View Full Version : genetic marker of ADHD


daveddd
03-06-16, 08:42 AM
i noticed mentioned of a genetic marker found for ADHD in another thread


im intrigued

can someone share this information with me and the forum?

Little Missy
03-06-16, 08:46 AM
i noticed mentioned of a genetic marker found for ADHD in another thread


im intrigued

can someone share this information with me and the forum?

When I googled it there are quite a few mentions of it. :)

daveddd
03-06-16, 08:49 AM
I'm sure those keywords will get thousands of mentions

what I'm interested in is the confirmed genetic marker for ADHD

Little Missy
03-06-16, 08:49 AM
None of them seem to actually confirm anything.

daveddd
03-06-16, 08:50 AM
no, just a link to NCBI home page

i check the ADHD articles on that daily

daveddd
03-06-16, 08:53 AM
None of them seem to actually confirm anything.

i didn't think they would

but i thought i missed something since someone said it was confirmed and many agreed

ginniebean
03-06-16, 10:39 AM
I don't know if this is what you're looking for Dave, but I found this? Not sure it'll do tho.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2847260/

daveddd
03-06-16, 10:45 AM
from the study

"Yet, even these associations are small and consistent with the idea that the genetic vulnerability to ADHD is mediated by many genes of small effect"

"One such strategy, examination of refined phenotypes that may reduce heterogeneity, is beginning to bear fruit"


"gene-environment interactions (e.g. prenatal or psychosocial risk factors for ADHD and SLC6A3)"


this is pretty much exactly how I've been viewing it, many different pathways to ADHD thanks, good article

mctavish23
03-06-16, 06:06 PM
Cook, et. al.(1995) focused on the dopamine transporter gene DAT1, as well as several

others. As I said earlier, this was the 1st study to pinpoint a genetic marker for ADHD.

tc

Robert

mildadhd
03-06-16, 11:07 PM
Some people have these associated variants but don't have ADHD.

ginniebean
03-06-16, 11:20 PM
Some people have these associated variants but don't have ADHD.

Yes, this is true. Russell Barkley mentioned this when he pointed out that siblings and relatives of those with adhd also have similar markers but do not have symptoms significant enougb to have adhd.

mildadhd
03-06-16, 11:23 PM
Some people have ADHD but don't have these associated variants.

ginniebean
03-06-16, 11:26 PM
Absolutely, some people have no genetic tie to adhd. Head injury, lead exposure just to name two.

mildadhd
03-06-16, 11:27 PM
I wonder if the people who grow out of ADHD, unexpress variants?

mctavish23
03-06-16, 11:36 PM
mild,

The genetic propensity for ADHD has already been confirmed. This is Evidence Based

Diagnosis 101. I maybe retired, but this isn't some internet hobby for me.

tc

mctavish23

(Robert)

ginniebean
03-06-16, 11:38 PM
No, they don't. From what we know symptom severity is not stable in life. Meaning, people can go below the threshold required for their symptoms to be called a disorder, the underlying condition remains and can increase or decrease in severity for various reasons. Like aging, for instance. Then a person who "outgrew" adhd grew right back into it again.

namazu
03-06-16, 11:49 PM
I've recommended it before, but Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) is a good (though admittedly technical) website for information about genetic markers associated with various disorders (and other traits). Here's OMIM's page on ADHD (http://omim.org/entry/143465?search=adhd&highlight=adhd).

I think mildadhd makes a very important point. Although there are a number of genetic variants associated with ADHD, most of them have fairly low penetrance (i.e. most people with the variants do not have ADHD -- though, as Ginniebean noted, some people with the variants may have subclinical elevations in traits associated with ADHD). Conversely, many of us with apparently-inherited ADHD do not have the specific genetic variants that have been identified thus far.

There's still a lot we have to learn about the different pathways to ADHD (even through genetics).

Lunacie
03-06-16, 11:53 PM
No, they don't. From what we know symptom severity is not stable in life. Meaning, people can go below the threshold required for their symptoms to be called a disorder, the underlying condition remains and can increase or decrease in severity for various reasons. Like aging, for instance. Then a person who "outgrew" adhd grew right back into it again.

Absolutely right. I wondered for years how my daughter managed not to inherit ADHD when I have it and both her daughters have it.

Turns out it was sub-threshold for a long time, but now that she's having lots of stress and is approaching peri-menopause I'm seeing a lot of the traits in her.

(OMG ... I'm old enough to have a daughter beginning peri-menopause!)

((In my family we begin our menses early and start peri-menopause early, she's only 42. Same age I began.))

mctavish23
03-06-16, 11:57 PM
OMIM is a great page on the genetics of ADHD. Thank you for that.


U R Welcome :cool:

mildadhd
03-07-16, 12:20 AM
mild,

The genetic propensity for ADHD has already been confirmed. This is Evidence Based

Diagnosis 101. I maybe retired, but this isn't some internet hobby for me.

tc

mctavish23

(Robert)

There are always genetic factors. But never only genetic factors.

namazu
03-07-16, 12:21 AM
Absolutely, some people have no genetic tie to adhd. Head injury, lead exposure just to name two.
And if it weren't complicated enough already, then there are things like this (hot off the press, but behind a paywall, alas!):

Nigg JT, Elmore AL, Natarajan N, Friderici KH, and Nikolas MA. (2016) Variation in an iron metabolism gene moderates the association between blood lead levels and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children. Psychol Sci 27(2):257-69. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26710823)

mildadhd
03-07-16, 12:24 AM
I've recommended it before, but Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) is a good (though admittedly technical) website for information about genetic markers associated with various disorders (and other traits). Here's OMIM's page on ADHD (http://omim.org/entry/143465?search=adhd&highlight=adhd).

I think mildadhd makes a very important point. Although there are a number of genetic variants associated with ADHD, most of them have fairly low penetrance (i.e. most people with the variants do not have ADHD -- though, as Ginniebean noted, some people with the variants may have subclinical elevations in traits associated with ADHD). Conversely, many of us with apparently-inherited ADHD do not have the specific genetic variants that have been identified thus far.

There's still a lot we have to learn about the different pathways to ADHD (even through genetics).

Thanks Namazu.

Are we discussing common endophenotypes?

Where does endophenotypes fit into the discussion?

ginniebean
03-07-16, 12:24 AM
To be honest, I don't want any specific gene marker to be found. Since they found the one for downs syndrome so few of them have been born due to tests that can notify parents in time for an abortion.

mctavish23
03-07-16, 12:27 AM
mild,

I'm simply quoting the accepted standard of research on ADHD, which I've studied for

many years. In fact, with the possible exception of Autism, ADHD is recognized as THE

most genetically based psychiatric disorder.

tc

mctavish23

(Robert)

mildadhd
03-07-16, 12:31 AM
mild,

I'm simply quoting the accepted standard of research on ADHD, which I've studied for

many years. In fact, with the possible exception of Autism, ADHD is recognized as THE

most genetically based psychiatric disorder.

tc

mctavish23

(Robert)

In regards to origin and treatment. I think it is important to understand that whenever ADHD is considered genetically based, that ADHD is never considered only genetically based.

mildadhd
03-07-16, 12:43 AM
And if it weren't complicated enough already, then there are things like this (hot off the press, but behind a paywall, alas!):

Nigg JT, Elmore AL, Natarajan N, Friderici KH, and Nikolas MA. (2016) Variation in an iron metabolism gene moderates the association between blood lead levels and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children. Psychol Sci 27(2):257-69. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26710823)

I wonder what are the ages of the individuals with ADHD being studied in the research?

namazu
03-07-16, 01:01 AM
Thanks Namazu.
Are we discussing common endophenotypes?
A note for people who aren't familiar with this terminology:
An endophenotype (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endophenotype)is a measurable characteristic (and not a genetic variant) that follows predictable patterns of inheritance and may represent a link between a particular genetic variant and a disorder. When there's a lot of variation in the phenotype -- as there often is in psychiatric disorders -- and many possible contributing genes and/or other factors, it can be helpful to consider endophenotypes, which are usually narrower in scope than the diagnostic criteria for the disorder, to try to understand genetic contributions to the disorder. (Here's an article from the American Psychological Association (http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov06/endophenotypes.aspx)that explains the idea pretty well.)


Whether or not we (or the researchers) are discussing endophenotypes -- let alone common endophenotypes -- varies.

In many of these studies, the researchers are comparing a population diagnosed with (usually DSM-defined) ADHD with people who don't have (DSM-defined) ADHD. So in that sense, they're starting with a standardized version of the ADHD phenotype, without necessarily having particular endophenotypes in mind.

Some of the studies look at a subtype of ADHD (again, per the older DSM), which may (or may not!) be closer to an endophenotype.

And some are looking at traits like impulsivity or attention or signals from brain imaging or performance on some kind of test. These can often be thought of as endophenotypes.

And sometimes researchers start with the genes themselves and try to figure out what they do. This can be helpful in suggesting potentially-useful endophenotypes.

