User talk:Notpayingthepsychiatrist

Hello, Notpayingthepsychiatrist! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Dlohcierekim 02:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hypoxia

Hi. Yesterday, I added a paragraph on fetal hypoxia to Causes_of_schizophrenia#Other. You should consider adding some of the information posted at Talk:Causes_of_schizophrenia there, lest it go to waste. Just keep in mind that we have policies against original research, including synthesis of sources to make an original conclusion -- so any new citations will need to make the connection between hypoxia and schizophrenia themselves. --AnotherSolipsist (talk) 19:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou very much for telling me that, thanks for reading the research and I will avoid synthesis of research.

Sorry I forgot to answer your message. It looks like you've figured it out now anyway. Thanks for your contributions. --AnotherSolipsist (talk) 17:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Prophecy#Skepticism about prophecy

Hi! I added maintenance tags to some material you added to this section. A key difficulty is that you didn't supply any sources for this material. Wikipedia's no original research and verifiability policies prohibit material which cannot be verified by reliable sources and make contributors responsible for supplying appropriate sources. The material you added about certain Bible passages being vague may, for all someone attempting to verify can tell, be your own personal, possibly original opinion. Please supply sources identifying specific commentators who both identify these passages as vague and conclude that this vagueness is a basis for skepticism. The policy explains that unsourced material is subject to deletion. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 23:55, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

As an FYI if you're willing to do some research or you have some sources available you're welcome to add material back in. The article could use a more scholarly approach including an overview of the history of skepticism in this area. But simply a few comments by important people would be an improvement. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 20:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

August 2008

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Causes of schizophrenia, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Elenseel (talk) 17:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Notpayingthepsychiatrist, I think it can be assumed that Elensee (understandably) mistook the cuts for vandalism, but that they could be re-done as per the prior talk page discussion. I'd do it myself but it's not clear to me and you know the material better. But I may want to make additional edits/cuts for other material that seems too general, off-topic or original research. The Philip Seeman protein folding section in the neural section could do with simplifying/shortening too, the article is specifically on causes so personally I would say it can go into more detail than the schizophrenia article itself, but it needs to remain user-friendly and each issue given only its due weight/coverage. Cheers EverSince (talk) 16:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Notpayingthepsychiatrist, you left a note on my talk page asking about a revert to your edits on Causes of schizophrenia. Suggest discussing the matter with Elenseel if it hasn't already been taken care of. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 04:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hypoxia causes axon guidance deficits

• Here. Cheers, --CopperKettle (talk) 16:04, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Stats

Hi Steve, Really when using sources you should generally go with the conclusions as drawn by the authors themselves. Although they say in the main article that they're going to analyse demographic variables including pregnancy complications, they don't seem to conclude anything much about them (but conclude the findings may be due to a wide range of possible genetic and epigenetic causes I think). In any case, probability estimates from statistical significance tests are very specific to the particular test used and the sample size and the study methodology etc, so I would say they can't really be taken out of that context and used to support general statements about links between things. Also, since pregnancy was only one of the factors analyzed in the article/supplement, only highlighting that one in the article seems to give a biased impression.

By the way we should probably keep such discussions, that are part of the ongoing development of the content of a particular article, on that article's talk page so that any editors can see what's happening and perhaps comment... using user pages for more indirectly related issues or things more specific to each of us. EverSince (talk) 18:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, I was wondering if by any chance you have online access to the full text of PMID 15062627? EverSince (talk) 18:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Graph2.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Graph2.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 10:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Your message

Hi, got your message. Answered at my talk. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

delusions

You said:

Hi, please check 'specific delusions' under 'delusion' it is a December copy and is more readable, it's not original research as under 'Delusion' X is a type of Y. Notpayingthepsychiatrist (talk) 19:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I am a bit tired today, which bit are you referring to here in particular? I didn't follow "december copy"...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I looked at what you added. I really like Sims' first point. The other stuff looks esoteric but interesting nonetheless. Need to process it more. Heavy going when tired. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Copyright questions

Please sent all correspondence to the Wikimedia volunteers mailing list at permissions-enwikimedia.org. Releasing personally identifiable information about others without their express consent, as was done in the e-mails, is not allowed for editor protection, so I removed the conversation. Thank you for understanding. -- Avi (talk) 16:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Your message

Hi, got your message. Answered at my talk. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Incubation

Hi Innab, I am interested in your post on Causes of Schizophrenia about addiction.

