Excuse me, can I see your blood?

"...It clearly indicates we can diagnose from blood and create a blood diagnosis test for depression.” *

What in the fuck is happening? Are we still really this naive?

(there is possibly some hint of understanding at the end of the video, no?)

Scientist: "Oh, look, we found it! We can now move it from subjective to objective!"(hahah, how sad)

Scientist(other): "Yay! TO THINK IT'S THAT SIMPLE?!" (yet so very difficult, no?)

------------------------------------

     So some scientists now think that because they, "isolated and identified the 26 blood markers for depression *(?) and anxiety *(?) based on decades of research with severely depressed and anxious *rats*, known to mirror many behavioral and physiological abnormalities found in patients with major depression and anxiety", they can detect depression from a blood sample...

             "The tests found 11 markers showed up in depressed teens blood and were absent in teens without depression." - link
^Does this sentence not make your head turn a little? Does it not seem a little backwards? 

     When they found those 11 "markers", did they not still have to confirm the evidence with the patients?  What if a patient comes about who displays such "markers" yet does not "report" to be depressed? What then? 

    With what other form of "illness" or "disease" do the doctors have to check with their patients to see if their diagnosis is correct? Does a doctor take blood work to check if a patient has diabetes, get a positive result, and then ask the patient him/herself for validation? Is that "science"? Is that objective? What does a blood test really fucking tell you about depression?

   Better yet: you could lie. There is no blood test for lying(yet). The doctors could say, "well according to the results of your blood test, you are depressed." and then you say "well, I'm not."(inner laughter)
What does the doctor say then?.......

   The referent for and about the data is the thing they are examining itself...I'm sorry, how does that work?

    How is it to be determined (if it should be at all) whether one is "depressed" or "anxious": by asking, listening, and trying to understand them(it)? or by doing some blood work, which already presupposes such things as "depression" and "anxiety" within a certain, specific (one could say stigmatized) psychological confinement?

-----There seems be an overarching idea here in all of this that science is trying to make it "easier" for people who may or may not be "depressed" - whatever that means and however you find that out - by eliminating the "stigmas" attached to it(them).

.....Hahaha well, where do I begin?.....well, maybe....is this science driven by our need to make ourselves feel better? is that our objective point of reference? hahah, oh my, pardon me, I don't know what's come over me...hahahhhhhhhhewholooksthehardestsquintsthemost

-------------------------------------

“Everybody, including parents, are wary of treatment, and there remains a social stigma around depression, which in the peer-pressured world of teenagers is even more devastating,” Redei said. “Once you can objectively diagnose depression as you would hypertension or diabetes, the stigma will likely disappear.” 

 Kid: (crying) "I..sniffle...I...I don't like how I feel, I don't like how other kids make me feel about how I feel.."

Scientist: "Have no fear little (girl/boy), we are working on that! Have no fear, for the Scientist is here!"

Some time passes........

 Kid: "Gee, thanks Mr. Scientist man!  Now that depression can be diagnosed like a "normal" illness, I don't have to be a freak anymore!" 

Scientist: "No problem, kid-o! After all, aren't I only here to try to make the universe a better, safer place?"

-----------------

**quotes from this  article

except for the ones that aren't