Some of the endophenotypes may indeed be common across disorders, where there are shared vulnerabilities, and some may be more specific to a single disorder, or even a subset of people with a disorder.

There's a lot of work in this area right now, and I think we may learn a lot about the heterogeneity of ADHD (and shared features with other diagnoses) from it.


P.S. mildadhd, the kids in the ADHD -- lead -- iron metabolism gene study ranged in age from 6-17, and the authors note that The timing of the exposure to lead in this cross-sectional sample is unknown; obviously, if lead exposure is causal, it should precede development of ADHD. In keeping with this idea, results from broader population studies have shown that peak lead exposure in children occurs in the toddler years, whereas ADHD is typically not observed or diagnosed until later in preschool or school age. Even so, it is unclear whether early exposure or sustained exposure drove the effects we observed.(Also, the effect they saw was stronger in boys than in girls.) There have been some studies looking at interactions between genetic variants and other environmental factors (both chemical and social) in relation to ADHD that you might like. If I remember, I'll try to dig up some of the studies for you. All of the connections are clear as mud still.

daveddd
03-07-16, 10:46 AM
To be honest, I don't want any specific gene marker to be found. Since they found the one for downs syndrome so few of them have been born due to tests that can notify parents in time for an abortion.

I think it's proven there won't be a specific genetic marker for ADHD

No need to worry

BellaVita
03-07-16, 11:00 AM
To be honest, I don't want any specific gene marker to be found. Since they found the one for downs syndrome so few of them have been born due to tests that can notify parents in time for an abortion.

That's exactly how I feel about ADHD and autism.

namazu
03-07-16, 02:13 PM
I think it's proven there won't be a specific genetic marker for ADHD
No need to worry
Might be more accurate to say that there may be many genetic markers for ADHD...but probably very few so strongly and certainly linked with disorder and so completely unlinked with other important functions or traits that people would feel ethically justified in using them as a basis for discrimination. (Which is maybe what you meant by "specific" in the first place.)

That may be a reach on my part; I don't doubt that there are some people who would have fewer scruples about it, but I still don't see many bioethicists finding it easily justified.

As one possible counterexample: With Fragile X Syndrome (which is related to ADHD and autism symptoms as well as intellectual disability and reproductive problems -- and which can get worse over successive generations), the American College of OB/GYNs suggests people with certain medical histories do consider screening (http://www.acog.org/Resources-And-Publications/Committee-Opinions/Committee-on-Genetics/Carrier-Screening-for-Fragile-X-Syndrome) and possibly preimplantation diagnosis (for IVF, when there are multiple blastocysts generated) or the use of donor eggs. (I'll save further discussion of this for the thread in Debates, if I get to it.)

One potential benefit of finding genetic markers for ADHD would be insight into causal pathways, which could potentially lead to the development of more effective treatments (medication or otherwise) and/or more targeted approaches than the current medication roulette so many people experience. (Of course, people have been hyping personalized medicine since at least the inception of the Human Genome Project, and it turns out that understanding/interpreting the tsunami of genetic data, let alone translating it into safe and effective therapies, is a formidable challenge.)

ginniebean
03-07-16, 05:38 PM
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/news/science-news/2013/new-data-reveal-extent-of-genetic-overlap-between-major-mental-disorders.shtml

The study results also attach numbers to molecular evidence documenting the importance of heritability traceable to common genetic variation in causing these five major mental illnesses. Yet this still leaves much of the likely inherited genetic contribution to the disorders unexplained – not to mention non-inherited genetic factors. For example, common genetic variation accounted for 23 percent of schizophrenia, but evidence from twin and family studies estimate its total heritability at 81 percent. Similarly, the gaps are 25 percent vs. 75 percent for bipolar disorder, 28 percent vs. 75 percent for ADHD, 14 percent vs. 80 percent for autism, and 21 percent vs. 37 percent for depression.


If what I'm understanding is correct heritability for adhd is 75%. It seems to suggest that the statement put out by R. Barkley that "adhd is the most heritable of all mental disorders." still stands. I have yet to see any evidence that this statement is no longer correct.

If this is so why is it that mentioning this on the forum has become so controversial? To the point where discussions about genetic heritability are uniformly and without exception challenged?

Why has this information become so threatening that even it's mere mention creates unending controversy.

Namazu? Has this statement become controversial in actuality?

mctavish23
03-07-16, 10:52 PM
The genetic propensity for ADHD is greater than human height or IQ

namazu
03-08-16, 01:12 AM
If what I'm understanding is correct heritability for adhd is 75%. It seems to suggest that the statement put out by R. Barkley that "adhd is the most heritable of all mental disorders." still stands. I have yet to see any evidence that this statement is no longer correct.

If this is so why is it that mentioning this on the forum has become so controversial? To the point where discussions about genetic heritability are uniformly and without exception challenged?

Why has this information become so threatening that even it's mere mention creates unending controversy.

Namazu? Has this statement become controversial in actuality?

No, the high heritability of ADHD is not controversial.

However, there have been occasions when members have (mis-)used this fact in a way that suggests they're trying to shut down or dismiss consideration of potential non-genetic contributing factors or even of possible gene-environment interaction. (You may have noticed that threads on non-genetic factors also tend to be swiftly challenged -- quite often fairly, but sometimes seemingly without consideration of the potential validity of the factors in question.)

I think the backlash arises in response to authoritative claims that (non-TBI, non-lead poisoning) ADHD is "proven" to be genetic, period, end of story, nothing more to see here -- but more so to the associated implication that anyone who wants to look at environmental factors must either be an ignoramus or have some shady ulterior motive.

I personally believe that genetics is the most significant contributor to ADHD in most cases (including, I suspect, -- but cannot prove! -- my own). I believe genetics may often be sufficient to cause ADHD even in the absence of obvious environmental adversity. However, I also believe it an error and a misunderstanding of the science to summarily dismiss the possibility that environmental factors (including social environment in early life) could play some role in causation.

Most forum members do take a more nuanced view, so please be aware that I'm not calling anyone out here. I can't think of a single forum member who believes that genetics are completely irrelevant. And even those who doubt that environmental factors play a significant role in causation are usually willing to consider that environmental factors may be relevant to the severity of ADHD or to the development of comorbid disorders or for mitigation.

It can be hard not to get emotionally invested in these discussions, especially given the prevalence of (dubious) causal claims that come with a heaping plate of judgment ("you were a bad parent" chief among them). But I think sometimes this leads people to become defensive when potentially relevant factors are brought up in ways that really are not judgmental. There is value in reassuring stressed-out, guilty-feeling, well-meaning parents that it's not their fault their kid has ADHD -- and I think it's a true statement. But in a science discussion section, it seems reasonable for people to be able to ask questions about, say, stressors during pregnancy, without being immediately shut down because someone saw the word "maternal" and read it as "blaming the mother". (Note: I'm not aware of a confirmed link, but there has been research in this area, which suggests that at least some researchers wonder if it's relevant.)

I should probably shut up before I start rambling about heterogeneity in ADHD and "no true Scotsman" fallacies and other things that are tangentially related, but don't really answer your question.

In sum: ADHD is indeed highly heritable, even if most of the genetic details remain elusive. Genes don't explain everything, so it's worth keeping an open (if appropriately skeptical) mind about other possible contributing factors. We all have a lot to learn.

namazu
03-08-16, 05:34 AM
Also, having just flipped through a genetic epidemiology textbook and browsed a bunch of websites, I'm reminded just how difficult it is for me to wrap my brain around the interpretation of heritability.

It's not the proportion of any given individual's ADHD that's genetically determined, and it's not the percent of ADHD cases that are purely genetic. It's a measure of the proportion of variation in ADHD in a population that's attributable to genetic variation -- and it's influenced by the diversity of the population and of the environment.

Here is an interesting (and only moderately jargon-filled) news feature about the issue of "missing heritability" that was published in Nature (http://www.nature.com/news/2008/081105/full/456018a.html) in 2008.

"Missing heritability" basically refers to the gap between heritability estimates and what can be explained by the effects of the genetic variants that have been identified so far. For ADHD and most other psychiatric disorders and complex traits, that gap is still pretty huge.

The article (not about ADHD specifically, but relevant here) touches on several issues:
- some of the challenges in identifying genetic markers,
- gene-gene interactions,
- copy-number variants (at least one of which, in the DRD4 dopamine receptor gene, has been implicated as a risk factor for ADHD (http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/09_00/DRD4_gene.shtml))
- assumptions inherent in heritability estimates, and
- heterogeneity of the trait(s) under study.

daveddd
03-08-16, 10:43 AM
Namazu.

