• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio

A drug that can erase memories

I haven't seen much research on the use of this drug for treatment of PTSD.

As I recall, though, the original hypothesis was that an administration of the drug would be optimal immediately following a traumatic event, thereby preventing the consolidation of the memory and the associated response. I would be far less optimistic about the use of the drug simply in exposure therapy. For exposure therapy to be effective, the patient MUST be able to experience some of the undesired reactions to the stimulus.

I do recall some speculation that the drug might be useful in weakening an emotional association of the memory of an event, if it is administered in conjunction with evoking a recall, but this always struck me as highly, highly speculative.

The fact is that we simply don't know enough about how memory really works for this to be anything but speculative. Access to memories seems to involve the recreation of a certain "state" of the brain, and is extraordinarily complex. We're still struggling to understand why, for example, sufferers of various forms of dementia can nonetheless have lucid moments, or "good days," in which they seem to regain access to various long-term memories that were thought to be lost.

The goal of treating PTSD is not to remove all emotional salience from the memory; I'm not sure that's really possible. The goal is simply to stop the adverse symptoms of PTSD from recurring, e.g. nightmares, inappropriate hypervigilance, obsessive recall of the memory, and so forth.

It's perfectly normal to retain the memory of a horrible event with some degree of horror, or grief, or anger, such emotions being experienced again upon recall. That's not a symptom of PTSD. That's a symptom of being human.

What I found most intriguing about the speculation regarding this drug, to be honest, is in its preventive potential. We focus an enormous amount of attention on the treatment of PTSD, but comparatively little on preventive measures. I'd like to see more focus on the latter, and view this as fertile ground for new research.
 
Heuristic said:
We focus an enormous amount of attention on the treatment of PTSD, but comparatively little on preventive measures. I'd like to see more focus on the latter, and view this as fertile ground for new research.
Click to expand...

Can there be a chemical preventive measure for PTSD when the events that create it are usually unpredictable and arbitrary? E.g a violent car crash, a rape, witnessing a murder.

There are only two contexts I can imagine something like this being of use - to give to frontline emergency workers, or to give to soldiers, which is obviously a really bad idea.
 
^ yes, I have first responders and soldiers in mind. I don't see anything wrong with that. There is nothing productive or useful about PTSD.

I'm not simply referring to chemical preventive measures, though I think they should be a part of any broad research effort.
 
I think the concern is the government abusing this drug to push soldiers to commit even more horrific acts with little threat of psychological repercussions. It would seem the vividness of a negative memory is essential to instilling guilt in people who commit heinous acts knowingly. If you can burn a village and rape children with no negative association why would you care to speak out against it when your ass is on the line?
 
Thanks World, and I appreciate the opportunity to address the concern. That's not what this drug does. It doesn't turn the soldier into someone who has lost all moral compass, and is enabled to commit horrible war crimes without guilt.

As I said, we're talking specifically about PTSD---not normal guilt, anguish, or grief, that might follow an encounter.

Let me put it this way... the hypothesis isn't that the drug will alter a soldier's personality, so that he can commit war crimes without a second thought. The hypothesis is that, for soldiers who need it, we may be able to prevent contact with the carnage of war from turning into PTSD. The soldier's personality, his aversion to doing certain things, etc., are all intact.

I'm getting the sense that some of you think that PTSD is what soldiers should expect at the end of a tour.

That's flat wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top