Depression not a malfunction, but a mental adaptation (article)

peacegrrl

Active member
From Depression's Evolutionary Roots: Scientific American

Two scientists suggest that depression is not a malfunction, but a mental adaptation that brings certain cognitive advantages

By Paul W. Andrews and J. Anderson Thomson, Jr.


Depression seems to pose an evolutionary paradox. Research in the US and other countries estimates that between 30 to 50 percent of people have met current psychiatric diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder sometime in their lives. But the brain plays crucial roles in promoting survival and reproduction, so the pressures of evolution should have left our brains resistant to such high rates of malfunction. Mental disorders should generally be rare — why isn’t depression?

This paradox could be resolved if depression were a problem of growing old. The functioning of all body systems and organs, including the brain, tends to deteriorate with age. This is not a satisfactory explanation for depression, however, as people are most likely to experience their first bout in adolescence and young adulthood.

Or, perhaps, depression might be like obesity — a problem that arises because modern conditions are so different from those in which we evolved. Homo sapiens did not evolve with cookies and soda at the fingertips. Yet this is not a satisfactory explanation either. The symptoms of depression have been found in every culture which has been carefully examined, including small-scale societies, such as the Ache of Paraguay and the !Kung of southern Africa — societies where people are thought to live in environments similar to those that prevailed in our evolutionary past.

There is another possibility: that, in most instances, depression should not be thought of as a disorder at all. In an article recently published in Psychological Review, we argue that depression is in fact an adaptation, a state of mind which brings real costs, but also brings real benefits.

One reason to suspect that depression is an adaptation, not a malfunction, comes from research into a molecule in the brain known as the 5HT1A receptor. The 5HT1A receptor binds to serotonin, another brain molecule that is highly implicated in depression and is the target of most current antidepressant medications. Rodents lacking this receptor show fewer depressive symptoms in response to stress, which suggests that it is somehow involved in promoting depression. (Pharmaceutical companies, in fact, are designing the next generation of antidepressant medications to target this receptor.) When scientists have compared the composition of the functional part rat 5HT1A receptor to that of humans, it is 99 percent similar, which suggests that it is so important that natural selection has preserved it. The ability to “turn on” depression would seem to be important, then, not an accident.

This is not to say that depression is not a problem. Depressed people often have trouble performing everyday activities, they can’t concentrate on their work, they tend to socially isolate themselves, they are lethargic, and they often lose the ability to take pleasure from such activities such as eating and sex. Some can plunge into severe, lengthy, and even life-threatening bouts of depression.

So what could be so useful about depression? Depressed people often think intensely about their problems. These thoughts are called ruminations; they are persistent and depressed people have difficulty thinking about anything else. Numerous studies have also shown that this thinking style is often highly analytical. They dwell on a complex problem, breaking it down into smaller components, which are considered one at a time.

This analytical style of thought, of course, can be very productive. Each component is not as difficult, so the problem becomes more tractable. Indeed, when you are faced with a difficult problem, such as a math problem, feeling depressed is often a useful response that may help you analyze and solve it. For instance, in some of our research, we have found evidence that people who get more depressed while they are working on complex problems in an intelligence test tend to score higher on the test.

Analysis requires a lot of uninterrupted thought, and depression coordinates many changes in the body to help people analyze their problems without getting distracted. In a region of the brain known as the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC), neurons must fire continuously for people to avoid being distracted. But this is very energetically demanding for VLPFC neurons, just as a car’s engine eats up fuel when going up a mountain road. Moreover, continuous firing can cause neurons to break down, just as the car’s engine is more likely to break down when stressed. Studies of depression in rats show that the 5HT1A receptor is involved in supplying neurons with the fuel they need to fire, as well as preventing them from breaking down. These important processes allow depressive rumination to continue uninterrupted with minimal neuronal damage, which may explain why the 5HT1A receptor is so evolutionarily important.

Many other symptoms of depression make sense in light of the idea that analysis must be uninterrupted. The desire for social isolation, for instance, helps the depressed person avoid situations that would require thinking about other things. Similarly, the inability to derive pleasure from sex or other activities prevents the depressed person from engaging in activities that could distract him or her from the problem. Even the loss of appetite often seen in depression could be viewed as promoting analysis because chewing and other oral activity interferes with the brain’s ability to process information.

But is there any evidence that depression is useful in analyzing complex problems? For one thing, if depressive rumination were harmful, as most clinicians and researchers assume, then bouts of depression should be slower to resolve when people are given interventions that encourage rumination, such as having them write about their strongest thoughts and feelings. However, the opposite appears to be true. Several studies have found that expressive writing promotes quicker resolution of depression, and they suggest that this is because depressed people gain insight into their problems.

