Posted by so on July 17, 2005, at 23:13:26 [reposted on July 22, 2005, at 14:23:30 | original URL]
In reply to People it is, then... » so, posted by chemist on July 17, 2005, at 22:03:26
Chemist, it would be easier for me to maintain a dialogue with you if you were to recognize my premises as I offer them.
It is difficult for me to understand and respond to your interest in a publication that is only tangentally relevant to the discussion as the source of a quote from a relevant, qualified expert. I am certain the the statement from the well-qualified source who said no diagnostic test is available to identify a specific "chemical imbalance" could as well be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps you could address your review comments to the merit of his statement, instead of to the merits of the forum where the APA president's statement appeared.
> hello there, chemist here...my comments delineated by asterisks, below....all the best, chemist
>> *** yes..."People" magazine! ***
> *** very far. all the way to Las Vegas, at least...***
>
> *** you are correct. i would not know so much about Brad and Jennifer if my dentist did not subscribe to "People." ***
>>
> *** i think there are plenty of peer-reviewed journals which regularly include - if not focus upon - the living populace. in fact, many manuscripts are written and read by the living. however, i will take your word for it, throw away my library card, and look no further than "People" for such information. ***Could you try to better understand my words if you are going to represent that you accept my statements as worthwhile? If anything, I have advocated that you might consider expanding your scope of interest; I have not suggested that you limit your scope by restricting your reading to a magazine even I rarely find interesting or informative. However, I'm sure many intelligent and interesting people find People magazine an interesting and informative read, and I don't want my lack of interest in the publication to appear as a put-down for those who do find it interesting. Different people have different interests.
> > *** does "People" offer legal advice?
I'm sure they advise their reporters on matters related to who is a public figure and who is fair game for media comment.
> >
> > > ***"People" magazine, the APA, and your thorough tracking of all media aside,***Please try to accurately represent my interest in popular literature if you are going to cite my interests, especially when I have stated this particular popular publication is seldom any more interesting to me than it is to you.
> > ***the understanding and dissemination of the phenomenon known as chemical equilibrium has been addressed long ago and is not an opinion and/or a well-kept secret.****
The concept of "Chemical imbalance" has not been connected to Le Chevelier's Principle in any scientific literature I have seen or that you have cited to this forum.
> >
> > But that century old principle has not been conclusively or even generally connected in any scientific or popular literature that I know of
>
> *** well, until now: "People!" ***Perhaps you have seen it connected there, but the quote from the APA president I cited and attributed to People magazine indicated the contrary -- that it has not been connected by any diagnositic test.
>
> *** sorry, but you are incorrect here: i did not cite any source or mention Pfizer at all. you have confused me and my posts with those of some other person. or "People," as it may well be...***
I did not say you cited any source or mentioned Pfizer. I asserted, as you now concur, that you have not cited any source beyond a centuries-old fundamental principle of chemistry. I attributed the "chemical imbalance" concept in part to Pfizer marketing literature, and did not claim that you had similarly attributed the concept to that or any other source more recent than Le Chevelier.
>
> *** and they advertise in "People," right? ***again, I ask, what is the relevance of People Magazine in this context besides the fact that the president of the APA considered them a legitimate outlet and responded to their interview questions by confirming the absence of diagnostic tests to identify the role of a "chemical imbalance" in any particular individual mental problem?
Do you concur that the president of the APA is a qualified expert in the matter of whether a specific diagnostic test exists to reveal a "chemical imbalance"?
>> *** well, regardless of Liz Smith's position, i am going to begin reading "People" cover-to-cover...thanks so much for the heads-up! all the best, chemist ***Could you please try not to attribute to me advice, qualified or not, that I have not offered?
poster:so
thread:529166
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20050718/msgs/531643.html