Depression and Biological Factors - Dissertation Example

Depression and Biological Factors Introduction Depression, in today’s modern world, has become a common mental health problem regardless of race, creed, gender, sexual orientation, class or age (Stallard & et. al., 2012). Depression manifests itself in many different ways in a persistent manner. These symptoms range from tiredness and loss of energy to persistent sadness, loss of confidence and self-esteem, difficulty concentrating and making decisions, avoiding others and becoming isolated and lonely, not being able to enjoy things that are usually pleasurable or interesting, undue feelings of guilt or worthlessness, feelings of helplessness and hopelessness, sleeping problems, finding it hard to function at work/college/school, change in appetite, sexual dysfunction, physical aches and pains, suicidal ideation and self-harm (Depression Alliance, 2015; Kandel, 1998). Depression can assume the form of low mood along with an individual’s aversion towards tasks, which affects the individuals’ thoughts, sense of humor, feelings and behavior towards others (WHO, 2012). Considering the fact that controversies still prevail regarding the actual cause of depression among individuals, it is assumed that the biological, sociological and psychological factors may have an effect as its root causes in the modern context (Almeida, 2011; Schmidt & et. al., 2011; Hyde & et. al., 2008; Mossner & et. al., 2007). Correspondingly, the essay will identify and draw the arguments in favor and against the claim that depression is an outcome of biological. The essay will come to a critical evaluation of the arguments and would finally draw a conclusion on the claim in the final part of the essay. Arguments in Favor of the Claim The biological school of thought argues that depression is caused by hormones, genes and chemicals in the brain, engaged in the individual’s thinking process, which again depends on their family heredity. Heredity signifies the genetic construct of an individual that often creates an influence on an individual’s responsive nature towards the external environment. Experiments conducted in this regard revealed that owing to poor genetic constructs, an individual can accede a higher level of vulnerability to depression, even if there does not exist any negativity in the surrounding in actuality. It is thus that biological differences can lead to depression wherein physical changes in the individual’s brain can be a factor causing depressive behavior (Mayo Clinic Staff, 2014). Almeida (2011) argued that neurotransmitters are vital biological factors that can cause depression in an individual. These neurotransmitters are the naturally occurring components of brains, associated with formation of chemicals essential for its effective functioning. Emphasizing the context, Piccinelli and Wilkinson (2000) revealed that when the neurotransmitters are less, individuals face depressive moods. Moreover, the neurotransmitters bind themselves with the receptors that results in activation and excitement in the neurons. It is due to this reason that lowering of the chemical may cause depression, whereas its increase may cause mania. Contextually, common neurotransmitters include norepinephrine, dopamine and serotonin those have been identified to actively contribute to the increasing risks of depression (Piccinelli & Wilkinson, 2000). Besides, marriage related issues or problems associated with child birth and various other sociological factors imbibe the impact of the parents facing depression that in turn affects the lives of their children. In the later period of life, the depressed child may develop negative interpersonal relationships with others, under the influence of their depressed parents but majorly because of their genetic construct that forces them to consider occurrences negatively at the initial stage of justification. Furthermore, parents of children facing depression are also observed to be more hostile than naturally witnessed among sensitive parents, which also increases biological stress on their child. Under such circumstances, depression may take place because of the negative view created among the children regarding their depressed parents. Such circumstances further act as a sociological factor for depression, as it will create lack of adequate control among individuals along with high chances of conflict, lowered self-motivation levels and sense of dejection. Additionally, children who face depression at a younger stage may live uncomfortable lives in future, as they might have to depend on others to cope with the challenges faced in life (Hammen & Brennan, 2000). In addition to biological factors, societal classes among people are considered as another vital factor that may cause depression among people. Studies conducted have reflected that people in working class face high risks of depression when compared to people belonging to middle class and upper class families. Furthermore, working women are also observed to be more prone to depression owing to their high degree of involvement in job demands and random fluctuations in their work-life balance (Brown & Harris, 2012). However, concentrating on the