![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 57 to 81 of 148. Go back in thread:
Posted by willyee on July 2, 2005, at 0:55:33
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society, posted by Nezirov on July 1, 2005, at 23:12:43
> It would take some major changes to fix it. Difficult, but hopefully not impossible.
> At some point we will have to change the fabric of society otherwise the human species will not survive.
> Destructive power is growing exponentially, but altruism appears to be decreasing. Not good trends. I could write more, but perhaps another time or a different thread? I'm going to bed. Good night.
>
> N
>
> As technology > Well I must agree with you there. I do believe that we are way too focused on terribly unrealistic standards for ourselves. We've come to expect perhaps more instant gratifications. Things seem disposable. We find less fulfillment in our passions in favor of a rat race that never seems to end. And then sometimes we come up empty or burn out, and blame ourselves. I don't know how to fix that...
>
>I actualy agreed with some of toms comments.However tom lost his cool,and became very close to crossing the line,his co-correspondent handled it nicly.I agree with tom as to the fact chemical imbalance as a term is thrown around too easly.
Anyone should be able to see we need more scieance behind the prescribing of these medications.
What i dont agree with is tom implying depression can not be a bio chemical disorder.
Okay so lets walk this down....every part of you body can fall ill to a disease or disorder,from your ankles retaining water and swelling and using a water pill which DOES help my father,right up to diabetes where of course medication saves lives.
With this said,WHY,WHY,WHY is it hard for people to believe the brain,the most important body part,that relys on some many functions to work properly cant fall ill to a disorder.So seizures can be real,and some type of malfunction in the brain,but depression,well no that cant be.
Those comments such as snap out of it,or the one i love most,excersie and diet,i say this cause i personaly have done so since 16 hard core,and its done nodda nodda tom cruise.
I absolutly believe the people here,includin myself have fallen victim to some form of disorder,a pyhsical one,where something is not functioning up to par in the brain.
I believe its prob very complex,and what we have data and studies on our prob just the end results of the major problem,i.e low serotion levels and such.I am sure the problems is much deeper.So i agree the term chemical imbalance is just too vague.
I also feel since these medications make so much money,i dont see any incentive for the pahrm companys to do real research,why,they are not looking to spend money,but make,so they tweak an exisiting med here,there,give it a cute name with maybe a lime green neon butterfuly mascott,and put it out.
I especialy disagree with tom as to how he indirectly implied people are wrong for using these meds.These people do the SENSABLE THING,they go to their docters,they trust their docters to give them the best care,its the industry and the docs who prescribe these medications sometimes too often.I dont see how in any way its a patients fault,its a responsable thing to go to the doc when ur sick.Tom is entitled to his opinion,but yess he sure did look wired,restless,irratable,and totaly unproffesional in that interview,his counterpart was calm and collective,and brushed off toms rude and confrontaional outbursts,cheers to him.
The worst thing is for a person who does not have a clinical emotional disorder to speak adementaly on it,its very annoying.
Posted by Phillipa on July 2, 2005, at 0:55:33
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society, posted by Nezirov on July 1, 2005, at 23:12:43
Got here late driving all day to Charlotte. But it seems like N is getting by, by the skin of his teeth. flmm there was one post where he was uncivil in my opinion only to you but you took it in stride. We seem to be able to stand up for what we believe is right or wrong without complaining to Dr. Bob. At the end of the discussion a lot of good points were expressed. It's as if this is a "should be continued"......Fondly, Phllippa
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 2, 2005, at 2:17:58
In reply to perhaps it's your combativeness? (nm), posted by sleepygirl on July 1, 2005, at 21:47:21
> Psychiatry ... is an absolute disgrace. It is morally bankrupt, and all about power, control, and money.
>
> Nezirov> Dream on Dr. Nezerov, you need medication too!
>
> flmm> perhaps it's your combativeness?
>
> sleepygirlPlease don't exaggerate or overgeneralize or post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above posts, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by linkadge on July 2, 2005, at 3:09:25
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society, posted by Phillipa on July 1, 2005, at 23:38:02
I agree with most of what you say. There is a limit, IMO, as to where to draw the line.
Certain persons are severely depressed. To me, it seems extrordinarly juvinile, for Tom Cruse to approach the topic in such a way. He is a whistle blower. Do you know how extrordinarily easy it is to be a whistle blower? Depression invloves a lot of guilt, do these patients really need more guilt? Bottom line, people need tangable solns.
I would agree that many people take these drugs without knowing what they can fully do, they are certainly not risk free. There are others, who fully know what they can and cannot do, and yet still choose to take them.You may have mentally lumped me in with a whole bunch of naive drug users but I pose a challenge for you.
Tell me one alternative, non drug approach to treating depression that I have not yet tried.
