WHITE PRIVILEDGE

It is so sad that Whites continue to be priviledged at the expense of others, mostly African-Americans. The priviledge is a weight on whites as we suffer from the abuse that is perpetrated in our name whether we agree with it or not. Our country grew up supporting racism and white priviledge and it is woven into our culture and to change this we must choose to see the priviledge for the abuse that it represents whether by financial institutions refusing loans or having higher interst rates, maintaining segregation through realestate practices or by promoting Whites only charter schools. According to Resmaa Menakem [My Grandmother's Hands] Whites suffer in their bodies from a long pattern of reacting to African-Americans as a threat and yet are also frequently dependent on them. Mr. Menakem feels that Whites need to become aware of their bodies response to African-Americans and change it so that they can process and then dismiss their emotional reactions and begin to see them as like themselves and not a threat. Mr. Menakem sees the police as needing a lot of support to overcome their frequent automatic response as if African-Americans are dangerous with the increased risk that lethal force will be used inappropriately.  Support to help the police to manage traumatic experiences that they have as well as help people they are responsible for keeping safe to resolve any traumatic experiences that they might have. Finally, Menakem also sees African-Americans as needing to stop their automatic response of defering to Whites and feeling responsible for them. If we all can overcome our rapid, automatic and destructive body responses to others we will be free to experience our common humanity and not need to live in fear or with the weight of prejudice and judging others. 

I believe that what Menakem is describing is similar to patterns of behavior that develop related to our automatically perceiving people or situations to be dangerous because of past traumatic experiences. Our behaviors are meant to protect us from the danger that we [or our ancestors?] had experienced in the past . The human brain is capable of storing patterns of behavior and accessing them instantly [in a nanosecond which is a billionth of a second] to protect us. We are reacting before we are even aware that we are. This makes changing these patterns of behavior much more difficult, even if we actually no longer need to be afraid or react to what is no longer a threat to us. According to Menakem, we all need to be aware of changes in our bodies that indicate we are recalling past threats and need to calm ourselves down to avoid reacting. This is especially important if we by the nature of our work, carry guns. Menakem recommends therapeutic support for police officers who are exposed to violence or participate in violence. It is important for all of us to develop this awareness of changes in our bodies that can activate old patterns of behavior that we no longer need and can lead to conflicts in our relationships with others. Then we need to learn ways to diffuse these reactions so we do not get triggered and thus do not react to them. How do we learn ways to diffuse our reactions?

What do you think?

ZERO SUM OR NON ZERO SUM

Zero sum refers to any exchange where whatever is gained by someone is lost by another person. An example would be where two people or two groups of people [like in a company] are both competing for something where if one person or group gets that something the other person or group will get less. Zero sum refers to the fact that when you have a limited amount of something that two or more want, how much each individual changes but the total never does and there is always no [zero] change in the overall amount that does not change. So the possibility of a win, win situation does not exist if the total amount is fixed or the value of the something is fixed. Thus, a way where both benefit is not possible. It seems to me that any kind of competition is always zero sum, so that whenever you have winners and losers you are dealing with zero sum. Win-lose outcomes are common and result in one side gaining and the other losing. This can lead to some benefit in the short run but significant losses in the long run. It is the problem of competition [zero sum] vs cooperation [non zero sum or win-win].

Well, what then is not zero sum? It requires that both persons, parties, groups, entities benefit from the exchange or interaction. How does this happen? It can be called a "win-win" outcome where both sides benefit. Examples of this include: all human relationships have the potential to be win-win [right?!]; selling and buying interactions where it is by choice and the seller benefits by the sale and the buyer by what is purchased; and where there is a direct benefit and an indirect benefit such as an employer relaxing work schedules to allow more choice by employees and this increases employee satisfaction and morale and productivity that then benefits the employer.

I mentoned above that human relationships can be win-win and ideally are. Actualy, I believe that human relationships are win-win or they are not human relationships. But, what would they be called if not human? Maybe it is the relationship aspect that requires that it be win-win? Aren't human relationships supposed to be mutually beneficial?

What do you think?

WHY I AM AGAINST "GOOD INTENTIONS"

I have recently had a number of my patients say that they know that a person [family member or friend] had good intentions but that what they said or did was not helpful. So, what is wrong with good intentions? Most people are familiar with the proverb [aphorism?] that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. This has been explained as it is not enough to intend to do good things but one must actually do them.  Another has to do with possible unintended consequences after one acts on their good intentions. It seems that one can have good intentions for themselves as well as for others. So, it is considered bad if we have good intentions but never act on those intentions. This may be true for good intentions for ourselves but my concern is that good intentions for others may represent thinking we know what is best for others and by acting on these intentions end up taking over and making it harder for others to make decisions for themselves.  

I believe that we can't know what is best for other people because we are not them. People must take responsibility for themselves and make their own decisions. There seems to be no other way to live our lives.  Related to this, I have blogged a number of times about the importance of being supportive and encouraging towards others but to not tell others what to do or take over for them in any way, no mattter how good our intentions are. I believe that we must choose how we will live our lives and that this is easier if we are connected to others who are supportive and encouraging but respect our independence.  

What do you think?

WHY DO AMPHETAMINES HELP PEOPLE WITH ADHD?

