Posted by Lou Pilder on March 10, 2015, at 8:04:07 [reposted on March 14, 2015, at 22:17:30 | original URL]
In reply to another way- Lou's reply to Robert-1050362, posted by Lou Pilder on March 10, 2015, at 6:12:12
> > > > > > > > > > Robert,
> > > > > > > > You say that you do not follow my logic. I say to you that what you have posted here could result in the deaths or addictions or life-ruining conditions to other readers here and I am asking that we have an immediate discussion here.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Lou, your assertion is misleading, inflammatory and unfair. Nothing I posted "could result in" (i.e., be relevantly causally related to) any of the terrible consequences that you imply in your statement would flow naturally from the post I made.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >This is all because the psychiatrist that operates this forum is allowing your claims here to be seen as supportive and I think otherwise,>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The psychiatrist who operates this forum imposes as a condition of participation that no-one infers from the posts published here that medical advice is being supplied. The purpose of this forum is not in the online supply of clinical advice on which participants are intended to act but in describing, and thinking out-loud about, medication problems and *possible* medication strategies that participants might *think over*. No post here carries the express or implied intention or expectation that the content of any post should be acted upon *because* of any assumed expertise in the poster or because the reader has read the post here. Indeed, such expectations are very properly, and responsibly, expressly excluded by Dr Hsiung.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >and your claim that Mirtazapine is used to treat SS, and that the site drugs.com has erroneous information is what is in issue here.>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I never "claimed" that Mirtazapine "is used" (i.e., in the ordinary meaning of that aspect of the tense you have chosen to express my original comment in, habitually) to treat serotonin toxicity. I said that it "has been used" to treat such toxicity; and I say further than an authority argues persuasively that the serotonergic potency of mirtazapine is low to negligible in humans, a fact which the safe combination of venlafaxine and mirtazapine appears to bear out: see Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental, (2006) 21, pp 117-25.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You produce accurately my claim, based in my experience, that the drug interaction section of drugs.com *has* erroneous information. I.e., that occassionally its information is erroneous in the level of detail it provides. Yet you then proceed, in one of your highly tendentiously phrased questions, to assert that I claimed that drugs.com is not "based on facts". I never claimed such a thing, nor did I ever claim to profess to a degree of knowledge of the entirety of drugs.com beyond my experience of it. My knowledge that it sometimes throws up erroneous information derives, in the instance to which I adverted, from its assertion that the combination of mirtazapine and venlafaxine poses a *major* risk of serotonin toxicity. Drugs.com also asserts that the combination of tranylcypromine and nortriptyline poses a *major* risk of serotonin syndrome, an assertion that is inconsistent with a clinical assessment of the pharmacological mechanisms of each drug. I would pose in reply to you the challenge to produce a citation which demonstrates this information to be accurate.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Most certainly did I not assert, or imply, that drugs.com contains information that is *always* or *mostly* erroneous. Not did I ever suggest that drugs.com should not be used or consulted. My point was that it is *better* to refer to specialist views rather than generic information as provided by drugs.com *exclusively*. Drugs.com may be a first port of call, but it shouldn't be the only one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If you could post answers to the following then by my responses I could address your claims here in what I think could save livesprevent life-ruining conditions and addictions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I do not propose to oblige you in this matter, given the tendentious and quite frankly deeply offensive way you have chosen to phrase your questions. Your purpose is not, clearly, fair-mindedly to elicit clarifications but to inflame prejudice. My answers are as provided above.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I note that you have had a habit of delivering yourself of outrageously unfair imputations against Dr. Hsiung. I do not propose to engage with you further given the nature of the imputations you have chosen to direct at myself.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It may also be as well to remind you that the primary purpose of this thread is to offer responses to fido; it is not meant for you to indulge in the riding of eccentric hobby-horses.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Robert,
> > > > > > You wrote,[...Nothing I Posted could result in...any of the terrible consequences that you imply...].
> > > > > > The consequences of your claims being followed by the readers here, are listed by me as death, life-ruing conditions and addictions. Your claims here are:
> > > > > > A.Drugs.com will say incorrectly that many combinations can cause serotonin syndrome
> > > > > > B. Drugs.com says that the combination of mixing Mirtazapine with venlafaxine carries the risk of serotonin syndrome. *This is just erroneous.* (stars mine)
> > > > > > C. Mirtazapine has been used to treat serotonin syndrome.
> > > > > > Your claims here could be seen as being supportive because the rules by Mr. Hsuing is that if he does not intercede, what is posted is not against his rules. and that being supportive takes precedence. He later goes on to say that he could not intercede where there is a statement that is not supportive because in his thinking it will be good for this community as a whole to do so. This is what is at issue here that I think could cause the deaths of readers, induce a life-ruining condition or addiction and lead parents to drug their child in collaboration with a psychiatrist /doctor.
