Online and face-to-face programmes to suit your CPD needs, apply now for September 2018
Page URL: https://www.bionews.org.uk/page_92074

Mental health needs more research

21 December 2009
By Fenno Outen
Head Occupational Therapist for Newham at East London NHS Foundation Trust
Appeared in BioNews 539
Useful research in mental health care has historically been in short supply. Whether the issue is accurate diagnosis of problems, understanding their causes or the delivery of reliable treatment, there remains plenty of room for progress. For example, it is common for clinicians to disagree about diagnoses or for them to be changed on a regular basis. Furthermore a diagnosis provides a relatively poor guide to effective treatment.

Controversies around psychiatric medication continue. Trial and error continues to be a significant route to arriving at a satisfactory combination of drugs. Side effects still cause dissatisfaction and impair functioning as well as put people off taking medication at all. And while a greater range of non-drug treatments are now becoming available to service users, their application to those most severely affected remains unsatisfactory. Medication and compulsion continue to be the overriding experience of mental health services for many in this group.

Anyone seeking some kind of explanation for their difficulties remains likely to hear a vague reference to imbalanced brain chemicals or a 'biopsychosocial' model that covers all the bases but explains little. If they do get something more specific, it is likely it will be contradicted by the next professional they see. In all these areas mental health compares badly with other areas of healthcare.

At present there is little discussion on the 'shop floor' of the latest advances in genetic and epigenetic research. This is not surprising since, for all the promise and impressively large scale research projects, developments are still in their early stages. Any discussion of what these developments will mean must therefore be speculative, at least to some extent.

It is clear, however, that the interaction of genes and other factors is a complex process. For the major mental health problems there are not single genes that determine outcomes. The new work underscores this as well as providing some routes to understanding how, for example, multiple genetic and environmental factors might interact. The current genetic tests on the market are therefore to a large extent red herrings, and not actually in keeping with the research that has made them possible. On their own they tell us next to nothing.

Better models of the control of gene expression, through environmental influences (including the impact of some potential social factors) and including impacts and influences on development provide rich ground for speculation on improvements to care that might flow from them. This appears to have most potential in clarifying some diagnostic issues, for example raising some questions about the distinction between schizophrenia and bipolar affective disorder. If this helps dispense with unhelpful diagnostic mystification and instead focus on reducing symptoms then that will be to the good.

More widely, in terms of understanding the causes of mental health problems, there is a general benefit to a positive discussion around mental health focused research. This could provide a stimulus to debate and understanding of mental health problems and their causes. Increased clarity around genetic factors provides a challenge to produce clarity around the non-genetic factors too.

Treatment advances stemming from the new work seem still to be some way off. The complexity of the factors involved and the difficulty of finding appropriate methods of delivery are formidable obstacles. While successful treatment remains elusive direct benefits of the new genetic research for people with mental health problems will be scarce. However, indirect benefits may occur - the possibility of treatment, of recovery, will sustain hope (both for the individual and for healthcare providers). Furthermore, high profile discussions focused on (at least) the possibility of understanding mental health problems will help to reduce stigma.

The question of meaning within human social and cultural contexts will continue to be important and need further examination. Hypothetically speaking, we could arrive at a situation where we have a full understanding of how stress impacts at the level of gene expression. We would still then need to understand, potentially at the very specific level of the individual's experience how the stress came about.

It seems likely then that whatever the genetic research outcomes, we will continue to need to intervene at the many levels that we already do - biological, psychological and social - though we may be better guided as to what is likely to work well. At the level of culture, we also need to examine how phenomena such as medicalisation sit with new genetic understandings. If, for example, we accept that there are current cultural factors that make it more likely that people experience problems in the form of psychological distress, then we need to find a way of reconciling this (or not) with the genetics. It is interesting that two conditions where some have argued that problems are being medicalised - autism and ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder) - are also those being scrutinised at the genetic level. It should provide fertile ground for new ideas.

