Understanding Bipolar Disorder

Bipolar disorder is a mental health condition that causes extreme mood swings that include emotional highs (mania or hypomania) and lows (depression). People with bipolar disorder experience periods of unusually intense emotion and changes in sleep patterns and activity levels, and engage in behaviors that are out of character for them—often without recognizing their likely harmful or undesirable effects. Bipolar disorder is often diagnosed during late adolescence or early adulthood and usually requires lifelong treatment.

Mania vs. Depression

Symptoms of the manic phase of bipolar disorder include feeling very happy or elated, feeling full of energy, being easily distracted, feeling self-important, being easily irritated or agitated, and not feeling like sleeping. People who are experiencing mania may become delusional and experience hallucinations and disturbed or illogical thinking. They may also do things that have disastrous consequences as well as make decisions or say things that are out of character and that others see as being risky or harmful.

Symptoms of the depressive phase of bipolar include feeling sad or hopeless most of the time, a loss of interest in everyday activities, feelings of emptiness or worthlessness, self-doubt, lacking energy, difficulty concentrating and remembering things, and suicidal thoughts.

Types of Bipolar Disorder

There are several types of bipolar disorder, including bipolar I disorder, bipolar II disorder, and cyclothymic disorder. Individuals who have bipolar I disorder have had at least one manic episode that may be preceded or followed by hypomanic or major depressive episodes. Individuals who have bipolar II disorder have had at least one major depressive episode and at least one hypomanic episode, but they have never had a manic episode. Individuals with cyclothymic disorder have had at least two years (or one year in children and teenagers) of many periods of hypomania symptoms and periods of depressive symptoms. Sometimes a person might experience symptoms of bipolar disorder that do not match one of these three categories, and this is referred to as “other specified and unspecified bipolar and related disorders.”

Comorbid Disorders

Many people with bipolar disorder also have other mental disorders or conditions, such as anxiety disorders, ADHD, substance use disorder, or eating disorders. Sometimes people who have severe manic or depressive episodes also have symptoms of psychosis, which may include hallucinations or delusions.

A 2022 study found that there is a high prevalence of medical disorders comorbidities in the group of patients that participated in the study. 96.3% of BD patients had at least one medical disorders comorbidity, and of the patients that had at least one comorbidity, 77% had two or more comorbidities (Fig. 1).

Bipolar Disorder Statistics

  • Bipolar disorder affects approximately 5.7 million adult Americans, or about 2.6% of the U.S. population age 18 and older every year.
  • More than two-thirds of people with bipolar disorder have at least one close relative with the disorder or with major depression.
  • The median age of onset for bipolar disorder is 25 years.
  • Both men and women develop bipolar disorder, and only slightly more women are diagnosed than men (Fig. 2).
  • Bipolar disorder is the sixth leading cause of disability in the world.
  • As many as one in five patients with bipolar disorder completes suicide.
  • When one parent has bipolar disorder, the risk to each child is l5-30%. When both parents have bipolar disorder, the risk increases to 50-75%.

Avoidant-Restrictive Food Intake Disorder

As we normalize talking about mental health, many are raising awareness about more common disorders like anxiety and depression. However, there is a lack of awareness surrounding less common mental health disorders, so I have decided to start a series in which we cover less well-known disorders. Today, we will talk about an eating disorder called avoidant-restrictive food intake disorder, or ARFID. ARFID was first introduced in the DSM-5 in 2013, and many people do not fully understand the disorder, even as awareness of ARFID is increasing.

When thinking about eating disorders, most people picture someone changing their eating habits in order to lose weight or alter their body in some way. While many eating disorders, such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa, fit this description, not all eating disorders do. For example, those with ARFID do not restrict their food intake with the goal of losing weight. Rather, eating can be physically and emotionally difficult for these individuals, causing them to consume less food or limit their diet to certain types of foods.

What is ARFID?

Fig. 1. Nutrients.

Those diagnosed with ARFID have trouble meeting nutritional and/or energy needs for any of the following reasons:

  1. Lack of interest in eating or food: those with ARFID may say that they have no appetite, don’t enjoy eating, or are full after eating a small amount.
  2. Avoidance based on sensory characteristics of food: those with ARFID may avoid or eat foods only of certain texture, taste, smell, temperature, or appearance.
  3. Concern about aversive consequences: those with ARFID may have a fear of choking or vomiting.