There is another suggestive line of evidence. Various studies have found that people in depressed mood states are better at solving social dilemmas. Yet these would seem to have been precisely the kind of problems difficult enough to require analysis and important enough to drive the evolution of such a costly emotion. Consider a woman with young children who discovers her husband is having an affair. Is the wife’s best strategy to ignore it, or force him to choose between her and the other woman, and risk abandonment? Laboratory experiments indicate that depressed people are better at solving social dilemmas by better analysis of the costs and benefits of the different options that they might take.

Sometimes people are reluctant to disclose the reason for their depression because it is embarrassing or sensitive, they find it painful, they believe they must soldier on and ignore them, or they have difficulty putting their complex internal struggles into words.

But depression is nature’s way of telling you that you’ve got complex social problems that the mind is intent on solving. Therapies should try to encourage depressive rumination rather than try to stop it, and they should focus on trying to help people solve the problems that trigger their bouts of depression. (There are several effective therapies that focus on just this.) It is also essential, in instances where there is resistance to discussing ruminations, that the therapist try to identify and dismantle those barriers.

When one considers all the evidence, depression seems less like a disorder where the brain is operating in a haphazard way, or malfunctioning. Instead, depression seems more like the vertebrate eye—an intricate, highly organized piece of machinery that performs a specific function.
 

cosmosis

Well-known member
Thanks for the article. Finally some common sense in the research field. I've been saying it all along that depression is not a malfuction at all, but a means of your brain trying to adapt to its environment. Trying to shut this function off with medication is making sure you never have the potential to adapt. Anxiety is similar too in that its just a function of your brain trying to help you adapt as well.
 

doesit

Well-known member
interesting,but i cant see how this article could make any sence.It says that depressed people solve the problems better,and break them down in several problems to get to the root cause,but again the condition makes a person totally vulnerable to any emotional,social or physical contact with the world,which if not treated evolves into total disaster.
 

cosmosis

Well-known member
interesting,but i cant see how this article could make any sence.It says that depressed people solve the problems better,and break them down in several problems to get to the root cause,but again the condition makes a person totally vulnerable to any emotional,social or physical contact with the world,which if not treated evolves into total disaster.

Yeah, some of it is a little silly and misguided. And I think they are confusing some of anxiety with depression. You arn't really solving anything intellectually with depression, but you are emotionally rewiring your brain. For example, if you lose a loved one, your brain gets depressed in order to rewire your brain and adapt to a different world (one without your loved one). Depression is letting go of something and accepting it. Anxiety is your brains way of trying to actively solve and fix something.

We tend to have this idea that depression is a one way track to hell. That isn't possible. Just like joy or happiness can never be a one way track up. It's always a cycle of letting go and adapting then coming back up then doing it all over again.

Depression is maladaption.

By itself, no. We are suppose to get depressed in order to adapt. Just like if you lose your job or a close family member. The maladaption occurs when we continually have too high expectations or perceptions that are unrealistic. The depression is just your brain continually trying to emotionally adapt to unrealistic expectations or thoughts.
 
Last edited:

Anastasia

Member
Thanks for this, it's really terrific that new understandings like this are emerging. Perhaps it somehow ties in with other recent research that, unlike previously thought, depressed people actually have a better grip on reality than the non-depressed.

We tend to have the notion that if something doesn't feel or look good then it must somehow be a maladaptation, a mistake, or something else negative or non-beneficial. And yet it's even been theorised that sociopathy is a (positive) adaptation.

Nature seems to not be concerned about whether something feels nice or seems nice to others or not. It's concerned with whether it works and gets results.
 

euphoria13

Member
So what could be so useful about depression? Depressed people often think intensely about their problems. These thoughts are called ruminations; they are persistent and depressed people have difficulty thinking about anything else. Numerous studies have also shown that this thinking style is often highly analytical. They dwell on a complex problem, breaking it down into smaller components, which are considered one at a time.

I'm sorry but this one statement bugs me. I don't know about anyone else but when I'm depressed, yeah, I ruminate quite a bit but it's not in a logical way. Most depressives that I know, including me, tend to see the darker side of things and their perceptions are hugely skewed.

While the ability to think deeply about things can be a good thing, how can that be linked with depression and called good?? When depressed people ruminate, it's not how to make things better but how to escape from the pain (maybe that is one way of making things better but I digress...).

But depression is nature’s way of telling you that you’ve got complex social problems that the mind is intent on solving.

They're assuming that depression is caused by situations and not biological causes.

Personally, I think the people that wrote that article need to go back and reevaluate their information and maybe talk to a few people that have clinical depression while they're at it.
 

