In the last twenty years or so, research has emerged that supports the idea that boosting levels of NAD+ (the oxidized form of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide) in animals (including mammals) can slow or even reverse many aspects of biological aging, either by activating sirtuins (proteins that regulate key biological pathways), by facilitating cell-to-cell and intracellular communication, and/or by other means. NAD+ levels can be boosted by orally supplementing with NAD+ precursors, including nicotinamide riboside (patented and marketed as Niagen, abbreviated as NR), and nicotinamide mononucleotide (abbreviated as NMN). To a much lesser extent, NAD+ can be increased by supplementing with plain old niacinamide/nicotinamide (NAM), and niacin/nicotinic acid (NA).
Tag: schizophrenia
Within the last year the understanding of schizophrenia has advanced considerably. Most notably, the origins of the disease have been traced to an overactive expression of the C4 (complement component 4) immune system protein, which is responsible for tagging neurons for “pruning” (destruction) in the adolescent and young adult brain. This “overdrive brain pruning” leads to the devastating symptoms of schizophrenia (delusions, hallucinations, difficulties in planning and life management, paranoia and social isolation). Earlier research, in 2014, linked ultra-high-risk individuals (in terms of developing schizophrenia) to overactive microglial activity. (Microglia are the macrophage immune system cells of the central nervous system, destroying “plaques, damaged or unnecessary neurons and synapses, and infectious agents.“)
Lately I’ve been trying to get help for a relative who is mentally ill. What passes for a “mental health care system” in the United States is a joke. There is no system. There is a patchwork of uncoordinated crap.
I try to be positive and constructive on this blog, and to offer something of value to my readers. This post will be no exception, but I need to get a short rant out of the way first.
Some observations …
- HMOs tend to farm out mental health services to independent clinics, and then refuse to coordinate with those clinics (like transferring medical records to the psychiatrist). This means the person with mental illness needs to deal with such logistics (which means a family member or caregiver needs to do it — if they have access and permission).
- There is an incredibly low bar for “well” or “ok” among most psychiatrists. If you are not currently committed for violent or suicidal behavior, you are doing “well” or “fine.” Even if the patient is delusional and suffering from severe memory issues, they are deemed “ok” if they are not hospitalized.
- All psychiatric drugs are prescribed on pretty much a crapshoot “let’s see if this works” basis.
- It is extremely rare for a patient with mental illness to be able to work with a single qualified psychiatrist, or even a single team. The patient is much more likely to see a psychiatrist who is new to their case, ignorant of their history, and under too much time pressure to carefully consider the needs of the patient.
- Getting committed to psychiatric lockup is horrible for the patient, even if the facility is run well. Everyone is aware of losing their freedom when they lose it. But often it’s the only way for a patient to get care. Usually the care is sub-par, and consists of sedation, cursory evaluation, and rapid discharge.
- The “residential treatment” options I have seen are really dismal. Ratty houses, cramped quarters, no psychiatrist (or therapist) on staff, lots of TV watching, lots of sitting around. Not a healing environment.
I could go on and on, but my point is simply that there is massive room for improvement. The Mental Health Parity Act (2013 technical amendment) is a start. But what would real improvement look like? What’s the best case scenario?
I’ll put forth my own pipe dream. Here’s what I would want the experience of trying to provide help for a mentally ill family member/loved one to look like:
1. Let’s assume the patient has HMO coverage with Kaiser Permanente, either through employment (unlikely if they are chronically disabled), through Medicare, or independently purchased. (Already we’re in pipe dream land, right? Many people with mental illness don’t have *any* medical insurance).
2. I notice my family member or friend is having severe psychiatric problems (serious depression, mania, psychosis, delusions, hallucinations, confusion, memory loss, etc.). Let’s assume I manage to notice these symptoms before they reach a point of “decompensation” (med speak for losing your shit entirely — especially with schizophrenia).
3. I convince the friend or family member that it’s time to seek help, and (depending on the seriousness of the symptoms) we go to the ER or make a regular doctor’s appointment. Those who have been in the situation know what a Herculean feat of patience, persuasion, and persistence this single step entails.
4. Medical tests (blood work, blood pressure, exam, interview) are run to rule out stroke, side effects of new meds, etc. These tests are either run in the same intake location (ER or doctor’s office) or a medical escort is offered to help the patient and caregiver navigate the system (pipe dream — I know!). If it’s clear the problem is psychiatric in nature, the patient is referred (immediately) to a psychiatrist on call.
5. The on-call psychiatrist begins the diagnostic process, considering recent events in the patient’s life, meds history, family history, nutrition, sleep, past episodes of mental illness, etc. At this point the on-call psychiatrist refers the patient to a permanent psychiatrist (the patient would have the option to change doctors later if desired), and provides the option of a short-term residential voluntary stay in an HMO-managed facility.
