Ma `lumot

Ilm biz o'lishimiz kerakligini aytadimi?


Baxtsiz hodisalardan o'lgan hollarni hisobga olmaganda, o'limning asosiy sababi - umumiy kasalliklar.

Odatda, ko'p yillar o'tgach, "charchagan" organ haqida. Bu natijalarning barchasi tajriba va statistikadan olingan:

Ammo men hech qachon hech qachon eshitmaganman: "odamlar x yoshdan uzoq yashay olmaydilar, chunki yurak bundan uzoq yashay olmaydi".

Mening fikrimcha, menimcha, biz hayot tarzimizni boshqaramiz va shuning uchun kimdir boshqasidan ko'ra uzoqroq yashashi mumkin. Masalan, chekuvchilar erta yoshda o'lishadi.

Hatto dunyodagi eng keksa odam ham 122 yil 164 kun yashagan. Men uchun bu etarli emas. Aftidan, kimdir o'z yoshini boshqara olmaydi.

Asosan mening savolim: fan inson bundan ortiq yashay olmaydigan chegarani beradimi? Masalan, kimdir 1000 yildan ortiq yashay oladimi?


Eslatma: Menimcha, kimdir bunga qodir emas, chunki bizning eng sog'lom odatlarimiz ham "unchalik" sog'lom emas. Lekin tasavvur qiling -a, biz kabi hech kim odam kabi yashamaydi, ya'ni sog'lom va tabiiy hayot kechira oladi


Buyuk biolog Piter Medavardan iqtibos keltirgan holda:

Yosh hayvonlarni faqat oqsoqollari hisobidan yaxshi ko'radigan genetik xayr -ehsonni tasavvur qilish qiyin emas. aniqrog'i o'zlari qariganida o'z hisobidan. Bu holatni rag'batlantiruvchi gen yoki genlarning kombinatsiyasi, ma'lum sonli sharoitlarda, populyatsiyaga tarqaladi, chunki u yoqtirgan yosh hayvonlar, guruh sifatida, kelajak populyatsiyasining ajdodlariga katta hissa qo'shadi. .

Nima uchun biz kasal bo'lamiz:

Tasavvur qiling, kaltsiy almashinuvini o'zgartiradigan, suyak tezroq shifo beradigan gen bor, lekin o'sha gen ham arteriyalarda kaltsiyning sekin va barqaror cho'kishiga olib keladi. Bunday genni tanlash mumkin, chunki ko'pchilik yoshligida uning afzalliklaridan bahramand bo'ladi, kam odam esa qarilikda arterial kasallikning kamchiliklarini boshdan kechirish uchun etarlicha uzoq umr ko'radi. Hatto gen 100 yoshga to'lganda hammaning o'limiga sabab bo'lgan bo'lsa ham, u yoshligida hatto kichik foyda keltirsa ham tarqaladi. Bu dalil qarilikning ilgari mavjudligiga bog'liq emas. O'limning boshqa sabablari-baxtsiz hodisalar, pnevmoniya va qolganlarning hammasi keksa yoshdagi aholini kamaytirish uchun etarli. Shuningdek, nazariya, Haldane singari, ko'payishning to'xtashiga bog'liq emas.

Men tushunmoqchi bo'lgan xabar shuki - organizmlar DNK va DNKni tashiydigan transport vositalariga o'xshab, xuddi "telba" tarzda o'zini takrorlashni va o'zini avloddan -avlodga o'tkazishni xohlasa, Tabiiy tanlanish reproduktiv muvaffaqiyatni maksimal darajaga ko'taradigan xususiyatlarga yoqadi. Bu yoshlikdan maksimal foyda keltiradigan, lekin asta -sekin zarar etkazadigan va qarilik va o'limga olib keladigan xususiyatlar bo'lishi mumkin.

Siz ham shunday o'ylashingiz mumkin - har bir mashinaning eskirishi bor va uni tuzatib bo'lmaganda tashlab yuborish kerak. Bizning tanamizda ham xuddi shunday, bu dunyodagi eng chiroyli mashina, lekin u ham xuddi shunday eskirishga moyil.

Shuningdek, takroriy takrorlash muammosi mavjud. Agar men nima haqida gapirayotganimni bilmasangiz, telomerlarni ko'ring. Hujayra bo'linishining chegarasi bor.

Umuman aytganda, men aytamanki, biologik chegara bor - bu odam yashashi mumkin bo'lgan ma'lum bir yosh.


Sizning tanangiz o'lishi kerakligini biladi. Ilm biz tushunadigan tafsilotlarni kashf etdi. Bunga apoptoz deyiladi: oldindan dasturlashtirilgan hujayralar o'limi. Bizning hujayralarimizdagi DNK faqat ma'lum marta takrorlanishi uchun kodlangan. Shunday qilib, organlar eskiradi, chunki hujayralar ishonchli tarzda almashtirilmaydi (qarishning boshqa omillari ham bor).

[havola] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apoptosis

Bu, ehtimol, rivojlangan, chunki o'lmaydigan organizmlar soni ko'payib ketadi, hamma ovqatni iste'mol qiladi va hammasi o'ladi. Tasavvur qiling, agar biz hech qachon saraton yoki organ etishmovchiligi tufayli o'lmasak, qancha odam bo'lardi. Bizni bir mil chuqurlikda yig'ib olarmidi?

Aksincha, saraton - bu DNKning shikastlanishi yoki mutatsiyasi tufayli apoptoz bilan bog'liq bir yoki bir nechta mexanizmlar (genlar) o'chirilgan hodisa. Keyin saraton hujayralari abadiy bo'lib, abadiy replikatsiya qilinadi va mutatsiyani davom ettiradi. Bu o'smalar va muammolarni keltirib chiqaradi, chunki bo'sh joyni egallaydigan va ozuqa moddalarini iste'mol qiladigan ko'p miqdordagi ishlab chiqarish bo'lmagan hujayralar mavjud.

Shunday qilib, chegara bor. 1000 yoshli odam, agar kimdir apoptozni nazorat qilish usulini ishlab chiqmasa, saraton kasalligini keltirib chiqarmasa, normal genetik siljishni oldini olmasa va boshqa qarish omillarini yo'q qilmasa, bu mumkin bo'lmaydi. Tabiiyki, umrini uzaytirish uchun ko'p pul topish kerak, shuning uchun bu sohani tadqiq qilishmoqda. Yaqin o'lmas jonivor ham tasodifiy mutatsiya tufayli o'z -o'zidan rivojlanishi mumkin edi. Uchta funktsional qo'llari mutatsiyaga uchragan yoki odamlarni yirtqich hayvon kabi hayratga soladigan odamga o'xshab, genetikasi o'lmas, hayotiy odam o'lmasdir.


O'limdan keyin hayot yo'q: olimning ta'kidlashicha, oxirat hayoti imkonsizdir

Havola nusxa ko'chirildi

Oxirat hayoti: Mutaxassis o'limga yaqin bo'lgan voqealarda o'z his-tuyg'ularini muhokama qiladi

Siz obuna bo'lganingizda, biz sizga ushbu axborot byulletenlarini yuborish uchun taqdim etgan ma'lumotlardan foydalanamiz. Ba'zan ular biz taklif qilayotgan boshqa axborot byulletenlari yoki xizmatlari uchun tavsiyalarni o'z ichiga oladi. Maxfiylik xabarnomasi sizning ma'lumotlaringizdan qanday foydalanishimiz va sizning huquqlaringiz haqida ko'proq ma'lumot beradi. Istalgan vaqtda obunani bekor qilishingiz mumkin.

Kaliforniya Texnologiya Instituti kosmologi va fizika professori Shon Keroll fizika qonunlarini chuqur o'rganib, oxirat hayoti haqidagi munozaralarni yotqizdi, deb hisoblaydi.

Doktor Kerolning ta'kidlashicha, kundalik hayotda yotadigan fizika qonunlari to'liq tushunilgan va hamma narsa imkoniyatlar doirasida sodir bo'ladi.

Uning so'zlariga ko'ra, oxirat hayoti bo'lishi uchun ong bizning tanamizdan butunlay ajralib turadigan narsa bo'lishi kerak.

Aksincha, ong eng asosiy darajada - bu bizga ongimizni beradigan atomlar va elektronlar to'plamidir.