To be considered ARFID, the restrictive eating pattern must affect the individual in at least one of the following ways:

  1. Significant weight loss
  2. Need for enteral feeding (tube feeding)
  3. Severe nutritional deficiency
  4. Negative impact on psychological/social functioning

Comorbid ASD and ADHD

ARFID is linked to neurodevelopmental disorders, particularly autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). One study found that among patients with ARFID (n=263), comorbid ASD was present in 58.3% of patients relative to 41.7% in the non-ARFID group (Fig. 2). Sensory sensitivities common to those with autism and ADHD contribute to the acceptance or refusal of food because of texture, presentation, temperature, color, or smell.

ARFID Statistics

The prevalence of ARFID in the general population is not known. However, it is known that the rates of ARFID are between 5% and 14% in pediatric inpatient eating disorder programs and up to 22.5% in a pediatric eating disorder day treatment program. ARFID also affects more males than females, and it is more common in children and young adolescents and less common in late adolescence and adulthood.

Treatment

The most appropriate level of care for treatment depends on the patient’s overall health. Eating disorder treatment may include inpatient-level care, residential-level of care, partial/intensive outpatient programs, or outpatient therapy. The treatment process for ARFID typically involves providing education about the diagnosis, treatment, and importance of nutrition as well as monitoring food intake and increasing volume and/or a variety of fear foods.

Gender Differences in ADHD

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, is a neurological disorder characterized by a persistent pattern of inattention that interferes with daily functioning. Individuals with ADHD might also have symptoms of hyperactivity and impulsivity, but they are not required for a diagnosis.

 

Common Symptoms in Women

Women more commonly have inattentive symptom presentation, which includes these symptoms (according to the DSM-5):

  • Forgetfulness in daily activities 
  • Getting easily distracted
  • Failing to give close attention to details or making careless mistakes in activities
  • Trouble holding attention on tasks

Women with ADHD struggle more with socialization than men do. Women often experience rejection sensitivity, which is an intense emotional response to real or perceived rejection. Women are often overwhelmed by the demands of relationships and tend to have fewer meaningful relationships. They often also have trouble maintaining friendships.

Women also tend to experience more hypersensitivities, including sleep difficulties, tactile defensiveness and sensory overload, as well as headaches, migraines, stomach aches, and nausea. Furthermore, psychological distress, feelings of inadequacy, low self-esteem, and chronic stress are common.

Fig. 1. Teh, Dawn. Health Match.

Symptoms of impulsivity in women increase their chances of engaging in high-risk behaviors as well as addictive behaviors.

By adulthood, most women with ADHD have at least one comorbid disorder. In fact, 25-40% of people with ADHD have an anxiety disorder. Other common comorbid disorders include mood disorders, dysregulated eating, and personality disorders. 

 

Researching ADHD

There is very little research studying the effects of ADHD on women, as most research focuses on children, adolescents, and men. In children, studies show that boys often get a more accurate diagnosis than girls. Boys tend to show more hyperactive behavior than girls do, and ADHD researchers often focus on studying hyperactive behavior over other symptoms of ADHD that are more common in girls. More research is necessary to help experts accurately identify, diagnose, and treat symptoms earlier in girls and women. 

 

Fig. 2. Koch, Jenna. Marquette Wire.

ADHD Diagnosis

The prevalence rates of ADHD in men and women are similar, yet the diagnosis rate among American men is 69% higher than it is among American women. Men and boys are diagnosed far more commonly than women and girls, and most women with ADHD do not get an accurate diagnosis until they are in their thirties or forties. 

There could be several reasons for this:

  • Research shows that women are highly motivated to hide their ADHD symptoms and compensate for them. The symptoms that are observable are often anxiety or mood-related, which can lead to misdiagnosis.
  • Rating scales for ADHD are still skewed toward male behavior symptoms.
  • Stereotypes, bias, and gender role expectations all impact the diagnosis of women and girls. 
  • Parents, teachers, and pediatricians might miss ADHD symptoms in young girls because they are not obvious. 
  • ADHD is often a misunderstood disorder, even by many doctors. 

