RESEARCH ROUND UP

Depression and Low Serotonin Levels-The Myth -Credible evidence that debunks this myth!

The results of this research are huge news, and need to be shared with anyone that is taking antidepressants or currently considering taking antidepressants.

The Past

Ask anyone in the street what they know about depression, and the universal story is that there is a ‘chemical imbalance in the brain’-  serotonin levels in the brain being too low. Recent surveys show that this belief is held by 85-90% of the public.

This has been the story for over thirty years. 

During the 1990’s the newer antidepressants e.g  Prozac. Pacxil, Celexa, Lexapro were said to increase serotonin levels and the story went that they therefore reduced the severity and duration and depression symptoms in individuals.

Prozac was the first of these newer second generation antidepressant drugs called SSRI’s, and the pharmaceutical industry has continued to widely publish the serotonin story ever since. This is despite there being little good quality science behind their effects and efficacy etc.

The pharmaceutical industry had many resources available and published misleading articles in leading medical journals of the day, and so the serotonin myth became a fact ,and was and still is widely accepted by many professionals and the general public alike to be the leading cause of depression. 

The most commonly held belief was that these drugs were safe and effective with little side effects.

In the USA where the advertisement of drugs is allowed, the drug industry employed a strategic advertising strategy initially to physicians, but soon realise that much more profit (billions) could be made if they promoted their use directly to the potential patients-using a direct to consumer approach. The rational that serotonin was the problem, seemed like a miracle and was irresistible to most people due the promises being made.

And so it is today with antidepressants now being the number one form of treatment in Australia, USA, Portugul and many other countries around the world.

What we now know

A recent major study titled "The Serotonin Theory of Depression: A Systematic Umbrella Review of the Evidence" published on the 20th July 2022 in the journal of Molecular Psychiatry has delivered a serious blow that undermines the ‘chemical imbalance’ myth. This was a meta-analysis of all the available evidence.

The researchers undertook a very comprehensive review of the existing evidence regarding serotonin receptors, serotonin transporter molecules etc 

This review was conducted by an extremely well respected team led by the University College London psychiatrist, Professor Joanna Moncrief, finally concluding that (quote) ‘ there is no evidence of a connection between reduced serotonin levels or activity and depression’

There have been and still are many professionals and clinical experts that have, over the past decades, held the view that the causes of depression are many and complex, but the one thing that some came to understand is that depression is a social rather than a medical problem. This renders the use of antidepressant medication as one dimensional for what is essentially a multidimensional disorder, rather than a disease.

Dr Michael Yapko (A clinical psychologist) , has spent the vast majority of his career, proposing and presenting clinical evidence that depression cannot be successfully treated using medication alone. Whilst he acknowledges that there are some patients that have reported that certain medication have saved their life during the darkest of time, little is understood about their precise effectiveness and impact on the brain.

Furthermore he has been quoted as saying “I have spent my professional life researching, treating, and writing about depression, a most serious and debilitating disorder. If antidepressants were completely safe and highly effective, I would gladly say “take them!” But…they’re not. And now, finally, the advertising myth that has given rise to a non-critical widespread acceptance of questionable drugs has been challenged and possibly seriously damaged. Let’s see what the fallout will be”

If you would like to read the full research article please use the link below:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-022-01661-0.epdf?utm_source=Email_marketing&utm_campaign=Feb_2022&cmp=1&utm_medium=HTMLEmail

Source: Michael Yapko and Moncrieff J, Cooper RE, Stockmann T, Amendola S, Hengartner MP, and Horowitz, MA. (7.20.2022). “The Serotonin Theory of Depression: A Systematic Umbrella Review of the Evidence.” Molecular Psychiatry. DOI 10.1038/s41380-022-01661-0.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:

Do not stop taking any antidepressant medication that you are currently taking, if you want to stop, please speak to your prescribing professional for a clear and safe plan to reduce their use.

