Schizophrenia - General Discussion

William Evans10 said:I’ve been doing quite a bit of reading online lately. Honestly, though? It all feels a bit scattered to me. Just a whole lot of guesswork. One study says this, another study claims that—the truth is, nobody seems to have a definitive answer on any of it. But, from what I can gather... it appears a person is born with certain genetic markers in the brain that might be activated, or they might stay dormant. There are so many variables involved: lifestyle choices, alcohol consumption, drug use, and even psychological trauma. It can be passed down from grandparents to grandchildren, though that isn't a guarantee. Sometimes, you won't see the illness manifest in the first generation, yet it suddenly surfaces in the second. It’s unpredictable. A brother might develop it while his sister remains perfectly healthy, or vice versa. Even with identical twins, one could be affected while the other isn't. There is also the matter of adoption. Children adopted and raised away from biological parents who suffered from schizophrenia or bipolar disorder can still potentially develop these conditions within their foster environments. These two specific illnesses are very closely linked.

I recently stumbled upon a fascinating article regarding a massive longitudinal study conducted by a group of researchers over in Sweden. They tracked every single individual diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder across the country from 1973 all the way through 2003, cross-referencing that data with familial relationships among those affected. The findings are quite striking: children who have a parent living with schizophrenia face a 9.9% higher probability of developing the condition themselves. Furthermore, they carry a 5.2% increased risk of bipolar disorder compared to children whose parents were unaffected. Because of this deep connection, the researchers are arguing that we really ought to be studying both disorders in parallel rather than treating them as separate silos, as they seem to be fundamentally intertwined.

A person whose sibling has one of those two psychiatric conditions also faces an increased risk of developing both disorders themselves.

My son is still far too young for me to know anything for certain. All I can do is wait. But, of course, I worry, because the possibility is there.

So, I’ve come to the conclusion that in my mother-in-law's case—meaning her specific illness—multiple factors are at play. For starters, she had difficulties growing up and attended special education schools. She also survived meningitis as a child and dealt with epilepsy, which might have caused some minor brain damage. On top of that, she suffered a massive psychological trauma at age eight when her sister passed away. So, all of that combined likely played a huge role in triggering the gene she carried, which she inherited from her own mother.
It is possible that my husband (her son) also carries the gene, but perhaps it didn't manifest, or maybe his generation simply skipped over it. I don't know; I can only speculate and assume... the brain is such a complicated organ.

What truly keeps me up at night is my child. As for him, right now, I can't say anything about him other than that he is a happy, lively little boy. What worries me is an incident that happened last year in July. One morning, out of nowhere, he just collapsed, and we couldn't get him to wake up. He was only 10 months old then. Naturally, we rushed him to the hospital in a total panic. That same state recurred the second day while we were in the hospital. The doctors suspected a cerebral seizure (there wasn't any muscle twitching or oxygen loss, he was just unconscious). They also considered narcolepsy, but they ruled that out since his sleep patterns were perfectly normal and regular. They even looked into meningitis. We went through every test imaginable: brain CT scans, EEGs (four or five times), a lumbar puncture, and an echocardiogram. However, not a single result pointed toward any diagnosis. It has been eight months since then, and it hasn't happened again. But given the family medical history—specifically the fact that his grandmother survived epilepsy and meningitis and suffers from schizophrenia—it has sparked doubt and anxiety in me, my husband, and the doctors. In nine months, we are headed for an MRI, so we should finally know more. We are just praying for a clean scan.

Both you and I can only hope that our children stay healthy. There isn't much we can do to influence it. Regarding your daughter, my humble opinion is that you should seek a second opinion and take her to another doctor just to see what they think. You should consult with several specialists and perhaps even build connections if necessary. I sincerely hope and believe that a girl her age isn't suffering from depression. I am so incredibly sorry about your sister. I honestly don't know what to say to all of this; I'm at a loss for words...😢 What you need to do now is watch your children as closely as you possibly can and monitor everything they do; if something does happen, you have to react immediately.

Let's just hope they discover something new and that we end up knowing much more than we do now. If nothing else, at least for now, we can remain vigilant and stay informed about it all.

