Schizophrenia is the price we pay for minds poised near the edge of a cliff
Anon84
a day ago
184
279
https://www.psychiatrymargins.com/p/schizophrenia-is-the-price-we-pay
PaulHoule21 hours ago
Why does no-one dare say "schizotypy?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizotypy

crawfordcomeauxPaulHoule21 hours ago
It's dangerous to existing systems for people to become aware they're capable of creating/conjuring/channeling useful new voices in the mind to help learn different things. People get burned at the stake for that.
bad_haircut72crawfordcomeaux21 hours ago
I've never ever had any symptoms of schizophrenia but the idea of trying to consciously encourage myself hearing voices is terrifying, Im sure I could send myself truly insane with probably not much effort.
PaulHoulebad_haircut7221 hours ago
My belief about is that the core of schizotypy and schizophrenia is

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_disorder

as did Eugen Bleuler. I have a friend who is schizophrenic whose speech hardly makes sense and she is always calling people on the phone and carrying on nonsensical conversations. Somehow the general public is hung up on ‘hearing voices’ but I have never once heard a voice but under stress I (schizotypal) did once spend about six months under the influence of a ‘system of delusions’ yet stayed mostly functional, kept working, and managed to avoid getting in serious trouble.

I think it is quite ordinary also for people to have a dialogue with an ‘invisible friend’ or believe that they ‘talk to God’ when they pray, the auditory hallucinations of schizophrenia seem to be something like you have a thought that you don’t think is your thought but somebody else talking, notably schizophrenics often believe that somebody is putting thoughts into them or taking thoughts out of them, see

https://www.theairloom.org/mindcontrol.php

DiscourseFanPaulHoule20 hours ago
It's like gang-stalking--its not that there's something being introduced, but rather that the subject sees relations that are not objective relations (like, for instance, the relation between temperature, pressure, and state change). Typically, however (and I can't imagine a case where this didn't happen), the relations are social in character--and since social relations are subjective to the extent that all the social world is not expressly a fact, it can be difficult to differentiate between an illusion and a reality: people imagine their partners are cheating on them, whether or not its true. And there are many things we do not know about the social world around us; but, statistically speaking, nobody has ever actually been gang-stalked.
uniq7PaulHoule20 hours ago
That is very interesting. Excuse me if this question is too personal, but what do you mean by "system of delusions" exactly?
ivapeuniq720 hours ago
A constant state of needing to do continuous reality testing. The GP almost lost a grip basically.
WarOnPrivacybad_haircut7220 hours ago
> the idea of trying to consciously encourage myself hearing voices is terrifying,

This is not unreasonable.

It could be less awful if the voices were positive and not harsh and negative. Schizophrenics outside the US were found to have a more benign relationship with their voices.

    The striking difference was that while many of the African
    and Indian subjects registered predominantly positive experiences
    with their voices, not one American did. Rather, the U.S. subjects
    were more likely to report experiences as violent and hateful – and
    evidence of a sick condition. 
ref: https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2014/07/voices-culture-luhrmann-071614
crawfordcomeauxbad_haircut7213 hours ago
I once accidentally came up with another conscious voice in my head & we decided to govern through the 12 traditions of Codependents Anonymous. She also had specific qualities I'd chosen 3 weeks prior as qualities I chose to believe I could come to embody, so that was an interesting pointer to what's possible.

And as others have pointed out, it really depends what kind of programming you're carrying around. Feeling terrified of something isn't the issue...it's how you've trained to respond to terror that matters. If you lash out or avoid, yeah....don't cultivate multiple voices. If, instead, you're choosing to purge the addiction to violence & domination fairly rooted in American imperial colonial indoctrination, it's really quite something. I'm now working on bringing in 16 others as a way to better connect with different parts of the population and spread this and other blackness-embracing ways.

Hearing/seeing things that aren't there has historically for the majority of humanity's time on Earth not been an issue. We can get back to living in such ways, especially since doing so can be extremely helpful.

PaulHoulecrawfordcomeaux21 hours ago
Dangerous to the autism-industrial complex and as well as the addictive stimulant industry.
WarOnPrivacyPaulHoule20 hours ago
> addictive stimulant industry.

Whom I thank every day for repairing my retention processes, just enough that lessons become learning.

amanaplanacanalPaulHoule20 hours ago
Is this supposed to be some kind of diss for adhd stimulant therapy?
PaulHouleamanaplanacanal20 hours ago
Gotta a friend who’s 52 and has all his teeth rot out 10 years ago. He goes to Wegmans every month and comes back with a pill bottle the size of a small trashcan. He says he could get nothing done without out but I don’t see him getting anything done. Wouldn’t be surprised if will fall and break his hip 20 years early.

I’ve seen plenty of those pills get diverted with outcomes like somebody stays up for 4 days and gets hospitalized so, yeah, I want to diss ADHD medication. It is clear it helps in the short term, not so clear if it helps in the long term.

fragmedePaulHoule20 hours ago
How scientific.
WarOnPrivacyPaulHoule19 hours ago
Even that very limited study didn't link stim use to poor teeth - at all. As far as study went, this was it.

    • Stimulant ADHD medication use in adults is associated with decreased bone
     mineral in the skull and thoracic spine.

    • No other areas of axial or appendicular skeleton showed significant
    differences.

    • There was no dose-response effect between stimulant medication use and
    bone mineral density.

    • The overall effect of stimulant medications on adult
    bone health is unclear. 
ref: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9062265/
WarOnPrivacyPaulHoule20 hours ago
> Gotta a friend who’s 52 and has all his teeth rot out 10 years ago.

FTR, meth mouth has no overlap with ADHD meds. I specifically looked into this, way back when.

> He goes to Wegmans every month and comes back with a pill bottle the size of a small trashcan.

If he took that many ADHD meds he'd be dead on day one. Three tabs/day is a heavy dose.

gfodyPaulHoule20 hours ago
many people hear voices and experience symptoms of schizophrenia while managing to keep their cool and thrive amongst the nerts. hearing-voices.org is a support network for such people
JamesBarney21 hours ago
If genes that increase schizophrenic risk increases cognitive abilities you should find people who have high polygenic scores for schizophrenia without having schizophrenia test well on these cognitive abilities. I'm not aware of any of data that shows this in a convincing matter. I think I've seen a few small studies but nothing that replicated this on a large scale. And most of the studies show they score worse on cognitive abilities.

The only conclusions I've come to are one of the following.

1. They improve cognitive abilities in some way we aren't good at measuring. 2. There is something about our modern environment that is more likely to trigger schizophrenia which has more recently increased the fitness penalty these genes confer.

jonahbard21 hours ago
I wonder if Autism would be even simpler to explain with a cliff-edged fitness function. Because there seems to be a high correlation between extremely intelligent people and people on the spectrum. Maybe the group of genes rewarded for high intelligence/creativity/quantitative ability also, by accidental design, inhibits social capacity.
hyperhellojonahbard21 hours ago
Is it possible that every non-typical presentation simply tells others in society to give them space enough to develop the intellect?
PaulHoulehyperhello21 hours ago
Maybe it does when you are an adult but it can make childhood a disaster.
mandmandamjonahbard18 hours ago
> Maybe the group of genes rewarded for high intelligence/creativity/quantitative ability also, by accidental design, inhibits social capacity.

Maybe living in a world with neurotypical people who immediately dislike you [0] 'inhibits social capacity' after years of traumatic experiences piling up.

0 - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8992906/

cjbgkagh21 hours ago
I think people should study the RCCX gene cluster and link to giftedness more, I have TNXB SNPs which results in hEDS, but C4 SNPs have a similar effect and is likely to result in Schizophrenia. There are some cross over symptoms such as dopamine dysregulation and flat affect. I think dysautonomia and auto-immune plays a big part. Our lifestyles are very different than they used to be and this could be exacerbating auto-immune issues and as we get better at treating auto-immune conditions I expect we'll get better at treating Schizophrenia.
PaulHoulecjbgkagh20 hours ago
Is there some puzzling chronic condition that isn’t on this list?

https://me-pedia.org/wiki/RCCX_Genetic_Module_Theory

cjbgkaghPaulHoule20 hours ago
Of course there are. I'm guessing you're insinuating two things, it's highly improbable that individuals can have this many simultaneous issues, and it's impossible for medical researchers to miss such an anomaly. The Ehlers Danlos subset is shorter but still covers a huge amount of issues (https://ohtwist.com/about-eds/comorbidities).

Well there is a reason why doctors kept telling me I am a hypochondriac, but I do have a whole zoo of conditions simultaneously, and this is a pretty common state for people with hEDS and I'm on the extreme end of it. So while milder versions of it are ~2% of the population the extreme versions of it are < 1/20K.

And yeah, medical researchers are in fact in the aggregate really bad at their jobs. Look how long it took to convince surgeons to wash their hands. But a lot of the genetic stuff relies on Linear Regression for GWAS which assumes independents of SNPs, otherwise you get multicollinearity problems, this is not a safe assumption and they've confused their results as confirming their assumptions. Instead of listing everything they get wrong a much shorter list is what they get right, Dr Jessica Eccles (https://x.com/BendyBrain) does great research into Long Covid and Generalized Joint Hypermobility which should put to bed the theory that GJH is benign - still good luck trying to talk a doctor out of that train of thought.

If you find someone who has hEDS the odds are they have a very large number of those things and most of them don't even know the names of most of the conditions, just one or two that bother them the most. The RCCX / hEDS list is a distinct subset of all possible things, the list of all medical maladies is far longer. It becomes highly improbable that a set of people have the same set of maladies - doctors tend to chalk this up to social contagion but that doesn't bear out. Genetic and behavioral causes have distinct diffusion patterns.

It's confirmable with WGS which I've done and I've encouraged many others to do and it turns out that you can indeed predict with a great deal of reliability if someone has TNXB / CYP21A2 SNPs. Unfortunately it's harder to find people who have C4 since they're likely to have schizophrenia.

gavinraycjbgkagh9 hours ago
Do you have a list of which SNP's are related to this/are pathological?

I have an Ancestry partial genome that I've imputed to expand. Would be curious whether those SNP's are present in the data.

cjbgkaghgavinray6 hours ago
They are listed as benign, since I find the people first then get the sequence I think that classification is incorrect.
cjbgkaghcjbgkagh3 hours ago
There are many TNXB SNPs and many are not rare, while I can theorize that the number and severity of the SNPs can explain a spectrum I don't have enough data to prove it. The data that I do have is highly improbable to be from random chance, but not impossible so I'm still collecting and am open to being wrong.
suzzer9921 hours ago
I've lost one of my best friends to what I think is schizophrenia. We don't know because she's cut off all contact with friends and family and refuses to see a doctor. It's definitely psychosis. She thinks she's in some kind of Truman show that she calls "the game". Since none of her friends or family are willing to admit to it, then we must be in on it.

We don't know her full family medical history because her dad was adopted. I do know that she was "microdosing" and macro-dosing hallucinogens for years. Mostly acid and shrooms as far as I know. She followed the band Phish around with a group of friends. I can't imagine most of those shows were sober.

We've also seen a few incidents of paranoia when she was under the influence of drugs/alcohol going back decades. So it feels like this was always there in some form, but maybe the estrogen was holding it back before menopause hit. I read an article about women who get schizophrenia after menopause that suggested this could be the case.

Anyway, whenever I see wellness healers and the like extolling the virtues of psilocybin, I want to point out that there could be a downside. We don't know that all of her hallucinogen use over the years contributed to this. But it's certainly a possibility.

winridsuzzer9920 hours ago
If you have a genetic predisposition to schizophrenia it's starting to seem like drugs that seem harmless like marijuana (specifically THC?) can definitely bring it out. At least, that's what seemed to happen to my mother and another friend.
amanaplanacanalwinrid20 hours ago
I also suspect people with schizophrenia that haven't yet started showing symptoms are more likely to take drugs.
crazygringoamanaplanacanal20 hours ago
Based on what?
cjbgkaghcrazygringo19 hours ago
The huge number of them who smoke cigarettes prior to their first episode - a different form of self medication. 90% of people with it smoke and there is research indicating a greater likelhood prior to first episode. I’ll have to look up those numbers though. (Edit, seems about 60% at a time when the average US population was at 20%)
hopelitecjbgkagh10 hours ago
We often like to diminish things like nicotine and alcohol, but they are also psychoactive drugs even if they are far more natural and have a far longer history with humans in general, but also among respective subgroups/subspecies of humans specifically.

For those who were not aware, alcohol is a substance that Europeans and Asians have evolved with over about 8 millennia and the American tribes evolved with tobacco for about 12 millennia. Considering other factors like how up until very recently evolutionary pressures had far greater and more acute effects on the gene pool, it should really not surprise anyone that certain effects of tobacco and alcohol may be far less apparent than something like LSD, MDMA, cocaine, heroine, and even marijuana that has had far less evolutionary pressure/impact on humanity. Simply put, at best, it seems humans or our subgroups/subspecies have not sufficiently evolved to adapt to the uses of those newer substances over time, if that is even possible (i.e., at what level is self-poisoning by several different means simply too overwhelming and not adapted to, but rather becomes an evolutionary terminus?).

It would be rather interesting to me to see research on something like drug induced mental health related issues that compares teetotaling type groups like the Amish and Mormons/LDS to the general public and individual drug user cohorts. If anyone is aware of something along that line, I would appreciate a pointer in that direction beyond what I can search/AI.

I am someone that does not do any illegal drugs, and minimal legal drugs like caffeine and alcohol, but I see the effects of them all on people around me and am even supporting a friend that is trying to pull away from marijuana use. My observation over many years and many different experiences around the world with different groups is rather clear that there is definitely some kind of interaction between drug use and various mental disorders; mental disorders which we also similarly mitigate like how caffeine is mitigated or even negated as a drug at all.