Tegishli maqolalar

Doktor Kerol koinot qonunlarini o'rgangan (Tasvir: GETTY)

Doktor Kerolning so'zlariga ko'ra, koinot qonunlari bu zarrachalar bizning jismoniy o'limimizdan keyin ishlashiga yo'l qo'ymaydi

U shunday dedi: & ldquo Bizning tanamiz o'lib, o'z atomlariga parchalanib ketganda, ongning qandaydir shakli saqlanib qoladi, degan da'voni aytganda, kundalik hayotda yotadigan fizika qonunlari to'liq tushunilgan va bu qonunlar ichida ma'lumotga ruxsat berishning iloji yo'q. miyamizda saqlanadi, biz o'lganimizdan keyin ham saqlanib qoladi. & rdquo

O'zining dalillari uchun doktor Kerol kvant maydon nazariyasiga (QFT) ishora qiladi. Oddiy qilib aytganda, QFT - har bir zarracha turi uchun bitta maydon borligiga ishonish.

Ong faqat ongda bo'ladi (Tasvir: GETTY)

Fizika qonunlariga ko'ra, o'limdan keyingi hayot yo'q (Tasvir: GETTY)

Masalan, koinotdagi barcha fotonlar bir darajada, hamma elektronlar ham o'z maydoniga ega va boshqa har bir zarracha uchun ham.

Doktor Kerol tushuntiradiki, agar hayot o'limdan keyin ham ma'lum darajada davom etsa, kvant maydonidagi sinovlar "ruhiy zarralar" va "ruhiy kuchlar" ni aniqlagan bo'lar edi.

Doktor Keroll Scientific American jurnalida shunday yozadi: & ldquoAgar bu atomlar va ma'lum kuchlardan boshqa narsa bo'lmasa, ruhning o'limdan omon qolishining iloji yo'q.

Doktor Kerol o'limdan keyin hayot yo'qligini aytdi (Tasvir: GETTY)

& ldquoO'limdan keyin hayotga ishonish, yumshoq qilib aytganda, standart modeldan tashqari fizikani talab qiladi.

Eng muhimi, bizda mavjud bo'lgan atomlar bilan o'zaro aloqa qilish uchun fizika va rsquo uchun qandaydir usul kerak.

& QLT ichida oddiy atomlarimiz bilan o'zaro ta'sir qiladigan & lsquospirit zarralar va rsquo va & lsquospirit kuchlar & rsquo yangi to'plami bo'lishi mumkin emas, chunki biz ularni mavjud tajribalarda aniqlagan bo'lardik. & rdquo


O'limni tanlovga aylantirmoqchi bo'lgan texnologik milliarderlar

Nima uchun texnologiya zillionerlari umrini uzaytirish bo'yicha tadqiqotlarni moliyalashtirishni tanlashi mumkin? Santa Barbara Kaliforniya Universitetining zamonaviy texnologiyalar tarixchisi Patrik Makkreyni uchta sabab hisoblaydi. Birinchidan, agar sizda shuncha pul bo'lsa, undan uzoqroq yashashni xohlamaysizmi? Keyin u erda tepaliklarda pul ishlash kerak. Lekin oxirgi va uning fikricha, masalaning mohiyati mafkura. Agar sizning biznesingiz va ijtimoiy dunyongiz "buzuvchi texnologiyalar" ga asoslangan bo'lsa, qarishni sekinlashtirish yoki "mag'lub etish" dan ko'ra buzuqroq nima bo'lishi mumkin? "Shu bilan bir qatorda, agar siz 0 va 1 sonlarni aniq nazorat qilishga asoslangan sanoat sohasida milliardlab pul ishlab topgan bo'lsangiz, nega buni atomlar va molekulalar nazoratiga ham cho'zishingiz mumkinligini tasavvur qilmaysizmi?" Deydi u.


"Faqat nazariya": 7 ta noto'g'ri ishlatilgan ilmiy so'zlar

Gipoteza. Nazariya. Qonun. Bu ilmiy so'zlar muntazam ravishda talon -taroj qilinadi, lekin ko'pchilik odatda ularning ma'nosini noto'g'ri tushunadi.

Endi bitta olim, odamlar bu noto'g'ri tushunilgan so'zlarni butunlay yo'q qilib, ularni "model" so'ziga almashtirishi kerak, deb bahslashmoqda. Lekin bu muammo tug'diradigan yagona ilmiy so'z emas, va so'zlarni boshqalari bilan almashtirish yangisiga olib keladi. , juda noto'g'ri tushunilgan atamalar, boshqa bir qancha olimlar aytishdi.

Stenford universiteti kimyogari Maykl Fayerning so'zlariga ko'ra, "nazariya va so'z" - bu texnik ilmiy atama. & quotKo'pchilik uning ilmiy ma'nosini noto'g'ri tushungani, biz undan foydalanishni to'xtatishimiz kerak degani emas. Bu bizga yaxshiroq ilmiy ta'lim kerak degan ma'noni anglatadi

Bu erda & quot; nazariya & quot dan & quot; muhim so'zlar & quot dan - tez -tez noto'g'ri ishlatilgan ettita ilmiy so'z.

1. Gipoteza

Keng jamoatchilik gipoteza, nazariya va qonun so'zlarini shunchalik noto'g'ri ishlatadiki, olimlar bu atamalardan foydalanishni to'xtatishi kerak, deb yozadi janubi -sharqiy Luiziana universiteti fizigi Rhet Allain, Wired Science blogida. [Ajoyib fan: 25 ta qiziqarli faktlar]

"Men hozircha bu so'zlarni saqlash kerak emas deb o'ylamayman", dedi Allain LiveScience -ga.

Gipoteza - bu haqiqatan ham sinab ko'rilishi mumkin bo'lgan narsa uchun taklif qilingan tushuntirish. Agar siz kimgadir gipoteza nima ekanligini so'rasangiz, ular darhol "o'qitilgan taxmin" deb javob berishadi, - dedi Allain.

2. Faqat nazariya?

Iqlim o'zgarishini inkor etuvchilar va kreatsionistlar iqlim o'zgarishi va evolyutsiyasiga shubha qilish uchun & quot; nazariya & quot; so'zini ishlatdilar.

"Bu haqiqat emasdek, chunki bu shunchaki nazariya", dedi Allain.

Bu juda ko'p miqdordagi dalillar iqlim o'zgarishi va Darvinning evolyutsiya nazariyasini qo'llab-quvvatlasa ham.

Muammoning bir qismi shundan iboratki, & quot; nazariya & quot; so'zi oddiy tilda fanga qaraganda boshqacha ma'noni anglatadi: Ilmiy nazariya - bu takrorlanuvchi tajribalar yoki testlar orqali isbotlangan tabiiy olamning ba'zi jihatlarini tushuntirish. O'rtacha Jeyn yoki Jo uchun nazariya - bu tajriba va sinovdan kelib chiqqan tushuntirish emas, balki kimningdir boshida yashaydigan g'oya.

Biroq, nazariya muammo tug'diradigan yagona ilmiy ibora emas. Hatto Allain va boshqalar ham gipoteza, nazariya va huquqni almashtirishni afzal ko'rishgan - & quot; model & quot; - o'z muammolari bor. Bu so'z nafaqat o'yinchoq mashinalari va uchish -qo'nish yo'lagida yuradiganlarni, balki turli ilmiy sohalarda har xil narsani bildiradi. Iqlim modeli, masalan, matematik modeldan juda farq qiladi.

& quot; Turli sohalardagi olimlar bu atamalarni bir-biridan farq qiladi, & quot; Jon Xoks, Viskonsin-Madison universiteti antropologi, LiveScience elektron pochtasida yozgan. & quot; Model ' ishni yaxshilaydi deb o'ylamayman. U hozirda standart model tufayli fizikada mustahkam ko'rinishga ega. Aksincha, genetika va evolyutsiyada 'modellar juda boshqacha ishlatiladi. & Quot (Standart model - zarrachalar fizikasini boshqaruvchi dominant nazariya.)

Odamlar iqlim o'zgarishini odamlar qabul qilmasa, ommaviy axborot vositalari bu odamlarni "iqlim skeptiklari" deb ta'riflaydilar. Lekin bu ularga haddan ziyod katta ishonch bag'ishlashi mumkin, deb yozadi Pensilvaniya shtati universiteti iqlimshunosi Maykl Mann.

& quot; Ilm-fanni noto'g'ri, noto'g'ri va tez-tez kun tartibiga asoslangan tanqidlarga asoslangan asosiy fanni rad etish-bu umuman shubha emas. Bu qarama -qarshilik. yoki rad etish, & quot; Mann LiveScience -ga.