TDoi: 10.4025/psicolestud.v21i2.30820   

CLINICAL HYPNOSIS AND CHRONICLE PAIN: TOWARD A COMPLEX PERSPECTIV

E1 Maurício S. Neubern2 Brasilia University (UnB), Brasília, Brasil. 

ABSTRACT. 

This paper seeks to build initial theoretical notions on complex thought of Edgar Morin as an alternative to understanding of the relationship between hypnosis and chronic pain. Starting with a critique of the dominant instrumentalist thinking in the field, which is often too simplistic, this paper will focuse on two main axes: a) subjectivity and animality as possible fields for qualifying chronic pain and b) the relationship between subject, unconscious processes and change during hypnosis. The work is completed highlighting the relevance of some complex concepts to the topic : the hologram, which highlights the multiple socio-cultural and biological influences, in contrast to the individualistic perspective on pain and hypnosis; the configurational organization, highlighting the singular aspect of the semiotic production of the subject and the particular logic of the fields subjectivity and animality ; and awareness that, as an emerging quality in trance, the subject is located in mediating condition and not chronic pain experience driver. Keywords: Hypnosis; chronic pain; complexity. 

NIH Public Access Author Manuscript Int 

J Clin Exp Hypn. 

Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 April 1.

Published in final edited form as: Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2009 April ; 57(2): 198–221. doi:10.1080/00207140802665476. 

A Comparison of Self-Hypnosis Versus Progressive Muscle Relaxation in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis and Chronic Pain1

 Mark P. Jensen, Joseph Barber, Joan M. Romano, Ivan R. Molton, Katherine A. Raichle, Travis L. Osborne, Joyce M. Engel, Brenda L. Stoelb, George H. Kraft, and David R. Patterson2 University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA Abstract 

Twenty-two patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and chronic pain we recruited into a quasi- experimental trial comparing the effects of self-hypnosis training (HYP) with progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) on pain intensity and pain interference; 8 received HYP and the remaining 14 participants were randomly assigned to receive either HYP or PMR. HYP-condition participants reported significantly greater pre- to postsession as well as pre- to posttreatment decreases in pain and pain interference than PMR-condition participants, and gains were maintained at 3-month follow- up. Most of the participants in both conditions reported that they continued to use the skills they learned in treatment and experienced pain relief when they did so. General hypnotizability was not significantly related to treatment outcome, but treatment-outcome expectancy assessed before and after the first session was. The results support the efficacy of self-hypnosis training for the management of chronic pain in persons with MS. 

NIH Public Access Author Manuscript Contemp Hypn. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 March 1.

Published in final edited form as: Contemp Hypn. 2009 March 1; 26(1): 24–39. doi:10.1002/ch.370. 

THE EFFICACY OF HYPNOTIC ANALGESIA IN ADULTS: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 

Brenda L. Stoelb, Ivan R. Molton, Mark P. Jensen, and David R. Patterson University of Washington School of Medicine, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA 

Abstract 

This article both summarizes the previous reviews of randomized, controlled trials of hypnotic analgesia for the treatment of chronic and acute pain in adults, and reviews similar trials which have recently been published in the scientific literature. The results indicate that for both chronic and acute pain conditions: (1) hypnotic analgesia consistently results in greater decreases in a variety of pain outcomes compared to no treatment/standard care; (2) hypnosis frequently out-performs non- hypnotic interventions (e.g. education, supportive therapy) in terms of reductions in pain-related outcomes; and (3) hypnosis performs similarly to treatments that contain hypnotic elements (such as progressive muscle relaxation), but is not surpassed in efficacy by these alternative treatments. Factors that may influence the efficacy of hypnotic analgesia interventions are discussed, including, but not limited to, the patient's level of suggestibility, treatment outcome expectancy, and provider expertise. Based upon this body of literature, suggestions are offered for practitioners who are using, or would like to use, hypnosis for the amelioration of pain problems in their patients or clients. 

