In <364F6BD6.6DAD at postoffice.idirect.com> K C Cheng
<kccheng at postoffice.idirect.com> writes:
>>F. Frank LeFever wrote:
>> =
>>> Again, kccheng shows his ignorance in a most embarassing way (if he
>> were capable of shame, that is). MRI involves a powerful
>> electromagnetic force, but ECT involves direct electric current
>> passage. =
Kccheng stupidly replied:
>>And you don't think direct current would cause more electromagnetic
>erasing than mere external magnetic field??????? If not, why use ECT,
>and not MRI machine to "treat" clinical depression?
>You or I ignorant?
>Shame or no shame?
Why didn't he read a little something about ECT or about MRI before he
exposed his pathetic ignorance and muddled thinking to the world? A
few hours in a good library could have spared him public shame which
will follow him for days, weeks, months, or years (depending on how
long the memories of newsgroup readers are...)
ECT works by causing seizure activity in the nerve cells of the brain.
What this seizure activity does that is beneficial in treating
depression is not so clear, but changes in neurotransmitter balances
seem likely. We are just beginning to understand some of the
cellular-level changes involved, but the answer may lie in IEGs
(immediate early genes), HSPs (so-called "heat-shock proteins"),
neurotrophin responses, etc. In other words, this is a therapy which
has been developed and applied empirically (i.e. "it works") and the
theory lags behind.
However there is NO reason to invoke "memory erasure". If this were
the basis, patients who recovered from depression after ECT would be
amnestic. Indeed, in an effort to AVOID even transient memory
disruption, some use unilateral ECT rather than bilateral...
And why do we not use MRI to treat depression? Because it apparently
has NO effect on brain physiology. (I am open to correction on this.
If someone knows of evidence of some subtle changes, I'd be interested.
I believe some have been seen with deoxyglucose)(sp?) (not my area of
expertise).
Mr. Cheng: I repeat my suggestion to find a less critical newsgroup.
No point (pun?) in "crossing swords" with worthy challengers if you are
incapable of the intellectual honesty of acknowledging when you've been
"hit".
F. Frank LeFever, Ph.D.
New York Neuropsychology Group
>> =
>> >> =
>> >