Merged Psychological conditions are illusory

[Weak Kitten]

Wrong again.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101220163059.htm

People with Dyslexia process written information in a different part of the brain then “normal” learners. Furthermore, their ability to somewhat overcome this imparemtn can be directly linked to development in the area of the brain dyslexics process written inforamtion rather than the area where normal learners process that same information.

Absolutely fascinating! I hadn't heard of this before but I have heard of other cases of people using different parts of their brains to compensate for the damaged portions.

I do wonder how this effects the normal functions of that lobe. According to wikki the inferior frontal gyrus is normally related to risk aversion. I have not heard of any problems with risky behavior in dyslexics one way or the other.

That is neither here nor there however. The point is that this is solid evidence of a physical difference in the brains of dyslexics. Thus, to get back to the original question, we can define dyslexia as "a disorder of the brain such that the normal linguistic centers do not function properly, most specifically in regard to deciphering written characters. In the best cases these functions can be taken up by a different section of the brain with imperfect results."

There, we answered the original question about defining dyslexia and why it must be defined as a disorder! Betcha this definition will now be willfully ignored.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

I once overheard the Chaplain praying with a wife if a recently returned vet. He said something to the effect of "thank you for bringing most of SSGT Joe home. With your help, we need to bring the rest of him home now."

Not a prayer that would work for every spouse, but it helped reframe her understanding so she could help him better.

I was talking to a soldier once who told me about freaking out in the grocery store. He overcame the crowd thing, but then flipped out at the ketchup. Four different brands in 6 different sizes, bottle that are upside down and some are right side up.... the choices overwhelmed his ability to process massive amounts of information and make life or death decisions.

I think it's safe to guess the OP doesn't know any vets or first responders and is just pulling this stuff out of his ... uh ... sock.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I find it curious that if someone has problems reading or comprehending the alphabetic symbol set, he may be classified as dyslexic, yet my inability to make sense of mathematics is considered simple dimness.

Fifty years ago any sort of problem with learning was considered simple dimness. Now we have the idea that at least some of these problems are due to differences in the brain. This leads us to study the problems and try to figure out what's going on in the brain.

My son is dyslexic. Educators have some good idea what to do about this.

My daughter has an receptive/expressive language disorder. Educators have a vague notion what to do about this.

She also has some sort of dyscalculia. Educators don't have the foggiest notion.

~~ Paul

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

You believe that we are affected by our brains only when we feel bad or can't do things as well as others. So we say things like "dyslexia" is caused by the brain. This belief is, I hope, obviously irrational.

What the hell?

~~ Paul

 

[Drachasor]

You believe that we are affected by our brains only when we feel bad or can't do things as well as others. So we say things like "dyslexia" is caused by the brain. This belief is, I hope, obviously irrational.

Wrong, we are always our brains. Good and bad, that's what we are. However, just like I am not going to get treatment for not being cut or for having good health, I also wouldn't get treatment for being happy. These things aren't problems obstacles in life. It's when stuff is bad that one needs help.

 

[lomiller]

Absolutely fascinating! I hadn't heard of this before but I have heard of other cases of people using different parts of their brains to compensate for the damaged portions.

I do wonder how this effects the normal functions of that lobe. According to wikki the inferior frontal gyrus is normally related to risk aversion. I have not heard of any problems with risky behavior in dyslexics one way or the other.

Broca's area, which is associated with speech and language, is also in the inferior frontal gyrus.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broca's_area

 

[Dinwar]

You are disempowered because you are thought of as fundamentally damaged goods - a pateint, under the doctor for life, rather than simply as a whole person who cannot read as well as someone else.

Well, you ARE damaged. Or, rather, not standard. And in a world that's more or less designed to fit a particular standard, this can be debilitating. I'm still at a loss for why someone would object to getting help for something that is clearly causing problems. Seeking help for a learning disability doesn't make you any less of a person than seeking therapy for a physical deformity does.

The issue with the label is meaningless garbage, and not worth debating. If you don't like the term dyslexia we can make up a new one.

You believe that we are affected by our brains only when we feel bad or can't do things as well as others. So we say things like "dyslexia" is caused by the brain.

It's so nice to have someone outside of me tell me why I think the way I do. Saves me all the trouble of actually doing that pesky "introspection" thing.

Except that they're almost inveriably wrong....

There are NO efforts to address "dyslexia" anywhere in the world.
There are efforts to address difficulties in reading.

You continue to assume, fallaciously, that simply because two things have the same outcome, they therefore have the same cause. I can bleed from any of literally hundreds of different causes--trees falling on me, bricks cutting me, roads stripping my skin off a body part, slamming my fist into a wall too hard, my wife biting me, and jabbing my hand into the sharp end of wire, to name a few off the top of my head (and which I have the scars to prove happen). The mere fact that I'm bleeding in no way tells you anything about WHY I'm bleeding. Similarly, the mere fact that a person has trouble reading tells you nothing about WHY that person has trouble reading.

Here's a dirty little secret: if there's a different cause, different methods are necessary to fix the issue--even if it's the same issue. If one's inability to read at the expected level is caused by a lack of trying, it takes one cure (practice). If, on the other hand, your brain is processing the information in a fundamentally different way than in most people, it takes a whole other cure (and is called dyslexia).

