JANE KELLEY was thinking about Re: Hello and keyed into cyberspace:
JK>MP>RF> Mark, I not claiming she is right on anything, but about 1
JK>MP>RF>month ago I  saw on the news a seemingly breakthrough.  It
JK>MP>RF>seems they have found  what looks like some type of change in
JK>MP>RF>the brain during a scan.  They  believe that they maybe able to
JK>MP>RF>detect ADHD this way now.
JK>MP>PET scanning showed certain differences in the ADHD brain nearly a
JK>MP>decade ago. However, for the scan to be diagnostic, it has to show
JK>MP>the same changes in every ADHD brain. It doesn't. (BTW, I read the
JK>MP>original reports, and have spoken personally with Alan Zametkin
JK>MP>when I was at NIH a few months back on something else. He did the
JK>MP>study.) 
JK>That is because there is a difference in the results of varying
JK>causes of what today is known as ADHD.  Some are now insisting that
JK>this is a manifestation of food allergies simply because some of
JK>those affected have them.
Jane, the idea that diet causes ADHD has been debunked for well over a 
decade. Remember the Foolsgold, oops, I meant Feingold, diet? No 
scientific study every showed that it works. In fact, in several of the 
studies, placebo worked better.
The diagnostic process for ADHD is "very simple" rule out all possible 
known causes of the behaviors. If there are still unexplained behaviors 
that fit the diagnostic model, the it is ADHD. It is that "simple". But 
the process has got to be thorough, both physically and psychologically.
  In some cases, a virus may be the cause,
JK>and in others it is going to be found to be genetic.
Genetics is the most probable cause. 
JK>IF those who do the brain scans will simply continue their research
JK>without prejudice and preconceived ideas, this will be discovered in
JK>time.
That is what NIH and NIMH is doing.
JK>Alan Zametkin is only one of many who are doing brain scans these
JK>days. They are being done on both coasts and have been for some time.
Zametkin's teams have been the unquestioned leader in this area for over 
a decade.
JK>MP>Jane's use of the term "mental disorders" was too broad. I am
JK>MP>looking for her to clarify what she meant.
JK>"Mental illness" to me means those diseases which have a definitive
JK>physical cause and which also have a definitive physical treatment of
JK>one kind or another, not always just stuffing someone with pills.
I see. Your definition may be too narrow. 
JK>"Mental health" is the term used to denote anything that is
JK>considered to be wrong with the way someone else's head works.  It is
JK>used by those who haven't the faintest idea of what goes in the the
JK>average pharmacology or physiology class and who have every intention
JK>of going to their graves without finding out.
Now, Jane, lets keep it intellectual and not get up on your high horse.
JK>MP>RF> OBTW Jane, if you are reading this, I'm glad to see you giving
JK>MP>RF>advice to  someone to find a Dr. who knows about ADHD.  I
JK>MP>RF>personally have a family  Dr. who deals with ADHD children.  He
JK>MP>RF>not only knows all of our family  history, but does testing for
JK>MP>RF>ADHD too.  He is very through allthough he  knows about other
JK>MP>RF>things that can look like ADHD, but are not.  When I had
JK>MP>RF>Jeremy tested a year ago, the suggestion given before a
JK>MP>RF>diagnosis of ADHD,  IS A PHYSICAL. 
JK>All of it is physical.  We just don't know enough about that yet to
JK>know how to deal with what we see before us.
Slowly, but surely, we are getting there.
               The Few. The Proud. The Chosen.
                     markprobe@aol.com
---
 * CMPQwk #1.4 * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY
---------------