Slashdot Mirror
MIT Engineers World's First Schizophrenic Mice
Frosty Piss writes "MIT researchers have created a schizophrenic mouse that pinpoints a gene variation predisposing people to schizophrenia. Research with the mouse may lead to the first genetically targeted drugs for the disease, which affects 1 percent of the population worldwide. This is the first study that uses animals who demonstrate an array of symptoms observed in schizophrenic patients to identify specific genes that predispose people to the disease."
Pinky (or was it the Brain?) was the first schizophrenic mouse.
The problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher
im too lazy to go digging around the article, but diagnosing schizophrenia in a human being ... ok.
actually they dont even know how to diagnose it exactly.
"People diagnosed with schizophrenia usually experience a combination of positive (i.e. hallucinations, delusions, racing thoughts), negative (i.e. apathy, lack of emotion, poor or nonexistant social functioning), and cognitive (disorganized thoughts, difficulty concentrating and/or following instructions, difficulty completing tasks, memory problems). "
http://www.schizophrenia.com/diag.php#diagnosis
now, how do you find out if a mouse has those problems?
besides, only a psychiatrist can diagnose schizophrenia, which we learned yesterday from slashdot posters, is just another 'left wing conspiracy' major, an evil liberal arts degree, when what this country really needs is more engineers blah blah blah etc etc etc.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6923577.stm
Before some jerkweed lawyer gets it.
My grandfather is a left-handed schizophrenic mouse, you insensitive clod!
I read it as "Some group of MIT Engineers are the world's first schizophrenic mice"
The actual article is interesting, but not NEARLY as interesting as it could have been.
(it is early still)
Great. Now I know why MIT engineers smell bad.
(Either that, or the mice think they're engineers.)
I thought genetic engineering's creedo was never to cause suffering? I know this is all nobel prize winning stuff and all but how did they get this past an ethics comitee (or did bio engineers find the things too pesky an troublesome)? Is this considered to be humane? Biologically engineering an animal to become psychotic in my book is not simply cruel, its inhuman. But hey, who am I to judge, the end justifies the means...... right?
Agreed.
For one thing, it may be just upset that someone messed with its DNA
I'm all for animal testing and all. I'm no animal rights advocate by a long shot; but intentionally giving mice schizophrenia seems a bit wrong to me. Schizophrenia runs in my family and I want to see a cure as much as anyone else. Therein lies the conflict. I suppose the mouse gets it if the experiment can do some good.
The game.
does the mouse have a secret stash of lots of old newspapers with scribbled details showing how secret messages are encoded in them? does the mouse have an invisible friend? does the mouse show a novel grasp of game theory and in fact has a nobel prize for the study of game theory? is the mouse married to jennifer connolly?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Squeak, squeak squeak!
[translation: "I'm crazy, and so am I!"]
Schizophrenia is hell, and I don't think I'm stretching that much. This is a geek audience, right? Well, let's just consider a world where you can do a scientific experiment and find a result that only you can confirm. Over and over again.
The standard narrative of schizophrenia that we've all internalized is that it's somehow a weakness of an individual. That can't be true, especially if it can be induced.
Please pay attention to article
:-).
"MIT Engineers" "World's First Schizophrenic Mice"
haah... rabid MIT engineers
Someone need to fix that headline more appropriately.
-- "Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration" - TAE --
...something something...
Go crazy?
Don't mind if I DOOOOOOOOOO!
I'm just wondering if they are pan-dimensional and capable of constructing the second greatest computer in all of time and space.
But if results from these mice lead to a treatment for even one type of schizotypia in humans, that's still a leap forward for psychiatry nonetheless.
I guess no body noticed that this article is from 2003.
The way this story is being oversold as 'schizophrenic mice, now we can do targetted drugs' is ridiculous though the discovery may be a little step forward. ... or meat, I prefer not to cause needless suffering) - please, grow up people and get over these ridiculous sensibilities. Anything that gets us closer to fixing schizophrenia is worth a pile of mice bodies a mile high. As a doctor who has done both psychiatry and some animal research, I can't help wondering if the people asking the question have any idea of the suffering involved on each side of the equation.
To start with, the notion that the mice are 'schizophrenic' on the basis that they have a genetic abnormality which can be loosely seen in some people with schizophrenia. It would be more interesting if all people with the mutation had schizophrenia - but they don't. The fact is that schizophrenia is not a genetically neat Mendelian type trait, or even any of the other interesting single gene modes of transmission discovered since, but rather a polygenic thing with a lot of other factors influencing as well (look at identical twin studies).