This website, for example says a sexy image, for example, will elicit a dopamine spike, but not of long duration. http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/kuszewski20100828

"So what are the take-home points? Imagery and suggestion that is blatant and forceful may get a big spike in dopamine, but it will be short-lived. This isn’t giving you enough time to feel the attachment effects of oxytocin to the fullest extent possible. The element of mystery is a trigger for dopamine — in figuring out that mystery, we are intrigued, drawn in, motivated to examine it closer. If a stimulus is more abstract and leaves a little to the imagination, you will spend more time on it, thus extending every pleasurable neurochemical process, giving you a prolonged neurological orgasm. "

d2 receptors, in order to turn to d2high, need incubation in dopamine.

Have you got a quote which says this can be achieved by thought only?

Steve Notpayingthepsychiatrist (talk) 09:28, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Infact this article actually says sexual arousal is inhibited by stimulation of the schizophrenia receptor: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T0P-3TVNH8Y-N&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F30%2F1997&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1453147183&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=106e61b723100a0260a2826c424d178f&searchtype=a

Notpayingthepsychiatrist (talk) 10:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Steve, for your interest to my edit. Sorry, I was on vacation and did not respond you right away. Here is my original edit that was deleted from the article, if you open this block in edit mode, then you will see all the links, or go to my talk page:

++++++++++++++ Original Block in Schizophrenia article ++++++++++++++++++

Postsynaptic
density

Voltage-
gated Ca⁺⁺
channel

Synaptic
vesicle

Neurotransmitter
transporter

Receptor

Neurotransmitter

Axon terminal

Synaptic cleft

Dendrite

Structure of a typical chemical synapse

Increased dopamine and serotonin activity in the mesolimbic pathway of the brain is consistently found in individuals with Schizophrenia and OCD by number of independent studies. Dopamine is released (particularly in areas such as the nucleus accumbens and prefrontal cortex) by rewarding experiences such as food, sex, drugs (like amphetamines), neutral stimuli that become associated with them. Researches has found that even thinking about reward like sex, drugs, alcohol, food, can increase the dopamine levels. This explains placebo effect, for example. Dopamine and serotonin are commonly associated with the reward system of the brain, providing feelings of enjoyment and reinforcement to motivate a person proactively to perform certain activities. However, some patients are abusing the "repetitive thoughts" reward system, invoking rewarding memories and thoughts again and again to naturally produce the "feel-good" neurotransmitters in their brain, losing self-control. This is similar to drug addiction: nearly all drugs, directly or indirectly, target the brain’s reward system by flooding the circuit with dopamine. As a person continues to overstimulation of the “reward circuit”, the brain adapts to the overwhelming surges in dopamine by producing less of the neurotransmitter or by reducing the number of receptors in the reward circuit. As a result, chemical’s impact on the reward circuit is lessened, reducing the abuser’s ability to enjoy the things that previously brought pleasure. The decrease in neurotransmitters flow compels those addicted to dopamine to increasingly think rewarding thoughts in order to attempt to bring the neurotransmitter level back to normal - an effect known as tolerance. This can explain why many of the schizophrenia and OCD patients have increased levels of dopamine. Development of the tolerance can eventually lead to profound changes in neurons and brain circuits, with the potential to severely compromise the long-term health of the brain. Modern antipsychotics are designed to block dopamine function. However, excessive blocking can also cause relapses in depression, and can increase addictive behaviors. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) done by mental health professional can also be effectively used to control obsessive thoughts and compulsion acts, improves self-esteem, deals with depression factors and explains patients negative long-term consequences of dopamine addiction.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
To me, there plenty evidence that pleasurable thinking can release neurotransmitters, but unfortunately English is not my first language, so I could not convince american editors to leave the block in the article. I would appreciate any of your help with the editing, because I am trying to re-write it in such a way that it will not get removed again because of my bad English. Idea of schizophrenics deliberately invoking pleasant thoughts and dreams to make them feel good was in Europe for centuries, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) considered is one of the most effective methods to treat schizophrenia there, but I was surprised that apparently it is very uncommon in USA where doctors prefer to medicate rather than talk to patient. Dopamine is main part of the "reward system", something that makes us "feel good". The pleasure principle is a psychoanalytic concept, originated by Sigmund Freud defined in his book "Beyond the Pleasure Principle". The pleasure principle states that people seek pleasure and avoid pain, the counterpart to the reality principle, which defers gratification when necessary. During the depression there is few reasons for reward, so neurotransmitters flow goes down. This makes person to try to seek ways to adjust dopamine flow level in receiving neurons to what normal to them.