Buning o'rniga, haqiqiy skeptiklar ilmiy dalillarga ochiq va uni teng baholashga tayyor.

& quotBarcha olimlar shubhalanishi kerak. Haqiqiy shubha, [Karl] Sagan ta'riflaganidek, fanning o'zini o'zi tuzatuvchi mashinasidir, dedi Mann.

5. Tabiat tarbiyaga qarshi

"Qabul qilish va tarbiyalash" iborasi olimlarga bosh og'rig'ini ham beradi, chunki bu juda murakkab jarayonni tubdan soddalashtiradi, dedi Michigan universiteti evolyutsion biologi Den Kruger.

& quot; Bu - zamonaviy evolyutsionistlar g'azablantiradigan narsa, - dedi Kruger LiveScience nashriga.

Genlar odamlarga ta'sir qilishi mumkin, lekin shuning uchun ham epigenetik o'zgarishlar sodir bo'ladi. Bu modifikatsiyalar qaysi genlar yoqilishini o'zgartiradi, ular irsiy va atrof -muhit ta'siriga oson ta'sir qiladi. Insonning xulq -atvorini shakllantiradigan muhit, homilaning bachadondagi kimyoviy ta'siridan tortib, odam o'sgan blokgacha, bolaligida iste'mol qilgan ovqat turiga qadar bo'lishi mumkin, dedi Kruger. Bu omillarning barchasi tartibsiz, oldindan aytib bo'lmaydigan tarzda o'zaro ta'sir qiladi.

6. Muhim

Olimlarning tishlarini chetga surib qo'yadigan yana bir so'z - bu juda muhim so'z

& quot; Bu juda katta to'ng'iz so'z. Bu statistik jihatdan muhimmi yoki muhimmi? " - dedi Maykl O 'Brien, Missuri universiteti San'at va fan kolleji dekani.

Statistik ma'lumotlarga ko'ra, agar tasodif tasodif tufayli farq qilmasa. Ammo bu, masalan, bosh og'rig'i yoki IQ darajasidagi farqni anglatmaydi.

& quotNaturali & quot - olimlar uchun yana bir xato. Bu atama yaxshi, sog'lom yoki yaxshi bo'lish bilan sinonimga aylandi. Ammo hamma narsa ham nosog'lom emas va tabiiy bo'lgan hamma narsa siz uchun yaxshi emas.

"Uran tabiiydir va agar siz unga etarli miqdorda in'ektsiya qilsangiz, siz o'lamiz", dedi Kruger.

"Tabiiy" aka -uka va quotorganik "ham muammoli ma'noga ega, dedi u. Olimlar uchun organik shunchaki "uglevodga asoslangan" so'zini anglatsa, bu atama endi pestitsidlarsiz shaftoli va yuqori sifatli paxta choyshablarini tasvirlash uchun ishlatiladi.

Yomon ta'lim

Ammo bu so'zlar noto'g'ri tushunilishi mumkin bo'lsa -da, olimlarning aytishicha, haqiqiy muammo shundaki, odamlar o'rta va o'rta maktabda qattiq ilmiy ta'lim olmaydilar. Natijada, jamoatchilik ilmiy tushuntirishlar qanday shakllanganini, sinovdan o'tganini va qabul qilinishini tushunmaydi.

Bundan tashqari, inson miyasi gipotezalar yoki nazariyalar kabi asosiy ilmiy tushunchalarni intuitiv ravishda tushunish uchun rivojlanmagan bo'lishi mumkin, dedi Kruger.

Ko'p odamlar har kuni taqdim etiladigan ma'lumotlarning kakofoniyasini tushunish uchun aqliy yorliqlardan foydalanadilar.

Bu tendentsiyalardan biri - bu mutlaq ma'noda haqiqat va yolg'on yoki yolg'on o'rtasidagi farqni aniqlashdir, dedi Kruger. & quot; Ilm -fan bilan, bu davomiylik. Biz doimo o'z tushunchamizni rivojlantirmoqdamiz

Mualliflik huquqi 2013 LiveScience, TechMediaNetwork kompaniyasi. Barcha huquqlar himoyalangan. Bu materialni nashr qilish, translyatsiya qilish, qayta yozish yoki qayta tarqatish mumkin emas.


Tramp ma'muriyati ikki jins vakillari borligini aytadi. Ilm -fan ular xato qilayotganini aytadi.

Biologiya X va Y xromosomalariga qaraganda ancha murakkab.

Trump ma'muriyati qonuniy ravishda jinsni qat'iy erkak yoki ayol deb belgilash niyatida. Ammo ilm -fan shuni ko'rsatadiki, jinsiy aloqa juda xilma -xil bo'lishi mumkin - va osonlik bilan tor toifaga kirmaydi.

O'tgan hafta oxiri, The New York Times AQSh Sog'liqni Saqlash va Xizmatlar Departamenti o'z jinsini faqat o'zlari tug'ilgan biologik jinsiy a'zolaridan kelib chiqib belgilashni rejalashtirayotgani ma'lum bo'ldi - go'yoki, kamsitishni taqiqlovchi fuqarolik huquqlari qonunlari bo'yicha jinsiy ta'rifni yanada izchil qilish.

Ammo bu erda muammo bor: odamning biologik jinsi har doim ham erkak yoki ayolga bir tomonlama mos kelavermaydi. Va, ehtimol, eng muhimi, erkak jinsi - erkak va ayol spektrini ijtimoiy jihatdan aniqlashni qanday tanlashi va tanlashi - har xil bo'lishi mumkin.

"Hamma mos kelishi mumkin bo'lgan ikkita toifa bor degan fikr ozgina noaniq",-deydi Braun universitetining biologiya va gender tadqiqotlari professori Enn Fausto-Sterling.

"Jinsiy tizimlarning rivojlanishi ancha murakkab", deya qo'shimcha qildi u.

Aziz yangiliklar, iltimos, "ular tug'ilgan jinsi" deb aytishni bas qiling, bu noto'g'ri. Odamlar jinsi bilan tug'ilmaydi, biz buni bolalikdan o'rganamiz. Hech kim qorin bo'shlig'idan, romantik va sovuq yelka tepalaridan chiqmaydi.

- Eshli Nikol Blek (@ashleyn1cole) 22 oktyabr, 2018 yil

Shunday bo'lsa-da, hukumatning bunday tor tasnifi, agar oxir-oqibat federal qoidalar sifatida qabul qilinsa, 60 kunlik majburiy jamoatchilik muhokamasidan so'ng, kuzda-kamida 1,4 million amerikalik transseksual kattalarning qonuniy ravishda boshqa narsa sifatida tan olinishiga to'sqinlik qiladi. jinsi ular tug'ilish paytida tayinlangan.

"Biologiya ikki jins borligini aytmaydi", dedi intervyusida Chikago universitetining tibbiy antropologi Andrea Ford.

"Biologik jinslar har doim ham oldindan aytib bo'ladigan tarzda mos kelmaydi yoki ikkita toifaga to'g'ri kelmaydi", dedi Ford.

Jinsiy organlardan tashqari jinsiy bezlar (moyaklar va tuxumdonlar), gormonlar va xromosomalar mavjud bo'lib, ular turli yo'llar bilan namoyon bo'ladi.

Masalan, erkak xromosomalari (XY) bo'lgan chaqaloqlar moyaklar bilan tug'ilishi mumkin, lekin jinsiy a'zolari noaniq, bu jinsni belgilash masalasini tug'dirishi mumkin. Ba'zi ayollar tabiiy ravishda ko'p miqdorda testosteron ishlab chiqaradilar. Odatda ikkita urg'ochi bo'lgan ikkita XX xromosomasi bilan tug'ilgan odamlarda erkak jinsiy a'zolarining o'ziga xos geni bo'lishi mumkin. Va ba'zi odamlar o'nlab yillar davomida har ikki jinsning atributlarini bo'lishlarini bilmay yashaydilar.

"Odamlarga narsalarni taniqli toifaga ajratish qulay, lekin, albatta, jinsiy aloqa qanday namoyon bo'lishining cheksizligi bor", dedi Ford.

Bundan tashqari, jinsi va jinsi turlicha, lekin ko'pincha bir -biri bilan chambarchas bog'liq, - dedi UCLA Integrativ biologiya va fiziologiya kafedrasi professori Artur Arnold intervyusida.

Ammo jins bizning tanamiz va fiziologiyamiz bilan chegaralanmagan.