The notion of observing some behaviour in mice, and it being - well, essentially a bit brain damaged - and saying "this looks just like schizophrenia" is reminiscent of the emperors new clothes.
Nonetheless, this may be a little step towards understanding the disease. Their family studies are more interesting than the mice ones, actually, based on the little bit that I read.
And by the way, the whole ethics thing - "should we be doing this to the poor little mice?". Well, as a strict vegetarian myself (no gelatine, cochineal,
Where are we going to find a hippo, 5 gallons of grease, and a tutu, at this time of night?
Best Slashdot Co
To be a white mouse is to be nestled in an alien environment of metal and bars, forced under threat of punishment to perform acts that have no relation to natural instincts, fed an array of processed and unnatural (to a mouse) foods, all while being watched by alien creatures that frequently whisk away your mouse friends and colleagues who, if they are returned, are often physically and psychologically damaged. Frankly, that any white mouse is considered "sane" by the researchers is a very telling commentary about the mental state of those running the laboratory.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
space aliens and cover their heads with tin foil hats.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
the buttons, instant schizophrenic mouse. What so hard
I'd love to see a follow up article that discussed the practical extensions of this science that was done 4 years ago.
Hopefully it hasn't just been sitting on a shelf for all this time to only just now become "breaking" news.
Anything you say will be held against you.
It thought it was a cow.
Hmm... you know, that doesn't actually sound similar at all to me. What they said there, basically, is that they made the mice stupid. Maybe there's some other stuff at work, but not being able to learn any more looks the closest to genuine stupidity.
That's not at all similar to schizophrenia in humans. A lot of schizophrenic humans are actually highly intelligent, and perfectly able to both lean and do (more than) simple associations. Their brain does work wrong, to different degrees and with a very broad spectrum of possible symptoms (there are at least 5 fundamentally different _categories_ of schizophrenia), but not in the same way as being retarded.
The most easy to understand kind of schizophrenia, the paranoid schizophrenia kind, isn't being unable-to-learn or unable-to-associate stupid, but, according to at least one explanation, having a very fuzzy line between fantasy and reality. (In various ways and to various degrees.) They're people who otherwise are perfectly capable of logical thought and learning, but some of their input data is their own delusions, or is slightly distorted by those delusions. It can range from just slight sensory delusions, to outright seeing and hearing things that actually originated in their own minds, mixed with the real input. While you might, for example, imagine a ghost in your head or think what you'd like to tell the boss, for a really bad case of paranoid schizophrenia it might get registered as stuff that actually happened, or which _is_ currently happening, mixed with the stuff actually happening around. They might actually see that ghost in the (otherwise real) room or get the impression that that boss is communicating with him telepathically.
Of course, that's really really bad cases that end up in the loonie bin or shooting up an university dorm. Most people included in that 1% figure are a lot more slightly affected, and can function normally.
In a sense, paranoid schizophrenia is a case of "garbage in, garbage out". The mental capacity for logic and learning is there, but some of the input is corrupted. The illogical behaviour you see on the outside isn't usually stupidity, it's just the result of applying good logic on bad input data.
So basically, I'm sure they probably base their theory more on the protein similarities than on those symptoms. Because those symptoms don't sound like schizophrenia at all.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
The article is a fluff piece with no real info, the findings from that study didn't yield anything as its redundant. And there is evidence in an article I read last year in GQ (of all places) that mice are the main targets of the infection that it thought to cause Schizophrenia.
also here http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=12372
Also the Wikipedia entry point out that a realistic study say that the real infection rate is 0.55% of the population. [I guess we are not as crazy a planet as first mentioned]
on the whole I would give this article a 0 for points and both a REDUNDANT and OVERRATED tag
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
That's crazy! Those MIT scientists must be insane! Totally off their rockers, they are!
I wonder what a mouse's delusions of grandeur are. All I could imagine is a mouse running around constantly, either in an invisible ball or after invisible cheese. And you have to watch out for those secret government mice that are wearing cloaking devices that only they can see through and who don't age.
Translation: I have a cure for both of you, and I promise it won't hurt... much!
You can have it fast, accurate, or pretty. Pick any 2.
Our overcrowded prison system contains a large number of mentally ill persons who should be in mental hospitals which no longer exist. A lose lose situation - worse outcome for the mentally ill and higher economic cost to society. Even for those few with health insurance there is lack of parity between physical and mental health benefits.
In the same way that thye would know a human is.