It doesn't really matter if it's F20, F23, F25... and so on. It's all closely linked and similar. Every one of these illnesses is difficult, both for the patient and for the family. That's why it's vital that if it is present, it's caught early so you can respond. That way, one can lead as normal a
life as possible. Also, something that really needs work is the education and support provided to families of those affected, because not everyone has access to the internet and not everyone knows how to handle this kind of "pressure." My husband and I will likely have to visit a psychiatrist or psychologist ourselves eventually, because unfortunately, there isn't anyone else to turn to for help and support. We live in a country where people with mental illnesses are exposed to stigma and prejudice from others, and that is precisely why I fear most for my son; no two people are the same, and none of us handle obstacles and judgments in the same way.

Look, the advantage of the internet is that you can find any article you need quickly and easily.

I spent about a month visiting libraries in Chicago searching for the specific articles I needed, most of which are probably the exact same ones available online now.

And not all research covers the same topic or yields the same results; findings are often contradictory, making it difficult to determine which ones hold weight and which do not. I spent another month reading through everything I gathered just to arrive at something actionable, and within a day or two, I calculated the probability that my brother and sister would face issues. Not a single psychiatrist agreed with my calculations, simply because I am not a doctor, even though it was pure mathematics—a discipline I thought I was failing at until I became the top student in my class year after year at university. Regardless, nobody took it seriously; I couldn't calculate that my sister would attempt suicide (perhaps I could have if I had spent more time on it), but what I did calculate certainly wasn't positive.

I looked into schizophrenia a little today, remembering that twenty years ago, the causes were largely unknown.

Nowadays, it is perhaps thought to be a hereditary condition influenced by the environment, though I am not certain. Again, this 5% or 10% increased probability of transmission mentioned in studies from Sweden is negligible; even measuring a 5% or 10% shift is difficult. To me, that sounds more like confirmation that the disease isn't hereditary. I am not a doctor, of course, and they will dismiss my conclusions, and if I'm unlucky, they'll just think I'm ill myself.

I remember that until quite recently—perhaps even now—there were ideas that schizophrenia should be abandoned as a diagnosis because too many different illnesses fall under its umbrella, suggesting they could all be categorized under different names. Yet, the term is still used, encompassing five or more subtypes plus simple, undefined cases.

I am going to take my Daughter to another doctor to see what they say, but I know the problem exists; the only question is the diagnosis.

She attempted suicide when she was only seven years old, which certainly doesn't support the idea that everything is fine with her. I simply thought I had a few more years before the first diagnosis would be made.

Robin Lopez2 said:In my view, nobody is obligated to have any kind of faith; you can just live your life!

To me, faith is just an entry point into a sort of "mild collective psychosis." That's fine by me, provided it stays purely theoretical and doesn't interfere with actual, practical action.

To actually enjoy life, you’ve got to believe it’s worth living in the first place—you know, that there are a million beautiful things out there waiting for you. And let's be real, sometimes holding onto that belief isn't easy.

Me? I’d much rather lean into what I call "blind faith in science"—even if everyone else thinks that's just a fancy way of collectively losing our minds.

Michelle Evans said:To each their own...
Supposedly, even living isn't healthy... 😉

So, does nobody ever get together to meet up and share their experiences... It’s a shame...

Check in with the Shine Association...I couldn't find the link you were referring to...)

The very first thing that hits you when you land on their website is news about their members passing away. It’s quite grim, honestly. It seems I'll be continuing this journey on my own, much like I always have.

David Vaughn75 said:To actually enjoy life, you’ve got to believe it’s worth living in the first place—you know, that there are a million beautiful things out there waiting for you. And let's be real, sometimes holding onto that belief isn't easy.

Me? I’d much rather lean into what I call "blind faith in science"—even if everyone else thinks that's just a fancy way of collectively losing our minds.

It seems to me that placing any kind of blind faith in something you cannot verify through your own observation is, in our specific situation, a fundamentally misguided approach.

Brian Hayes43 said:It seems to me that placing any kind of blind faith in something you cannot verify through your own observation is, in our specific situation, a fundamentally misguided approach.