"Biz bu erda asosan jins haqida gapirayapmiz", dedi Arnold. "Bu haqiqatan ham ijtimoiy nomenklatura jangi. Siz odamlarni bir jinsli deb cheklamoqchimisiz?"

Masalan, odamlar jinsi disforiya deb nomlanuvchi jinsdan norozi bo'lishlari mumkin. Shunga ko'ra, "kimdir kiyinishi mumkin, kimdir ijtimoiy o'tishni xohlashi mumkin", boshqalari gormonal terapiya yoki jinsiy tasdiqlash operatsiyasi yordamida tibbiy o'tishga qaror qilishlari mumkin Amerika Psixiatriya Assotsiatsiyasi.

Bizning tanamizda yoki genimizda bizni ma'lum bir jinsga aylanishga undaydigan narsa bo'lishi mumkin. Ammo hozircha bizni jins yoki spektr bo'yicha joy tanlashga nima undayotgani haqida aniq jinsiy yoki biologik tushuntirish yo'q.

"Bu hal qilinmagan paradoks", dedi Arnold.

Jinsiy va gender xilma -xilligini keng tan olish deyarli yangilik emas.

Bu hukumatning yaqinda tug'ilish paytida yoki tug'ilishidan oldin aniqlanadigan ikkita jins borligi haqidagi taklifini, eng yaxshisi, hayratga soladi va bu toifalarga to'g'ri kelmaydiganlar uchun, eng yomoni, zararli qiladi.

"Jinsiy aloqa qilishning cheksiz usullari bor"

Umuman olganda, jinsni o'rganish yangi tadqiqot sohasi emas.

"Bu 1950-yillarga borib taqaladi va bu vaqt o'tishi bilan tobora aniq bo'la boshladi", dedi Fausto-Sterling, jinsiy identifikator tadqiqotchisi Jon Moneyning erta va seminal ishlarini qayd etib.

1950 -yillardan bir necha asr oldin, tubjoy amerikaliklar boshqa jinslarning haqiqatini tan olishgan va qabul qilishgan. Ko'p qabilaviy madaniyatlarda erkak ham, urg'ochi ham faqat erkak yoki urg'ochi bo'lmagan jinslarni tanlagan.

Santa Barbara Kaliforniya Universitetining ma'lumotlariga ko'ra, "bu juda hurmatli shaxslar jinslar spektrini yaxshi boshdan kechirishdi va ular hech qachon kimligi uchun hukm qilinmagan".

Shunday bo'lsa -da, XXI asrda Trump ma'muriyati amaldorlari jinsiy aloqa va shunga mos ravishda jinsini ham o'zlari tanlagan qutiga solishga intilishadi.

"Bu mafkuraviy pozitsiya, ular ilm -fan haqida o'ylashga harakat qilmoqdalar, lekin ilm -fan buni aytmaydi", dedi Ford.


30 yoshda bo'lish haqida fan nima deydi

Ommabop madaniyat va Internet ro'yxatlari odatda 30 -yillarni hayotning eng yaxshi yillari sifatida tasvirlaydi. 20 -yillarning moliyaviy va shaxsiy ishonchsizligidan xoli va 40-50 -yillardagi o'rta hayot muammolariga hali yaqinlashmagan, 30 -yillar erkinlik va mas'uliyatning eng yaxshisi ekanligi aytiladi. Ammo fan 30 yoshda bo'lish haqida nima deydi?

Tadqiqotlar o'n yillik hayotning aralash rasmini, barqarorlikni oshirish va sezilarli o'zgarishlarni aks ettiradi. Ba'zi tadqiqotlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, 35 - "eng yaxshi yosh" va haqiqiy baxt 33 yoshdan boshlanadi. 100 yoshdan oshganlar 30 yoshini o'z hayotining eng yaxshi o'n yilligi deb bilishadi.

Mana, ilm-fan 30 yoshdan oshishning past-balandligi haqida nima deydi:

O'n yillikning boshi va oxiri hayotda jiddiy o'zgarishlar bo'lishi mumkin.

Agar siz karerangizda katta o'zgarish qilmoqchi bo'lsangiz, yangi shaharga ko'chib o'tsangiz, marafon o'tkazsangiz yoki ishqiy munosabatingiz bo'lsa, siz buni 30 yoshga yaqinlashganda qilishingiz mumkin.

30 yoshga kirgan yoki ketganlar, mazmun va qoniqishni baholash uchun "hayot tekshiruvi" o'tkazishi mumkin. So'nggi tadqiqotlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, biz o'n yillik kitob kitoblarini hayot yo'llarimizni baholash va o'zgartirishlar kiritish uchun ishlatamiz. Yangi o'n yilliklar ma'no izlashga undaydi va bizni "yangi davrga kirishni tasavvur qilishimizga" olib kelishi mumkin,-deydilar tadqiqotchilar, "9-yoshli" (29, 39, 49 yoshli va boshqalar) xatti-harakatlarini kuzatganlar.

Siz jinsiy aloqa cho'qqisiga chiqishingiz mumkin.

30 yoshga kirganingizdan zavqlanadigan katta narsa? Ajoyib jinsiy aloqa.

Ayollar uchun biologik soatlarning o'tayotgani 30 -yillar davomida rivojlanishning salbiy tomoni bo'lishi mumkin. Ehtimol, bu hodisa tufayli, tadqiqotlarga ko'ra, ayollar hayotning bu davrida jinsiy cho'qqiga chiqadi. 30 yoshdan 40 yoshgacha bo'lgan ayollar yosh yoki keksa ayollarga qaraganda ancha jinsiy aloqada bo'lib, ko'proq jinsiy fantaziyalar va haqiqiy jinsiy aloqa haqida xabar berishadi. Tadqiqotchilar taxmin qilishicha, ayollar evolyutsion moslashuv sifatida jinsiy motivatsiya va xulq -atvorni boshdan kechirishadi, bu esa ularning qolgan tug'ish qobiliyatidan foydalanishga olib keladi.

Haqiqiy sabab shu bo'ladimi, ko'pchilik 30 yoshli ayollar, o'zlarini 20 yoshdagidan ko'ra o'zlarini jinsiy jihatdan yaxshi va uyg'unroq his qilishlarini va shuning uchun ham jinsiy hayotdan yaxshiroq zavqlanishlarini aytishadi. Daily Mail tomonidan o'tkazilgan so'rov natijalariga ko'ra, 31 yoshida ayollar o'zlarini jinsiy jihatdan eng ishonchli deb bilishadi.

. Va karerangizda yangi marralarni zabt eting.

20 -yillar, odatda, sizning ta'limingizni, ishsizligingizni yoki to'liq ishlamasligingizni, martaba tanlashingiz va zinapoyaga ko'tarilish uchun ko'p vaqt ishlashingiz bilan tavsiflansa, keyingi o'n yil ko'proq martaba va moliyaviy muvaffaqiyatdan zavqlanish bilan bog'liq.

30 yoshdan 39 yoshgacha bo'lgan vaqtlar kareradagi eng muhim davr bo'lishi mumkin. Payscale.com tahliliga ko'ra, o'ttiz yoshli ayollar o'rtacha 39 yoshida o'sishning eng yuqori cho'qqisini kutishadi. Agar siz rassom yoki olim bo'lsangiz, ilmiy kashfiyotchilar va Nobel mukofoti sovrindorlari tadqiqotiga ko'ra, 30-yillarning oxirida sizning eng katta ijodiy yutug'ingiz bo'ladi. The Atlantic tomonidan 1977 yilda o'tkazilgan tadqiqot shuni ko'rsatdiki, fizika bo'yicha Nobel mukofoti sovrindorlari tadqiqotlarini o'tkazganlarida o'rtacha 36 yoshda, kimyo bo'yicha mukofotlar g'oliblari esa o'rtacha 39 yoshda edi.

Agar siz tanlagan kasbingiz sizni qoniqtirmasa, ishingiz yomonlashadi. Ba'zi tadqiqotlar shuni ko'rsatdiki, 30 yoshli odamlar o'z ishlaridan qoniqmaydilar va 20-40 yoshli odamlarga qaraganda ko'proq emotsional kuyishadi.

Ehtimol, sizning shaxsiyatingiz unchalik o'zgarmaydi.

20 -asr Garvard psixologi Uilyam Jeymsning aytishicha, 30 yoshdan keyin shaxsiyat "gips singari" paydo bo'lgan. Jeymsning ta'kidlashicha, shaxsiyat balog'at yoshida paydo bo'ladi. Ba'zi tadqiqotlar bu dastlabki e'tiqodni qo'llab -quvvatlaydi.

