Picking your Brain

[gentle field]

Yeah, because the amount that needed to be replicated was and still is huge, but with time there have been plenty of studies and replications done

I think this is more about the pressure to publish positive results, which is common in academia as a whole

[fickle nest]

IIRC the backlog was an issue but there were institutional pressures pushing newer researchers to focus on original research vs replication. Curious if that culture has really changed

[gentle field]

That pressure still exists but as said things still go down the pipeline eventually. Maybe not as fast as we would like but they do

[worn forum]

I partially agree there but would also say there's some actual pretty decent studies that've hit that same issue rather than the pressure point

[gentle field]

Tbh the study of MDM is rather novel so it's common to find contradictions if standards are not set, especially with such amount of cofounding factors and unknown variables

[worn forum]

Yeah I read a lot of them and unironically makes me feel like I'm just reading a super scientific version of a TAA 🤣

I think those specific types of studies cause of the silo thing run into the issue where they end up kinda doing a study on various TA factors rather than, necessarily, MDM at large

[gentle field]

Almost 3 months later...

So regarding scepticism itself, there's isn't much. But for doubt, under which we can categorise scepticism, there has been some research, usually with doubt in the face of decision making. Interestingly we see activations at the low parietal lobules, an area more associated with sensorimotor activity, spatial attention and visual and auditory stimuli processing. Decision making is usually associated rather with the prefrontal cortex. If anything this serves to set that brain regions are modular and diverse in functions and not just a simplistic, reductionist and fixed association of areas with functions

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0925492721001220

From a more psychological pov, there are more aspects of it. For instance cognitive dissonance is a common model that can be applied to sceptical thought for a while and how beliefs can either change or maintain inertia when confronted with conflicting information

And for which we have observe predictive values in neuroimaging on whether attitude will change under cognitive dissonance https://www.nature.com/articles/nn.2413 (this article is available for free if you look it up in scholar, just that's a huge link and I didn't want to share it 😅 )

[bleak star]

Thanks! And respect for even finding my original question to reply to lol

[fickle nest]

https://x.com/rezendi/status/1826299346239009263

Jon Evans (@rezendi) on X

"The researchers found that 24 of the brain samples, which were collected in early 2024, measured on average about 0.5% plastic by weight." https://t.co/PkKYZ71pq5

Twitter · Aug 21, 2024, 4:44 PM

[worn forum]

0.5% on our way to becoming the xenobiologics we cannot yet find

If anyone needs a good joke our brain now has more plastic than a barbie dolls brain 🥁

[fickle nest]

I was really astounded by the link between neuro degenerative diseases like Alzheimer's, dementia and the amount of plastic in the samples

[gentle field]

It's a low sample number, but yes, it definitely warrants to study if microplastics increase the risk of developing dementias

(I need to be pedantic here and say that Alzheimer's is a type of dementia)

[worn forum]

Do you think it could see heavy correlates with... neuroplasticity?

Sorry it's too good I'm done

[gentle field]

Lololol, I'm surprised I didn't come up with that one, good one

[worn forum]

I stole that one credits to that guy, summarily named, That Guy

[gentle field]

I know who you mean, I may lurk in swamps 😉

[weary bloom]

Being pedantic is useful, especially for the overarching topic like the human mind

[worn forum]

Off a cool little post I saw earlier

Not sure about the reddit logo but the coca cola can actually has 0 red coloring lol

[worn forum]

Yeah I wasn't sure if the reddit one was the same or not, presumed it wasnt

Focus of the post was on the coca cola can*

Fun little example of how we pick up patterns and align them to things

[gentle field]

The coca cola can is black and blue 😉

[worn forum]

White too 😛

Some of that actually is white not just really light blue

[gentle field]

No, it's not white and gold, it's blue and black

[worn forum]

new marketing meme in 5, 4, 3

[gentle field]

Can't believe it's been 9 years since the dress thing

[worn forum]

I found a way to win that debate everytime

Ask the other person what they think the color is first

Then just agree with them

[bitter cobalt]

Liar! No way was that nine years. This is another mind trick.

[worn forum]

Also I just looked it up because I felt 9 years was too long also and it totally has been

2015

aaah

[gentle field]

February 2015.... so almost 10

[worn forum]

I'm sad we didn't get anyone pulling out yellow and green with that

Wouldve been a funny addition to the mix

[gentle field]

Also the fact that I'm convinced it was like right before the pandemic, not that long ago

[hybrid stone]

I believe it made a popular resurgence during covid as anyone and everyone who suddenly became chronically online "newly rediscovered" old memes.

[hybrid stone]

Somewhat related.

https://fixupx.com/dieworkwear/status/1827411714801070171

https://fixupx.com/dieworkwear/status/1827411718240399565

[weary bloom]

aaaaaaaaa

that makes eyes confused

[worn forum]

picking your brain fashion hours? Yes I too enjoy dressing up

Shoutout double breasted suits making a come back

[dire pawn]

Can’t escape the derek guy

He’s everywhere now

I actually had to buy my first necktie this week for more formal pictures, finally caved :/ so far it was always no tie or bow tie

ignore the opened collar showing part of the tie, although i actually kinda think it’s not too bad looking like this (the visible tie + wide knot kinda replaces the “closing” look that’s normally brought by closing the top collar button)

[bitter cobalt]

(Just needs a little work on placement of the dimple.)

[dire pawn]

was purposeful actually

well technically i'd prefer slightly more fabric next to it folding backwards (while keeping the dimple in roughly the same place), but the asymmetry is on purpose (tried it symmetrical but felt like with the collar like this it looked like i was essentially creating 3 triangles in a row (unbuttoned collar + knot + dimple) which looked a little bit too much, this way that line is broken)

[weary bloom]

Oh hell yea. Was the photographer (and potential formal event) alright?

[dire pawn]

Photographer was alright enough, just another uni student who had a digital camera

Sadly no formal event, simply had to take pictures for a uni student board

[weary bloom]

Ohhh ok

[fallen marsh]

This illusion is created by the saturation of green in the surrounding image, and a slight notch of green in the apparently-red areas; however there are some pixels which have more red than blue or green.

[worn forum]

Knew the blue and green mix here, totally hadnt picked up on the red part though, good catch there!

[worn forum]

just go no tie its okay

I was pre-trend on the double breasted suits, now no one makes fun of them and they're seen as cool again but actually in a casual form over the old early-mid 1900s era where they were more formal

I rock them with no tie, debatably worse than single breasted suits but hooah

[dire pawn]

Yeah that’s actually what i usually do, but peer pressure succeeded this once

[worn forum]

Double breasted suits are probably the only time I'll ever wear ties just cause outside of some hyper specific colors and textures most look weird without ties 💀

[dire pawn]

Usually it’s no tie or if it’s like an actual formal formal (red carpet like) event i’ll wear a bow tie

[dire pawn]

Fair, worthy sacrifice for double breasted suits

[worn forum]

See I've always seen that stuff as a bit of a misonomer

You see those suits where people are like "never wear that anywhere"

Yeah there's people that can rock those too

[dire pawn]

Can also go for a double breasted looking suit jacket that’s worn single breasted

Which i’ve only ever seen with women actually

[worn forum]

I've always seen that more in how the person carries it, anyone could theoretically rock anything - the limiting factor is how much the person is able to adjust themselves to "fit" it in others perception

[worn forum]

hmm what do you mean by that

I think I know what you mean but that way of wording it throws me off

Do you mean the ones that have the like, double breasted form style, but just single breast buttons? Or where people only button the top double breast buttons and bottom left?

Technically the top button thing is a rule for double breasted suits too just slightly adjusted, you're not suppose to button the bottom right/outside button, it's not as hard of a rule tho so you can find people who button all 4

[dire pawn]

No the buttons similar to double breasted, but tailored on a way where you only tie one of them

[worn forum]

Sometimes the full 4 actually looks better depending on your build

Ooh okay yeah I know what you mean then

[dire pawn]

Yeah its pretty straightforward, just don’t see it much

[dire pawn]

Yeah pretty mucj

[worn forum]

I think these are more of a "women" thing because of their form

[dire pawn]

And then the other one down right is non functional

[dire pawn]

Yeah i agree

Although i have seen single button double breasted suits for men online

Which is functionally the same even if aesthetically different

[worn forum]

Yeah I think those are for more specific forms, I can definitely think of guys that could wear them

Honestly I probably could but I think they look a bit odd lol

General double breasted suits are really made with a specific type of male form in mind, even for women, you can find light adjustations but it's why you have to match them a bit more carefully than normal suits, you can easily make your form look really weird

My height is weird as hell so I have to get everything custom made when it comes too suits, usually cant buy off rack or tailor even.

Which is both awesome but also really sucky financially shit is so expensive

[bitter cobalt]

Is this still ⛏️ 🧠?

[worn forum]

hey my friend we were speaking about fitting to form and perception etc

that is all the neuro side of fashion !!!