We should really be asking ourselves why the western world in particular is so fixated on self-harming with drugs; be it caffeine or meth. And no, please spare us all your justifications for how caffeine is fine or micro-dosing has been amazing, because they are simply varying levels of rationalization, I do it too, I’m just not in it as deeply. And no, just because you were able to become rich with and on the back of drugs does not mean you did it without harm, you likely just scandalized a lot of harm to, e.g., get rich selling some service to some coke head investor who will only fuel the abuse of data mining and social media addiction.

I see all the drug users around me make excuses for why their drug is fine (“it’s just caffeine”) and they are in control. It’s never true though, even when I use caffeine at times or tell myself I can be socially acceptable by also having a beer/glass of wine and it has an enormous effects on me because my body and mind are not used to dealing with the drug in a regular basis; it is really just coping and rationalization. In simply just willing to admit it to myself.

Frankly, I sometimes think that especially the western world is rather terrified with facing the reality of how damaged we are due to and from drug use, so we effectively just suppress even investigating it sufficiently even as it is burning right through our whole civilization in too many ways to list right now.

Caffeine, alcohol, marijuana. LSD, heroine, cocaine, crack, MDMA, meth, and all the other things I’m not even aware of; are all substances that effectively cause the brain to intentionally short circuit and run corrupted scripts in their minds, sometimes overlocking and wearing out things, other times scrambling data. We then though convince ourselves that the poison/toxin taken, was really a beneficial substance and the mind going haywire for a certain time was a good thing.

heisenbithopelite7 hours ago
Could there be a similar cliff function for alcohol and psychoactive drugs iff used in moderation which may confer to a society an advantage to the detriment of individual health. If used above a limit things fall of a cliff. Abstinence however may also be sub-optimal even if best for any individual.
heavyset_goheisenbit2 hours ago
Recently doctors and research show that there is no amount of alcohol that is "healthy" to drink.
cjbgkaghhopelite5 hours ago
I think the main problem is conflation and averaging out experiences to the general population. There are distinct subsets of people who react to things very differently to the others and the focus should be on first finding out if someone is in a particular group.

I do a lot of DIY psychopharmacology, mostly modafinil and amitriptyline, in a successful effort to reduce ME/CFS/hEDS related brain fog. I’ve given modafinil to normal people and they tend not to notice any effects where for me it’s a super strong drug that’ll keep me wired unless I take other drugs to calm down.

I think quite a large subset of human behavior is seeking self medication for genetic anxiety disorders and I think in knowing the mechanisms people can avoid stumbling around in the dark and go directly towards things that work.

cosmic_cheesehopelite5 hours ago
What are your thoughts on people who self-medicate with caffeine due to their baseline ability to focus being reduced (which in modern society is cause for trouble)? That’s the reason for starting caffeine use for many.

My use is also light and fully legal, but personally I’m not sure that this is something that’s so binary. It seems more likely to sit on a spectrum, as most things do, and is largely dependent on the individual due to wide differences in brain and body function. It’s the same reason why the prescription drug that works wonders for one person and do nothing or worse, be detrimental for somebody else. We’re not all identical units of a particular model rolling off an assembly line somewhere, after all.

So I guess I would say that yes, we should be more conscientious of how substances (even those that are common) interact with our minds, but I have a hard time labeling them all as harmful. It’s just too broad of a brush.

gknapphopelite5 hours ago
> And no, please spare us all your justifications for how caffeine is fine or micro-dosing has been amazing, because they are simply varying levels of rationalization, I do it too, I’m just not in it as deeply. And no, just because you were able to become rich with and on the back of drugs does not mean you did it without harm, you likely just scandalized a lot of harm to, e.g., get rich selling some service to some coke head investor who will only fuel the abuse of data mining and social media addiction.

I think you make some interesting points, and it's a very well thought-out post, but this is the definition of "poisoning the well". You're attempting to preemptively discredit the most obvious flaw in your argument.

There is a massive amount of evidence for the impact on both society, economy and neurology for each of the drugs listed in your last paragraph – and it's these impacts that often change personal and societal perception of risk and reward. Caffeine, at average doses, induces an effect that is comparable to a small cortisol spike – it is mildly addictive, but nowhere near that of an opioid, for example.

Drugs like meth and heroine (and one wonders why you left off fentanyl) are highly addictive and destructive, cause enormous loss of life an an inconceivable scale, and can permanently damage neurological pathways. From what I've read, the impact of hallucinogenics is less well understood... but probably not great.

If your argument is "we like to say caffeine and alcohol are fine, when they're really no different than opioids and meth", well there _is_ a staggeringly enormous difference in the potency and impact of caffeine vs the other drugs you've listed. I do agree with you that alcohol is far more harmful than society cares to admit, however, and that's both well-studied and often ignored.

financltravstygknapp4 hours ago
I hate to write out these words, but you're strawmanning.

The point is caffeine etc. corrupt the mind and cause a person's mental faculties to run in a way they were not initially designed to.

The point is not that these drugs are all extremely harmful, only that they are all harmful. Caffeine and other things get a pass because the "hard drugs" are so uniquely and visibly harmful that they overshadow all other forms of harm.

One could even say that this has tricked us into thinking that lesser drugs like caffeine or canabinoids are "effectively harmless" because they're not causing us to OD or steal things to get another hit or causing visibly psychotic states. But that is not true. We've simply accepted that the harm they due is not worth thinking about (this is subjective, not objective).

cjbgkaghfinancltravsty3 hours ago
A small percentage of people, like myself, have clearly autosomal genetic conditions that means being 'normal' is just not on the cards. I have to take psychopharmacological drugs just to get close to normal.

Not everyone is the same, there is a lot of variety, what you say could indeed be true for most people but can also not be true for a small minority of people.

FollowingTheDaocjbgkagh2 hours ago
> A small percentage of people, like myself, have clearly autosomal genetic conditions

What is the Autosomal dominant disordered gene polymorphism you have that causes your mental illness? I am assuming you are just guessing here?

> I have to take psychopharmacological drugs just to get close to normal.

I hope you can consider that you are taking drugs to manage being in an environment/diet that you are not genetically adapted to.

I used to think like you, but then I saw my genetics, now after 35 years, I am on no meds and have essentially cured my schizoaffective disorder.

cjbgkaghFollowingTheDaoan hour ago
hEDS, there is a very long list of comorbidities and I tick off most of them. Not guessing, runs in the family, did a WGS and found the TNXB SNPs responsible.

I tried the no-drugs and being super healthy approach for the vast majority of my life, I look like a pro-athlete, the only reason I started the meds was due to figuring out the statistical possibility of having X things wrong with me was next to impossible without a common cause, and the ME/CFS with brain fog was destroying my life.

I also tried to quit caffeine but that only resulted in very negative effects that persisted for more than 4 months after going cold turkey, that's 4 months being largely housebound and not able to work for that one experiment. I've been at this so long that if you can think of something I've probably tried it - including the healthiest of healthy lifestyles.

Just comparing within my own family most are anti-drugs and anti-medications and their health is an absolute mess. I wish living a healthy lifestyle would be sufficient, I wouldn't have to walk a tightrope of balancing meds, but I don't get that option.

mwigdahlfinancltravstyan hour ago
The use of the term "corrupt" rather than "alter" or "affect" is assuming the conclusion here. The human mind is not something that always works in the same Platonic perfection in a state of nature. Biological and cultural differences are major factors in what is considered normal at any given place and time.

Some people have conditions that make the way their brains work different than what is considered normal. Western technological culture imposes differences in social interaction and pressures on thinking and required performance that are far different than existed in societies even mere hundreds of years before.

Drugs can be a way to compensate for these pressures and find a way to exist in the world with as much equanimity as possible. And I say all this as a person who avoids all caffeine and illegal drugs, and uses alcohol very infrequently. I'm lucky I can do this and thrive in today's Western culture. Not everyone is as fortunate.

heavyset_gocrazygringo15 hours ago
Statistics literally show this.
tony69winrid20 hours ago
In Europe this (some rec drugs bring out latent schizophrenia) is taught in med school as a “known fact” (source: psychiatrist friend) so it’s well beyond “starting to seem”
el_benhameentony6920 hours ago
This was treated as pretty much a fact when I took a class on psychological disorders in the US circa 2007, too.
winridel_benhameen13 hours ago
Ah okay, good to know!
kurthrel_benhameen2 hours ago
Marijuana was known to do this in 1936.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kg0sK-dY98

anthktony6913 hours ago
And at High School too on talks about drugs; the marijuana->schizophrenia link it's widely known.
morkalorkanthk4 hours ago
Unfortunately it's hammered on so hard, and without nuance, that kids will discard it with the other half-truths that are told. And also the tendency for families to cover up and hide any "shameful" facts like uncle Jim having spent some time in a facility, that kids might not know at all that there's a family history.
mystified5016morkalork2 hours ago
DARE is one of the reasons I started smoking cigarettes. The only time the teacher was ever actually honest was when he described the effects of nicotine. Everything else was half-truths and scary lies.

Funny what kids pick up on.

have-a-breaktony6913 hours ago
The fact that in different parts of the world the voices can be helpful instead of intrusive makes me feel like the drugs are not the problem but how external forces view the drugs or if we really wanna talk like crazy people how the drugs influence the people around you even if they do not directly know you are using the drugs.
overu589have-a-break10 hours ago
You’re right and wrong.

The voices are quite real, we’re not alone in our own minds, and the it is the greatest taboo of society to discuss.

It’s really sad, all of these sharp modernists determined upon the cult of science explanations for everything. Those who refuse to believe our thoughts are not all our own. That much mysticism is rooted in something that merely cannot be explained by the logical empirical mind.

Readers will be so upset when a perspective challenges their rehashed psychological diatribes as mountains of lies. They got “help” damn you. Their friends (“real people”) are hurt by the craze and they’re more hurt when someone says “modern science and society is wrong.”

The true Truth is whatever existential reality reflects, not what we are prepared to understand. We are not alone in our own minds, we have collectively known this since before our generations and the “straights” of society are so adamant of their self possessed lies they will condemn those insights as crackpot crazy.

motorestoveru5898 hours ago
> It’s really sad, all of these sharp modernists determined upon the cult of science explanations for everything.

That which you try to attack and downplay as "cult of science explanations" is actually something extremely simple: you need to show something, anything at all, that actually supports your beliefs.

How can you tell something exists or works as you think it does if you are unable to show it?

Do you expect everyone should just believe anything anyone says? What is there to tell lunatics and snake oil salesmen apart from those who are actually onto something?

> Those who refuse to believe our thoughts are not all our own.

Ok, you formed an hypothesis. Now tell me, how do you go about showing others that things do work the way you think they do? How can they check them for themselves? What do you expect from others?

> That much mysticism is rooted in something that merely cannot be explained by the logical empirical mind.

If you cannot explain your beliefs, how do you expect others to just take your unverified and unsubstantiated claims as something worth considering over any random claim from any random loony?

xyprotomotorest5 hours ago
> If you cannot explain your beliefs, how do you expect others to just take your unverified and unsubstantiated claims as something worth considering over any random claim from any random loony?

Even without an explanation, you can use statistics to find the fruits of the beliefs, though. Does 100 people believe in not working and rather join a cult that worships the watermelon god? Fine! How did that work out for them in the span of 3 generations?

I think that some beliefs can have value and merit, just based on measures of quality of life and society.

motorestxyproto4 hours ago
> Even without an explanation, you can use statistics to find the fruits of the beliefs, though.

I hope you are not serious.

> Does 100 people believe in not working and rather join a cult that worships the watermelon god?

Hundreds of loonies making nonsense statements that no one can verify is collective lunacy that adds no value. It only takes a single person to show something exists and works to add substance to a claim. If all those loonies push a belief that none of them can support, they are fools.

This sort of absurdness would mean absolute morons, such as those in Heaven's Gate cult, should be taken seriously in their claims about aliens and comets. Let that sink in.

overu589motorest4 hours ago
> It only takes a single person to show something exists and world to add substance to a claim

You cannot be serious. Proofs take thousands of man hours and decades of railing against well entrenched beliefs such as yours (that you would see it and accept it readily if true.)

This is one of those things that cannot be proven to more than one person at a time through anything other than a personal revelation. Everyone everywhere will respond exactly as you now do regardless of “poof” or the severity and consequence of prolonged incredulity. This is one of those situations where you must undeceive yourself. Observe humanity and your own life. All except those who actively deceive themselves will admit science is as close to understanding our minds as horoscopes.

I do not criticize your doubts, I criticize that you think truth and reality are so easily accepted by the mind who “refuses to believe.”

card_zeroxyproto4 hours ago
So like Matthew 6:28, "And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin", and something about how they're as glorious as King Solomon despite not having clothes or jobs. The religion in question did OK, despite this bad advice.
gweinbergcard_zeroan hour ago
Sure, because most Christians don't take Jesus' teachings too seriously. You shouldn't slap a Christian (or anyone) on the cheek for no reason, but if you were to, the odds of him responding by inviting you to slap the other cheek are pretty slim.
card_zerogweinberg34 minutes ago
Heh. Probably just as well.
motorestDer_Einzige4 hours ago
> The only "ish" evidence for this kind of raving is this stuff:

That is far from even coming close to qualify as evidence. At best they are unverified hypothesis.

heavyset_goDer_Einzigean hour ago
There's a long human history of beliefs like that in spiritualism, animism, etc. People believed they could hear the voices of their dead ancestors, spirits, etc for example.