> > > > > > The rules here are for support and education. Since Mr. Hsiung has not interceded to your claims, the claims could be seen as supportive and educational, and readers could take your claims as facts. I dispute your claims as facts, in particular, but not limited to that you claim that Mirtazapine has been used to treat ss. I would like to see a citation that you use to make that claim so that readers could see for themselves what you are using to claim that Mirtazapine has been used to treat ss, because I do not want readers to be misled to think that because you claim that Mirtazapine has been used to treat ss, that there is a standard treatment for serotonin syndrome by using Mirtazapine which I think could mislead a subset of readers to think that if they do take a combination of drugs that could induce ss, they could be saved from death by going to an emergency room and all the doctors know to bring out a shot of mirtazapine and the sufferer is saved from death. I base that on that I think a subset of readers could be misled unless you post your citation is because there are readers that could think that your use of (has been used to treat ss) is not having a specification as to {how many} people were treated with Mirtazapine when they had ss and if the citation has that it is unreliable information or not. Readers could think that because you claim that Mirtazapine has been used to treat ss that taking Mirtazapine could not induce serotonin syndrome when it actually can, I can post citations to such for anyone requesting those here.
> > > > > > And your claim that the site drugs.com could be incorrect in their list of adverse consequences of taking combinations of drugs, could lead readers to think IMHO to ignore their research because Mr. Hsiung has not interceded where you make that claim. Your claim of the site could be incorrect has the potential for readers to ignore their research and be killed by taking combinations of drugs that they list could cause ss and you say could be incorrect or erroneous. I think that Mr. Hsiung and any deputy of record has an obligation to intercede in claims like you make here in order that no reader takes your claim as fact and dies from your advise or gets a life-ruining condition or addiction. And if parents that are trying to make a more-informed decision as to drug their child or not in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor, I do not want them to be misled to think that taking the combination of drugs that could induce ss as stated in drugs.com could be considered by this site to be incorrect and go ahead and have their child take the combination of drugs that drugs.com says could cause death by serotonin syndrome and their child is killed by the drugs. The claim by Mr. Hsiung is that he does what in his thinking will be good for his community as a whole. But more than that, he says that readers are to try to trust him. That part about trusting him is what IMHO could lead readers to think that your claims here are facts because he has not intervened to say otherwise and he wants readers to try to trust him. Readers could think that Mr. Hsiung and any deputy or record are validating your claims because he has not interceded.
> > > > > > Lou
> > > > > > > Friends,
> > > > > It is written here,[...produce a citation which demonstrates this information to be accurate...]
> > > > > The issue here is the drug called Mirtazapine. This drug is a knock-off of an illegal drug in the U.S. By itself, it has severe risks of life-ruining conditions and death. Combined with other psychotropic drugs could cause the risks to be increased exponentially.
> > > > > Here is a link to the FDA concerning Mirtazapine. Please read it. And if anyone tells you that the information here by the FDA is erroneous, or incorrect, ask yourself what their motive could be to sway you to think that the information is incorrect.
> > > > > And to mothers reading here. You mothers that want to make a more-informed decision as to drug your child or not in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor could read here what you could think is supportive and factual because Me. Hsiung's TOS states that being supportive takes precedence. But be advised that maybe unbeknownst to you mothers, Mr. Hsiung has a hidden clause not posted in his TOS/FAQ that is self-made where he says that he does not have to abide by his own drafted rules if he thinks that by allowing what is unsupportive, it will be good for his community as a whole. Man greater than him in the historical record have used the same tactic to allow slavery, as they said that slavery will be good for the community as a whole. And the same tactic has been used to commit genocide and mass-murder, saying that mass-murder will be good for the community or country, as a whole. And schools have used segregation in the past by saying that segregation will be good for the school as a whole. And there are countries today that say that killing Jews will be good for their country as a whole. I say to you mothers to examine closely here what is being perpetrated as support and education. Be advised that I am prevented from offering here educational material that I think could save lives due to the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung. I do not consider education to be valid here because of the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung. When academic freedom is repressed, education could become just propaganda, which is fraudulent education.
> > > > > Now let us look at this drug, Mirtazapine by the FDA. You mothers, do you want your child to get Stevens -Johnson syndrome, or serotonin syndrome or other life-ruining diseases or death and a worse chance if combined with other psychotropic drugs?
> > > > > Lou
> > > > > http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/Safetyinformation/ucm215532.htm
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Robert,
> > > > You wrote,[...The psychiatrist that operates this forum imposes as a condition of participation that no-one infers from the posts published here that medical advise is being supplied...].
