My Experiences with Industry Sponsorship

Around 2001, when I was a mood disorders fellow, I was asked to do an educational lecture by Organon, the manufacturer of the antidepressant mirtazapine. The company clearly wanted one of the more prominent mood disorders research psychiatrists to do the lecture--but since no one else was available, they settled for me. It was common practice for research psychiatrists or other perceived "leaders in the field" to be paid by drug companies for "educational lectures" attended by family physicians or other psychiatrists, usually at expensive restaurants or lavishly-catered hotel conference rooms (the drug company footing the bill, of course); I think this common practice remains. To be fair, I think everyone assumed that this was all fine, even a useful educational service. Probably many of those involved in this practice still believe that. And perhaps many of these lectures are useful educational services to some degree, it's just that both the lecturers and the recipients may be unaware of the biases involved. Anyway, my lecture was supposed to be about treating resistant depression. I was provided by the company rep with numerous powerpoint slides about mirtazapine to include in my lecture. I did the lecture, and was paid generously for it. I included a few of the slides about mirtazapine, but I truly tried to give a lecture broadly about treating resistant depression, and discussed mirtazapine for only about 20% of the talk. Clearly the company rep was not impressed with my performance, and I was never again asked to do a lecture for them. I'm glad of that, since the more one does these things, the more one can be convinced that it is professionally appropriate, despite the obvious biases involved.

Around 2000-2001 I was involved in a clinical study of a new drug. The drug company sponsored the study, flew everyone business-class to Monaco (on the French Riviera), and put us up in a lavish 5-star hotel, to attend an introductory meeting regarding the study. Such meetings, in my opinion, are utterly needless expenses. Introductions and instructions about a study can be done without transcontinental travel. Training for rating scales, etc., could be done in some other simple, standardized way, without any need for travel. I did enjoy the trip, and I wouldn't doubt that it contributed to my having a more favourable view of that company's products in the following years.

Also around 2000-2001 I was involved in another clinical study. The drug company, also sponsoring the study, flew everyone business-class to Miami, Florida, and put us up in a famous 5-star hotel. By this time I was starting to have more questions about the neutrality of the research, under these circumstances. Something that struck me during that trip was my observations of the company reps meticulously preparing their video presentation for us -- they were preparing a show; it was basically a slick info-mercial, sound-effects and all. I was also struck by the fact that no one around me seemed to notice this or have a critical view of it. I felt like, on the one hand, we were being treated like royalty, but on the other hand we were simply being bought. I realize that it is good for companies to make participation in research projects attractive to everyone involved. It can be frustrating work to recruit patients for clinical studies, and many psychiatrists would rather not take time away from other aspects of work to participate in research. Research is important, and maybe travel & adventure could be fair aspects to enjoying the life of a researcher. BUT -- the travel is really not necessary at all. It is an extravagance. Information and training about a research protocol can happen locally. Other communication can happen over the phone, over the net, or over a video link. The other expensive extravagances just reduce the neutrality of the study, and also bias all participants (many of whom are "leaders in the field" who often influence other practitioners) to have and convey a more favourable view of the company's products, irrespective of the results of the particular study.

I think it would be interesting to have disclosures in research papers not only about the authors' affiliations with, or income received from, the drug companies, but also about the travel expenses paid by the companies for meetings pertaining to the study in question.

A more mundane aspect of industry sponsorship, during my residency between 1995-2000, was the weekly phenomenon of the "drug lunch." Basically, during almost every group meeting or rounds, food would be provided by a drug rep--usually quite a tasty lunch.

A continuing aspect of industry sponsorship is the distribution of free samples. At times I find this quite useful, to help someone get started on something right away, without the time or expense of a pharmacy visit. At other times, people have not been able to afford medication (the most common psychiatric medications are available for free in BC, through a government plan, but many more exotic medications are not covered by this plan): in some cases, the drug companies have provided a free "compassionate release" supply of medication for extended periods of time. Yet, I recognize that these phenomena lead to bias. The presence of a particular sample can influence the choice of which particular medication to recommend, particularly when the different choices are all similarly effective.

I realize this post may come off sounding like some kind of anti-corporate rant. I don't want to slam corporations too much though -- thanks to large companies, we have many more treatments which can profoundly improve quality of life, and which can save many lives. Profit-oriented motivations can drive productivity, competition, and better research. It's just that we can't be swept into the current of advertising and other biased persuasive tactics which companies use to sell more of their products. We can sympathize with the reality that companies behave this way, but as health care professionals, or as individuals contemplating whether or not to take a particular medication or other treatment, we need to have information which is clear, unbiased, as objective as possible.

Dietary Fat and Mood

Dietary fat is necessary for mental and physical health. Excessively lean diets may be mentally and physically unhealthy. A balanced diet, with abundant fruits and vegetables, at least 30% of calories coming from fat, and with carbohydrates coming from foods with a lower glycemic index (e.g. reducing amounts of simple sugars), is probably a sound recommendation for good physical and mental health.

The type of fat is important, though: trans-fats are particularly harmful (these are from hydrogenated oils including hydrogenated margarines). It is probably true that omega-6 fatty acids (present in vegetable or soybean oils), while necessary in moderation, are over-abundant in western diets. Saturated fats (such as from red meat and dairy) have been associated with worse health outcomes.

Yet, as I review the literature, I see that this assumption about saturated fat may not be as clear as what most people assume. I intend to review this literature more thoroughly, and add to this post later. It may be that saturated fats from plant foods such as coconut are more benign. And it may be that health problems associated with eating a lot of red meat are due to factors aside from the saturated fat content.

*As I look into the coconut oil issue, I see there is a tremendous amount of hype and salesmanship going on--it seems to be touted as some kind of miracle food, also with a variety of scientific claims (e.g. about medium-chain triglyceride content) intended to strengthen the persuasion. When I look into what the research literature has to say, there really isn't a lot out there. What is out there at this point is not very consistent. It is true that there are groups of people, such as in Polynesia, who consume a lot of coconut oils, apparently without developing high rates of heart disease. In any case, I think it is fair to say that coconut or coconut oil in small quantities could be reasonably included in a healthy diet.

Clearly healthy sources of fat include fish, olive oil, nuts, avocados, and canola oil.

There are several types of cholesterol in the blood, the main subtypes being LDL and HDL. High LDL is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (e.g. heart attacks and strokes). HDL is considered "the good cholesterol", and it is quite clear that higher HDL levels reduce the risk of developing cardiovascular disease. It is possible to increase HDL by exercising regularly, maintaining a healthy weight, stopping smoking, increasing dietary intake of monounsaturated fat (e.g. olive oil & canola oils), and increasing soluble fiber in the diet (e.g. oats, fruits, vegetables, legumes). 1-2 drinks per day (but no more) of alcohol may favourably impact HDL levels and overall health. It is important to note that the actual cholesterol present in certain foods, such as eggs, has an inconsistent relationship with serum cholesterol levels (perhaps a stronger relationship in some people than others), and an even less consistent effect on health variables--so cholesterol content of foods need not be a particularly important variable to assess.
(reference:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18726564

In this 1998 study from the British Journal of Nutrition, subjects initially consumed a diet with 41% of calories coming from fat, then half of these subjects switched to a low-fat diet with only 25% of calories from fat. The group with the lower-fat diet developed higher levels of anger, hostility, and anxiety compared to the group continuing the higher-fat diet:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9505799

In this 2008 meta-analysis from Annals of Behavioural Medicine, an inverse association is found between serum cholesterol levels and depression. It is an interesting and surprising finding, given that we recognize lower cholesterol levels as beneficial for your heart:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18787911


In this 2008 study, a group with chronic depression was compared with a group with normal mood, and it was found that depression was associated with lower HDL levels (i.e. lower "good cholesterol"), even after controlling for several confounding factors. This type of study is unfortunately a bit weak. Here's a link to the abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18583011

