
Can Mental Illness Be Prevented in the Womb? - Mz
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/10/22/498843225/can-mental-illness-be-prevented-in-the-womb
======
yanjuk
>But most diets contain adequate choline

Should be 'inadequate choline', I think.

I remember there was a rat study done showing that unborn pups whose mothers
received choline supplements at about two thirds full term had superior
memories in later life, possibly referred to here:

[https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/04/980409080807.h...](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/04/980409080807.htm)

------
costcopizza
I wouldn't be surprised one bit.

Very downvotable anecdote here but...

My mom is a vegetarian and was before/during pregnancy. This was before
prenatal fish oil and DHA/EPA supplements were all the rage. I'm vegetarian
myself, live an overall healthy lifestyle, and have struggled with depression
and mental fog more often than not.

After starting taking a high quality fish oil and multivitamin I've felt much
better when it comes to clarity and outlook.

There are a ton of vitamins, minerals, and components that play a huge role in
being mentally fit. Some obvious, and the troubling part, some rather not so
obvious.

------
jack9
Some mental illness can be prevented by interfering with development in the
womb, surely. Some cannot, surely. Genetics are not something you can medicate
away, completely. When we can modify the genes early enough, we still have to
deal with what is genetically missing or weak.

~~~
stri8ed
It's worth noting that in the case of identical twins, with one having
schizophrenia, the other twin is only 50% likely to develop it as well. This
would suggest that genetics are not the sole determining factor, at least in
schizophrenia.

~~~
TTPrograms
50% is a massive correlation, as far as typical hereditary causes go.

~~~
sp332
Yes, but it shows that genes are not the only factor. It implies that 50% of
people with a "schizophrenia gene" might never develop the disease.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
Can you screen for abusive parents before they've actually had a child?

(responding to the headline, not the article)

~~~
Mz
Children who have been abused themselves are more likely to be abusive. But it
is still a minority of them who are abusive and this does not explain why some
people who were not abused as kids are abusive. Furthermore, some kids from
bad homes are incredibly committed to making sure their kids get something
better, the way some children of alcoholics simply will not touch a drop of
alcohol.

The future is unwritten. We all make choices. I would rather be asking how we
can give parents more support generally and improve outcomes generally than be
trying to come up with some kind of _Minority Report-esque_ means to find
people guilty of things they haven't yet done, thus may not actually do. It is
possible to push people into bad behavior by putting them in a position where
it doesn't matter what they do, they are presumed guilty. This is part of why
things like racism and classism are such big problems.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
> trying to come up with some kind of Minority Report-esque means to find
> people guilty of things they haven't yet done

I don't actually want to do that, I probably shouldn't have worded that
comment the way I did.

What I wanted to point out is that a large part of mental illness prevention
would be, well, figuring out how to subject people less to situations which
create it. It's probably more effective than supplements.

~~~
Mz
Mental illness has two components. Brain chemistry or health is one. Social
crap is the other. The article addresses a factor in the first category. Even
if someone is treated extremely well, if their brain is impaired by nutritonal
deficiency or disease, they won't think right. These are both important
factors and not really interchangeable.

You have a valid point with regards to mistreatment being causative. But being
kind does not cure nutrient deficiencies per se. Supplements can cure that
piece.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Sure.

------
wwggggoi
how can they possibly diagnose mental illness in the womb ?

~~~
walter_bishop
They would first have to define what exactly they mean by 'mental illness' and
children getting diagnosed with ADHD has more to do with the pharmaceutical
industry selling more drugs than any valid evidence that ADHD actually exists.

~~~
eivarv
Are you implying that ADHD is not a real condition?

If so, what makes you think this is the case?

~~~
Mz
When my dad grew up on a farm, the world was slower and quieter. When I moved
back home during my divorce with my two teenaged sons, my parents lived on the
edge of town with no cell phones or computers and you could hear a pin drop in
their house at night. No one called them ADHD or accused them of suffering
from some disorder or suggested their odd lifestyle was accommodation for some
condition where they can't cope with distractions. They were just old.

The world has changed and sped up and kids who don't cope with life these days
get all kinds of labels. For all we know, they would be fine if they were
growing up on a quiet farm with a more organic pace of life and disconnected
from our many gadgets and what not -- as was the norm for everyone on the
planet not too many decades ago.

If you look at history, each era has some widespread "mental health" issue.
Modern peoples consider many of these labels bogus. For example, at one time
women were believed to suffer a condition known as "Hysteria" which was
treatable with medically induced _hysterical paroxysms_ \-- aka orgasms:
[https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-
sex/201303/hy...](https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-
sex/201303/hysteria-and-the-strange-history-vibrators)

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/female-
hysteria_n_4...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/female-
hysteria_n_4298060.html)

[http://www.motherjones.com/media/2012/05/hysteria-sex-toy-
hi...](http://www.motherjones.com/media/2012/05/hysteria-sex-toy-history-
timeline)

You would be well advised to be skeptical of extremely widespread cases of
"mental disease" found to be prevalent in a particular generation during a
particular time span. In another generation, they are likely to have a
different explanation and ADHD may well be a term that only occurs in history
books and articles mocking the concept.

~~~
eivarv
I get what you mean, but as far as I can see your first two paragraphs only
amount to conjecture. I don't see how you can draw any conclusions about ADHD
from that.

I do know of these cases, of course, but the field of mental illness is very
much different today than what it was in the days of "Hyesteria" \- both with
regards to diagnostics, and to research. For instance, there are well known
structural and functional abnormalities associated with certain mental
illnesses - which would seem to imply that the current categorizations aren't
completely off.

While you may be right in the technical sense that future research can make
our current understanding obsolete, I don't think there's any doubt that some
people suffer as a consequence of what is currently conceptualised as a
behavioural disorder called ADHD.

~~~
Mz
Saying future generations will see it differently does not deny that people
are genuinely suffering currently. I have two special needs sons. Their issues
have benefited tremendously from dietary changes, among other things.