6. The permanent/longer-term psychiatrist meets with the patient and caregiver(s) in the context of the short-term residential program or regular appointment. The in-depth diagnostic process begins, and includes the following tests and considerations:
- detailed patient history (previous episodes, past and current medications, life circumstances)
- genetic (family history and complete DNA sequencing)
- nutritional (eating habits, allergen testing, gluten sensitivity, tests for vitamin and mineral deficiencies)
- infectious disease, as related to psychiatric conditions (neurosyphilis, toxoplasmosis, etc.)
- recent traumatic events (death in the family, divorce/breakup, loss of a job, etc.)
- sleep patterns, sleep deprivation
- changes in medications, side effects of medications
- recent chemical exposure/toxicity
- drug/alcohol abuse
- meditation (not kidding here — I know of two cases of meditation-induced psychosis)
- recent head injury or concussion
- brain scan/other neurological tests (looking at both activity and organic structure/pathology including injury or tumor)
7. The patient, psychiatrist, and (if invited) caregiver(s) come up with a treatment plan, and treatment goals. The treatment plan would contain the following elements:
- conservative medication (conservative both in dosage, and in the number of concurrent medications, and in the duration of the prescription — not every psychiatric patient needs to be on meds for the rest of their lives)
- medication tapering (if the side effects are suspected as being part of the problem, powerful psychiatric medications may need to be tapered off slowly, over a number of weeks or even months)
- nutrition (high nutrient/low junk diet, with food restrictions if tests indicate such restrictions might be helpful, correcting any nutrient deficiencies)
- exercise
- social (time with family and friends)
- therapeutic (group, music, talk, addiction, whatever is appropriate for the patient)
- treating any infectious diseases or other treatable organic causes discovered during the diagnostic process
Not all of these elements would be required for every patient … it might be more effective to devise a simpler treatment plan with fewer elements. But they should all be considered by the psychiatrist.
8. The patient should have the option to stay in a voluntary residential program (HMO-managed, covered by insurance), under psychiatric observation, for as long as they need. In cases where powerful medications are being added, tapered off, or modified, months of observation and supervised meds might be required.
9. Follow-up. The patient should be able to meet with the same long-term psychiatrist for years, as needed.
Those who have had experience dealing with the mental health “system” in the United States know how far we are from anything remotely resembling the scenario described above.
But it’s not impossible.
A few years ago I had a hernia repaired, through Kaiser. The entire process was incredibly streamlined and well-managed. Every step of the process was well-organized. The level of care was excellent. Even with insurance, I paid a lot out-of-pocket, but it didn’t bankrupt me.
So large HMOs can provide excellent care. But most of the time, people with mental illness fall through the cracks. They are treated like 2nd-class citizens. They are blamed (or partially blamed) for their own condition. Their treatment is outsourced to poorly funded, haphazardly run clinics. Caregivers must navigate a Byzantine maze of services. The left hand doesn’t talk to the right hand. The ball is constantly dropped. Nobody is willing to take responsibility for the patient’s medical care. Doctors say “it’s a psychiatric problem,” as if the brain were not an organ of the human body.
Psychiatric care should be medical care. One system, accountable and responsible for the wellness of the patient. Just like any other disease!
Psychiatric care is incredibly complicated (and expensive). The patient isn’t thinking clearly, and won’t necessarily comply with recommendations. So HMOs like to avoid the sticky wicket, and outsource the care. But they shouldn’t be allowed to. They should step up and deal with these patients like they do with every other kind of patient. That’s why the Mental Health Parity Act and continued improvements to psychiatric healthcare are important.
A commonly heard phrase is that you have to let someone hit “rock bottom” before they will be willing to accept help, seek help for themselves, or make positive life changes.
The problem with “rock bottom” is that for many people, “rock bottom” is death (or in some cases, irreparable harm to health, relationships, and career). Substance abuse, remaining in abusive relationships, mental illness, dementia, gambling addiction, untreated chronic health conditions, and many other life circumstances can lead to a grisly end and premature death. In many cases, an early intervention by family, friends, and/or the state can preserve and improve quality of life for a person for many years.
The “rock bottom” trope is a convenient rationalization for friends and family members who (for many valid reasons) do not want to jump headfirst into the messy, unpredictable, time-consuming, expensive, grueling, no-results-guaranteed process of trying to help someone whose life is going off the rails. I have personally made good use of this rationalization at several points in my life.
I’m in the process of helping out someone I’m close to, who is not in a good way. I’m part of a team helping this person. It’s not the first time. It’s stressful, it takes up time, there are serious opportunity costs, but it’s worth it.
It’s almost always worth it. When you don’t help, when you turn away and cut someone off entirely, you’re killing part of yourself (and not always a small part). This post is about how you can help effectively, and protect (and possibly even enhance) your sanity in the process.
Summary: For friends and family suffering from illness or addiction issues, “rock bottom” can mean death or irreparable harm. It’s better to do something to help, rather than taking a “hands off” approach.
Some General Observations
After struggling for many years with the question of “when, and how much, should I help?”, I’ve come to some of the following conclusions:
- Some (but not all) forms of “helping” are counterproductive. While it can be an act of kindness to bail out a friend or family member and protect them from harsh consequences, doing so over and over again enables the behavior that is getting them into trouble. This cycle is called codependence. The other extreme is total disengagement: cutting someone off entirely. Some “in-between” alternative are offering support, being part of a support team, and in some cases being part of an intervention.