Here's a reference to a 2003 article from Encephale reviewing some of the evidence about low cholesterol being associated with depression and suicide. The authors also suggest that inadequate omega-3 fatty acids compared to omega-6 fatty acids in the diet may be a contributing factor to higher rates of depression.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12640327

This is a small but convincing 2008 study which showed significantly lower cholesterol levels in suicidal patients with schizoaffective disorder, compared to non-suicidal patients with schizoaffective disorder, and compared to healthy controls. HDL (the "good cholesterol") was higher in the non-suicidal patients and in the control group. The groups did not differ significantly with respect to BMI, so the association between cholesterol and symptoms would not have been due to weight.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17850945

Here's another 2007 study showing low cholesterol levels in an elderly group with cognitive impairment, and in an elderly group with depression, compared to a healthy elderly group.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17712096

Here's a 2007 study showing strong association between higher HDL cholesterol and better physical functioning among the oldest elderly (over 80 years old):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17913756

Here's a 2004 review describing the many findings about higher HDL being associated with better physical and mental functioning in the elderly, and in particular that people who live over 100 years have higher HDL levels:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15557706

In this strong, prospective 2009 study following 1,468 nurses with type II diabetes, higher dietary saturated and trans fat intake, and a lower ratio of polyunsaturated fat to saturated fat in the diet, was associated with worse cognitive decline (those in the highest third of saturated+trans fat intake effectively aged an extra 7 years with respect to cognitive decline, compared to those in the lowest third):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19336640

Here's a similar 2004 article from Neurology showing worse cognitive decline associated with higher saturated fat intake, lower monounsaturated fat intake, and a lower ratio of polyunsaturated to saturated fat intake:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15136684

In this strong, prospective, randomized 2007 study from JAMA, a diet with a low glycemic load (e.g. reducing simple sugars and increasing complex, slowly-digested carbs) and 35% of energy coming from fat, was compared with a low-fat diet (20% of energy from fat), with follow-up over 18 months. The higher-fat, low-glycemic load diet led to better improvement (increase) of HDL levels, and considerably better weight control:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17507345

Studying & Practicing Techniques

The field of optimizing study or practice time is quite interesting. There are elements of wisdom from diverse points of view, such as from athletic trainers & coaches, elementary and high school teachers, musicians, and educational psychologists.

Here are a few ideas:

1) make a commitment to spend regular, frequent periods of time in study or practice

2) make your study or practice time interesting or fun

3) if your attention is failing, try to compete with yourself gently (e.g. put a mark on your page if you catch your attention wandering off); but also allow yourself brief breaks. In order to control this process (and to prevent your brief break from becoming a 6-hour break), you could use a timer. During breaks, you could rest quietly or go for a walk, perhaps reviewing in your mind some of what you have just learned. During periods of decreased attention, you may need to allow for more frequent breaks.

4) frequent review helps with memory consolidation. If you have just learned something, go back right away to remind yourself of it--maybe ask yourself, and answer to yourself, a few questions about it, rather than immediately plowing ahead with the next chapter.

5) Sleeping after learning improves consolidation of memory. Slow-wave sleep, which tends to occur in the first few hours after you fall asleep, is particularly important for memory consolidation. In one clever 2007 study published in the presitigious journal Science, subjects were exposed to an odor when learning a task. If they were exposed to that same odor during subsequent slow-wave sleep, their retention of the learning task was significantly improved. Here's the reference:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17347444
This suggests a simple aromatherapy technique to enhance your studying: infuse your study environment with a distinct, pleasant fragrance (for example, try an aromatherapy oil) -- then infuse your pillow with the same fragrance afterwards. During an exam or test, try infusing the same fragrance on your skin or clothes (just don't overdo it, or you might irritate the people writing their exams next to you!)

Furthermore, there is evidence that brief naps (60-90 minutes) in the middle of the day can help with memory consolidation, motor learning, and can also prevent the deterioration of mental and physical performance which tends to happen in a long day. Here is one reference about this:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12819785

6) choose a study or practice environment which is psychologically pleasing. This could include multi-sensory environmental manipulation, including access to healthy foods, smells, comfortable seating, quietness, soothing background noise, etc.

7) if part of the learning task requires repetition, make special effort to infuse the repetition with something imaginative.

8) if part of the practice is for exam preparation, etc. then you could try to mimic the exam environment repeatedly--e.g. by doing mock exams at the same time of day as the scheduled exam, or by doing these practices in the same physical location as the actual exam, if possible.

9) if the practice is for a performance, it can help to record yourself periodically; when you hear or look at your recording you may need to be critical but you should also consciously affirm the aspects of your performance that went well. Self-criticisms should never be in the form of a personal attack (e.g. "I'm stupid!") but should be gentle observations of areas to work on or change.

10) a tutor could be quite helpful, not merely to "teach you" but as a motivational figure to help you practice or study more efficiently or with greater enjoyment (along the lines of a personal trainer for fitness). A friend or study partner could have this type of role, provided the friend does not become a distraction from your work.

Good News

Here are a few "good news" websites:

http://www.happynews.com/index.aspx
http://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/
http://www.only-positive-news.com/archives
http://globaldialoguecenter.blogs.com/jbgoodnews/

There is so much bad news in the world today...

Yet, of course, the bad news is accurate: many people are doing many horrible things; whole nations are behaving badly; the whole planet is at risk for irreversible deterioration... It is important and healthy for us to be aware of the truth, even if the truth is difficult to hear.

This reminds me of the way depression can work, particularly chronic depression: the negative, cynical, painful, or pessimistic thoughts associated with depression may represent accurate truths about one's life or about the world.

It can feel frustrating, irritating, and shallow to simply ignore the negative thoughts or negative truths, and focus strictly on "happy thoughts." It can feel like mental manipulation to try to convert a negative observation into a positive one.

I believe that part of the solution is not necessarily to try to negate negative thinking. This would be like refusing to learn about the realities of global hunger, environmental pollution, or about a child being bullied in your neighbourhood, and just simply carrying on with a smile as though everything was fine. This is just denial--things have to be done about hunger, pollution, and bullies.

But I do believe that part of the solution is to be informed about positive news that is going on in the world...this requires very deliberate effort.

Human nature, and the human brain, tends to focus on things that are going wrong. This is a vital safety mechanism...it has kept us safe from predators and other environmental dangers over millions of years of evolution. This tendency shows up in news reporting--headlines are all about disasters, not about moments of sublime beauty or courage or hope. Disaster reporting sells more papers, it grabs our attention more strongly--that's the way our brains are made.

In order to have a healthy and balanced lifestyle we must actively inform ourselves of things that are going right, alongside whatever information comes to us about things that are going wrong. We must do this on a global scale, a local community scale, and on a personal scale (within our own thoughts or minds).

Many anxious negative thoughts represent strong over-estimations of risk (e.g. a fearful airline passenger may feel that the likelihood of crashing is 90%, when in fact the likelihood is 0.0001%); in cases like this an objective "cognitive therapy style" analysis and challenging of thoughts can be therapeutic and reassuring.

Cognitive therapy need not discount negative thoughts. An acknowledgment of a very negative reality may be an honest and frank therapeutic step.

But I think cognitive therapy for depression must allow space for seeking out things that are positive.

I invite you to check out some of the websites above, and seek out more (or better) sources of good news (let me know if you find some). I also invite you to pay attention to examples of "good news" in your community, in your daily life, and in your thinking.

Preparing for a psychiatry interview

There are many reasons to see a psychiatrist. There are different types of psychiatric interviews, depending on the situation and on the individuals involved.

A psychiatric interview is a chance to describe your history, examine your problems, review your symptoms in detail, and hopefully to make a plan for things to change.

You may feel reserved about sharing your personal history in detail until you have built up a greater trust in the therapeutic relationship. I think it is important to feel comfortable with your psychiatrist, and to know that you don't have to talk about certain things, or to answer certain questions, unless it is your wish to do so.