In all seriousness though it's actually super interesting how much "fashion" and how we perceive fit and form etc of clothing hits closer to neuro direct subjects than psych sometimes

I'd think itd be reverse in the more direct sense (obv any involves a variation of both)

[weary bloom]

Perception can fit in this too considering it’s the brain that interprets things

[gentle field]

Indeed, perception is a cognitive process and these viral stories have caused a lot of interest within researchers in neuroscience, cognitive sciences and psychophysics (:

[modest arch]

perception is quite fascinating

yeah

[worn forum]

perception management would be a lot cooler if it was actually neuro and cog rooted instead of a communication function buzzword

instead we hit the influence paddle ball like its just a form of intended output

[gentle field]

There will always be someone who finds X concept/theory that can be applied in Y field. However the validity of such hypotheses would depend on the evidence that supports it

[worn forum]

One thing I will add to this too, noting I haven't read them yet but about too

Our sciences are not really enabled to port Russian sciences 1-1

Especially when it hits social sciences areas, there are key periods in history where our fields took entirely different directions and foundational understandings differ

It's already a "thing" in our info space where research and scientific studies referencing Russian concepts tend to not actually reflect them in their true form (eg X concept will be taken singularly and studied & presented with everything else being our understanding - not the entire background that also comes with X)

I do enjoy how the second study pretty much prefaces this at the start

Okay skimmed the second and I don't have grand issues with it, it sticks to its guns pretty well on aligning with trying to not fall into that issue

The first one, entirely sources from "Mind in Society" - Lev did not write this himself, they're paraphrased translations from another group of researchers. This group of researchers has openly stated they took broad creative liberty with persenting Levs work to make it more understandable and presentable to english audiences. It is a horrid source for Levs theories.

For example, the "proximal development" concept is botched in presentation in the first study. For Vygotsky, the relevancy in this is for example, teaching school children, and where it becomes infeasible en-masse to require entire cohorts of kids to teach above that baseline. Any individual has skew here. It also does not exclude literally learning concepts, generally grooming "hijacks" around the frame this reference is working in.
An example given of this, is, for example, if you are asked to do 10 pullups, but can only do 7, 7 is your zone of proximal development. It doesn't exclude the person asking you teaching you a new technique to get to 10 the very next time you do it.

None of that means either that their research doesn't have applicable insight, just means their drawing it to that specific concept is faulty.

[worn forum]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-69630-x

@gentle field

this is pretty nifty havent seen anyone use fnis for this before

[gentle field]

I'm really excited to see what comes out now that fNIRS is becoming increasingly portable

A few days ago Artinis and Bitbrain released a new portable fNIRS + EEG system

Pretty pricey for sure (idk how much it costs but you have to request a quote, so that's an indication that it isn't precisely cheap ) but it's getting there

But really exciting as one complements the other's weaknesses

[worn forum]

Got to love a little price gouge

Random sidenote to it but the visuals these authors use are great too 🤣

[gentle field]

Tbh fNIRS is still crazy expensive, but both brands are known for being high quality but also really expensive stuff (A Bitbrain Hero EEG headset is like 16k€ iirc)

So I'm estimating at least 30k for that device

Which really sucks because if you apply for public funding, at least here, you need an offer from at least 3 different providers for any good or service above 15k, so for something there's only one company producing it....

[weary bloom]

Yea… a sad part of life, yet people need to earn money somehow

[worn forum]

Yeah examples above are more price gouging though, not so much an organic price point

In the case above, it's the same exact equipment, there's no differences, you pay different prices for the same thing - the seller isn't putting in any more effort outside whatever assessment they decide to do for the price (in which case, yeah it costs for their salary, but, they also dont really need to do that, its an added cost for no reason)

That's very different than if the company has like, a base piece of equipment, but you can get stuff to it adjusts, so the price may be hard-set but too long to list in all variations. Or you could outright have something but it still has to be made for a company. There's a lot of companies that offer different sorts of dashboards for example, like for say marketing and audience research etc. These can have adjustable pricing also since, they do have all the stuff made already, but they build a dashboard for you with the things you want/need, not everything they have. Still similar to the other form just, its made more from scratch instead of being natively adjusted.

[worn forum]

Funnily enough I don't remember the exact quote but Vygotsky made a statement that sciences of the sort have to be recognized and studied within/with recognition of the culture it comes from

[weary bloom]

Arent there mental illnesses that does not care about culture or history? Or am I misreading this?

[empty frost]

What is your definition of science? BEcause that's quite a big statement.

[weary bloom]

Glad I’m not the only one who looked at this and immediately went “????????”

[worn forum]

So, I do use the "western" and "eastern" thing in some contexts, this is one area I dislike using it though

It can still kinda be used in referencing like, how some people reference "eastern" medicine in re traditional sense

More what happens here though is less of a western-eastern thing

This is as true today and will be for a very long time - but, it's important to remember any science, whatever field or etc, was conducted within a specific society and culture

Different discoveries could come at different points, sociocultural views could alter understandings and give different insight that brings different output, etc

For example, after Stalin died, Soviet social sciences predominately were cybernetic centric or cognizant, whereas here in the "west" it still has not reached predominance but some pockets of people come up with theories that... are basically just cybernetics but reinventing the wheel

This is not an "eastern" split though - that same developmental pathway is not something China went on for example, nor Iran. Although, as we can see, they also have different understandings on certain subjects, and these are also because at some point in their history, you can look back and see how either a) sociocultural factors or b) chance output from research - ultimately ends up driving its future developmental paths.

Why is this as true today? Theoretically it wouldn't be as big of a problem if knowledge sharing (not access to information) was wider. But, as you mention though, we tend to think ours are better or more efficient or "right" etc, so, instead of ever taking that holistic other lens and viewing it, we try to port their framing into our own lens

This is also where we find issues like that second study I mentioned where, their only source on Vygotsky, was a book written by authors who admittedly took liberties in presenting the concepts so they could resonate better with english audiences, and also fit that research into our own understandings

By doing this, they entirely remove every element that actually is foundational to that concept, and is part of it - it's just being isolated and taken out of its organic existing environment (where that full set of foundational understanding and etc is important)

[empty frost]

That doesn't answer what I was asking. You stated "But psychiatry is not an actual science." so I asked "What is your definition of 'actual' science?".

[weary bloom]

I asked about the mentall illnesses that seemingly do not care about culture or time

[worn forum]

So keep in mind zelda, my original point was that, in a lot of cases, just taking isolated bits of understanding like this and trying to fit them into our own understandings comes with problems

Not that either is better or worse

I agree with you on that part, but in the same hand, it is also bad practices to take that isolated research alone, especially in cases where it's foundationally incorrect in representing the concept, and just running with its name as a buzzword basically (maybe getting a few things right)

@gentle field is probably the best person here on the actual science side to speak to how that can very quickly become a major issue, both in research and application of your output. It works the same for our social sciences, there's a lot of stuff you can't just isolate alone and run with that aside from everything else related to it (the "fitting" here being "easy" is because we're working with stuff entirely developed organically within our own system - not trying to fit outside things into it)

random example but eg applying operant conditioning - this is a uniquely "western" concept, operant conditioning isolated by itself though, if you tried to research or apply it without understanding any of the foundational elements that are not operant conditioning in itself, you're gonna run into some problems, and could also end up harming somebody.

Psychiatry is science according to that source

A psychiatric diagnoses being "scientifically meaningless" is also really debatable depending on what exactly you're doing with it

And how you come to that conclusion

In a lot of cases potentially but I'd say its more because the psychiatrist had a hiccup, or someone fucked up big time - not that, what they're doing is useless

[empty frost]

That's still not an answer. Your definition of natural science is .. ??

[weary bloom]

Took a look through this link and it doesnt seem to answer my question of how mental illnesses do not care about culture or time period

[empty frost]

It comes across like you're dancing around a definition to avoid being called out on the fact that by any definition there are either parts of psychiatry that do fit the definition or you're removing vast swathes of other science fields in support of your argument.

[worn forum]

I for example have a diagnoses that is patently incorrect and resting on outright made up stuff. This diagnoses is, not only bullshit, but is actually scientifically meaningless (they came up with it entirely based off random stuff that makes no sense).
I have other diagnoses that, are scientifically meaningful, both personally and non-personally. Another diagnoses I have, I don't participate in them a whole lot, but since I have the actual diagnoses, I am able to participate in research programs that look for things like biomarkers. This follows the actual scientific process, and the research being done goes on to help inform studies seeking to build more robust indicators & various other matters like management and prevention. That, on the other hand, to call "scientifically meaningless" is dumb. To let anyone into those research programs is dumb also because you'd never narrow to the people it's looking for.

It'd be like trying to get people for a study on biomarkers for cancer but you don't actually attempt to identify if anyone has cancer because the diagnoses is "scientifically meaningless" (not a 1-1 example ofc but, framing outside psychiatric matters for the point). You then end up with a study, primarily, of people who don't have cancer, and now your results about people with cancer are represented by them.