- You can’t control other people, and trying to do so leads to anxiety and despair, or abuse/coercion. What you can do is try to persuade them to get help and/or change their behavior, using both soft and hard tactics (intervention).
- Helping someone has real, tangible costs (time, money, emotional strain), and if you overextend yourself you risk losing your own health, sanity, means of supporting yourself, and important relationships.
- You may put in a great deal of effort, at great personal cost, and still not succeed in helping someone.
- Helping someone also has real, tangible benefits (the person might get better, you may feel like you are doing the right/moral thing, other people may consider you to be a good person, or even heroic).
- You might feel resentful if you overextend yourself. You might feel guilty if you don’t help enough. You might feel both emotions; regardless of how much you help you offer.
- You have to decide for yourself if you want to get involved, and how much. You may be negatively judged (and even suffer tangible consequences) for your decision to help or not help, depending on the social norms and values of your peers and family. There is no “right” decision; you have to figure it out for yourself.
Nobody is exempt from these decisions. At some point every person will have to make a decision about helping a family member or close friend who is in very poor shape. This is a choice 100% of us face, at some point in our lives.
Summary: There are benefits and costs to helping someone. There is no “right” decision in terms of how much you should help.
Do Something!
There is almost always something you can do to help a person in trouble. Some of the items below may seem “small,” but never underestimate the possible impact of making a “small” gesture to help someone. They may remember the act of kindness for the rest of their lives, and what seems “small” to you might actually be a huge turning point for the person you are helping.
- Learn about the condition, so you’re not flying blind.
- Tell the person that you love them and care about them (frequently).
- Acknowledge that the problem they are facing is difficult, and commend them on any positive steps they take (no matter how small).
- Research social services and programs that might be available to help the person in question.
- Let the person know about social services that are available to help them (support groups, treatment programs, healthcare, assisted living, etc.)
- Encourage the person to take advantage of any support resources that are available.
- If the person is resistant to accepting help or seeking treatment, keep suggesting it (but don’t threaten or cajole or bully; it needs to be their decision). You might get stonewalled at the first suggestion, and by the fifth they are happy to go along with whatever you suggest.
- Offer temporary assistance in the form of basic necessities (food, paying utilities, rides, etc.). This kind of helping is not necessarily codependent, especially if the person is in the process of trying to get better. Don’t offer more than you can afford (see below).
Summary: There is always something you can do to help that is within your means and abilities.
Stay Sane
When someone you love is in bad shape, you’re going to have a bad time. There’s no way around it. But there are ways to mitigate the bad feelings, to manage your stress, to preserve your sanity, and to protect your life and well-being. Here are some suggestions:
- Don’t go it alone. Build (or join) a support team, focused on help the person in trouble. If the people you ask first aren’t willing or able to provide much help, keep expanding the circle until you feel like “we’re in it together.”
- Don’t put your life on hold. Keep doing the things you love, keep meeting your responsibilities. Never go “all in” trying to help someone; you’ll just quickly deplete yourself and end up needing help yourself.
- Don’t put yourself in physical danger. Leave dangerous and highly volatile situations to the police. If you feel physically threatened, get out.
- Don’t expect a quick fix or resolution. The healing (or dying) process can take years. Provide support at a level that you can sustain, and think long-term.
- Experience and constructively express your own emotions. Don’t bottle it up; talk about it. At the same time, don’t fixate on emotions, or endlessly process your feelings with everyone you encounter to the extent that you become tedious and a downer.
- Understand and use your stress. Stress is a physical response to 1) provide energy to deal with a situation (adrenaline) and 2) seek emotional support (oxytocin). Acute stress does not have negative health consequences, especially when that stress leads to constructive action. Watch the video below for more information (there are some “association vs. causation” issues, but valuable information nonetheless).
Summary: You’re no use to anyone unless you maintain your own sanity and well-being. It’s not selfish to continue living and enjoying your own life; it’s common sense. Also — stress isn’t necessarily bad for your health.
A Final Thought
Helping someone is not an all-or-nothing question. There is always something you can do to be helpful, something that is within your means and abilities. When someone you love is in trouble, figure out what that thing is, and do it (and keep doing it).
Please feel free to share your own perspectives and experiences below.
There’s a great deal of misinformation on the internet regarding B-vitamins and health. I know this because I’ve read most of it. During the 5 years or so when I was researching how to cure my own asthma, I devoured every text I could find regarding the physiological effects of specific vitamins and minerals — especially the B-vitamins. Large doses of B-complex or individual B-vitamins are recommended to improve mood, reduce PMS, reduce asthma symptoms, reduce the risk of various cancers, reduce the risk of heart disease, fight yeast infections, ward off mosquitoes, and prevent or cure numerous other ailments.
Which of these claims are based on reputable clinical research, and which are bullshit?