5 ms·
I'm sorry - you are wrong. John Cade found the effects - with animals - by accident. And he was widely ignored because of his lack of fundamental, industry-wide
by reneberlin 7y ago
I'm sorry - you are wrong. John Cade found the effects - with animals - by accident. And he was widely ignored because of his lack of fundamental, industry-wide standards for exploration.
Neverless: lithium is now the way to go with clinical treatment of a wide range of disorders and reducing self-harm and suicide rates.
The problem so far: nobody is sure why it works.
The dose is worth mentioning. Clients receive a dose of 200-500mg per day. The lithium you can buy without prescription contains around 1mg. Effects are still there, but the dose on the subjects of matter are quite high and can be toxic if done wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_(medication) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_(medication)
- tokai 7y agoDevelopment of lithium treatment involved a lot more than John Cade's accident. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bdi.12739 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bdi.12739
- phkahler 7y agoWish we knew why it works. But it's also nice that something is accepted based on data alone. Many people in science tend to reject claims based on a lack of explanation alone. But that's the whole point - observe and then try to figure out why or how.
- gus_massa 7y ago> Many people in science tend to reject claims based on a lack of explanation alone. Do you have a good example? Most of the examples I think of are just results got by badly run clinical trials or unreproducible physics experiments.
- ncmncm 7y agoPsychiatrists say the difference between a dose where you start to see some effect, and the toxic dose, is often only 1:2. So experimenting with lithium is hazardous and needs careful, almost, titration.