I wouldn't describe this as "raving", this is someone who has had very real personal experiences. To them, they happened just as much as the sun rises and sets. I don't know what I'm getting at other than have some patience and compassion for people who experience distressing things that they themselves cannot explain.

have-a-breakmotorest7 minutes ago
Simply put the observer affect shows that somethings cannot be measured without causing change to the system hence may not be verifable.

Maybe the only way to make enough random looney until they outnumber the "sane" individuals. The only issues being how do you organize the new pyramid structure which will evidently be formed by this new "religious" organization?

safety1stoveru5892 hours ago
I don't hear any voices in my head aside from my own. Are you saying that they're present and I'm pretending they're not?

I get impulses. Science knows about and studies these. But I don't hear any voices.

overu589safety1stan hour ago
Every network is different (though common themes exist).

Firstly yes, they’re probably there and not revealing themselves (which is most typical.) They will either reveal themselves for some purpose or not at all (I had caused a stir, and a “hooligan army” went ahead and “recruited” me.)

Well after full immersion I looked back through my life and saw I was not really alone. Little things, some hypnogogia here and there, odd games they play, and other nonsense suppressed or blown off. Most are never aware or comprehend any of it. Those that do, what would they say to you? Look at these responses. And I know what is going on. Most others are desperate.

The noisy networks are usually those of prisons. You will hear very similar accounts among many who have done small stints. Enough for a network to take an interest, not long enough to be coerced into eternal silence. I have never been to prison though you can guess what city I’m from if I say “the most controversial prison system in America up to a decade ago.”

Prisons full of slave (coerced) networks is no doubt how the humanity level horrors began. The streets (and all humanity) are saturated with these various networks. Plenty of accounts by others throughout time, you have ignored them. The prisons and the black ops military power cults are the worst. Don’t worry, those are busy in Ukraine and Gaza. What do you think these would do for fun?

Power extorts ordinary power infrastructures of humanity. No one is going to talk about it.

There is a “you don’t talk about it” element. I don’t care. You cannot make me care. I so don’t care I take pains to be a contrarian. I make people f-off. I do not capitulate. It doesn’t make me “special”, I’m of the few who talk about it, even if it does no good. Let it then be for an account. To remain silent in the face of a tyranny of evil is to be complicit. Complicity be damned. These want to play God among you, and they extort each other for this ends.

And I suppose I should risk a flaggable wall of text to say there are “families” who have protected and guided us throughout our generations. Like all of modernity these are falling apart and cannot compete with the devastating industrialized efficiency of prison networks.

Xmd5ahave-a-break9 hours ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41980986

What happens when people with acute psychosis meet the voices in their heads?

euranon96tony697 hours ago
Do you know what is considered as "latent schizophrenia"? Is it like in your 40's or 30's or just couple years after the mean?
lucidrainseuranon965 hours ago
if you are a man and make it past age of 29 without starting to hear voices, you can breathe a sigh of relief (I did)
kadushkalucidrains4 hours ago
Were you afraid you had it at 29?
amaraitlucidrains4 hours ago
We dont even know what constitutes a mental voice. Hell, a huge percentage of people cant hear their own voices in their heads
LoganDarkamarait3 hours ago
I wonder if there are any schizophrenics with dissociative identity disorder. We're not schizophrenic but we have voices (we don't hear them as from outside though)
heavyset_goamaraitan hour ago
During psychosis there is no question about what you hear. You hear it. You may know it isn't real, but you hear it.
overu589lucidrains3 hours ago
I started hearing the voices well after 30. First it began with gang stalking, and by coincidence I am from the “home town” of Americas thought control elite. I was “recruited” (press ganged) and it is only a determination not to accept a word these say that keeps me unconcerned with the collapse of the lie that is modernity in my life.
heavyset_gooveru589an hour ago
I just want to point out that psychosis and schizophrenia tend to get worse over time, so while you might have a handle on it now, without treatment you might not in the future. They also have much better prognoses with treatment, even complete remission.

I've watched several people go from having a grip on reality, thinking they don't need treatment, to absolutely losing their minds. It's tragic and I hate to see it happen.

Point is moments of lucidity should be seized upon, I say this as someone who briefly experienced psychosis after extreme sleep deprivation. It was fucking terrifying and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

lucidrainsoveru589an hour ago
I am sorry to hear that.
overu589lucidrainsan hour ago
Don’t be. After nearly two decades of development I experience the precipice of humanity. The state of the art of human consciousness. I have peered beyond the veil and what I see is terrifying yet truth.
suzzer99overu58931 minutes ago
I keep hoping my friend gets to the point where you are someday. Another thing not working in our favor is she's the most stubborn person I know. She thinks she can beat this thing with her mind and no help from anyone.
heavyset_golucidrainsan hour ago
Unfortunately, this is just statistics. There are cases that lie outside of that age range. I know of two cases, personally.

Things like stress, drugs, childbirth, significant life changes, etc can trigger psychosis and latent schizophrenia at any age, it's just statistically more likely to happen during adolescence and the period right after.

Another way to look at this is that adolescence is when someone experiences new stresses, significant life changes, drug experimentation, etc, which can be triggers for schizophrenia especially during age-correlated prodromal phases.

lucidrainsheavyset_goan hour ago
indeed, it just becomes less likely
suzzer99heavyset_go33 minutes ago
Yeah, in this case it seems to be menopause + losing her job and having all the free time and nothing to focus on plus who knows what other stressors. I think something bad happened with her Phish friends.

The really tough part for me is she was out of work, so I paid her to be a beta reader for my book. She's a brilliant person and very detail-oriented. She went way over and beyond what I asked for. She spent months and took three passes on the book making different kinds of notes. Then her problems seemed to come on right at the end of that. I worry that all the increased mental activity, and then suddenly not having anything to focus on again, might have been the trigger.

thrwwXZTYElucidrainsan hour ago
I kinda heard lots of whispers when I was very young (like 6-7) and now I'm 40 and haven't had any such problems.

I blamed it on the drugs I got prescripted for sleeping (I had bad allergy and was scratching myself to the point of bleeding during sleep so I got some "pacifying" drugs).

mystified5016euranon962 hours ago
Schizophrenia is pretty interesting this way. It's rare for it to show up outside of a certain age range, somewhere around 20 to 35 iirc.

It's strongly correlated to genetics, and most people are totally asymptomatic, no idea they have it until one day they do.

The story of sudden-onset schizophrenia inducing a psychosis making the patient unwilling to consider treatment is depressingly common.

ryanjshawmystified5016an hour ago
> It's strongly correlated to genetics, and most people are totally asymptomatic, no idea they have it until one day they do.

Depending on whose stats you go with, you can also argue that most people with schizophrenia never know they have it due to anosognosia.

crtifiedwinrid20 hours ago
I wonder if alcohol is one of the seemingly harmless drugs whose abuse catalyzes such conditions in susceptible people.

Because, if so, then alcohol's ubiquity in society would imply that it is probably responsible (in the sense that substances are responsible) for most such conversions.

jamal-kumarcrtified15 hours ago
It's kind of worse with alcohol because the psychosis associated with that as an exacerbating factor is more related to alcoholic encephalopathy, Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome etc... much of which can be brought on with self medicating with alcohol. Definitely a component but more like psychosis and mania drive you to drink because these experiences are awful more than a causative factor that's been proven

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459134/

FollowingTheDaocrtified14 hours ago
The aldehydes that are produced from drinking alcohol heighten the risk for schizophrenia if you carry certain genetics.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26941382/

colechristensencrtified12 hours ago
Even peculiarly stressful life events can trigger onset
amy214crtified4 hours ago
Complicated interaction.

Schizos may take alcohol or cigarettes to calm down, a form of self medication. On the long term these may worsen, in the immediate they help. Why do you think they smoke a lot?!? To treat. If you smoke or drink, what do you do after a tough day - smoke or drink, to relax, feels great. Schizos may have a tough day , but not from external stimuli, but from internal stimuli

jajkowinrid7 hours ago
One of my ex' father triggered a lifelong episode of schyzophrenia by excessive drinking during mandatory military service around age 18-19. So i'd say there are number of triggers
Loughlajajko6 hours ago
Alternate theory; schizophrenia tends to manifest in men between 18 and 22. The drinking was him self medicating because of symptoms he was experiencing?
reactordevLoughla5 hours ago
Final thesis: schizophrenia was starting to manifest and the drinking was him self medicating, not knowing it was making the schizophrenia worse and causing further harm.
quickthrowmanwinrid4 hours ago
Or perhaps people predisposed to schizophrenia are more likely to seek out drugs. Something like 9 in 10 schizophrenics smoke cigarettes too, is schizophrenia caused by nicotine or do schizophrenics smoke because they’re predisposed to do so? I find it hard to believe that so many schizophrenics smoke cigarettes and are not also predisposed towards using other drugs.

I think blindly accepting the statement ‘drugs can cause schizophrenia’ is harmful because we don’t actually know if the drugs trigger it or if the disorder makes them seek out drugs.

treydquickthrowman2 hours ago
Iirc, there's some evidence that suggests that nicotine helps with the symptoms, so it's self-medicating.
asveikauwinrid4 hours ago
It's important to know that the correlation can have some other cause. Like that people with predisposition to schizophrenia may seek out drugs.

Keep in mind also the typical onset for schizophrenia is teenage years or early 20s in men, and is often later, up to early 30s in women. These are years you might experiment with drugs.

comrade1234suzzer9919 hours ago
You don't develop schizophrenia in your 50s. It sounds like you track her behavior and habits quite closely?
suzzer99comrade123418 hours ago
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/premium/article/schizophrenia-under-diagnosed-women

https://archive.ph/zT99C

> But when the protective hormone is withdrawn during menopause, some who avoided earlier psychosis get a later onset. Having a first experience after age 40 is uncommon, but it may include up to 15 percent of the women with schizophrenia—twice the percentage of men who have schizophrenia onset after age 40.

superb_devcomrade123415 hours ago
> It sounds like you track her behavior and habits quite closely?

No it doesn’t. It sounds like they’re really concerned about a loved one who went off the deep end.

e1ghtSpacesuzzer9912 hours ago
abbadaddae1ghtSpace12 hours ago
why?
krstffrsuzzer9912 hours ago
My friend had a very similar episode with a psychosis, but turned out to be bipolar, not schizophrenic. Sounds very similar though!

He was smoking a lot of weed leading up to and during the psychosis.

Ended up in psychiatric ward for a month, which was followed by a couple of years of depression/introspection/therapy, but is now doing great with lithium.

woodpanelkrstffr11 hours ago
It’s why I profoundly dislike the line of thinking that easier access to drugs means social progress.

It’s rather a shedding off of an inconvenience for those that have no (direct) problems of functioning (eg risk of developing addiction, psychosis, etc) at the heavy costs payed by those that are more vulnerable.

adaptbrianwoodpanel9 hours ago
I'm all for getting illicit drug users out of jail, that's social progress. There needs to be more education and attempt at shoring up mental health in the public sector and not just kicking everyone into a room and calling it a day, like the problem is solved.
anticorporatewoodpanel6 hours ago
> It’s why I profoundly dislike the line of thinking that easier access to drugs means social progress.

While that framing might change the aperture for people to support decriminalization efforts, "helping people who have addiction means social progress" is the greater good here.

Unfortunately, at least from a USian perspective, we only got so far as the decriminalizing part, and we did it while actually cutting a lot of the social services, health care access, and safety net that actually help people with addiction function in society.

I had a parent with schizophrenia. I can tell you what a privilege it is to have my cannabis use be the primary risk factor I have to worry about, and not the financial stress and eventual homelessness, untreated health issues, and lack of mental health support my father faced.

tim333suzzer998 hours ago
I have more friends mucked up by LSD like drugs than any other type - at any rate three of them and I don't have much in the way of junkie of alcoholic friends. I say LSD like as they all took other stuff. From my n=3 data I'd say if you do it more than once a week for more than two years you have a good chance of ending up like your friend.
MarcelOlsztim3332 hours ago
It's called "getting fried". Know many people that fried themselves doing that stuff recreationally every weekend. Good rule of thumb is if they can't hold their alcohol they won't be able to hold their psychs.
giantg2suzzer997 hours ago
Of course there's a downside. It's a tale as old as time. Some new miracle cure comes on the scene and people promote it without relaying the risks. You see this with mushrooms, pot, etc going back to snake oil and silphium. I've never looked into it, but I would bet that there are no medications that exist that don't have some sort of side effect or increase in risk of some negative outcome. So if someone is pushing a cure/medicine its best to assume there is risk, even if we don't yet know the risk.
lotyringiantg26 hours ago
As opposed to what belief? That it is possible for there to be medical interventions or substances that are entirely risk-free regardless of your individual circumstances, potentially hidden allergies, or other known or unknown contraindications? Was anyone ever under such an impression?
giantg2lotyrin6 hours ago
"Was anyone ever under such an impression?"

If you've ever listened to some of people pushing or debating psychedelics, or natural remedies, or even "totally safe" vaccines, then it should be readily apparent.

cosmic_cheesegiantg25 hours ago
Vaccines are a bit of a different can of worms in that first generally, they’re well-studied and the risks are reasonably well known, and second the impact isn’t solely personal — you’re trading off in most cases a small risk for the betterment of society — maintaining herd immunity, reducing capacity for spreading, etc depending on vaccine. The lives of many others can be negatively impacted, in some cases fatally, by one’s personal choice to not partake. There’s a certain amount of social responsibility involved.