 Journal International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis ∠ Volume 67, 2019 - Issue 3 􏰜  1,358 0 13 Views CrossRef citations to date Altmetric Listen Articles 

THE EFFICACY OF HYPNOSIS AS A TREATMENT FOR ANXIETY: A META- ANALYSIS 

Keara E. Valentine ", Leonard S. Milling, Lauren J. Clark & Caitlin L. Moriarty Pages 336-363 | Received 09 Oct 2018, Accepted 07 Dec 2018, Published online: 28 Jun 2019 # Download citation $ https://doi.org/10.1080/00207144.2019.1613863   ) Full Article % Figures & data & References # Citations | Metrics In this article + This meta-analysis quantifies the effectiveness of hypnosis in treating anxiety. Included studies were required to utilize a between-subjects or mixed-model design in which a hypnosis intervention was compared with ( Reprints & Permissions  PDF Abstract https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00207144.2019.1613863 13/9/19, 9?38 am Page 1 of 50  a control condition in alleviating the symptoms of anxiety. Of 399 records screened, 15 studies incorporating 17 trials of hypnosis met the inclusion criteria. At the end of active treatment, 17 trials produced a mean weighted effect size of 0.79 (p ≤ .001), indicating the average participant receiving hypnosis reduced anxiety more than about 79% of control participants. At the longest follow-up, seven trials yielded a mean weighted effect size of 0.99 (p ≤ .001), demonstrating the average participant treated with hypnosis improved more than about 84% of control participants. Hypnosis was more effective in reducing anxiety when combined with other psychological interventions than when used as a stand-alone treatment. Anxiety problems and anxiety disorders are some of the most impairing and costly mental health conditions in the United States. As a group, the anxiety disorders are also the most common of the mental disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 2013), with the lifetime prevalence in the US estimated to be approximately 29% of the population (Kessler, Chiu, Demler, & Walters, 2005). No doubt, there are many other individuals who suffer from significant anxiety symptoms but who do not qualify for a diagnosis of an anxiety disorder according to the criteria listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (American Psychiatric Association). According to the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (Kessler et al., 2005), among individuals with an anxiety disorder, an estimated 23% had serious impairment and 34% had moderate impairment. The economic costs associated with the anxiety disorders are staggering. One study estimated the total costs associated with the anxiety disorders in the US to  https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00207144.2019.1613863 13/9/19, 9?38 am Page 2 of 50  be $46.6 billion, with about three-quarters of those costs attributable to reduced productivity (DuPont et al., 1996). Fortunately, there are many effective psychological interventions for anxiety. 

  American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis Copyright ©2007 by the American Society of Clinical Hypnosis 49:4, April 2007 

Hypnosis Prevents the Cardiovascular Response to Cold Pressor Test

 Edoardo Casigliaa,b, Laura Schiavona, Valérie Tikhonoffa, Hilda Haxhi Nastoa, Mariafrancesca Azzia, Panagiota Rempeloua, Margherita Giacomellob,c, Monica Bolzona, Anna Bascellia, Roberta Scarpaa, Antonio M. Lapentab, Augusto M. Rossia,b 

Abstract 

To highlight the effects of hypnotic focused analgesia (HFA), 20 healthy participants underwent a cold pressor test (CPT) in waking basal conditions (WBC) by keeping the right hand in icy water until tolerable (pain tolerance); subjective pain was quantified by visual scale immediately before extracting the hand from water. The test was then repeated while the participants were under hypnosis and underwent HFA suggestions. Cardiovascular parameterswerecontinuouslymonitored. Paintolerancewas121.5±96.1 sec in WBC and 411.0 ± 186.7 sec during HFA (p < 0.0001), and visual rating score 7.75 ± 2.29 and 2.45 ± 2.98 (p < 0.0001), respectively. CPT- induced increase of total peripheral resistance was non significant during HFA and +21% (p < 0.01) in WBC. HFA therefore reduced both perception and the reflex cardiovascular consequences of pain as well. This indicates that hypnotic analgesia implies a decrease of sensitivity and/or a block of transmission of painful stimuli, with depression of the nervous reflex arc.