According to a study conducted by the CDC, the number of privately insured US women ages 15-44 years who filled a prescription for a medicine to treat ADHD increased 344 percent between 2003 and 2015. This reveals that more women have started to finally receive an ADHD diagnosis and receive treatment.

Replicability Crisis

Research is an essential part of practically every field of study. Biology, economics, anthropology – you name it. However, research is not always perfect. Researchers sometimes focus on data that “shows what they were looking for – findings that are only true if they look at information a certain way,” according to Kevin Loria.  

In the field of psychology, research is necessary to better understand human behavior and mental illnesses. But researchers in psychology have begun to face a major problem – a potential replicability crisis. 

Replicability is obtaining consistent results across studies aimed at answering the same scientific question, each of which has obtained its own data. Put more simply, replicability is being able to repeat a study and get consistent results. If a study is able to be replicated, its results are seen as much more reliable than the results of studies that are unable to be replicated. 

A replicability crisis means that studies that are repeated may lead to different results. In order to figure out how prevalent the crisis really is, Brian Nosek (along with 270 other psychologists) repeated 100 studies published in three of the top psychology journals and published their findings in the journal Science.

Fig. 1. Science.

Originally, 97% of the studies were statistically significant. However, only 36% of the studies were still significant when repeated (Fig. 1).

The psychologists also looked at how much of an effect there was in the study. As Ed Young explains, “the effect values measure the strength of a phenomenon; if your experiment shows that red lights make people angry, the effect size tells you how much angrier they get.” The effect size changed after repeating the studies; the median effect size for most studies was less when the studies were repeated, and on average, the effect sizes of the replications were half those of the originals (Fig. 2). In some studies, there was even a negative effect, meaning that the new results were opposite those of the original study. 

Fig. 2. Science.

Many are questioning the reliability of studies in psychology. While the replicability crisis is a problem, this does not mean that you should not believe in psychology at all. Importantly, failed replications do not discredit the original studies. There are numerous reasons why different results may have been produced. It could be due to random chance. The original study might be flawed, or the replicated study could be flawed. There could be differences in the people who volunteered for both experiments or differences in the way in which those experiments were conducted. 

According to Nosek, “This doesn’t mean the originals are wrong or false positives. There may be other reasons why they didn’t replicate, but this does mean that we don’t understand those reasons as well as we think we do. We can’t ignore that. We have data that says: We can do better.” 

The study conducted by Nosek is an important step toward understanding research in the field of psychology. While it is important to maintain a healthy level of skepticism when reading research studies, do not assume every study is a false positive. 

Recurring Dreams: What Do They Mean?

Recently, I have been having recurring dreams, and this is not the first time I have experienced this type of dream. When I was about five or six, I watched The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and had dreams of wolves chasing me for months afterward. While terrifying at the time, it is hilarious looking back on it (especially since few people consider The Chronicles of Narnia to be a scary movie). 

After waking up from one of my new recurring dreams, I remembered my nightmares as a kindergartener and decided to do a deep dive into the science behind recurring dreams. 

 

What are Recurring Dreams?

Recurring dreams are dreams that are experienced repeatedly over a long period of time. Between 60 and 75 percent of American adults experience recurring dreams, and more women experience them than men.

They are not necessarily nightmarish (though 77 percent of these dreams are negative); they can also be pleasant. Recurring dreams are unique to every person, but there are themes that are commonly seen in these dreams, including flying, falling, not being able to speak, being chased or trapped, being unprepared for an exam, and finding new rooms in a familiar building. 

What Causes Recurring Dreams?

It is common for recurring dreams to occur during times of stress, and these dreams may reflect unresolved conflicts in the dreamer’s life. Dreams, in general, help us to regulate our emotions and adapt to stressful events. The repetitive content in recurring dreams might represent an unsuccessful attempt to make sense of these emotions or stressful events. Once a person has resolved their personal conflict, they often stop experiencing recurring dreams.

 

Interpreting Recurring Dreams

If you are experiencing these types of dreams, there are ways to figure out their meanings and determine the reason that you keep having them. 