I dare you !!Linkadge
Posted by Nickengland on July 2, 2005, at 5:21:55
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society-Nevrov, posted by linkadge on July 2, 2005, at 3:09:25
Yes Linkadge!...I like your question!
>Tell me one alternative, non drug approach to treating depression that I have not yet tried.
I dare you !!I asked Nezirov this same thing in a similar way..
Like I said before, you can quite easily, Nezirov, say that all these medications are a disgrace and psychiatry is terrible etc etc Bear in mind though that as much as your intentions maybe good for informaing people of this....they may also be offending people in way because other people on here reply on such medications..
I personally think you most probably didn't really need to even be prescribed an anti-depressant in the first place, would you agree?...In a nutshell your views are based on people who have very mild symtoms then and could be helped by talk therapy perhaps ~ you speak for these people with mild symtoms, who go to a doctor presenting these mild symtoms but get medication when it is not needed.
In the mean time understand that most people on this board, I believe do not have mild symtoms like yourself.
Many of these people cannot simply say "oh I'm not going to take my meds because I get sexual side effects" because if they don't take their meds they get sucide thoughts and extream side effects from there illness which far out-weigh the side effects from the medications.
You answered this question eariler with a very bold statement indeed.
---------------------
> Invent a better drug youself, in your basement.
Huh? Actually I have the scientific exertise to do that
--------------------
What is your scientific background?
Like I said before "anti psychiatry" people think they have all the ansers becasue they can say how bad medications are and so on.
Now you have expressed many many times your view on this.
Lets you if you can now do the same with so many writings on how you personally think you can treat:
Schizophrenia - Paranoid, delusional, etc.
Bipolar disorder - Mania Symtoms, Mixed states & Bipolar depression.
Severe depression
Severe depression with anxiety
Servere anxiety
ADHD
I look forward to the many positive repsonses which could possibly equal the many negative ones you have to say about psychiatry...possibly without a politicians answer - by which I mean direct sloutions to the illness presented before us today.
Kind regards
Nick
Posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 7:41:08
In reply to Re: personally i hope people listen to him..., posted by Nezirov on July 1, 2005, at 19:03:12
> As I've said before, some people do require these medications.
Under what circumstances would these people require medications?
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 7:55:31
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society, posted by willyee on July 1, 2005, at 23:35:03
Amidst his making movies, I wonder how Tom Cruise managed to afford and devote the time and energy necessary to "know the whole history of psychiatry" as he so confidently states. I'm sure he has thoroughly evaluated the PET scans and MRIs used by H. Manji to determine that the structual anomolies found in the brains of bipolar and schizophrenic patients are a hoax, and has prepared himself for the technical expertise to evaluate both the images and the methods used to produce them.
lol
That is only ONE study. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, Tom Cruise knows the whole history of psychiatry.
LOL
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 8:00:05
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society-Nevrov, posted by linkadge on July 2, 2005, at 3:09:25
> Tell me one alternative, non drug approach to treating depression that I have not yet tried.
> I dare you !!
Scientological detoxification.Well, you asked.
:-)
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 8:03:38
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society, posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 7:55:31
Let us not lose sight of the true focus here: the health of the individual.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 8:13:45
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society, posted by Phillipa on July 1, 2005, at 23:38:02
> At the end of the discussion a lot of good points were expressed. It's as if this is a "should be continued"
As long as there are people in the world who would get in the way of the individual seeking his health using the tools that are available to mankind, it is the discussion of the denial of these tools that should always be continued.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 8:32:46
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society, posted by willyee on July 1, 2005, at 23:35:03
Hi.
> I actualy agreed with some of toms comments.
I'm curious as to which ones you agree with.
> I agree with tom as to the fact chemical imbalance as a term is thrown around too easly.
But still believed too seldom.
> Anyone should be able to see we need more scieance behind the prescribing of these medications.
Everyone does, especially the neuroscientists who have devoted their entire careers to answering the questions as to how these medications work. However, it makes sense to use these drugs prior to their being completely understood. Homo Erectus used fire without having a clue as to how it worked (and continues to work). Actually, this has been true of the entirety of human history. There are still things about the physics of the universe that we cannot account for, including the subatomic forces involved in the production of fire. Perhaps we should stop using it.
- Scott
Posted by sleepygirl on July 2, 2005, at 12:35:35
In reply to Re: please be civil » Nezirov » flmm » sleepygirl, posted by Dr. Bob on July 2, 2005, at 2:17:58
Posted by 10derHeart on July 2, 2005, at 12:42:14
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society » willyee, posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 8:32:46
Posted by sleepygirl on July 2, 2005, at 12:48:35
In reply to Point well taken, Scott :-) (nm) » SLS, posted by 10derHeart on July 2, 2005, at 12:42:14
OK-I think that was a nice redirection toward why we would deny any tools to combat mental illness. Why wouldn't we use whatever we can? I'm keeping this in mind.
