I am a living case in point... When I was unwell my hospital notes show me stating many times that the water had made me sick, this was seen evidence of psychosis. 6 weeks later it was discovered I was physically run down due to giardia which I had contracted during the last part of my pregnancy. Night sweats and teeth grinding had caused broken sleep and broken teeth (hence mercury exposure). While disrupted digestion probably had caused poor nutrition absorption and depletion, especially after a c-section and two weeks of feeding baby.

Not once did a doctor or family member apologize for not picking up the prenatal distress, not believing me while in hospital or even acknowledge I was correct after the fact. The impact of the m/h diagnosis was a year where I could hardly remember my own name, breastfeed or enjoy my baby due to medication, negative power shifts in my marriage, loss of self esteem and self belief as well as career. I am sharing this not for pity but to give mental health professionals an idea of the cascade of impact when a simple organic cause is overlooked. I was lucky it was 20 years ago or I could probably add obesity, diabetes and heart failure to the impact list. Huge prices to pay for a small amoeba that could have been sorted with a single dose of medication.

Take a look at the Canadian company Truehope and their product EMPowerplus. They have won the right in court to claim therapeutic benefit of minerals, vitamins and amino-acids. Their research is huge, their 10+ history of success stories is impressive and I can personally attest to the effectiveness of nutrition for coming off mental health drugs and sustaining well being. Also look at the author Patrick Holford, his book 'Optimum nutrition for the mind' is very detailed and will answer any questions you have as it has at least 500 studies quoted. His work is a continuation of the work done by Abraham Hoffer which was indorsed by Linus Pauling.

The strength model of Self-Control may be related to what you are looking for.

Baumeister, R., Vohs, K., & Tice, D.,(2007) The Strength Model of Self-Control. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 16(6) 351-335, doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00534.x

Mo, can we clarify, you seem to be asking about models, rather than about any particular findings; is that right?

That is correct, models are the prior matter of interest.

Then it's a very qood question - if only because I, at least, don;'t know who has even attempted to raise it before.

The recent UK summary of evidence on mental capital and well-being has a whole section on nutrition, wellbeing and SES:

http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/foresight/docs/mental-capital/sr-e17_mcw.pdf

But it seems to have pre-supposed a biological/ethological link with stress (following Richard Wilkinson's work) and so it uses socio-economic status as a proxy measure of low status and stress, rather than exploring actual social relations for their causal role ( a common feature of much of this strand, sadly).

In most areas of mental health, I personally would regard the bio-psycho-social model as the default place to start from. But that is a minority view; most researchers tend to follow eirther at best a psychological model, or at worst a cruder version of the bio-medical model (if only because that is where the funding tends to be; so let's not blame the medics themselves; psychiatrists I have known tend in their practice to give far more credence to the psycho-social...)

I suspect, meanwhile, that you will get more traction if you winnow down "mental function" into more specific areas, such as common mental health problems of depression and anxiety; substance abuse and eating disorders; behavioural problems and/or conduct disorders amongst children and/or aduts; and finally, psychosis.

Or if you already do have a particular focus or purpose in mind - do say?

James Jackson of Harvard published an article@ American Journal of Public Health that may be related to this issue, on the fringe. He showed that in the inner city, fast food places provide a cheap & quick bite to eat...and high fat / high carb food provide physiological stress relief for these individuals who are usually impoverished / under distress. While they are temporarily relieved of their mental / emotional distress, over time, they suffer from higher rates of cardio-vascular disorder. If interested, I have the PDF.

The intention is to interconnect recent findings on nutrition effects with mental functions, behaviour and mental disorders. The work is desired to be from a bio-social-perspective, since it appears to be considerably holistic. For not finding a broad enough model, it seems i have to create one myself.

Poor outcomes in some patiens beeing treated with recent psychotherapeutic treatments as well as poor long term effects of many therapies, including many somatic approaches, are, in my opinion, largely due to missing out central aspects concerning the natural habitate Homo Sapiens evolved in until the Neolithic revolution. Considering a Meso-/Neolithic diet, regular exercise, moderate sun exposure all year round, a mainly sun-guided sleep-wake state, as well as the reduction in nocturnal noise, exposure to mineral gas exhaust fumes, convenience foods, some food additives and the majority of drugs might increase the chance of positive treatment outcome by vast amounts.