Well put

Lung cancer in some is thought to be heritable

But it needs something like smoking to activate

Just a really simple comparison

daveddd
03-08-16, 10:47 AM
Joel nigg has laid out several different gene environment interactions for ADHD which I posted in another thread

TygerSan
03-08-16, 12:16 PM
Heritability is a weird concept. As I understand it (and I'm not a genetcist or an epidemiologist) if you somehow raised a group of people in an identical environment, then any variation in the trait you were looking at would have to be close to 100% heritable, as the environment did not contribute to the variance in that instance (of course that is a situation that is pretty much impossible in the real world).

ginniebean
03-08-16, 12:24 PM
No, the high heritability of ADHD is not controversial.

However, there have been occasions when members have (mis-)used this fact in a way that suggests they're trying to shut down or dismiss consideration of potential non-genetic contributing factors or even of possible gene-environment interaction. (You may have noticed that threads on non-genetic factors also tend to be swiftly challenged -- quite often fairly, but sometimes seemingly without consideration of the potential validity of the factors in question.

This isn't really answering my questions. My question was why is the statement that "adhd is the most heritable of all mental disorders." iniformly and without exception challenged.

In polite conversation it's ok to once in a while give way to another and say "ok, I can put aside the tragectory of what I wanted to speak of and let's talk about what you want to talk about" once in a while, when it's so consistent and so aggressively done it become obnoxious and annoying so I have no doubt some people in tone or what ever come across as "**** off already"

The statement that Adhd is highly heritable is not a controversial one and what I see is that each and every time it's mentioned it's treated as if it's a dangerous competing theory and a gravely suspect one at that.

There have been debunking of child twin studies, derailments to epigenetics, derailments of statements by certain authors, derailments about play, about early child nurturance, and any number of other adjunct ideas.

These ideas are not being spoken of as adjunct but rather as adversarial competitive theories and simple fact is they're not. I won't even dispute the importance of these topics, I myself think of them, and have made posts about some of these topics myself prior to this problem.




I think the backlash arises in response to authoritative claims that (non-TBI, non-lead poisoning) ADHD is "proven" to be genetic, period, end of story, nothing more to see here -- but more so to the associated implication that anyone who wants to look at environmental factors must either be an ignoramus or have some shady ulterior motive.If the statement Adhd is highly heritable is not a controversial how is it that it cannot be a stand alone statement. Is it necessary that every time it's uttered we must enter an arduous conversation where this is not the case? I mean it does say highly not wholly. I don't think it has anything to do with "adhd is proven to be genetic, period, end of story" but more a "this isn't the tragectory of the conversation that I was going for and I don't want to enter into this personal issue the person has with anything genetic being mentioned. It is really impolite to so consistently highjack every conversation because this is my pet issue.

I understand having pet issues, I have my own, and if I were to be told, you know, you're highjacking my topic, or that's not the direction I wished to go, I'd withdraw and let the person go with it and do my best to follow along in that spirit. It's a give and take, and I'm not seeing that same give and take, and frankly haven't in years, like about three years + actually. That's a long time to be polite and say "ok, let's not talk about what I want to talk about let's defend what I'm talking about so you can talk about your pet issue and wedge it in yet again. It happened yet again in this thread. See the statement .. pounce.

Do you see how this could be a possiblity you may not see or have considered? Because it's plain as day from my experience.

I personally believe that genetics is the most significant contributor to ADHD in most cases (including, I suspect, -- but cannot prove! -- my own). I believe genetics may often be sufficient to cause ADHD even in the absence of obvious environmental adversity. However, I also believe it an error and a misunderstanding of the science to summarily dismiss the possibility that environmental factors (including social environment in early life) could play some role in causation.Well, none of us can prove much of anything, but as the statement "adhd is highly heritable" is not a controversial statement the constant challenge makes it one.

I don't dismiss the possibility of environmental factors at all and think in fact that there can be many interesting ideas that come out of that, and many interesting conversations, including those I've personally made posts about, (again, prior to the genetic controversy being the only topic possible)



Most forum members do take a more nuanced view, so please be aware that I'm not calling anyone out here. I can't think of a single forum member who believes that genetics are completely irrelevant. And even those who doubt that environmental factors play a significant role in causation are usually willing to consider that environmental factors may be relevant to the severity of ADHD or to the development of comorbid disorders or for mitigation.I think most if not all of us including myself have a nuanced view. I don't think this is at issue in any way.

It can be hard not to get emotionally invested in these discussions, especially given the prevalence of (dubious) causal claims that come with a heaping plate of judgment ("you were a bad parent" chief among them). But I think sometimes this leads people to become defensive when potentially relevant factors are brought up in ways that really are not judgmental. There is value in reassuring stressed-out, guilty-feeling, well-meaning parents that it's not their fault their kid has ADHD -- and I think it's a true statement. But in a science discussion section, it seems reasonable for people to be able to ask questions about, say, stressors during pregnancy, without being immediately shut down because someone saw the word "maternal" and read it as "blaming the mother". (Note: I'm not aware of a confirmed link, but there has been research in this area, which suggests that at least some researchers wonder if it's relevant.)Absolutely and I have on occaisions even brought this up myself. My objection is the narrow filter these discussion are forced to flow thru and that being pet ideas of certain individuals who appear to have a major problem with the non controversial statement "adhd is highly heritable".


There are terrible parents, there are good parents who do terrible things in the mistaken idea that adhd requires tough love, there are parents who by their actions exacerbate the condition. No dispute and I, again, don't think this is in dispute. Or at least not that I have seen. It is the forcing of the conversation into a narrow conduit and lenses with which the topic inevitably follows due to what I call hijacking. The reaction I'm speaking of can be witnessed in this thread and the inevitable path that follows that I'm speaking of becomes the main thrust of conversation. It's tiresome to be charitable.


In sum: ADHD is indeed highly heritable, even if most of the genetic details remain elusive. Genes don't explain everything, so it's worth keeping an open (if appropriately skeptical) mind about other possible contributing factors. We all have a lot to learn.It's also worth allowing people to make a non controversial statement as part of a conversation go unchallenged sometimes instead of forcing a bogged down defence.

I hope my tone and my objections are not seen as hostile, because they're not. I admit I have been quite frustrated in the past because like most people having to give way to those who object every time you mention even in passing something that hits a hot button that then segues neatly into what they want to talk about is actually frustrating. It leaves you to make the only reasonable choice and that is to stay away from something you actually enjoy so as not to be labelled as a troublemaker for simply wanting to have a discussion flow in the tragectory you intend.

So as SB likes to say: "In summary"

Adhd is highly heritable is not a controversial statement and getting bogged down with exceptions consistently isn't always welcome in the spirit of the thread or to posters who might like to speak of their own pet theories. At a certain point "would you just please butt out" becomes a reasonable request.

Lunacie
03-08-16, 12:41 PM
:goodpost:

daveddd
03-08-16, 12:52 PM
Who challenges ADHD is heritable ?:scratch:

daveddd
03-08-16, 12:56 PM
I'm interested in the heritable temperaments Barkley mentions in the newest handbook that can lead to ADHD

daveddd
03-08-16, 12:58 PM
It think the only time anyone gets annoyed by the heritable comment. Is when people simply show up and meaninglessly blurt it out

It's nothing new and it doesn't make anything else not true

ginniebean
03-08-16, 12:59 PM
I'm interested in the heritable temperaments Barkley mentions in the newest handbook that can lead to ADHD

I only have his old one, has he made significant changes? Wait, I'm not even sure we're talking about the same handbook. Can you refresh me?

Any quotes you can bring out? I know that can be a lot of trouble but I'd be happy to check out any online source, not sure I have the time even to read a book these days.

ginniebean
03-08-16, 01:01 PM
Who challenges ADHD is heritable ?:scratch:

I'd rather not get into finger pointing by naming names, it always seem so terribly rude to me and as I have been subject to it very publicly I'd rather not do that to anyone else.

Fuzzy12
03-08-16, 01:03 PM
To be honest, I don't want any specific gene marker to be found. Since they found the one for downs syndrome so few of them have been born due to tests that can notify parents in time for an abortion.

Wow..really?? I didn't know that though I'm sure you are right. :(

Abortion aside, I think, it's good to have a genetic marker, mainly to manage your expectation and maybe adjust your plans. I did the standard test for downs for the same reason that I want to find out the sex of my baby...so that I can manage my expectations, not in a value judgment type of way but in the sense that I know what to expect. I hate surprises.

Before getting pregnant I did try and find out if there was any sort of genetic testing that I could do to 1. know for sure if I have ADHD and 2. find out how heritable it was. Apparently there is nothing. Not because it's not heritable but just because no specific marker has been identified yet (or something like that). If I could have found out I wouldn't have tried for a baby. Similarly, if I could have found out that I'm bipolar and how inheritable that is, I, for sure, wouldn't have tried for a baby. Not because a child with bipolar or ADHD or any other disorder doesn't have any value or the same value as any other child or isn't as lovable as any other child but because I don't see how I could justify the risk of passing on disorders that are likely to cause a lot of pain and suffering in a child's life.

Even now with the uncertainty, it's something I feel hugely guilty about.