Bizning asosiy shaxsiy xususiyatlarimiz hech bo'lmaganda qisman genetika bilan belgilanadi. Ammo bolalikdan 20 -yillarga qadar bizning shaxsiyatimiz bor 30-ga yaqinlashganda bu o'zgarishlar asta-sekinlik bilan sekinlashib bormoqda. Biz 3: 0 ni urganimizdan so'ng, bizning shaxsiy fazilatlarimiz deyarli o'zgarmaydi, bu biz o'zimizga qarshi chiqa olmasligimizni, fe'l-atvorimizdan chiqib, o'sib-ulg'ayishimizni anglatmaydi. Shunchaki, hayotimiz barqaror bo'lganda, xarakterimiz ham o'zgaradi.

"Siz o'smirlik davridan balog'at yoshigacha bo'lgan juda katta o'zgarishlarni 30, 35 yoshdan keyin o'chirasiz", - deydi psixolog Pol T. Kosta Nyu -York jurnalining Science of Us. "Shundan keyin ham shaxsiyatda o'zgarishlar bo'ladi, lekin ular hayotning oldingi bosqichlariga qaraganda juda oddiy."

Siz o'rta yoshgacha bo'lgan blyuzni olishingiz mumkin.

Har o'n yil o'z inqiroziga ega va 30 -yillar ham bundan mustasno emas.

Chorak hayot inqirozi-psixologik singari pop-madaniyat hodisasi ham-20-yillarning o'rtalaridan 30-yillarning o'rtalariga qadar davom etishi mumkin bo'lgan o'rta hayot inqirozidan oldingi holat. Ko'pincha bu 30 yoshda sodir bo'ladi. Umuman olganda, ekzistentsial tashvish va so'roq qilish davri ishda yoki ishlamayotgan munosabatlarda qolib ketish tuyg'usidan kelib chiqadi.

Britaniyalik psixolog Oliver Robinson New Scientist jurnaliga bergan intervyusida: "Bu tashqi tomondan bir narsaga, lekin ichingizda o'zingizni boshqa birov kabi his qilishga olib keladi, bu sizning xatti -harakatlaringiz va ichki hissiyotingiz o'rtasidagi tafovutni keltirib chiqaradi".

Bu o'zgarishga, hozirgi vaziyatdan chiqish rejasini topishga va hayotingizni qayta qurishga bo'lgan istakni keltirib chiqaradi, - tushuntirdi Robinson. Bu qiyin jarayon bo'lishi mumkin, lekin oxir -oqibat bunga arziydi: Robinson bilan suhbatlashgan yoshlarning 80 foizi o'rta yoshdagi inqirozga ijobiy qarashgan.

Haqiqiy baxt endigina boshlanadi.

Tizimdan chorak hayot inqirozini olib tashlaganingizdan so'ng, hayotning haqiqiy zavqlanish vaqti keldi. 2012 yilda o'tkazilgan so'rov shuni ko'rsatdiki, 40 yoshdan oshgan britaniyaliklarning 70 foizi 33 yoshgacha haqiqiy baxtli emasligini aytishgan.

So'rovda qatnashganlarning yarmidan ko'pi 33 yoshida hayot yanada zavqliroq bo'lishini, 42 foizi bu yoshda kelajakka ishonch bilan qarashini, 38 foizi esa 33 yoshida yoshligidan kamroq stressni boshdan kechirganini aytishdi.

"33 yosh - bu yoshlikdagi g'ayrat va g'ayratni yo'qotmasdan, bolalikdagi befarqlikni va yoshlikdagi yovvoyi hiyla -nayrangdan voz kechish uchun etarli vaqt", - deb tushuntirdi tadqiqot mualliflaridan biri, psixolog Donna Douson. "Bu yoshga kelib aybsizlik yo'qoldi, lekin bizning haqiqat tuyg'usi kuchli umid hissi," qila oladigan "ruh va o'z iste'dod va qobiliyatimizga sog'lom ishonch bilan aralashgan."

HuffPost UK va YouGov tomonidan o'tkazilgan britaniyalik boshqa so'rov natijalariga ko'ra, biz 34 yoshimizda ish va hayot o'rtasidagi eng yaxshi muvozanatni o'rnatamiz va 38 yoshimizda haqiqiy qoniqishga erishamiz.


Tadqiqotlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, o'ta o'ylaydiganlar o'z muammolarini boshlarida qayta tiklash orqali o'zlariga yordam berishadi. Ammo tadqiqotlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, tahlil falaji haqiqiydir.

Hamma narsani ortiqcha tahlil qilish muammoni hal qilishga xalaqit beradi. Bu sizni yechim izlashdan ko'ra, muammo ustida to'xtalishga majbur qiladi.

Hatto oddiy qarorlar, masalan, intervyuda nima kiyishni tanlash yoki ta'tilga qayerga borishni tanlash kabi, agar siz haddan tashqari o'ylayotgan bo'lsangiz, o'lim yoki o'lim haqidagi qarorga o'xshaydi. Qizig'i shundaki, bu fikrlash sizga yaxshiroq tanlov qilishga yordam bermaydi.


Iqtisodiyotga ariza

Darvinga Shotlandiya faylasufi Adam Smit ham ta'sir ko'rsatdi Millatlar boyligining tabiati va sabablarini o'rganish 1776 yilda nashr etilgan. Bu asarda Smit shaxsiy manfaatni hurmat qilgan: "Biz kechki ovqatni qassob, pivo ishlab chiqaruvchi yoki novvoyning xayrixohligidan emas, balki ularning manfaatlari uchun o'ylaymiz". Bunday shaxsiy manfaat olam haqidagi falsafiy qarashga asoslangan bo'lib, uning fikricha, guruhlar emas, faqat shaxslar muhim elementlardir. Shunday qilib, Smit o'zini nominalistik dunyoqarash bilan uyg'unlashtirdi (bu haqiqat faqat aniq va individual narsalardan iborat). Smitning so'zlariga ko'ra, u "ko'rinmas qo'l" deb atagan narsa-bu shaxsiy ijtimoiy manfaatlarning to'plangan shaxsiy manfaatlaridan kelib chiqadigan foydali ijtimoiy va iqtisodiy natijalar-metafora-odamlar o'rtasidagi muammolarni hal qilib, ularning ishiga muvozanat tuyg'usini olib keladi. Smitning dunyoqarashi laissez-faire iqtisodiyoti doktrinasi bilan bog'liq edi (shaxslar va jamiyatning iqtisodiy ishlariga hukumatning minimal aralashuvi siyosati) va u Darvinning tabiiy tanlanish evolyutsiyasi haqidagi o'z hisobida aks etadi:

Aytish mumkinki, tabiiy tanlanish butun dunyo bo'ylab har kuni va har soatda, har xil o'zgarishlarni, hatto eng yomonini ham rad etadi, yaxshisini saqlaydi va qo'shib qo'yadi. har bir organik mavjudot uning organik va noorganik hayot sharoitlariga bog'liq.


MIYANI TALGILASH

Hozirgacha transseksuallikning kelib chiqishi haqidagi tadqiqotlarning asosiy qismi miyaga qaragan.

Nevrologlar, transgender odamlarning miya tuzilishi va faoliyatida, ularni tsisenderli odamlardan ajratib turadigan maslahatlar topdilar.

1995 yildagi seminal tadqiqotni golland nevrologi Dik Svab olib bordi, u ham erkak va ayol miyasi o'rtasidagi tizimli farqlarni kashf etgan birinchi olimlardan edi. Transgender sub'ektlarning o'limdan keyingi miya to'qimalariga qarab, u erkak-ayol transseksuallar odatdagi ayol miyasiga o'xshash hujayralar klasterlari yoki yadrolari borligini aniqladi va aksincha.

Swaabning o'limdan keyingi namunalar bo'yicha ishi 25 yil davomida yig'ish uchun sarflagan 12 ta transgender miyaga asoslangan edi. Ammo bu butunlay yangi tergov maydonini vujudga keltirdi, chunki bugungi kunda transgender tirik ko'ngillilarning miyasini skanerlashning ilg'or texnologiyasi o'rganilmoqda.

Miyani skanerlash bo'yicha etakchilar qatoriga Shvetsiyaning Karolinska instituti nevrologiya professori va Los -Anjelesdagi Kaliforniya universitetining professori Ivanka Savich kiradi.