This above-mentioned work on nutrition is supposed to be one corner stone, empirically covering the importance of nutrition.

Please read on Metrabolic Correction.

Article Metabolic Correction: A Functional Explanation of Orthomolec...

Here is a contribution from a biopsychological approach, but it concerns only one of the many mental functions (so it fits to Robins suggestion to winnow):

http://tinyurl.com/38ktkws

Despite not being a part of a large theoretical framework, it may embedded in the above mentioned theories. E.g., it stresses that carb food is not “bad” per se, but was an important resource. Concerning the considerations above, it still may be under certain conditions (impaired executive functioning in mental disorders, self-regulation in healthy people...).

Hi

I would also look at James Coan's Social Baseline Theory (https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2F70-40-200-36.bluehost.com%2Fdocuments%2FSocialBaselineTheory.pdf&ei=0ghjUZT9AoSM4ASo2oGIAQ&usg=AFQjCNGgmucfhhxibUCkG26S7lEB2Xn8LQ).

It depends on what mental functions and behavior you are interested in. there are quite a few studies focusing on things like carbohydrate cravings, depression, and PMS as they relate to consumption of snacks and carbohydrates. There are also quite a few studies relating to breakfast consumption and the type of food eaten as it relates to academic activities. Just go into the literature and you will find many studies. If you do a PsychINFO search under my name you will find some review articles on this topic. You can also look under Bonnie Spring and find many studies as well as Richard and Judith Wortman.

The model is called orthomolecular nutrition and it has a long and distinguished history. Mo please have a look at Patrick Holford's Optimum nutrition of the mind book, 500 studies supporting nutrition as a primary intervention in mental health care. 13 direct causes of distress including blood sugar imbalance. All the omega-3 studies of children with ADD and ADHD compared and discussed. 5 vitamins that in deficiency directly cause psychosis. Also Simon Yu, Accidental cure for information on parasites and Vit C mega doses.

Great point Heather!

I respectfully disagree regarding the statement that orthomolecular nutrition "has a long and distinguished history". While I have not looked at that specific approach in some time, when I did I found that it did cite many studies supposedly supporting that approach but looking at the specific details of the studies revealed many rival hypotheses and good science has typically not supported this model.

Larry what is good science? remember "All truth passes through 3 stages:

First its ridiculed, second it is violently oppossed, third is accepted as being self evident" Arthur Schopenhauer

Michael, by good science I mean studies that eliminate rival hypotheses, that provide good controls that allow one to draw a good conclusion that the nutritional variable being investigated is the one that is causing the change in behavior, mental function, etc. When Hoffer's studies using such criteria were investigated no effect was found. this is why his orthomolecular approach continues to be a fringe therapy. I just did a literature search to see if additional studies had been done that would cause me to change my position. I did not find such studies. Rather, I just found articles advocating the orthomolecular approach and trying to convince the reader that because the brain and whole body needs nutrition and supposedly it is not receiving appropriate nutrition, then the orthomolecular nutrition approach is the type of therapy that should be used. This is not an evidence based approach and I will take an evidence based approach anytime over someone's opinion. Your statement that truth passes through 3 stages misses the critical one of being investigated using specific criteria that allows one to draw good causal conclusions. It is only when it has passsed this critical test that it will be accepted and part of the mainstream. Without passing such a test it will continue to be fringe and never accepted which is the way it should be.

Larry "ïf everybody is thinking alike then no one is thinking"Ben Franklin.Hoffer studies were investigated by who?The same psychiatrists that investigated Feingold that when asked in private used his protocol to treat their children hyperactivity? Larry where are you looking at? You have to read papers by Dr. Bruce Ames.Have you read about the concept of metabolic Correction? It is not opinion is cutting edge science.

"Discovery is seen what everybody else has seen but thinking what nobody else has thought" You have to keep an open mind Larry!

World wide we have an attack on natural healing from all sides that has been going on for a long time. Right now in New Zealand I am part of the group fighting The Natural Health Products Bill. One by one safe natural products are being taken out of general circulation and taken up as 'medicine' , represented as prescription only and many times more expensive. Scientific studies such as the huge one on Vit E and prostrate cancer spread negative media but when it is show that they used a synthetic Vit E from a petrochemical source rather than natural whole Vit E the general media did not make any retractions. It is impossible to have an unbiased opinion if you only look mainstream science.

