Introduction: The purpose of this study was to examine whether the combination of atypical and typical antipsychotic medications is related with metabolism and cognitive functions in the same manner and degree as taking medications of one kind only, i.e. atypical or typical.
Material and methods: The participants of the study comprised of 91 adults with diagnosed mental illness (F-20-F69). The participants were divided into groups on the basis of the kind of administered medications: T+A (typical and atypical medications), A (atypical medications), T (typical medications), P (antidepressants, sedatives, normothymic/antiepileptic drugs). In the study, Short Test of Mental Status (STMS), Verbal Fluency Test (VFT), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) were used for the purpose of examining cognitive functions.
Results: The kind of antipsychotic medications taken by the patients did not differentiate the group in relation to BMI (p<0.13), nor in relation to the level of general cognitive function (p<0.72) or verbal fluency (p<0.34). Both atypical antipsychotic medications and the combination of atypical and typical medications were related to the occurrence of abdominal obesity (p<0.01). An increase in waist circumference decreased an ability of abstract reasoning (p<0.005). When it comes to the body mass index, waist circumference negatively correlated with the delayed memory (p< 0.03, p<0.004).
Discussion: Both the combination of atypical and typical antipsychotic medications and atypical medications are associated with the occurrence of abdominal obesity. The deposition of fat tissue in the abdomen negatively correlated with an ability to learn.
Conclusions: The future studies might explain the interactions between antipsychotic medications, obesity and cognitive function.
approached political theory. Dialogue, rather than abstractreasoning by a sole reasoner or identical identity-less individuals, has motivated multiculturalists. They assume that the context for politics is already thoroughly imbued with dominant ways of thinking and doing—with cultural orientations such as national history and language, with religious and/or secular perspectives, with institutional norms and so on—and that these contextual factors cannot be abstracted out so as to identify a set of culture-–free problems. Moreover, the relationship between the relevant
References 1. Breuning, M. The Role of Analogies and AbstractReasoning in Decision-Making: Evidence from the Debate over Truman’s Proposal for Development Assistance, International Studies Quarterly 47 (2), 2003, pp. 229-245. 2. Brunel, F., Tietje, B., Greenwald, A. Is the Implicit Association Test a Valid and Valuable Measure of Implicit Consumer Social Cognition? 2003. 3. Gentner, D., & Loewenstein, J. Learning: Analogical Reasoning. Encyclopedia of Education, Second Edition , New York: Macmillia, 2003. 4. Gentner, D. & Maravilla, F. Analogical reasoning
by Anderson showed that difference between cognitive
domains are marked less by differences in neural circuitry and more by different patterns
of cooperation between mostly shared circuitry (5). Coalitions of neural circuitry tempo-
rarily assembled support specific cognitive tasks. In short, “language and motor control
and memory and vision and abstractreasoning—perception, action, cognition—are all
supported by a shared pool of domain-unrestricted functional components” (5).
Other studies bring arguments for the idea that in some cases it is difficult to