[weary bloom]

Not everyone gets a mental illness or cancer, but itll help those who are in the risk group or already in either group

[worn forum]

id be really cautious there with talking about things especially not being compatible with human rights laws

while also sourcing apa

you're basically sourcing the same people who certify the people you are sayings entire practice is incompatible with human rights

the fact they have guidelines and everything like that hits at the idea a bit that, its that loose

"For example, people don't get jobs are health insurance because of a diagnoses." this is only partly true and the way you're presenting that is really not correct for the US at least

May be a bigger issue in other nations though

It is an issue, yes, but it's also flat out illegal to do that, both in hiring or firing. For that to be done, the person has to put in some actual effort to do something not to show their own hand. If they show their hand at all, it can be quite easy to win those cases unless you're going up against someone who has enough funding (and care) to tie it up in court until you drop the case cause you cant keep paying out.

And a lot of insurance places I know tend to have better rates for MH matters but there's a lot of caveats to it, eg in network vs out of network, if your insurance is through work or individual, what plans you have specifically, etc

Thankful not to have to deal with that cycle but I know, for example, at my last job, if I took our work insurance, I would be entirely out of luck simply because the people I work with for my MH matters are out of network, I would end up having to pay entirely out of pocket instead of nada

That's not the fault of the company either, it'd cost them 10,000s to get an extra plan basically just to cover me, no other employee. Not really sensible on the businesses end.

[empty frost]

Not offended, just concerned. So now you have said "Psychiatric diagnoses are not validated". That's an entirely different statement than "Psychiatry is not an actual science".

And I have not judged anyone. I am asking for an explanation.

[weary bloom]

Oh shit, good eye

How is it? Cabletie has mentioned the inconsistencies with your messages?

[empty frost]

I asked a literal question that you didn't answer &* tried to rephrase twice . My ad hominem was preceded by your moving goalposts 🤷‍♂️

[worn forum]

People who commit any sex crime, or violent crime - overwhelmingly see commonality in doing literally anything to undermine credibility of victims

That example also does not really mean anything about diagnoses themselves

That's someone applying the diagnoses (post-diagnoses, it already happened) for malign purposes

[empty frost]

Ok. You said "psychology is not an actual science". One of the main ways to describe science is to define it as a "way of organising things we know". Psychiatry as a field of study does this, though there are many things we do not know. Then you linked to a who article that made a statement regarding human rights and the biomedical model of mental health. The biomedical model of mental health != 'psychiatry' per se so that doesn't answer the question. You then mentioned 'natural science' which is commonly thought of on relying on an observation + hypothesis testing model. This is difficult and frequently unethical in psychiatry, as it is in most fields involving humans (and animals). But is psychiatry a 'natural sicence'? I mean biology is, but that's a way broader topic. This is why I need clear definitions for your statement.

[worn forum]

I'm really not sure if sex crimes are the example to use here

[covert jolt]

Neuroimaging studies into psychiatric conditions are pretty commonly done in research these days and they keep uncovering structural features related to these conditions.

[empty frost]

Like, we can observe in psychiatry but we can't always test. Witholding or giving treatment of which the efficacy is unknown comes with a whole host of ethical dilemmas

First aid/response is also not 'scientifically validated' because not taking a bullet out is highly unethical

[weary bloom]

Dangerous too

[worn forum]

Yup! Not just neuroimaging either

[weary bloom]

Even taking one out in a trauma unit gives doctors pause too IIRC

[worn forum]

I know some of the stuff I've done has taken blood for various purposes

[empty frost]

Like, when I was doing some training we had a looooong discussion on RICE, specifically the icing part. There's almost no studies into it because not icing might have consequences so unforeseen that we just stick to it

[covert jolt]

It seems like the main disagreement here is about whether psychiatry is a descriptive or a normative field.

[worn forum]

The DARVO strategy has nothing to do with psychiatry

Also I will tell you exactly why you should just stop using that example

This is literally a medical version of when people try to go like "bbut they're sex workers" to sex workers who get assaulted

Their job has literally no standing on the crime committed

A perpetrator who knows of someones diagnoses and leverages that against them, is not a psychiatrist, they did not conduct the diagnoses, they are not a medical professional, they have absolutely 0 part in that cycle. Their interaction with the diagnoses is entirely removed from the actual medical field and processes, and is entirely, not even second, but third order to it.

[covert jolt]

So are physical disabilities, but that does not invalidate their existence.

[worn forum]

And no that's... not how you connect concepts

You're applying that connection in reverse

Psychiatry is not issued because people abuse it in the conduct of crimes. People who abuse psychiatry, create issued use cases.

There is not really a single thing you can find that people do not abuse in the conduct of some crime

[covert jolt]

Descriptive = These are patterns we've observed in a large number of patients, so we've developed a model to characterise these patterns and find a way to talk about them.
Normative = A person has condition X, so they have to behave in a certain way.

This issue is when you try to use a descriptive model in a normative way. And I think that's the type of issue you are referring to, for example with DARVO. But the impression people are getting is that you are trying to argue against the descriptive value of psychiatric models.

[worn forum]

I don't think you are against psychiatrists or the field of psychiatry. Some of your points don't really make sense though.

Eg because people abuse psychiatric diagnoses, does not make psychiatric diagnoses a problem

People also abuse prescription drugs, should we get away with all prescription drugs?

Or rather a better way to frame that Q is, people also abuse prescription drugs, is the concept of prescription drugs faulted because people abuse them?

[gentle field]

Even psychiatrists disagree between themselves on this

[covert jolt]

Maybe they should try being scientists instead

[worn forum]

Come on erredece you should know already. It's psychiatry hours! Aka we'll focus on not the important stuff

[gentle field]

And let not get me started in the psychiatrists vs psychologists wars

[gentle field]

Agreed, psychologists have the more evidence based approach 😏

[worn forum]

I refuse to work with individual psychiatrists now 🤣

They gotta be on a team for me jack

[gentle field]

Psychiatry is too reductionist at setting any psychiatric condition as exclusively determined by a set of physiological symptoms when mental health conditions are a more complex system

[weary bloom]

Lets party 🍿

[empty frost]

fight fight fight 😂

[worn forum]

there is no fight to be had here

there is no one on the fully pro-psychiatry side

[gentle field]

That said it's important to not ignore those physiological divergences, and it's not the same an anxiety disorder than a psychotic or a neurodegenerative condition

[worn forum]

[weary bloom]

damnit i already made popcorn /j

[worn forum]

have no fear as real (science) progressives, we can partake in some real psychiatric study, and spend more time trying to figure out what it actually is

[gentle field]

Would depend on the condition, as I say above there's a big difference between say schizophrenia or Alzheimer's than OCD for instance

[covert jolt]

I thought about mentioning Alzheimer's as an example, but isn't that firmly in the domain of neurology instead of psychiatry?

[gentle field]

In all of them there are neurobiological factors involved but on the first two there's a much heavier involvement of these - I mean, the symptomatology is largely due to the loss of neural tissue

[gentle field]

They overlap

[weary bloom]

Fair. Sometimes, one interacts with those dealing with a psychological phenomena so out the ordinary that theres close to no awareness of it to begin with

[worn forum]

Even with more traditional psychology leaning areas, some can skew relevancy to psychiatry too

[gentle field]

There's always going to be an overlap between neurology, psychiatry, psychology, neuroscience, etc

[covert jolt]

It feels like the definition is
Neurology = things we kinda understand
Psychiatry = things we don't really understand

[weary bloom]

Even then, k i n d a

[worn forum]

Different types of depression for example can be more relevant to the psychiatric side, esp MDD (and subcategories if you recognize them)

[gentle field]

As said, depends on the condition, it is not the same a psychotic condition than something more anxiodepressive

So to me that statement is really vague

[weary bloom]

Already made em, have some! 🍿

sweet popcorn?! Not a heretic

buttery poopcorn only

[gentle field]

Then it's a really vague abstract

[empty frost]

For the record, I never mentioned popcorn.

[weary bloom]

gotts be REAL careful on salt. too much and it overwhelms. Ill hesitently agree on the salt. Butter on the other hand, firm agree

[covert jolt]

I am a bit curious about the authors, since they seem to argue from an "outsider perspective" on psychiatry.

[gentle field]

Let everyone heat up their popcorn

[covert jolt]

The title of the first author's PhD thesis is: "Food choices: Perceptions and Experiences of Australian Fathers"

[weary bloom]

Already hot and fresh

[gentle field]

If I'm honest, I don't have the head to read through this now

[weary bloom]

same

[covert jolt]

Not generally, but a lot of fields get these "Field X I'm not familiar with is actually stupid" type papers.

[empty frost]

Anything in there about popcorn?

[empty frost]

Except physics people, they mostly get outsiders claiming they have broken the 2d law of thermodynamics if they are male and you don't know what you're talking about if they're female.

[gentle field]

Absolutely, but if you come over with a bulldozer disregarding scientific evidence collected through decades, that's an issue

But well, that's psychology every two minutes, because both the beauty and the curse of this field is that everyone experiences it and their experiences regularly contradicts such evidence

[worn forum]

Your psychiatrist says: No! Don't use the butter! You'll increase your chance of Alzheimers by 420%!