There are some elements of a psychiatric history which you can organize or prepare in advance, if you wish, and if these things are relevant to you:


1) charts or chronologies of specific symptoms
-if you have had a history of mood symptoms, it can be informative to prepare a chart showing how your symptoms have changed over time.
-your chart might start literally at your birth, continuing up to the present, with a graph showing how your mood has changed (e.g. showing when your mood has felt good, felt anxious, felt depressed, felt manic, etc.)
-a closer examination of the past few months, or past few years, could allow you to show mood changes in more detail
-underneath the graph of your symptom, you might include significant life events (e.g. losses, changes or problems in school, work, relationships, family, finances, etc.). This allows an examination of the relationship between life events and symptoms
-in another row underneath the graph of your symptoms, you might include any treatments you have attempted (e.g. starting, changing, or stopping any counseling, medications, or self-help)
-these charts could illustrate the long-term pattern of your mood, and illustrate what things might have helped or hindered your problems over the years
-if you have had medication treatments, it can be especially useful to see how your symptoms have changed in association with starting or stopping the medication

Here is an on-line example of a so-called "restrospective life chart":http://www.bipolarnews.org/pdfs/Patient%20Retrospective%20Form%20.pdf I find this particular chart cumbersome and cluttered--I invite you to make your own simple, personalized version of such a chart, with areas on the chart pertinent to your own specific symptoms or treatments.

There are various monthly mood symptom charts you can find on-line. I have included my own version of a monthly mood chart, which you could adapt according to your own symptoms. You can right-click on the chart above, select "copy image", then open your word processor and paste the image onto a new empty word processing file. To use my chart, you could circle the number most representative of how your symptom is on a given day; or make an oval over several numbers at once to show symptoms that have fluctuated during the same day; or you could gradually trace a line showing symptom changes, without circling the numbers, etc. I made my chart in a few minutes using Excel--you could make your own, with different categories relevant to your situation.

2) sometimes writing a narrative essay about your life can be a useful exercise to prepare for a psychiatric interview; however, you may wish to speak out this narrative during therapy sessions, rather than write it down in advance. You may find that you can do both: in the course of therapy, you may find elements of your written narrative to expand upon or emphasize more strongly, other new elements to write about for the first time, and other elements you may wish to retire from the foreground.

Interesting mental health journals

Here are a few journals I recommend following. At my university office I enjoy the luxury of full electronic access to these journals, but almost everyone should at least be able to find on-line abstracts (brief summaries) of articles from each journal. Browsing through some of these will give you a general idea of what's going on in research. There might be a few of these journals you will want to follow in more detail; for this I recommend a monthly trip to a local university library.

I may add to or modify this list over time.

I. General Psychiatry Journals:
The American Journal of Psychiatry: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/
Archives of General Psychiatry: http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/
British Journal of Psychiatry: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/
Canadian Journal of Psychiatry: http://publications.cpa-apc.org/browse/sections/0


II. Psychotherapy Journals:
Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training: http://www.apa.org/journals/pst/
American Journal of Psychotherapy: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=104&sid=e3578a6f-d67f-4195-bde8-70686c4c1f0c%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&jid=ATC
Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=104&sid=81922580-de66-4070-9f45-506927e0361c%40sessionmgr108&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&jid=BUX
British Journal of Psychotherapy: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117987371/home
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=BCP
Sexual and Relationship Therapy: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713446685~db=all

IV. Psychology Journals:
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/
Journal of Educational Psychology: http://www.apa.org/journals/edu/
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology: http://www.apa.org/journals/ccp/homepage.html

V. Journals pertaining to specific areas within mental health:
Addiction: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117967480/toc?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
Eating Disorders: the Journal of Treatment and Prevention: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713666342~db=all
International Journal of Eating Disorders: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34698/home
Schizophrenia Research: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09209964
Depression and Anxiety: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/38924/home
Journal of Personality Disorders: http://www.atypon-link.com/GPI/loi/pedi?cookieSet=1
Sleep: http://www.journalsleep.org/
Archives of Sexual Behavior: http://www.springerlink.com/content/101587/
The Journal of Sexual Medicine: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118495964/home

VI. Journals pertaining to general health and medicine:
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition: http://www.ajcn.org/
American Journal of Epidemiology: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/
Journal of the American Medical Association: http://jama.ama-assn.org/
Archives of Internal Medicine: http://archinte.ama-assn.org/
New England Journal of Medicine: http://content.nejm.org/
Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/ (particularly the medicine & neuroscience sections)
Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html (particularly the medical research & neuroscience sections)

Predictably Irrational - a book review with ideas about psychiatric applications

Dan Ariely has written an interesting book, based on his research, called Predictably Irrational (HarperCollins, 2008).

Ariely is an economist but his research is about human behaviour.

There are a lot of studies done over the past few decades in the field of social psychology, which illustrate very similar behavioural phenomena. Ariely's work reminds me specifically of the work of Robert Cialdini, a social psychologist who studied persuasion.

I think this work is important to look at, because it shows that there are powerful factors which influence our decision-making or judgment, which we may not be aware of. The factors are not mysterious phenomena residing in unconscious childhood memories, etc., but are fairly simple--here are some of Ariely's examples:

1) If a person has to choose between two things which are approximately equal (let's call them "item A" and "item B"), there is about a 50% chance of either one being chosen. Suppose a third thing is added, which is similar but modestly inferior to item A; let's call that thing "item A-". This third item could be called a "decoy". If a person has to choose one item out of this group of three, then item A is chosen much more often than item B (in Ariely's experiments, the "item A" gets chosen about 75% of the time).
These experiments show that our decisions are often strongly influenced by irrelevant comparisons.

2) If a cost of something is suggested, it causes us to form an "anchor" in our minds, such that we are more willing to pay that cost or thereabouts, regardless of the true value. This phenomenon is exploited in advertising. But I suspect that as a general principle, we may be influenced to choose something, or to invest a certain amount of energy or commitment into something, based on suggestions, precedents, or personal "anchors", instead of based on the "true value" of the thing.

3) People are much more likely to choose something that is "free" even if it is a worse deal than something else. Free offers substantially bias judgment. Ariel's studies show this nicely, in a quantitative way.

4) Monetary norms and social norms are conflicting motivators. Social norms are healthier and more powerful motivators. Motivations based on money are tenuous, shallow, and easily changeable. Motivations based on social goals are deeper and more stable. The corporate trend to optimize productivity by continuously monitoring worker output is a type of "monetary" strategy. On a social level, it is often offensive and demoralizing. If workers have a sense of social belonging in their workplace, and also a sense that their employer will care for them in a time of need, then the health of the entire system will be much stronger.

Social language can be a persuasive tactic in advertising though, typically through ads (such as with a bank, cable, or insurance company) which make it sound like your relationship with the seller will be something like with a friend or family member. Such advertising could seem persuasive to some, but I think most sellers would not behave like a friend or family member if you got sick and couldn't make your payment on time!

Ariely wisely encourages the development of healthier social goals in education -- to encourage
education as a means to participate in the improvement of society, rather than as a means to get higher scores on a standardized test, or to attain a higher-paying job.

5) Emotional arousal substantially increases the likelihood of making a risky decision. For example, his experiments showed that a random group of college students were about twice as likely to consider engaging in dangerous or illegal sexual activities if they were sexually aroused when asked about it. This phenomenon highlights the need for two types of protection: first, people need to be protected from the potential consequences of making rash decisions in the heat of passion (e.g. being equipped with condoms would protect against the risks of impulsively-chosen sexual activity).

Second--and this is a point that Ariely does not make--people cannot just learn about how to make decisions while in a cool, "rational" state. Perhaps it is important to teach people--through practice-- how to make decisions while in the heat of passion.

I think this is an important idea in a psychotherapeutic process: calm, gentle analysis of thoughts and emotions is valuable (whether this happens in a therapy session or in a CBT journal, etc.) but it may also be necessary to practice rational and healthy decision-making while in an emotionally heated state. This, too, can sometimes happen in therapy sessions, or in CBT journals, etc.

