Home » Health »News » Currently Reading:

Psychiatrists plead to continue funding of genetic approaches to disease

August 30, 2011 Health, News 5 Comments

Jonathan Latham

Ninety six leading psychiatric geneticists have publicly requested their scientific funding agencies not to abandon the search for genetic links to mental health. In a letter, published Aug 9th in the journal Molecular Psychiatry, they argue that the ongoing failure to uncover significant disease genes for mental illness does not indicate that current research is fundamentally misdirected.

Instead, they believe that current experimental designs lack sufficient statistical power. And it is a defect they want remedied by further studies. “Since family history is a major risk factor” they write “we urge the major funding bodies worldwide to continue to support GWAS (Genome-Wide Association Studies) as a major investigative tool’.

The unprecedented letter is in response to growing scepticism of the search for genetic origins of disease. Criticism of the GWAS approach has been particularly severe since its results, especially in psychiatry, have almost entirely failed to support the idea that human diseases, including mental disorders, have a strong genetic basis. The biggest find so far is the ApoE4 variant that contributes to Alzheimer’s disease.

These criticisms have become steadily bolder. The most recent include a paper in JAMA documenting the non-replicability of many GWAS findings and a paper by psychologist and behavioural geneticist Eric Turkheimer of the University of Virginia (Ioannidis and Panagiotou 2011; Turkheimer 2011). Writing in the International Journal of Epidemiology Turkheimer proposes that “the molecular genetic project has foundered” .

Patrick Sullivan, who coordinated the Molecular Psychiatry letter, disagrees. While he conceded in a telephone interview that “common (genetic) variants of strong effect are not there. We have now proved that”, he still believes the genetic approach is the right one. “In one hundred years of searching for explanations of mental health very little has worked. GWAS at least has given some results.”

It is not only the theory of genetic determination of mental health that is finding itself challenged, however. Even when potential disease genes are found, they are not necessarily useful, points out Claudia Chaufan of the University of California (San Francisco). “In the case of diabetes, while genes may be of interest to researchers, studies show that whether you have a gene or not you still should get the same treatment” she says. Patrick Sullivan, however, believes that criticism to be unfair. “To do more meaningful clinical work on schizophrenia we need to understand it”.

Jay Joseph, author of The Gene Illusion, remains unconvinced by the letter. He also finds it puzzling that the authors chose not to cite evidence from twin studies to argue for a strong genetic component to mental health. “Almost everyone recognizes that family histories cannot disentangle potential genetic and environmental influences” says Joseph. Possibly the authors believe that twin studies, which have always been touted as the best evidence that genetics has a key role in disease causation, no longer have the credibility they once did.

David Cohen of the Robert Stempel School of Public Health at Florida International University, considers that researchers need to take a step back even further. For schizophrenia, which is the disease the authors of the Molecular Psychiatry letter chose to make their case, he wrote in an email, “schizophrenia remains neither sufficiently well defined nor properly circumscribed for adequate research into its genetic correlates.” Symptomatic of this, he points out, is that “the current DSM-V proposals recommend flatly eliminating the five schizophrenia subtypes that have been part of the conception of schizophrenia for at least 60 years”.

The letter to Molecular Psychiatry indicates that researchers perceive a substantial challenge to basic genetic research in mental health. That same challenge is also faced by researchers who work on diseases, such as diabetes and cancer, that can be measured as objective physiological disturbances but who have nevertheless had no more success than mental health researchers in identifying disease susceptibility genes. These researchers will be watching the fate of mental health genetics with considerable interest.

Ioannidis JPA and Panagiotou OA (2011) Comparison of Effect Sizes Associated With Biomarkers Reported in Highly Cited Individual Articles and in Subsequent Meta-analyses. J. American Medical Association 305(21):2200-2210
Joseph J (2004) The Gene Illusion. Algora Publishing
Sullivan P et al (2011) Don’t give up on GWAS. doi:10.1038/mp.2011.94
Turkheimer E (2011) Commentary: Variation and Causation in the Environment and Genome.
International Journal of Epidemiology 40: 598-601.

Currently there are "5 comments" on this Article:

  1. UrbanPeasant says:

    A recent defence of twin studies is at Psychology Today:
    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/twofold/201108/twin-research-misperceptions

  2. Jaakko Kaprio says:

    Please note that gwas and sequencing are very recent technologies. With only 5 years of results, hundreds of gene-disease associations that are replicated and robust have been found. Each one is potential lead onto new , previously unknown biology. Some disease and traits will have a few genes responsible for them, some will have population/regional/pedigree specific variants, other will depend on environmental circumstances. Furthermore, some, like IQ (see Molecular psychiatry August 2011), are partially genetic but spread throughout the genome. The biology and genetics will also help to understand better the effect of environmental triggers and exposures as the confounding role of genes is controlled for (as in the monozygotic twin pair design). For one xample of the latter see our review:
    Naukkarinen J, Rissanen A, Kaprio J, Pietiläinen KH. Causes and consequences of obesity: the contribution of recent twin studies. Int J Obes (Lond). 2011 Oct 11. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2011.192.