Lunacie
03-08-16, 01:04 PM
Who challenges ADHD is heritable ?:scratch:

There are always genetic factors. But never only genetic factors.

Why does this always have to be brought up in such an argumentative tone?

No one is saying that only genetics factor in, so why refute a point that hasn't been made?

namazu
03-08-16, 01:10 PM
Ginnie, I answered your question, "Has this statement [that ADHD has high heritability] become controversial in actuality?" with a clear "No."

I speculated, in relation to your other question, that the reason some statements related to the genetic contribution to causation ADHD are routinely challenged is because these statements are sometimes made with the strong implication that everything relevant to the causation of ADHD is already known (false), and/or that any discussion of environmental factors is folly or a threat or a distraction.

Do you see how this could be a possiblity you may not see or have considered? Because it's plain as day from my experience.
I see that it is a possibility, and I've seen it happen many times in other threads.

Here, the OP asked for info on genetic markers, and highlighted both genetic and non-genetic contributions in later posts. The statement about genetic propensity (with an appeal to authority) was made as a direct response (/challenge?) to the (scientifically accurate, uncontroversial, and on-topic) statements that many people with identified genetic markers do not have ADHD, and that many people with ADHD do not have identified genetic markers. This comment about propensity was replied to with yet another accurate and uncontroversial and not particularly contradictory statement regarding the fact that genes do not operate in a vacuum.

In this thread, given the topic and the sequence of posts, I do not see compelling evidence that scientific fact is under frivolous attack (or any attack, really).

I agree that in general, it is inappropriate for people to hijack/derail threads with their pet peeves or hypotheses. Please use the report button if you see that happening. (And as this sidebar is itself heading off-topic from the OP, I'll leave it at that!)

ginniebean
03-08-16, 01:13 PM
Wow..really?? I didn't know that though I'm sure you are right. :(

Abortion aside, I think, it's good to have a genetic marker, mainly to manage your expectation and maybe adjust your plans. I did the standard test for downs for the same reason that I want to find out the sex of my baby...so that I can manage my expectations, not in a value judgment type of way but in the sense that I know what to expect. I hate surprises.

Before getting pregnant I did try and find out if there was any sort of genetic testing that I could do to 1. know for sure if I have ADHD and 2. find out how heritable it was. Apparently there is nothing. Not because it's not heritable but just because no specific marker has been identified yet (or something like that). If I could have found out I wouldn't have tried for a baby. Similarly, if I could have found out that I'm bipolar and how inheritable that is, I, for sure, wouldn't have tried for a baby. Not because a child with bipolar or ADHD or any other disorder doesn't have any value or the same value as any other child or isn't as lovable as any other child but because I don't see how I could justify the risk of passing on disorders that are likely to cause a lot of pain and suffering in a child's life.

Even now with the uncertainty, it's something I feel hugely guilty about.


Luckily this really isn't in the horizon for Adhd or other conditions or I could be simply wishful thinking. I really don't want to make any judgement on parents for their choices, life is hard, raising children ups the ante and we don't live in a child friendly world. Parents really have less support than they've ever had with increasing responsibilities.

https://lejeuneusa.org/blog/war-down-syndrome#.Vt8HyeafLJ0

However, this can be a bit chilling.

ginniebean
03-08-16, 01:17 PM
(And as this sidebar is itself heading off-topic from the OP, I'll leave it at that!)

Yes it is, and I did write to the OP to apologise and also to say I'd not be offended if he asked for it to be moved. I'll leave it at this too, and of course will do as you suggest.


I guess people just see things very differently.

SB_UK
03-08-16, 01:40 PM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4517414/
Genome-wide association studies of complex physiological traits and diseases consistently found that associated genetic factors, such as allelic polymorphisms or DNA mutations, only explained a minority of the expected heritable fraction. This discrepancy is known as “missing heritability”, and its underlying factors and molecular mechanisms are not established. Epigenetic programs may account for a significant fraction of the “missing heritability.” The problem with genetics - is so what ?
The problem with epigenetics - is getting people to change after the basis to epigenetic modification is discovered.
It's all very unsatisfactory.

Be nice, exercise and eat healthy - for health - and nobody listens.

ginniebean
03-08-16, 01:44 PM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4517414/


The problem with genetics - is so what ?
The problem with epigenetics - is getting people to change after the basis to epigenetic modification is discovered.

"So what" sometimes your brevity is awe inspiring .. exactly! Hah! bet you never thought you'd hear 'brevity' used did ya? :D

We'll have to see how the epigenetic modifications work out.. personal work it seems.. not always of course, but I suspect that is the biggest part.

Lunacie
03-08-16, 01:46 PM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4517414/
The problem with genetics - is so what ?
The problem with epigenetics - is getting people to change after the basis to epigenetic modification is discovered.
It's all very unsatisfactory.

Be nice, exercise and eat healthy - for health - and nobody listens.

This is happening but it's so slow.

Many parents and grandparents were never diagnosed as children.

They were only diagnosed when their children or grandchildren were diagnosed.

It takes time and effort and meds and therapy to make lasting changes to the way we treat ourselves and the way we treat our children.

daveddd
03-08-16, 01:56 PM
I only have his old one, has he made significant changes? Wait, I'm not even sure we're talking about the same handbook. Can you refresh me?

Any quotes you can bring out? I know that can be a lot of trouble but I'd be happy to check out any online source, not sure I have the time even to read a book these days.


https://books.google.com/books?id=zlk8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA95&dq=russell+barkley+adhd+handbook+4th+edition+tempe rament&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiXkJ2u1LHLAhUDRyYKHYMAA6wQ6AEIKzAA#v=on epage&q=russell%20barkley%20adhd%20handbook%204th%20edit ion%20temperament&f=false


should be right to the page

starts at bottom left paragraph

Fuzzy12
03-08-16, 01:58 PM
Be nice, exercise and eat healthy - for health - and nobody listens.

I listen but being nice, exercising and eating healthy are for me three of the most difficult things to do!! :lol:

SB_UK
03-08-16, 02:00 PM
The basic problem with man is that man thinks - here's a test that proves whether something is this way or that - and then we find that that's not what it proves at all.

There's some strong inherited component though I haven't seen anything in the literature that justifies the incredible amount of money and effort that human beings have thrown into the genetics of common complex conditions.

Diabetes and Obesity for example.

The solution is going to be to eat less and exercise more.

But nobody really wants to hear that.

ginniebean
03-08-16, 02:05 PM
The basic problem with man is that man thinks - here's a test that proves whether something is this way or that - and then we find that that's not what it proves at all.

There's some strong inherited component though I haven't seen anything in the literature that justifies the incredible amount of money and effort that human beings have thrown into the genetic of common complex conditions.

Diabetes and Obesity for example.

The solution is going to be to eat less and exercise more.

But nobody really wants to hear that.

You are oversimplifying things here. Skinny excercisy people get diabetes even the type 2 variant.

Obesity is more of a social issue than a medical one in most cases.

I will agree with your first statement fully. The basic problem with mankind is that mankind thinks. YERP! no argument here.

SB_UK
03-08-16, 02:08 PM
The mighty epids are trying but nobody'll listen
- http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/07/middle-aged-people-targeted-in-new-public-health-england-phe-campaign

from yesterday

SB_UK
03-08-16, 02:09 PM
You are oversimplifying things here. Skinny excercisy people get diabetes even the type 2 variant.

Obesity is more of a social issue than a medical one in most cases.

I will agree with your first statement fully. The basic problem with mankind is that mankind thinks. YERP! no argument here.

You're right - that's the 'be nice' (source of our social woes) part above ... ... ...

SB_UK
03-08-16, 02:12 PM
You are oversimplifying things here. Skinny excercisy people get diabetes even the type 2 variant.

Obesity is more of a social issue than a medical one in most cases.

I will agree with your first statement fully. The basic problem with mankind is that mankind thinks. YERP! no argument here.

I'd love to know if exercisey people who lo-carb vegan protein get t2d - so uk's most famous rower is t2diabetic but there's this terrible culture - I've experienced it = of carbing up - ie massive over-intake of carbs.

Ritualistic in nature.

ginniebean
03-08-16, 02:23 PM
I'd love to know if exercisey people who lo-carb vegan protein get t2d - so uk's most famous rower is t2diabetic but there's this terrible culture - I've experienced it = of carbing up - ie massive over-intake of carbs.

Ritualistic in nature.

Well, I don't know about low carb and vegan protein is all that low carb. Most t2d need to consume less than 30 grams of carb to maintain without medication. That's damned hard to do on a vegan diet.

I have a brother and two sisters disgnosed now with pre-diabetes . My extended family is riddled with both types of diabetes. Two have been following a low carb lifestyle and have never been overweight, and one who is overweight and does not follow low carb. There's a lot of people out there who are obese and who never get diabetes as well.

I love carbs, carbs don't love me... low carb can be a very restrictive and hard to maintain diet. I won't judge people who struggle with it. For diabetics who want to get off or reduce medication vegetarian or vegan is generally not the answer.