Comparing the neurons to plumber pipes, I see 4 ways to increase the dopamine flow into the receiving neuron of the synapse (see the picture):

• 1) Naturally increase flow of dopamine and serotonin from the source (i.e. pre-synapse neuron). This happens during rewarding experience like sex, food, pleasant feelings and memories associated with that. So you right, masturbation is extremely heavy source of the neurotransmitters flow.
• 2) Artificially increase flow from pre-synapse neuron with drugs like amphetamine and methamphetamine See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine#Motivation_and_pleasure
• 3) Block re-uptake of neurotransmitters from synapse area, this way increasing the concentration of dopamine around receiving receptors. This is what cocaine effect based upon.
• 4) Brain itself can increase/decrease number of active receiving receptors when flow of dopamine is too high or too low to keep it on normal level. The research in the article states that it take up to seven days to normalize the receptors. This is similar to ears receptors get "plugged" when noise is too heavy. Unfortunately, some psychiatrist use the fact that number of active receptors is decreased in schizophrenia patients to label them as permanently "brain damaged" and "physiologically abnormal".

The counterpart of the pleasure principle, according to Sigmund Freud is the reality principle, which defers gratification when necessary. When level of dopamine is too high brain cannot function properly, so to block flow of neurotransmitters we can:

• 1) Naturally, by stopping the rewarding experience, including the drugs, alcohol, obesessive thinking etc.
• 2) Artificially by blocking the neurotransmitter receiving receptors with medication like atypical antipsychotics.
• 3) Brain can naturally decrease number of receiving neurotransmitters to keep the flow constant.

I would be very grateful for any of your help with the article. Innab (talk) 19:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Innab, thanks for replying. When you resubmit the text just reference this statement: "some patients are abusing the repetitive thoughts reward system,". Steve Notpayingthepsychiatrist (talk) 20:15, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Sigmund Freud defined pleasure principle in his book "Beyond the Pleasure Principle". The pleasure principle states that people seek pleasure whenever it practical, and neurotransmitters is main part of "reward system" that gives us the pleasure feeling. Do you think this will be more self-explanatory if I change this phrase with: "The increased release of neurotransmitters during the thinking about rewarding experience gives a person the pleasure feeling and motivates them to repeate the activity to experience the good feeling again, this is all in accordance with pleasure principle defined by Sigmund Freud. Unfortunately, many OCD and Schizophrenia patiences have problems with self-monitoring and cannot stop the excessive obessive activity due to failures in neurobiological mechanism.". Please reply to my talk page. Innab (talk) 18:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Innab, I had a quick look at the Schizophrenia Bulletin page, but when I searched it I couldn't find anything mentioning 'obsession'.

Here is a quote from a web page, the page would not have enough authority on its own, but it mentions a study from Columbia university - perhaps this study mentions schizophrenia?: " A Columbia University study found that sexually active teens use more drugs. One might think social factors alone lead to this correlation between drugs and sex, but when scientists studied hamsters, they found that sexually-active hamsters were much more susceptible to amphetamine addiction than their virgin counterparts." http://www.reuniting.info/science/sex_in_the_brain. Good luck. Notpayingthepsychiatrist (talk) 13:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

This is a great article, the author wrote exactly what I wanted to say. Thank you very much! I awarded you the The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar :-) I will try to modify my block about dopamine addiction using your link, so User:Lova_Falk do not remove it again. Unfortunately, people like her prefer to think about people with Schizophrenia like permanently brain-damaged sub-humans, rather then normal human beens with addiction. I am afraid she will remove the block again because of my bad English. It may take me a while to rewrite it, but I will consult with you before I post it again. If you can help me to re-write it in better English gramma and language I would really appreciate it. Innab (talk) 16:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

After thinking some more about the subject, I decided to write an article about Schizophrenia and addiction to dopamine, then I will send it to english-speaking journals and specialists that may be interested in the subject. Since I work in large state university and have an academic degree, I hope someone will publish it, or at least give me their opinion (unfortunately my degree is not a Neuroscience). Then it would be easier to reference the article in wikipedia :-) I have a close friend who had been suffered of Schizophrenia for many years and several doctors could not help him, until he realized that he himself invoke obsessive memories to get high on dopamine, like drug addicts do when they inject drugs. Once he got his addiction under the control he was able to enjoy life and keep a permanent job. Thanks for all your help, anyway, there are some very interesting ideas you have. Innab (talk) 22:39, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

With best wishes

		The Special Barnstar
		Hey, I got your messages at my talk page, and at the article talk page. I'm afraid that I didn't make myself clear before, so now I've tried to make it clearer. Please understand that you didn't do anything wrong, and you are very welcome, of course, to keep editing there. Best wishes, --Tryptofish (talk) 22:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)