  3. This article has numerous flawed statements. For one, it states that “the theory of genetic determination of mental health …is finding itself challenged”. Any psychiatric geneticist would be the first to tell you that while there is overwhelming evidence that genetic influences are important for psychiatric and substance use outcomes, genes DO NOT DETERMINE whether or not you will manifest the disorders. This is an important distinction that the public needs to understand. Genes may increase or decrease your risk, but genes are only part of the story. The environment also plays an important role. This is one of the reasons that it is so challenging to find the specific genes involved in these complex outcomes.

  4. Jane Bennett says:

    Surely the mapping of the human genome should include an understanding of the role of the genes that are identified and their effect on human health?

    Is there a concerted effort now to prevent that degree of exploration of the genome? If so, is it because of financial shortages (governments having prioritised bailing out bankers) or due to fears that analysis of genes in such ways exposes too many differences between people, which can lead to politically incorrect heresies?

  5. Yes there are genetic as well as environmental influences involved in “mental health”, but the dominant factor by far is environmental and the remedies (compassionate child care, social safety nets, elimination of obstetrical quackery which imprints trauma and mother-sensory deprivation etc are well known. Psychiatry’s monomaniacal targetting (the correct word) of the victims of such social dysfunction is more than a little socially expedient and self serving, and the victims it creates (also the correct word) by altering and damaging brain function over their objection are routinely stigmatized and ignored by the very “profession” that claims to be working on their behalf.

    The conflicts of interest in psychiatry are fundamental to the paradigm, and utterly ignored in practice. Being hired by domestic abusers to help dominate and numb the psychological pain of their victims while allowing their abuse to continue is way beyond the pale and way beyond rare.

    If you want an example of the institutionalized depravity and malevolence of psychiatric violence against children see psychiatry’s attitude toward infant male circumcision here:
    http://members.tranquility.net/~rwinkel/MGM/primer.html
    Especially footnotes 100-106.
    Clearly we have a big problem here.

Comment on this Article:







Science News on the Web

Why Independent Science News?

Scientific inventions and ideas shape the future. As science becomes ever more beset by commercial and ideological pressures, there is urgent need for scientific reporting and analysis from an independent, expert, public interest perspective. With this standard, Independent Science News works to shape a future that is biodiverse, just, and healthy for everyone.
More about us...

Sign up to our mailing list

E-mail address:
Name (optional):

Related News Articles

EU Safety Institutions Caught Plotting an Industry “escape route” Around Looming Pesticide Ban

How “Extreme Levels” of Roundup in Food Became the Industry Norm

Can the Scientific Reputation of Pamela Ronald, Public Face of GMOs, Be Salvaged?

No Scientific Consensus on Safety of Genetically Modified Organisms

The Experiment Is on Us: Science of Animal Testing Thrown into Doubt

New Report Links Food, Climate and Agricultural Policies

23andMe disproves its own business model

How Agriculture Can Provide Food Security Without Destroying Biodiversity

Commentaries

Peasant Sovereignty?

China village

By Evaggelos Vallianatos In May 2014, the Spain-based international agrarian organization, Grain, reported that small farmers not only “feed the world with less than a quarter of all farmland,” but they are also the most productive farmers on Earth. For example, small farmers and peasants in nine European countries outproduce …

Will Food Sovereignty Starve the Poor and Punish the Planet?

Weeding maize in Burkina Faso

by Gilles Billen, Luis Lassaletta and Josette Garnier Globalisation is not only a matter of clothing and mobile phones. Long-distance worldwide shipping of food commodities has also increased tremendously over the last few decades. Lassaletta et al. (2014) estimate that one-third of all proteins (a proxy for the nutritive potential …

How the Great Food War Will Be Won

Dustbowl and soil erosion USA, 1935's

By Jonathan Latham, PhD By conventional wisdom it is excellent news. Researchers from Iowa have shown that organic farming methods can yield almost as highly as pesticide-intensive methods. Other researchers, from Berkeley, California, have reached a similar conclusion. Indeed, both findings met with a very enthusiastic reception. The enthusiasm is appropriate, but …

Seeds of Truth: Vandana Shiva and the New Yorker

Dr. Vandana Shiva

by Dr Vandana Shiva (A response to the article ‘Seeds of Doubt’ by Michael Specter in The New Yorker) I am glad that the future of food is being discussed, and thought about, on farms, in homes, on TV, online and in magazines, especially of The New Yorker’s caliber. The …

More Commentaries...

Reviews

Poison Spring: The Secret History of Pollution and the EPA

Poison Spring Evaggelos Valllianatos

Book Author: Evaggelos Vallianatos with McKay Jenkins Reviewed by: Carol Van Strum “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts,” Richard Feynman famously declared in 1966. Ever quick to challenge accepted wisdom, he distinguished the laudable ignorance of science, forever seeking unattainable certainties, from the dangerous ignorance of experts …

The Real Cost of Fracking: How America’s Shale Gas Boom Is Threatening Our Families, Pets, and Food

The Real Cost of Fracking book cover

Book Authors: Michelle Bamberger and Robert Oswald Reviewed by Allison Wilson (The Bioscience Resource Project) The first researchers to systematically document ill health in livestock, pets, and people living near fracking drill sites were Michelle Bamberger and Robert Oswald. Bamberger, a veterinarian, and Oswald, a professor of molecular medicine at …

More Reviews...