Now I think I have to go to the naughty hijacker corner.. sigh sorry dave!

ginniebean
03-08-16, 02:24 PM
https://books.google.com/books?id=zlk8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA95&dq=russell+barkley+adhd+handbook+4th+edition+tempe rament&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiXkJ2u1LHLAhUDRyYKHYMAA6wQ6AEIKzAA#v=on epage&q=russell%20barkley%20adhd%20handbook%204th%20edit ion%20temperament&f=false


should be right to the page

starts at bottom left paragraph

reading it now, will have questions.. hopefully I can read a bunch today

daveddd
03-08-16, 02:26 PM
Well, I don't know about low carb and vegan protein is all that low carb. Most t2d need to consume less than 30 grams of carb to maintain without medication. That's damned hard to do on a vegan diet.

I have a brother and two sisters disgnosed now with pre-diabetes . My extended family is riddled with both types of diabetes. Two have been following a low carb lifestyle and have never been overweight, and one who is overweight and does not follow low carb. There's a lot of people out there who are obese and who never get diabetes as well.

I love carbs, carbs don't love me... low carb can be a very restrictive and hard to maintain diet. I won't judge people who struggle with it. For diabetics who want to get off or reduce medication vegetarian or vegan is generally not the answer.

Now I think I have to go to the naughty hijacker corner.. sigh sorry dave!

i don't mind a polite hijacking

in fact, its somewhat ridiculous to not expect and embrace it on an ADHD forum

ginniebean
03-08-16, 02:35 PM
The mighty epids are trying but nobody'll listen
- http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/07/middle-aged-people-targeted-in-new-public-health-england-phe-campaign

from yesterday

it's all on the focus my friend. I find this type of article spurious and misleading.

Sports injuries cost the NHS a lot of money, here in Canada extreme sports lead to incredibly expensive rescues and hospital stays. I've heard it said if everyone lost weight and excercised the health care system would save no money because it would be more than made up for by treating sports injuries but you don't hear anyone worrying over the cost of this. I don't care for bandwagons like this.

Smoking.. is on the wane..

Eating, smoking, drinking are all very addictive substances and yes I know food is contentious, but the fact is, there's so much judgement on substance abuse it's a wonder any of them are successful. I don't want to add to the judgement they endure.

That said, carbs are evil :P and taste sooo good.

daveddd
03-08-16, 02:38 PM
it's all on the focus my friend. I find this type of article spurious and misleading.

Sports injuries cost the NHS a lot of money, here in Canada extreme sports lead to incredibly expensive rescues and hospital stays. I've heard it said if everyone lost weight and excercised the health care system would save no money because it would be more than made up for by treating sports injuries but you don't hear anyone worrying over the cost of this. I don't care for bandwagons like this.

Smoking.. is on the wane..

Eating, smoking, drinking are all very addictive substances and yes I know food is contentious, but the fact is, there's so much judgement on substance abuse it's a wonder any of them are successful. I don't want to add to the judgement they endure.

That said, carbs are evil :P and taste sooo good.

That said, carbs are evil :P and taste soon good.

especially on pot

SB_UK
03-08-16, 02:46 PM
That said, carbs are evil :P and taste soon good.

especially on pot


'the munchies'

daveddd
03-08-16, 02:54 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbViuz7Sr1Q

SB_UK
03-08-16, 03:10 PM
I'm interested in the heritable temperaments Barkley mentions in the newest handbook that can lead to ADHD
from ddd's link (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zlk8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA95&dq=russell+barkley+adhd+handbook+4th+edition+tempe rament&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=russell%20barkley%20adhd%20handbook%204th%20edit ion%20temperament&f=false)

I'm still seeing inheritance of sensitivity underlying ADHD.

SB_UK
03-08-16, 03:12 PM
I don't think that we should underestimate sensitivity - as I believe that stress makes us more susceptible to inflammation - currently find it hard to type and walk - inflammation in hands and feet.

ginniebean
03-08-16, 03:16 PM
I'm interested in the heritable temperaments Barkley mentions in the newest handbook that can lead to ADHD


"Temperament" is the global term for a set of early emergent traits in development that form the basis for a later personality. Most of the constituent traits are thought to be affective in nature and can be distinguished as involving either reactivity or regulation. R. Barkley It took a long time to write this out so I didn't put in the extra stuff quoting various authors works. My bad.


I'm wondering about your saying temperament can 'lead to adhd' because I can see it at least as plausible that the underlying physical brain issues with adhd or adhd not yet diagnosed lead to a distinguishable temperament(s).

From what I've read in this book you linked I'm not seeing the suggestion that temperament leads to ADHD but rather that temperament is affective. Meaning it happens as a result of....... (fill in the blank).

I'd think it would be more likely for there to be the underlying brain issues, leading to a more frustrated infant/toddler, parental expectations, medical diagnostic milestones not being met and some pressure to get on it.. would creat an affect rather than an affect creating a disorder.

Am I making sense?

SB_UK
03-08-16, 03:18 PM
sorry - back on topic

from ddd's link (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zlk8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA95&dq=russell+barkley+adhd+handbook+4th+edition+tempe rament&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=russell%20barkley%20adhd%20handbook%204th%20edit ion%20temperament&f=false)

I'm still seeing inheritance of sensitivity underlying ADHD.

“Being HS is genetic,” says Dr Elaine Aron, who is a leading researcher in the field.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/wellbeing/health-advice/highly-sensitive-people/

daveddd
03-08-16, 03:19 PM
It took a long time to write this out so I didn't put in the extra stuff quoting various authors works. My bad.


I'm wondering about your saying temperament can 'lead to adhd' because I can see it at least as plausible that the underlying physical brain issues with adhd or adhd not yet diagnosed lead to a distinguishable temperament(s).

From what I've read in this book you linked I'm not seeing the suggestion that temperament leads to ADHD but rather that temperament is affective. Meaning it happens as a result of....... (fill in the blank).

I'd think it would be more likely for there to be the underlying brain issues, leading to a more frustrated infant/toddler, parental expectations, medical diagnostic milestones not being met and some pressure to get on it.. would creat an affect rather than an affect creating a disorder.

Am I making sense?

i know what your saying

but primitive affect comes well before EF

link- early affect=externalizing disorder (adhd) 'nigg'

daveddd
03-08-16, 03:22 PM
temperament - life long ADHD a lot ADHD that goes away in adulthood a little, controls- none

ginniebean
03-08-16, 03:22 PM
i know what your saying

but primitive affect comes well before EF

link- early affect=externalizing disorder (adhd) 'nigg'

Was that a link? if it's there not sure if it worked out as you planned.

SB_UK
03-08-16, 03:24 PM
This is interesting - from ^^^

“If you are a HSP you shouldn’t want to ‘cure’ yourself. It’s who you are. In certain societies being highly sensitive is seen as a positive thing. Research found that highly sensitive men in Thailand and India were rarely, if ever, teased, whereas highly sensitive men in North America were frequently so.” "We [Indians] have great respect for such individuals [ADDers], although their lives may be difficult."
"In America they consider this behavior indicative of a psychiatric disorder," I said.
- See more at: http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2010/07/adhd-disordered-minds-or-old-souls#sthash.diydWGw9.dpufSorry - typing with 1 finger ... ... (pain !!!)

daveddd
03-08-16, 03:26 PM
Was that a link? if it's there not sure if it worked out as you planned.

i didn't plan anything, just read it unbiasedly


barkley cited niggs work that said early temperament can lead to an externalizing disorder

SB_UK
03-08-16, 03:28 PM
Each time I read something about HSP - I see more info of use than I do in academic ADHD literature.

I really fo hopw the HSP people can sit down with the Markram model (of a mechanism for sensitivity).

(pain numbing wrists now - must stop)

Lunacie
03-08-16, 03:30 PM
I'm interested in the heritable temperaments Barkley mentions in the newest handbook that can lead to ADHD

https://books.google.com/books?id=zlk8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA95&dq=russell+barkley+adhd+handbook+4th+edition+tempe rament&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiXkJ2u1LHLAhUDRyYKHYMAA6wQ6AEIKzAA#v=on epage&q=russell%20barkley%20adhd%20handbook%204th%20edit ion%20temperament&f=false


should be right to the page

starts at bottom left paragraph

I'm not sure what you mean by the heritable temperaments "can lead to ADHD."

What I understand Barkley to be saying in that page you linked to is that early childhood temperaments may be an indicator the child has ADHD.

daveddd
03-08-16, 03:31 PM
Each time I read something about HSP - I see more info of use than I do in academic ADHD literature.

I really fo hopw the HSP people can sit down with the Markram model (of a mechanism for sensitivity).

(pain numbing wrists now - must stop)

one issue i see is barkley mainly cites others research even down to his original thesis (borowski and vygotski via 1960s )

so none of it is actually new, just introduced to a broader audience

daveddd
03-08-16, 03:33 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by the heritable temperaments "can lead to ADHD."

