Dearest readers,
I am planning on posting an article in the near future on depression. Attached below is an annotated bibliography containing more on this topic. One common argument being made are that depression is a common illness that does not receive the attention it deserves. After conducting some research on what depression is in general, I have decided to make some connections to neuroscience since depression is classified as a mental illness. I have researched articles covering the following: the current state of research for depression, current treatments available, the way these treatments work and which ones are most successful, why depression has not received more attention over the years, and how to manage this disease in the future.
"The Burden of Depression." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 31 Jan. 2015.
The author in this article makes claim that depression is one of the top three mental disorders we face today (along with substance abuse and anxiety), and that we must take greater initiative in finding solutions for this mental illness. The author believes that one of the main reasons why depression research may be lacking is because most people with the disorder are ashamed to admit it or share what they experience with therapists and/or scientists. The author also believes that although research as a whole has come a long way in recent years, there is still some work to be done in the mental illness department. Some people believe that it is silly to invest time, money, and other resources into depression research since depression can be caused by environmental, cultural, and many other factors humans deal with every day. However, the author believes that scientific research (including neuroscience) has yet to go past touching the surface on mental illnesses as a whole, and that there is no reason for this since technological breakthroughs have been recently discovered in the neuroscience department.
Ledford, Heidi. "Medical Research: If Depression Were Cancer." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 31 Jan. 2015.
The author makes claim that although depression is recognized as one of the most common diseases among society today, it does not receive the attention needed in the fields of both research and treatment. The author compares money invested for research between depression and cancer in 2013, showing an astonishing contrast (in cancer’s favor) of $4.885 billion. Although cancer is a much more serious disease than depression and deserves more attention, the author claims that declines in depression research have been occurring ever since the “war on cancer” was declared by the United States in 1971. The author states that the research potential for depression is increasing due to recent interest and breakthroughs in neurological studies. She believes that if people can get over any feelings of shame or embarrassment associated with depression and start advocating for more research in mental illness, then results will come.
"No Dishonour in Depression." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 12 June 2013. Web. 31 Jan. 2015.
The author states that since many people are ashamed to admit to or talk about depression, research for this mental illness has been neglected – however, if anything, this feeling of shame and sense of secrecy should cause greater research investment in the field of mental illness. The author makes the claim that more methods of treatment for depression are needed since 60% of the current treatments offered fail initially. Cognitive behavioral therapy and drugs are the two most successful forms of treatment – however, each patient responds to them differently. Some need both in order to show improvement, while others succeed with one but fail with the other. Recent tests show that response level to these two options typically depends on the level of insula activity occurring inside the brain. If these assumptions can be verified, many victims of depression can start to see results 2-3 months earlier than what they would see through random assignment of treatment types. The author believes that in order for these possible verifications to overcome any financial barriers and to be used regularly, people must take a more serious approach to mental illness.
Monteggia, Lisa, Robert Malenka, and Karl Deisseroth. "Depression: The Best Way Forward." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 31 Jan. 2015.
In this article, the authors state that depression is one of the biggest stumbling blocks we face in terms of mental health today, and that advancement in treatment (primarily drugs/medication) has failed to progress for years. The authors have two different ideas on how successful advances in treatment could be made. Monteggia states that antidepressant medication not only can take several weeks to produce results, but that it also usually does not work with patients who are experiencing depression at a level of greater severity. She believes the solution to these issues is ketamine, a drug that has shown not only rapid results in testing, but also improvements in those who were previously categorized as “treatment-resistant.” Malenka and Deisseroth believe that better treatment could result from neuroscientists finding brain circuits that are related to mental illness. Once this is done, certain brain cells can be manipulated via antidepressant medication with the hope of repairing any imbalances present.
Holmes, Emily, Michelle Craske, and Ann Graybiel. "Psychological Treatments: A Call for Mental-health Science." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 16 July 2014. Web. 31 Jan. 2015.
The authors claim in this article that we do not know how psychological treatment works, and this is preventing us from making further enhancements in this field. Psychological treatment, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, is the most common form of treatment among effected individuals. There are some flaws to this form of treatment, however – out of all of those who begin participating in this form of treatment, 60% see promising initial results and only 30% actually go through with their decision to complete the treatment process. 10% of these people that have seen promising results have set backs later on. This leads the authors to make the claim that scientists need to not only focus on making advancements in pharmaceutical treatment, but in psychological treatment as well. The authors believe that in order for these advancements to take place, three things must occur – study the techniques of current psychological treatments, utilize different forms of treatment (or maybe even create new ones) for certain situations based off of the techniques that were studied previously, and then figure out how to connect advancements in clinical research to advancements in laboratory research.
No comments:
Post a Comment