When we look at psychosis—at least during those acute stages—isn't the fundamental issue actually the complete unreliability of the very mechanisms a person uses to distinguish reality from delusion? Because of that internal breakdown, a person finds themselves in a position where they can trust neither their own perceptions nor the external world any more than the other. However, once those psychotic symptoms subside and the ability to reality-test is restored, the individual regains the capacity, just like anyone else, to weigh the credibility and logic of incoming information to decide whether it warrants acceptance or rejection.🤷

Brian Hayes43 said:It seems to me that placing any kind of blind faith in something you cannot verify through your own observation is, in our specific situation, a fundamentally misguided approach.

So what you're saying is healthy people get to believe whatever they want, but the sick ones shouldn't? 🙄

Your logic is totally tripping over itself.

fadedlynx96 said:Look, the advantage of the internet is that you can find any article you need quickly and easily.

I spent about a month visiting libraries in Chicago searching for the specific articles I needed, most of which are probably the exact same ones available online now.

And not all research covers the same topic or yields the same results; findings are often contradictory, making it difficult to determine which ones hold weight and which do not. I spent another month reading through everything I gathered just to arrive at something actionable, and within a day or two, I calculated the probability that my brother and sister would face issues. Not a single psychiatrist agreed with my calculations, simply because I am not a doctor, even though it was pure mathematics—a discipline I thought I was failing at until I became the top student in my class year after year at university. Regardless, nobody took it seriously; I couldn't calculate that my sister would attempt suicide (perhaps I could have if I had spent more time on it), but what I did calculate certainly wasn't positive.

I looked into schizophrenia a little today, remembering that twenty years ago, the causes were largely unknown.

Nowadays, it is perhaps thought to be a hereditary condition influenced by the environment, though I am not certain. Again, this 5% or 10% increased probability of transmission mentioned in studies from Sweden is negligible; even measuring a 5% or 10% shift is difficult. To me, that sounds more like confirmation that the disease isn't hereditary. I am not a doctor, of course, and they will dismiss my conclusions, and if I'm unlucky, they'll just think I'm ill myself.

I remember that until quite recently—perhaps even now—there were ideas that schizophrenia should be abandoned as a diagnosis because too many different illnesses fall under its umbrella, suggesting they could all be categorized under different names. Yet, the term is still used, encompassing five or more subtypes plus simple, undefined cases.

I am going to take my Daughter to another doctor to see what they say, but I know the problem exists; the only question is the diagnosis.

She attempted suicide when she was only seven years old, which certainly doesn't support the idea that everything is fine with her. I simply thought I had a few more years before the first diagnosis would be made.

I don't know, it all feels somewhat pointless to me. There is so little known. So little research is actually done. It's tragic... Doctors hand out a diagnosis, prescribe a regimen, and that's it. And since all these diagnoses are so similar, they often end up changing the diagnosis several times. No matter what you tell them, they don't know how to truly help, how to assist the patient. From their perspective, that's just the way it is, and nothing can be changed. There is no counseling, no support, no guidance on how to help the family manage someone with this condition. So what am I left with? Just trying to figure it out as best I can.

So much money is poured into weapons, while actual research and experiments that might actually save us are neglected... meanwhile, pharmaceutical companies rake in the profits from medications. People aren't getting the help they need. What happens to the people for whom none of the therapies work? Thank God there are people for whom these pills do help. But what about people like my mother-in-law, for whom they don't work? She suffers, and we all suffer right along with her.

These are heavy illnesses, and we know almost nothing about them. We don't even know for sure if they are hereditary.
I feel so sad and bitter about it all.

During my period of psychosis, I was under the absolute conviction that aliens had abducted me right from my bed one night and completely reprogrammed my mind, which is when everything else began to unravel... Now, I find myself questioning whether that experience was an actual reality or merely a hallucination; I suppose I can never truly know for certain.

David Vaughn75 said:So what you're saying is healthy people get to believe whatever they want, but the sick ones shouldn't? 🙄

Your logic is totally tripping over itself.

It isn't that we shouldn't be open-minded, but rather that I believe such an approach isn't always the most prudent path forward. You likely feel that one ought to adapt to those standard, "rational" ways of thinking, much like how one learns to navigate the rules of a major metropolitan area. However, my perspective is that any level of unsubstantiated belief doesn't sit quite right when you consider the reality that someone might occasionally find themselves ready to accept the idea that God or perhaps even extraterrestrials are communicating through the internet just to outsmart them.