What I understand Barkley to be saying in that page you linked to is that early childhood temperaments may be an indicator the child has ADHD.

i guess the best i can do is say research the original studies he cites?

ginniebean
03-08-16, 03:36 PM
I don't think that we should underestimate sensitivity - as I believe that stress makes us more susceptible to inflammation - currently find it hard to type and walk - inflammation in hands and feet.

Sorry I missed this, one of my knees has had inflamation for several years now, I've had it operated on and little functioning was restored. I'm still trying a lot of different things yet and haven't given up. I miss just being able to walk around for lengths of time like others do.

Lunacie
03-08-16, 03:37 PM
from ddd's link (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zlk8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA95&dq=russell+barkley+adhd+handbook+4th+edition+tempe rament&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=russell%20barkley%20adhd%20handbook%204th%20edit ion%20temperament&f=false)

I'm still seeing inheritance of sensitivity underlying ADHD.

I believe the underlying genetic differences in ADHD cause the person to be more sensitive and be more fearful and hostile/angry.

daveddd
03-08-16, 03:38 PM
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2006 Nov;47(11):1175-83.
Child ADHD and personality/temperament traits of reactive and effortful control, resiliency, and emotionality.
Martel MM1, Nigg JT.
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Models of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) suggest developmental influences may feed into components of the disorder separately from associated disruptive behavior problems. We investigated this in terms of key personality/temperament traits of Reactive and Effortful Control, Resiliency, and Emotionality.
METHODS:
A sample of 179 children (age 6-12, 63% boys), of whom 92 had ADHD, 52 were Controls, and 35 were borderline or not otherwise specified cases of ADHD, were examined. Dispositional trait scores were derived from parent-completed California Q-sort and the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire. Child ADHD symptoms were evaluated using maternal structured diagnostic interview and teacher-completed symptom ratings.
RESULTS:
Traits were differentially associated with symptoms. Reactive Control was related to hyperactivity-impulsivity as rated by both parents and teachers. Negative Emotionality was related to oppositional-defiance. Resiliency was primarily related to inattention-disorganization as rated by both parents and teachers; Effortful Control was related uniquely to inattention in parent but not teacher data. A moderation effect emerged; the relationship between parent-rated Negative Emotionality and teacher-rated ADHD symptoms was stronger for children with high levels of both Reactive and Effortful Control.
CONCLUSIONS:
Results are interpreted in relation to a two-pathway model of ADHD; regulation problems contribute to the emergence of symptoms of inattention-disorganization, reactive or motivational control problems to the emergence of hyperactivity-impulsivity, and these are distinct from negative affectivity. Children with regulation deficits and a reactive motivational style are especially at risk for the development of ADHD.


"Children with regulation deficits and a reactive motivational style are especially at risk for the development of ADHD."

here is one

Lunacie
03-08-16, 03:42 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by the heritable temperaments "can lead to ADHD."

What I understand Barkley to be saying in that page you linked to is that early childhood temperaments may be an indicator the child has ADHD.

i guess the best i can do is say research the original studies he cites?

Could you please explain in your own words why you see it differently than I do?

I am not able to understand most studies and research books. I need to have someone to explain them more simply, in smaller paragraphs.

I can generally understand Barkley's summations, although I have to paste them into Word or Email and break them into smaller paragraphs to do so.

ginniebean
03-08-16, 03:45 PM
I believe the underlying genetic differences in ADHD cause the person to be more sensitive and be more fearful and hostile/angry.

My youngest son was born angry, it was just his 'temperament'. He didn't cry he yelled angrily, even from one week of age. I can't think interaction had much to do with it because the interaction he had was mostly cuddling, me staring at him non stop falling completely head over heals with him, and nursing/changing diapers cooing etc..


But when he wanted to eat or needed a cuddle or a change of diaper he would turn bright red and I felt scolded by him. I'd quickly get him what he needed and he'd immediately become the sweetest little angel.


This continued as he got older, yelling and screaming followed by a big smile when he saw me coming.

He still has an angry temperament and I suspect he comes by that quite honestly but at the same time, it's like he was born with it.

ginniebean
03-08-16, 03:48 PM
"Children with regulation deficits and a reactive motivational style are especially at risk for the development of ADHD."

here is one

I believe this to be true. My interpretation of it may differ tho. Is that which causes adhd present before diagnosis? I would say that it is, are these affects a result of environment or heredity and I'd have to say both.

It's a very intriguing subject.

Can you point me to some of the studies where affect is seen to cause adhd? I am interested.

and if I figure it out lunacie, I'll try and put it in words that are understandable but I can become subject to verbal diarrhea and an over confidence that my view is the correct one, so take it for what it's worth.

daveddd
03-08-16, 03:52 PM
I believe this to be true. My interpretation of it may differ tho. Is that which causes adhd present before diagnosis? I would say that it is, are these affects a result of environment or heredity and I'd have to say both.

It's a very intriguing subject.

Can you point me to some of the studies where affect is seen to cause adhd? I am interested.

and if I figure it out lunacie, I'll try and put it in words that are understandable but I can become subject to verbal diarrhea and an over confidence that my view is the correct one, so take it for what it's worth.

you quoted one that barkley has cited


you are more than welcome to interpret the conclusion from the cited source differently


i guess i can look for where barkley says only half of these children develop ADHD

can you guys help me a little though?, I'm trying to get some burgers on the grill

70 and sunny today, first time in awhile

ginniebean
03-08-16, 03:55 PM
you quoted one that barkley has cited


you are more than welcome to interpret the conclusion from the cited source differently


i guess i can look for where barkley says only half of these children develop ADHD

can you guys help me a little though?, I'm trying to get some burgers on the grill

70 and sunny today, first time in awhile

oh sorry dave, no pressure, hell it can wait weeks.. I just feel like I need some pointers as to where to look...

eat ya burgers! :)

daveddd
03-08-16, 03:59 PM
https://books.google.com/books?id=BSLF7yueqoUC&pg=PA97&dq=russell+barkley+negative+temperament&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiO-bDm77HLAhWMQSYKHVJPDZEQ6AEILTAC#v=onepage&q=russell%20barkley%20negative%20temperament&f=false

heres a nice one

firing up the grill

ginniebean
03-08-16, 04:18 PM
Just read that Dave, and I have no argument at all. but it got CUT OFF. I hate that!

I'll have to do more reading to see for myself.

daveddd
03-08-16, 04:19 PM
Just read that Dave, and I have no argument at all. but it got CUT OFF. I hate that!

I'll have to do more reading to see for myself.

sorry, i believe i paid 10 american dollars for it?


equal to one canadian penny i think

Little Missy
03-08-16, 04:51 PM
I sure wish somebody would find the whatever it as along with ADHD that causes HSP because finally after a year I figured out that Bounce dryer sheets the lady uses to dry LOL's stuff is what has been rotting the skin off of my fingertips. Methylisothiazolinone needs to be outlawed. If I even breathe the air that comes out of the dryer it burns all the way down into my lungs.

mctavish23
03-08-16, 05:31 PM
The "genetic marker" for spring = 70 degrees & burgers on the grill :yes:


U R Welcome :cool:

daveddd
03-08-16, 05:40 PM
The "genetic marker" for spring = 70 degrees & burgers on the grill :yes:


U R Welcome :cool:

spring is unquestionably heritable

in fact I'm going to start the motorcycle

ginniebean
03-08-16, 05:48 PM
https://books.google.com/books?id=BSLF7yueqoUC&pg=PA97&dq=russell+barkley+negative+temperament&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiO-bDm77HLAhWMQSYKHVJPDZEQ6AEILTAC#v=onepage&q=russell%20barkley%20negative%20temperament&f=false

heres a nice one

firing up the grill

This gives new meaning to "nice one". The implications here have been on my mind since I read it and the longer I ponder.. it's horrifying. :(

daveddd
03-08-16, 06:47 PM
This gives new meaning to "nice one". The implications here have been on my mind since I read it and the longer I ponder.. it's horrifying. :(

Science is nothing to be afraid of


Take a deep breath and I bet it doesn't say what u think it says

Lunacie
03-08-16, 09:41 PM
https://books.google.com/books?id=BSLF7yueqoUC&pg=PA97&dq=russell+barkley+negative+temperament&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiO-bDm77HLAhWMQSYKHVJPDZEQ6AEILTAC#v=onepage&q=russell%20barkley%20negative%20temperament&f=false

heres a nice one

firing up the grill

I am trying to read that with no bias, but I think it very clearly says the same thing I've been saying.

I copied several paragraphs since it seems we may not be able to go back and reread it.

Thus it appears that child temperament, while an important early risk factor, can be a very strong genetic contribution to ADHD symptoms ~ one that is much greater than the contribution of environmental agents or purely social factors.

Everything we know points to the idea that children with ADHD have delayed brain development and less brain activity, especially in the pre-frontal regions ~ precisely those brain centers known to be involved in executive functioning and self-control, such as inhibition, persistence toward goals or tasks, resistance to distraction, and control of one's activity level.