Your psychologist says: I'm going to attend the movie with you and watch your behavior after eating the popcorn (the alzheimers wont indicate for another 40 years anyways)

[gentle field]

And we even have evidence on how their contradictions work, but hey, let's bulldoze it!

Anyway, I hate mumbo jumbo charlatan coaches

[worn forum]

broke: american-british-canadian-australian psychology
woke: russian psychology
bespoke: chinese psychology

[empty frost]

I'd be deeply amused by them if they didn't damage so many people.

Nope, al pers comms

[worn forum]

I think SEO as a field is stupid, but, that's just me

Just remember to ask yourself why the best SEO is never done by branded SEO specialists

[gentle field]

I think this is a very mainstream opinion lol

[worn forum]

yet the train continues full speed ahead and income heavy as ever 🤣

[covert jolt]

Classic psychologist's self hate. Take a seat and talk about it.

[worn forum]

psychologists when APA certified therapist-AI comes out:

[gentle field]

No, I mean as a general trend, I cannot judge that article since I said I don't have now the mindset to read through it

[gentle field]

It has existed since the 60s, look up ELIZA

[worn forum]

damn you ruined my joke

but thanks for the ref this is p nifty hadnt heard of it before

[weary bloom]

Human minds are hella complicated anyway

[gentle field]

Both complicated and simple

[worn forum]

Plot twist: human mind simple, human stoopid

[weary bloom]

wont be shocked

[empty frost]

Oh hey apparently there's reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/comments/1cyofj8/emails_claiming_to_disprove_physics/

[worn forum]

the fact you actually found a source for that insanely specific comment

LMAO

props

[weary bloom]

mad based for finding source for this one specific moment

[worn forum]

the best example of this is the entire UFO community

[empty frost]

is away reading /r/badphysics for the forseeable

[worn forum]

Same physics aint my thing but this shits golden lol

"I gave a talk about this in 2012: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXSgp755DSA

The physics dept. at my previous job had been keeping an archive of all the weird correspondence with physics crackpots since the early '90s. I took the archive ("The Box") home one summer, read through a lot of it, and gave a talk about what I found.

I've posted a bunch of these documents in r/badphysics."

newest OSINT project

find "The Box"

[gentle field]

Boxint

[worn forum]

Aka Pre-FICINT (when the books are still in boxes)

FICINT is fun because its totally the schrodingers intelligence discipline

even with it, you can reason, its fictional

it is only fictional or not fictional, in conduct, depending on how you view it - both are simultaniously true.

[empty frost]

WARNING: Mention of dunning-kruger at minute 4

[gentle field]

When people talk about the DK effect without actually understanding the DK effect

[weary bloom]

the Dk effect is for determining how much you know right? /s /j

[covert jolt]

Here we go again with #1099466152981303386

[gentle field]

Ok, that saves time, I forgot about that

Yeah, just read that

[worn forum]

We all do a lil dunning kruger

[worn forum]

It is funny tho how, despite literally what it is, the misunderstood form is the predominate one

🤣

Now that it's out there its easy for folks to latch on but aahhhhhh I really wonder how that came to be

[gentle field]

That's the actual DK effect!

We're just meta gaming here

[worn forum]

Yup its literally the greatest thing about it loool

I really want to go back in time and see how that happened

[gentle field]

The real DK effect are the friends we made along the way

[worn forum]

I feel like, if that came about now, the legitimate form would've had a better chance at being predominate

I do also enjoy how DKE is one of those things thats also just very logical and didnt really need to be made into a theory

[weary bloom]

And the jokes we made too

[worn forum]

Like how it does the peaking and etc for example I think that could be visualized better, for it to be like a uh, formalized visualization like that

If your baseline is not knowing it, you'll never talk about it directly, thus, your level of knowledge and belief of such, does not exist, so it cannot be weighted to your initial interaction and/or projection about it. Once that baseline is established, now that you know it, you will inevitably talk about it directly more, simply because your baseline beforehand was not knowing it at all thus not being able to speak about it directly.

With that in hand I think a roller coaster visualization is much better (I think most visualizations do the first peak far too early and the dip/inclines too severe + the rest should summarily follow for quite a bit also instead of flat inclining out)

Someone can still surpass that plateu and have the same issue happen, though, it's not necessarily changing the effect, just scaling it upwards (very relevant with thought leaders for example, who may be the plateu-peak of knowledge on a subject but, find themselves wrong and change their original conclusion, or etc )

[weary bloom]

The more you know, the more you learn on what you dont know

[fickle nest]

Salt, olive oil, nutritional yeast, tajin.

I don't make the rules

Not to say butter isn't tasty, but trying to cut down on animal stuff and sat fats

But yeah a decent olive oil is pretty good on popcorn

[weary bloom]

Alright, back to mental shenanigans

[scarlet mantle]

(I have a PhD in criminology and have engaged in academic research and object to calling academic research "likely nonsense". I know you've just said you're not a native English speaker, but still want to point this out because I don't think it helps your case to call social sciences and humanities research "nonsense" based only on the fact that they're not hard sciences)

Ha! No worries, thanks. Writing clearly is hard even for native speakers

[weary bloom]

Especially when words rhyme

[scarlet mantle]

and this is a heavy conversation, we're not talking what we watched on TV last night

[weary bloom]

Certainly!

Happens all the damn time too

[scarlet mantle]

Yup... it's important to be precise with language

[weary bloom]

And when in doubt, just say “hey, Imma back up a tad because I have a question but idk how to ask”

[scarlet mantle]

ha! thanks, I'm not their dad so it's ok haha I was just being nit-picky

[weary bloom]

We are in an OSINT server, talking about the human brain. If anything, we need to be the opposite of “not nit-picky”

[weak shell]

zeldalogy had a point tho
If we consider social sciences to be science strictly speaking, we can expect ChatGPT providing solutions for legal cases in the future becoming a feasible idea

[scarlet mantle]

Is that psychiatry's "problem", or the law's problem though?

[weak shell]

exactly

btw in common law systems are usually more permissive I believe, but generally it should be a psychiatric issue wether something is relevant or not in that sense

law can only define when something has to be deferred to specialists

[scarlet mantle]

(speaking of being the "dad" of social sciences) have you ever read Foucault? Because he wrote extensively on the intersection between law and medicine in a way that I think you'd find really interesting

Anything to do with "biopower", which is the topic that I think that you'd find interesting.

The wikipedia page is a good place to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopower

He talks about it in a bunch of his writings, but Foucault is famous for just sortta being all over the place, so all of his ideas area scattered across like 100 lectures and books

I think it first comes up in "The Histroy of Sexuality" which is one of his most famous books

[weak shell]

this is a very specific topic, but I would say it'd be simply illégal such law practice in at least most of the OECD world
it s interesting tho. I ll give it a check

[scarlet mantle]

Yeah I used to hate Foucault but he's not so scary. Read Cole's Notes and articles about his writings and you'll get it

[weak shell]

I'd say a jurisdiction which would allow this is like a doctor that prescribes a deleterious treatment. testimony especially in criminal cases shouldn t be valued for it's persuasivness or based on the relyiability of the witness. not even in the negative sense of it's unrelyiability but only from just an objective standpoint. either the witness is allowed to testimony or not

[weary bloom]

Really loving the convos here!

[weak shell]

I mean think about it.
you are prevented to testimony against your own harasser. it s like a doctor prescribing me lsd

such a judiciary system

[weary bloom]

Who knew that being halfway reasonable is so hard to come by

Will look into it over the weekend, just ping the account Saturday?

"Correspondingly, as the biomedical model of mental health (aka psychiatric diagnoses) is scientifically contested, it needs to replaced with an evidence-based approach." The human mind is ever interesting, and the pandoras box is partially open. Damn shame it isnt all the way open

Oh, its basically doing " @weary bloom "

Firm agree on those last 2 sentences! Each of us have a biological computer in our skulls, and goddamn it’s fun looking further into it

And imma snag that link :3

[gentle field]

Biomarkers for mental health are a holy grail for a reason. Yes, we are finding indicators in neuroimaging (EEG, ECoG, fMRI, fNIRS) and there are also promising signs on some other sources (eg from the voice, but definitely not from any hormone level, anyone telling you that they're bullshitting).

But given the overlap, comorbidity and ambiguous definition of mental health conditions it makes these much harder to establish. Even the definition of what constitutes a clinically relevant symptom for any mental health issue is ambiguous. That is what makes psychiatry as a discipline struggle, because it is too reductionist and narrow focused in physiological factors when, as said, they're holistic conditions that are also heavily depend in environmental factors. But at least they do reflect in physiological elements (eg: HPA axis for depression, variations in activation at the prefrontal cortex and the lymbic system, etc) which is what we can identify with neuroimaging.

