Is It A Full Moon For Stupid Ptsd Diagnoses?

[shimmerz]

$450 a visit with no rebate, what relevance that has to this thread I'll never know but there it is,

YIKES! Has tons of relevance Tony, we don't need to pay for ours but the wait list is long. I think the relevance that I was trying to get to was being able to actually scientifically identify people with PTSD now that fMRI's can identify (MRI's???). Proper studies could be done to see what types of therapy work etc.

 

[TonyG]

So if my MRI doesn't show my PTSD, what then

 

[shimmerz]

is that it takes this insanely huge jolt to your psyche, such as death or violence of such an extreme nature, to physically change your brains wiring.

If this is true, then

So if my MRI doesn't show my PTSD, what then

This wouldn't happen. However, perhaps there would be something else that could be identified and treated that is actually curable. It would be great imho if they couldn't see PTSD in me. I would be grateful.

I gotta be honest here..i just don't see what the problem is. Am I missing something?? And I don't understand the over protectiveness of a diagnosis.

I get what you are saying @tacit. I think that the problem is that there are people out there who are proclaiming that they have PTSD - which is much like someone wandering around proclaiming they have AIDS or dreaded disease (which this is), without it being true. That is why I would love to see a quicker and less subjective way of diagnosing PTSD.

 

[Friday]

Am I missing something??

Treatment changes based on what you're treating. If you're treating the wrong thing? You'll not only probably make things much worse, but also be wasting years of your life.

If all disorders were treated the same? No problem. But that's not the case. Telling someone with a delusional disorder (as just one example amongst hundreds) that their delusions are real? That those things really did happen? Reeeeeeally bad idea. That's driving them towards psychosis, not helping them get better.

And then we get into the realm of medications... And things can turn lethal very quickly if you're medicating for the wrong disorder. Our neurochem is so different anyway that it can be very problematic. Start treating for completely the wrong problem? Tragedy.

 

[joeylittle]

This wouldn't happen.

Actually, that's not correct. I believe, as of now, the kinds of changes/adaptation to the brain that occurs as a result of PTSD can only be seen in an fMRI (functional MRI), not the same as a straight MRI. They need to see you use the affected area of the brain, basically.

A MRI will show the anatomy of the brain and allow you to see things like tissue damage that may or may not correspond to a neurological function. An fMRI will show the activation of the areas of the brain based on metabolic rate.

In order to determine what a PTSD brain looks like, they currently need to compare information from both MRI and fMRI. For example, it is pretty well accepted (it seems) that hippocampal volume - the size of the hippocampus region of the brain - is decreased in people with PTSD - but also in people with depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, addiction disorders - and that's only talking about the mental health correlations.

The amygdala, on the other hand, shows significant information on an fMRI in terms of thew actual stress/fear response. You can't see that on an MRI.

The current research is trying to understand, in some kind of consistent or diagnosable way, what exactly happens to the brain when it has been affected by trauma - what's that full picture look like? What does it look like at 24 hours later, a week, a month, a year, a decade?

It will never be a straightforward diagnostic test, I don't think. It's more likely to always have component parts, unless they invent one machine that can evaluate anatomy, electrical activity, and metabolic activity all in one go.

But, they are plugging away at it.

This is a pretty comprehensive reader-friendly article: http://brainblogger.com/2015/01/24/how-does-post-traumatic-stress-disorder-change-the-brain/

 

[shimmerz]

So then this is the defining issue with PTSD then Anthony?

So then it is not just physiological it is functional and physiological - is that what you are saying JoeyLittle?

Whilst many things in life are seriously traumatising, do they really change our brains physiological makeup?

Would physiological not mean a straight MRI?

Thanks JoeyLittle, I appreciate knowing where we are at on this.

 

[joeylittle]

So then it is not just physiological it is functional and physiological

Yes - it's better to say anatomical and functional, though, because to say 'physiological' is to mean both the parts of an organism and how they function. So, it is accurate to say either 'physiological' (implying both the anatomical structure of the brain and the activity contained within it) or functional and anatomical (same, just more words).

Would physiological not mean a straight MRI?

No, because of the definition of physiological; however, I think you took physio. to mean anatomical - and no, the point is that without incorporating fuction (fMRI) and anatomy (MRI), there is currently no way to accurately diagnose PTSD (or any other psychological disorder).

Another way to look at this is: they do not know fully what the anatomy of the traumatized brain is; nor do they fully understand the scope of the activity in the traumatized brain.

They do know some anatomical markers; and they know some of the metabolic activity - but the connections of those things to PTSD are all confirmed through the standard diagnostic tools, which are patient-reported symptoms. It's like reverse-engineering.

 

[Chava]

I think the DSM description, all parts, is actually pretty useful, just not followed. Finding the right treatment for the trauma(s) seems like the tricky part (and I wonder if ultimately that would be the more useful reason for neuroscience or neuroendocrine testing...determining treatment or medications without wasting years with patients who have severe symptoms or don't otherwise find relief through therapy....then the extra testing would possibly cost less. No, we shouldn't waste the technology for simply diagnosing unless it's very fuzzy but symptoms are terrible (such as a real PTSD case where the memories of trauma are lost).

 

[Recovery4Me]

@joeylittle sometimes when I read your post, I get an adrenaline rush. When you are "on" you are simply amazing with your info sharing. God, I wish I could see you work a class. Thanks for the link.

 

[tacit]

Thanks @shimmerz for your response & it was during writing mine, to you, that I seemed to have answered my own question. Thanks again for that opportunity. I've been so used to having blind spots that it never occurred to me that I could be far enough along in my recovery that things just don't bother me as much as they used to. I can see what everyone is saying & I mostly even agree, totally, but I just couldn't see why it was so upsetting or important..or more to the point, wasn't to me :rolleyes:.

Treatment changes based on what you're treating. If you're treating the wrong thing? You'll not only probably make things much worse, but also be wasting years of your life.

Yeh, yeh..thanks for that @FridayJones..I see what you mean. But I still don't see how that applies with PTSD..really. My understanding is that there isn't an effective form of medication to treat PTSD..unless times have changed of course. And the treatment that resulted in my recovery from PTSD was, in the end when you take all the fancy words out, boiled down to, a combination of retraining physical responses, changing belief symptoms, healing wounds, education about myself & the world I live in, facing fears and letting go. Seems rather simple when noted like that and even though definitely more complex, still nothing I can see being detrimental to anyone who is given a false PTSD diagnosis..in fact, I believe can be just as beneficial for those who are not mentally health challenged, to deal with the normal traumas of life as much as those of the extreme kind.

Cheers :tup:

 

[tacit]

ok..sorry bout that..still not very technologically savvy..but hope you can still make sense of it anyway :oops:

 

[Autumn76]

I think you might be onto something Anthony, Some threads on this site I only read a couple of lines and t...

I have figured that out already and I've only been on here for less than 24 hours. Some people are being diagnosed for reasons that I would love for that to be my "trama" and I have to admit it makes me kind of mad. There is nothing glamorous about this and people really need to stop minimizing what people who have truly been traumatized have been through. Feces falling on someone, spouse having an affair, medication mix up, come on people. A true diagnosis can cost a lot in terms if relationships. This is a mental disorder and people need to not self-diagnose. I would love to be undiagnosed. Nope, don't care whose toes I just stepped on, I'm tired of the ones who want a sympathy party pretending they have it and causing those of us that really do to be taken less than seriously.