When attempting to figure out what your dreams mean, it is helpful to think of them as metaphors, since recurring dreams often metaphorically reflect the emotions of the dreamers. For example, a dream about being unprepared for an exam might represent something in the dreamer’s life that makes them feel unprepared or judged by others. A dream about being naked or inappropriately dressed might represent something in the dreamer’s life that makes them feel embarrassed or humiliated.

In recurring dreams, the scenario almost never appears exactly the same way in each dream, since there are typically changes or shifts to the basic scenario. For example, if you are dreaming about driving a car with no breaks, there might be variations in the type of car or where the car is going. Dr. Kelly Bulkeley explains, “These variations on the recurrent theme can be very helpful in understanding why the dreams come when they do. If the basic scenario of a recurrent dream has a metaphorical meaning, how do the changed details in a particular dream connect the metaphor to something happening in the waking world right now?” 

I hope this post helped you to better understand and interpret recurring dreams.

Dissociative Identity Disorder: Myths and Misconceptions

Fig. 1. IMDb.

In the 2016 movie Split, a man with 23 distinct personalities kidnaps three teenage girls and imprisons them in a secret underground lair. The man, who has dissociative identity disorder, is portrayed as dangerous because of his diagnosis. This psychological thriller sensationalizes mental illness and inaccurately portrays dissociative identity disorder – and it is not the only film to do so. 

 

The misrepresentation of individuals with DID as dangerous and violent is common in the media, leading to the public’s fear of those with the disorder and isolating those who have received a diagnosis.

 

What is Dissociative Identity Disorder?

Dissociative identity disorder (DID), previously called multiple personality disorder, is characterized by the presence of two or more distinct personality identities, each with its own traits and personal history. The transitions between personalities result in changes in the individual’s behavior, consciousness, memory, consciousness, and cognition. Individuals with DID experience gaps in their memories, and some may also experience hallucinations.

 

DID is often the result of severe abuse or trauma, and transitions from one personality to another are often caused by emotional distress. The disorder is thought to be a coping mechanism that enables the individual to detach themselves from trauma. 

 

Psychotherapy is the primary treatment for those with DID. Therapy focuses on merging the individual’s separate identities into a single identity, working through past trauma, and managing sudden behavioral changes.

 

There are many harmful misconceptions about the disorder that are perpetrated by the media. 

 

Misconception #1: People with DID are dangerous or violent. 

A DID diagnosis does not mean that an individual is dangerous. People with DID are actually much more likely to be victimized by others than to victimize them. They are also at high risk to repeatedly attempt suicide and self-harm. According to the DSM-5, 70 percent of individuals with DID have attempted suicide at least once. 

 

In a recent study on individuals with DID, the participants reported low rates of recent criminal behavior in the last six months. Three percent of participants reported a legal charge, 1.8 percent reported a fine, and 0.6 percent reported being incarcerated.

 

 

Misconception #2: DID is a “fad.”

DID is not merely a fad. DID has been formally recognized as a disorder for over four decades. Since the 1980 publication of DSM-3, the disorder has been included in four different editions of the DSM. DID patients can be reliably and validly diagnosed with structured and semi-structured interviews.

 

Misconception #3: DID is primarily diagnosed in North America by DID experts who over-diagnose the disorder. 

  1. DID is not primarily diagnosed in North America, and patients are consistently identified in outpatient, inpatient, and community samples around the world. 
  2. DID is diagnosed by clinicians around the world with varying degrees of expertise in DID, not just by DID experts.
  3. DID is not over-diagnosed. In fact, most individuals who meet criteria for DID have been treated in the mental health system for 6 to 12 years before they are finally correctly diagnosed. 

Fig. 2. Renzoni, Camille. The Recovery Village

 

Fortunately, many have begun to correct harmful stereotypes about DID, and there is even a petition to boycott Split because of its misleading representation of DID. 

Good Posture is Good for Mental Health

Many already know that poor posture can lead to physical discomfort, such as neck, shoulder, back pain, eye strain, and headaches. But did you know that posture does not only affect your physical health; it also has an impact on your mental health. Good posture has many psychological benefits. 

 

Good posture helps reduce stress and can increase positive mood and self-esteem.

