Depression, Transmissable Conditions and Why Cats Make You Mad
Sunday, October 9th, 2005 12:58 pmAges ago, I posted about whether emotional / mental conditions might be transmissable, rather than rooted in the wiring.
I've just been reading a piece in National Geographic. Snappily titled Cat Carrier: Your Cat Could Make You Crazy*, it does actually discuss the role of infection in mental illness. The article focusses on long-term effects of toxoplasma, but there are links to some other discussions.
This one (page down to 'Microbes and Mental Illness') is quite interesting:
Psychiatric syndromes caused by infectious disease most commonly include depression, OCD, panic disorder, social phobias, variants of ADD, episodic impulsive hostility, bipolar disorders, eating disorders, dementia, various cognitive impairments, psychosis, and a few cases of dissociative episodes.
I'm taking it with a hefty pinch of salt, since it seems to encompass so very much: also, given that the page is published by the Lyme Alliance, there's an emphasis on tick-borne infections. (Should I be having vivid flashbacks to the tick-bites I suffered one summer in France, aged 10? Probably not.)
Seems to me there are four potential components:
- physical issues with nerves, brain, etc ("I am depressed because my brain doesn't work properly.")
- genetic issues ("I am depressed because my ancestors bred with the wrong people.")
- infection-related issues ("I am depressed because I caught depression.")
- environmental issues ("I am depressed because of things that have happened to me.")
When I was a lot younger I thought of depression as a kind of choice, something that could be staved off by positive thinking, therapy etc. I find it more logical, now, to think of it as an illness -- caused by some combination of those four components -- that, yes, can be treated, can be fought, but is not something to blame oneself for suffering.
I also firmly believe that depression can be a result of physical illness: that pain and infirmity (and all that results from these) can induce persistent negative states of mind. That comes under 'environmental'. I'm still thinking about the distinction between this and infectious depression.
Do any of you (especially the medical types) have any observations?
*I think this is probably a different thing to 'your cat could drive you mad', which counts as Stating the Bleedin' Obvious
I've just been reading a piece in National Geographic. Snappily titled Cat Carrier: Your Cat Could Make You Crazy*, it does actually discuss the role of infection in mental illness. The article focusses on long-term effects of toxoplasma, but there are links to some other discussions.
This one (page down to 'Microbes and Mental Illness') is quite interesting:
Psychiatric syndromes caused by infectious disease most commonly include depression, OCD, panic disorder, social phobias, variants of ADD, episodic impulsive hostility, bipolar disorders, eating disorders, dementia, various cognitive impairments, psychosis, and a few cases of dissociative episodes.
I'm taking it with a hefty pinch of salt, since it seems to encompass so very much: also, given that the page is published by the Lyme Alliance, there's an emphasis on tick-borne infections. (Should I be having vivid flashbacks to the tick-bites I suffered one summer in France, aged 10? Probably not.)
Seems to me there are four potential components:
- physical issues with nerves, brain, etc ("I am depressed because my brain doesn't work properly.")
- genetic issues ("I am depressed because my ancestors bred with the wrong people.")
- infection-related issues ("I am depressed because I caught depression.")
- environmental issues ("I am depressed because of things that have happened to me.")
When I was a lot younger I thought of depression as a kind of choice, something that could be staved off by positive thinking, therapy etc. I find it more logical, now, to think of it as an illness -- caused by some combination of those four components -- that, yes, can be treated, can be fought, but is not something to blame oneself for suffering.
I also firmly believe that depression can be a result of physical illness: that pain and infirmity (and all that results from these) can induce persistent negative states of mind. That comes under 'environmental'. I'm still thinking about the distinction between this and infectious depression.
Do any of you (especially the medical types) have any observations?
*I think this is probably a different thing to 'your cat could drive you mad', which counts as Stating the Bleedin' Obvious
no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 12:54 pm (UTC)I tend to subscribe to what you might call a 'loading' theory of depression: we all have a certain amount of capacity for coping with stress, beyond which a depressive episode becomes much more likely. Various sorts of stress can start to fill up that capacity: immediate stress; long-term worry, physical stress from illness or chronic pain. The more of any of these are present, the less capacity there is for dealing with any of the others. Furthermore, any inherited disposition to depression might reduce the stress capacity to begin with.
I don't see this, by the way, as a simple 'top up until it spills over' model. It's more like quantum tunnelling: the lower the barrier is, the more likely that it will suddenly be penetrated. Some people will sustain a just-about manageable level of stess for a long time, whilst others will find that a combination of low-level factors will push them close enough to their capacity limit that a depressive episode becomes more likely and thus happens.
So, if someone has perhaps a mild predisposition to depression, long-term worries and stressful health problems, then they are more likely in my view to flip over to a depressive state; any addition of even moderate shorter-term stress can make this much more likely. This is my own rather empirical theory, but it does seem to fit several cases I've seen.
no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 04:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 05:03 pm (UTC)Intersting concept though.
By the way, belated happy birthday. If you were in france aged 190 have you reached 200 yet? You don't look bad for your age you know...
no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 05:24 pm (UTC)fixed, thanks! and thanks for birthday wishes.
Absence of cats doesn't necessarily preclude presence of microbes, I believe. Or tics.
no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 05:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 05:30 pm (UTC)And 'all of the above' ;-)
no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 06:12 pm (UTC)The downside of that is that we'd all avoid anyone who was depressed, in case we caught it too ...
I like your loading theory: a (no doubt complex) formula combining external stress + internal propensity. Some people never seem to crack. Others crack all the time.
What about the people who are depressed for no good reason? Is that a reaction to earlier stress, or a reaction to unperceived (and maybe internal, physiological) stress?
no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 06:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 06:16 pm (UTC)Have lived without cats for over twenty years: now have cats again (though not mine). Not much difference in mental peaks and troughs since I reacquired feline company, but they're ever such good company on bad days.
no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 06:20 pm (UTC)Glad the cats help. Maybe I should get a goldfish?
no subject
Date: Sunday, October 9th, 2005 10:31 pm (UTC)Actually, 'bucket' isn't the best analogy. A better one would be a sort of tall, narrow conical hill with a well sunk into it. The closer the water is to the top, the thinner and more permeable the wall of the well is. How permeable varies from person to person; some people are fine until the well is almost full, whilst others risk leakage once there's any amount of water.
(Ooops. That nasty twanging noise is my analogy stretching well beyond its elastic limit.)