Posted by Nezirov on July 2, 2005, at 13:34:08
In reply to discussion of denial of tools, posted by sleepygirl on July 2, 2005, at 12:48:35
Hi Guys,
I could reply to all of these individual posts, but I'm not going to. It's obvious you've already firmly made up your minds about this and will not be dissuaded otherwise.
Good luck to you all.
Nezirov
Posted by willyee on July 2, 2005, at 13:48:55
In reply to Re: discussion of denial of tools, posted by Nezirov on July 2, 2005, at 13:34:08
> Hi Guys,
>
> I could reply to all of these individual posts, but I'm not going to. It's obvious you've already firmly made up your minds about this and will not be dissuaded otherwise.
>
> Good luck to you all.
>
> NezirovA lot of the posts agreed with some of your views,as for changing anyones mind,just the same i doubt anyone here is going to change yours as well.
I simply think tom cruis attempted to dominate the conversation,in doing so PERSONALY i believe he lost credit to some of the things he was saying.He was not on political hardball being slaughtered by chris mattewhs,he came loose for no reason.I dident mind your post here at all.
>
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 2, 2005, at 14:02:48
In reply to Re: please be civil-sorry Dr. Bob-I got snotty (nm), posted by sleepygirl on July 2, 2005, at 12:35:35
Posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 14:35:15
In reply to Re: discussion of denial of tools, posted by Nezirov on July 2, 2005, at 13:34:08
> Hi Guys,
>
> I could reply to all of these individual posts, but I'm not going to. It's obvious you've already firmly made up your minds about this and will not be dissuaded otherwise.Dissuaded from what?
As adults, we are quite capable of making our own decisions regarding treatment. How dare anyone presume that we are not.
I think it is important that the patient be made aware by their doctor the pros and cons and risk versus benefit of any treatment being considered. What you have brought us here is nothing new. As a group, we are fortunate enough to have the tools to educate ourselves. Unfortunately, this is not globally true.
It is also unfortunate that people with so little knowledge about psychiatry should so globally condemn it and the treatments it affords. This may or may not be applicable to you, but it sure seems to be true of Tom Cruise.
If you want to make a difference here, it is more productive to bring to discussion less global statements and those that are more specific to one detail at a time.
For instance, can an SSRI produce negative effects upon one's sexual function that last long after its discontinuation?
Psychiatry works as best it can, and, without the knowledge of some, acts as its own watchdog. Psychiatry is definitely one of the "softer" fields of medicine. This is entirely the fault of the complexity of the human brain. That the brain will one day be understood well enough to develop better treatments for illness is entirely the gift of this same organ.
- Scott
Posted by Nickengland on July 2, 2005, at 14:58:36
In reply to Re: discussion of denial of tools, posted by Nezirov on July 2, 2005, at 13:34:08
I knew you wouldn't be able to comment on alternatives as there are none. The anti psychiatry foundations set up around the world offer no alternatives either.
Thanks for replying though and good luck to you too.
Posted by gabbii on July 2, 2005, at 15:00:04
In reply to Re: medicating a sick society, posted by Nezirov on July 1, 2005, at 23:12:43
> Destructive power is growing exponentially, but altruism appears to be decreasing. Not good trends.
That seems to be a popular statement, I'm not sure what the basis for comparison is though.
Personally, I consider it to be a drastic improvement that I can't have a neighbour burned at the stake on a whim, legally own a black person as a slave, hobble a child in order that they cannot run away from their labors or bring a lunch to watch the Christians be fed to the lions. I don't have to worry about being forced to wear a chastity belt, my friend was not abused at a residential school like her mother was, (a punishment for being First Nations) and it really wouldn't go over well with the neighbors if I surrounded my house with people impaled on stakes so I could watch their suffering for entertainment. I don't fear the "mouth pear" or an "iron mask" or worse, for not being Christian, and though I suffer from depression and do not always agree with psychiatric treatments, I'm quite thankful I have not had to suffer having the "evil spirits" tortured out of me.
Anything else?
Posted by Nezirov on July 2, 2005, at 16:31:48
In reply to No Comment Nezirov on Expertise Alternatives, posted by Nickengland on July 2, 2005, at 14:58:36
Of course I can think of alterantives, it's just that I've realized that this is the wrong forum for such discussions.
Good luck.
Nezirov
> I knew you wouldn't be able to comment on alternatives as there are none. The anti psychiatry foundations set up around the world offer no alternatives either.
>
> Thanks for replying though and good luck to you too.
