Thank you for sharing these. My brother was murdered a year ago and today I’m trying to finish writing my victim impact statement to be read at the sentencing of his killer. I’ve been frozen in my processing for several days and your descriptions helped me place myself back in my body as I tend to disassociate when faced with the overwhelming grief of his loss.
I'm so sorry for your loss, and the added layers of pain around how it happened. The thought of trying to put that into words that have to be shared publicly hurts my heart for you.
There's nothing I can say that will make it better. Just know a stranger on the internet is taking a moment to cry with your pain.
>Initially during the prodrome, a change in brain structure seems to be present in the temporal lobe volume and cingulated. On follow-up in those who have gone onto a psychotic episode, further changes can be seen in the cingulate, temporal lobe, and parahippocampal gyrus.
Structural changes occur before an episode has even occurred.
Thanks so much for that. I appreciate the honesty and clarity of the authors in presenting their findings.
Upon a very, very brief read it still seems difficult for them (in my opinion) to find that schizophrenia is primarily genetic in nature when there still could be potential causative agents that only siblings share (the same house, the same food and water, the same household/generational chemical/drug use/exposure, etc.) which may yet explain the changes/differences. I will take a closer look when I have the time and look at the wealth of references they included (they do have some pretty large studies referenced that support their findings). Thanks again.
I just want to say that while I may seemingly appear to be particularly hostile to the physical causative angle or the genetic (or predictive) angle of mental illness, I just want to clarify that this is mostly because of the fears I have about the current/near-future clinical/societal implications of this being established, in my opinion, prematurely.
There's unarguably a lot of good that research can do in this area, however, I just hope that more understanding in these areas are reflected clinically by a massive diversity of treatments. Especially, laser-focused treatments that cause minimal side effects.
I don't think there's any arguing from me that if we were able to stop the progression of schizophrenia before first-episode psychosis (especially without using anti-psychotics long-term or at all) that it wouldn't be a good thing.
Or as other commenters pointed out, to stop these people who share these markers from doing things that might worsen/manifest their illness, like cannabis. Or researchers finding out how the endocannabinoid system is involved in the illness, including potential therapies (like tackling the systemic inflammation that is common in serious mental illness).
It's just a slippery slope if we go about this in the wrong way. Like forced treatment. Or applying treatments to other differences that may not cause distress to the individuals or inhibit their functioning or participation in society (like forcibly treating high functioning individuals who are on the autism spectrum).
Or incorrectly diagnosing schizophrenia/psychosis in one person and inappropriately treating them, when in reality there were two or three distinct diseases causing a similar illness or set of symptoms. Who knows, there is a distinct lack of knowing still in this field. I just know that the profit-motive needs to disappear before true progress and medicine can happen.
Nobody with clinical experience or even an educational background in psychopharmacology/medicine would make a comment like this. Antipsychotics are given with great caution as many have extrapyramidal effects and a few even require REMS programs.
Thank you for adding this information. It shows how important it is to get granular with data otherwise so much nuance gets lost in the interpretation.
It does seem like any sufficiently advanced AGI that has the primary objective of valuing human life over it's own existence and technological progress, would eventually do just that. I suppose the fear is that it will reach a point where it believes that valuing human life is irrational and override that objective...
Don’t be. Almost all of it are speculations at this point and no one from inside is going to reveal the secret in a random HN comment.
And also, think about this, unless you’re a shareholder with openai, knowing the “opinion” of others isn’t going to impact your life in any form. I’m not saying you shouldn’t read it or participate in the discourse, but there’s no need to be overwhelmed by opinions let alone build a chat bot to get through it.
Yeah agree with all of the above but with one modification: We can spend a lot of time reading through 1800+ comments, and that's time when we're usually trying to just get a question answered like "what does everyone think happened?" etc.
Storytell's vision is to distill signal from noise → giving you a different way to navigate 1800+ comments where you're the one in control of how you spend your time doing it is our objective here.
Agree. There’s definitely use to get a general pulse of whats happening. This isnt directed towards storytell or such apps, sorry if that came off that way.
I was addressing the parent’s comment about being overwhelmed about not being able to go through the opinions. I’ve felt similar way before I realised they were just fomo. If anything, apps like storytell are actually better way to consume these things :)
Am I misunderstanding his answer, or does he not essentially say it should be "descriptive"? In which case, I misunderstood what your comment is implying.
Sorry for being vague. I was not at all referring to his answer per se. But rather his high-brow reference to Plato.
If he has truly read and digested Plato (and not just skimmed a summary video), he would not be in this ditch to begin with. That's the irony I was referring to.