 Contemporary Hypnosis (2001) Vol. 18, No. 2, 2001, pp. 62–72 

CONFERENCE REPORTS 

THE EFFECTS OF ABSORPTION AND REDUCED CRITICAL THOUGHT ON SUGGESTIBILITY IN AN HYPNOTIC CONTEXT 

Richard J Brown,1,2 Elena Antonova,1 Arun Langley1 and David A Oakley1 1Hypnosis Unit, Department of Psychology, University College London and 2Raymond Way Neuropsychiatry Research Group, Institute of Neurology, London, UK 

Abstract 

The suggestibility-enhancing effects of hypnosis are widely accepted, although poorly understood. In the present study, an attempt was made to address the effect of absorption and reduced critical thought on suggestibility change occurring in the hyp- notic context. Study participants were presented with a waking suggestibility assessment followed by an induction consisting of instructions for progressive relax- ation and a manipulation designed to establish an hypnotic context and an expectation for increased suggestibility. They were then presented with either further relaxation instructions, instructions to become absorbed or instructions to reduce critical thought, followed by a second suggestibility assessment. Groups were com- pared on objective and subjective suggestibility score change, controlling for suggestibility on the first test. Results indicate that the addition of instructions for absorption or reduced critical thought to relaxation procedures created a significantly larger suggestibility increase than instructions for relaxation alone. Moreover, instructions for relaxation alone were insufficient to produce an increase in sug- gestibility, despite the presence of an hypnotic context and positive expectations. These findings cast doubt on the notion that only non-state factors are responsible for suggestibility increases observed in the hypnotic context, and raise the possibility that absorption and reduced critical thought are important components of hypnosis.

 Consciousness and Cognition 21 (2012) 1582–1585   Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Consciousness and Cognition journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/concog  

