&gt; Well. I think you might be getting a little bit too eager with your reductionist approach to mental illness.<p>Schizophrenia is a classic case of a mental illness that isn&#x27;t one, a condition that doesn&#x27;t appear in people who don&#x27;t have a specific genetic predisposition.<p>&gt; It may not fit nicely into your mental model of the world, but biology is extremely messy business.<p>Yes, that&#x27;s true, but according to the new finding this thread is about, biology is now able to (a) detect schizophrenia in people who lack symptoms, and (b) dismiss the possibility in those who show symptoms (for example by an actor trained to imitate the symptoms). The reason? Schizophrenia isn&#x27;t a mental illness, it&#x27;s a physical illness with mental symptoms.<p>Dustin Hoffman nailed autism in &quot;Rain Man&quot;. If Mr. Hoffman appeared at a mental health clinic and performed his character, do you suppose he would be turned away by the psychiatrists as a fake? Now consider this alternative -- if there was a genetic test for autism (there isn&#x27;t at the moment), do you suppose he would be turned away by the biologists?<p>&gt; ... you have ideoligical [sic] issues with this reality.<p>Science isn&#x27;t about ideology, it&#x27;s about evidence.