Psychoactives and homeopathy have plenty of capacity to be harmful and aren’t necessarily anywhere near as well studied, but at least their effects are more bounded to the individual. (This does not however justify pushing them blindly.)

giantg2cosmic_cheesean hour ago
The context of this thread is that anything that is a medication has some sort of side effect and that some people overlook that. This is just as true for vaccines as for mushrooms. Cost benefit analysis is completely different.
mike_hearncosmic_cheese26 minutes ago
The effects of drugs aren't bound to the individual, that's the reason nearly all societies have banned them throughout history: they cause addicts to create large external costs.

Saying vaccines are well studied is like saying drugs are well studied, it's a category error. You can't study vaccines as a whole, and the quality of studies of specific cases vary wildly. As a consequence, common psychedelics are probably much better studied than some common vaccines. LSD in 2025 is the same substance as it was when it first became available, as far as I know, and there's lots of research into its effects. Compare that to the COVID vaccines which weren't even the same substance from trial to deployment, as the manufacturing process was changed completely. The trials were done on vaccine made using a very slow, non-scalable and expensive process that yielded a very pure result. The stuff people actually took was made using a totally different process designed for cheap mass manufacture. That second process had problems, leading to DNA contamination in some batches, which seems to explain why injury effect reports clustered by batch serial number.

All this was heavily suppressed for a long time (e.g. by rules forbidding study of vaccine vials), but has been coming out over the past year or so as the initial findings were confirmed. Research into psychedelics at least doesn't have that kind of problem, I think?

andaisuzzer997 hours ago
Cannabis is also a potent psychedelic, and its association with psychosis is well established.

(Not to condemn psychedelics, I just think the pendulum has swung a bit too far in the "it's totally harmless" direction.)

Could you elaborate on The Game? What did she say about this?

dsegoandai7 hours ago
As someone who has a person with psychosis in my family, I don't think you can find any interesting insights from the details of their delusions. It's like dissecting dreams or AI slop, there is no hidden meaning behind it. Usually best not to discuss it.
kayodelycaonandai6 hours ago
As someone who has had psychotic breaks, you aren’t going to learn anything from what was going on in their head.
suzzer99kayodelycaon44 minutes ago
100% agree with this. It's not rational in any way. From the period of time when she was still talking to us at least, there's no reasoning with it.

An example is she was having a nice conversation with her roommate, who brought up that he had gone to a bar where they have turtle races. She immediately turned defensive and thought he was making a joke about her being slow.

mike_hearnandai21 minutes ago
> Cannabis is also a potent psychedelic, and its association with psychosis is well established.

It's really fascinating to read this, because Alex Berenson has been beating this drum for a while now and he claims the psychosis risk has been downplayed or even denied. It's easy to find evidence supporting his take because if you just search Google for [cannabis legalization psychosis] you get a big pile of papers like this one:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36696111

"Abstract: Psychosis is a hypothesized consequence of cannabis use. Legalization of cannabis could therefore be associated with an increase in rates of health care utilization for psychosis [...] states with legalization policies experienced no statistically significant increase in rates of psychosis-related diagnoses"

That's from 2023. So apparently it's not that well established? Or if it's well established, there's a lot of researchers denying it.

iamnotageniussuzzer996 hours ago
> She thinks she's in some kind of Truman show that she calls "the game".

Might be depersonalization. I had suffered from it in my twenties; everything feels fake, although you know it is not.

ChainnChomppiamnotagenius2 hours ago
Derealization, I believe - not depersonalization? Believing everything around you to be made up - perhaps even by yourself in some cases. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, just trying to make sure I have the terminology correct
hshshshshshChainnChompp2 hours ago
So brain realizes it's completely making up the reality on fly?
prophesisuzzer992 hours ago
I believe since the 80's it's been well-established that people with a predisposition to schizophrenia have a greater risk to break out into psychosis when taking hallucinogenics. Even with today's clinical trials, they will exclude those with a family history of psychosis/schizophrenia.
absurdosuzzer992 hours ago
> She thinks she's in some kind of Truman show that she calls "the game". Since none of her friends or family are willing to admit to it, then we must be in on it.

She’s the most intelligent of the bunch for entertaining this possibility. The rest of you are fucking morons living day in day out without an iota of thought as to what you’re doing here.

It’s not schizophrenia or psychosis. It’s just denial and delusion by everyone around her.

ryanjshawabsurdoan hour ago
Plenty of intelligent people entertain this possibility, as well as many other possibilities, around how our world works.

If they then become obsessed with the idea being a fact and refuse to even consider updating their mental model when presented with evidence contradicting it then they have developed a fixed belief.

When that fixed belief is not common among their culture, it becomes a bizarre fixed belief.

When, as a result of their obsession with those bizarre fixed beliefs, they are unable to function (hygiene, nutrition, finances, care of their dependents, etc.) - then there’s a problem.

Or do you think a mind is a perfect thing that can never be ill?

photochemsynsuzzer992 hours ago
People who reject in-group socio-economic norms and isolate themselves from their previous in-group may or may not be mentally ill. If they were in one of those cults that programs their members behaviors incessantly, then it's entirely plausible that they became sane and escaped from a community of insane people.

For example, I've met several people who reported the set of symptoms and behaviors you describe - but in their case, 'the game' involved the fact they came from a wealthy extended family whose entire existence revolved around hanging onto their pool of capital and ensuring some rogue family member didn't gain control of the capital, which funded all their connected lives (including this guy, who was able to travel the country and go to music shows solely because of his family-linked trust fund). The game they all played was keeping the family members that controlled the capital happy, rather than going out into the world and finding jobs, making their own money, and being self-sufficient.

There's just not enough information in your post to evaluate whether the example was escaping from a cult or being indoctrinated into another cult, who is sane and who is crazy, etc.

suzzer99photochemsyn41 minutes ago
This isn't one of those cases. She had a career and tons of friends and now she's shunned everything. Her family lives in another state and had zero influence on her life.

But we can't do anything because she still knows how to take care of herself and isn't a danger to herself or others. So it's just sad.

thaumasiotessuzzer99an hour ago
> I've lost one of my best friends to what I think is schizophrenia. We don't know because she's cut off all contact with friends and family and refuses to see a doctor. It's definitely psychosis.

Schizophrenia is not defined strictly enough that it's possible for you to be right or wrong when you say your friend has it.

Here's a discussion of the change in diagnostic criteria from DSM-IV to DSM-V, which has the side effect of describing what the criteria formerly were and now are: https://psychcentral.com/schizophrenia/dsm-5-changes-schizophrenia-psychotic-disorders

Has your friend seen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(1997_film) ?

suzzer99thaumasiotesan hour ago
Yes, I agree with that. I'm just guessing because she's super paranoid of doctors. One of the downsides of being in and around the wellness community for decades.

I don't know if she's seen The Game, but I do know that she's always had a deep insecurity about being the naive one in the room, being the one not in on the joke. It seems like this thing plays on your worst fears and brings them to life.

Throwaway4275420 hours ago
I have schizoaffective disorder, induced by a bad trip from marijuana. It was like the 3rd time I had tried weed, and I naively took too much.

For me psychosis feels like pattern matching going on extreme overdrive, while at the same time memory goes to shit. It's truly an awful illness, and what's worse is that the current medical treatments are bad. I've been fortunate enough where I can get by on a low dose olanzapine, but for many people they simply don't work at all.

Even though I'm doing well enough to function normally and hold down a good, well paying job, it's impossible to find a partner. If I were to have kids, I would have to go through one of the embryo prescreening services. I am strongly in support of these screening services - the disease is truly horrible.

There has been little progress on treatments for schizophrenia, the mechanism of action of these drugs has remained the same for decades. The side effects are almost as bad as the disease, which is why so many schizophrenic stop taking them. The only novel medication recently released is Cobenfy, which I have not tried yet.

Personally I am holding out hope that schizophrenia has some basis as an autoimmune disease. There was a cancer patient who had a bone marrow transplant and ended up being cured: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/opinion/sunday/schizophrenia-psychiatric-disorders-immune-system.html

ChrisMarshallNYThrowaway4275420 hours ago
I have family with that.

The most striking thing, is the absolute certainty of the thinking. They feel as if their thinking is crystal-clear, and that they are the only one that "sees the patterns."

Currently, they're doing well. I know of others, that are not so fortunate.

It seems that pot is about the worst thing that a schizoaffective/schizophrenic person can use. They are better off chewing tabs of acid. I've not used it in about 45 years, and I've heard that today's pot is a heck of a lot stronger than what I remember.

pfannkuchenChrisMarshallNY20 hours ago
Can I ask how you are sure they haven’t had some novel insight that you just don’t currently understand? Like maybe they are bad at explaining but whatever pattern they noticed is valid?

I’m not defending them as I don’t know any details, I’m just curious how you came to be certain about your assessment.

Avicebronpfannkuchen20 hours ago
I wonder about this as well...like maybe there's some comfort in automatically "diagnosing" someone when they might see patterns or think in ways that challenge your priors..

EDIT: Imagine being powerful and wealthy and assured in your position in the Catholic Church and someone comes along and questions geocentricity and says you're wrong. It's a pretty easy leap to huffily say well, they are "mentally ill, crazy, delusional, paranoid"

marcherpfannkuchen20 hours ago
I can't speak for the above person, but what the OP of this comment thread said also tracks with my own experience of schizoaffective disorder: when I'm psychotic, the pattern matching part of my brain goes into overdrive and not only does my brain erroneously fill in the blanks in sensory input (causing hallucinations), it does the same thing on an abstract or logical level with ideas and people. It's easy to fall into the trap of paranoid delusion when you feel like you're seeing connections between so many otherwise benign, disconnected things and events.

I think what really gets me is that despite my constant vigilance and skepticism toward my own thoughts, I simply cannot talk myself out of how truly real those delusions feel when they happen. I can even acknowledge how absurd they are, even in the moment, but I can never shake the feeling that they're still very, very real. It's so maddening. The best I can do is to just not act on those thoughts.

Maybe the above person's family is actually unearthing valid insights, but if they're prone to psychosis, in that state they'll be prone to finding connections, associations, patterns, and so on between things in a way that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It'll feel very real to them in the moment, but when they exit that state (if they do) they'll likely be on the same page as others in thinking those ideas were a stretch.

ivapemarcher19 hours ago
Do you take adhd medication by any chance?
marcherivape19 hours ago
I used to on and off in the past, but I found it made me more prone to mania, so I've since stopped. Why do you ask?
ivapemarcher19 hours ago
Stimulant induced psychosis is very common. One of the major side effects of those medications, just like their street cousin, is paranoia.

I don’t really believe in the dormant/latent argument because once you shift down to the underground (as in, entertain all possibilities, even the possibility that you share something in common with drug abusers) where people abuse drugs, there you can see just how common psychosis is.

The drugs fuck people up. Interestingly, after many years of laying off the substance, many do find their way out of the psychosis.

Many people are actually caught in this trap and don’t tell anyone because they are struggling between reality and their delusions and trying to present a calm face to the world. It’s often directly the result of the substance, but it’s allowed to fester in the person due to all kinds of reasons (”hey, I’m really going to confess this is the crazy shit that feels believable to me?”). By the time they are done wrestling with reality and unreality, often they are left extremely damaged from the ordeal psychologically.

marcherivape18 hours ago
I can't say I've experienced psychosis due to stimulant use personally, but I see what you mean. For me it's maybe brought on instances of hypomania a few times, but I get how it could trigger issues in others, especially in high doses.

My instances of psychosis outside of depression/mania tend to be triggered by stress. I don't use drugs or take any stimulant medications, but they still just happen sometimes. It sucks. I'm thankfully not in an active episode at the moment, but I do suffer on a daily basis from the "negative" symptoms of schizoaffective disorder (i.e., the symptoms that take away function, like anhedonia, avolition, alogia, etc).

accidentallfactmarcheran hour ago
This is how we got all the "jews" intellectuals and other people who fought the evil fascists, angkor, and so on, who were "murdering intelligent people".
ChrisMarshallNYpfannkuchen19 hours ago
I'm not certain, but, in the case of my family member, their "certainty" is that everyone is conspiring to kill them. As I am one of the "conspirators," I can assure you that they are dead wrong.

Also, in my days of yute, I was fairly profligate in the use of ... mind-enhancing chemicals, shall we say. They basically gave me the same exact certainty and "insight."

Once, I decided to write down the marvelous insight that I experienced, while tripping. I wrote a whole bunch of stuff in a notebook, and then read it, a couple of days later.

It was pure gibberish. Made no sense at all.

[EDITED TO ADD] I should say that I had the luxury of having two distinct states of mind, including a "control state," in which to review the ramblings in the "enhanced" state. This is not a luxury that someone suffering from schizoaffective disorder has. They have no idea that their thinking is off.

dwaltrippfannkuchen19 hours ago
Talk to them for 2 minutes when they are having an episode. The effects are not subtle.

It’s an extremely debilitating condition.

sandsparpfannkuchen15 hours ago
Schizophrenics do sometimes have novel insights. I've noticed that schizophrenics tend to be extremely talented at coming up with deeply cutting insults. Like, insults that will change how you see yourself forever. Something about high pattern recognition. Plus an ability to mentally "go there", to countenance dark things that other people willfully ignore.
mandmandamChrisMarshallNY18 hours ago
> It seems that pot is about the worst thing that a schizoaffective/schizophrenic person can use.

This isn't entirely true, and it's a dangerous misconception. High THC, low CBD cannabis wouldn't be recommended, but that's exactly what making cannabis illegal selects for.

High CBD, low/zero THC cannabis, on the other hand, will probably be one of the paths to treatment if we ever get over our Reefer Madness and pharmaceutical obsession.