6) Procrastination. Ariely's studies with groups of students showed that a rigid, external imposition of regular deadlines led to the best grades. Requiring students to commit to their own set of deadlines, in advance, led to grades in a middle range. Having no deadlines at all, except for the requirement that all work had to be in by the end of the term, led to the worst grades. Those in the middle group who committed to regularly-spaced deadlines did as well as the first group. This experiment shows that people have a tendency to procrastinate (no surprise here!), and that a commitment to regularly-spaced deadlines is the best way to improve the quality of the work (whether this commitment is chosen by you, or imposed upon you).


I do suspect that there are individual exceptions to this -- I'd be curious to see a study to show this -- in which some people have a better experience with a bit less structure.

He gives a few good applications of this phenomenon: committing in advance to some kind of care plan (whether it be for your health, your car, your teeth, your finances, etc.) will make it less likely that you will procrastinate or forget to do these tasks (e.g. medical check-ups, oil changes, dental cleanings, etc.). With such a system, everyone benefits (e.g. you stay healthier, your car stays in good shape, the auto mechanics get regular work, etc.). The main problem with this is if you are being sold something that you don't really need. The solution is to be be well-informed in advance about the type of care that works best for your needs.

A psychotherapy frame is usually a regularly-spaced commitment of one's time--I certainly do find that people I see are more likely to engage in a beneficial therapeutic process if this kind of structure is in place.

7) Ownership. People have a tendency to value things more when they "own" them already (Ariely gives entertaining examples of studies showing this phenomenon in a monetary sense). This can lead to biased decision-making if the "owned" item is not valuable, necessary, or healthy. This is a similar phenomenon to loss-aversion. We don't like losing something, even if that something is not really good for us. Other social psychology research has shown that this principle applies to ideas as well: if we have espoused an idea, or a viewpoint, or an attitude, about something, we are much more likely to "own" this idea, and to stick to it. We are less likely to change our view, even if the view is unhealthy for us. I find such thinking patterns often involved in chronic depression.

This is definitely a phenomenon that occurs in a psychotherapy environment: therapy is an invitation to change. Even if the change leads to a better quality of life, people are resistant to change, and are more likely to hold on to systems of thought, perception, or behaviour, which perpetuate unhappiness.

8) People are more likely to choose things that seem to be disappearing. Ariely again demonstrates this phemonenon, using economic measures, in a clever experiment. We see this in sales tactics all the time, such as when we are warned that some item is selling out quickly, so we had better act soon! In life, we may tend to spend a harmful amount of time, energy, money, and commitment, keeping multiple options open: as a result, we may never get very far into any pathway we choose.

9) Stereotypes and expectations substantially affect behaviour and choice. In an amusing experiment involving a blinded beer-tasting test, Ariely showed that college subjects presented with two unlabeled containers actually preferred a beer that had been tainted by 10 drops of balsamic vinegar, over the untainted version. But if the students knew in advance that vinegar had been added, then nobody preferred the "vinegar beer". If we believe--or are persuaded to believe--that something is good or desirable, or that something is bad or undesirable (that "something" could be anything from toothpaste, to a new acquaintance, to a job, to our own self or our own skills), then we are significantly more likely to find our beliefs substantiated.

We need to have ways to "stand outside ourselves" at times, to reduce the biases caused by our own beliefs. I think that this, too, is one of the roles of psychotherapy.

10) Things that cost more tend to have a stronger effect. A more expensive placebo tends to be more effective than a less expensive placebo. This is an important, powerful bias to be aware of. This, too, can be a tool exploited by advertisers, in which the high price of their product is displayed prominently as a signifier of higher quality.

I have one major complaint about this book:

Ariely makes a few statements about medical treatments, including "when researchers tested the effect of the six leading antidepressants, they noted that 75% of the effect was duplicated in placebo controls." (p. 178) This claim is based on one single study, from a minor journal, published over 10 years ago, without considering other data from hundreds or thousands of other publications in the research literature. Furthermore, even if this 75% figure was accurate, the remaining 25% of the effect may be very significant for many suffering people. The psychological impact of Ariely's statement may be to cause skepticism and a dismissive attitude towards certain medical treatments, including antidepressant therapy. Ironically, Ariely would then be persuading people against something, based on a tiny, inadequate, and negatively-framed presentation of the evidence.

11) Randomly-chosen college students in Ariely's experiements had a strong tendency to cheat; but if these subjects were reminded of some kind of honour code immediately prior, they had a much smaller tendency to cheat. Based on his findings, he encourages a more prominent role for "honour codes" to reduce dishonesty. He observes that cheating is no trifling matter: fraud accounts for much more stolen money and property than all other forms of crime put together. Also, cheating is much more likely and pronounced if it is perceived to be indirect: people will cheat more if some kind of token is involved, even if the token is worth the same amount as actual money. Our society is evolving to use indirect currencies much more (various forms of credit, for example), which probably will increase systemic dishonesty.

The idea of an "honour code" may seem a bit odd or trite, maybe hard to take seriously. But I think its application could be imaginative and important, and could, at least in a small way, address something that is missing in many workplaces, homes, or individual lives. I suggest this not necessarily as a way to reduce dishonesty, but as a motivational tactic, that can remind us of ways to live healthily. Many workplaces or lives can be so caught up with being busy, competing, getting through the day, that a grounding sense of purpose is rarely contemplated.

An "honour code" in a psychotherapy frame could involve a formal set of statements for oneself, a "mission statement", which could guide choices, motivations, priorities, and attitudes over time.

So it could be an interesting exercise to write down, and answer for yourself:
"What are your morals/values/guiding principles?"
"What is it to be a good person?"
"How can I live honourably in a world which can be harsh and difficult at times, and in a life which can be harsh and difficult at times?"
etc.

Long-term antidepressant therapy to prevent relapse

Maintenance antidepressant therapy is likely to reduce the probability of depressive relapse. This would involve continuing to take an antidepressant, long-term, even when feeling better. I would restrict such a recommendation to those who have had recurrent or severe depressions. Such maintenance therapy is best indicated for those who have actually had an acute benefit from a specific antidepressant.

I emphasize the importance of psychotherapy and healthy lifestyle change, which also reduce relapse rates (in the case of CBT, for example, the reduction in relapse rate persists long after the course of CBT is over).

This is a 2008 link to findings from the so-called PREVENT study, which showed that 67% of patients on venlafaxine remained well over 2.5 years of follow-up, compared to 41% of patients on placebo:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18854724

A weakness of this study is that they did not allow for an extremely gradual taper of venlafaxine in the group randomized to receive placebo maintenance; therefore the worse outcome in the placebo maintenance group could have partly been due to withdrawal symptoms. However, there is a brief discussion of this possibility in some letters from the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (2008 May; 69(5): 865-866) , and the authors of the PREVENT study make some good points about why withdrawal symptoms are not likely to account for the worse outcome in the placebo group.

There are a variety of older studies showing reduced relapse rates in patients taking long-term antidepressant maintenance. Here is an example, using imipramine:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8478502

Withdrawal effects are unlikely to account for the worse outcome in the control group, because the control group actually still received the active antidepressant, but just at a lower dose. The point of this study is that a full dose of the antidepressant is probably required in a long-term maintenance phase.

Here is another study from 1992 in Archives of General Psychiatry, showing significant preventative effects from taking full-dose imipramine over 5 years of follow-up, with or without adjunctive psychotherapy:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1417428

Here is a link to a 1990 study in Archives of General Psychiatry showing that full-dose imipramine had substantial preventative effects, moreso than interpersonal therapy, over 3 years of follow-up:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2244793

For this study, I need to go back and look carefully over the full text, which I can't find at this moment.

This study is another compelling piece of evidence, from JAMA in 1999, supporting antidepressant maintenance, and it had an excellent design:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9892449

It showed that elderly patients who had recovered from a bout of recurrent depression, who then received placebo, had a relapse rate of 90% over 3 years. Treatment with interpersonal psychotherapy alone reduced the relapse rate to 64% over 3 years. Treatment with the antidepressant nortriptyline alone reduced this relapse rate to 43% over 3 years. Nortriptyline plus interpersonal therapy combined, led to a relapse rate of only 20% over 3 years. Withdrawal effects from notriptyline are unlikely to have substantially favoured the nortriptyline group, since the follow-up was over a 3 year period, which is way beyond any period of withdrawal effects.

Here is another 2007 review paper, from The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, summarizing strong research support that long-term antidepressant therapy reduces relapse rate in major depression by about 50%:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17953158

St. John's Wort

St. John's Wort is a herbal antidepressant. Its mechanism is not well-understood, and at this point is in the realm of speculation, but may involve multiple compounds rather than just a single ingredient (one of the many ingredients in St. John's Wort extracts, for example, is hyperforin).

There is an evidence base in the research literature, supporting its use. However, I find many of the articles to be published in minor journals, and to be of questionable quality.

I will restrict my present survey to a few studies that I consider to be of higher quality:

Here is an article abstract discussing possible mechanisms of action:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12775192

This is a reference to a Cochrane review from 2008.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18843608

It supports the use of St. John's Wort for treating major depression, and concludes that response rates were similar, compared to SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants. It also concludes that St. John's Wort was much better-tolerated than other antidepressants, with a greatly reduced risk of side-effects or of discontinuing the medication due to side-effects. The authors note that studies from German-speaking countries tend to report a greater benefit from St. John's Wort.

I note that this review was written by authors from a "Centre for Complementary Medicine Research" in Germany. It may be that researchers at such a site could have a biased view in favour of complementary therapies.

This review from the major journal BMJ in 2005 gives much less enthusiastic conclusions about St. John's Wort:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15684231

It gives a rigorous analysis of the data, and concludes that there is evidence, mainly from older, smaller, lower-quality studies, that St. John's Wort is beneficial compared to placebo, particularly for mild to moderate depression. More recent, larger, more rigorous studies, and studies including patients with more severe depression, show smaller treatment effects.

It does strongly emphasize that different preparations of St. John's Wort may differ in quality, especially since it is an over-the-counter product in most places, and therefore may lack the guaranteed quality control of regulated pharmaceutical products.


Here are links to 2 carefully done studies from 2001 and 2002, published in JAMA, showing no therapeutic benefit of St. John's Wort. The first study compared only with placebo, the second study also compared with sertraline, an SSRI--in the latter study the sertraline actually didn't do well against placebo either! I have to wonder if particular samplings of depressed patients are relatively less treatment-responsive compared to placebo, for a variety of reasons. Also, it may be that some preparations of St. John's Wort are more effective than others:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11308434

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11939866

Here is a link to a recent German study showing that people who respond to St. John's Wort have lower rates of relapse, compared to placebo, if they continue to take it for a year:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18694635


There are some interactions St. John's Wort may have with other drugs; mainly the concern is that St. John's Wort induces the liver to metabolize other drugs more actively, therefore reducing the levels of other drugs. This could be a danger for some people. Here is a reference about this:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15260917

There are case reports of St. John's Wort causing mania, so it would need to be used carefully in persons with bipolar disorder. But there are no studies that I can find, which give clear estimates of risk for St. John's Wort to cause mania or rapid cycling, particular when compared to other treatments for depression in bipolar disorder.

There is a poor evidence base looking at the safety of combining St. John's Wort with other antidepressants, but there are a few case reports of possibly dangerous states such as serotonin syndrome.

I will add to this posting later, but for now I would say that St. John's Wort is probably quite safe for most people, and is probably easier to tolerate (in terms of side-effects) than prescription antidepressants. It may be effective, for some people, to treat or reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety. It may reduce levels of other medications, including contraceptives, and may interact with other drugs, so these possibilities have to be considered very carefully, and discussed with your prescribing physician.

Also, I should add that different brands of St. John's Wort may differ in quality, differ in the extraction method used, etc. So if you are going to give St. John's Wort a try, it may be worthwhile to try several different brands. Given the abundance of positive research studies from Germany, it might be worthwhile to try a German brand.

How to Quit Smoking

It is difficult to quit smoking.

Here is my summary of the evidence about things that help:

The single most effective treatment to help smokers quit is a new drug called varenicline. This drug works by mildly stimulating a nicotine receptor, while blocking nicotine itself from interacting with the receptor: in this way it is a "nicotine receptor partial agonist." Varenicline is quite well-tolerated, the most common side-effects being nausea and insomnia. Usually these settle with time, and are less a problem if the dose is started low, and built up gradually. There have been reports of adverse psychiatric side effects (e.g. agitation, worsened insomnia, worsened depression) so it would have to be used cautiously in those with mental illnesses. I have reviewed a few studies below which affirm its usefulness among patients with psychiatric problems.

Evidence shows that there is only about a 10% chance of being able to quit smoking on your own (by quitting, we mean staying abstinent for at least a year).


A 3-month course of bupropion (an antidepressant) approximately doubles your chance of being able to quit. However, this raises your chance only to about 20%.

Tricyclic antidepressants such as nortriptyline can increase abstinence rates, probably comparable to bupropion.

Nicotine replacement (e.g. gum or patch) is less effective than bupropion. But it does increase your chances of quitting to about 15%.

Varenicline is most effective of all; a 3-month course increases your chance of quitting to about 25%.

Probably, combinations of the above pharmacological treatments increase your chances further.

Also I should note that many of the studies looking at pharmacological treatments for smoking addiction only used the active treatment for three months. It seems to me that longer courses of treatment would be more likely to help people maintain sustained abstinence; addictions and other long-standing phenomena in the brain persist, or change, over a course of years, not just months.

Psychotherapeutic strategies (e.g. CBT and other behavioural therapies) may help, but the evidence is weaker. The evidence that is available suggests that if psychotherapeutic or motivational strategies are to be effective, they need to be maintained over the long-term (perhaps permanently). In this regard, it reminds me of a "12-step" philosophy, which emphasizes the permanence of an addictive problem, and emphasizes that lifelong vigilance is needed to prevent relapse.

The following study published in CMAJ showed 54% 1-year abstinence in a group of smokers who had suffered an heart attack (MI), and who were given an "intensive anti-smoking intervention" (advice, an hour of counseling, and 7 telephone follow-up sessions over 60 days). The counseling employed "Marlatt and Gordon's relapse prevention model." A similar group of smokers not receiving this intervention had a 35% 1-year abstinence rate. Interestingly, medications were permitted in this study, and were associated with markedly worse abstinence rates. But the medications were administered more or less ad lib, so the effect of medications would be very confounded and unclear (for example, perhaps only the patients struggling most would have opted for medications--the reason they didn't do as well is because they were more severely addicted in the first place, not because of the medications. Also, with a haphazard administration of medications, patients might not realize the need to continue medications longer-term to maintain a therapeutic effect).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19546455
In my opinion, the level of "intervention" here actually seems quite minimal, yet it seems impressive that an organized effort of any kind to help prevent smoking through counseling methods would produce good results.

This is the best review article about medication treatments to date, in my opinion; it is from The Canadian Medical Association Journal (July 2008):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18625984?ordinalpos=87&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
A current study by Michael Steinberg et al. in Annals of Internal Medicine (2009;150:447-454) shows that combination therapy with bupropion + nicotine patch + nicotine inhaler, increased abstinence rates at 26 weeks to 35% in a group of medically ill smokers, compared to 19% in a group receiving only a nicotine patch. Those in the combination group were encouraged to use the treatments as long as they felt necessary, then to taper and discontinue as they felt able. This instruction, in my opinion, would have discouraged the participants from considering that bupropion could work to prevent relapse in the long-term, therefore they would probably have chosen to discontinue the bupropion as soon as they felt free of their smoking habit for a short time. As I look at the study in detail, I see that most of the combination group indeed did not maintain the bupropion beyond the 3 month mark. I suspect that if people were strongly encouraged to continue the treatments longer, on a preventative basis, then the abstinence rates could have been much higher than 35%.

Here is a 2005 meta-analysis showing that the tricyclic antidepressant nortriptyline can be effective. Once again, the effects were significant but modest. Most of the studies used only a standard 3-month course of treatment, followed by a taper and discontinuing the nortriptyline. In the one study allowing a full year of nortriptyline treatment, the abstinence rate was much higher (40%):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15733245?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=4&log$=relatedreviews&logdbfrom=pubmed

Similarly, in a study maintaining varenicline for 52 weeks, the abstinence rate was 36.7%, compared to 7.9% with placebo. However, while the existing evidence about the safety of using varenicline on a long-term basis is generally reassuring, more long-term experience is necessary with this drug to know for sure. I think the potential risks would have to be weighed against the risks of continuing to smoke. Here is a link to the study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17407636?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=1&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

Similarly again, in the one long-term study of bupropion (a full year of medication), there were considerably higher abstinence rates:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11560455?ordinalpos=18&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

The following small study showed that varenicline helped reduce smoking in patients with schizophrenia, and appeared to have some beneficial cognitive effects in this group.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19251401?ordinalpos=6&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

The following small study showed possible increased abstinence rates when varenicline and bupropion therapy was combined:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246427?ordinalpos=8&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

Another study supporting the idea that combination therapy (e.g. varenicline + nicotine replacement) is more effective than one treatment alone, for helping smokers quit:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18826906?ordinalpos=56&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

The following study shows that varenicline is similarly tolerated and effective in patients with depression, compared with patients without a history of depression. Stress and mood scores improved slightly with time:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19238488?ordinalpos=12&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

This 2009 study from Biological Psychiatry suggests that varenicline could also reduce alcohol consumption in heavy-drinking smokers:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19249750?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

This is a 2009 Cochrane review of smoking relapse prevention interventions; it supports extended treatment with varenicline to prevent relapse, and concludes that there is insufficient evidence at this point to comment one way or another on specific behaviour therapies:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19160228?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=1&log$=relatedreviews&logdbfrom=pubmed

This study looked at 20 weeks of adjunctive CBT, and found no significant difference in abstinence rates after a year. But it did find an advantage in the CBT group in the shorter term, during the course of CBT (45% abstinence in the CBT group vs. 29% in the control group, at the 20 week mark). This suggests that long-term, ongoing, continuous CBT may be helpful to boost abstinence rates, but the therapy loses its effectiveness if it is not maintained:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18855829?ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

All of these studies support the idea that smoking addiction is a long-term problem. Short-term strategies (typically over a few months) definitely help, but long-term, continuing effort or treatment is needed to maintain abstinence for most people. These strategies could include medications such as varenicline, bupropion, or nortriptyline; and they could include psychotherapeutic approaches such as CBT.

Individuals with psychiatric illnesses such as depression, bipolar disorder, ADHD, and especially schizophrenia, have much higher rates of smoking. Here is a reference:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15949648?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=2&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

There is evidence that nicotine can acutely improve elements of cognitive performance and to reduce impulsivity, particularly in those with illnesses such as schizophrenia and ADHD. This may be one of the reasons why individuals with these problems are more drawn to cigarette smoking. Here is some evidence:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17443126?ordinalpos=6&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18022679

Also there is evidence that nicotine can improve performance in attention tests in elderly people with dementia:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10326778?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=3&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

Yet, of course, nicotine has numerous harmful effects. And it is likely that nicotine could cause long-term harm to cognitive function, through several mechanisms, even if it causes short-term enhancement. A medication such as varenicline, due to its agonist effect on nicotine receptors, may be especially helpful to address some of the cognitive or attentional problems in persons with mental illnesses.

In terms of health care policy, I am puzzled about why effective therapies to improve smoking cessation are not publicly funded. Smoking is one of the largest public health problems in the world, and causes an enormous burden of premature disease and death, as well as an enormous financial drain on the health care system. I believe that all proven therapies for smoking cessation should be freely available.

Unfortunately, varenicline -- and other anti-smoking therapies -- are expensive, and they are often not covered by health plans.

Psychoanalysis & Neuroplasticity

This post is based in part on my thoughts regarding Doidge's book on neuroplasticity.

Psychoanalysis is a type of psychotherapy in which patients usually attend sessions almost every day (3-5 days per week, 50 minutes each time). The details of theory and practice vary, but in general psychoanalysts tend to believe that early childhood events and memories are very important to examine and understand, and that these events (e.g. relationships with mother) have direct causal links to adult personality traits and psychological symptoms. Also psychoanalysts tend to believe that the relationship with the therapist is a setting in which prior relationship dynamics recur, in the form of "transference." Most psychoanalysts assume a relatively quiet or passive stance, tending not to have active conversation or "problem solving" dialogs with patients. Also most psychoanalysts would tend to interpret various types of phenomena, such as dreams, behavioural habits, etc. as laden with meaning. A course of psychoanalysis might take years, and in general the model would be that the patient would "work through" various childhood conflicts, including as they might be transferentially manifest in the therapy, and that the patient might come to understand the various themes at play in their lives, as manifest in dreams, habits, and interpersonal behaviour. This process of understanding and "working through" is thought to lead to symptom relief and life change.


Doidge himself is a psychoanalyst. One of the chapters in his book describes psychoanalysis as a "neuroplastic therapy." (chapter 9, Turning our Ghosts into Ancestors). Part of the support for his claim comes from a case study (a type of evidence characteristic of psychoanalytic thinking). And part of his support comes from briefly describing the life and work of Eric Kandel, the great nobel laureate neuroscientist.

Kandel's work brilliantly demonstrated some of the specific anatomic and molecular changes that happen in neurons as memories are formed.

Kandel himself has been an advocate of incorporating recent biological scientific knowledge into the practice of psychiatry and psychoanalysis (see: http://www.hhmi.org/bulletin/kandel/), and had apparently planned to become a psychoanalyst himself.

I consider it not to be particularly relevant to mention Kandel at all, other than to quote someone important who probably considers psychoanalysis a good thing. It is a common sales tactic to mention an important person's name while trying to convince someone of something. Also it is common in medicine and psychiatry--but especially in alternative medicine--for there to be some mention of something that sounds "scientific" to bolster the public opinion of a product, while the science itself, if looked at closely, is only obliquely related. For example, many questionably effective naturopathic remedies, sold at quite a profit, include advertising laden with some kind of biochemical jargon, much of which, at close examination, lacks substance, but which sounds impressive.

I believe that psychoanalysis can be a powerful and transformative experience. However,I also strongly suspect that there are elements of dogma contained within the theory which are irrelevant to its beneficial effects, and which at times could make it an inefficient therapy.

Consider this thought experiment:

Suppose the beneficial effects of psychoanalysis are due to the following factors:
1) meeting with someone for an hour per day, who will listen and try to understand life problems
2) finding an "explanation" for symptoms. In the case of psychoanalysis this explanation tends to come from an examination of early life events.

Suppose that it is the belief in the explanation that causes symptom improvement, therefore that if some alternative "explanation" for symptoms could be developed, then it would lead to the same symptom improvement. Therefore, suppose that the psychoanalytic theory of character and symptom development is actually a fiction, akin to a dogmatic religious belief system, but that adherence to this belief system, and the resultant faith and conviction, would be the causes of symptom relief and character change.

A way to test this would be to conduct a randomized study of two types of intensive, long-term psychotherapy. Both would be 5 sessions per week, 50 minutes per session, lasting 5 years.

Group 1 patients would have psychoanalysis.
Group 2 patients would receive the same intensive, empathic, sessions, with intelligent and thoughtful, well-boundaried therapists. But let us imagine that some other belief system would underlie the therapy for group 2. For example, astrology. Or some form of religious fundamentalism (of any variety). Here, interpretations would be based on the positions of stars & planets, or on passages from religious texts.

A condition for this type of experiment would be that the patients in both groups would have to lack any differences in bias for or against the style of therapy. So, for example, patients in group 1 would have to have a similar level of belief that psychoanalysis is a valid and culturally-accepted system of thought, and have similar respect for the therapist, compared to the beliefs about therapist and therapy style of patients in group 2 (regarding astrology or fundamentalism, etc.).

In both groups, I suspect that subject matter would come up in the sessions, which would require the therapists to respond either empathically or interpretively. There would probably be dreams that would come up, probably interpreted quite differently--or not at all-- in both groups. The process of therapy, dream interpretation, feelings of closeness with therapist, etc. might well be experienced similarly between groups.

My hypothesis is that both the groups would show similar improvement in a 5 year course of therapy, with only a slight advantage for group 1. I believe this is because the core effect of such therapy is not from the theoretical belief system, but from the process, which is caring, consistent, empathic, understanding, and interpretive. Failed therapy experiences may happen in both groups, some of which because the patients do not like the style or belief system which is being introduced, some of which because life problems can be treatment-resistant at times, some of which because the patient did not feel well-matched with the therapist. I think group 1 would do very slightly better than group 2, because despite the dogma involved in psychoanalytic theory, the underlying process is more intellectually open (at its best).

Unfortunately, I think there is a substantial risk for people in both groups to come out of the experience with stronger dogmatic beliefs, irrespective of any therapeutic improvement. In a more mature psychoanalytic frame, I think this risk would be diminished, as the process would hopefully be more intellectually open.

I do believe that we as intelligent creatures should always seek the "truth" as best we can know it, and therefore we need to challenge our dogmas. The best therapies, in my opinion, need to seek such truths without being restricted by dogma. This is consistent with the underlying theme of psychoanalysis, which I think is about liberation (liberation from symptoms, liberation from past harms or traumas, etc.).

I am reminded now of Joseph Campbell, the comparative mythologist, who might argue that the different styles of therapy are something like different mythologies, none of which are literally "true", but perhaps all of which might contain core aspects of wisdom about the human condition. He might also argue that dogmatic, literalistic adherence to any system of belief could obstruct its underlying message. But he would also agree, I think, that one has to have "faith"--a sense of trust, engagement, and belief--in order to have a transformative experience from anything.

In psychoanalysis, I think it is immensely valuable to seek meaning by examining early childhood events, and by searching for meaning and themes in dreams and nuances of behaviour. But I think it can be can be obstructive to believe, literally, for example, that specific non-traumatic events or patterns of engagement with one's mother at the age of 2, are the causes of specific adult symptoms. I consider the greatness of psychoanalytic interpretation to lie in its focus upon a human life as though it is a great novel or work of art, and that the therapy is partly an experience of understanding, analyzing themes, interpreting, looking at context, in order to enrichen the experience of the art.

A weakness in psychoanalytic practice can, in my opinion, be due to its passive approach at times, which can render it less efficient. Another weakness can be due to a dogmatic or literalistic over-absorption with the theory, causing the therapy to digress--sometimes for years--into an examination of early childhood events, when the core elements of therapeutic need lie solidly in the present, or in the more recent past. I think modern psychoanalysis needs to much more actively incorporate ideas from cognitive and behavioural therapies, from social psychology, as well as from behavioural genetics, etc., and to actively question its dogma.

From a "neuroplastic" point of view, I think the immense advantage of psychoanalysis is in the frame, which is intense (5 days per week), long-term (over years), intellectually open (anything that passes through one's mind is encouraged to be spoken), and consistent. If one was taking language or music lessons, we would see MUCH more "neuroplastic change" in the brain (and, much more importantly, we would see much more language or music learning), if the lessons took place 5 times a week for 5 years, rather than just once a week for 6 months. The consistency and discipline of the psychoanalytic frame is powerfully motivational, just as is any other consistent and disciplined educational framework.

Drum Circles

Drum circles are groups where people gather to pound drums together: producing, hearing, and appreciating rhythms.

The perception of rhythm is one of the core elements of human experience.

Over hundreds of thousands of years of human evolution--even before the development of culture--the perception of rhythm must have been a very important part of daily life experience.

Here are some examples of rhythms that have been part of life experience for millions of years:

-The rhythmic pounding of ocean waves
-The beating of the heart (as perceived by feeling the pulses through touch, by feeling a throbbing, excited heart in the chest, or sometimes by hearing one's own or someone else's heartbeat)
-The rhythm of breathing (regular and soft in a calm state, rapid or erratic in anxious or excited states, irregular in various particular ways as a person is crying or sobbing; or when a person is dying, e.g. Cheyne Stokes respiration)
-The chirping of crickets or the croaking of frogs (these rhythms being affected by human proximity)
-The rhythm of work tasks (e.g. preparing some kind of meal or building some kind of structure would involve repetitively pounding, picking, or working with a material, and if this was a monotonous, laborious task, a rhythm would naturally form to help the person "get into it")
-The rhythm of human footsteps (steady and strong when feeling confident and certain, rapid or timid when frightened, stomping when angry)
-The rhythms of the human voice. Before the development of languages over 50 000 years ago, probably a great deal of communicative content between humans would have been based on "non-verbal" vocalizations, which would have emphasized tonal quality but also rhythm. Today vocal rhythms are most obviously part of the expressive content in poetry and song.
-Part of rhythm includes silence. It is the "empty space" between sounds. There was a lot more silence in pre-modern cultures.

Upon the development of human culture, starting perhaps 50 000 years ago, rhythms would have been generated spontaneously as a part of creative expression, as celebration, or as ritual.

In modern culture, perhaps a lot of the ancient, prehistoric aspects of rhythmic perception have been "drowned out". In urban environments, we have a lot of cacophonic, industrial sounds, or multiple sources of sounds all coming at us at the same time. There may not be very much silence at all. I suspect that this cacophony is a contributing factor to life stress, and one of the variables increasing the rate of mental illness (there are certainly many studies showing increased prevalence of various mental illnesses in urban environments). As a corollary, I believe that spending time developing one's musical and rhythmic experiences is beneficial to mental health.

As a therapeutic modality, drumming could help people in various ways:
1) as a form of meditative focus
2) it involves physical action: it is a form of exercise as well as a form of tactile stimulation
3) it helps to focus attention: it is a form of mental exercise, as well as a means to distract mental energy away from anxiety or other negative emotions
4) it can be an endless source of intellectual stimulation, with hearing or producing increasingly complex rhythms and cross-rhythms. This can evolve to become a source of esthetic enjoyment, also leading to appreciating rhythm in other aspects of life and music more richly.
5) it can be a social activity, in which other members of the group can be guides or teachers: in drum circles, individuals need not be skilled in drumming or in generating complex rhythms--exposure to the group permits a social learning experience
6) similarly, a drum circle could be a good setting to deal with performance anxiety or social anxiety, in the comfort of an encouraging and accepting group
7) it can simply be a healthy, enjoyable form of stress management
8) drum circles can be a means to build community: the experience combines elements having to do with conformity (maintaining the same rhythm together) and with individuality (each person may have a separate or special rhythmic role or task) -- both such elements are required to have healthy community life

In Vancouver, I know of one regular drum circle group, which has been open to anyone interested. The leader of this group, Lyle Povah, has done interesting work with drum circles as part of an inpatient eating disorders treatment program. Here's his website:
http://lylepovah.com/

There may be similar groups in other communities across the world, and I encourage people to research this, and to consider checking one out.

Doidge (Neuroplasticity) review - part 3 (Schwartz)

Doidge devotes a chapter to discussing obsessive-compulsive disorder. He claims that a treatment developed by Jeffrey M. Schwartz is "plasticity-based". The implication is that other psychological treatments for OCD are NOT "plasticity-based."

Schwartz has published articles in the literature going back into the 1980's looking at OCD patients using PET imaging.

I do not find any good study in the literature about Schwartz's particular technique, as published in his book, in particular no study comparing his technique with CBT.

Also the theory is presented that OCD is caused by a failure for the caudate nucleus in the brain to "shift gears automatically", and that the therapy described is a means of "shifting gears manually." While there are a variety of brain metabolism changes in OCD, I think it is an overly strong statement to believe that this is literally true. One could use the idea of the "caudate gear box" as a metaphor, but it may be quite inaccurate, or at least poorly supported by clear evidence, to be taken literally.

So it concerns me that the chapter in Doidge's book about the "brain lock" approach is more of a book plug than something founded on solid evidence. Doidge could well have made the case that CBT is a type of "neuroplasticity-based treatment". In fact, there is good data to support such a case--including numerous imaging studies--and including a recent paper which Schwartz himself co-authored, which shows various regional changes in brain metabolism associated with improvement in OCD symptoms from intensive CBT:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18180761

Yet, I think it is important to be open about any new therapeutic idea--it may be that the "brain lock" therapy for OCD could be helpful to many people. It's just that Schwartz's book has been given an endorsement by Doidge without a convincing amount of good evidence, while minimizing the robust evidence favouring CBT.

Doidge (Neuroplasticity) review - part 2 (Taub)

Doidge devotes a chapter to the work of Edward Taub. I think Taub's ideas are simple but brilliant. He developed a treatment called "constraint-induced movement therapy" which appears to be remarkably effective to help with recovery from strokes and other injuries.

The simple idea is to restrain the normal limb, almost continuously, for at least weeks at a time, after a neurological injury. Otherwise, the normal limb will compensate for the affected limb. If the normal limb is constrained, the brain itself will develop new pathways to improve the function of the affected limb.

This treatment has good evidence-based support:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18077218

{this 2008 study is from Lancet Neurology, one of the top journals in neurology}

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17077374

{another very important study from 2006 in JAMA}

I'm curious about the applications of this sort of therapeutic idea to psychiatry. Psychiatric symptoms can be like other neurological impairments, and the psychoanalytic phenomenon of "defences" may be analogous to the tendency for a neurologically-injured person to favour the non-affected limb, while the affected limb loses more and more function. A psychological therapy which challenges defences may be something like a Taubian "constraint-induced movement therapy" for the mind.

Importantly, in order for Taub's therapy to work, the constraint has to be applied almost continuously during waking hours, for at least weeks at a time. It is an immersive experience. It is an interesting challenge to find more psychological therapies that can be "immersive" in this way.

Doidge (Neuroplasticity) review - part 1 (Merzenich)

This post begins my review of Doidge's references from his book on neuroplasticity.

The first references I have looked through pertain to the work of Michael Merzenich. He has done very interesting research, dating back 4 decades, a lot of it having to do with studying the auditory cortex, and how it changes in response to stimulation of various sorts during different phases of development. Also he done major work researching and developing cochlear implants for treating hearing loss.

His 2006 article about using a "brain plasticity based training program" to improve memory in older adults (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16888038) is interesting and encouraging, yet it warrants a close look at the actual results: the memory improvements from this technique were very modest (though significant), also the control groups were both quite passive (one group just looked at DVD videos, the other had no "intervention" at all). It would have been much more interesting to me to see an active control group in which the individuals would be doing simple memory exercises or other active intellectual stimulation for the same length of time. Because this type of active control was absent, the results may aggrandize the specific form of skill training described in the study; this skill training regimen is now being marketed, and money is surely disappearing from the pockets of many people, including many elderly people who may not have an abundant financial reserve. This makes me especially less enthusiastic about the results. I have no doubt that active mental exercise changes the brain through "plasticity" but I have to wonder if we have to sign up for the deal ("save 20% and get free ground shipping!") with this specific technique to achieve this. Perhaps signing up for a book club, memorizing poetry, and playing chess daily, would accomplish similar results. I would like to see what the evidence has to say about this. His website is interesting to look at, has a few mental exercises to check out, the style of which I think really is quite positive and imaginative. I will be curious to see if his approach--and variations of it-- could be specifically helpful in treating disorders such as autism. But I don't see good clinical data out there yet.

As an amateur musician, I have found that "ear training" is probably the most important, but often least taught or practiced, form of mental development for improving musicianship. Merzenich's exercises clearly focus on "ear training" as a significant component. Here's his website for you to check it out yourself: http://bfc.positscience.com/

Here's a link to a program you can acquire, designed for music students, which develops musical ear-training ability much more thoroughly, in my opinion (I recommend this to all musicians): http://www.earmaster.com/

Neuroplasticity

This is an important book which I highly recommend:
The Brain that Changes Itself, by Norman Doidge (Penguin, 2007).

Doidge is a psychoanalyst who has done a fine job compiling evidence from recent neuroscience research, and from some older but neglected neuroscience research, that the brain has a tremendous capacity--a capacity which is arguably its most basic, core, innate quality-- for change and adaptation.

The idea of the brain as permanently "hard-wired" is refuted, with solid evidence.

Many of these ideas I have always felt to be obvious truths. For example, it seems an obvious necessity that the brain would have to build new connections in order to form any new thought, experience any new feeling, store any new memory, learn any new skill. But the degree to which whole areas of the brain can "re-wire" themselves is extremely interesting, and the evidence Doidge presents is very convincing.

Also, it has always been an obvious truth to me that any kind of sensitive neuroimaging device would of course demonstrate changes following a successful course of therapy (or of any other sort of learning or substantive life change).

The therapeutic applications based on this book are numerous, here are a few I can think of:

1) structured, intensive practice could lead to far greater effects than what has previously been assumed. The brain itself, as well as people in society, informed by culturally-based attitudes, tend to "work around" problems if the situation allows, whereas it can be the case that the problems themselves can be solved directly under the right conditions. For example, if an English-speaking person moves to a small town in a foreign country, that person will quickly learn that new foreign language, if it is necessary in order to survive. But if there are numerous English speakers in that small town, that person may not learn much of the new language at all.
We may need a type of immersive, constrained experience in order to compel our brain to develop a new faculty.

2) structured, intensive activities that have become part of a cultural norm (e.g. internet use, TV watching, etc.) could substantially alter the brain's connectivity and functionality, to optimally adapt to these new media. This could serve us well, culturally--but it may come at a cost of reduced functionality in media away from the TV or internet, particularly with respect to sustained attention, other intellectual and emotional faculties, and various types of social interaction.

3) Addictive processes are fed by the brain's capacity to adapt, to "re-wire" itself to expect a frequently reinforced behavioural pathway. "Un-learning" addictive behaviour once again may require a massive amount of work, akin to learning a new language.

--I have yet to review all of the references cited in this book. I think the primary source data will be important to go through in detail. There are some areas and claims that I think may possibly be overstated, in my opinion. But first I would like to review the evidence directly. I actually find the term "neuroplasticity" somewhat annoying, especially when therapeutic ideas are labeled "neuroplasticity-based treatments", etc. --I would say in response that ALL therapy, of ANY sort, is of course "neuroplasticity-based", so such lingo is unnecessary, and rings of salesmanship to me (indeed, there are several corporate ventures mentioned in the book). What matters most is the new types of therapeutic ideas that have been conceived by some of the researchers cited in the book, and how well they can work for very entrenched problems.


In the meantime, I do recommend Doidge's book highly.

Physicians in need of help

There is a high incidence of psychiatric problems in the medical community. Physicians may have a difficult time finding help. There are a variety of reasons for this, the most common of which is that the sources of help may all involve people the physician knows personally.

In BC we have something called the "physician health program", which is a resource especially for physicians in need of help. Here is the website:
http://www.physicianhealth.com/

Hopefully other communities have similar programs.

If a hospital admission is needed, it may be desired to arrange this in a different place, if privacy or confidentiality issues are major concerns.