The precise cause of this delayed maturation and underactivity is not known but appears likely to be due to genetics; people with ADHD have different versions of genes that build and operate these brain regions; and these variations may be contributing to altered brain development and function.

Where purely social factors seem to be important, as in the case of poor child management skills by parents, is in predicting which children may have more aggressive and defiant behavior.

Even the existence of this relationship, however, does not mean that how parents are managing a child with ADHD is the cause of the ADHD, only of the defiant and aggressive behavior.

A smaller percentage of cases appear to be due to acquired injuries to the developing brain, such as through toxins consumed by the mother during pregnancy or by the child after birth.

SB_UK
03-09-16, 06:06 AM
https://books.google.com/books?id=BSLF7yueqoUC&pg=PA97&dq=russell+barkley+negative+temperament&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiO-bDm77HLAhWMQSYKHVJPDZEQ6AEILTAC#v=onepage&q=russell%20barkley%20negative%20temperament&f=false

heres a nice one

firing up the grill

It all seems right.

But is just sensitivity overloaded.

eg from above

“Being HS is genetic,” says Dr Elaine Aron, who is a leading researcher in the field. “Twenty percent of us are born with it and it affects both sexes equally. I explain the condition in four letters: DOES. D is for depth of processing, which is the key to the whole condition. They process everything around them very deeply. O is for overstimulation, which is brought about because of D. E is for emotional reactivity and empathy.

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/adhd-zoe/2011/06/10-signs-that-youre-an-hsp-highly-sensitive-person/

Many people with ADHD (myself included) identify with being an HSP (http://blogs.psychcentral.com/adhd-zoe/2010/04/adhd-and-the-highly-sensitive-person/) (Highly Sensitive Person)We know the mechanism (sensitivity).

We don't really know how it's so transmissible - but if it's a speciation event - then that would make sense.
Nobody will be looking for this possibility.

The great problem with science is that we need to be highly critical of the tools we're using - are they actually telling us what we think they are.

When all you have is a hammer, everything's a nail.We can sequence genomes and so with genetics ruling the last 50 years of med reseearch - ,000s of phd's are trained in ensuring that everything be it cushions, speakers or cups - are nails.
Problem is - is that hammers have adverse consequences on everything bar nails.

The problem of ADHD can be solved just by looking at the Aron description of how HSPs thrive.
Leave 'em alone.

daveddd
03-09-16, 07:48 AM
I am trying to read that with no bias, but I think it very clearly says the same thing I've been saying.

I copied several paragraphs since it seems we may not be able to go back and reread it.

you won't get an argument from me that genetic temperament is the most important risk factor for ADHD

i can look through my family and see how the sensitive temperament forms different disorders (or ADHD with comormids depending how you look at it)

I'm just wondering why , and it states this in barkleys book, only 50% of the children with this temperament continue to have ADHD

SB_UK
03-09-16, 08:36 AM
Sad think about research is that they tend to split up psych, mental, inflmmation, respiratory into specialities with their own associated power hierarchies - and so I don't know if med research structures are good at bridging the divide.

Inflammation (pain) will alter food preference and exercise ability -

- and so being nice amongst a nice environment (ie not an insensitive environment to sensitive ADDers) will be the root to a hideous train of events which'll see ADDers predisposed to ALL common diseases.

Underlying it all - simply sensitivity.

SB_UK
03-09-16, 08:53 AM
you won't get an argument from me that genetic temperament is the most important risk factor for ADHD

i can look through my family and see how the sensitive temperament forms different disorders (or ADHD with comormids depending how you look at it)

I'm just wondering why , and it states this in barkleys book, only 50% of the children with this temperament continue to have ADHD

According to here sensitive temperament 15 - 20% (http://www.marcandangel.com/2015/07/22/10-life-changing-tips-for-highly-sensitive-people/)

ADHD 11% (American 4 - 17s) (http://www.healthline.com/health/adhd/facts-statistics-infographic)

So that's similar to 1/2 of 'sensitives' meeting the criteria for ADHD.

Certainly ADDers < Sensitives but ADHD only manifests if sensitives are stressed - presumably some find a comfort zone.

SB_UK
03-09-16, 08:55 AM
So underlying basis to ADHD -> sensitivity good thing
Underlying basis to disorder in ADHD -> overstimulation (-> pain -> inflammation -> all the bad things that're usually mentioned)

ginniebean
03-09-16, 09:45 AM
https://books.google.com/books?id=BSLF7yueqoUC&pg=PA97&dq=russell+barkley+negative+temperament&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiO-bDm77HLAhWMQSYKHVJPDZEQ6AEILTAC#v=onepage&q=russell%20barkley%20negative%20temperament&f=false

heres a nice one

firing up the grill


http://www.psychology.pitt.edu/person/susan-b-campbell-phd

I found her picture and she's still at it!

Lunacie
03-09-16, 12:21 PM
you won't get an argument from me that genetic temperament is the most important risk factor for ADHD

i can look through my family and see how the sensitive temperament forms different disorders (or ADHD with comormids depending how you look at it)

I'm just wondering why , and it states this in barkleys book, only 50% of the children with this temperament continue to have ADHD

Yeah, that is interesting. In my own family we have ADHD, Autism, Anxiety and Depression ... also Migraine Disorder which some have said may be a related neurological disorder.

A couple of us have all of the disorders I listed, some have only two. There may be different combinations of a specific set of genes that account for it?

daveddd
03-09-16, 01:06 PM
http://www.psychology.pitt.edu/person/susan-b-campbell-phd

I found her picture and she's still at it!

not bad

daveddd
03-09-16, 04:43 PM
Yeah, that is interesting. In my own family we have ADHD, Autism, Anxiety and Depression ... also Migraine Disorder which some have said may be a related neurological disorder.

A couple of us have all of the disorders I listed, some have only two. There may be different combinations of a specific set of genes that account for it?

joel nigg has replicated some studies that certain genetic variants need psychosocial contributions to cause ADHD

its hard to say for sure which one is genetic

maybe fragile x, but fragile X with ADHD is treated exactly the same

namazu
03-09-16, 11:09 PM
MODERATOR NOTE:
This is the scientific discussion section; please keep the discussion focused on published sources and the topic at hand.

Some off-topic posts have been removed. Please remember that the "ignore" feature is available to help you avoid unnecessary arguments and thread derails.

Thank you.

daveddd
03-10-16, 06:16 AM
could environmental sources simply be emotions themselves

remembering that ADHD

1. wasn't recognized in adults until recently

2. wasn't recognized as an emotional disorder until recently

i wonder maybe what ADHD and specific common comorbids were considered before

example-melanie klein depressive schizoid position was look at as a defense against uncontrollable rage and fear, inborn

ginniebean
03-10-16, 10:53 AM
could environmental sources simply be emotions themselves

remembering that ADHD

1. wasn't recognized in adults until recently

2. wasn't recognized as an emotional disorder until recently

i wonder maybe what ADHD and specific common comorbids were considered before

example-melanie klein depressive schizoid position was look at as a defense against uncontrollable rage and fear, inborn


Sorry Dave, I don't get where you're going with this or how remember 1 and 2 will help. Can you add a bit more here?

daveddd
03-10-16, 11:06 AM
Well I just meant that because adult ADHD was just relabeled an emotional regulation disorder a few years back. Logic tells me we didn't just not exist in psychology.

So I like to look at older disorders and try to find things that ADHD and "comorbids" could have been

Lunacie
03-10-16, 12:12 PM
Before ADHD was recognized in adults, we were considered "lazy" or "stupid" or "retarded" or "losers" or "depressed."

Or drug or alcohol addicts because that's how we self-medicated.

Depressed was probably the only label that doctors used for us.

Fuzzy12
03-10-16, 12:14 PM
Before ADHD was recognized in adults, we were considered "lazy" or "stupid" or "retarded" or "losers" or "depressed."

Or drug or alcohol addicts because that's how we self-medicated.

Depressed was probably the only label that doctors used for us.

Aren't there also cases where people are wrongly diagnosed with bipolar disorder rather than ADHD? Especially kids I think. (Or maybe it's the other way round. I don't remember).

Lunacie
03-10-16, 12:25 PM
Aren't there also cases where people are wrongly diagnosed with bipolar disorder rather than ADHD? Especially kids I think. (Or maybe it's the other way round. I don't remember).

I don't know for sure, but I think mis-diagnosis of Bipolar is more common now that it was a dozen years ago.

I find it interesting that back then, ADHD wasn't recognized in adults and Bipolar wasn't recognized in children.

ginniebean
03-10-16, 01:25 PM
Well I just meant that because adult ADHD was just relabeled an emotional regulation disorder a few years back. Logic tells me we didn't just not exist in psychology.

