Mens sana monographs最新文献

Commencement means both an end and a beginning; the end of the academic year and the beginning of the rest of your life as new physicians. For such a beginning, it is useful to view it in retrospect, from the point of view of the end, by conducting a pre-mortem on your life. Taking the existentialist (ex sistere, to stand forth) stance, each of us can be classified into one of four basic types of person, based on our characteristic space and time (or spatio-temporal) context or horizon. Our space can be limited to the "here" and our time to the "now;" or our space may extend to "infinity" and our time embark on "eternity." In-between these poles, most have space contexts rooted in their home and work "turf" and time involving their "lifetime," while some expand their space to include the "world" and their time to encompass "history." From the "here and now" and "turf and lifetime" contexts, the horizons of "world and history," and "infinity and eternity" are examined, challenging new medical doctors to realize their full potential. The new physician is exhorted not to wait for a post-mortem to define (des finitus, to set limits) his or her life. He or she should stand forth, to live, and give life. The new medical doctor is encouraged to look to the sunrise, draw strength from the sunshine, to be brave, and strong and true.

In 1952, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) system of creating, validating, studying and employing a diagnostic system in clinical psychiatric practice was introduced. There have been several updates and revisions to this manual and, regardless of its a theoretical framework, it actually does have a framework and presupposition. Essentially the DSM dictates that all psychiatric disorders are syndromes, or a collection of symptoms that commonly occur together and impair psychosocial functioning. These syndromes allow for homogenous groups of patients to be studied and psychotherapies and pharmacotherapies to be developed. This editorial will examine the DSM system with regards to its applicability to central nervous system dysfunction where psychiatric disorders are concerned. Specifically, the brain does not follow categorical, or syndromal, constructs. In fact, the psychiatric patient likely inherits several risk genes that promote abnormal proteins along several neuropathways in the brain. These abnormalities create dysfunctional neurocircuits which create individual psychiatric symptoms, but not a categorical syndrome or diagnosis. The concept that the DSM may be excellent for clinical diagnostic purposes, but less correct in its assumptions for a psychopharmacologist's treatment approaches will be discussed.

In the last thirty years, a relatively large group of cognitive scientists have begun characterising the mind in terms of two distinct, relatively autonomous systems. To account for paradoxes in empirical results of studies mainly on reasoning, Dual Process Theories were developed. Such Dual Process Theories generally agree that System 1 is rapid, automatic, parallel, and heuristic-based and System 2 is slow, capacity-demanding, sequential, and related to consciousness. While System 2 can still be decently understood from a traditional cognitivist approach, I will argue that it is essential for System 1 processing to be comprehended in an Embodied Embedded approach to Cognition.

The catch 22 situation in psychiatry is that for precise diagnostic categories/criteria, we need precise investigative tests, and for precise investigative tests, we need precise diagnostic criteria/categories; and precision in both diagnostics and investigative tests is nonexistent at present. The effort to establish clarity often results in a fresh maze of evidence. In finding the way forward, it is tempting to abandon the scientific method, but that is not possible, since we deal with real human psychopathology, not just concepts to speculate over. Search for clear-cut definitions/diagnostic criteria in psychiatry must be relentless. There is a greater need to be ruthless and blunt in this, rather than being accommodative of diverse opinions. Investigative tests - psychological, serum, CSF, or neuroimaging - are only corroborative at present; they need to become definitive. Medicalisation appears most prominent in psychiatry; so, diagnostic proliferation and fuzziness appear inevitable. And yet, the established diagnostic entities need to forward greater and conclusive precision. Also, the need for clarity and precision must outweigh pandering to and mollifying diverse interests, moreso in the upcoming revision of diagnostic manuals. This is specially because the DSM-5, being an Association manual, may need to accommodate powerful member lobbies; and ICD-11 may similarly need to cater to diverse country lobbies. Finding precise biological correlates of psychiatric phenomena, whether through neuroimaging, molecular neurobiology and/or neurogenomics, is the right way forward. It is in the 1.5-kg structure in the cranium that all secrets of psychiatric conditions lie. Social forces, behavioural modification, psychosocial restructuring, study of intrapsychic processes, and philosophical insights are not to be discounted, but they are supplementary to the primary goal - studying and deciphering those brain processes that result in psychiatric malfunction. Experimental breakthroughs, both in psychiatric aetiology and therapeutics, will come mainly from biology and its adjunct, psychopharmacology; while supplementary and complementary breakthroughs will come from the psychosocial, cognitive and behavioural approaches; the support base will come from phenomenology, epidemiology, nosology and diagnostics; while insights and leads can hopefully come from many fields, especially the psychosocial, the behavioural, the cognitive and the philosophical. Major energies must now be marshalled towards finding biomarkers and deciphering the precise phenotype-genotype-endophenotype axis of psychiatric disorders. Energies also need to be focussed on unravelling those critical processes in the brain that tip the scale towards psychiatric disorders. At how those critical processes are set into motion by forces de novo, in utero, in the genes and their expression, by the environment's psychopathological social forces - stress, peer pressure, poverty, deprivatio

The study of consciousness is poised today at interesting crossroads. There has been a surge of research into various neurobiological underpinnings of consciousness in the past decade. The present article looks at the theories regarding this complex phenomenon, especially the ones that neurobiology, cognitive neuroscience and cognitive psychology have to offer. We will first discuss the origin and etymology of word consciousness and its usage. Neurobiological correlates of consciousness are discussed with structures like the ascending reticular activating system, the amygdala, the cerebellum, the thalamus, the frontoparietal circuits, the prefrontal cortex and the precuneus. The cellular and microlevel theories of consciousness and cerebral activity at the neuronal level contributing to consciousness are highlighted, along with the various theories posited in this area. The role of neuronal assemblies and circuits along with firing patterns and their ramifications for the understanding of consciousness are discussed. A section on the role of anaesthesia and its links to consciousness is presented, along with details of split-brain studies in consciousness and altered states of awareness, including the vegetative states. The article finally discusses the progress cognitive psychology has made in identifying and theorising various perspectives of consciousness, perceptual awareness and conscious processing. Both recent and past researches are highlighted. The importance and salient features of each theory are discussed along with the pitfalls, if present. A need for integration of various theories to understand consciousness from a holistic perspective is stressed, to enable one to reach a theory that explains the ultimate neurobiology of consciousness.

Introduction: Neuropsychiatry has generally been regarded as a hybrid discipline that lies in the borderland between the disciplines of psychiatry and neurology. There is much debate on its current and future identity and status as a discipline.

Materials and methods: Taking a historical perspective, the future of neuropsychiatry is placed within the context of recent developments in clinical neuroscience.

Results: The authors argue that with the maturation of the discipline, it must define its own identity that is not dependent entirely upon the parent disciplines. The requirements for this are the claiming of neuropsychiatric territory, a strong training agenda, an emphasis on treatments that are uniquely neuropsychiatric, and a bold embrace of new developments in clinical neuroscience.

Conclusion: The exponential growth in neuroscientific knowledge places neuropsychiatry in an excellent position to carve out a strong identity. It is imperative that the leaders of the discipline seize the moment.

De Sousa's comprehensive two-part review of a diversity of contemporary approaches to the study of consciousness is highly welcome. He makes us aware of a proliferation of theoretical and empirical approaches targeting a common theme, but diverging in many ways. He skilfully accomplishes a classification of kinds of approach, identification of the main representatives, their contributions, and respective limitations. However, he does not show how the desired integration could be accomplished. Besides summarising De Sousa's efficient analytical work, I make critical comments and briefly report my contribution for the integration project.