Uning tadqiqotlari shuni ko'rsatadiki, transseksual erkaklar miyaning ikki sohasi o'rtasida o'zini va o'z tanasini idrok etuvchi aloqasi zaiflashgan. Savichning aytishicha, bu aloqalar odam gormonlararo davolanishdan keyin yaxshilanadi.

Uning asarlari har xil mavzularda jurnallarda 100 martadan ko'proq nashr etilgan, lekin u hali ham odamlar jinsi tug'ilishidan xulosa chiqara olmaydi.

"Menimcha, lekin buni isbotlashim kerak", dedi Savich.

Boshqa bir qator tadqiqotchilar, shu jumladan genetiklar ham, nevrologlar ham biologik komponentni nazarda tutadilar, bu ham tarbiyaga ta'sir qiladi.

Ammo Jon Xopkins tibbiyot maktabining psixiatriya professori Pol Makxyu "bu yo'l bilan tug'ilish" gipotezasini rad etuvchi etakchi ovoz sifatida paydo bo'ldi.

U transseksuallar, ayniqsa bolalar uchun psixiatrik terapiyani rag'batlantiradi, shunda ular tug'ilish paytida o'zlariga tayinlangan jinsni qabul qilishadi.

McHugh has gained a following among social conservatives, while incensing LGBT advocates with comments such as calling transgender people “counterfeit.”

Last year he co-authored a review of the scientific literature published in The New Atlantis journal, asserting there was scant evidence to suggest sexual orientation and gender identity were biologically determined.

The article drew a rebuke from nearly 600 academics and clinicians who called it misleading.

McHugh told Reuters he was “unmoved” by his critics and says he doubts additional research will reveal a biological cause.


Kaitlin Luna: Welcome to Speaking of Psychology, a bi-weekly podcast from the American Psychological Association. Men sizning uy egangiz Kaitlin Luna.

Suicide rates in the U.S. climbed in all but one state from 1999 to 2016, according to a CDC report issued in June 2018. This alarming report and notable celebrity suicide deaths like Anthony Bourdain and Kate Spade have pushed this topic further into the national spotlight. In this episode we'll be exploring the factors that cause people to die from suicide, the effects of past trauma on mental health, and how psychologists can successfully treat suicidal patients.

Our guest is Dr. Samuel Knapp, a licensed psychologist in Pennsylvania who has worked in rural community mental health centers delivering psychotherapy and crisis intervention services. He's the author of the forthcoming book “Suicide Prevention: An Ethically and Scientifically Informed Approach,” that will be published by APA in August. Suicide is also the cover story for the July-August issue of the Psixologiya bo'yicha monitor, APA's magazine for members that covers science, education, psychology practice and more. Welcome Dr. Knapp.

Samuel Knapp: Rahmat.

Kaitlin Luna: My first question for you is, why do people die from suicide?

Samuel Knapp: Suicide is multi-determined, meaning that many factors can be involved. But we have identified some common factors that reappear over and over again. One of the major ones is a lack of social connections so that people perceive themselves as unwanted or as a burden to others. In fact Dr. Thomas Joiner, a noted suicidologist, has used the term perceived burdensomeness to describe the sense of being a burden on others. And as a society, it appears that we are becoming more disconnected from each other, and that may be a factor in the increase in the suicide rates. But you know the mediate cause might be the disruption of a social relationship, a loss of a job, financial distress, some kind of humiliation, but usually there's a loss of social connectedness as well.

Kaitlin Luna: You mentioned Dr. Thomas Joiner, he and other psychologists developed the interpersonal theory of suicide can you explain what that theory is?

Samuel Knapp: It's a very helpful theory, and on its surface is very simple, but it's actually very useful in that suicide is caused by both a desire to die and the capability of killing oneself. And the desire to die is usually associated with thwarted belongingness, not being part of a valued social group or perceived burdensomeness. And then then you have the second step which is the acquired capability that means a person has overcome the normal habituation, the normal inhibitions against harming oneself. We have very strong self-preservation instincts and it takes a lot for people to overcome that and it usually occurs when people have become habituated to pain and suffering or they lose their fear of death. There's other it's called an ideation to action theory and there's other ideation to action theories and they overlap a great deal, but all of them look at the unique role that acquired capability has in leading a person to die from suicide.

Kaitlin Luna: And what do you think the factors are behind that steep rise in suicide deaths around the U.S. that was noted by the CDC?

Samuel Knapp: Well I think it is the increased lack of social connectedness that we have in society. I know suicide is also multi determinant I mentioned and we have to realize too that even though the nation itself is prosperous, there are many areas of the country and many professions where people are struggling financially. If you know farmers losing their family farms, a great sense of loss, a great sense of anger itself because they weren't able to make it, and so those are those are factors as well. A very high incarceration rate in the United States, and incarceration is often a life event that that causes some people to attempt suicide.

Kaitlin Luna: And that report did note that in some states, especially in North Dakota, the suicide rate went up significantly during that time period, and Montana had the highest per capita rate in the, I believe between 2014 and 2016. Does that speak to some of the issues going on in rural areas which you've had experience with?

Samuel Knapp: Yes, in fact some people have referred to, they call the geographical suicide belt, which is you know western states, rural states having an increased rates of suicide. Now there's many factors for this, one which is that some of these states have a higher proportion of older adults and older adults do die from suicide more frequently than younger people. They have a greater access to guns because it's very common for the average household to have a gun. They have a lack of adequate health care services in many of those areas. There's longer distances between people, greater risk of social isolation younger people moving out, family members moving out. So you have all those factors that appear to occur. There's nothing inherent about living in Montana that increases one's risk of suicide it's just that people in Montana are more likely to have these high risk factors that we know about.

Kaitlin Luna: And one very interesting thing in that report was that more than half of people who died by suicide did not have a diagnosed or known mental health condition at the time of death, so what does that tell us?

Samuel Knapp: That whole issue is controversial. You know the relationship between a diagnosed mental illness and a suicide attempt. Now, Thomas Joiner whom I mentioned before, did a study where he looked at the medical records of people, and even if they didn't have a diagnosed mental illness a lot of them appeared to have symptoms that were noted in the medical record, suggesting that perhaps they really did have a mental illness that was not diagnosed, or maybe they were in great distress but didn't meet a formal definition of mental illness. So I suspect that the rate of emotional turmoil or mental illness is probably higher, far higher, than what the CDC suggested. There's also been some very useful research from Palo Alto University with Dr. Joyce Chu who looked at suicide among Asian Americans. And she found that the rate of mental illness instead of being 90 percent higher as most studies find, was about, I think if I recall correctly, about 66 percent, so she's suggesting that mental illness is less a factor in Asian-American suicides. But then I wonder if some of these Asian Americans didn't have cultural variations of distress that aren't picked up in the usual diagnostic nomenclature that based primarily on Western populations. Now this is just speculation on my part, but the CDC finding of less than half of people with diagnosed mental illness, I think we need to put that in perspective and say that might say more about our diagnostic system than about suicide itself, which is almost always linked to great emotional turmoil. A diagnosable mental illness or a cultural variation of a mental illness.

Kaitlin Luna: So there's definitely a lot more involved in this than just some simply saying that these people didn't have…

Samuel Knapp: That's right, yea far more than that.

Kaitlin Luna: Going back to what you were talking about older people, there's an investigation by Kaiser Health News and PBS Newshour that found that older Americans are quietly killing themselves in nursing homes, assisted living centers, and adult care homes, what are your thoughts about that report?

Samuel Knapp: Well there is what we call passive suicidal ideation. Now going back to the interpersonal theory, remember there is the desire to die and then the capability of dying. And some of the people in nursing homes may have the desire to die but because they're in a restricted environment they don't have the capability or maybe they don't have, maybe they haven't become sufficiently habituated to pain and suffering that they've overcome their inhibitions against actually killing themselves.

But there is such a thing as a passive suicidal ideation people just wish that God would take them away and wish that they then have to live anymore, even though they can't actively take steps to kill themselves. And people in nursing homes are more likely to have some of the risk factors associated with suicide such as a comorbid mental illness, I mean a comorbid physical illness, chronic pain, restriction in their activities of daily living, loss of connection with other people. In fact one study found that when suicides do occur in nursing homes it very often occurs when a loved one has been transferred out of a nursing home, and so a big social connection has been lost. Also a very interesting perspective by psychologist Kim Van Orden talked about the role that ageism might play in this, which is something I hadn't thought about which I probably should think about because I'm an old man. But, people get put into an age role, you're expected, your expectations are people. they can't do this stuff or they're not interested in things. they just need to sit in the corner and you know maybe that's a factor too that I had not thought about before.