Anthony Lopez8 said:When we look at psychosis—at least during those acute stages—isn't the fundamental issue actually the complete unreliability of the very mechanisms a person uses to distinguish reality from delusion? Because of that internal breakdown, a person finds themselves in a position where they can trust neither their own perceptions nor the external world any more than the other. However, once those psychotic symptoms subside and the ability to reality-test is restored, the individual regains the capacity, just like anyone else, to weigh the credibility and logic of incoming information to decide whether it warrants acceptance or rejection.🤷

It creates this incredibly paralyzing sense of confusion and doubt regarding things that most people simply take for granted as absolute facts. Much like how focusing too intently on a minor, accidental slip-up during a conversation at a Starbucks might lead to an awkward moment you can't stop replaying in your head, this uncertainty can spiral into deeply uncomfortable situations that only serve to deepen the distress.

I truly believe that building self-confidence, maintaining persistence, and even embracing a bit of boldness are the essential keys to navigating this struggle, much like finding the courage to laugh off a mistake and tell someone, "Yeah, I'm having a bit of a rough time today."

William Evans10 said:I don't know, it all feels somewhat pointless to me. There is so little known. So little research is actually done. It's tragic... Doctors hand out a diagnosis, prescribe a regimen, and that's it. And since all these diagnoses are so similar, they often end up changing the diagnosis several times. No matter what you tell them, they don't know how to truly help, how to assist the patient. From their perspective, that's just the way it is, and nothing can be changed. There is no counseling, no support, no guidance on how to help the family manage someone with this condition. So what am I left with? Just trying to figure it out as best I can.

So much money is poured into weapons, while actual research and experiments that might actually save us are neglected... meanwhile, pharmaceutical companies rake in the profits from medications. People aren't getting the help they need. What happens to the people for whom none of the therapies work? Thank God there are people for whom these pills do help. But what about people like my mother-in-law, for whom they don't work? She suffers, and we all suffer right along with her.

These are heavy illnesses, and we know almost nothing about them. We don't even know for sure if they are hereditary.
I feel so sad and bitter about it all.

It is true that there is an overwhelming amount of research and academic papers regarding mental illness, yet the conclusions are constantly at odds. Determining what applies to your specific situation is incredibly difficult. I spent an entire month reading everything I could find just to try and weigh the options. Calculating the probabilities isn't a simple matter of basic math; you have to sift through endless conflicting studies and somehow attempt to synthesize it all into something coherent.

Even today, American psychiatry relies heavily on a trial-and-error approach with various medications, hoping something finally sticks. Just because a treatment works for one person doesn't mean it will work for you.

I think I got lucky in my case. They were actually planning to discharge me as an incurable case before they gave me that last medication that finally worked. Whether the medicine was the savior or the illness simply receded is a question that will never be answered. If I had suffered another episode within the next six months, I have no idea what they would have done. They didn't have any other options left to give.

I cannot recall if I wrote this here or somewhere else, but later this year will mark exactly twenty years since my first hospitalization. I am not sure why I chose twenty years as my benchmark, but if I go two decades without a relapse, I consider myself cured. Any subsequent episode would be entirely unrelated to the first. Then again, I am prepared to cheat if anything happens in the coming months. I might just wait until I see the doctor or miscalculate the dates so I can claim twenty years passed yesterday or today. Whatever, everyone needs their little delusions.

Brian Hayes43 said:It isn't that we shouldn't be open-minded, but rather that I believe such an approach isn't always the most prudent path forward. You likely feel that one ought to adapt to those standard, "rational" ways of thinking, much like how one learns to navigate the rules of a major metropolitan area. However, my perspective is that any level of unsubstantiated belief doesn't sit quite right when you consider the reality that someone might occasionally find themselves ready to accept the idea that God or perhaps even extraterrestrials are communicating through the internet just to outsmart them.

At the end of the day, cold, hard scientific facts aren't going to bring you happiness. Sure, meds can balance out your brain chemistry, but if we want to actually function as human beings in society, we have to believe there's a reason to get out of bed—we have to believe in the good stuff life throws at us.

