Mental illness diagnostic invention peer reviewed

Discussion in 'Education, Research and Inside Reports' started by Incredulicide, Jun 5, 2010.

  1. Incredulicide Member

    Mental illness diagnostic invention peer reviewed

    Introducing Electrovestibulography:
    New Inventors: EVestG
    15 minutes 50 seconds into the full episode (in WMV or MP4 format) they mention having about 20 publications, 3 of which are in journals and the rest are in conference papers at the moment.

    But of course you could just grab the cans at your nearest Stress Test table and rely on an instant diagnosis by the cult's spruikers.

    The deception of the Oxford Capacity Analysis relies on this invention not existing, so inB4 thread derail.

    Since this is useful as before and after measuring of the effectiveness of medication given for certain conditions, imagine if it was used to gauge the effectiveness of each level up the bridge ;)
  2. Anonymous Member

    Re: Mental illness diagnostic invention peer reviewed

    I wonder if someone thought this up while on a carnival ride?
  3. Anonymous Member

  4. Anonymous Member

    Re: Mental illness diagnostic invention peer reviewed

  5. anonohio Member

    Re: Mental illness diagnostic invention peer reviewed

    i didn't see the peer reviews that they're talking about? lets see some double blind RCTs!

    looks interesting
  6. Incredulicide Member

    Re: Mental illness diagnostic invention peer reviewed

    This invention just won "Invention of the year" on The New Inventors which means they'll be getting a lot more interest and money to put into more testing/studying and hopefully deploying.

    ABC iView

    New Inventors - ABC TV
  7. Incredulicide Member

    2 years on, the device shows up 8 minutes into this Catalyst story:

    A search brings up the current papers and trials:
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Anonymous Member

    This is amazing! The medical fraternity rocks!
  9. Anonymous Member

    I'm glad people are doing this research, but I'm annoyed by this particular report which repeats the CCHR's old tropes and so perpetuates the public's misunderstanding of psychiatry in general. For example:

    Firstly, all of medicine is concerned with the relief of human suffering, which is subjective. Where there is no suffering now or in the foreseeable future, there is no need to treat. So doctors rely upon a patient's expression of subjective experience all the time, not just in psychiatry.

    I can see a rash on someone else, but I can't tell if it is itchy or not. Headache, nausea, loss of appetite, lack of libido, feeling drowsy, chest pain, dizziness, shortness of breath, chills, fatigue, blurred vision, loss of the sense of smell, ringing in the ears --all subjective but still important in making many medical diagnoses. There is no a priori reason to privilege these symptoms above complaints of depression, anxiety, insomnia, compulsions, or hearing voices.

    Secondly, although laboratory tests are helpful in the diagnostic process, rarely are they definitive. Everyone reading this post will have abnormalities on routine labs even without any illness, because there exists a large overlap between states of illness and of health.

    The show format reeks of stealth marketing: psychiatry is a mess, enter solution. Investors, get your checkbooks ready!

    Really, I long for the old days when academic psychiatry and drug development companies were more involved. The academics benefited from the soft money and the companies benefited from the frequent intellectual smack upside the head.
    • Agree Agree x 4
  10. Missfit Member

    Yeah, I don't like the idea of a test that can prove you have a mental illness because what if it's wrong? Some mental illnesses are subject to change a perspective of a person from family, friends, co-workers, bosses or even doctors. I've heard many Dr.'s say " Oh, you're depressed, take this." And unknowingly blind themselves to what could actually be something else. Also, let's say you get tested and they say your schizophrenic and the dr.'s decided you cannot control your own actions, even if not true, you can be locked away or treated for things that just aren't true. Too many components to mental health than just a test to figure out your problems.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Anonymous Member

    I can see insurance companies using this to disprove a mental illness being claimed for, when it might just be a misdiagnosis of some other mental illness.
  12. Anonymous Member

    The biomarkers are indicative only to assist a diagnosis, there is no claim of 100% effectiveness so it can't be used to prove or disprove anything. Enough FUD.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  13. Anonymous Member

    You step in the stream,
    but the water has moved on.
    This page is not here.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. Anonymous Member

    Just like blood testing for the Braca gene for members of families assailed by breast cancer can inform them of choices and behaviours into the future. These biomarkers can inform people if they are more or less likely to become mentally ill in the future and adjust there behaviours accordingly. Such as if a young person has biomarkers for mental illness they may be better informed to avoid social drug use. Its a tool to estimate the relative predisposition of a person to these illnesses which I think is amazing.
    • Winner Winner x 2
  15. Anonymous Member
    Bio-markers will help people.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Anonymous Member

    Biomarkers quite likely will help us understand the brain better. But organic systems are complex and there is a real possibility that many biomarkers that look promising during the early phases of research will not be of use in the clinic.

    Measure the height of 100 men and 100 women and you will find that men are on average taller than women. But if you are told that someone is 5'9", can you have reasonable confidence that the person with that height is male?

    1. All early stage medical research should be ignored by the general public.
    2. Anyone marketing a product based upon preclinical studies is a scammer.
  17. Anonymous Member

    This I agree with.
  18. Anonymous Member

    Or a stock analyst
  19. Anonymous Member

    If you are told that height is an early detector of gender, you could have reasonable confidence that person is using a logical fallacy for an argument.
  20. Anonymous Member

    What the fuck is an "early detector"? In science we talk about correlation. And yes, height correlates with sex.

    If I tell you the average height of one group of 100 people of a certain sex is 5'4" and the average height of another group of 100 people of another sex is 5'10", you will have no trouble determining the sex of 200 people.

    If I tell you that an individual is 5'9", you are not going to do a very good job predicting that person's sex.

    All these brain scan brain wave studies involve two groups of people: one with some problem like schizophrenia or ADHD or Alzheimer's and a control group. The results of these studies may be statistically robust. Still we can't know if the specific high tech brain scan machine thingie will help individual patients without understanding the variance within groups, which usually is large.
  21. Anonymous Member

    Gotcha :)

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins