ADHD risk is linked to many different genetic variants
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Are you arguing that smoking, drinking alcohol, taking illicit drugs, being overweight (or underweight) and generally speaking not having good prenatal care is not leading to premature birth?... The only "reasonable" cause in 2018 for premature birth is having twins (or other multiples). Everything else can be avoided with good prenatal care and testing in the early stages of pregnancy.
Now you may not agree with me, but knowingly delivering a high risk pregnancy or knowingly ignoring basic prenatal care is the same thing in my book - taking a risk for your future child's life. Your mother paid the ultimate price for that decision. The least you can do is learn about it.
Upvote
-8
(0
/
-8)
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15901269
CONCLUSIONS: Smoking increases the risk of very preterm birth caused by preterm labor (including idiopathic preterm labor), preterm premature rupture of membranes, and late pregnancy bleedings.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14506499
CONCLUSIONS: The study shows an increased risk in mothers who drink >/=3 die units alcohol in pregnancy of preterm births.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29573249
CONCLUSION: The risks of both total and spontaneous PTB were significantly greater in the overweight/obese group than in the normal BMI group.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27172996
CONCLUSION: Increasing severity of maternal prepregnancy underweight BMI was associated with increasing risk-adjusted PTB at <37 weeks. This increasing risk was of similar magnitude in spontaneous and medically indicated births and in preterm delivery at 28-31 and at 32-36 weeks of gestation.
The real problem nowadays is that you cannot ask your patient, the mother, if she smoked or drank alcohol during the pregnancy even when the symptoms are obvious. What's done is done. You'll list the anatomical cause, usually Intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) and move on. Suggest it was avoidable and you'll end up jobless, in court etc...
Upvote
-6
(0
/
-6)
By "The Educational System in the US" I am referring to how government funding works as well as how programs are handled out of Washington DC, also how regulations put on school systems help some but hurt others.
I grew up in this educational system, I've put kids through it and yes... I WORK FOR THE SCHOOL SYSTEM.
As far as me not knowing my nieces and nephews, they are around me much more than you're assuming they are. But you're right... I'm not qualified to diagnose them and in my experience, neither are the majority of the psychologist out there. This is what makes it so dangerous and why we see so many kids doped up.
Don't hurt yourself getting off that high horse.
Upvote
-4
(0
/
-4)
You're a really special kind of stupid. An uneducated idiot opens his mouth to make proclamations about the causes of premature birth. It takes an inveterate moron to do it again after being slapped down the first time.
I was born prematurely because my mother was dying of septicemia, you half-witted slab of internet grievance and poorly thought-out reasoning. Since you evidently aren't capable of Googling, allow me to define that for you. Sepsis is a condition caused when the body's response to infection causes injury to its own tissues and organs. She had a blood infection, not a fifth of Johnny Walker.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4031877/
"It is worth emphasizing some possible complications of sepsis during pregnancy such as increased rates of premature births."
Other causes of premature birth include:
High blood pressure.
Preeclampsia
Diabetes
Blood clotting disorders.
The use of in vitro fertilization
Stress.
Having had a previous premature birth.
Having had a previous miscarriage.
Physical injury and trauma.
You have seized on some common causes of premature birth and have assumed they cover all incidents of premature birth. That's stupid. But what really makes me suspect you've got a telephone pole for a family tree and cards from Uncle Dad sitting on the mantle is the fact that I already told you everything you needed to know to disprove your own point. You either arrogantly assumed you knew everything you needed to know on the topic or arrogantly thought you had the standing to explain to me the conditions and causes of my own birth.
I'd offer you a shovel to help you dig out of the hole you've created for yourself, but based on your displayed intelligence to-date, I suspect you'd just try to eat it.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Washington really can't mandate anything to the states if the states don't want them to. If your state is playing games because they want funding, that's that state's issue. As far as your assertion about psychologists, you're only exposing your own ignorance. Psychologists can't prescribe to begin with so they're not at fault here. That's a psychiatrist or, much more commonly, a pediatrician. Psychologists only really get involved when the other potential issues need to be ruled out. Moreover, you're woefully unqualified to be making that statement about "the majority of the psychologist" as well. You clearly don't know most of them and I'd doubt you know more than a handful.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
There is a very simple rule of psychological disorders. They're not disorders unless they're disorderly (or cause disorders in a person's life). It sounds redundant but it's the best rule of thumb there is.
ADD, ADHD, depression, OCD, basically anything that can be classified as a disorder is not something that necessarily needs to be "fixed." Having any number of psychological issues is perfectly normal and they're not problems, in-and-of themselves. However, these things can start to cause issues with one's ability to live life the way they want to or start to inhibit a person's ability to function.
When OCD goes from being slightly annoyed when a picture is slightly askew to having to wash one's hands 20 times with scalding hot water or not being able to enter a new room without smacking oneself in the face 5 times, then it becomes a disorder. The only reason the OCD is being "fixed" is not that it's abnormal, but because it is affecting the daily life of the person with the condition.
Same with ADD/ADHD. Low levels, I'm sure, can be just fine. But if ADD/ADHD starts to inhibit one's ability to pay attention in class, to learn, then treatment can be a good option. But it's not fixing the person because the person isn't normal. The goal is to fix the condition, so the person can live a normal life--or what ever sort of life they want to live.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
If you can write the bible in a day, you are gifted. It took a bunch of random nutters centuries to write.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
I can't help but feel as though GWAS studies over represent the role of genetics in certain disorders. For example, younger kids from the same class, e.g. kids born in August are more likely to develop "ADHD" than those born in September. Therefore, it could just be that we tell kids who are mentally unprepared to sit at a desk to listen to 4 hours of boring lectures all the while cutting their recess.
I''m not saying that GWAS data is completely bunk, just that there are likely more practical reasons why certain multigenic diseases are increasing in frequency. The genome hasn't changed that much in 100 years....
http://www.aappublications.org/news/201 ... ADHD041916
I''m not saying that GWAS data is completely bunk, just that there are likely more practical reasons why certain multigenic diseases are increasing in frequency. The genome hasn't changed that much in 100 years....
http://www.aappublications.org/news/201 ... ADHD041916
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Is this evidence of which are the most common cause of premature birth, or the effects of such on relevant conditions, in your mind?
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I can't find a single statistical list of what the most common causes of premature birth are. I will note, however, that none of the medical data on this topic supports his assertion that the most common causes are lifestyle factors.
If you look at the guidance from Mayo Clinic and similarly well-accredited health websites, the data on lifestyle factors is included as one type of risk factor for premature birth. Lifestyle factors do not appear to be commonly listed at the top of the page or as the first topic of discussion. See here:
http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheet ... term-birth <-- WHO
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-con ... c-20376730
https://www.marchofdimes.org/complicati ... -risk.aspx
March of Dimes claims the most common risk factors are:
Having already had a premature baby.
Having multiples.
Having had medical problems with the uterus or cervix.
Lifestyle factors come after these three. Drugs and alcohol use are well down the page.
http://americanpregnancy.org/labor-and- ... ure-labor/
American Pregnancy Association basically mirrors the March of Dimes.
So, no. He's just blatantly wrong with his assumptions on this. Yes, it's true that drugs, alcohol, and smoking can have an impact on fetal development. Yes, it's true that these are risk factors associated with premature birth. But Mr. "I make grotesquely wrong assumptions about the reasons someone else's parent died, then assume I have the right to tell them the facts of the situation" is talking straight out his ass.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
While I agree somewhat with your position re DNA there are many factors that have changed dramatically in the last century. Diet, VITAMINS (for the $!!!), stress, and multi-faceted attacks on our health.
Now, take a gene pool for nearly anything and change its environment as dramatically as ours has. Evolutionary pressure to adapt is slow in humans, but birds often adjust in a few years (or die).
Let's not forget that many in Western societies believe there's an answer to everything. Which will surely lead to a cure. The closer the problem is to the person, the more urgently they want to believe.
For example: We only recently elevated the diagnoses of depression above bad humours. Yet it was well known for centuries, aka melancholia. That we have so many being treated for depression is about what then? The ability to diagnose it correct, or to treat it, or is something in someone's DNA that is just depressing? Or in this case, maybe there are a series of gene groups that indicate a tendency to depression.
This study doesn't solve the ADHD issue. It does provide some interesting areas for investigation. As complex as the disorder is, the more difficult its solution.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
I'm not sure I completely take your point.
There was a great deal of advice for melancholy sufferers before the advent of modern pharmaceuticals. At the sane end of the scale, you would find people who recommended certain hot springs to people suffering from melancholy -- including hot springs that are known to be quite high in lithium and may have had a therapeutic effect. In many cases, people recommended the same sorts of treatments that still can help today: Talk to the person in question, if your depression is related to an individual. Spend time in nature. Try to deal with worry and fear more constructively. Try to evaluate whether or not the things you are afraid of are actually likely to come to pass. Try to give your concerns over to God and pray for guidance. Seek support and aid from your family. Be kind and generous to yourself.
But the reason people specifically seek treatment for depression today is pretty straightforward. A century ago, depression wasn't something you wanted to be treated for. The 19th century's ideas on how to treat mental illness involved things like being involuntarily immersed in scalding and freezing water (sometimes both, sometimes one or the other). It involved things like putting people into involuntary insulin comas for prolonged periods of time through an abuse of the pancreas that makes walking into Baskin-Robbins and eating the entire establishment look like a sane afternoon activity. When lobotomies were invented they were embraced partly because the medical establishment was desperate for a therapy that actually worked when dealing with mental illness.
There were, basically, three groups of people:
1). People who could function well enough to live in society.
2). A small group of people who couldn't *really* function this well, but were fortunate enough to have power / wealth / birth to help them hide it.
3). The remains of the people (living or otherwise) who went through the sanitarium system and, if they were lucky, emerged without yet further damage to their sanity.
Groups #1 and #2 were well aware of Group #3. Hospitals weren't places you went to be cured, they were cesspools where people went to die when they had no other options. Mental hospitals very much included.
The fact that so many mental disorders were untreatable had two effects. First, there was *enormous* social pressure against acknowledging any kind of truly serious mental ailment. It implied you were the kind of person who belonged in the sanitarium in the first place. Second, because these issues weren't really thought of as treatable problems, if the solutions I first proposed don't work for you, well, that's really all there is. You might identify as a person with melancholy, but you sure as hell aren't going to seek treatment for "depression" if you know treatment for depression involves being immersed in freezing and near-boiling baths over and over, with a side order of sexual abuse, filthy conditions, horrifying food, and rampant disease.
To put it succinctly: If you have a pill I can take, or a behavioral therapy regime I can follow, maybe I have depression. If your treatment for severe depression involves insulin comas, lobotomy, and other similarly dubious scientific enterprises, I'm a shining beacon of hope and light in the darkness. I've never been unhappy in my life if the treatment for depression puts me at risk of dying or losing my sense of self.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Upvote
-2
(0
/
-2)
Pro Tip: If you don't know how evidence is gathered, don't appoint yourself as the Premie Whisperer.
If you want to gather scientific evidence on the likelihood of incidence of various outcomes, you measure the rate of incidence in a control population versus a test population. If you want to know whether or not preeclampsia causes premature birth, you measure how many women with preeclampsia suffer a premature birth versus how many women without preeclampsia suffer a premature birth.
In order to make certain that you *don't* wind up measuring the impact of something other than preeclampsia, you have to carefully select your populations. You want to make sure that the two test groups are as similar as possible with respect to age, ethnicity, economic status, and other potentially important factors. If older women are more at-risk for premature birth, for example, you'd want to make certain that one of your groups didn't contain a large population of women 40 and over while the other was drawn from women mostly in the 20-25 age bracket.
We know that certain conditions lead to premature birth because the women who suffer those conditions have premature births at a higher rate than the general public. We do not always understand why these effects occur. Having had a previous premature birth may not seem as if it should be a predictor for an independent future child, but it's listed as one of the leading factors in predicting whether or not someone is at-risk for premature birth. Not all of these interactions are understood. The well-known fraternal birth order effect, for example, shows a link between the number of male children a woman has previously had and the likelihood that future male children will be homosexual. The effect is biological, not psychosocial, and relates directly to the child's prenatal development.
You wouldn't think that the number of brothers you have and how many of them are older than you would impact someone's chance of being gay -- but it does.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal ... rientation
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
A. You went on a rant and forgot what the question was (hint: most common causes). Specifically, how to figure out if more premature births are caused by smoking vs alcohol, obesity, diabetes, twins, old age etc.. Pre-eclampsia is the effect, not the cause. It has many risk factors, including smoking. It is also a mostly avoidable outcome with good pre-natal care. So we're back to my original argument (which you clearly didn't understand) - "mother didn't care"...
B. You write a lot, but say very little.
Upvote
-3
(0
/
-3)
So I'm "blatantly wrong" because you cannot find proof for or against my assumption, then you decide that the ordering of a list is your proof? Excellent reasoning!
Upvote
-2
(0
/
-2)
I already told you how you'd estimate frequency. I also included multiple links above to multiple statements from accredited medical institutions on what the most common causes are. Hint: Not yours.
You're collectively wrong about all of this. You continually refuse to acknowledge it because, like most Dunning-Kruger darlings, your own ignorance prevents you from recognizing exactly how much you don't know. The fact that something is a risk factor for something else does not mean people who have the "something else" automatically engaged in the risky behavior. You continually try to button up this idea into safe compartments in which, if women will only do all the right things, they will magically have safe pregnancies. I don't know where you grew up or what your experience of life is, but buddy, it ain't true. Never has been.
I'm not going to sit here and continually explain to you that no, medical science has not yet advanced to the point that we can simply magically safeguard pregnancies.
The proof against your assumption is the lists from accredited medical institutions of the most common causes of premature birth. I haven't been able to find a single study giving absolute figures, on every single cause, no. What I found were lists made on the most common causes, and a few links like this one, which notes that in 25% of cases, women who deliver premature babies have no known reason for doing so. 30% is premature membrane rupture, 20% due to bleeding during pregnancy, 14% due to high blood pressure, 9% due to a weak cervix. "Other" is 2%. So right off the bat, first stop: 25%, we don't know why, 20% due to bleeding, 14% due to high blood pressure, 9% due to a weak cervix. That's 68% of the total, and nothing to do with drugs, alcohol, or similar abuses.
https://www.healthline.com/health/pregn ... m-delivery
That lines up much better with the information I posted from March of Dimes and Mayo Clinic than it does your bullshit "You were born premature because your mother didn't love you enough to take care of herself while pregnant."
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I gotta say, it's weird to see someone call ADHD kids "doped up" when the first-line treatment is giving them amphetamines.
(Related, this is why undiagnosed ADHD adults tend to self-treat by drinking four cups of coffee a day.)
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Coffee tastes awful and you have to drink a lot of it. Caffeine pills or straight Stoke shots (40mg each!) for me.
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
I literally received a box of Stoke shots from Amazon today. Yes. They're real. I like them because they deliver a precise dose of caffeine in a smaller amount than a caffeine pill (200mg is typical size in a pill). I tend to have to bite the pills to break them up, since I'm not interested in seeing pink elephants and don't need 200mg in one day. Since caffeine is one of the most bitter substances on Earth, I don't enjoy the biting very much.
But 1/2 - 1 stoke shot typically suits me fine.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
I'm not sure if this is true or not, but I drink about 5-6 Peet's Major Dickason k-Cups a day. which has supposedly 267mg of caffeine per 16oz cup. (1300mg+ caffeine a day)
https://www.caffeineinformer.com/caffei ... wed-coffee
Am I dead?
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Actually, I just went in for a checkup about a year ago and got a clean bill of health. I consider myself very lucky!
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
I take caffeine in 40-50mg amounts and rarely exceed 100mg per day. I think you were talking to the fellow below me, who has approximately 13x my daily input.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
i put 2 of those in my coffee thermos in the morning with my regular coffee.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
*This* ^^^^^
For example I absolutely *hate* doing time accounting for work. Guess what always gets done late and guess who is always on the "Time Hag's Nag List".
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)