> > > > As I read Mr. Hsiung's TOS/FAQ, there is no condition imposed upon readers here for participation except that posters are to be civil at all times as a condition for participation. Mr. Hsiung states that being supportive takes precedence and that he does not wait to sanction uncivil statements because one match could start a forest fire, so if it is uncivil, don't post it.
> > > > This could lead readers to think that what is posted without sanction is not against his rules and is supportive. Mr. Hsiung in a secret post of his, since it is not incorporated in his FAQ, reveals that he admits that there are unsanctioned posts to be seen as supportive and that he will not let readers know that he considers those statements to be un supportive because by allowing those statements to be seen as supportive, it will be in his thinking to be good for this community as a whole for readers to see un supportive statements to be considered to be supportive and will be good later on even if they put down or accuse or are insensitive or un supportive and that there could even be tragic consequences from those statements to be seen here as supportive. And his stated goals for the forum is for support and education and to try to trust him as well for what he does here.
> > > > This can IMHHHO lead readers to think that medical advise is being supplied here when the advise is allowed to be seen as supportive and will be in Mr. Hsiung's thinking good for this community as a whole because he states to trust him here, and worse, he has posted prohibitions to me that prevent me from offering education and support here that could expose the propaganda used here that IMHHHHHHO could result in the deaths and/or harm to readers, in particular but not limited to Jewish readers here.
> > > > Just one example is the allowed statement here,[..No non-Christian will...], which is analogous to, [...No Jew will...], or [...No Islamic person will...], or worse, [...Only Christians will...], which insults all those that believe that they can enter heaven without being a member of Christiandom.
> > > > > > Now that is an example of what could be seen here as supportive and civil and will be good for this community as a whole according to Mr. Hsiung's thinking. So there could be a subset of readers here easily IMO persuaded to to think that is accepted advise from Mr. Hsiung and as an example of advocating to take drugs here, that could also IMHHHHHO be taken as medical advise from Mr. Hsiung because:
> > > > A. He sets himself up as an authority here to trust, as in his TOS/FAQ
> > > > B. He has posted prohibitions to me that prevent me from posting what I need to in order to expose the anti-Semitic thought being allowed to be seen as supportive here.
> > > > C. He has posted prohibitions to me that prevent me from showing the history and development of drugs that I think could be educational and save lives here.
> > > > D. Since there are such prohibitions to me here, then my perspective is excluded that could result in what is being promulgated here to constitute propaganda and not true education.
> > > > E. I am prevented from posting here the historical relationship between psychiatry and mass-murder.
> > > > F. Since anti-Semitic propaganda is allowed here to be seen as supportive and not against Mr. Hsiung's rules, this could cause readers to have hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me as a Jew here, that could result in readers discarding what I write here, which could lead readers to accept what is posted here concerning drugs to be medically accepted advise.
> > > > Lou
> > > > > Robert,
> > > Now you say that drugs.com says that taking tranylcypromine (Parnate) with Nortriptyline poses a major risk of serotonin syndrome which you say is inconsistent with a clinical assessment of the pharmacological mechanisms of each drug, and you want me to post here otherwise.
> > > Each of the two drugs has the potential to cause serotonin syndrome by themselves and when taken in combination, that risk is exponentially increased. The tragic consequences here is that a subset of readers could rely on what you have posted and that what you are advocating could cause death to those relying on what you posted about the two drugs taken together.
> > > Here is a link that shows that both drugs can cause serotonin syndrome. I hope it is not too late for readers to see that they both can cause ss and I hope that no one has died from taking these two drugs together seeing here that what you posted could be considered to be supportive and will in Mr. Hsiung's thinking be good for this community as a whole.
> > > Lou
> > > http://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/injuries_poisoning/heat_illness/serotonin_syndrome.html
> > >
> > > > > Robert,
> >
> > You wrote that I post {unfair imputations} concerning the owner/operator here, Robert Hsiung.
> > Let there be no misunderstanding here. The owner-operator here openly states that he is not going to honor my notifications as he will to the other members here. This could be thought to be a discriminatory act on his part and is not in any doubt that he states his intentions here. His intentions are to have others shun me here and not respond to me by seeing that he does not respond to me as an example which is a powerful influence to children reading here. That policy of his could isolate me here which was a tactic of European fascism when Jews were ghettoized and this policy could be thought by a subset of readers to be an anti-Semitic policy for I am the only one that Mr. Hsiung states that he is not responding to me so that others could also not respond to me by his lead. As to if it is unfair for me to point this out, no one here is disputing the fact that it is what it is and Jews are being openly defamed here as being supportive and will be good for this community as a whole according to Mr. Hsiung's thinking and statements that accuse Jews are allowed to be seen as supportive by Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record.