ChrisMarshallNYmandmandam17 hours ago
Eh, maybe. I can certainly say that I have "skin in the game." Someone very dear to me suffers from it, and it's difficult to hear theories from folks that don't have as much of a stake.

That's one reason that I have compassion for parents of autistic children, that are vehemently anti-vax. I completely disagree with their stance, but I know what they are dealing with, and the very real fears and stresses that they are under.

mandmandamChrisMarshallNY9 hours ago
> it's difficult to hear theories from folks that don't have as much of a stake.

It's not a theory that CBD has anti-psychotic properties. It certainly does, we just don't fully understand why.

My theory is that it will someday be part of treatment plans; and as someone with skin in the game I would hope that you care enough to learn a bit more about it. The comparison to anti-vaxxers with autism in the family is not appropriate here.

ChrisMarshallNYmandmandam8 hours ago
> is not appropriate here

Actually, if the agenda of pushing CBD therapy applies, then it is. I know a number of folks that have autistic children, of various levels, from "nerd," to "wheelchair-bound." Their parents are usually absolute saints, regardless of their political views, or misinformation diets, and live in constant pain; making daily sacrifices that I don't think many folks here, can even comprehend.

We were discussing a serious mental illness, and, as someone that is a caregiver for someone like that, I think that my experience is relevant; just as someone who believes that their child's condition was caused by something that is really a red herring.

The real villains, here, are the people that have secondary agendas (like legalizing drugs, or pushing political agendas), and look at people like us, with very real pain, as nothing but pawns, to be used to push their agenda (Think of the children!).

CBD, like Blockchain, probably has some valid application, but, because it was so unexplored, scientifically, it is currently about 75% snake-oil. We'll find out what it's good for, over time. The same can be said for other drugs, like MDMA, microdose LSD, or psilocybin.

aspenmayerChrisMarshallNY5 hours ago
> The real villains, here, are the people that have secondary agendas (like legalizing drugs, or pushing political agendas)

The natural state of affairs is silence, as plants don't care about humans. The actual history of plant illegalization is inherently political, and inextricably racist in America due to Nixon.

mandmandamaspenmayer4 hours ago
I agree, except that the racism involved with prohibition goes right back to Day 1 with Harry Anslinger [0].

0 - https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=harry+anslinger+racism&atb=v340-1&ia=web

mandmandamChrisMarshallNY4 hours ago
CBD has an antipsychotic effect. There's not really any debate on that in the scientific community, and I've already provided a link. That's not part of some sinister agenda to legalize cannabis, it's just stating facts to clear up the misinformation which at this point you are willfully repeating.

> The real villains, here, are the people that have secondary agendas (like legalizing drugs, or pushing political agendas), and look at people like us, with very real pain, as nothing but pawns, to be used to push their agenda

Your assumption that I don't also have personal experience, and a stake, and real pain with this issue is based on what exactly? Did I miss the part where you asked me about my own experience, or does your personal experience trump my own for some reason?

I do, in fact, have all three. That has no bearing whatsoever on the basic fact that CBD has confirmed anti-psychotic potential with particular regard to schizophrenia, as was already linked above.

Finally, there's no secret agenda here - cannabis should be legalized. It's just basic common sense and decency, for all the reasons I've already stated and more. Prohibition doesn't work and we have decades of data proving that beyond any doubt.

Have rates of psychosis shot up in states where cannabis was legalized? No, according to a massive analysis of 63,680,589 beneficiaries followed for 2,015,189,706 person-months [0]. So please, stop with the reefer madness. I'm sorry about your family member but if you want to help people you could really try looking at the data.

ChrisMarshallNYmandmandam3 hours ago
> I do, in fact, have all three.

I don't believe you. If you had, you would have led with it, just like I did. I value people that have skin in the game. Jenny McCarthy is a big fat pain in the ass, but she really does have an autistic kid, is a good mother, and has formed her worldview around that.

> So please, stop with the reefer madness.

WTF? I've never believed that crap in my life. Interesting that it's important to you, that I support that twisted worldview. You've mentioned it a couple of times, so it seems to be something that you're fixated on.

I do, however, have considerable experience with the fallout from drug use. I have spent my entire adult life, helping folks out, who have had their lives shattered by it. There are a small percentage of the population that can't handle drugs, and need help to recover from it. I do my best to help them out, and don't insist that the vast majority of the population change their worldview to fit mine.

Personally, I think that pot should be legal everywhere, including at the federal level (which will basically kill all the "mom and pop" operations out there, so be careful what you pray for). I don't use it, and don't care, myself. That doesn't make me an enemy.

I'd gently suggest that a professional forum, read by many of the most influential people in tech, might not be the best place to be a crusader for drug use.

mandmandamChrisMarshallNYan hour ago
> I don't believe you. If you had, you would have led with it, just like I did.

You really can't imagine someone arguing from scientific research over their own personal experience?

> Jenny McCarthy is a big fat pain in the ass

Again with the autism/vaccines comparison, again missing the point, again doing yourself and your family member a disservice.

> WTF? I've never believed that crap in my life.

You keep repeating the claim that there's no therapeutic value to cannabis. That's madness, my friend, by the very literal definition of ignoring reality.

> don't insist that the vast majority of the population change their worldview to fit mine.

That's exactly what you're doing though? You're insisting that people ignore the research which I've linked multiple times now, and adopt your worldview which is based on vague assertions and claims; and you insist that anyone would argue the same way as you're doing when that's neither true or sensible.

> Personally, I think that pot should be legal everywhere, including at the federal level (which will basically kill all the "mom and pop" operations out there, so be careful what you pray for).

Huh? I can't tell if you're insinuating I'm a drug dealer or what your point is here. I'm certainly not the one who made this debate about whether cannabis should be legal or not; I just pointed out that prohibition made it much more dangerous to consume.

> I'd gently suggest that a professional forum, read by many of the most influential people in tech, might not be the best place to be a crusader for drug use.

As has been pointed out by people above, you're the one on the crusade here. My point, which I've repeated many times now, is that CBD has shown potential to help people vulnerable to psychosis and schizophrenia. I don't know why that triggers you so hard, or why you can't engage with the research which shows that very clearly, but I wish you the best all the same.

jazzyjacksonmandmandam15 hours ago
Legal competition had lead to much higher concentrations of THC than was normal in the bad old days of smoking Mexican brick weed, not to mention the pure accessibility of buying 96% THC vapes wherever you go in unlimited amounts as opposed to being happy you could get your hands on an ounce.
talentedcoinmandmandam15 hours ago
“Dangerous misconception”? Get out of here with that. Cannabis is dangerous for schizoaffective people. Why are people that smoke pot so tiresome about this? Just accept that it’s not good for everyone!
mandmandamtalentedcoin9 hours ago
> “Dangerous misconception”? Get out of here with that.

I will not.

The demonization of cannabis has led directly to it becoming high THC and low CBD, as I said. It also has lead to it often being tainted with all manner of adulterants, from ketamine to glass beads to plaster dust to worse.

> Cannabis is dangerous for schizoaffective people.

CBD is a leading target of research for it's anti-psychotic properties; and if you don't know this it's a complete mystery to me why you feel entitled to weigh in.

And it's not even the only compound in cannabis that is being investigated; there are others with anti-psychotic and synergistic potential.

> Why are people that smoke pot so tiresome about this?

What if what I'm saying might be true, and you're dead wrong to accuse anyone who disagrees of being a 'tiresome stoner'?

... Because, in fact, it may well be [0].

> Just accept that it’s not good for everyone!

If it's not for you, that's fine; but the wilful ignorance around cannabis over decades has caused far, far more harm than cannabis ever has.

Can you accept that it will may well have a role in treating "psychosis, in general and schizophrenia, in particular" [0]?

0 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22716160/

mikeweissmandmandam15 hours ago
"High CBD will probably be one of the paths to treatment"

On what exactly are you basing that off of? Vibes?

dakommikeweiss12 hours ago
I wouldn't dismiss personal anecdotes any more than I'd dismiss someone claiming they saw something in a reputable journal but can't remember the citation.

In other words, yeah, don't just believe it at face value- but if you have good reason to trust the source, it's worth considering and checking into further.

In this case it's not just one individual but many people saying that THC and CBD are almost opposites if eachother, for example in how they affect anxiety.

Definitely worth proper research imho, could lead to medication that has more of the pros and less of the cons

mandmandammikeweiss10 hours ago
Not trying to be glib, but this is a genuine lmgtfy moment.

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=cbd+antipsychotic&atb=v340-1&ia=web

mikeweissmandmandam6 hours ago
No it's not. The poster should have referenced some sources. CBD has been touted as a miracle drug for over a decade now and it seems mostly like a fad at this point. But also it's not well regulated so it's easy for unscrupulous companies and individuals to profit from misleading marketing around it.
mandmandammikeweiss4 hours ago
> The poster should have referenced some sources.

Who, me? ... Why? It's very well known and established that CBD has antipsychotic properties.

And if you don't know, that and don't bring any evidence against it, then why claim otherwise before like, doing a simple search to check your priors?

In any case, I've provided multiple citations elsewhere in this thread, and a whole bunch more come up on the linked search results. This isn't hidden knowledge or anything.

> CBD has been touted as a miracle drug for over a decade now

That's a separate issue.

> it seems mostly like a fad at this point

If you click the link you can see that isn't true.

> also it's not well regulated so it's easy for unscrupulous companies and individuals to profit from misleading marketing around it.

That's a separate issue.

bryanrasmussenChrisMarshallNY12 hours ago
>It seems that pot is about the worst thing that a schizoaffective/schizophrenic person can use. They are better off chewing tabs of acid.

from the guys I knew who chewed the tabs of acid and had evident schizophrenic problems, I don't think so.

accidentallfactChrisMarshallNY2 hours ago
Exactly. This well matches my hypothesis about how the brain works.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44347211

ashoeafootThrowaway4275420 hours ago
It also makes you near unemployable as stress triggers the paranoia/psychosis.
sandsparashoeafoot15 hours ago
Not for everyone. Many schizophrenics find their work calming and grounding.
wycyThrowaway4275420 hours ago
Why do you need to do embryo pre-screening for something that’s not genetic? Or do you think it still is genetic despite also thinking you know the specific trigger in your case?

Edit: are you thinking it’s genetic, but exacerbated by weed?

jjallenwycy20 hours ago
Everything is at least partially genetic.

We have a friend whose sister has it and she went to genetics counselors before having kids.

They told her that because her sister has it that her kids had a 20% likelihood of developing it. Obviously 20% is way higher than normal.

SoftTalkerjjallen15 hours ago
Be sure you understand what this means. 20% higher chance (of a 1% baseline) is vastly different from a 20% chance.
jajkoSoftTalker5 hours ago
I think its pretty clear which case is being discussed. 20% increase in chance is not something to generally worry about.
Throwaway42754wycy20 hours ago
From my understanding of the science, weed can trigger schizophrenia in the genetically predisposed. Schizophrenia can be triggered by other environmental factors, so the embryo screening makes sense to lower the risk of the child getting it as well.
robocatThrowaway4275417 hours ago
> I am holding out hope that schizophrenia has some basis as an autoimmune disease

From article:

  Increasingly, researchers consider schizophrenia to be a “meta-syndrome,” encompassing multiple symptom dimensions/clusters and arising from intersections of diverse underlying mechanisms
So while autoimmune might be the cause for some people, other people have other causes?

As humans we look for a simple A therefore B story. Even then most people in my experience are either (a) poor at spotting cause and effect or (b) go into denial e.g. many political arguments

> kids, I would have to go through one of the embryo prescreening services

Have to? Do you mean you would want to? Or is there some compulsory force where you are?

FollowingTheDaoThrowaway4275414 hours ago
I have schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type as well. And man when I have anything with THC in it I’m a basket case. Worst psychosis in my life.

He might be interested in looking up THC, glutamate and schizoaffective disorder. Here’s a good start.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-019-0374-8

petraThrowaway42754an hour ago
Interesting link, thank you!.

One other possible immune system link is the relationahip between the parasite toximoplasis gondii to schizophrenia.

If I'm not mistaken that's the paper about that:

https://dbc.wroc.pl/Content/39095/PDF/1031.pdf

damion620 hours ago
Schizophrenia is genetic. So you're born with it. This makes zero sense. Maybe you mean shizo-effective which usually has to do with traumas.
11217mackemdamion620 hours ago
Nobody is born with schizophrenia.
thephyber11217mackem20 hours ago
Parent most likely meant you are born with the predisposition for it to present when it usually does.
11217mackemthephyber20 hours ago
~10%
11217mackemthephyber16 hours ago
I also happened to have a schizophrenic father. So I looked into this one a little bit :D
timewizarddamion620 hours ago
Induced schizophrenia is well known. Your brain is not a machine. It's several independent chunks of meat that were assembled in situ. There are more failure modes than operational modes.
sakohtdamion615 hours ago
The odd thing is that among identical twins when one has it the other has it roughly 50% of the time. Which suggests that having the generic basis still requires something external, and it is common but not too common.
K0balt20 hours ago
Random layperson musing:

I wonder if schizophrenia (or perhaps psychosis) could be in some way analogous to the LLM temperature function becoming disregulated?

I mean, what is the extreme opposite of psychosis? If it is matter of degree, which it seems to be, then there is probably a tuning mechanism. Perhaps too little and you fail to account for factors that might not be apparent but might be guessed or inferred, too much, and too much seems plausible.

If so it would be possible to have a great deal of different “causes” given the tight and complex coupling of biological mechanisms.

jackcosgroveK0balt19 hours ago
There was a theory that autism and schizophrenia were opposite ends of a spectrum, but it's fallen into disfavor. The theory went that autism produces mechanical, rigid thought patterns while schizophrenia takes free association too far.