There has been a lot of concern expressed about amphetamines being prescribed for ADHD in children and adults. There is concern about addictions and dependence on these medications. It had been thought that these medications work by influencing neurotransmitters [serotonin, norepinephrine and dopamine]. These neurotransmitters are influenced by amphetamines. However, my patients have never responded to these medications as if they were amphetamines when they are helping them to focus. In fact, if my patients do respond to these medications as amphetamines [typically with increased energy, restlessness and irritability, appetite supression and difficulty falling asleep], they interfere with focusing and concentration and if they persist indicates a need to try another medication in the other group of medications for ADHD. When my patients respond to these amphetamine medications with improved focusing and concentraton, they are calmer, more alert, more able to complete tasks, less likely to finish tasks at the last minute and are less socially anxious. My patients who have problems with concentration [are ADHD], do not respond to these medications like they are amphetamines.

So why might that be the case. There is recent research suggesting that in people with ADHD, amphetamines influence the white matter [WM] portion of the brain that is deeper in the brain then the gray matter [GM] where our emotions, moods, anxiety, fears, etc., are. The WM is where the so called long tracks are located that function to connect different parts of the GM together and thus serve to help to coordinate brain activity and maintain stability, even when the emotions are activated. This location for concentration could serve to protect our ability to concentrate from the ups and downs of our emotional lives and preserve our ability to concentrate even if we are upset. This has not been demonstrated to occur in brains as it is difficult to see the WM with MRI's except by measuring the diffusional motion of water molecules using Diffusion Tensor Imaging [DTI] that assesses the micro-structural features of white matter studies that have found delays in brain white matter development in people with ADHD. This work has been added to by Bouziane, et.al. ADHD and maturation of brain white matter: A DTI study in medication naive children and adults" in Neuroimage Clin. 2018; 17: 53-59. who studied medication naive children and adults using DTI. They found that the WM of children with ADHD were the same as children without ADHD while adults with ADHD had reduced fractional anisotropy [FA] compared to adults without ADHD in several regions and the anterior thalamic radiation. FA is a normalized measure that quantifies the directional anisotropy of diffusion and is thought to reflect fiber density, axonal diameter and myelination in white matter. It is now thought that WM changes in people with ADHD occur in adults and not children. However, animal studies [van der Marel et al.Long-term treatment of adolescent and adult rats: differential effects on brain morphology and function. Neuropsychopharmacology; 2014;39:263-273] have shown that methylphenidate [a medication used to treat people with ADHD] in animals has upregulated the striatal genes that are involved in axonal myelination and thesse changes might be the changes seen in WM in people who are treated for their ADHD and thus supporting that these medications work in the WM part of the brian. 

So it seems that people with ADHD respond to amphetamine type medications with improved focus and concentration and not with responses that are typically associated with amphetamines. This would explain the benefit of these medications for people with ADHD and why they tolerate them without the problems that can be connected to taking amphetamines. In fact, research has repeatedly demonstrated that treating ADHD in young adolescents will reduce their risk of having an addiction. None of the thousands of people that I have treated with amphetamine type medicatons for ADHD have abused these medications.

IS LONELINESS AT THE HEART OF ADDICTION?

Recently I listened to a TED talk by Rachel Wurzman entitled: "How isolation fuels opioid addiction." She discribes her experience of having tics [Tourettes Disorder] that she calls "unvoluntary." Dr. Wurzman experiences her involuntary tics as unvoluntary meaning that she feels like she is doing the tic movement and not an external force. However, Dr. Wurzman recognizes that her tics are not related to her conscious intentions or attention. Dr. Wurzman then makes the point that we all have things that we do in healthy ways and other things that are not healthy and this can help us to understand what others are experiencing, including those with tic disorders and addiction. So, why is it important that we can understand each other? Dr. Wurzman goes on to talk about the opioid epidemic and it's connection to being lonely. She states that this epidemic is killing 91 people every day and it is getting worse. Dr. Wurzman understands that addiction is a medical, neurobiological problem and yet she feels that we can help people with addictions by changing how we respond to them. To change how we respond to people with addictions she feels that it is helpful if we understand how and why our brains cause behaviors like urges to use substances. Dr. Wurzman's research suggests that loneliness may be reinforcing the brains of addicts to seek comfort from substances as their striatum's are seeking things that have most frequently been associated with reducing their feelings of loneliness. These responses [seeking things] are like they are on autopilot, so that when there is a stimulus there is then a very rapid and automatic response from their brains. 

Importantly, according to Dr. Wurzman, feeling socially connected to others is part of what the striatum does. The experience of feeling pleasure in social interactions is modulated by opioid receptors in the striatum. If some one is experiencing intense loneliness the opioid receptors are sensitized so that anything that reduces this sense of loneliness, such as taking opioids, is intensely and very rapidly sought. Therefore, loneliness may keep people addicted and social connections may help people not be addicted. However, those social connections need to be strong enough to convince the striatum that it is safe to let go of the immediate and reliable relief that taking opioids [and other drugs] represents. Dr. Wurzman also believes that to establish powerful social connections, it is better to connect with each other not focused on one aspect of ourselves/others [like addictive behavors] but recognize how we all have unvoluntary or automatic type behaviors. This helps us to realize that we are connected to people who happen to have different unvoluntary or automatic type behaviors. 

After listening to Dr. Wurzman, I wondered about a connection between the social isolation experiences of people with addictions and those who suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder [PTSD]. If so, then does the isolation theory apply to people who have PTSD? And how would this influence treatment of PTSD?

What do you think?