> > And it is much more than that. For by Mr. Hsiung stating that he is not responding to me so that others could also not respond to me, that could stigmatize me and all Jews on the basis that he is a psychiatrist and is claiming that whatever he does here, including this encouragement for others to shun me here, will be good for this community as a whole. I say that those that understand the history of European fascism, that the historical record shows that to have been a false hope, that culminated in over 70 million deaths. And this false hope is still promulgated today by Jew-haters bent on killing Jews. And why would anyone want the statements that could lead readers to think that Jews are being defamed here that I am objecting to on the admin board in my discussion with Mr. Hsiung that are plainly visible, to be allowed to stand?
> > Psychologists have studied that question for decades and here is what I have found one of their answers to be. There are other answers and as time runs, as to which answer fits in here, time will be the judge. That answer in question is that those that want to foster hatred toward the Jews by using their authority to do so, hate the Jews and want others to follow their hatred {because they hate the God that the Jews give service and worship to and that gave life to all}. They hate the god in question because they hate life. They show their hatred of life and discriminate against Jews which has been ruled a crime against humanity itself, for it is against life itself.
> > Here is a link that shows this and until Mr. Hsiung opens up the post and types right down in the post a refutation of what he posted, readers can see this as it is, and it is what it is.
> > Lou
> > [admin, 1050362 ]
> > > >
> > > > Another way to see the post in question is to go to the search box at the bottom of this page and type in:
> [ Lou's reply-heyazakcptabul ]
> Lou
> > > Robert,
Let there be no misunderstanding here. This site can reach homes all over the world. When Mr. Hsiung allows posts here that constitute dehumanization of the Jews, it is a world-wide defamation, not just here on this site.
Now here is a post that dehumanizes the Jews as is plainly visible. But what may be unbeknownst to you is that Mr. Hsiung did not abide by his own drafted rule to sanction the post. In fact, a sanction is not posted by him or any of his deputies of record even though he had in place a rule before the post was posted to not post to a link that has anti-Semitic content. The rule was even emphatic as he stated not to do so, period. That meant no exceptions. Then came:
[ admin, 428781 ]
Let readers look at this before going on.
Now if you have looked at the post, the dehumanizing accusations against the Jews that could foster anti-Semitic feelings here and to homes all over the world were allowed to be seen as being allowed to stand, being justified by the owner on the grounds that the hatred toward the Jews is in a link, even though the rule was in place that what is in a link is directly to the text and not immune from sanction just as if it is posted directly. He then says to the poster to post another link that omits the antisemitic hate that dehumanizes the Jews, without redacting what is in the link, nor posting his tagline to please be civil. This means that anti-Semitic propaganda could now be posted with impunity in a link as long as after posting the link, another link is posted omitting the anti-Semitism.
This altering of his own drafted rule is especially made here by the owner, and the owner wants readers to try to trust him for he is doing what in his thinking will be good for this community as a whole by making a venue for hate to be posted with impunity as long as another post has a link omitting the defamation against the Jews is posted by the poster while the original post remains un sanctioned. This allows continual anti-Semitic propaganda to be posted here without the poster being subjected to the TOS in relation to the enforcement section here. It is a special venue here by Mr. Hsiung for anti-Semitic hate only, for the rule to not post in a link what could be uncivil posted directly applied to posts that had links to uncivil content outside of anti-Semitic hate. In fact, the rule is so broad that I do not post links, but a way for you to see the link without me posting it by having you go to the search box and typing in key words that bring it up to you without it being seen on the board, for what is in the link can not be posted. But the anti-Semitism can be posted in a link. This can lead to thinking that there are two standards here that allow anitsemitic hate to be posted in a link, but anything else that could be uncivil to be not allowed. Just think about how this could dehumanize Jews here as a venue for posting hatred toward the Jews is devised here for members to be excepted from Mr. Hsiung's own drafted rules here. And then Mr. Hsiung could "miss" the link and it could stand forever as being civil and he makes another self-made rule that he says he can choose to not honor my notifications which if honord, would bring the post into light. What if the links had racist taunts in them? Could Mr. Hsiung allow that to be justified by the poster posting a different link omitting the racist taunts? What is the difference, if any?
In 428781, the dehumanizing of the Jews was initiated here to be allowed with the strategy that Mr. Hsiung implemented that could create and develop IMHO hatred toward the Jews here. The fact that Mr. Hsiung altered his own drafted rule to not post anti-Semitism in a link, period, leads one to form their own opinions as to what Mr. Hsiung's intent was in doing so. His intent is plainly stated as that he will be doing in his thinking what will be good for this community as a whole. And those Jews that suffer dehumanization from reading the anti-Semitic propaganda as seen as supportive by Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record, and those feelings of dehumanization carried into the child reading here to kill themselves, they can not speak here, their dreams have ended, I will speak for them.
Lou
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1077523
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20150223/msgs/1077540.html