Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 14:50:39
In reply to Re: Lou's defense-ehynupsong, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 13:36:08
> > > > Lou Pilder.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for replying to my question.
> > > >
> > > > > > > ...the drug that they are promoting.
> > > >
> > > > > > What do you mean by "promoting"? Do you think I have motives to suggest the efficacy of drugs for reasons that are not altruistic? I feel accused and put-down.
> > > >
> > > > > Then, the post here in the link talks about taking Topomax. As I understand the grammatical structure of the statement, it is offering Topomax as something that the mother could have the child take which in my understanding of the word {promotion}, could include as that as being advocated.
> > > >
> > > > I feel accused. You are paraphrasing my words and substituting "advocate" for "promote". You now add "advocate" as if the definitions for these two words were the same. I did not promote Topamax. "Promote" is the word you first used to describe my behavior. You did not use the word "advocate".
> > > >
> > > > SLS: "One more tool to be aware of is Topamax. It works for mixed states, as does Depakote. Topamax treatment must be initiated at a very low dosage and titrated gradually in order to avoid cognitive side effects. 100 mg may be all that is needed. I have seen it work wonders for mixed states. Topamax is known to produce weight loss, just in case that is an issue."
> > > >
> > > > This is simply education and support.
> > > >
> > > > Just to address your characterization my use of my grammer, I think it would have been appropriate for you to have included a quotation of my words so that they could be scrutinized. I did not suggest that anyone take Topamax. Clearly, I suggested that the poster be aware of the existence of Topamax. I did not promote nor advocate that it be used.
> > > >
> > > > I do advocate the use of Topamax for bipolar disorder. I currently do not promote it. Perhaps I will in the future.
> > > >
> > > > Promote:
> > > >
> > > > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/promote
> > > >
> > > > "to encourage the sales, acceptance, etc., of (a product), especially through advertising or other publicity."
> > > >
> > > > This is not a question of grammer. It is a question of diction.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Scott
> > >
> > > Friends,
> > > The post above is one that I think can go a long way to undertsanding the issues here. I will include the link to the post in question here to go back to in order to see the issues involved.
> > > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010901.html
> > > Now bw advised that in situations like this, the words in question can become what is what. It is what can be seen, not what the maker of the words says that it means after the fact, but in most of the cases that I have prosecuted, the defendant raises to the judge/magistrate that the word means something different.
> > > Now here is how those type of cases haave been handled in my cases:
> > > The rule is that it is not what the person who is the maker of the word says that it means, or the one contesting the word's meaning says that it means, but what a reasonable person could think that it means. I know of only one case that then went further as to that the phrase {reasonable person} was contested to mean.
> > > Also the magistrate/judge usually states that the plaintif can not invoke what they want the word to mean, except by dictionary definition and such. This is because the defendant does not have to be a mind-reader.
> > > Now in the case at hand here, there are three words that the maker of the document in question here is bringing up. First, he is the maker of the words, I am defending my post from what I read that he made with his words. I can not tell what he wants to mean after the fact, for I could only post my response as seeing the words before the fact. Now let's look at the words....to be contimued
> > > Lou
> >
> > Friends,
> > There are three words here that I read {in their context} that as considering myself a reasonable person, responded with the understnding of what the words could mean.The three words are: tool, promote and advocate.
> > The generally accepted meaning of {tool} is that it is ssomething that facilitates getting a job done correctly.
> > The generally accepted meaning of to {advocate}, is to write in favor of or be supportive of its inclusion in or for something. This usually happens in what is referred to as a {testamonial} of praise.
> > The generally accepted meaning of {promote} is to write something that one could think to adopt because there is language that {raises above} what else is in that set of things being talked about.
> > Now in this case, we have the maker of the words stating:
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msg/1010901.html
> > Let's see how a resonable person could think as to what the maker of the post could be meaning.
> > Lou
> >
>
> Friends,
> Here is the link to the post in question that the words are in discussion.
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010901.html
> In the forst statement, the context is defined. The daughter might be experiancing a bipolar mixed-state.
> Noew the maker of the words in question responds to that context. The statements are:
> A. One more tool to be aware of is Topomax.
> B. It works for mixed-states
> C. I have seen it work wonders for mixed-states
> D. Mixed states are not pleasant for the sufferer
> Now I am "the defendant" here as I am defending my response as being what a reasonable person could think when reading the words in question in it's context.
> Inj (A), the maker writes that Topomax is a tool, and one more tool. So Topomax could be thought by a reasonable person to a drug that could be included in the tool-box to facilitate helping the mother to get the doctor/psychitrist to prescribe the drug to the daughter.
> Then in {B}, the maker of the word state that it {works} for mixed-states. This is a testamoniial of that in the maker of the words thinking, it could be good to get the daughter to take the drug via the psychiatris/doctor to prescribe the drug because it {works}.
> Then in {C},the maker of the words states that he has eseen it work wonders for mixed-states. This type of ttestamonial {raises above} the others in consideration which could be thought to be a promotion of the drug by a reasonable person.
> Then in {D], the unpleasentness of the sufferer of the mixed state is brought in. This could be thought by a reasonable person to be an advoction to take the drug because the promis that it works from the previous statement gives rise to an advoction to take it to stop the mixed stte because it works ccording to the maker of the wordss. The maker of the words is speaking in favor of the drug, which could be thought to be advocating that the drug be taken, in this case by the daughter. In fact, the mother is confronted with {what if she doesn't go right now to the doctor to get the drug for the daughter?}. This is because the maker of the words states that {it works}, {it is a tool},{he has seen it work wonders} and {mixed-states are not pleasent for tthe sufferer}. What is a mother to do here? She is confronted with that the drug is ssaid by the maker of the words that the daughter is suffering unpleasently and that the drug will work wonders. If that was me as parent, I would rush to get that drug right away , for there is the aspect that it will stop the suffereing of the child. Topomax is a drug used for siezure dissorder. As of my last understanding, the drug is not approved by the FDA for treating mixed-state of bipolar disorder.
> Now I hope that you could see something that has been previously unbeknownst to you here. This is just the start. I intend to show you thinks to come, and things that I think could give you a whole new life, and you could sing a new song.
> Lou
>Friends, If you are considering being a discussant in this thread or considering taking or getting someone Topomax, I am requesting that you read the following.
To read this article:
A. Bring up Google
B. Type in:
[Topomax. bipolar disorder, not approved by the FDA]
there will be several. I am looking at the one that explains about those using it for weight loss and that there is no proven study to say that Topomax is effective for any psychiatric condition. Could be first
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1010739
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1011004.html