Psychiatry needs to evolve from just identifying symptoms to contextualising such symptoms. And honestly take more insight from other related branches like psychology and neuroscience

And on top of that, social prejudices and misconceptions against certains behaviours that would then be considered as psychiatric conditions when there isn't any evidence to support such claim

[worn forum]

I would also note here though, especially if you're interested in working towards things like protecting the youth and etc, it is really, really insanely important to actually learn the foreign sciences 1-1 if you do

Cases like taking that second study you mentioned (in that way back original comment) are inherently issued because they botch the root concept, it provides no extra value in that form, and you could actually harm people trying to integrate stuff like that by just trying to fit it into certain things without recognizing its "true" form.

[worn forum]

Blood can be a big one too but yeah hormone one is meme. I know for a lot of types of depression and ptsd they look for things like glycotic ratio and arginine levels. Serotonin is still considered but you probably know the prior issue with that so it is good to see folks viewing that more holistically instead of just silo'd.

Cortisol levels for some of that too can swing to unnatural highs or lows but without your baseline not the most helpful in a diagnostic sense

[gentle field]

Nope, there are no biomarkers in blood. Low serotonin is associated with depression but increased serotonin is not associated with a reduction of symptoms in depression

And cortisol levels is associated to other conditions but none psychiatric

[worn forum]

Those are all things used in varying studies for multiple forms of depression and ptsd (it's not for diagnoses, at least not in the cases I've seen)

I do think there is issues with using them singularly tho

And yeah the serotonin thing a lot of people misunderstand, the cortisol levels run into similar issues sometimes but not sure how frequent it is at broad

[gentle field]

As said, identifying biomarkers in blood for these conditions is something that has been pursued by a loooong time but there is no evidence for any

[worn forum]

Actually not entirely true I guess the Army did claim to kind of have a blood kit they said could be used diagnostically but not a fan of that

[gentle field]

If it was done it was without any scientific basis

Or under heavy misconceptions (eg: associating levels of serotonin or dopamine to certain conditions)

[worn forum]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-019-0496-z
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2468749923000169

[worn forum]

Do agree a lot of earlier study runs into that issue

[gentle field]

Ok, that's a new paper, I hadn't seen it

[worn forum]

I know a lot of the 2015ish and before studies reference a lot about hermones and etc which, yeah covered that issue

[gentle field]

I'll read through it later, I'd be happy to be wronged

Well, this is from 2023 (:

[worn forum]

Yessir

With that said I do not like their point about that being used diagnostically, but, I do think it could be a good tool for assisting in it

Lot of questions and tiny bits to cover still before it could be adjusted that way

My personal opinion on kind of applying these sort of biomarkers anyways is more as an indicator cumulatively, not isolated pieces. Like the serotonin issue mentioned, cortisol can be the same

Folks can have increased cortisol levels from their baseline when say, having a panic attack, but that doesn't mean anything to decrease cortisol levels (like breathing techniques or etc) will mitigate that overall response

https://academic.oup.com/database/article/doi/10.1093/database/baz081/5525201

There was this big one I came across before too that's connected to some effort to make a big database, but it got into a bunch of stuff I dunno, seemed pretty interesting regardless but not sure how it'd stand.

[empty frost]

Thank you for that. As someone who is active in science in the 'observe -> hypothesize -> measure -> repeat' category these definitions are super important to me because vague terminology is frequently used to discredit my and adjacent fields. And people often misunderstand (as I mentioned before) how hard (often impossible) it is to ethically test with statistical strength (controlled experiment) anything pertaining to human bodies and minds. Nonetheless, I probably agree with you on many things, e.g. I don't think psychiatry is the be all and end all of everything and frequently have huge issues with how it is applied (as I think most people in this channel do), in some cases also in the way of diagnosing, over/under-diagnosing and misdiagnosing conditions & the questionable wax and wane of various popular conditions. It is also a very powerful tool to control people (like troubled kids) and tools of power are often attractive to a very specific type of person. But there are probably also some redeeming sub-fields which had quite a big influence on how we perceive how people think and as a result in how we treat those people within our society. Also, I think a tool like psychotherapy (a sub-field of psychiatry) can help some people and specialties like developing theories in (another sub-field) substance-abuse psychiatry are imo interesting and also necessary to lessen the amount of stigma that surrounds users. So like most things I believe it's a mixed bag. I am just wary of folks blanket denying any field (except for evolutionary psychology ).

[gentle field]

Psychotherapy is not a subfield of psychiatry

[empty frost]

Isn't it? I thought it was

Afaik you need a psychiatry degree for it, not a psychology one (at least here)

I say here, I mean 'here 20 years ago' because that's the last time I checked, might have changed.

Ok, I'm wrong/misinformed, it's a specific postdoc accessible only to those with a PhD in one of the following: Psychology, Medicine, Pedagogical Science, or Mental Healthcare

[sleek wave]

Where is 'here'?

The Netherlands?

[empty frost]

Yes. There's a whole thing here with the term though because it's not a protected title so people who are part of EAP/NAP (european/netherlands association for psychotherapy) are not considered to be psychotherapists but 'alternative therapists' even though that's arguably the bulk of the people who utilise the title.

You can't be a 'registered psychotherapist' unless you have the postdoc. This is not going to be too many people

[weary bloom]

Huh, TIL

[empty frost]

I was apparently wrong again (so many wrongs). It is a protected title but that is ignored by many [dutch lang]: https://www.kwakzalverij.nl/nieuws/waarschuwing-nap-of-nep-psychotherapeuten/

It's not postdoc but post-academic, butmedical degrees are longer than a regular bachelor. Afaik reg medicine degree is like 6 years.

[weary bloom]

Still interesting to learn

[weary bloom]

@strong cradle here’s the psychology section of the server

[strong cradle]

Ty

Anybody have recs for where to start with Hegel?

I think if I’m going to have any inkling of understanding I need to have a post-analysis first

I’ve got Schopenhauer down pretty well, Kant is iffy, Nietzsche seems like a crazy man but I can see what he’s going for

[weary bloom]

Unfortunately I don’t really know much about Hegel, although it’s likely someone else here does

[scarlet mantle]

I'd recommend reading books on Hegel first rather than trying to read Hegel on its own

"Phenomenology of Spirit" is both his most important and influential work and also is almost entirely incomprehensible

I can dig through old syllabi to see if I can pull any readings that might help ease into Hegel

[weary bloom]

Even though I am not bigfoot, may I snag it too?

[scarlet mantle]

Ya if I find anything I'll share it here

[weary bloom]

Thank you! 🥰

[scarlet mantle]

But honestly just going on YouTube and watching videos on Hegel would be the best start, and then maybe moving onto books on Hegel if the videos interest you

[weary bloom]

Fair point

Watched an introductory video of the guy and so far, pretty interesting

Certainly needs further research

[strong cradle]

I’ve looked up videos on Hegel and my recs are all related to communism

Which doesn’t underpin what I think he’s trying to get at

[strong cradle]

Agreed that’s what I mean, I need context for this fool

I’ve tried to dive into Pheonomology of Spirit and can’t get past two pages

[scarlet mantle]

Yeah because Marx took "dialectics" which is one of Hegel's big contributions to philosophy and spun it off into one of the core concepts of Marxism

Your best bet is to stick to youtube videos, wiki articles, and Cole's Notes. There's no need to subject yourself to actually reading his works unless someone's paying you to do it

Someone should start a philosophy thread if you wanna keep talking about this, this isn't the right channel

[pine bone]

The "Introducing ______" graphic guides saved me considerable time and frustration in my studies -- at least for getting a decent enough grasp of various philosophers and schools of thought.

https://www.amazon.com/Introducing-Hegel-Graphic-Spencer-Paperback/dp/B011DBZPKE/

For me, they helped make the actual source texts (and many professors' lectures) more accessible. I've spent a fair amount of time leafing through the series in bookstores when I couldn't afford to buy copies for myself.

There's something about the combination of tone, illustrations, and text from an author who knows their stuff (and how to explain it) that really opens up challenging material for me.

Additionally, I appreciated that they presented a bit of each philosopher's personal life and Sitz im Leben, which wasn't always covered in classes. With a little context about where someone was coming from, things can sometimes snap into focus.

Finally, if you find you really want to get into Hegel (or any of their subjects) they provide great "for further reading" lists:

Just a word of encouragement: Good luck with Hegel!

He can be challenging, but it's definitely worth the effort. It would be hard to overstate the impact of his ideas on modern thought. As things start to click, you'll find new perspectives opening up on history, politics, and even the nature of human consciousness.

[gentle field]

Ehm, this is the psychology section of the server but it is a scientific psychology section of the server

Not a philosophy discussion place

[weary bloom]

Still counts as psychology though, so close enough?

[gentle field]

No

It counts the same as philosophising about chemistry (:

[scarlet mantle]

Ya sorry erredece, my bad

I suggested someone make a philosophy thread

[gentle field]

I have nothing against philosophy, but if we were to discuss baseless claims that have since left outdated through empirical research, then we open the gate to pseudoscience

[gentle field]

That would be cool and long overdue!

[weary bloom]

Isn’t it the thread we are in…?

[scarlet mantle]

Potato, psychology and philosophy are two completly different things

It's like saying "Is cooking the same as painting?"