Come on!!! Do you actually believe that they want to treat schizophrenia????? I just realized their plan..... a) create an army of schizophrenic mouses b) put them in big boxes c) keep them hungry for some days d) through the boxes from airplanes with parachutes over Iraq or any future target e) Sit back and watch the madness on earth!!!!! Presto!!! Genius plan....
Does schizophrenia affects 1 or 2 percent of the population worldwide?
Well, being schizophrenic isn't the same as being a sociopath, or even the more fuzzy "being a dick".
A paranoid schizophrenic for example has (at least according to one theory), a pretty fuzzy line between fantasy and reality. At any rate, stuf originating purely in their imagination or beliefs gets mixed with the reality. They might hear voices, see stuff that isn't there, or feel or smell stuff that noone else can perceive. Where you might just imagine telling someone where to shove it, a schizophrenic might actually perceive it as having happened or as in progress. They might become convinced it's telepathy, or some kind of astral projection, or whatever. That is, either that others are able to project their thoughts into their head, or that they themselves have some telepathic or clairvoyance powers. Others might see stuff that's not actually there (e.g., ghosts) or distort their perception of real stuff (e.g., seeing a piece of string on their skin as some mysterious new parasite.)
Well, that's just one of the kinds of schizophrenia, and what I've described there is more like the extreme cases that get sent to a mental institutions. Most people are a lot more mild than that, and either never get diagnosed or are considered harmless enough to just give them some medicine and let them go back home. Plus a lot are intelligent and socially aware enough to know that everyone else will think they're crazy if they go around saying that they see ghosts, and that carries a major social stigma in our society. So they do their best to hide it, and might never get diagnosed at all.
That doesn't, however, mean that they're necessarily "a dick". The cases where the voices told them to do something nasty are actually quite rare, and most might not even hear voices at all, but have some other form of sensory delusions or distortions. A schizophrenic might just as well be a very nice guy or gal, who just happens to see or hear something slightly different than you do. Just because someone sees ghosts, for example, doesn't mean they will go and tell everyone where to shove it and how deep. That ghost might as well tell them to be nice, or do some great work of charity, or reinforce whatever other belief that spawned that bit of imagination in the first place.
The cases where the voices told them that everyone is their enemy and must be elliminated, are actually quite rare. The 1% of the total population being or having at some point been schizophrenic is a _lot_. Plus, as I was saying, there are a lot which never get diagnosed at all. If they all went and did nasty stuff, you'd notice.
So, basically, chances are you've met or interacted daily with one or more people with schizophrenia without even knowing it. And chances are they weren't the obnoxious "dicks" either.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
a new man-trap that only catches nut-jobs, with cheesecake as a bait!
1) Nnut Job runs down street
2) Sees Cheese!
3) Goes "EEEoww eeeOOWWW!"
4) SNAP! Profit!!
The problem is a little more complicated (and less political) than that. Even in Canada where we have free health care, the problem is much the same. Since the late 70's, to be institutionalized (i.e. treated against their will) a mental patient must be an immediate danger to themselves or others. Most don't fall into that category, and if you ask a crazy person if they want treatment, most will tell you "I'm not crazy!" Even those who agree to treatment take their drugs long enough to start feeling better, then stop taking them because they think they are cured, then get worse and refuse to take them again (and you can't force them to unless they are an immediate danger to themselves or others).
Is this situation better than the previous system of forced treatments including shock therapy, lobotomies and sterilization? Certainly. Did we create a new problem by giving freedom of choice to people without the mental faculties to use it wisely? Definitely. Can the situation be solved by throwing more money at it? I doubt it.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Heh. Here's some free clue for you: you don't need any pre-requisites to start using your head. There's a reason why you have one on your shoulders, and it's not there just so it wouldn't rain straight down your throat.
No, seriously. Einstein was just a lowly patent office clerk, when he dared think he can do better than the great Hendrik Lorentz. No, seriously, Lorentz too was a Ph.D. and a Nobel Prize laureate, and a mighty smart guy all around.
So I guess people like you would have made fun of Einstein too, for daring even try to think on his own there, right?
Now I'm not saying that I or you are of the calibre of Einstein, but nevertheless, get this: you don't need to pass any special exam to start using your brains. You have it anyway, you can start using it any time you want to. You don't need anyone's royal stamp of approval.
Plus, you know, the site's motto says "news for _nerds_". You know, the guys who like to use their _brains_, even when it's as pointless as this or as memorizing Star Trek trivia. That's the whole point of being a "nerd".
So, no offense, but if you're rather in the cathegory that would just unthinkingly believe what some great figure of authority says, and never dare imagine yourself worthy enough to question it... why are you even here? I'm sure there's some religious community outhere where you'd feel more fulfilled, without having to deal with us pesky nerds who insist on thinking and questioning.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
...who moved my cheese?