A philosopher, and anyone with more than a passing knowledge of the field, should know that.

 

[BStrong]

I reject the pseudo-condition of PTSD as it is a natural process that has been represented and distorted by medical tradition and taboo.

I've worked with flashbacks, intense emotions and experiences. But I think you are looking for mainstream, because you think it is safer or is publicly endorsed.

Acid flashbacks don't count.

Unless you have something closer to personal experience and proof, You're talking out your fundemental.

I've lived with my own PTSD for long enough to have recovered to an extent, and volunteer my time with StP to help others - your OP is complete nonsense.

 

[Tracy Dalziel]

And your dismissal of actual problems other people have as not really existing isn't offensive?* The comparison is dead-on.

*As well as completely lacking in evidential support.

I never dismissed it as a problem just as a medical condition. The comparison is anything but dead on - genuine illness or deformity doesn't compare with these problems and the comparison is blatantly offensive to sufferers of the former.
The onus is not on me to give evidence - I made a negative assertion.

 

[Dinwar]

The onus is not on me to give evidence - I made a negative assertion.

An irrelevant one. It is still a problem, and one that the people suffering from need to fix. If I slice my hand off, the fact that it's not caused by bacteria doesn't mean it's not an issue--I lost my hand, and am likely bleeding to death while passed out. Similarly, if someone has dyslexia it's a problem--whether it's medical or not is irrelevant. It's a semantics game that anyone who knows someone with dyslexia isn't going to play, because it's POINTLESS.

 

[bruto]

You are disempowered because you are thought of as fundamentally damaged goods - a pateint, under the doctor for life, rather than simply as a whole person who cannot read as well as someone else.

You don't need a pseudo diagnosis of "dyslexia" (whatever that is) to get help in reading.

Where are you that this is the case? It certainly isn't the case here in the US as far as I've seen, where dyslexia is generally not considered a medical condition but a learning issue, addressed through special education. One may not need a diagnosis of anything to get help in reading, but if, as many experts assert, dyslexia differs from some other causes of reading difficulty, and since a great deal of effort has been put into finding specific approaches to it, a diagnosis would seem helpful in deciding how to approach the job.

As to being a patient forever, why would that be so? How do you think that would work? Yearly spell checks? An adult can choose. Besides, why would you rather go through life as "a person who cannot read as well as someone else," when a well schooled dyslexic can do so much better.

Perhaps your quarrel is not with the question of dyslexia but how it is handled somewhere else. You're making a poor case so far, but if you have some specific experience that informs your opinion it might serve you better than theory and semantics, which have so miserably failed you thus far.

 

[Drachasor]

I never dismissed it as a problem just as a medical condition. The comparison is anything but dead on - genuine illness or deformity doesn't compare with these problems and the comparison is blatantly offensive to sufferers of the former.
The onus is not on me to give evidence - I made a negative assertion.

How is it not a medical condition?

You say it is a problem.
It is one concerning the human body (the brain is part of the body).
It is diagnosable by doctors.
It is treatable with therapies and/or medication.

So how isn't it a medical condition? Sure, it isn't a missing leg or eyes, but neither is an inability to metabolize copper. So on what basis do you rate the brain poorly functioning in some area as "not medical?"

 

[Dinwar]

So how isn't it a medical condition?

The term "medical condition" carries with it some social baggage. Far as I can tell, that's it. Which is why I've repeatedly said that this portion of the discussion is pointless: the issue is whether it's a problem or not (everyone admits that it is) and how to fix it (the real area of disagreement), not what someone chooses to call it. Yet several people want to go down that semantics rabbit hole.

 

[Drachasor]

The term "medical condition" carries with it some social baggage. Far as I can tell, that's it. Which is why I've repeatedly said that this portion of the discussion is pointless: the issue is whether it's a problem or not (everyone admits that it is) and how to fix it (the real area of disagreement), not what someone chooses to call it. Yet several people want to go down that semantics rabbit hole.

I'm fine talking about any of that, but I just wanted to point out I think it is silly to say a problem involving the body isn't a medical condition.

As to how to fix it? Well, use whatever way works best. Sometimes therapy does the trick (cognitive-behavioral therapy is a great for a lot of things), sometimes drugs alone can do the job and little else will, sometimes there are a wide variety of options, sometimes they just have to learn particular techniques, etc, etc. But figuring out what works and applying it is part of evidence-based medicine for these conditions. These medical problems are carefully studies as are potential methods of dealing with them.

Seems to me that arguing it isn't a medical condition is a why to argue we should just ignore all the research that has gone into these problems.

 

[yy2bggggs]

Well, what do you do if someone tells you a lie,

How do you know it's a lie?

Give me something other than your word. You're a random internet guy. Show me that you have actual insight--and note that degree of confidence in one's claims has nothing to do with whether said person has actual insight.

Give me your sales pitch, or I've no reason to believe you, especially if you're saying that the established experts are wrong.

or poisons your well?

