According to prominent Schizophrenia researcher the decades--long search for genes for Schizophrenia has failed :
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...8123006418
Well gee whiz I could have told them that , before wasting 8 billion dollars. When critics state that Schizophrenia does not exist we do not mean disturbing behaviors don't exist. Rather, by the 1960s it was obvious to an American Psychologist Don Bannister that Schizophrenia is so diffuse as to be meaningless in the scientific context. Specifically you can have two different patients diagnosed ,with two different non-overlapping sets of symptoms . The DSM-5 also failed its field trials : Schizophrenia scored a .45 rather .70 or higher on the intra-reliability statistical kappa scores. .70 is a satisfactory score while .45 is not.
If a concept is so diffuse as to be meaningless in the scientific context and is mathematically unreliable : scientifically speaking it is game over; it is pointless to look for genetic causes or brain defect correlates :
Raymond Dolan (considered one of the top neuroscientists in the world), published a scientific article in the prestigious scientific journal neuron :
Functional neuroimaging in psychiatry and the case for failing better
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35981525/
In it after looking over 30 years of psychiatriatric MRIs and neuroimaging, did not find a single biomarker of clinical utility.
He concluded :
Quote:E. Fuller Torrey writes, “Over twenty years later not a single gene has been identified to cause schizophrenia, despite the expenditure of almost $8 billion in genetic research by NIMH. Nor have any new treatments become available from this research.”
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...8123006418
Well gee whiz I could have told them that , before wasting 8 billion dollars. When critics state that Schizophrenia does not exist we do not mean disturbing behaviors don't exist. Rather, by the 1960s it was obvious to an American Psychologist Don Bannister that Schizophrenia is so diffuse as to be meaningless in the scientific context. Specifically you can have two different patients diagnosed ,with two different non-overlapping sets of symptoms . The DSM-5 also failed its field trials : Schizophrenia scored a .45 rather .70 or higher on the intra-reliability statistical kappa scores. .70 is a satisfactory score while .45 is not.
If a concept is so diffuse as to be meaningless in the scientific context and is mathematically unreliable : scientifically speaking it is game over; it is pointless to look for genetic causes or brain defect correlates :
Raymond Dolan (considered one of the top neuroscientists in the world), published a scientific article in the prestigious scientific journal neuron :
Functional neuroimaging in psychiatry and the case for failing better
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35981525/
In it after looking over 30 years of psychiatriatric MRIs and neuroimaging, did not find a single biomarker of clinical utility.
He concluded :
Quote:It remains difficult to refute a critique that psychiatries most fundamental characteristic is its ignorance.