Reply Varieties of attention in hypnosis and meditation q,qq a a a,b,⇑ Michael Lifshitz , Natasha K.J. Campbell , Amir Raz a McGill University, 3775 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2B4 b Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, 3755 Côte Ste-Catherine Road, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3T 1E2 In their commentary, Oakley and Halligan (2011) echo their recent thoughts regarding the cognitive neuroscience of hypnosis and suggestion (Oakley & Halligan, 2009, 2010). Here we address some of the issues they raise concerning the quest for neuropsychological markers of hypnotic states, the use of hypnotic vs. posthypnotic suggestions, and the potential for other forms of atypical attention such as meditative practices to elucidate hypnosis and de-automatization. Oakley and Halligan twice allude to the paucity of data indicating a special neuropsychological ‘‘state’’ of hypnosis some- times known as ‘‘trance’’ (2011). The authors note, however, that recent investigations show some promise of identifying a neural marker of hypnosis. Whereas some evidence, including our own research, supports the idea that hypnotic phenomena typically follow suggestions even in the absence of a formal induction procedure (Mazzoni et al., 2009; McGeown et al., 2012; Raz, Kirsch, Pollard, & Nitkin-Kaner, 2006), other research findings may serve to support a distinctive physiological marker unique to hypnosis or to hypnotic suggestions (e.g., Cojan et al., 2009; Demertzi et al., 2011; Pyka et al., 2011; Raz, Fan, & Posner, 2005; Terhune, Cardeña, & Lindgren, 2010; Vanhaudenhuyse et al., 2009). Scholars, however, hardly agree even about the behavioral and phenomenological characteristics that typify ostensible hypnotic planes. For example, distinct sub-types of highly hypnotically suggestible individuals seem to diverge in their experience and behavior throughout hyp- nosis, challenging the view of hypnosis as a unitary concept (Terhune, Cardeña, & Lindgren, 2011). In addition, the literature provides mixed accounts of how psychological factors such as context, sense of control, relaxation, and expectation relate to hypnosis (Kihlstrom, 2008). An adequate psychological model, therefore, would be instrumental to understanding hypnosis from a physiological perspective. In research settings, as in clinical practice, specific suggestions often accompany hypnosis. Few reports, however, have investigated brain and behavioral correlates of ‘‘neutral’’ hypnosis sans post-induction suggestions (Cardeña, 2005; Cardeña, Jönsson, Terhune, & Marcusson-Clavertz, 2012; Kihlstrom & Edmonston, 1971; McGeown, Mazzoni, Venneri, & Kirsch, 2009). These few published accounts, moreover, rarely control for the effects of implicit suggestions—for relaxation, drowsiness, and focused attention—that are ubiquitous in classic hypnotic inductions. In addition, it appears that the influence of neutral hypnosis is different from that of hypnosis with explicit suggestions. For example, in response to incongruent Stroop stimuli, highly hypnotically suggestible individuals demonstrated increased conflict-related brain activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) following neutral induction (Egner, Jamieson, & Gruzelier, 2005); conversely, when offered an explicit sugges- tion to perceive the stimuli as meaningless symbols, participants showed decreased fMRI signal in the ACC (Raz et al., 2005). Further research, therefore, would need to carefully tease apart such hypnotic variations. Whether or not hypnosis involves distinct neurocognitive indices, posthypnotic suggestion (PHS) provides a useful exper- imental alternative to hypnotic suggestion. PHS refers to a condition during common wakefulness following termination of the hypnotic experience, wherein a subject is compliant with a suggestion made during the hypnotic episode. Thus, PHS keeps cognitive performance untarnished by potential confounding factors associated with the ritual of hypnosis. Oakley DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2010.01.013 q We dedicate this collection of responses to the memory of Bill Banks, founding coeditor of Consciousness and Cognition. This project was the last professional interaction we had with him before his untimely parting. qq Reply to Oakley, D. A., & Halligan, P. W. (2011). Using hypnosis to gain insights into healthy and pathological cognitive functioning. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(2), 328–331. ⇑ Corresponding author. Address: 4333 Côte Ste-Catherine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3T 1E4. Fax: +1 514 340 8124. E-mail address: amir.raz@mcgill.ca (A. Raz). 1053-8100/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.05.008    M. Lifshitz et al. / Consciousness and Cognition 21 (2012) 1582–1585 1583 and Halligan (2011) propose that upon detecting the post-hypnotic cue, highly hypnotizable individuals might spontane- ously re-enter hypnosis. One approach provides preliminary support for the hypothesis of spontaneous hypnosis (Barabasz, 2005), but this theory has been criticized on both theoretical and empirical grounds (Kirsch et al., 2008). More likely, there- fore, PHS allows participants to carry out responses during a typical experience of wakefulness, albeit with some attention resources allocated to the processing of suggestion (Tobis & Kihlstrom, 2010). We concur with Oakley and Halligan that it would be important to study hypnosis and de-automatization in a wider context. The preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that