Kaitlin Luna: You've spoken a lot about the importance of social connections and I think they might apply in this case, I want to get your thoughts on it, but more than a million children and teens in the US were admitted to the emergency room for suicide, suicidal thoughts, or suicidal attempts, an amount that doubled between 2007 and 2015 according to JAMA Pediatrics. Do you have any insights on why this is happening? Is it related to that social connection you were talking about before?

Samuel Knapp: I think it is and there's also been some speculation on, not more than speculation some research, on the role of smartphones, social media. And some people are thinking that it isn't the smartphones per se that's leading people to increase the risk of suicide, but that it interferes with normal, healthy, direct, interpersonal contact that people have. And so having a smartphone isn't intrinsically bad for a teenager, but it becomes bad if it keeps them from engaging in experiences that are really helpful and good. But yes, disconnectedness, it's a very serious problem with adolescents, it's a society-wide problem that needs to be addressed.

Kaitlin Luna: I did a recent podcast earlier this year about loneliness, which is very fascinating, talked a lot about the importance of social connections for our physical and mental well-being. It was a very good, very good conversation. And, going back you also mention too when you're talking about some of the other rural states some issues that might come into play there, but I think this is more of a national issue. But the National Bureau of Economic Research released a paper in late April that found that when the minimum wage in a state increased or when the state offered good tax credits for working families, the suicide rate decreased what do you think about that?

Samuel Knapp: Makes sense. You have the loss of income, you have financial and security you have males are socialized into a breadwinning role and if they failed to do that is the source of great humiliation, so that makes a lot of sense to me. That as income inequality rises, as financial insecurity increases, people who are vulnerable to suicide it's an added burden. One of the greatest spikes in suicide in the United States was in the early 1930s during the early years of the Great Depression and to me that's a typical example of the impact of economic security on suicide rates.

Kaitlin Luna: I want to talk a bit about the lasting impact of trauma. Specifically, in relation to three recent high-profile suicides, one of those was Jeremy Richmond, whose daughter was killed at Sandy Hook and then two Parkland school shooting survivors. Can you explain the lasting impact of a traumatic experience on a person's mental health?

Samuel Knapp: Yeah so this relates to the interpersonal theory of suicide, and as I mentioned acquired capability is one of the factors that Thomas Joiner has identified as related to a suicide attempt. And the acquired capability occurs when people have had exposure to violence, they become habituated to suffering and they lose their fear of death. And this explains why you look at it statistically higher rates of suicide and they find that they occur among people who are physicians, people who are sex workers, police officers, homicide detectives, and you think what do all these groups have in common. And one thing that they do have in common is exposure to pain and suffering. And so when people have that, you know, losing your fear of violence fear of suffering isn't necessarily bad, because you don't want to have a physician who's so afraid of suffering that says she can't do her job well or a police officer who's so afraid of suffering that she becomes paralyzed in a time when action is needed, but when it's combined with the desire to die then it becomes a factor in the suicide attempt.

So we have people these people, me I don't know them, only thing I know is you know is the very brief thing is that they had been exposed to trauma and violence, but people who are exposed to trauma and violence do have an increased risk of developing that acquired capability to kill themselves. You find this with child abuse victims too. Most of the people who are victims of child abuse will go on and despite the great pain involved they can carve out good lives for themselves, but statistically they are at a higher rate to die from suicide if they've been a victim of childhood violence. So you do create this habituation of pain and suffering that does increase the risk to people.

Kaitlin Luna: And because these, the people I mentioned, had to experience these incredibly traumatic events in their lives. I think that the one thing that was really I guess struck me about those stories was how many years it was later. Especially for the father of the Sandy Hook victim, and he was very actively involved in research into why people commit violence, and yet years later he did die by suicide. What does this tell us about how trauma can last for a long period of time? Does it say anything more about how you might feel fine for several years but then there could be a point where it gets to be too much and you decide to take this action?

Samuel Knapp: It is a factor and hopefully most people experiencing trauma will be able to get some help to be able to put the trauma in the back of their lives, but you know not always, as these cases illustrate.

Kaitlin Luna: And I want to talk about do suicides cluster together. I know this can be a very controversial topic. And there was just an article, a bunch of news stories released recently, about the increase in suicide deaths among teens after the airing of the show “13 Reasons Why.” And many of the articles were cautious on making a link between that, but they did note an increase in suicide deaths after that show aired. And we've seen this before about after a celebrity dies sometimes I've heard that the rate of suicide does increase after that, is there a connection and do they cluster together?

Samuel Knapp: Well we have we have two things going on, one is called contagion and the other is called cluster.

Kaitlin Luna: Can you explain what each one is?

Samuel Knapp: Sure, so after the death of a celebrity by suicide there's a great deal of publicity to it, and many studies have been done on the impact of this death upon suicide rates. And it's very hard to research because there are natural variations in suicide rates. During the spring, during the fall, the suicide rates tend to increase, so if a celebrity dies by suicide in April, well there's going to be an increase in suicide rates anyways. So we have to figure out how much is the increase due to the increased exposure of the suicide versus the natural increase. There was a review a year ago that says there is a slight impact of publicity of celebrities on suicide rates, a very small impact, when you look at all these different studies some which found an impact some which didn't, if you're looking at them all together there might be a slight contagion effect.

But we look at clusters which is different. Now clusters are when you know someone personally who's died from suicide. So for example in some schools there are all of a sudden several suicides of students in a school who sometimes they knew each other. And is this just a coincidence, I mean sometimes it might be just a coincidence, but is there some kind of effect? Did the suicide of one person increase the risk of suicides for other people? It appears that there is an impact. You know knowing someone who's died from suicide does increase a person's risk of dying from suicide themselves. It depends on how well they knew the person, many other factors, but there is a slight increase in risk.

Now why is that? Now some people say it might be a modeling effect, it might be habituation to violence, people knowing someone who's died from suicide might see it as an option. There's also been discussions about how should public schools respond publicly when a student dies from suicide? How can you honor the student's life without glamourizing it? And so there's guidelines established by the American Association of Suicidology on how to do that so that it doesn't appear to glamorize it or increase the risk of other students dying from suicide.

There's something called social network theory which says that many of our traits are similar to those who are close to us up to three degrees of separation. So if you know someone who died from suicide, your risk is going to be higher. If you know someone who knew someone who died from suicide it's gonna be a little bit higher, three degrees of separation it's going to be a tiny bit higher, and beyond that there's probably not an effect. But yeah it does appear to be a cluster effect.

Kaitlin Luna: Does it seem like suicide, the spotlight is on suicide more now today than it was in the past, or do you think homicides get more attention?

Samuel Knapp: I think there is more attention on suicide, as it should be it's been neglected a great deal. Now part of the attention started because of the high suicide rates in the United States military, but now it's a 30 percent increase in suicides since 1999. So it deserves to be in the public spotlight, it's a very neglected area of public health. For example, on the Golden Gate Bridge there's been I think 2000 suicides or something like that since the bridge was constructed. They built a bicycle lane, even though the number of people being injured riding bicycles on the Golden Gate Bridge is minuscule. Spent millions of dollars on a bicycle lane for safety purposes. I'm not opposed to a bicycle lane, but that was a priority over putting a net underneath the bridge which would save people from dying from suicide even though far more people died from suicide than died from bicycle accidents on the Golden Gate Bridge.

And that's just one example, you look at funding for research. Suicide is the 10th or 11th leading cause of death in the United States, comparable to lung disease, kidney diseases, even though lung disease and kidney disease each receive about 20 times the amount of federal funding for research than suicide does. So we are really disadvantaged in terms of research because of the lack of funding. It really is being a very serious neglected area of public health, and I think it has to do with myths and prejudice, stigma against people who have mental illnesses and who attempt suicide.

Kaitlin Luna: Yeah that's exactly what I was gonna ask you. Do you think it's because of the stigma. It does seem in general that the stigma might be lifting a little bit as the more it gets discussed, but you know the research dollars need to catch up with that. The monitor article stated that psychologists who study suicide are still members of a relatively small group because historically most research was done by psychiatrists who work with patients in psychiatric settings. Why is it critical to have psychologists study suicide?