Fenno Outen will be speaking at the free-to-attend Progress Educational Trust/Royal Society of Medicine (PET) debate Marked for Life: Are Genetic Markers Helpful in Understanding Psychological Disorders? in London from 6.30pm to 8pm on the evening of Wednesday 3 March 2010. Email Sandy Starr at sstarr@progress.org.uk if you are interested in attending.

SOURCES & REFERENCES
RELATED ARTICLES FROM THE BIONEWS ARCHIVE
3 May 2011 - by Dr Tamara Hirsch 
Korean scientists have uncovered another gene, GIT1, linked to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The study published in Nature Medicine lends further support to a genetic basis for this behavioural condition, which is sometimes attributed to poor parenting....
18 April 2011 - by Ruth Pidsley 
Skin cells from four people with schizophrenia have been successfully reprogrammed into an embryonic-like state and then transformed into brain cells. The research, published in Nature, offers scientists a novel way to study the causes of schizophrenia...
13 April 2010 - by Ruth Pidsley 
The Imprinted Brain sets out a startling new theory that could reshape the way we think about the human brain...
6 April 2010 - by Professor Derek Bolton 
Genetics has made enormous advances towards understanding the causes of medical and psychiatric conditions. We know from the past few decades of research that many common psychiatric conditions have some contribution from genes, ranging from modest (30 to 40 per cent) to high (over 60 per cent). Moving on from this general finding, two questions dominate current research...
12 March 2010 - by Sally Marlow 
Mental health is a huge global concern, with one in four people experiencing some form of mental health problem at some point in their lives. Psychiatric disorders are sometimes difficult to study, as they are diagnosed on the basis of observed behaviours...
8 March 2010 - by Sandy Starr 
In their concluding remarks, all three speakers said the answer to the question implicit in the event's title - if you are genetically predisposed to a neurodevelopmental disorder, does this effectively mean you are marked for life? - is an emphatic 'no'. Nonetheless, they had divergent views on the likelihood of successfully applying the fruits of genetic research into mental health...
14 December 2009 - by Helen Keeler 
I had wanted to donate my eggs to a woman with fertility problems ever since having children of my own. I frequently tell my three children that I always wanted to be a mother and that every day they make my dreams come true. How wonderful it would be to help make someone else's dreams come true too....
7 December 2009 - by Dr Aarathi Prasad 
Session 3 of the Progress Educational Trust's annual conference (PET), held on Wednesday 18 November 2009 at Clifford Chance, was chaired by Professor Dian Donnai,Professor of Medical Genetics at the University of Manchester, and started with a talk by Karen Temple, Professor of Medical Genetics and Honorary Consultant in Clinical Genetics at the University of Southampton and Wessex Clinical Genetics Service. Professor Temple gave an intriguing talk on the influence of parent...
30 November 2009 - by Dr Rachael Panizzo 
Researchers at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, have identified a gene that may be involved in mental illness and maintaining brain health. The scientists compared the genes of 2,000 psychiatric patients and 2,000 healthy people in Scotland. They discovered that the ABCA13 gene was faulty more frequently in patients with severe mental illness - such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and depression - than in the healthy control group....
23 October 2009 - by Sandy Starr 
The Progress Educational Trust (PET) debate 'From Autism to Asperger's: Disentangling the Genetics and Sociology of the Autistic Spectrum' took place in the UK Houses of Parliament on the evening of 20 October 2009, two days before the Autism Bill received its third and final reading in the House of Lords....
20 July 2009 - by Sandy Starr 
From our perspective at the Progress Educational Trust (PET), one of the most welcome aspects of the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee's new report 'Genomic Medicine' is its consideration of public engagement issues. This section of the report appears to anticipate and complement PET's plans for its 2009 annual conference, entitled 'Does Genetics Matter? Help, Hype and the New Horizon of Epigenetics', which will take place in East London on Wednesday 18 November....
HAVE YOUR SAY
Log in to add a Comment.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions


Syndicate this story - click here to enquire about using this story.