In a small study of 74 participants, researchers concluded that adopting an upright seated posture in the face of stress can maintain self-esteem, reduce negative mood, and increase positive mood compared to a slumped posture. They also note that sitting upright may be a simple behavioral strategy to help build resilience to stress.

 

Good posture increases confidence.

Several small studies indicate that good posture does increase confidence. In one study, students who maintained an upright posture had more confidence in their own thoughts as they speculated about future job performance.

 

Good posture activates your assertiveness.

When you stand tall, your posture promotes respect from others as well as self-respect, regardless of your actual position in an organizational hierarchy. It may also increase your chances of success in a job search.

 

Good posture helps you perform better under pressure.

In a study of 125 college students asked to do simple math problems, those who sat upright reported they found it easier to do the math. The authors of the study speculate that using an empowered position can help you focus on a variety of performance situations, not just math tests.

 

Tips for good posture:

  • Keep your chin parallel to the floor.
  • Keep your shoulders back and down.
  • Activate your abdominal muscles to pull up from your waist.
  • Keep hips and knees even, with knees pointing straight ahead.
  • Distribute body weight evenly on both feet.
  • Aim for a neutral spine.

Coping with Burnout

If you consistently experience high levels of stress without taking steps to manage it, exhaustion eventually takes over – leaving you emotionally and physically burned out. Towards the end of the semester, especially as the weather becomes colder, many students experience burnout. If you are experiencing burnout, there are many strategies you can use to help you cope and recover. 

 

Self-Care

Because lack of self-care is one of the most significant contributors to burnout, it is important for those trying to recover from burnout to intentionally make time for self-care. Prioritize getting adequate amounts of sleep, eating well, and exercising. If you feel that you do not have enough time or are too exhausted for self-care, you can start with just 10 minutes a day. Even just going to sleep 10 minutes earlier than the night before or going on a 10 minute walk can really help you cope with the exhaustion that comes with burnout. 

 

Ask for Help

Let those close to you know that you are burned out and exhausted, and do not be afraid to ask them for help. Asking for help with studying, errands, or meals can be extremely helpful, and it can allow you to save some of your energy and give you more time to recharge. 

 

Set Boundaries

Setting boundaries means not overextending yourself. When you are not in class or doing schoolwork, try not to think about school. When you are not working, leave your work behind. Make sure to set aside time during the day to rest, even if you can only squeeze in 15 minutes. 

 

Practice Self Compassion

Those who experience burnout might also experience feelings of failure and a loss of purpose or life direction. Grant yourself the same love and support that you would give to a loved one in this situation. Remind yourself that it is okay to take a break and that you do not have to be perfect. 

RCL Blog 9

Work Plan: History of a Public Controversy, Vaccine Mandates

TED Talk Work Day Activity Summary

Duties of each member:

  • Reba – park ranger, research history of controversy, film/edit first segment
  • Divyesh – goalkeeper, research argument for vaccine mandates, film/edit third segment
  • Rachael – record keeper, research argument against vaccine mandates, film/edit second segment, put all segments together for final video

Timeline:

  • Over Thanksgiving break, continue researching, finalize the script, and begin editing individual segments. 
  • Have individual video segments completed by Friday, December 2. 
  • Have segments of video combined by Sunday, December 4 to submit to peer review discussion. 
  • Have final drafts of individual segments finished by Wednesday, December 7.
  • Submit final video on Friday, December 9. 

 

Day 1:

Our group discussed many topics, including affirmative action, vaccine mandates, artificial intelligence, death penalty, minimum wage, gun control, and animal rights. 

We decided on vaccine mandates.

Day 2:

We decided to divide up the work equally, with each person researching one topic and creating a segment on that topic. We researched our topics and discussed the information we learned together. We talked about ways to make sure that our video was unified, since that might be difficult with three people editing three different sections. 

