evolutionary significance of emotions !!
nick at hermit0.demon.co.uk
Fri Mar 3 13:22:07 EST 2000
In article <ex$pUfNh$GA.219 at cpmsnbbsa03>, sisial
<sisial at email.msn.com> writes
>"Nick Medford" <nick at hermit0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:++7whHAsRxv4EwVa at hermit0.demon.co.uk...
>> No, because it isn't. Lifetime prevalence for depression is generally
>> 2.5 - 4.5% for men and 5 - 9% (i.e. roughly twice as high) for women. Peak
>> age of onset is in the 30s for women and in the 40s for men.
>The 2:1 ratio is certainly more commonly used.
well, certainly more commonly than 25:1, which I have never seen
> But, it is my understanding
>that this ratio is based on an assumption that males are less likely to seek
>treatment for depression.
No. That may contribute to the lower figure in males, but the prevalence
rates are calculated from population studies, rather than guesses about what
might be happening in the people you haven't seen.
Suicide, incidentally, is commoner in males.
>I don't place much trust in data manipulation
>techniques, and chose instead an estimate based on actual reported
>incidences of major depression.
Where did you actually get your figure from? I have never seen any figures
for "actual reported incidences of depression" that would yield such a huge
discrepancy in lifetime risk for men and women.
>However, I am no statistician and there may
>be more to the 2:1 ratio than I am aware. I have no problem conceding to the
>2:1 ratio; it has no major impact on my arguments.
True: all the points about creativity are unaffected by the stats.
More information about the Neur-sci