effects of biological makers to depression, these social factors play a major role in causing changes to the genetic patterns of human brain (Mossner & et. al., 2007). In addition, gender is considered as one of the important biological factors that affect individuals’ lives through depression. Illustratively, as Cox & Brooks-Gunn (1998) argue, women often face greater chances of depression in comparison to men as they are perceived to have a weaker ability to overcome unwanted fluctuations and negativity in life, as they demand for greater stability. Contextually, with steady alterations in the social structure of the modern human society, these biological factors have become inherent as causes to depressive attitude that often explores uncontrollably (Hyde & et. al., 2008). It is worth mentioning in this context that various studies conducted have found that females experience more frequent situations of stress and encounter depression more than their male counterparts. Nevertheless, males too suffer depressed situations (Hankin & et. al., 1998). Although this contradicts the sociological pressure caused by gender roles in the society, the differing rates of depression also indicates that biological factors are the fundamental causes of biological factors. Physiological factors also play a vital role in the life of individuals who face stress in their lifestyles. Physiological factors involve physical factors that create depression among the individuals and may involve nutritional deficiencies among individuals, causing lack of healthy living and proper diet structure leading to diseases such as candida and hyperthyroidism among others. Improper functioning of adrenal system and allergy to different kind of food stuffs along with other factors may also result in depression among people with symptoms of selenium toxicity, sleep disturbances and dental problems (Safe Harbor, 2013). In contrast to the biological cause of depression, depression can be a result of the environmental factors as well. A person suffering from depression may have faced environmental challenges that created stress and consequently led to depression (Joshi, 2008). Individuals who are either prone to or have faced natural disasters including hurricanes, earthquakes and tsunamis among others, could encounter vulnerability to depression. Furthermore, individuals who have very low reaction to stressful situations can get distressed, as a result of environmental consequences like total destruction of their living after a disaster (Nemade, 2007). Although underlying all these factors are the external causes to depression, biological factors also play a vital role in shaping the behavior of individuals to cope with such situations. Contextually, Schmidt & et. al. (2011) argued that while on one hand biological factors can be observed to create a strong influence on the responsiveness of an individual to stressful situations, whether imaginary or real, on the other hand, these factors also act as biological makers, which can make an individual either least prone to depression or intensely prone to the same. Arguments against the Claim Assumptions taken in search of the root causes to depression often argue that such variances result from a combination of environmental, biological, physiological and sociological factors, which disregards the strength of biological factors as the sole causes to depressive behavior in individuals. However, in the real life scenario, the results are not verified and remain unclear among researchers and individuals, enrooting controversies in the stream. In various studies, experts have gauged that depression results from secretion of lower levels of specific neurotransmitters, including norepinephrine, serotonin and dopamine. Conversely, further studies conducted by modern experts have made it clear that depression is a result of interplay of certain causes that involve environmental, biological, physiological and sociological factors (National Institute of Mental Health, 2011). For instance, Valenstein (2002) argue that abnormal body parts and functioning of endocrine, including hypothalamus and pituitary glands play a major role in causing depression. Hence, improper body functioning that can be identified as an abnormal biological activity, is identifiable as a cause of depression. Nevertheless, Valenstein (2002) also asserts that depression may also be a result of other factors those might have been wrongfully associated with biological factors. These are stress caused due to various factors apart from feeling isolated or undergoing a trauma, smoking habits, and/or loss of attention in learning. Apparently, these factors cannot be related to biological factors according to Valenstein (2002). Taking reference from the famous book, ‘Blaming the Brain’, Valenstein (2002) argued that the writer was able to rule out the ‘Chemical Imbalance Theory’ that formed the conventional idea that depression is caused solely due to biological factors, either directly or indirectly. Disagreeing to the theory, Valenstein (2002) was able to prove that a minor decrease in the secretion of fluids such as serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine, are not responsible for depression