I think it is possible to be diagnosed with both schizophrenia and autism which is why the theory is not considered anymore.

K0baltjackcosgrove13 hours ago
Interesting. I wouldn’t have intuited autism as being on the opposing end of psychosis, really, at least not based on my experience of both in my family.
bottom999mottobK0balt12 hours ago
I think your LLM temperature analogy is interesting in this deprecated dichotomy between autism and schizophrenia.

One Youtuber Jreg used a breadth-first search (schizophrenia) vs depth-first search (autism) analogy when comparing the the two, but I think your temperature analogy is more apt. Higher temperature results in more disorganized thoughts like schizophrenia. And if you buy into the idea that the root of most schizophrenia is thought disorders, then this analogy implies that dialing up temperature corresponds to more signs of psychosis through speech

My experience with many friends on the autism spectrum is that their speech tends to be more scripted, but I certainly don't think autism and psychosis are mutually exclusive.

subpixel20 hours ago
Schizophrenia can coexist with extreme levels of intelligence and lucidity.

A schizophrenic member of my family argued in divorce court that her husband, a leading physician at one of the most famous medical institutions in the world, was secretly involved in outrageous nefarious activities.

The stories were all fiction but she was so convincing that the judge awarded her a ruling in the divorce that ruined her husband financially and took an emotional toll.

blueprintsubpixel14 hours ago
I wouldn't exactly call it intelligent to lie to a court ;) Perhaps another descriptor would be more precise? For that matter, can one be "truly lucid" if one lies in such a manner?
barrenkoblueprint11 hours ago
Lucidity is a feeling let's say. And the stuff you feel it "about" does necessarily mean that the stuff is legit.

Or to quote Moby Dick ~ "Human madness is oftentimes a cunning and most feline thing. When you think it fled, it may have but become transfigured into some still subtler form..."

sethammonsblueprint4 hours ago
People lie in court all day every day. If you think everyone is being honest, you are delusional and must not be truly lucid.

Note, I don't question your lucidity. But hope it shows the fallacy of your logic train.

ryanjshawblueprintan hour ago
People with schizophrenia are often not lying, they really believe the bizarre things they say. How do you know what your brain is telling you is true?
renewiltordsubpixel21 minutes ago
An alternative explanation is that the judge was stupid.
alganet20 hours ago
Completely anectodal:

Right after the time I was diagnosed (~36), I started to become weirdly good at some stuff.

Music, for example. I've been playing for almost two decades and couldn't progress after a certain level. This changed almost overnight, and I started to learn new instruments very quickly (now I play guitar, bass, drums and piano). I'm not a genius at them, it's not what I'm trying to say. It's just that the pace at which I learn is very different from when I was younger, I can do things I never imagined being able to do.

Somehow, I also acquired some ambidextry. This might be due to learning the instruments. I now can write with both hands (not at the same time, dominant hand is still faster and more acurate). I also developed a second, completely different handwriting (now I have two "fonts" I can use naturally).

I got worse at dealing with people. Everyone seems to be in a haze from my point of view, and it discourages any kind of meaningful relationship. I can pretend though.

I am highly skeptical of the idea that any genetic component is involved in all of this (my father was ambidextrous though, but he acquired it in childhood), it seems purely psychological. I am also skeptical about the stereotypical triggers people often associate schizophrenia to.

Last year I was reading about Havana Syndrome. That was the thing that most resonated with the kinds of psychotic events I had. Weird sounds and voices that seem to come from nowhere, dizziness, balance problems, insomnia, headaches. By the time I got to a doctor, these effects were not there anymore (they last a very short time, at least for me). I was diagnosed by describing them to the psychiatrist. Since the first episode, it has happened again a handful of times. I have learned since that Havana syndrome is not a thing anymore, but there are no official explanations other than "it's likely to be psychogenic". I also wouldn't qualify for it (apparently, only diplomats and spies had it).

jongjongalganet19 hours ago
Could be age related. I could never play a musical instrument until my mid thirties. Nobody in my family could. My wife found a Ukulele which was left on the side of the road and which was in good condition and took it home. I started playing just randomly tugging strings to understand the sounds and I kept doing that maybe 10 to 30 mins a day for about 2 months and the tunes became less and less random and now I can improvise full 1 to 2 minute melodies on the spot with multiple strings.

I don't need to plan the melody ahead of time I just pick a few notes that go well together then I pick some starting notes and I just intuitively know how to join them together into a full piece. It's like when I play some notes, my fingers themselves resist certain bad notes and whatever note I end up choosing (high pitch or low pitch) seems to work out every time.

alganetjongjong18 hours ago
I had a guitar since I was 16, and never gave up trying to learn. I reached a plateau very quickly (knew some chords, simple songs), and could never go past it. I then spent almost 20 years in that plateau.

Then, suddenly, it all started to click. I was reharmonizing, writing my own lines, improvising, soloing. It was uncanny. I moved to other instruments at similar speed, stuff I never played before. It became so easy.

I heard many times that once you age, you lose some ability to learn music. What made this experience so jarring was that I experienced the exact opposite.

Maybe this thing that you have to start young is all bullshit (probably what's going on here), and before I had some kind of block. I can't explain what that block was though.

pfannkuchenalganet13 hours ago
Did the diagnosis perhaps relax some defensive structure in your mind which freed up an ability to tolerate the discomfort of actually identifying what you need to improve?
alganetpfannkuchen13 minutes ago
I don't know. It seems too vague of a description.

On the guitar, I did some identifying and learning.

On drums though, I just sat there and in a matter of months I was able to play to a lot of songs. I was doing polyrhythms, for example, before I knew what polyrhythms were.

Possibly, this is nothing extraordinary and fits the overall learning curve for the general population (I'm assuming lots of people do polyrhythms without knowing them). Which means that before the first episode, I was below that general curve of learning music (slower than everyone else would learn), then something changed right after such episode.

Since I'm on HN, let's use a computer analogy: I would describe it as upgrading a PC to new hardware, things felt smoother. The world of music (and arts in general) felt higher resolution, faster, more responsive to my actions.

Nevermarkalganet19 hours ago
> I am highly skeptical of the idea that any genetic component

Something can still be (weakly or strongly) genetic, but not inherited in any direct way. I.e. due to a particular mix of genes.

alganetNevermark18 hours ago
The kinds of genetic claims people usually make about schizophrenia are of the hereditary kind (including the post article), not random mutations.

I attribute this to how the illness is researched: finding a genetic factor would be a major breakthrough, so lots of people do studies on that, and eventually force their way into a discovery that represents a narrow subset of the illness but ultimately fails to explain it. It's all over the place.

This makes me extra skeptic regarding the validity of some of these studies.

sandsparalganet15 hours ago
If you scan Wikipedia's "Famous people with schizophrenia" article, as in people whose talent was so exceptional that they could succeed despite their disadvantages, most of the people on the list are musicians.
daft_pink19 hours ago
After reading this article, I’m really curious how you would model all kinds of other reproduction reducing behaviors that have become popular in recent years and how they many generations it will take them to be squeezed out of our culture. Like say taking care of a pet instead of having a kid in Korea.
sandspardaft_pink15 hours ago
One plausible explanation is that birth and childhood have become much less dangerous. Before 1900, children with poor genes died; since 1900, children with poor genes survive and have children of their own.
rixedsandspar5 hours ago
My understanding of high child mortality rates in the past is that it has little to do with genetics, and more to do with infectious diseases and poor hygiene.
zingababba19 hours ago
Julian Jaynes' theory is always interesting to think about. I self-diagnosed myself as schizophrenic in my late teens and I still stand by my diagnosis 20 years later. I do believe it is a spectrum though and the degree to which one is schizophrenic is not static, and I don't think it's even necessarily a bad thing.
anonymarszingababba15 hours ago
I assume you mean the bicameral mind / consciousness?
absurdo16 hours ago
As expected a lot of the comments here are anecdotes. I’m assuming there exists a class of highly technical articles that get posted regularly that incite ancillary discussion, but no real contribution involving the article.

For me, I don’t like that this is about a mathematical model. I don’t want a mathematical model. I like the theory, and I think it’s interesting. I don’t need further digressions into a model. I want to see the real thing. Prove it, replicate it, codify it.

bettercallsalad15 hours ago
As someone who is currently dating someone with history of psychosis, I have vested interest.

90% of the time she is truly the most amazing, compassionate, full of life and thoughtful person one can ever meet. Then there are times when it’s truly awful. She can barely sleep at all, leaves house without telling anyone seemingly thinking the presence of third person around. And she strongly feels others around are judging her hard, giving non verbal communication. It’s truly awful.

I didn’t know to the full extent her symptoms when we started dating. But one thing that was clear was she could barely sleep at night. Or sleep too long. There was no “normal sleep cycle”.

Over the time, some triggers are noticeable. Places with crowds, bright lighting, or sometimes stress at work. Aripaprazole so far seems to be holding up, no one knows for how long. I hear meds become resistant at some point. I don’t know what future holds. Kids are probably not an option. Although she very much wants it.

Natsubettercallsalad15 hours ago
Did you ever check for sleep apnea? The tests for it can be done at home now if anxiety would otherwise be a concern.
FollowingTheDaobettercallsalad15 hours ago
I have schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, and I just wanted to acknowledge and thank you for staying with your partner. I’ve never been able to get someone to stay through my illness with me through my life. But that’s probably because I am man.

I was on so many meds. I can’t even count them. Now I’m not on any, and I consider myself essentially cured after living with it for 35 years.

If she has triggers, that means she does not have a disease , it means she’s a different person that sensitive to different things. If someone who carries the celiac risk genetics, never eats wheat they never get celiac disease. If your partner was never exposed to triggers, you would never know she had a mood disorder. Do you see what I mean?

bettercallsaladFollowingTheDao12 hours ago
Thank you for sharing your journey! Most difficult part of this relationship has been to have her not worry about me leaving her because of her symptoms. Communication is the key. The only thing that can get tiring is when sleep schedules are so messy, and I have to go to work in the morning.

If you don’t mind sharing, what was your progression towards being cured? Did you do anything different lifestyle wise? I have consulted many psychiatrists but the general consensus seems to be that the management is the only option.

I am also somewhat concerned about the genetic component of it. The general feedback I received from pedestrians is most meds are not safe during pregnancy and postpartum episodes are very likely. And the risk of passing down is also about 10-20%. Her dad’s sister also seemingly had it.

FollowingTheDaobettercallsalad6 hours ago
First, I’m sorry if there’s any typos I am doing speech to text on my iPhone writing this and it’s early in the morning.

There are many psychiatrist that have different viewpoints, for example I’ve talked to many who see purines as a problem and then you have the whole keto/mitochondrial doctors. There are many psychiatrist that will never change their minds about mood disorders because why do they have to?

I should add as well that there are so many things out of my control that are triggers that I still carry Klonopin with me just in case. It’s the one thing that can stop my psychosis in a heartbeat. I think the glutamate GABA balance is extremely important and unlooked with a lot of mental illnesses. Glutamate are a big trigger for my psychosis.

To me, and I think this can be true for anyone, it’s all about connecting the dots between the triggers and not only mood symptoms, but physical symptoms as well. But obtaining my genetics and also learning about genetics over a 10 year period helped me tremendously. I knew it was in my family because my mother, my brother and my nephew, including myself all had extremely similar experiences and also suicide attempts.

The first thing is, I could not have done this if I did not stop my medication. I’m not recommending anyone stop their medication‘s but it’s going to be really hard to find things that affect glutamate, dopamine and serotonin if you’re taking these drugs at the same time. But being on the same drugs my mother was o 50 years ago did not seem logical to me. And then I started hearing stories about people recovering from mental illness, real stories. Then my nephew hung himself at 13 and that changed everything. I knew it was genetic so I knew that’s the direction I had to go to investigate what was going on with my family.

So I got to know my mother side of the family a bit better both genetically and from stories. It definitely came from my great great grandmother side and it turns out while we all thought that side of the family was Polish, they were actually from Finland.

For myself, my gut was a big indicator and clue. I’ve had IBS-D really bad since I was a child. I managed on my own to find foods that were triggers, but it was not until I discovered I was a FUT-2 non-secretor that thing is really changed. Only 20% of Europeans carry this gene so I knew it was important

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9301175/

Eating a diet heavy in Fucose (not fructose!) fixed my gut. Seaweed, mushrooms, etc.

This was not a cause of my schizoaffective disorder, but it definitely was a trigger. When my gut was bad, I was bad. But there were a lot of times when my gut was good and I was bad as well. So I kept looking for triggers.

Then there was the early heart attacks in my family and my hyperlipidemia. In my genetics, I saw that I had genes that were more like people who were the Inuit when it comes to poly unsaturated fatty acids. At this time, I was a vegetarian. With all the research about how omega-3 helps with heart disease I decided to eat more like an Inuit and what do you know, my cholesterol totally reversed. LDL down and HDL from 30 up to 54. Plus, I was feeling much more stable. Don’t underestimate how omega-3 can control receptor function.

Both my mother and I also had what is called multiple chemical sensitivity. I don’t really like that name but that’s what I’m left with. It’s essentially a sensitivity to a lot of aldehydes. The story here is kind of long and complicated so I’m not gonna go too much into the genetic details but I’m just showing you another of several triggers that helped me find out what was going on. A lot of foods have aldehydes, aldehydes impact flavor of foods and food manufacturers add aldehydes to foods as well as add glutamate and purines to increase our taste but sensitivity to flavors.