So I like to look at older disorders and try to find things that ADHD and "comorbids" could have been

I know for women to this day they'll be diagnosed bipolar, anxiety and depression. Anything but ADHD.

ginniebean
03-10-16, 01:27 PM
Before ADHD was recognized in adults, we were considered "lazy" or "stupid" or "retarded" or "losers" or "depressed."

Or drug or alcohol addicts because that's how we self-medicated.

Depressed was probably the only label that doctors used for us.


Having been diagnosed in the late sixties I do remember thinking, I'm supposed to have outgrown all this problem, why do I still have it. I kept waiting for it to happen, later in the late 80's when I first heard about adult ADHD my response was "I knew it!".

And those labels are still in play..

ginniebean
03-10-16, 01:29 PM
Well I just meant that because adult ADHD was just relabeled an emotional regulation disorder a few years back. Logic tells me we didn't just not exist in psychology.

So I like to look at older disorders and try to find things that ADHD and "comorbids" could have been

Dave, when was emotional regulation added to the list of core symptoms? Has it truly been recognised? I mean all the researchers know it exists but I know the newer dsm didn't add it, has it become accepted diagnostic wisdom? Was there some press release or something?

namazu
03-10-16, 01:52 PM
In addition to the many informal and moral judgmental labels applied to people who might now be diagnosed with ADHD, "Minimal Brain Dysfunction" was one medical term used for before AD(H)D was introduced.

Here is an overview of the evolution of the ADHD diagnosis from its antecedents (free article!):
"The History of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3000907/) Lange KW, Reichl S, Lange KM, Tucha L, and Tucha O. Atten Defic Hyperact Disord. 2010 Dec; 2(4): 241–255.

I don't know for sure, but I think mis-diagnosis of Bipolar is more common now that it was a dozen years ago.

I find it interesting that back then, ADHD wasn't recognized in adults and Bipolar wasn't recognized in children.
AD(H)D in adults has been formally recognized in the DSM since 1980, when the DSM-III included "Attention Deficit Disorder - Residual Type" (source (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3000907/)), though there are published papers on the subject that date to the 1970s (here's one (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/793563)).

That said, widespread acceptance/awareness of AD(H)D in adults among clinicians lagged then, and unfortunately continues to lag now.

Similarly, there are mentions of "manic-depressive illness" in children dating back to the 1950s, at least (one example (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14367055); I didn't dig further) -- though it wasn't nearly as frequently diagnosed back then as it came to be in the 1990s-2000s, when it really took off. I'd guess that misdiagnosis of bipolar disorder in kids may have diminished somewhat in the past 5-10 years, but I don't have hard data, and can't dig for it now to see if I'm way off.

In DSM-5, there's a new diagnostic category called "Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Disruptive%20Mood%20Dysregulation%20Disorder%20Fac t%20Sheet.pdf)". It is intended to capture some kids who have significant problems with irritability/rage, beyond what might be called ODD, but who don't exactly fit the episodic model of bipolar disorder, either. As the linked fact-sheet notes, a lot of those kids might have been diagnosed with bipolar disorder because it seemed like the closest match, even if they didn't fit the criteria exactly. Apparently many of the kids whose behavior would qualify them for DMDD don't go on to have "classic" bipolar disorder, but still have elevated risk for anxiety disorders and major depression.

The DMDD diagnosis speaks a bit to "temperament". The temperament issues here aren't necessarily shared with ADHD; I'd guess that many kids who meet the criteria for DMDD might also meet criteria for ADHD, but that most kids with ADHD wouldn't meet criteria for DMDD.

Emotional dysregulation in ADHD (of a somewhat different nature, perhaps? or perhaps not? or perhaps similar, but only in some cases?) is recognized by many researchers as a component of executive dysfunction, and one that is related to various impairments in functioning. But although emotional dysregulation is an important part of the overall ADHD picture, I don't believe that most would consider ADHD primarily an emotional dysregulation disorder -- the executive function heading is broader, and includes some common features of ADHD that wouldn't be explained by a core emotional dysregulation problem. But conceptual models of executive function are pretty inconsistent across the literature, so what's included in one may not be included (or grouped differently) in another.

The historical division of "childhood" and "adulthood" disorders seems like it was a mostly-unseen obstacle to research for a long time in the history of psychiatry. I'm glad to see more research into lifetime trajectories (which reveal some differences in the course of ADHD in the population, possibly reflecting underlying causal pathways).

daveddd
03-10-16, 07:54 PM
Before ADHD was recognized in adults, we were considered "lazy" or "stupid" or "retarded" or "losers" or "depressed."

Or drug or alcohol addicts because that's how we self-medicated.

Depressed was probably the only label that doctors used for us.

I'm going to disagree

I'm seen several constructs of emotional regulation disorders that i would say today would be diagnosed adult ADHD

daveddd
03-10-16, 07:57 PM
In addition to the many informal and moral judgmental labels applied to people who might now be diagnosed with ADHD, "Minimal Brain Dysfunction" was one medical term used for before AD(H)D was introduced.

Here is an overview of the evolution of the ADHD diagnosis from its antecedents (free article!):
"The History of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3000907/) Lange KW, Reichl S, Lange KM, Tucha L, and Tucha O. Atten Defic Hyperact Disord. 2010 Dec; 2(4): 241–255.


AD(H)D in adults has been formally recognized in the DSM since 1980, when the DSM-III included "Attention Deficit Disorder - Residual Type" (source (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3000907/)), though there are published papers on the subject that date to the 1970s (here's one (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/793563)).

That said, widespread acceptance/awareness of AD(H)D in adults among clinicians lagged then, and unfortunately continues to lag now.

Similarly, there are mentions of "manic-depressive illness" in children dating back to the 1950s, at least (one example (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14367055); I didn't dig further) -- though it wasn't nearly as frequently diagnosed back then as it came to be in the 1990s-2000s, when it really took off. I'd guess that misdiagnosis of bipolar disorder in kids may have diminished somewhat in the past 5-10 years, but I don't have hard data, and can't dig for it now to see if I'm way off.

In DSM-5, there's a new diagnostic category called "Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Disruptive%20Mood%20Dysregulation%20Disorder%20Fac t%20Sheet.pdf)". It is intended to capture some kids who have significant problems with irritability/rage, beyond what might be called ODD, but who don't exactly fit the episodic model of bipolar disorder, either. As the linked fact-sheet notes, a lot of those kids might have been diagnosed with bipolar disorder because it seemed like the closest match, even if they didn't fit the criteria exactly. Apparently many of the kids whose behavior would qualify them for DMDD don't go on to have "classic" bipolar disorder, but still have elevated risk for anxiety disorders and major depression.

The DMDD diagnosis speaks a bit to "temperament". The temperament issues here aren't necessarily shared with ADHD; I'd guess that many kids who meet the criteria for DMDD might also meet criteria for ADHD, but that most kids with ADHD wouldn't meet criteria for DMDD.

Emotional dysregulation in ADHD (of a somewhat different nature, perhaps? or perhaps not? or perhaps similar, but only in some cases?) is recognized by many researchers as a component of executive dysfunction, and one that is related to various impairments in functioning. But although emotional dysregulation is an important part of the overall ADHD picture, I don't believe that most would consider ADHD primarily an emotional dysregulation disorder -- the executive function heading is broader, and includes some common features of ADHD that wouldn't be explained by a core emotional dysregulation problem. But conceptual models of executive function are pretty inconsistent across the literature, so what's included in one may not be included (or grouped differently) in another.

The historical division of "childhood" and "adulthood" disorders seems like it was a mostly-unseen obstacle to research for a long time in the history of psychiatry. I'm glad to see more research into lifetime trajectories (which reveal some differences in the course of ADHD in the population, possibly reflecting underlying causal pathways).

I'm not sure most people even are sure what EFs are anymore

i would say all aspects of EF have a one or possibly two way relationship with emotional regulation , as an opinion

daveddd
03-10-16, 08:02 PM
either way

barkley considers emotion reg a core of ADHD

Lunacie
03-10-16, 08:45 PM
I'm going to disagree

I'm seen several constructs of emotional regulation disorders that i would say today would be diagnosed adult ADHD

Oops, I think I answered a question that you didn't ask.

I think that today an ADHD diagnosis covers a broader spectrum than previously.

The same is true of Autism. I can remember when the only kids diagnosed with Autism were non-verbal and banged their heads.

daveddd
03-11-16, 06:42 AM
Oops, I think I answered a question that you didn't ask.

I think that today an ADHD diagnosis covers a broader spectrum than previously.

The same is true of Autism. I can remember when the only kids diagnosed with Autism were non-verbal and banged their heads.

much broader, seems like a good thing emotional regulation can effect every aspect of us

its kind of cool , I've been able to predict exactly where the next ADHD studies will go with accuracy , by hobbying around with old psychological constructs

SB_UK
03-11-16, 10:43 AM
either way

barkley considers emotion reg a core of ADHD

If emotional regulation means emotional reactivity - then I think he's right.

E is for emotional reactivity