Samuel Knapp: Well fortunately psychologists are getting more involved in the study of suicide, and the quality of research is excellent in my opinion. I mean obviously much more needs to be done, but in the last few years the research is phenomenal and has very real public health implications. For example, efficacy of treatments. We now know that there are, we've always suspected that mental health treatment is going to save lives of people who die from suicide, who are at risk to die from suicide, but now we have evidence that really shows without a doubt. That you have research by Craig Bryan and David Rudd cognitive behavior therapies, David Jobes on collaborative assessment management of suicidality, Marsha Linehan dialectical behavioral therapy, and you know, Guy Diamond's attachment-based therapy, we have these studies that show, yea we really have effective treatments. And we should study more on the phenomena of what happens in the suicidal crisis state. You know some really good research by Raymond Tucker and Megan Rogers and Thomas Joiner and Igor Galynker on the suicide crisis state, what happens immediately before a person attempts suicide. This is really opening a lot of possibilities as far as prevention and treatment are concerned. So I'm just so impressed by the psychologists who are working in this area, I benefited a great deal from their research.

Kaitlin Luna: It's wonderful to know that there's a lot of great research coming out in this field that will help people moving forward. And I wanted to talk about some more of the practical tips for people. How do we recognize the signs of someone who might be contemplating suicide?

Samuel Knapp: Well it's not always easy to do. And there's been these lists of warning signs that people have developed, and sometimes these lists become very, very long and one of the problems is that they become so long that they become useless. Because there's so many factors that are, you know are so marginally related to suicide that, well one list I see is that if a teenager is disrespectful to a teacher, you, okay, this is not good that teenagers are disrespectful, but that's not, they're disrespectful for a lot of different reasons, of which suicidal thoughts might be one out of many, many, many. But if you go thinking, oh this child is disrespectful they must be suicidal, you're just going to be wrong so much of the time that these warnings lists become meaningless. But one of the best ways to find out is just ask someone. Or you can take a step back and just ask, “how are you doing overall, how are you doing.”

If you're concerned about someone, focus on your relationship with them. You know, spend time with them. Think like a family, a parent and a child, or a child and an older parent, “how are you doing,” spend time with them, quality time. Now because of some of the research that I mentioned, Raymond Tucker and Megan Rogers and others, we do know more about the immediate psychological states that people have before a suicide attempt and there are some things that occur, agitation, insomnia, irritability we mentioned perceivers, sense of entrapment, humiliation, we know those states are present in a large number of people who eventually go on to die from suicide. So that's one of the practical applications are the some of the recent research that we've had.

Kaitlin Luna: So in terms of intervening if you're worried about a loved one it can be something like, as you mentioned, saying something “now how are you doing” that sort of thing. What are other ways you can intervene to keep someone safe?

Samuel Knapp: Well I mean if they're currently suicidal right now yeah so “are you suicidal,” “yes I am,” get them into treatment, and work with the treatment provider be one to be an asset to the treatment provider and what they're doing. And it's hard to generalize because there's so many different, every case is individual, is unique but doing what you can to promote their overall well-being and going back once again to the sense of connection, making sure that you have a good relationship. Now, family members usually are very well intentioned and they need to draw a balance between being helpful and being overly paternalistic, overly controlling, which sometimes people do when they're afraid someone is suicidal they'll be tend to be bossy and dogmatic and pushy and the motives might be good but that actually can turn people off as opposed to making them feel closer.

Kaitlin Luna: And how do psychologists treat suicidal patient patients? What research-informed interventions do you use in your practice or do you suggest others use?

Samuel Knapp: I mentioned some of them, and you know cognitive behavioral therapy, dialectical behavioral therapy, collaborative assessment management suicide, there's also what we call suicide management strategies, but you know looking at the broad question, there's a very good book and its edited by Louis Castonguay and Clara Hill on why some therapists are better than others. And one of the chapters says, okay what do the really good therapists do? And one of them was like good relationships, they practice hard at what they do. They're humble, and this is really good because humility, ability to look at one's self objectively, because they're not afraid of feedback, they elicit feedback. If a patient isn't doing better, they want to know about it and they will go out of their way to get the feedback.

And then we look at, what is specific about suicidal patients other than good therapy in general, and there was a very nice article recently by Craig Bryan on some of the common factors in effective suicide treatments. Now he was looking at treatments in the military, but I think this applies in other places as well. One of them was making sure that patients are engaged in treatment and they believe in treatment and follow through with treatment. You don't always assume that, sometimes people come in so demoralized that they think “nothing's gonna help me” or “I'm not worth saving,” that getting their buy-in is really important. Teaching specific skills, people in a great deal of emotional distress, and giving them skills.

For example, insomnia has a very strong link with suicide attempts. It greatly increases the risk that someone's going to attempt suicide if among all the other things they're not sleeping well at all, have chronic insomnia. And knowing that, there's things that people can do, there's sleep hygiene, there's imaginal rehearsal that can be done to reduce nightmares, there's some medications that can be done to in the short-term improve sleep. So knowing that stuff, being able to get their emotional arousal down, giving them skills is important.

And then another very important one that naive psychotherapists miss but it's very crucial, and that is suicide management. That is being able to give concrete steps so a person is less likely to attempt suicide in the short-term. You want to keep them safe in the short-term so the psychotherapy has a chance to work and that's a very important thing to do. And fortunately, there's been some very good research on suicide management programs such as Greg Brown and Barbara Stanley on some safety management strategies, and some other researchers that work on that. That really gives very concrete steps on things which have been empirically verified to help people reduce the risk of suicide. You know there's one study that was done which asked veterans “what kept you from killing yourself?” And the number one reason they gave, they gave many different reasons, but the most common one was “my psychotherapist cared about me.”

Kaitlin Luna: Wow that really does say a lot.

Samuel Knapp: It does, you want to build a relationship, you want, at the end of the first session you want the patient to think, “this psychotherapist really cares about me.” And you also want them to have a chance to tell their story. Now one of the advances in treatment, with people who are not experienced working with suicidal patients, there might be a fear, they might be alarmist, they might become over-controlling. “Oh you gotta go to a hospital” or “I have to tell your family members I don't care what you think, I'm going to tell your family members regardless of what you think,” over-controlling, bossy. But that can turn people off very quickly. But it's much better to listen to them. Instead of arguing with them “oh you should live, here's the reasons you should live,” for every reason you give they're going to tell you two reasons why they shouldn't live, you're never gonna win that argument. But it's much better to give the experience that having someone listen to you, yeah, the experience of a human connection. So you're not arguing with them, but you're giving them a meaningful human experience that intrinsically makes life worth living, and that's better than any argument you could ever give.

Kaitlin Luna: For people who've experienced a loss of a loved one by suicide, how do they best cope in the aftermath?

Samuel Knapp: Oh that's very difficult, the pain of people who suffer afterwards is very great. There was a study done which looked at families of veterans who had a member die from suicide and those who died from natural causes or from combat. And when the family member died from suicide, the adjustment was far worse. And if you think about why is that, well one of which is shame, guilt, stigma, and people ask themselves why didn't I pick up on it, what could I have done differently, what's wrong with me as a spouse I didn't pick up on this. And the reaction of others is often worse. And people described where they had friends for years, and then they just dropped them. Or they have people who would never bring it up, you know they are consumed by grief, the most important thing in your life, and people aren't talking about or if you do bring it up they change the subject. So the reaction of others is very important in the post-death adjustment. So how do you go on, just go on like you would otherwise, you rebuild your life. And if possible you connect with other survivors who have gone through very similar experiences. And the American Association of Suicidology does have survivor groups that have opportunities for people to connect with others when there's been a loved one who's died from suicide.

Kaitlin Luna: Yeah those are great resources for people. Is there any advice for the long-term impact on surviving family members and friends? I mean does it change you know right after the event versus a year or two later or five years later?

Samuel Knapp: You know, I don't know. You know, the general trend is, after a trauma people move to a baseline, but I don't know the long-term data on that. Now we do know that, statistically, you know we talked about the cluster effect, you know that statistically when a family member dies from suicide, that increases the suicide risk of everyone in the family. Now, it's even more of an effect than with a friend. And it may be that there are common biological factors that predispose a person to a mental illness, it might be a similar stressful environment, we don't know. But obviously most family members don't go on to die from suicide themselves. Other than that I don't know much about the long-term adjustment of families.

Kaitlin Luna: Well thank you so much for joining us Dr. Knapp, it's been a really wonderful conversation, very informative.


Videoni tomosha qiling: ИККИ ФАРИШТА ВА КАМБАГАЛ ОИЛА ХАКИДА РИВОЯТ (Yanvar 2022).