They're completly different things

[weary bloom]

Oh shit, nvm

I’m still waking up, sorry

[scarlet mantle]

Philosophy thread here https://discord.com/channels/709752884257882135/1289576823973351476

[fickle nest]

(not sure which thread this thought belongs in) I used to be pretty into Patricia Churchland and Neurophilosophy until she got the Terf mind virus

[gentle field]

I haven't but reading that title I like him

[fickle nest]

That article says DSM V will pathologize grief. Idk if it's overtly clear cut that DSMV pathologizes grief insomuch as it recognizes that grief, to the extent that it disrupts—over the long term—a person's ability to take care of themselves and interact with the world, is a condition that merits treatment.

[gentle field]

That said, when we talk about anxiety and grief disorders we talk when those emotions have become prolongued enough through time to disrupt the person's day to day

But it's fundamental to indeed say that these on their own are not a bad thing, quite the opposite

[gentle field]

DSM 5-TR did add a grief disorder that met a lot of controversy, but it goes in the lines you mention

[worn forum]

"Foreign sciences" just being broad, to note I am American and in the US (someone in/from a diff nation could use this and "foreign" be respective to them, so, I/America would be foreign in their context, etc)

Amongst "foreign sciences" there are plenty of distinctions you can find still. Say, if you were to look between Chinese and Russian sciences. This is why I don't like using the "western" vs "eastern" in that context, even countries that fall within either banner can still have heavy distinctions that don't really relate.

And in that specific context yes we are speaking about somewhat similar things but when we get into specifics you and I definitely draw away from each other in some points

Eg the example I gave before that, just applying Vygotskys paraphrased conclusions into American sciences can absolutely create harm, because it disrecognizes the entire background that's critical to that conclusion - nor the actual conclusion, but something made up by authors to make it easier to understand and "fit".

[fickle nest]

Isn't ICD-10 diagnostic coding for record/insurance purposes?

[worn forum]

I love how DSM-5 added a cannabis disorder category that is literally never diagnosed properly

I got diagnosed with it despite not meeting literally any of the qualifications lmao

Still fighting that diagnoses

the thing with that study though it wa staking the baseline of no knowledge

the zone of proximal development does not reference inability/ability to learn concepts that you do not know

grooming inherently kinda works around that because the person is teaching the child from no baseline and building a faulty malign baseline

the "zone of proximial development" in their context is whatever is being taught

zone of proximal development is more properly as an example like uh

say when you're a baby right, you know how things sound, but you dont actually know how to sound them yourself - that point right there, your inability to sound them yourself, is where your zone of proximal development ends

when you start to learn your ABCs in daycare or whatever, your zone of proximal development shifts upwards as you can now pronounce the letters, but cannot properly form those into our words

the only relevancy of zone of proximal development here to grooming is the sort of education most people already hear through, at least in the US, already conditioned cultural memes (stranger danger for example, etc)

eg now that the child knows grooming can happen, and it could look like this, they now know that it exists and can potentially spot it

this is something that already existed here in the US for example far before vygotskys works ever reached our environment

vygotskys work also doesnt really pair any grand hows or whats to it, it basically just tells you that educating the child about the possibility and what it could look like, enables them to recognize it and thus spot it, and thus, have the potential to identify and prevent it (which, is not really any greater development of knowledge, thats already known) - that was studied and set in stone well before vygotsky wrote anything ever (kinda par for the course too with anything, I can't identify something as something specific if I don't know what that specific is, I may be able to characterize it though)

[harsh goblet]

Yes and to facilitate interoperability between various medical records softwares and systems

For doctor's offices, pharmacies, labs, and insurance companies to all speak to each other, a common diagnostic code is needed

[fickle nest]

Right. I had to do a lot of creative coding and insurance appeals a while ago so I used to have this all down pretty well

Thankfully haven't had to do that again

[worn forum]

I think the areas where this is unhelpful though still ends up rotating back to where it's used. I've agreed with a lot of your points at broad but we tend to skew when it comes to specifics like that.

[weary bloom]

Fair enough, thx for the ping

[harsh goblet]

ICD-10 is used globally. Most systems also facilitate ICD-9.

[worn forum]

For example like I mentioned I have an objectively false diagnoses, it is an actual annoying battle to combat it even though it's predicated off literally nothing and even includes provably false reasoning. If it were to for example, be disclosed to an employer, it could look like I have an addiction which is flat out not true nor based off anything besides the psychiatrist being anti-weed

The existence of that as a diagnoses in general, I do think is legitimate (though DSM gets really fucky with splitting different things so some issues w it still)

[weary bloom]

Which one is preferred then? Seems like DSM and ICD are both equally valid, although that just may be my layman perspective

[worn forum]

The "controlling your own story" gets weird when talking about psychiatry. That is how you get people who falsely claim certain things and get "assistance" for it that can steal assistance from others, heavily alter research, and not actually do anything for that individual themselves - which in turn, due to a not working process to help manage it or etc, can amplify certain other issues (folks can become hopeless, depressed or etc from consistent non-returns)

I think your point there is more on recognizing agency to combat say, false diagnoses, I think that's more the process surrounding the appeals for it though, not really the diagnoses itself

[harsh goblet]

ICD and DSM aren't really a 1:1 match. DSM attempts to group symptoms into a category to assist in diagnosing a person in a clinical context.
ICD classifies everything that can be diagnosed or observed via laboratory values, etc - you will have an ICD code for being infected with a virus or having a certain lab result or subtype of cancer.

@weary bloom ^ for you

[worn forum]

sucks ICD cant be lead with in the US though

[weary bloom]

Sweet, thank you!

[harsh goblet]

I'm not following?

[worn forum]

there's definitely areas where the dsm is unhelpful in that context

[worn forum]

for example here in the US, you cannot be formally diagnosed with CPTSD since it is not in the DSM.

[harsh goblet]

What?

[worn forum]

people commonly get misdiagnosed with BPD due to its presentation even though its more similar to PTSD

[worn forum]

There are certain things the ICD recognizes that you cannot be diagnosed with, in the US, because it's not in the DSM, or our weird national version of the ICD (forget its fancy term) doesnt consider it either

the national icd we use is still the last version iirc dont think we've switched to the new one

[weary bloom]

Hey, you’re not wrong in a metaphorical sense! Really love talking to Sarah

[harsh goblet]

I'm not quite sure what the "national icd" is or who is using it.

[worn forum]

the US does not use the international ICD

because we're special we use our own special one

[harsh goblet]

When you say "the US" what are you talking about? Our EMRs use ICD-10 and 9.

[worn forum]

sec let me find the formal name for it

ICD-10-CM

It's not the normal ICD-10

It's specifically made by the NCHS - and afaik only used in the US

Plus there's other weird stuff between it that can impact psych diagnoses, maybe not in a super impactful way but can definitely have some impact

schizophrenia for example I think is one of the weird ones that the ICD has multiple codes for but the DSM just ropes into one

[harsh goblet]

I thought you were talking about a completely separate system. That expands the codes, yes. To facilitate medical record availability when a patient travels between jurisdictions, EMRs will be able to use the ICD system to talk to each other

Just about everyone tweaks it a little for national need

[worn forum]

yeah what I'm talking about morein is we wait forever to update ours

the example I was talking about for cptsd for example actually has grand ramifications

since its only in the icd 11, you literally cannot be diagnosed for it here in the US

it presents for most people more similarly to BPD than it does for PTSD, but the entire backgroud to it and the processes and etc align far more with PTSD, just presentation differs

So you have a lot of people with an entirely wrong diagnoses there

[harsh goblet]

I mean. I'm not sure about that in practice. You may not be able to enter a dedicated cptsd code but providers are aware of it, treat for it, and can keep accurate notes about it

[weary bloom]

How are the what…?

[worn forum]

Indeed but it can also make that more difficult

[harsh goblet]

Yes but so do any number of emerging diseases, Covid 19 etc

[worn forum]

Yeah fully agree there but just sticking to the context of psych diagnoses

There's programs you can get into, for example, but some of the good catered ones require a diagnoses

If you originally get falsely diagnosed with BPD, you have to go through the whole process to fight that and etc, it could take months and a lot of your money to get rediagnosed properly

[harsh goblet]

Anyway I'm going to dip because I'm not quite sure what's happening and I don't like to speak too out of turn beyond my knowledge.

[weary bloom]

Ok, lemme google that real quick

[worn forum]

The false one I have isn't really that impactful but just as an example it's taken more than 4 months, I have solid insurance so getting second opinion and etc was covered but to get a lawyer for it I had to pay out of pocket, can only get the money back if anything comes from it

[weary bloom]

Ohhh ok. Yea, I’ll back out from this topic since I don’t know too much about Cole

Gotta use the broom the garage for a bit, brb

[worn forum]

Not to mention alongside having to go and get the second opinions and all, meetings with the lawyer, the first few weeks it was taking up significant amounts of time I had to call off work for

Can be approached still yeah but to treat it like that isn't disruptive isnt always correct

[weary bloom]

K I’m back

lol

[fickle nest]

Yeah. I've had stuff coded that isn't necessarily the proper diagnosis but allows access to treatment and insurance coveragw

Any provider worth seeing will know how to interpret your notes and not simply rely on the coding

[worn forum]

Yeah the point I was making there wasn't really about ability to get par treatment, more about difficulties it can cause

You can still go get the treatment in some cases, might be limited from some stuff, but the bigger issue is say. If you get falsely diagnosed with something, and now you're fighting that diagnoses, that takes up your time and money. For a lot of people that can be in short supply and a major headache.

