Reply to Jim Mancuso

Su McLain, Ph.D. (
Thu, 03 Dec 1998 20:38:53 -0800

Meant to send this to the list, but accidentally sent it to Jim
Mancuso's personal e-mail:

> "Su McLain, Ph.D." wrote:
> It seems to me that PET scans open
> other possibilities for understanding how neural pathways
> for construing
> are affected by brain damage.

Jim Mancuso wrote:
> Su -- can you refer me to an article which gives convincing
> evidence that PET scans, or any other measure of any index of
> biological involvement in vexenigmatic behavior, allows a
> diagnostician to place one into a diagnostic category called
> "schizophrenia?"

Hello, Jim. No, I can't. The PET scan pictures were in the California
for the Mentally Ill (CAMI) journal right after PET scans first became
They were done "after the fact" on persons already diagnosed. There was
a difference
in brain function between the groups of persons...but that doesn't mean
that a person can be diagnosed by the PET scan. Only that somehow brain
structure and activity
varied between the two groups of patients.

Sorry I haven't read the article you referenced. In my humble opinion
ADHD is far
too frequently assigned to children whose behavior has become
objectionable to their
parents (who often have objectionable behavior of their own, such as
inconsistent, confusing treatment of those same children).

Like John, I've seen some pretty dramatic results for patients who were
started on antipsychotic meds, results that seemed to bring the patients
a greater clarity and sense of mastery of their own behavior. Maybe
I've just been corrupted by working in a state hospital...

Su McLain