BigShrimp

Member
There is a difference between feeling normal sadness over certain life events and experiencing depression, which results from distorted thinking.

Here's an article that calls into question the theory prestented in the original article: Could Depression Be Nature’s Way of Saying, “Think!”?


Could Depression Be Nature’s Way of Saying, “Think!”?
By John M Grohol PsyD
August 28, 2009

Could depression serve a purpose we hadn’t thought of? Something simple, like thinking?

That’s the theory presented by Paul W. Andrews and J. Anderson Thomson, Jr. in a recent article in Scientific American.

The scientists point to a couple of points of evidence to support their theory. One, they say, ruminations help people figure out their complex problems, breaking them down into smaller, more digestible components. Such an exercise, they argue, makes a depressed person more able to solve the problems that made them depressed in the first place:

"This analytical style of thought, of course, can be very productive. Each component is not as difficult, so the problem becomes more tractable. Indeed, when you are faced with a difficult problem, such as a math problem, feeling depressed is often a useful response that may help you analyze and solve it."

The flip side of the coin not examined by the scientists, however, is obvious — ruminations can also be very nonproductive, too. It’s fine to describe how when one is an analytical frame of mind, one can tackle even highly complex problems. But math isn’t life, and a person who suffers from depression may often ruminate with no clear answers forthcoming. Rumination + lack of energy still = no behavior change.

But thinking about things from a different perspective is the basis of some modern psychotherapies, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). So perhaps there’s something to this line of thought. Indeed, the researchers then suggest that many of the so-called symptoms of depression might just be the body’s evolutionary way of dealing with this need to stay focused on analyzing and solving the problem that caused the depression in the first place:

"Many other symptoms of depression make sense in light of the idea that analysis must be uninterrupted. The desire for social isolation, for instance, helps the depressed person avoid situations that would require thinking about other things. Similarly, the inability to derive pleasure from sex or other activities prevents the depressed person from engaging in activities that could distract him or her from the problem. Even the loss of appetite often seen in depression could be viewed as promoting analysis because chewing and other oral activity interferes with the brain’s ability to process information."

All of which is very logical and makes sense, if ruminating alone usually helped most people resolve their serious depression on their own. But most people don’t. In fact, most people with depression simply suffer for years without treatment or help for it because they either feel it’s not “serious” enough to seek out help, or they’re afraid (or too ashamed) to get help for it. All those people, and all that time — you’d think we’d be seeing much higher cure rates simply by people thinking their way out of the problem.

Something unmentioned by the scientists also is worth noting — many people can’t trace their depression back to a specific concern, problem, or life event. For many people, depression doesn’t strike in some sort of logical fashion — it occurs out of the blue, for no reason at all. All the thinking or ruminating in the world isn’t going to help someone solve a problem that doesn’t exist.

For most people, ruminating about things doesn’t really seem to help their depression.

So while it’s an elegant theory on the face of it, I’m not sure how well it stands up against the reality of most people’s lives and the depression they face. If depression was simply nature’s way of saying, “Hey, wake up and start thinking about this problem,” I don’t understand why most people don’t cure themselves within a short amount of time. After all, if nature is giving us all of these symptoms to help us think, surely it has provided us with the natural innate reasoning and analytic skills to actually solve the problem, no?

Well, no. It hasn’t. And that’s the reason I don’t think this is a theory that makes much sense to anyone who’s ever actually dealt with depression for months or years on end.
 

cosmosis

Well-known member
Depression does have a purpose, but I don't think is has anything to do with problem solving. The original article missed that pretty badly.

It simply helps you adapt by accepting some kind of loss. In my case, when I was seriously depressed for years, I was trying to accept that I was stupid and worthless. If I got depressed enough, I would rewire my brain to the point where I actually accepted that I was stupid and worthless. My mood would kinda plateau out and eventually some things would happen that would make me think that I wasn't as worthless as I thought. But that would only set me up for another round of depression.

Depression is just your brain trying to help you accept a thought. It's not evil, or cruel or a disease by itself. It's just simply working to do exactly what you want it to do...like accepting those horrible thoughts we keep having.
 
The origin of modern Homo sapiens is not yet resolved. Two extreme scenarios have been proposed. According to the first, the distribution of anatomical traits in modern human populations in different regions was inherited from local populations of Homo erectus and intermediate "archaic" forms. This "Multiregional Hypothesis" states that all modern humans evolved in parallel from earlier populations in Africa, Europe and Asia, with some genetic intermixing among these regions. Support for this comes from the similarity of certain minor anatomical structures in modern human populations and preceding populations of Homo erectus in the same regions.
 
Top