It could also mean you have to take time off work, which means less money to spend fighting that, when you'll likely have to spend more also for treatment unless you have kickass insurance that actually covers it all (most people dont have that).

This issue is especially more true if we look at already vulnerable communities where individuals are already probably working multiple jobs and short on time and cash - and also have less capability to access these services in general.

[fickle nest]

Yeah self advocacy in the medical system is full time job levels of time and energy commitment

[gentle field]

The science that studies human behaviour is psychology, but social psychology and sociology would be fine

[gentle field]

There's a description of what's this channel for at the very top: #1146386070263570462 message

[weary bloom]

Would say that making sure is a sign of intelligence, so there’s no need to be too worried

[weary bloom]

Alright

🙂

[strong cradle]

I feel like the rule of “disrupts everyday life” boils down to one thing

It’s like doctors prescribing sex toys to women in “hysteria” in the early 1900s tbh

But the mental healthcare system seems so backed up that if you got diagnosed with grief, you’re probably there for something bigger

[dire pawn]

have some friends whose anxiety (looks like mostly lingering effects of forms of CPTSD combined with other things) is so bad that they definitely qualify under this

Based on my experience with them I'd say that qualifying it as a mental disorder or not is purely just semantics in that case

(you can argue that it's a symptom of another disorder, but from a non professional perspective that just feels like a game of potato potahto. Both ways of phrasing it have the same problems that need the same treatment in the end (mix of therapy and when useful medication))

The article itself i agree with though

[worn forum]

I'd largely agree with that example and think that's a good one too

Much more anecdotal but that was something I got a lot of exposure too working at dispos lol

We'd have a lot of people come in who would use for more severe anxiety in larger social situations but not actually have say, a defined anxiety order.

That is actually why I split theraputic and defined medical use (not the best terms to use to draw the distinction tho) wherein defined medical use is backed by a prescription aligned to a specific condition, and theraputic use (or if anyone has a better recommended term 😛) is more personalized decisions aligned with health impact but not backed by a prescription.

There is a huge chunk of traditionally "recreational" users that fall into that theraputic category because they aren't just smoking to get high, they are looking to extract specific benefits like that still just lack the prescription and defined condition. Same with a lot of folks say using it for say pain management w/ headaches or migranes.

[empty frost]

As a sidenote, might not be as true as is commonly thought e.g. https://journalofpositivesexuality.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Failure-of-Academic-Quality-Control-Technology-of-Orgasm-Lieberman-Schatzberg.pdf

[strong cradle]

Interesting to hear, a no paywall source text is also much appreciated

[empty frost]

Wait, you get a paywall there? Because I don't..

[weary bloom]

Checked the link and no paywall?

Maybe its geolocked?

[strong cradle]

Should have added a hyphen into no-paywall

I could see it fine

[bleak star]

Anyone have any good info on how groups made up of primarily neurodivergent people interact and those group dynamics? I feel like most research is centered around the difficulties neurodivergent people have in settings dominated by neurotypical people. Or, with group dynamics research, it feels like there's an underlying assumption that those groups are made of 100% neurotypical people. I'm interested in this because I'm involved in organizing groups with quite a mix of neurotypes

[sleek wave]

Working with other ND folks is my preference bc they are often more accomodating and understanding of my difficulties.

I'm also involved in organising groups with a large mix of neurotypes so what I have is lived experience/anecdotal evidence. There are difficulties when people have clashing access needs so clear communication is key to managing that effectively. And it helps having folk who are able to read body language or understand each others needs well so we are able to advocate for each other (cuz sadly society has often taught us to repress our ability to advocate for ourselves).

[bleak star]

That's interesting, especially the part about repressing the ability to self-advocate, that feels very relevant. Do you have specific strategies you use and are they successful?

[sleek wave]

Like, me personally or helping others meet their access needs?

[bleak star]

The group as a whole, what strategies do you use that help people? You've already said folk who can read body language or understand each other's needs help to advocate for that person, how did that come about and do you do anything else?

[sleek wave]

having highly empathic individuals is super useful so it's important to ensure they are protected from burn-out. Usually they tend to very helpful and have a tendency to take on more than they can manage, so it's helpful to keep an eye and ensure they aren't shouldering more responsibility than they can cope with. While this is important for compassion reasons, it's also pragmatic as highly empathic organisers are useful for mediating situations and ensuring others are having their needs met.

Teaching about burnout is very helpful for those folk too.

Understanding each other's needs came about by working together for a long time but it helps to go into things without assumptions about everyone's capabilities. So ensuring that you're checking with everyone what their access needs are rather than waiting for people to speak up for themselves.

Flexibility when it comes to meetings, understanding when people have to cancel and having a plan B if someone is having a bad day.

Making sure people are using the right pronouns and that people feel safe speaking up if they feel uncomfortable. Establishing a culture of openness to new ideas. Clear safer spaces policies (depending on the kind of organising you're doing)

Establishing a culture of checking in to see if people feel welcome or if something is confusing

[bleak star]

Thank you so much! All super helpful

[winged lagoon]

https://bsky.app/profile/mmasnick.bsky.social/post/3l62egugulc2p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ewxe4pWOH-I

[strong cradle]

I hate to have a “that’s so me” moment but I digress. Does anyone else want to quantify a social group

[worn forum]

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4966780

"Dark News: Recognition, Harm Perception, and Trust
This study explores the implications of deceptive design on news trust by examining how the news audience has characterized the harms they have experienced from deceptive designs– dark patterns– they have encountered on or in connection with news sites. Using topic modeling and sentiment analysis of both reddit posts and submissions to a tip line, this study advances theory at the intersection of news trust and design by investigating design patterns examining the relational aspects of design and news trust, and centering harm to news audiences. Results demonstrate that audiences are aware of manipulative or deceptive practices and may connect those practices with the news organization. This article also offers organizational and public policy recommendations."

[weary bloom]

tongue twisters are wild, like "Ĉu ŝi ĉiam ĉe ĉio ruĝiĝas?"

[worn forum]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02015-2

[worn forum]

https://www.cecan.ac.uk/news/the-visual-representation-of-complexity/

Not a big article or anything but cool little visualization on complex adaptive systems

[weary bloom]

Huh, thats neat 🙂

[worn forum]

https://www.psycnet.org/fulltext/2025-38154-001.html

more psych side but fun study profiling predominate personalities across some 260+ occupations

"Using a comprehensive personality assessment, we mapped 263 occupations in self-reported Big Five domains and various personality nuances in a sample of 68,540 individuals and cross-validated the findings in informant ratings of 19,989 individuals. Controlling for age and gender, occupations accounted for 2%–7% of Big Five variance in both self-reports and informant reports."

[gentle field]

I remain very sceptical of these kind of studies that associate personality traits with X, starting that they're merely correlational studies

[worn forum]

I do agree but this study had a very interestingly sized cohort IMO

Overwhelmingly the ones I see posted like this have cohorts that're sub-10k (granted informant ratings at 19,989 isnt a super great cohort increase vs the 68k+ self report cohort)

Also they don't attempt to specifically connect it to behavior, or any causation or etc - just that the occupations see correlation between the occupations and traits

Using the big five is also a bit of an interesting approach to that over MBTI or some trait-specific typology

[weary bloom]

Isn’t MBTI hella unreliable, and is used as a “heh that’s cool” quiz?

[gentle field]

Personality testing as a whole is very unreliable, but at least the Big Five model has some scientific background, MBTI is indeed built on pseudoscience

So "heh that's cool" quiz is a accurate way to put it

[weary bloom]

Nice 🙂

[worn forum]

Yeah pretty much what erredece said, and even if you step into the studies with clamied higher-reliability the informantive side (if any) tends, to, well not really be controlled, they're people who know the MBTI stuff and are thinking of it from that frame (at least in the studies I've seen thats a reasonable conclusion to make)

I'm not sure about all the ways in which you could test it but afaik across pretty much them all Big Five you can control way better and not bias reporting like that (on either side too)

[weary bloom]

Still something to do when you get spare time lol

[worn forum]

Yeah I think MBTI has some loose basis but, not in really how it's applied usually

Like erredece mentioned its p much built on pseudoscience so, you can approach it other ways with more scientific rigor

[weary bloom]

“Loose basis” you mean “next to zero”?