Plus, let's be real: even science itself is built on a foundation of believing in axioms.🙂

Brian Hayes43 said:It creates this incredibly paralyzing sense of confusion and doubt regarding things that most people simply take for granted as absolute facts. Much like how focusing too intently on a minor, accidental slip-up during a conversation at a Starbucks might lead to an awkward moment you can't stop replaying in your head, this uncertainty can spiral into deeply uncomfortable situations that only serve to deepen the distress.

I truly believe that building self-confidence, maintaining persistence, and even embracing a bit of boldness are the essential keys to navigating this struggle, much like finding the courage to laugh off a mistake and tell someone, "Yeah, I'm having a bit of a rough time today."

This might sound a little naive, but I’d really appreciate your take on this. Honestly, the confusion and uncertainty you mentioned in your last post—it really got me thinking...

I was wondering—and I’m curious to hear what you all think—is it actually possible for someone struggling with their mental health to develop this kind of intense, almost total reliance on a loved one? I mean, could they reach a point where they use another person as a sort of human compass to test reality? Like, imagine you’re in a headspace where you aren't even sure if what you’re thinking or feeling is actually happening—if things are truly real. Could you end up leaning on someone else just to double-check if your perception matches the actual world? Is that a thing that happens?

I’m not even sure if I phrased that question clearly enough—hope I didn't make it too confusing! 🤷Honestly, I can't help but feel that having that kind of absolute, 100% trust in someone—especially when you pair it with a healthy dose of self-confidence, grit, and just being plain old bold—might actually make life a whole lot easier. It could really go a long way in cutting down those nagging doubts and the constant insecurity that people struggling with illness often have to deal with.

David Vaughn75 said:At the end of the day, cold, hard scientific facts aren't going to bring you happiness. Sure, meds can balance out your brain chemistry, but if we want to actually function as human beings in society, we have to believe there's a reason to get out of bed—we have to believe in the good stuff life throws at us.

Plus, let's be real: even science itself is built on a foundation of believing in axioms.🙂

Science has absolutely nothing to do with faith. In the scientific community, faith is redundant; faith is just another word for ignorance. If I have reliable data, there is no need to "believe" in it—I simply know it.

When dealing with psychosis, faith can be extremely dangerous. One should avoid any thoughts or conversations centered on unrealistic concepts. It is vital to stick to things that are grounded and logical, which is achieved through the consistent use of antipsychotics.

Robin Lopez2 said:Science has absolutely nothing to do with faith. In the scientific community, faith is redundant; faith is just another word for ignorance. If I have reliable data, there is no need to "believe" in it—I simply know it.

When dealing with psychosis, faith can be extremely dangerous. One should avoid any thoughts or conversations centered on unrealistic concepts. It is vital to stick to things that are grounded and logical, which is achieved through the consistent use of antipsychotics.

Let me run that back: my goal is to actually be happy in this life, and for me, that only happens if I have something to believe in.

So, what does science have to say about that? Is there some kind of pill for happiness? 🙂

fadedlynx96 said:It is true that there is an overwhelming amount of research and academic papers regarding mental illness, yet the conclusions are constantly at odds. Determining what applies to your specific situation is incredibly difficult. I spent an entire month reading everything I could find just to try and weigh the options. Calculating the probabilities isn't a simple matter of basic math; you have to sift through endless conflicting studies and somehow attempt to synthesize it all into something coherent.

Even today, American psychiatry relies heavily on a trial-and-error approach with various medications, hoping something finally sticks. Just because a treatment works for one person doesn't mean it will work for you.

I think I got lucky in my case. They were actually planning to discharge me as an incurable case before they gave me that last medication that finally worked. Whether the medicine was the savior or the illness simply receded is a question that will never be answered. If I had suffered another episode within the next six months, I have no idea what they would have done. They didn't have any other options left to give.

I cannot recall if I wrote this here or somewhere else, but later this year will mark exactly twenty years since my first hospitalization. I am not sure why I chose twenty years as my benchmark, but if I go two decades without a relapse, I consider myself cured. Any subsequent episode would be entirely unrelated to the first. Then again, I am prepared to cheat if anything happens in the coming months. I might just wait until I see the doctor or miscalculate the dates so I can claim twenty years passed yesterday or today. Whatever, everyone needs their little delusions.