Have gnu, will travel.
I updated my synaptics driver and it works like a charm afterwards.
Web Developers: Celebrate to our roots! Animated Gifs and Tiled Backgrounds, dont let our history die!
lol - my captcha is "zealous"
Schizophrenics have many impairments beyond hearing voices - social withdrawal, low performance on most cognitive tests, bizarre reasoning. Drugs that work well to stop hallucinations ("positive symptoms") do not do anything about these "negative symptoms". Many schizophrenics do not have "positive symptoms" and those in fact have worse long-term prognosis.
Most of us will not start throwing our feces at people by applying good logic to whatever real or imaginary input data.
As I was saying, I described only one kind of schizophrenia, and there are 5 major categories. In fact, the original term by, you know, the guy who coined the term, was the "schizophrenias". The 5 categories being:
- paranoid type (the one I described already)
- disorganized type (where thought disorders do occur)
- catatonic type
- undifferentiated type
- residual type
Some include two further subtypes:
- post-schizophrenic depression (somewhat deceptively named, since schizophrenic symptoms are still more or less present)
- simple schizophrenia (progressive development of the negative symptoms you describe. But even then, the keyword is progressive: it doesn't flat out start by flinging feces, as you put it, but includes a very long and slow progression through states that most people would at most think eccentric or slightly bizarre, and when the person is still fairly logical and intelligent.)
So basically, you're trying to tell me that there's more than one type, right? Well, given that I've said that repeatedly by now too, I'd say we're not disagreeing much, right?
I'd also like to say that schizophrenia is one of the most controversial and mis-diagnosed illnesses even in humans, who can, you know, talk and tell you their logic. If you take two psychiatrists, they're almost as likely to disagree about a diagnostic as they are to agree.
I'd just love to know how would they diagnose that in mice. Basically, again, how do they know if the mouse is simply retarded or having a delusional or illogical train of thought? Not everyone who can't learn is schizophrenic, you know, and all they showed there in the mice's behaviour is that they're dumb as a brick. It's not a mouse who uses some bizarre logic and ends up digging in some interestingly different place than the clues point him to, it's a mouse who flat out can't take the hints at all. That's all I'm saying.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I for one welcome our new schizophrenic mice overlords, may they realize that we exist.
After all, according to this, mice are the three-dimensional manifestation of hyper-intelligent pan-dimensional beings.
We're doomed! DOOMED!
Have gnu, will travel.
As devil's advocate, I need to raise the question: are we sure a "cure" for schizophrenia would be a good thing? As a scienctist it is imporant to consider the potential consequences of our discoveries. The same 'gene' that predisposes people to schizophrenia might also be related to volition and genius and creativity and what fundamentaly makes people human. If curing people of schizophrenia eventually means something akin to giving at-risk fetuses a localized shot of some protein or amino acid or whatever at a strategic time in development, we might risk losing some potential brilliant minds as well. Moreover, a cure for schizophrenia could also mean a technology that allows governments to turn populations into zombies and robots. That might make the world easier to govern, but, at what cost?
My first thought was "Ah, that explains RMS!"
sounds kinda like this http://nootropics.com/genes/index.html to me.
How do you classify a rat as being schizophrenia when, even today, the /existence/ of schizophrenia has been questioned by noted psychologists Carl Jung and, more recently, the anti-psychiatry group, not to mention, the all pervasive, Phillip K Dick. Whether you read into psychotic symptoms as an emergent property of a modified perception of time (Dick's explanation), an internalization of alternative social maps that leads to a breakdown of defense mechanisms in a violent catharsis (Jung), or simply "individuality" (anti-psychiatry), we haven't yet falsified schizophrenia:
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=125704 7
Now, taking all that into consideration, how many orders of magnitude in difference are human beings from rats? Even if a rat could be one-dimensionally classified as "schizophrenic" by a gene-level modification, it would be a schizophrenia stretch (pun intended), I posit, to induce that a human would be likewise affected by the same gene in a similar manner -- and this is only if we concede that "schizophrenia" exists and if so we can finally arrive at a operational definition of it (which we have yet to do):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6033013.stm
Take off your tinfoil hat, doctor. ;-)
what I'd really like is to be able to shoot nutters in the street.
I can't see any point being able to carry if I can't shoot anything? They could be marked with paint, and we could get a bounty on the ears, yeah?
Be different from shooting possums and squirills - more fun!
;-)
Steve Jobs lives in a reality all of his own.
Does that make him schizophrenic?