Posted by Nezirov on July 2, 2005, at 16:33:25
In reply to Re: discussion of denial of tools » Nezirov, posted by SLS on July 2, 2005, at 14:35:15
I'm itching to respond, but as I said in my previous message, I have realized that this is not the right forum for these kinds of dicussions. Good luck to you.
> > Hi Guys,
> >
> > I could reply to all of these individual posts, but I'm not going to. It's obvious you've already firmly made up your minds about this and will not be dissuaded otherwise.
>
> Dissuaded from what?
>
> As adults, we are quite capable of making our own decisions regarding treatment. How dare anyone presume that we are not.
>
> I think it is important that the patient be made aware by their doctor the pros and cons and risk versus benefit of any treatment being considered. What you have brought us here is nothing new. As a group, we are fortunate enough to have the tools to educate ourselves. Unfortunately, this is not globally true.
>
> It is also unfortunate that people with so little knowledge about psychiatry should so globally condemn it and the treatments it affords. This may or may not be applicable to you, but it sure seems to be true of Tom Cruise.
>
> If you want to make a difference here, it is more productive to bring to discussion less global statements and those that are more specific to one detail at a time.
>
> For instance, can an SSRI produce negative effects upon one's sexual function that last long after its discontinuation?
>
> Psychiatry works as best it can, and, without the knowledge of some, acts as its own watchdog. Psychiatry is definitely one of the "softer" fields of medicine. This is entirely the fault of the complexity of the human brain. That the brain will one day be understood well enough to develop better treatments for illness is entirely the gift of this same organ.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Nickengland on July 2, 2005, at 16:40:13
In reply to Re: No Comment Nezirov on Expertise Alternatives, posted by Nezirov on July 2, 2005, at 16:31:48
Support and Education forum...even an Alternative Forum for you to post..what more could you ask for... :-)
Take care lol
Posted by flmm on July 2, 2005, at 17:50:20
In reply to Re: No Comment Nezirov on Expertise Alternatives, posted by Nickengland on July 2, 2005, at 16:40:13
By the way, I just got back from seeing "War of the worlds". This is the worst Spielberg movie ever! I am not kidding, it is awful. Cruise etc. should be ashamed of the money they are stealing. This one is bad folks! Ireally wanted to like it. Not possible! Sorry Nez your boy stinx.
Posted by TomG on July 2, 2005, at 18:30:00
In reply to Re: Comment War of the worlds Sucks, posted by flmm on July 2, 2005, at 17:50:20
I've been doing some research on Scientology and found a reason why Tom might be so opposed to psychiatry in general.
"The story of Xenu is covered in OT III, part of Scientology's secret "Advanced Technology" doctrines taught only to advanced members. It is described in more detail in the accompanying confidential "Assists" lecture of 3 October 1968. Direct quotes in this section are from these sources. (See also Scientology beliefs and practices)
75 million years ago, Xenu was the ruler of a Galactic Confederacy which consisted of 26 stars and 76 planets including Earth, which was then known as Teegeeack. The planets were overpopulated, each having on average 178 billion people. The Galactic Confederacy's civilization was comparable to our own, with people "walking around in clothes which looked very remarkably like the clothes they wear this very minute" and using cars, trains and boats looking exactly the same as those "circa 1950, 1960" on Earth.
Xenu was about to be deposed from power, so he devised a plot to eliminate the excess population from his dominions. With the assistance of "renegades", he defeated the populace and the "Loyal Officers", a force for good that was opposed to Xenu. Then, with the assistance of psychiatrists, he summoned billions of people to paralyse them with injections of alcohol and glycol, under the pretense that they were being called for "income tax inspections." The kidnapped populace was loaded into space planes for transport to the site of extermination, the planet of Teegeeack (Earth). The space planes were exact copies of Douglas DC-8s, "except the DC-8 had fans, propellers on it and the space plane didn't." DC-8s have jet engines, not propellers, although Hubbard may have meant the turbine fans.When the space planes had reached Teegeeack, the paralysed people were unloaded and stacked around the bases of volcanoes across the planet. Hydrogen bombs were lowered into the volcanoes, and all were detonated simultaneously. Only a few people's physical bodies survived."
I also thought that this was 'interesting' about L. Ron Hubbard as he wrote 'OT 111'.
"In a letter of the time to his wife Mary Sue[11], Hubbard said that, in order to assist his research, he was drinking a great deal of rum and taking stimulants and depressants ("I'm drinking lots of rum and popping pinks and greys"). His assistant at the time, Virginia Downsborough, said that he "was existing almost totally on a diet of drugs."[12] Miller (p290) hypothesises that it was important for Hubbard to be found in a debilitated condition, so as to present OT III as "a research accomplishment of immense magnitude"."
Tom
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.