in humans. In addition, as per Valenstein (2002), the ‘Chemical Imbalance Theory’ was unable to provide an explanation to the fact why medications are used to reduce the levels of depression, even though they seldom have an effect over neurotransmitters and certain specific fluids (Drummond, 2006). In another study by Moncrieff (2008), the findings revealed that research studies conducted on a global scale have been successful in establishing the truth that a majority of patients suffering from depression do not carry lesser level of neurotransmitter fluids including serotonin and norepinephrine. In reality, only a minor 25% of the depressed patients have lower levels of such fluids. Furthermore, a few of the patients facing depression have higher levels of fluid since their birth while people who have never built a relationship with depression since early stages, have lower levels of ‘norepinephrine and serotonin’. Claims regarding the presence of high levels of ‘monoamine oxydase’ in depressed patients were also found at an erroneous scale. However, it was worth noticing that high levels of these fluids were found in minority of patients and not among everyone facing depression, which again falsified the claim that biological factors are the sole causes to depression (Moncrieff, 2008). Another important problem that does not relate with biological factors on depression is the inability to gauge the levels of ‘norepinephrine and serotonin’ among the patients who suffer from depression. There lies a problem in the measurement of the necessary fluids as doctors’ measure these fluids by making an estimation of the transmitters and calculation of the fluid breakdown products present in the urine of the patient. This reflects the idea that the level of fluid breakdown products is required and used to assess the quantity of neurotransmitters and fluids present in the brain, which consequently gives a wrong conclusion to the state of depression (Jackson, 2005). Although vital evidences from the past show that sociological factors play a major role in causing depression, some of the facts support the truth that sociological factors causing depression, were a consequence of the inability of people to face challenges in their lives. For instance, as claimed in a report of Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc. (2007), most of the sociological factors responsible for causing depression among people are death of dear ones, marital problems, failure to achieve success and financial problems. It is in this context that studies have made it clear that these causes were personal to the individual and could have been avoided by the patient by taking precautions and necessary steps that could eliminate the prevailing stressful situations. Through social support by peers, colleagues and self-motivation, the patients could also have alleviated stressful situations (Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc., 2007). Arguably, if it can be claimed that social factors can cause depression, it can also be affirmed that social factors can assist in the prevention of depression at the very first instance. One of the best solutions to these problems is societal support. Societal support can act as one of the best alternative to medications for reducing depression levels. Peers, colleagues, family members, friends and elder, by providing depressed, shoulder, care, guidance, laughter, love, entertainment along with a plethora of additional physical and mental guidance in times of crisis, can provide societal support to the depressed. Additionally, research studies have claimed the fact that individuals are more likely to face depression in case they are left isolated when they require additional care (Cacioppo & et. al., 2006). This further reveals that biological factors are not the only reasons for depression amid individuals. Contextually, since sociological factors can be held responsible for causing depression, similarly, connecting with society and performing activities such as collective exercising, healthy diet, establishment of realistic objectives in life, can help reduce depression. Furthermore, involving oneself in tasks that reduce stress and activities that can make the depressed feel better also constitute the causes that can prohibit depression rates (Blechner, 2008). Critical Evaluation From the above arguments, it can be concluded that depression is a result of the biological, environmental, physiological and sociological factors altogether, rather than an impression caused by any of these variables single handedly. Illustratively, biological factors may involve hormones responsible for depression among people. Studies conducted by researchers have further illustrated the occurrence of hormonal changes during the depression process, as the brain is involved in some kind of activities prior to and after a depressive mood, which affects other parts of the brain. One such hormone that increases or decreases and results in depression is Cortisol whereby depressed people encounter high levels of cortisol in their hypothalamic and pituitary parts of the body (Schlimme, 2002). Assessment of the claim further revealed that an individual may face depression