We also identified the most important parts of our research:

  • Vaccine mandate definition – a requirement that states you have to be vaccinated in order to do certain things like working, traveling, and attending school 
  • History of vaccine mandates
    • First mandate started in the 1850s in Michigan
    • 1990s: Childhood vaccination initiative
    • Today, nearly all states have laws pertaining to children up to 12th grade that require students to have certain vaccines in order to attend school
  • Arguments against vaccine mandates: 
    • Religious beliefs
    • Concerns about safety
    • Lack of information
    • Limits personal freedom 
  • Arguments for vaccine mandates: 
    • The science shows that vaccines are effective in preventing diseases.
    • Autism isn’t brought on by vaccines.
    • Vaccines save money.
    • Vaccine mandates do not infringe on rights

Day 3:

We each did more in-depth research in the time between days two and three, and then we discussed our research when we met on day three. We decided how to organize the video, including the types of pictures and videos we should include. We began writing our script and gave each other feedback on the information and visuals that we each planned to include. 

 

Framing the issue

Vaccine mandates are a public controversy because people have differing opinions on if mandates are ethical or not. While some people believe that it is one’s role to get vaccinated for the good of the entire community, some believe that vaccine mandates infringe on personal rights and prevent people from making their own decisions for their health. People against vaccine mandates also emphasize that, if a government pushes for vaccine mandates, then there might not be anything stopping them from pushing more mandates and stripping away more rights in the future. 

We will use charts, statistics, and medical research to show how effective vaccines might be for those who are strong proponents of them. We can have information on their side effects and how they might affect health for those concerned about side effects. 

Framing questions:

  1. Where do we draw the line between infringing on rights and protecting the community?
  2. Is it the government’s responsibility to overlook the community’s health or to protect fundamental rights?
  3. Should medical professionals be allowed to have a say on pushing for vaccine mandates?
  4. Are medical centers ultimately responsible for possible side effects and health issues resulting from vaccines?
  5. How could enforcing vaccines change the way society views personal freedoms in the future?
  6. How much power should schools and universities have when it comes to deciding whether or not to have immunization mandates for students?

RCL Blog 8

Topic: Impact of AIDS on Public Opinion of LGBTQ Rights

Thesis statement: Following the 1980s, a swift transformation in American public opinion toward homosexuality was induced by the increase in activism and subsequent visibility of the gay community as a result of the outbreak of AIDS.

  • Intro
    • People with AIDS, especially LGBTQ individuals, were isolated and shamed by the American public, yet the condition acted as a catalyst for the shift toward the acceptance of the gay community following the 1980s. This paradox leaves us with a lingering question: how can the very disease that caused an increase in the stigmatization of LGBTQ individuals simultaneously influence the public’s greater acceptance of the community?
  • Body
    • Main idea: The AIDS epidemic influenced an increase in gay rights activism, resulting in greater visibility of the LGBTQ community to the American public.
      • Large-scale protests were successful in gaining national attention
        • Ex: National March on Washington
      • Sparked dialogue about gay rights among those who previously thought very little about LGBTQ issues 
      • New representation of the gay community in news outlets began the process of normalizing the existence of LGBTQ people and discussion of gay rights issues
    • Main idea: This increased visibility of the gay community caused a surge in the number of LGBTQ individuals openly expressing their sexualities.
      • As media outlets began to report on the hundreds of thousands of LGBTQ individuals that showed up to protests like the National March on Washington, Americans began to realize that homosexuality was not as uncommon as they had once believed. 
      • This realization coupled with the normalization of discussions about homosexuality created an atmosphere in which members of the LGBTQ community felt more comfortable coming out than they had in the past, leading to greater numbers of openly-gay individuals in the United States. 
      • The increase in LGBTQ people coming out led to a greater presence of openly-gay individuals in the lives of heterosexual Americans. 
    • Main idea: The surge in the number of openly-gay individuals, which promoted connections between heterosexual and openly-gay Americans, caused the change in public opinion in the United States toward LGBTQ acceptance.
      • The increasing number of interactions between straight and openly-gay Americans, whether in the workplace, on the street, or at the dinner table, reduced the stigma surrounding homosexuality. 
        • Critic Samantha Schmidt explains, “The more connections Americans made with gay or lesbian people, the more positive their attitudes toward them became – a trend social scientists call ‘the contact hypothesis.’” 
      • As their own family members, friends, and acquaintances started to openly express their sexualities, straight Americans began to define members of the LGBTQ community by more than just their sexuality
  • Conclusion
    • Concluding remark

Slides:

#1: 

#2: Image from the National March on Washington

#3: Newspaper clips

#4: Graph