And then we could talk about air pollution. Another big trigger. My grandparents lived in Manhattan and every time we went back there I would feel worse. I even tried to work in Manhattan for a year and that did not end well.

Alcohol is complicated. At the front end, it brings me really really big relief. But I could never drink too much because it gave me a really bad fatigue in the end. It turns out that the calcium ion channel blocking effects of alcohol are great, but the aldehydes alcohol creates just make me feel worse in the end.

So I just started avoiding those foods and eating Whole Foods that are people in a cold climate would eat, and they went away a bunch of more of my triggers.

And then there was heat. Heat is the number one trigger for me. And for some stupid reason, I moved to North Carolina. Since I ended up homeless because of this and living in a van, I was able to move to different climates to different places and also found not only the cold weather, but high altitude were triggers.

see the problem with all this is my mother married an Italian man. So instead of eating a more Polish/Finnish diet we were eating in Italian diet having a carbohydrates and red meats and little fish. This was the worst diet for me.

I do take some supplements and two supplements. I’ve been tested deficient in, and that helped me are zinc and B6. When I say these supplements help me, I mean they dramatically make me feel different when I’m am low I them and when I supplement with them. And magnesium is another one.

So now I try to live like a Sami. I ate a lot of seafood, salmon, mackerel, oysters, mussels and wild game meets. I say low latitudes in cold climates. And I also avoid polluted cities.

Now that’s gonna sound depressing because I know that not everyone can do what I did, live in an van and move somewhere that fits them genetically. But that’s the truth of the matter. In my humble opinion, they have the idea of mental illness all wrong. It is a disease more like an allergy than a mental illness. There is an environmental trigger that causes a reaction. And make no mistake I think for the majority of us, including myself, it is an immune disorder and not a nervous system disorder in a fundamental way. For example, I’ve had very low white blood cell counts, but also showed signs of lupus that they were always testing me for. They also kept testing me for HIV because of my symptoms in white blood cell counts.

And then the doozy was when I had COVID-19. Both times I caught it I had the worst psychosis in my life. For some reason, no one finds this interesting not even my doctors.

Edited to add

I want to add this in a shorter post cause I can’t believe I didn’t bring it up.

The first thing I would do was get all of her nutrition levels, tested, and ruled out as causes. There are several tests you can get without a prescription.

The first important one is a hair mineral test. But getting a full iron panel, zinc, B6, homocysteine, B12, methyl malonic acid, serum amino acid test, and of course, a complete CBC with differential and metabolic panel. Keeping track of the last two were really important for me. I noticed my white blood cell count changed when I was in different locations. For example, my white blood cell count was consistently higher in North Carolina than it was when I was in Washington state.

As an example, I had a friend who was on Prozac since she was 18 and she was now 48. I looked at her blood test and it was clear she had anemia. They did an iron panel and her serum ferritin was only three. It turned out they were treating her lifelong anemia with SNRI’s and antipsychotics.

barrenkoFollowingTheDao3 hours ago
Thank you so much for writing this.

The thing about treating it all as some sort of an allergy makes sense for me since connecting some ideas from Gabor Mate about the immune system.

And the covid triggering a phychosis like state rings true for me as well (not that I need to corroborate what you are saying, once you know you know). One of the worst trips I've had was "just" having covid during the summer.

FollowingTheDaobarrenko2 hours ago
You're welcome.

Yes, people underestimate how stress effects the immune system and why it is so hard for people to see this link even when they can become fatigued, depressed and irritable when they have a cold.

They have investigated me for some sort of primary immune deficiency and found low T cells but they said they were "not low enough to cause problems".

When I had COVID I was running around this small town hiding from people and taking pictures of the, texting them to my friend as evidence they were following me and spying on me, and picture of my van and how people were messing with it. They I thought she and her family were in on the conspiracy. She finally convinced me to take a klonopin and I came out of it enough to take some more and it was done. The next day I had a fever and COVID. So it was weird that both time sit preceded my physical illness.

Sending love to you and your partner and hoping she can stay curious about why she is ill.

johndevorFollowingTheDao21 minutes ago
I lost my brother to suicide in a similar situation. Thanks for writing this and I hope it helps others stuck on the med treadmill.
Xmd5abettercallsalad28 minutes ago
>Most difficult part of this relationship has been to have her not worry about me leaving her because of her symptoms. Communication is the key.

Every comment you're making in this thread confirms her fears and delusions. Whether or not she was right initially doesn't matter anymore since the situation has now been bootstrapped. If she can't quite tell in which way you're being dishonest, she has the certainty that she eventually will. And here you are, committing a violation of intimacy, taking strong advice from blind strangers to whom you are confiding the destiny of your relationship. You have just put on your shoulders as much, if not more, weight than you wanted to get rid of when you started commenting, and you will leak it through non-verbal communication, 100%. Looking at it a second time, it seems there is as much self-fulfilling prophecy in your behavior as in hers. As you complain about her paranoia behind her back, you are judging her hard and stockpiling the very weapons of silence she's complaining about.

You're nonetheless as captive to the situation as she is: the idea of psychosis, even though it may well be correct, is what allows you to deflect her delusions before they are funneled back to her in the very terms she anticipated – it is also what binds you to her, her delusions, and your reaction which confirms them. You're not just commenting on your situation; you're calling for help.

Your dilemma is that her psychosis allows you to define the problem and helps you enact your decision, but at the cost of painting you as an asshole when you look in the mirror. This is why you're getting so many replies; this is what makes these situations so interesting. Intuitively, every poster has understood this and given you justifications for dumping her or for accepting that you're an asshole. I hope to have given you the tools to see yourself as part of the problem and to consider breaking up as the ethical thing to do.

I believe she can be fixed, though. This requires acknowledging and letting her know that no matter what you do, you're under the spell of her pre-traumatic stress disorder, and you're bound to confirm it. So why not stuff her mouth shut with your passion to prevent her witch's tongue from twisting disharmony into reality, and own her as a slave in retribution?

achieriusFollowingTheDaoan hour ago
> If she has triggers, that means she does not have a disease , it means she’s a different person that sensitive to different things

This is not the medical consensus. Schizophrenia, along with many other mental disorders, are well known to have a complex interplay with not only background genetic/chemical factors, but also the psychological conditions of the patient -- stressors like homelessness, drug use, and lack of sleep very much can trigger psychotic episodes. Suggesting otherwise is to suggest that a sick person not get care that they very well may need.

pinkmuffinerebettercallsalad11 hours ago
> Kids are probably not an option

I’m assuming this is due to life complexity? If it’s generic fear, you could consider adopting (although that also has the potential to be difficult in it’s own way).

Also wanted to +1 to the other comment, you seem like a wonderful person, thankyou for making the world a better place. I hope I “grow up” to be like you :)

brailsafepinkmuffinere11 hours ago
Even if you love someone and can manage your life with them, it's important to consider how that'll play out with even a little bit more pressure placed on a situation that thrives on stability. Kids are not a little bit of pressure, and if there's a possibility their mother (or adopted mother) will disappear for periods of time unpredictably, it would make an already extremely demanding obligation that much more tenuous.
heresie-dabordbettercallsalad6 hours ago
> Kids are probably not an option. Although she very much wants it.

Like many (but not all) people, my bias is love of children. But extend that love to your dearest future hopes. A marriage will be a serious test of commitment and stable teamwork every day — for decades. Otherwise it is likely to crumble and the children will be victims too.

Even as an optimist, I will say to a HN brother... there are short hikes, but for the longest you choose your ascent, your kit, and the weather conditions.

vbezhenarbettercallsalad4 hours ago
She will break down, then she'll get strong meds and she'll change unrecognizably. Think twice before making a long relationship with this person. You'll get a lot of stress and eventually she'll change drastically.

Schizophrenia has a strong genetic component, so think twice about making a children as well.

anonnonvbezhenar3 hours ago
Please don't downvote or flag this person unless you have a family member (or better, family members) with schizophrenia.
pier25bettercallsalad4 hours ago
That sounds like my mother (except for the "90% of the time" comment). I can tell you from experience it would be a bad idea to have kids, even adopting.
dimalbettercallsaladan hour ago
This is a shot in the dark, but there is a lot of excitement right now about treating schizophrenia and bipolar disorder as a metabolic issue. Some people are seeing complete remission, without medication. This isn’t a quick easy recommendation to just go off meds and go keto, but for some people that apparently has worked. Chris Palmer M.D.[0] is one of the main people driving it.

[0] https://www.chrispalmermd.com/chris-palmer/

wizzwizz4dimal20 minutes ago
Is there a reason to go off the meds when starting keto? If the meds are only mostly effective, and then a keto diet makes them very effective, then I might be inclined to go off the meds – but only if it stacks like that.
sakoht15 hours ago
The article suggests a possible model where the schizophrenia is an extreme linear progression. But the inability to find a culprit genes suggests something more complex. It is possible that there are is a group of genes that all have variations that confers benefit, but when those variations are all together negative effects occur. That makes the positive variants overall beneficial, and keeps them in the gene pool. This is why it is dangerous to presume that when we correlate genetic variants with disease and then presume they should go away. In fact, nearly any inherited disease that has survived may be conferring value to other individual when in proper partnership with other genetic profiles.
FollowingTheDaosakoht7 hours ago
This is true for every population. For instance, the price of protecting many African populations from malaria is sickle cell disease.

But I think environment plays a bigger role in modern society to increase the risk of mood disorders than genetics alone.

discoutdynamite15 hours ago
For your consideration: the theory of "Positive Disintegration" developed by Kasimir Dabrowski does help to explain the capacity and reality of schizotypal disorders. The easiest way to explain it, is that human brain potential for "over-excitation" leads to personality development; this is natural and human. The stages of personality development are not guaranteed to succeed and proceed correctly. Most cases of schizophrenia may be a result of failed re-organization, or a failure to develop the final, executive, function. In cases of "arrested development," this process may be delayed till later in life. This is the so-called mid-life-crisis, which also can fail, and then you get adult onset schizophrenia. This is all emerging research thats usually locked up in foreign language journals. Almost no medicine to be sold here, AMA and APA are not interested...
boston_clone15 hours ago
Very worth it to read the follow up research paper that moves away from this cliff-edge hypothesis, highlights other ambiguities, and attempts some self-correction.

https://www.psychiatrymargins.com/p/the-evolutionary-genetics-of-schizophrenia

In any case, a fascinating read and well-worth it to explore the linked citations, especially by Crow and Nesse.

FollowingTheDao15 hours ago
The problem with this whole line of thought is that the human environment since the neolithic period has changed.

It also does not take into account the huge amount of human relocation that’s taken place over the last 200 years. For example, we have a large number of Africans that are now living in climate that are much colder than what they evolved to live in. The same as truth for northern Europeans, who lived in cold, cloudy climate now living in sunny, warm climates. Does anyone hear really think that that wouldn’t affect the populations mental health?

We know schizophrenia genes are almost always risk genes, meaning their polygenic, or they don’t cause schizophrenia, and everyone who carries the genetics. There are a very few number of cases of people who carry genes that directly caused schizophrenia.

So it’s quite possible that schizophrenia did not exist as frequently as it does in the modern world, a world filled with pollution, stress, drugs, aldehydes, bad food, and on and on and on.

But let’s just take migration. It is a well-known risk factor for schizophrenia. See the paper below.

https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/appi.ajp.162.1.12

So no schizophrenia is not the price we pay for mine poison near the edge of a cliff, it’s the price we pay for technology. The technology that enabled not only all the wonderful things to get, but also all the horrible things that come with it.

I had schizoaffective disorder, and I have essentially cured it. But I really can’t say it’s a cure because what was happening was there was a Mitch match between my genetics in my environment. It’s like curing yourself from celiac by not eating wheat. Celiac is only a disease if you eat wheat.

So I am one of these involuntarily relocated people because of capitalism. My great great grandparents on my mother side were Sami and I still carry those genetics. Changing my environment and changing my diet changed my life. Frankly, I’m tired of these articles saying that there’s no cure for mental illnesses and it’s just a price we pay.

bottom999mottobFollowingTheDao12 hours ago
I'm curious how you've cured your schizoaffective disorder? Diet?
FollowingTheDaobottom999mottob6 hours ago
I’ve made a very long reply to another comment that explains everything. As well as I can at least.
barrenkoFollowingTheDao12 hours ago
This is personally interesting to me, as I am the first generation of my family that is not semi-nomadic (not sure about the exact term in English). When you say you've cured it - did you move somewhere more adequate or you did you stop moving?
FollowingTheDaobarrenko6 hours ago
I believe my sensitivities came from a semi-nomadic people, but northern European cold climate, so I generally focus on staying in cooler climates.
barrenkoFollowingTheDao3 hours ago
Mine are from south-eastern Europe and I have been ignoring the longing for my mountain for so long, I've figured everyone longs for their habitat anyways so it's not that special.

We also have a lot of mental health issues in my family since the switch to "civilization", not sure that any one of us is totally sane.

FollowingTheDaobarrenko2 hours ago
I think many people are suited just fine to handle all this pollution and stress and stationary living. The farmers have taken over the world and they have left us hunter/gatherers to struggle.
barrenkoFollowingTheDao2 hours ago
I am of the same mind, need to get a van it seems :).
FollowingTheDaobarrenko6 hours ago
X
drgo14 hours ago
Is it possible that the pro-schizophrenia genes persist because they offer other (non-neurological) benefits, e.g., lower risk of cancer? Siblings of patients with schizophrenia are less likely to develop cancer, and in several studies these patients had lower risk of developing cancer despite higher prevalence of smoking.
FollowingTheDaodrgo14 hours ago
There’s no such thing as a “pro schizophrenia genes”. There are only genes that increase the risk of schizophrenia, and this is probably due to environmental variables.