because of sociological factors involving unforeseen life events. These can be illustrated in terms of traumatic events involving loss or death of a beloved person, or financial limitations at a certain point of time, trauma experienced during childhood and high level of stress may be some of the additional biological factors that may cause depression among individuals (Riemann & Voderholzer, 2002). Apart from the above-mentioned social factors, depression may be caused due to marital problems, loss of earning, poverty, homelessness, violence in the living conditions, and lack of self-confidence because of abusive relationships, creation of mistrust among friends and other social factors. Above assessment also reveal that family plays a key role in the creation and elimination of the root causes of depression among individuals. On an average, around 30% of the problems faced in the marriage life results in depression of a spouse because of the emergence of hostility among the partners and absence of affection between them (Gotlib & Hammen, 2010). The example hereby reveals that social causes can also lead to depression showing ignorable correlation to biological factors. This could be justified with the above arguments wherein socialization in the personal and professional environment may result in the creation of depression among individuals. People who are unable to maintain a balance between their personal and professional lives can also face the challenges of depression imposing negative consequences on the societal abilities among the depressed people that have an effect on their functioning. This negative attitude due to depression may lead in lack of social activities, quality relations, family and group tasks and absence of effective communication with others (Callender, 2010). Furthermore, individuals facing stressful situations display lower levels of self-esteem, high level of sensitivity towards other people and consequently, become less active. A perfect example of this can be an athlete who faced stressful situations and gave poor performance during competitions. This led to his voluntary retirement from the athletics and indulged himself in negative relationship with others (Lewinsohn & et. al., 1997). According to the above arguments, physiological factors can also be identified as a contributing factor to depression. In addition to the biological and sociological factors, depression may be a result of the combination of certain environmental factors simultaneous with the physiological and psychological factors. These factors may present lowered levels of self-motivation, lack of perfectionism, sensitivity towards statements of others, feeling of getting rejected by rest of the world, high rate of chronic anxiety. Furthermore, people who carry an avoidant personality may face serious depression in their lives (BCMHAS, 2007). Furthermore, depression may be a result of differing thinking patterns among individuals. These thinking patterns refer to the thought process of individuals such as overstressing upon the negative factors that result in stressful situations, taking accountability of the failures and leaving the success achieved. Depression can also occur among people, as they carry inflexible rules regarding the behavior of their partners and colleagues (Centre for Clinical Interventions, n.d.). Conclusion The study was conducted to assess the claim that depression is a result of the biological factors. Correspondingly, the essay tried to establish the meaning of depression, the effects of depression and the ways it could be treated. The findings obtained therewith further revealed that biological factors, such as neurotransmitters and lack of fluids could result in the overall creation of stressful circumstances. According to the obtained research findings, sociological factors, such as lack of social integration and absence of opportunities for career advancements can be addressed as responsible factors to depression. The study discussed the claims on how biological factors, sociological factors, physiological factors and environmental factors were responsible for depression among people. For instance, physiological factors such as chronic anxiety and lack of self-motivation can definitely lead to depression. The paper also outlined the impression caused by environmental factors such as pollution and natural calamities that establishes a relationship between the prevalence of negative biological factors and depression. Finally, the critical evaluation constructed aimed at establishing the importance of the claim that depression was actually a result of biological factors, but was falsified owing to stronger claims that together with biological factors, physiological and sociological elements play a major role in controlling the depressive mood swings in individuals. Nevertheless, there exists a huge scope for future research, to identify the root causes of depression, common to a mass of individuals. References Almeida, L. C., 2011. Environment, Biologic Rhythms, Depression and EM Radiations. Research Journal of Environmental and Earth Sciences, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 81-89. BCMHAS, 2007. What causes depression? Depression in the Workplace. [Online] Available at: http://www.comh.ca/antidepressant-skills/work/workbook/pages/section1-04.cfm [Accessed January 25, 2015]. Blechner, M. J., 2008. Interaction of Social and Neurobiological Factors In Depression. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 571-580. Brown, G. W. & Harris, T., 2012. Social Origins of Depression: A Study of Psychiatric Disorder in Women. Routledge. Cacioppo, J. T. & et. al., 2006. Loneliness as a Specific Risk Factor for Depressive Symptoms: Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analyses. Psychology and Aging, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 140-151. Callender, K. A., 2010. The Effects of Parental Depression, Cognitions, and Discipline on Later Child Externalizing Behavior. Parental Depression, Cognitions, and Discipline, pp. 1-60. Centre for Clinical Interventions, No Date. What Causes Depression. Docs. [Online] Available at: http://www.cci.health.wa.gov.au/docs/ACFAE4.pdf [Accessed January 25, 2015]. Cox, M. J. & Brooks-Gunn, J., 1998. Conflict and Cohesion in Families: Causes and Consequences (Advances in Family Research Series). Routledge. Depression Alliance, (2015) What is depression? Retrieved January 29, from: http://www.depressionalliance.org/ Drummond, E. H., 2006. The Complete Guide to Psychiatric Drugs: Straight Talk for Best Results. John Wiley & Sons. Gotlib, I. H. & Hammen, C. L., 2010. Handbook of Depression. Guilford Press. Hammen, C. & Brennan, P. A., 2000. Depressed Adolescents of Depressed and Nondepressed Mothers: Tests of an Interpersonal Impairment Hypothesis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 284-294. Hankin, B. L. & et. al., 1998. Development of Depression From Preadolescence to Young Adulthood: Emerging Gender Differences in a 10-Year Longitudinal Study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 107, No. 1, pp. 128-140. Hyde, J. S. & et. al., 2008. The ABCs of Depression: Integrating Affective, Biological, and Cognitive Models to Explain the Emergence of the Gender Difference in Depression. Psychological Review, Vol. 115, No. 2, pp. 291–313. Jackson, MD G. E., 2005. Rethinking Psychiatric Drugs: A Guide for Informed Consent. Author House. Joshi, S. M., 2008. The Sick Building Syndrome. Indian J Occup Environ Med., Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 61-64. Kandel, E. R., 1998. A New Intellectual Framework for Psychiatry. Am J Psychiatry, Vol. 155, No. 4, pp. 457-469. Lewinsohn, P. M., & et. al., 1997. Depression-Related Psychosocial Variables: Are They Specific to Depression in Adolescents? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 106, No. 3, pp. 365-375. Mayo Clinic Staff, 2014. Depression (Major Depressive Disorder). Diseases and Conditions. [Online] Available at: http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/depression/basics/causes/con-20032977 [Accessed January 25, 2015]. Moncrieff, J., 2008. The Myth of the Chemical Cure: A Critique of Psychiatric Drug Treatment. Palgrave Macmillan. Mossner, R. & et. al., 2007. Consensus paper of the WFSBP Task Force on Biological Markers: Biological Markers in Depression. The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 141-174. National Institute of Mental Health, 2011. Depression. Health. [Online] Available at: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/depression/depression-booklet_34625.pdf [Accessed January 25, 2015]. Nemade, R., 2007. Lifestyle Factors and Environmental Causes of Major Depression. Depression: Major Depression & Unipolar Varieties. [Online] Available at: http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=13012&cn=5 [Accessed January 25, 2015]. Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc., 2007. Preventing Recurrent Depression: Long-Term Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 214-223. Piccinelli, M. & Wilkinson, G., 2000. Gender Differences in Depression. British Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 177, pp. 486-492. Riemann, D. & Voderholzer, U., 2002. Primary insomnia: a risk factor to develop depression? Journal of Affective Disorders, Vol. 76, pp. 255-259. Safe Harbor, 2013. The Physical Causes (And Solutions) Of Depression. International Guide to the World of Alternative Medical Health. [Online] Available at: http://www.alternativementalhealth.com/articles/depression.htm [Accessed January 25, 2015]. Schlimme, M., 2002. The Neurobiological Factors Associated with Depression. 2002 First Paper. [Online] Available at: http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro02/web1/mschlimme.html [Accessed January 25, 2015]. Schmidt, H. D. & et. al., 2011. Functional Biomarkers of Depression: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Pathophysiology. Neuropsychopharmacology, Vol. 36, pp. 2375–2394. Stallard, P. & et. al., 2012. Classroom based cognitive behavioural therapy in reducing symptoms of depression in high risk adolescents: pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ, pp. 1-13. Valenstein, E., 2002. Blaming the Brain: The Truth about Drugs and Mental Health. Simon and Schuster. WHO, 2012. Depression. Media Centre. [Online] Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs369/en/ [Accessed January 25, 2015]. Read More