Posted by Phillip Marx on January 14, 2000, at 16:08:24
In reply to Re: internet addiction, posted by Adam on January 12, 2000, at 18:28:39
> > McLean Hospital, the local loony b- -- err, psych hospital...
>
> My father was fond of the term "booby hatch" until his son landed in one.
>
> As for internet addiction, I find I'm sucked in sometimes (search engines, esp. Alta Vista and MedLine advanced searches w/ all those funky boolean operators you can throw in) and it's tough to pull away. I've stopped checking during work hours, and I try not to go online after certain hours b/c it's just another insomnia enabler (and I need that like a hole in the head/trepanation). It's weird. Just slip out of the cycle of checking/reward/more checking for less reward, the desire just kind of goes away, or falls to a healthy level. Behavioral therapy has taught me well.This forum has many that are very aware of brain chemical "touchiness" from and without medicinal effects. The brain-body "approves" of anything that "dithers" it's internal well-being appraisers towards anything greener. This sense-of-internal-approval/improvement craves encores, which affects volitional predispositions. Just for laughs that aren't so funny, search just the chemical effects in the reports you come up with under the following search terms. Please, please, completely ignore the social statistics research that also comes up, look at the hard-cold-reproducible, indisputable laboratory bio-chemical facts only. Aren't those chemicals AWE-Fully familiar?
I use Google.com for super fast searches.
Search:
EMF
EMFRAPIDDO NOT be surprised at what happens to human microchemistry. Put a solar cell in front of your internet monitor screen and hook it up to an oscilloscope and see just what information frequencies you are forcing your brain's visual field of view (FOV) analyzer/interpreters to synchronize to. Be objective. There is a specific APA disorder under which EMF-related suspicions are listed. Don't let your mood get upset and destabilize your medicine-balance. Phobia labels have both pro and con criteria. I wonder where the APA documents UP orders? I'll list it if I stumble across it again. Stick to the instrumented scientific facts and you can avoid being labelled as phobic, maybe.
For nausea regarding R&D integrity, go back afterwards and read the social research. Not many reconciliations of the "facts" will be dead-center between the two extremes is my guess.
pm
poster:Phillip Marx
thread:17556
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000112/msgs/18940.html