Exchanging a risk for cancer for a risk of schizophrenia is not a win-win situation. You’re just switching one set of risk genes for another.

ekaryoticFollowingTheDao4 hours ago
>Exchanging a risk for cancer for a risk of schizophrenia is not a win-win situation But it can be though. Consider a population that works with carcinogens like coal. due to capitalist class structures, they cannot leave their occupation, so a gene that would increase their survivability would be a great help.
dustbunnyekaryotic4 hours ago
Schizophrenia is far more likely to prevent you from reproducing than cancer, because schizophrenia hits way earlier.
FollowingTheDaodustbunny2 hours ago
Yes, this is what I was going to comment, and adding that it was funny they used a coal miner as an example since my family side that has the mood disorders were all coal miners in central PA.
01HNNWZ0MV43FFFollowingTheDao4 hours ago
> There are only genes that increase the risk of schizophrenia

I think that's what GP was saying?

> You’re just switching one set of risk genes for another.

I think... that's what GP was saying?

FollowingTheDao01HNNWZ0MV43FF2 hours ago
>> You’re just switching one set of risk genes for another. > I think... that's what GP was saying?

If you are switching one low survival gene for another there is no net benefit.

lokardrgo4 hours ago
The benefit must be to reproduction. Cancer generally happens after peak reproductive years.
voidhorse14 hours ago
The cliff theory is an interesting one. I don't have any kind of schizo propensity, to my knowledge, but I did, for a brief period of my life, have what I call a "firemind" experience.

During that period I spent an unhealthy amount of time alone. I also spent tons of time reading. During that time the ability of my brain to free-associate seemed to absolutely explode. I felt like I could see a pattern or form a connection between almost anything whatsoever. I read symbolism in everything. The few times I did see friends during that time, I remember them being kind of shocked at the callbacks, linkages, etc. that I was able to fire off instantaneously at the board game table.

My brian no longer works like this. I underwent several lifestyle changes and it seemed to really rewire me. I'm much more logical in my thinking now, but it's taken practice, and the shift was gradual. Every now and then I kind of miss the "semiotic aptitude" I had in those days, but I wonder if I was really just teetering on the edge of a cliff. Maybe a few more months of isolation would have pushed me over the edge.

boardwaalk14 hours ago
Though it doesn’t mention it by name exactly, I think a related idea for systems that are optimized close to a point of phase change is “the edge of chaos”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_of_chaos

bryanrasmussen12 hours ago
>The persistence of schizophrenia is an evolutionary enigma

how much schizophrenia is actually going to manifest in peak procreating years?

throw-qqqqqbryanrasmussen5 hours ago
I have two relatives with schizophrenia. Both had onset in their mid 20s.
bryanrasmussenthrow-qqqqq3 hours ago
yeah but a sizeable part of the discussion here has been about women with menopause starting to show schizophrenic behaviors. So that might be a significant amount of the schizophrenic cases in the population.
throw-qqqqqbryanrasmussen2 hours ago
> So that might be a significant amount of the schizophrenic cases in the population

I dont think they are. Most are diagnosed in their teens or early twenties. Women slightly later than men.

Women diagnosed in their menopause are not a majority of diagnosed schizophrenics; far from.

I understood that part as merely a curiosity.

rozabbryanrasmussen2 hours ago
Reproductive fitness does not end as soon as offspring are born. Maximising the likelihood of genetic continuation is a lifelong endeavor.
cageface12 hours ago
Maybe this could explain why mental illness & creativity seem to be so closely related? Just as one example, James Joyce's daughter was schizophrenic.
kayodelycaoncageface6 hours ago
Mental illness and creativity are not closely related. There is correlation but mental illness is not required for creativity.

According to Wikipedia, creative people are 25% more likely to have a mental illness.

As for why so many bipolar people are famous, manic episodes can be very productive.

For myself, being bipolar has given me several lifetimes of perspective to inform my writing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity_and_mental_health

andrewflnrkayodelycaon4 hours ago
> Mental illness and creativity are not closely related. There is correlation

What do you think a correlation is if not a relationship? No one said it was "required".

kayodelycaonandrewflnr3 hours ago
Yeah. I wasn’t clear. I do not believe that 1 and 1.25 is considered “close”.

There’s absolutely a correlation, enough to be causation. But it doesn’t make mental illness a primary factor in creativity in modern society.

woodpanel11 hours ago
Interesting article. Also a good amount too high above the paygrade for me to decipher all concepts in it, but as someone who had close contact with schizophrenics a lot, I was missing one aspect in particular:

All schizophrenics I know didn’t start as obvious psychopaths, but rather have their personal „cliff“ usually around an age associated with hormonal changes (eg early twenties, menopause).

So in other words the negative selection effects aren’t there until after reproduction.

storus8 hours ago
Isn't it due to synaptic pruning going wrong, a sort of off-by-one error of a gene tagging synapses for deletion?
HarHarVeryFunny7 hours ago
Genetics is messy - as I understand it most genes don't code for a single thing, so assuming evolution is "selecting for schizophrenia" that only implies that there is an evolutionary benefit to some of the things controlled by the same gene(s) that control schizophrenia, that outweighs the disadvantage of schizophrenia.

Homosexuality is interesting from this perspective too - common enough that evolution has to be selecting for it, yet basically fatal to reproduction, so what are the benefits that evolution is selecting for? Is it advantageous to groups, or maybe the same genes confer an individual benefit to non-homosexuals?

no_wizardHarHarVeryFunny7 hours ago
I always wondered if it was natures check on overpopulation. I know that is controversial to say, but it seems most fitting on its face
HarHarVeryFunnyno_wizard6 hours ago
My best guess it that there is a societal/group benefit in reducing aggression (maybe not unrelated to they way our closest DNA match, Bonobos, function).

I don't think we're at the point yet, and certainly not in last few million years of evolution, where overpopulation is an issue, and since evolution is all about (collectively) creating the largest next-generation population, this isn't the way I would expect to see increased competition for resources to play out.

FraterkesHarHarVeryFunny2 hours ago
For evolution to “select” for homosexuality, wouldn’t it have to be hereditary in large part? As far as I can tell, to the extent that theres any evidence for that the effect of genes on sexuality is kinda limited
HarHarVeryFunnyFraterkes41 minutes ago
Male vs female differences, including differences in typical sex-specific sexual attraction, are obviously genetic, even if we've yet to figure out all the specifics (where are the male's "curve detector" genes, etc).

Do men and women both have the coding for male/female attraction, with one typically disabled ? This perhaps seems most likely, in same way both sexes have nipples, etc. Without knowing exactly how this all works we can only speculate how male/female genes can combine to create same-sex attraction. Obviously it's not so simple as inheriting a gay gene from one of your parents!

throw4847285HarHarVeryFunny19 minutes ago
> Male vs female differences, including differences in typical sex-specific sexual attraction, are obviously genetic

Typical is putting in a lot of work in that sentence. I could rephrase it with the same truth content and make it much more ambiguous.

"Many phenotypical sexual differences in humans are obviously genetic. Some very common differences in sex-specific sexual attraction are likely genetic as well. For large swaths of sexual attraction, we have absolutely no evidence of a genetic link."

What's funny is that the one example you facetiously picked (a curve detector) is extremely culturally dependent. Trying to tie elements of human sexuality to evolutionary just so stories is usually pseudoscience. When we start isolating genes for the things that we think of as natural, if we ever do, I bet you $100 the mapping from our social experience of these traits to some kind genetic reality is muddled to the point of total detachment.

HarHarVeryFunnythrow484728510 minutes ago
> What's funny is that the one example you facetiously picked (a curve detector) is extremely culturally dependent.

Actually, it wasn't intended as facetious! I'd bet money that male attraction to females is indeed based on curve and jiggle detectors! If not this, then what - it has to be based on some physical characteristics. I realize that female ideals vary a lot between cultures, and time periods, but the differences are more about things like fat percentage and distribution than the underlying characteristics that visibly differentiate men from women.

KittenInABoxHarHarVeryFunnyan hour ago
> Homosexuality is interesting from this perspective too - common enough that evolution has to be selecting for it,

Are we sure this is the case? I think it's more like homosexuality isn't extremely selected against on a population level. Evolution doesn't really select for, more like evolution is a process in which least-viable-specimens are killed off for their environments. It could very well be that a small number of homosexual specimens are simply irrelevant to evolutionary fitness.

renewiltordHarHarVeryFunny16 minutes ago
The article's first paragraph has some alternative factors in selection

> Traditional evolutionary hypotheses, such as those invoking kin selection, mutation-selection balance, and evolutionary mismatch don’t quite explain this.

There's lots of explanations here but one that is often mentioned is "kin selection". If you increase evolutionary fitness of nephews, nieces, etc. There's many others, some of which apply here and others which don't.

natnat6 hours ago
This reminds me of the "Natural engagement pattern" sketch that Mark Zuckerberg made about facebook content back in 2018: https://www.facebook.com/notes/751449002072082/

Content gets more engagement as it gets closer to the "policy line" of getting banned, and in a competitive information environment (an engagement maximizing algorithm) you end up with a lot of content close to the border of what's allowed.

aspenmayernatnat5 hours ago
Facebook is hostile to archive sites, so I am quoting this link for discussion purposes:

https://pastebin.com/S4bWZpma

Mistletoe5 hours ago
> Let’s say schizophrenia is associated with a 50% loss of reproductive fitness in 1% of the population (and there is no offsetting benefit in the rest of the population), then it would take roughly 180 generations to cut the rate in half and about 560 generations to reduce it to one-tenth of its original value (Mitteroecker & Merola, 2024). We’ve had a comparable number of generations since the Neolithic era, but as far as we know, the prevalence of schizophrenia has not decreased in the manner anticipated.

What if the number we experience now IS 1/10 of what it used to be? Would explain a lot of religious talking to God in the past.

scotty79an hour ago
Do you think schizoid personality disorder has actually anything in common with schizophrenia, apart from aptitude and even preference for social isolation?
tempestnan hour ago
This is fascinating, and makes me wonder if human intelligence itself is such a cliff edge trait. For most of human history our advanced intelligence has obviously been a benefit, but now we see, as people and societies become wealthier and better educated (both correlated with intelligence), their reproduction rates drop precipitously. Perhaps we've overshot the intelligence cliff and evolution is now gradually pulling us back. (Evidence of this would be less intelligent people having more children on average than more intelligent ones.)
stauntontempestnan hour ago
Humanity is changing so quickly nowadays, biological evolution most likely doesn't matter at all anymore, at least for the kind of questions and time scales you're discussing.
heavyset_gostaunton40 minutes ago
Humanity is still subject to evolutionary pressures. We are "natural" and what we do is "natural", and if something like our environment were to drastically change as an evolutionary pressure, selection would absolutely happen.

Consider a change in environment where, for example, oxygen levels drastically drop. That might make living at altitude deadly for those who don't have genetic adaptions to high altitude living.

As an extreme example, in ~500 million+ years when the sun starts expanding, you can bet natural selection will finish off non-extremophiles that aren't living deep within the Earth.

stauntonheavyset_go16 minutes ago
Sure, I never claimed otherwise.

What I'm saying is that evolution matters across large timescales. By contrast, I believe the topics I was commenting on concern timescales where effects of biological evolution are negligible compared to the effects of memetic evolution.

Thus, biological evolution doesn't matter at all for predicting what will happen (or is happening right now) to humanity, unless predicting so far into the future as to be completely futile speculation (imagine someone 200 years ago wondering how biological evolution might affect humanity during the next couple thousand years).

varjagtempestnan hour ago
There is no evidence people are measurably more intelligent now than two-three decades ago.
_ink_varjagan hour ago
tempestnvarjag24 minutes ago
Yes, the genetics wouldn't have significantly changed over such a short period, but the environment has.
stauntontempestn14 minutes ago
Genetics isn't all that matters. Things like malnutrition (and a lot more things) very much also do.
Animats40 minutes ago
"The persistence of schizophrenia is an evolutionary enigma. It is a disabling psychiatric condition that reduces the likelihood of having children, and yet it has roughly 1% lifetime prevalence worldwide. Traditional evolutionary hypotheses, such as those invoking kin selection, mutation-selection balance, and evolutionary mismatch don’t quite explain this."

Much the same could be said for gayness. If it were genetic, it should have been eliminated by evolution by now. Which suggests that it's not.

There are some differences in incidence of schizophrenia in populations.[1] Birth order matters, slightly, with prevalence higher for firstborns. (This is the reverse of homosexuality and left-handedness.) Migrants have higher rates of schizophrenia than non-migrants. Women vs. men, about the same. Rural vs. urban, about the same.

What the original paper suggests is that they didn't discover anything significant. It's more like a discussion of feedback control problems near a cliff, but by people who don't know about that part of control theory.

The title is overly dramatic for the results.

[1] https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020141

hn_throwaway_99Animats32 minutes ago
> Much the same could be said for gayness. If it were genetic, it should have been eliminated by evolution by now. Which suggests that it's not.

There are very plausible explanations for the genetic basis of gayness. One is that being gay is essentially a "byproduct" of higher fecundity in women - I'd have to search for the study, but gay men with sisters tend to have sisters with more kids than the norm.

The other is the "guncle" hypothesis (which is related to the previous one). While gay men and women do not have their own biological children (at least through gay relationships), they are able to spend additional resources on their nieces and nephews. Anecdotal obviously, but it certainly worked this way in my family. As a guncle I helped pay for my niece's education (and was happy to do so because I don't have to care for children of my own ).