Unless they're the ones making a point, or I'm trying to make a particular point to them for some reason, then I ignore them.

 

[Tracy Dalziel]

How is it not a medical condition?

You say it is a problem.
It is one concerning the human body (the brain is part of the body).
It is diagnosable by doctors.
It is treatable with therapies and/or medication.

So how isn't it a medical condition? Sure, it isn't a missing leg or eyes, but neither is an inability to metabolize copper. So on what basis do you rate the brain poorly functioning in some area as "not medical?"

It is a problem only in the context of making work and social life difficult- it doesn't do any direct physical or mental damage and although there may be genetics underpinning it, this is nothing that can't be explained by natural variation. Up to 10% of children in the US apparently have it now even though it only gained wide acceptance as a medical condition in the 70s, although drugs were used before this to treat hyperactivity and a similar set of 'symptoms' have been called by various other names since the 1900s. The diagnostic methods used are arbitrary. The fact that stimulants work doesn't lend ADHD any credibility - smoking helps me concentrate, does this mean I have ADHD ?

 

[Dinwar]

It is a problem only in the context of making work and social life difficult

So it's only a problem for the majority of modern life. I guess it's NOT that bad!

this is nothing that can't be explained by natural variation.

People with Dyslexia process written information in a different part of the brain then “normal” learners.

I'm gonna go ahead and say you're wrong here--unless "where one processes written information" is subject to natural variation?

Up to 10% of children in the US apparently have it now even though it only gained wide acceptance as a medical condition in the 70s,

And obviously improved diagnostic techniques are completely incapable of revealing something that's always been there. I mean, "old age" is still an accepted cause of death, right? Those increases in cancer rates MUST be caused ENTIRELY by increases in cancer prevalence!

although drugs were used before this to treat hyperactivity and a similar set of 'symptoms' have been called by various other names since the 1900s. The diagnostic methods used are arbitrary. The fact that stimulants work doesn't lend ADHD any credibility - smoking helps me concentrate, does this mean I have ADHD ?

Wait, are we talking ADHD (off-topic, and something you clearly don't know much about), or dyslexia (on-topic, and something you clearly don't know much about)?

Sorry for the heavy sarcasm, but seriously, your posts don't warrant much more. You haven't even bothered to read the thread, nor have you dealt with any of the relevant medical literature (because if you had, you'd have realized that ADHD is a legitimate condition). And you've continually ignored the simple and obvious fact that merely because something has variation in a population, that doesn't mean that the extremes are healthy or even survivable.

 

[Tracy Dalziel]

The term "medical condition" carries with it some social baggage. Far as I can tell, that's it. Which is why I've repeatedly said that this portion of the discussion is pointless: the issue is whether it's a problem or not (everyone admits that it is) and how to fix it (the real area of disagreement), not what someone chooses to call it. Yet several people want to go down that semantics rabbit hole.

And this social baggage is partly why the distinction is important. Medical conditions and disabilities give some alleviation of personal responsibility i.e. a schizophrenic (genuinely ill) who commits a violent crime generally goes to a secure hospital rather than jail. Should someone with ADHD be treated the same ? Criminal behaviour is a feature in a subcategory of so called ADHD and is known as known as oppositional defiant 'disorder' - essentially hooliganism by another name.

 

[Weak Kitten]

Broca's area, which is associated with speech and language, is also in the inferior frontal gyrus.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broca's_area

Wow, I guess my wikki-fu isn't so great. Thanks for showing me this, that's fascinating stuff! Definitely points out that written language and spoken language are normally separate sections of the brain. Maybe this is why I cannot listen to a lecture and take notes at the same time? I always wondered how other people could do that, I find that if I try to read or write I can no longer hear what people are saying around me. Strangely I can draw and listen to a lecture at the same time...must be wired to a different part of the brain.

Why do people even need woo when real science is so weird and amazing?

 

[Tracy Dalziel]

I'm gonna go ahead and say you're wrong here--unless "where one processes written information" is subject to natural variation?

It may well be. Again the handedness analogy fits here ; as regards language ~95% of right handers are left hemisphere dominant as are ~60% of left handers. The remainder of people are divided about equally between right side dominance and bilateralism.

And obviously improved diagnostic techniques are completely incapable of revealing something that's always been there. I mean, "old age" is still an accepted cause of death, right? Those increases in cancer rates MUST be caused ENTIRELY by increases in cancer prevalence!

They can also pick up natural variation. Old age whilst a cause of death is not a medical condition either - it is natural.

Wait, are we talking ADHD (off-topic, and something you clearly don't know much about), or dyslexia (on-topic, and something you clearly don't know much about)?

Sorry for the heavy sarcasm, but seriously, your posts don't warrant much more. You haven't even bothered to read the thread, nor have you dealt with any of the relevant medical literature (because if you had, you'd have realized that ADHD is a legitimate condition). And you've continually ignored the simple and obvious fact that merely because something has variation in a population, that doesn't mean that the extremes are healthy or even survivable.

I never claimed ADHD was not an accepted medical condition - I said I felt this wasn't justified. Extremes are survivable and do not directly impact health for the variables I speak of even if this is not true for others.