I am so glad things turned out well in your case... and that you are doing okay 🙂. Especially considering how much time has passed while you've remained stable... whether it's 18, 19, or 20 years doesn't matter... what matters is that you are functioning...🙂 Plus, you have such great motivation in your life... your kids...

I agree with everything you wrote above... I don't really have much to add... I feel like I've already said plenty... maybe I'm being a bit much already... hehe 🙂

Anyway, I just wanted to ask (if it's not a secret, of course) what kind of therapy you are prescribed?

My mother-in-law takes John Doe (Zyprexa) and Faverin.

And one more thing.... on the most recent report, the doctor wrote: "In my opinion, it is necessary to revise the diagnosis to F 20.05"

So... do you know anything about that diagnosis? Or maybe someone else does? That is RESIDUAL SCHIZOPHRENIA.... I don't believe anyone here has it (maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't noticed anyone with it), but if anyone knows anything about it, or knows someone who has this diagnosis?

There isn't much about it online...

Thank you.....

steeleagle23 said:This might sound a little naive, but I’d really appreciate your take on this. Honestly, the confusion and uncertainty you mentioned in your last post—it really got me thinking...

I was wondering—and I’m curious to hear what you all think—is it actually possible for someone struggling with their mental health to develop this kind of intense, almost total reliance on a loved one? I mean, could they reach a point where they use another person as a sort of human compass to test reality? Like, imagine you’re in a headspace where you aren't even sure if what you’re thinking or feeling is actually happening—if things are truly real. Could you end up leaning on someone else just to double-check if your perception matches the actual world? Is that a thing that happens?

I’m not even sure if I phrased that question clearly enough—hope I didn't make it too confusing! 🤷Honestly, I can't help but feel that having that kind of absolute, 100% trust in someone—especially when you pair it with a healthy dose of self-confidence, grit, and just being plain old bold—might actually make life a whole lot easier. It could really go a long way in cutting down those nagging doubts and the constant insecurity that people struggling with illness often have to deal with.

Yes, I certainly understand what you mean, and honestly, that sounds like a potential lifeline. It really just comes down to needing someone to lean on. However, I haven't been able to build that kind of bond with anyone yet, not even with my own mother. I find myself questioning whether the disconnect lies within me or if she simply doesn't grasp the situation—though I suppose it's hard for anyone else to understand since I haven't explicitly opened up about my struggles to anyone. Most people just assume I'm antisocial or haven't quite "figured life out" yet, even though, by all standard measures, I should be at the stage where I have a car, a house, and a kid in middle school.

David Vaughn75 said:At the end of the day, cold, hard scientific facts aren't going to bring you happiness. Sure, meds can balance out your brain chemistry, but if we want to actually function as human beings in society, we have to believe there's a reason to get out of bed—we have to believe in the good stuff life throws at us.

Plus, let's be real: even science itself is built on a foundation of believing in axioms.🙂

I suppose that might just be my own perspective, a unique quirk of my personality. Who knows?

Brian Hayes43 said:I suppose that might just be my own perspective, a unique quirk of my personality. Who knows?

Look, if you ask me, there's a massive, crystal-clear line between a delusional psychotic belief and just having a general theory about how the world works. We're talking about psychosis when someone starts thinking everything is being scripted specifically for them. Like, hey, believing in the Illuminati or some shadowy cabal isn't necessarily "crazy"—it's just a conspiracy theory. But it turns into actual psychosis when you think those groups are personally stalking you, or that they're the reason you failed that midterm at NYU or missed your flight at JFK. You know what I mean? It's that shift from "the world is weird" to "the world is out to get *me* specifically."

Being sane is basically just knowing the difference between those two things.

So... do you know anything about that diagnosis? Or does anyone else here? It’s RESIDUAL SCHIZOPHRENIA. I don't believe anyone on this forum has it (though I could be wrong, I haven't noticed anyone specifically), but if anyone knows something about it or knows someone living with this diagnosis?

Residual schizophrenia is characterized primarily by "negative symptoms": apathy, sparse communication, social withdrawal, emotional blunting, a lack of interest in one's surroundings, an inability to express emotions, loss of pleasure, and an inability to work.
Would those symptoms apply to her?