[worn forum]

Kinda

IMO the way it "should" be used if it is being used, is more as self reflection, not so much direction

a lot of people see it as a box to fit into or etc to be more "efficient"

its better to help understand, so, if say, you are in a situation having difficulty, you can use that as a tool to help assess it - trying to "fit" in places where its simply claimed to be "efficient" or whatever won't work out because there's so many other factors that impact that

eg you see the "INTJ"-business owner thing referenced a lot. Can that be true in correlation? Sure. Does that mean an "INTJ" will make a good business owner? Not at all, nor does anything about it help you be a more efficient business owner. If you get stuck with a certain part of your management style though, say, with how you interact with employees, you can use it as a tool to self-reflect where it may root from and how to adjust it (which, again, other ways to do that with more scientific rigor still)

[weary bloom]

All it proves is that the business owner doesn’t really know psychology

[worn forum]

eh theres plenty of good leaders that dont know psychology, even in the supposed "INTJ" category

[weary bloom]

Doesn’t shock at all

[worn forum]

being charismatic in employee interactions for example is something that, at least here in the US, is something that tends to be a positive trait (other factors can alter that a bit though). If you go into the whole MBTI thing both "Introverted" and "Extoverted" can express any varying level of charisma, but someone in the "Extroverted" category is more likely to just have natural charisma that expresses in their behavior. Someone in the "Introverted" category may be more likely to have it express in a calculated and/or limited manner (not necessarily in a devious type way).

thats also an example of the issue with mbti, not only can you figure all that out without it - it adds an extra layer, and beyond that, the metrics with it are also just really weird to follow. Like for example going off the above, someone who does know psychology, and lets say has something else going on like narcicissm or machiavellianism, they may express that calculated charismatic behavior at a par level with someone who has that natural charisma.
99% of the time no ones thinking that deep so the debate is never had about whether they may rest in one or the other category, cause the metric framing that MBTI would consider isn't really that solid. If you did consider that properly though that, is fairly debatable, cause the system isn't really that sound.

[empty frost]

mb are a pet peeve of mine. I really dislike it

[gentle field]

Laughs in Barnum-Forer effect

[bitter cobalt]

"There's a fortune-teller born every minute." 😉

[worn forum]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01174-9

@gentle field Curious on your input on this one

"These misinformation categories are compared with factual news measuring the cognitive effort needed to process the content (grammar and lexical complexity) and its emotional evocation (sentiment analysis and appeal to morality). The results show that misinformation, on average, is easier to process in terms of cognitive effort (3% easier to read and 15% less lexically diverse) and more emotional (10 times more relying on negative sentiment and 37% more appealing to morality). This paper is a call for more fine-grained research since these results indicate that we should not treat all misinformation equally since there are significant differences among misinformation categories that are not considered in previous studies."

Also some other obv things that'd have to be covered, like it just focuses on news and not organic SM comments or forum posts etc. Do think it's an interesting starting point though for a more objective measurement understandnig for those matters.

[gentle field]

Makes sense tbh

[winged lagoon]

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/lead-gasoline-tied-millions-excess-mental-health-disorders-study-rcna182881

[fickle nest]

Wow

[worn forum]

Time to get those class actions in fellas

If we go first we can get the biggest payout

[gentle field]

So this study reflected an effect on lead into p-factor, which is a generalised psychopathology construct that works very much like IQ, which is something I'm really sceptical of, especially considering it takes the definition of psychopathology from the DSM-5 (the 2013 edition), which is quite outdated

I really think this is an instance of correlation does not imply causation, even if lead on its own causes some neurological damage. Attributing mental health issues to lead in gas is a huge overgeneralisation, especially with that methodology

That said, I need to find a time and chance to read the full paper

I'm only reacting to what is freely available right now

[worn forum]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661324003139?dgcid=rss_sd_all

"Physically activated modes of attentional control"

"Human sensory, cognitive, and physiological systems are constantly challenged by changes in the environment, goals, and expectations, and natural regulatory mechanisms that are a part of the body’s effort to anticipate and respond to physiological demands caused by a variety of factors, including physical activity.
Evidence from awake and behaving nonhuman species has clearly shown how physiological states can impact systems associated with arousal and attention, but there is no similar understanding of the interplay between states and attentional processes in humans.
We bridge this gap using convergent evidence from studies of humans engaged in physical activity and simultaneous noninvasive neural recordings, and we propose that there are two physically activated modes of attentional control: altered gain control and differential neuromodulation of cortical control networks."

[fickle nest]

@gentle field curious what your take on this is: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/evolutionary-psychology-brain-changes/

[gentle field]

If evolutionary psychology matures as a discipline and becomes more grounded in reality, then cool I guess?

The issue with evolutionary psychology in general is that it's based on simplistic views on evolution to justify unscientific beliefs

If it can move away from that, then that is good news

[empty frost]

I now refer to evo psy as an expensive pseudo science. I wish we had an evo psy cynicism emoji.

[gentle field]

I think does the job

[empty frost]

Lemme remember that one

[fickle nest]

The conjecture that human brain evolution is a quicker process than we assumed is the part that had me wondering

[gentle field]

If you read the work they're promoting that conjeture from - it's an interview to the author of a book - it is said that their studies were never presented for peer reviewing and publishing in a journal

Which is

[fickle nest]

I tried clicking the link but the page just shows nothing but white

[empty frost]

It's from back in 2011: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001109

[fickle nest]

Good lord I can't believe I didn't notice the article was that old

[empty frost]

I have this all the time

[fickle nest]

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.01.16.633439v1

Really fascinating

[unkempt shard]

@gentle field https://bsky.app/profile/reuters.com/post/3llo35sh2rk2p

Reuters (@reuters.com)

A tie-up between a Chinese research institute and tech company said that it aims to implant its brain chip into 13 people by the end of this year, in a move that could see it overtake Elon Musk's Neuralink in collecting patient data reut.rs/41TbkUQ

Bluesky · Mar 31, 2025, 9:45 AM

[gentle field]

Neuralink isn't a pioneer however, there are other companies going more advanced than this

But yep, China is increasingly working more in neurotech, including invasive approaches, and I don't like it

Thanks for sharing

[zealous rain]

Lead in aviation fuel is still a thing for now. Hopefully Trump doesn’t derail this effort: https://www.faa.gov/unleaded

[worn forum]

Hm decent article, haven't read her book yet though

One thing I do find interesting today is most people botch references between ideals, ideology, ideological group, and philosophies

People will take specific ideals in isolation, then use that to cast (insert named ideological group) as your ideology, then confusingly treat ideology and ideological groups the same when they are actually referencing ideological groups and philosophies (while ignoring individuals ideologies - hence the amount of confusion we tie ourselves in when someone doesn't finely align with how we group them based off said sequence).

[fickle nest]

Interesting video. Kinda disappointing that she ultimately describes "ideological rigidity" in terms of horseshoe theory

[worn forum]

Yeah I gave the video a browse and was less enthused than with the article

IMO her bit casting ideology itself as bad was a bit, odd too. For example, she is speaking ideologically there, from her exact angle. If someone could use money to motivate her instead of ideological lines though, they could make her throw bits of her study to align with negative ideological interests. Vice versa ideologies can act to defend against certain negative things like that more efficiently than resting on other factors like ego-centric categorizations.

I don't think she runs into the issue 1-1 either but you can see how she runs into the issue I mentioned above, she keeps referencing ideology as kind of finely existing things that are organized and there, rather than, everyone intrinsically has an ideology because we all have ideals and the term ideology references our ideals. She instead seemed to be getting there at say, named philosophies, and people taking them up as part of an ideological group and how it influences their individual ideology.

[fickle nest]

What she's saying makes more sense if you replace ideology with world-view

Subtle but important distinction between the two imo

[worn forum]

Yeah I'd agree far more on that angle

[worn forum]

https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/zx7tc_v3
Revisiting the IPIP-NEO Personality Hierarchy with Taxonomic Graph Analysis
@gentle field

This is pretty nifty, probably the most intensive psychometric assessment taxonomy I've seen. Has 37 different points (facets and traits) split into 3 dimensions/categories.

first level ones are the facets, second is traits, they call the third meta-traits

[winged lagoon]

https://bsky.app/profile/jeffgreene.bsky.social/post/3lnxkcvdobc24
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-82644-3_5

Jeff Greene (@jeffgreene.bsky.social)

"we would recommend that CT & self-regulation be taught across the curriculum. Nevertheless, it remains that future research should investigate these approaches with regard to their efficacy in facilitating development of self-regulation..." doi.org/10.1007/978-... #PsychSciSky #AcademicSky #EduSky

Bluesky · Apr 29, 2025, 3:01 PM

[worn forum]

https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/your-brain-on-chatgpt/overview/

[desert reef]

https://www.neuroba.com/post/understanding-the-role-of-microtubules-in-quantum-consciousness-neuroba

[swift tundra]

Interesting to see this going from a fringe theory with limited plausibility (and the decoherence problem etc), to now something that invites active investigation! Excited to see where we end up in a few years time.

[wintry badge]

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZDJ2sJwRHVPamkOKvadG8hKK6jGhZw5S
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16z6zJQt6EUFLW6VD0CM8brHPHWGo5-Oe?usp=sharing