Yes natural health producers also indulge in marketing and some use dodgy fillers etc so here in NZ a industry lead regulation was created which is being ignored by the government. People simply want to take care of their health with simple common sense metabolic correction when it has deviated away from health. We should not have to fight 'health professionals' and our governments in order to do that.

Heather there are two easy ways of producing negative studies on dietary supplements,1-Using the wrong form. 2- Using the wrong Dose, both extremely common in the "Good Science" literature.

I'm so on the fence about orthomolecular approaches and that is because many of the people I have come into contact with have made general all-or-nothing sweeping statements that suggest all mental-health problems are 'caused' by nutritional deficiencies. This I do not agree with or find strong evidence for. But I do think these approaches are very useful. Not in the least due to the fact that stress places additional demands upon the body and that these additional demands likely need to be met with additional nutrition. The body is under duress, just as much as the mind, and it needs to be boosted up to deal with the onslaught. Also because when people are unwell they tend to neglect good nutrition and this likely compounds and helps maintain problems like low energy, poor mood, anxiety etc. These two factors mean that nutrition is important in mental-health. I wouldn't go so far as to say they are the sole underlying factor for the vast majority of people, but I think it's doing many people a disservice to not attend to this aspect of their wellbeing - I've seen it make a big difference for some. Also, the act of taking time to care for one's body through good nutrition is an act of self-care and self-valuing that I think likely has really positive psychological effects.

All brain disease related to glucose lavel presence of emotional lavel.

Miriam lets put it this way nutrition is important for neurotransmitter balance that is key to mental health. Nutritional deficiencies or insufficiencies profoundly affect neurotransmitter production due to insufficient co factors/ precursors for these non survival physiological reactions.This concept is based on the Triage hypothesis by Bruce Ames.

Yes absolutely. That doesn't seem at all controversial to me, it seems logical. Though I don't really occupy a biological standpoint on mental health problems. Which is where orthomolecular approaches lose me, they forget the psycho-social part of the equation and focus in on the biological. I do agree this is very important. For myself, back before I became an academic, I went through my own recovery journey, nutrition was part of the puzzle, but it wasn't the whole puzzle. I have always been intrigued by the notion of competing theories, when it seems to me that each has something to offer.

Miriam I see your point but coming from a public health background, its been the other way around. First and second psycho-social and no Biological/Biochemical.

I truly believe we should correct the Biochemical dearrangements first and this will facilitate all psycho-social interventions. Your point is well taken that each approach has something to offer and should be combined in an integrative approach.

Yes I agree - it's such a simple thing, trying it first seems like an all round good idea. It's really odd how little attention is paid to such a basic thing. Some services likely add to the problem with poor quality food and no ability to control the diet in acute units and supported residential services. If we're in need biologically, it is very difficult to be able to do the psycho-social. There's another issue worth mentioning here, possibly unrelated, but I doubt it. This is the issue that people with mental-health problems just don't tend to be given the same number of physical health tests or be taken seriously when they mention symptoms that could have a physical cause. Stigma leads many professionals to assume everything a person says is the related to their mental-health problem, and tend not to look further. Part of the reason for the increased mortality rates.

Excellent point Miriam!

I am a living case in point... When I was unwell my hospital notes show me stating many times that the water had made me sick, this was seen evidence of psychosis. 6 weeks later it was discovered I was physically run down due to giardia which I had contracted during the last part of my pregnancy. Night sweats and teeth grinding had caused broken sleep and broken teeth (hence mercury exposure). While disrupted digestion probably had caused poor nutrition absorption and depletion, especially after a c-section and two weeks of feeding baby.

Not once did a doctor or family member apologize for not picking up the prenatal distress, not believing me while in hospital or even acknowledge I was correct after the fact. The impact of the m/h diagnosis was a year where I could hardly remember my own name, breastfeed or enjoy my baby due to medication, negative power shifts in my marriage, loss of self esteem and self belief as well as career. I am sharing this not for pity but to give mental health professionals an idea of the cascade of impact when a simple organic cause is overlooked. I was lucky it was 20 years ago or I could probably add obesity, diabetes and heart failure to the impact list. Huge prices to pay for a small amoeba that could have been sorted with a single dose of medication.