typical and atypical attention (e.g., suggestion) comprise intersecting organ systems (Raz, 2005). Such top-down processes draw on overlapping neural circuitry, functional neuro- anatomy, chemical modulators, and cellular structures (Fernandez-Duque & Posner, 2001; Posner & Fan, 2004; Raz, 2006; Raz, Lamar, Buhle, Kane, & Peterson, 2007). Thus, the association between suggestion and attention has been affirmed both theoretically and empirically (Raz, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008; Raz & Buhle, 2006; Raz & Campbell, 2011; Raz et al., 2007). Probing the relationship between hypnosis and other forms of atypical attention may elucidate the processes underlying cognitive control. One such set of insights comes from the investigation of meditative practices. Most forms of meditation share the essential feature of attention regulation. The word meditation describes a broad range of practices aimed at cultivating particular attentional sets to increase cognitive control, promote well-being, and achieve existential insight. Drawing on traditional Buddhist perspectives, scientists generally classify meditation practices into two non-exhaustive categories: focused attention and open monitoring (Lutz, Slagter, Dunne, & Davidson, 2008). Focused attention involves sustained narrowing of attention on an experiential object such as the breath or a mantra. Open monitoring, on the other hand, involves non-discriminatory broadening of attention to include the whole field of moment-to-moment experience. Many meditative techniques draw on both focused attention and open monitoring to cultivate a non-judgmental, receptive awareness of the present moment. De-automatization is a central theme pervading historical, phenomenological, and scientific accounts of meditative prac- tice. Traditional Buddhist sources, which inspire much of the recent empirical work on this topic, construe meditation as a group of techniques geared at refining attention and meta-awareness with the goal of releasing unwholesome habits of thought and behavior (Gunaratana, 2002; Lutz, Dunne, & Davidson, 2006). Accordingly, studies indicate that meditation training may improve attention and executive control (Brefczynski-Lewis, Lutz, Schaefer, Levinson, & Davidson, 2007; MacLean et al., 2010; Slagter et al., 2007; Tang et al., 2007; but see Jensen, Vangkilde, Frokjaer, & Hasselbalch, 2012), override involuntary emotional reactivity (Farb et al., 2010; Taylor et al., 2011), and alter the experience and neural expression of pain (Brown & Jones, 2010; Gard et al., 2011; Grant, Courtemanche, & Rainville, 2011; Zeidan et al., 2011). Meditative practices, moreover, may reduce the automaticity of mind-wandering (Mrazek, Smallwood, & Schooler, 2012) and alter connectivity within the default-mode network of the brain (Brewer et al., 2011; Farb et al., 2007; Hasenkamp & Barsalou, 2012; Jang et al., 2011; Josipovic, Dinstein, Weber, & Heeger, 2012; Pagnoni, 2012; Pagnoni, Cekic, & Guo, 2008; Taylor et al., 2012). Such functional and behavioral alterations manifest alongside volumetric, morphometric, and tractographic changes in brain structure (Grant, Courtemanche, Duerden, Duncan, & Rainville, 2010; Hölzel et al., 2011; Kang et al., 2012; Lazar et al., 2005; Luders, Clark, Narr, & Toga, 2011; Luders, Kurth et al., 2012; Luders, Phillips et al., 2012; Pagnoni & Cekic, 2007; Tang et al., 2010). Thus, similar to hypnosis, meditation provides a promising vehicle for exploring the top-down modulation, and even transformation, of deeply-ingrained processes. Comparing de-automatization across both hypnosis and meditation may help illuminate the neural underpinnings of cog- nitive control. Parallel to our findings involving suggestion, some studies indicate that meditation may lead to reductions in Stroop interference effects (Alexander, Langer, Newman, Chandler, & Davies, 1989; Chan & Woollacott, 2007; Moore & Malinowski, 2009; Wenk-Sormaz, 2005). Oakley and Halligan aptly remark that ‘‘an important aim for future studies of hyp- notically induced inhibition of the word/color Stroop effect will be to discover at what stage in the reading process the as- sumed attentionally mediated effect (the suggested deficit) produced its impact’’ (2011, p. 2). We investigated this question several years ago using combined fMRI and electrical scalp recording. A specific posthypnotic suggestion to perceive the printed words as meaningless symbols of a foreign language produced a general dampening of visual processing in the ex- tra-striate cortex as early as 150 ms following stimulus presentation, along with reduced fMRI signal in the ACC (Raz et al., 2005). Preliminary efforts have begun to explore the brain correlates of ballistic processes, such as the Stroop, among prac- titioners of meditation (Kozasa et al., 2012; Moore, Gruber, Derose, & Malinowski, 2012; Teper & Inzlicht, 2012). One recent study documented that, compared with participants who were naïve to meditation, long-term meditators with experience in a variety of FA and OM practices demonstrated reduced ACC activity in response to incongruent Stroop stimuli (Kozasa et al., 2012). These results mirror our findings with posthypnotic suggestion (Raz et al., 2005) and intimate that certain meditative practices may override the automaticity of word reading in a Stroop context. Future studies examining de-automatization in both hypnosis and meditation would be instrumental to elucidating the similarities, differences, and neurocognitive sub- strates of these unique and overlapping forms of self-regulation.