. Things I learned in medical school in the 80's have since been shown to be wrong. But it takes research. Usually studies have to start small because of funding issues. I used to teach at a major university and did research in anesthesia. It was hard to get subjects at all, let alone people who were diverse. The media blow things out of proportion constantly because they make money off of stories. Researchers get funding based on either the likelihood of a drug company getting a patent or the government looking at likelihood of public benefit. Finally - not every study is good science either from emthodology flaws to bias issues. Early studies tend to be flawed because often not all the science is known.
<Please insert full line spaces between paragraphs. Thanks Amethist>
New research looking at PET are designed to look at receptors that you can't see any other way except by PET. They use healthy controls matched against the PTSD patients. The way brain fields light up is quite different between controls and PTSD patients. I've actually participated in a PET study looking at CB1 receptors. There are two experimental drugs currently only for animal use that selectively attach CB1 receptors - when those become available, I'll sign up. It has only been a year since I received a proper diagnosis. I've been treated for ulcers, depression, irritable bowel, migraines, fibromyalgia, hypertension, seasonal affective disorder, premenstrual dysphoric disorder, social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, panic attack disorder. It is all just PTSD.
Because I'm an anesthesiologist, I know it is important for people to participate in research - that is how we make strides in medicine. Things I learned in medical school in the 80's have since been shown to be wrong. But it takes research. Usually studies have to start small because of funding issues. I used to teach at a major university and did research in anesthesia. It was hard to get subjects at all, let alone people who were diverse. The media blow things out of proportion constantly because they make money off of stories. Researchers get funding based on either the likelihood of a drug company getting a patent or the government looking at likelihood of public benefit. Finally - not every study is good science either from emthodology flaws to bias issues. Early studies tend to be flawed because often not all the science is known.
<Please insert full line spaces between paragraphs. Thanks Amethist>
