![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 13 of 13. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 1:28:50
What a sorry display of rage and affront. Without a shred of friendship or concern for Sal.
None of us are well, or we wouldn't be here.
Can't we think of some response, in our own struggles, more suggesting of the compassion we would wish and hope to receive?
Zo
Posted by Cam W. on August 31, 2001, at 2:46:37
In reply to It's Not About Religion, posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 1:28:50
Zo - No it's not about religion, it's about Sal's attitude toward treatment.
Yes, he should be seeing a doctor.
Things like "Links of the Century" and "Look at my Thank Yous" just reinforce this fact. This sort of grandiosity tells me that Sal is looking for attention; but he is doing it in a way that could be dangerous to others.
I'm sorry, but I cannot stand by and let erroneous information be meted out by someone pretending to be a professional. Have you noticed, that whenever asked for credentials, he never replies? And thus let people assume that he has a deeper understanding of what he is posting, than he really does.
Also, I think we see a clear example of the dangers of self-prescribing, and from overseas purchasing of medications without a prescription.
Sal hears what he wants to hear, and no one was going to cause him to deviate from his course. This called for the drastic measures that were taken. He pushed and pushed, in a number of different directions, until all those directions pushed back.
Someone who does not have an educated understanding of the material should only be offering personal experience, or the experiences that they heard from others. The information source should be labelled accordingly. His lack of expertise is glaringly obvious, even in his postings today. For example, replacing moclobemide with bromocriptine (or even recommending bromocriptine, period) would cause most pharmacists to do a double take. It is too dirty a drug.
I picked on Sal, after my first tirade against his methods, because Dr.Bob had emailed me and said that I should mentor him. Most of the advice I did give fell on deaf ears.
You do realize that I seldom offer advice, but I may offer alternatives and hopefully give the asker, the tools to make an informed choice. I try to stick to what the drugs do, because that is what I am trained to do. I am not trained in diagnosis, nor am I trained in prescribing, therefore I consciously try not to do it. Sal thinks he is qualified to do both.
The backlash against Sal was bound to occur the way it did, and Sal is mainly responsible for the way it came out. Hopefully this will be a good learning experience for him (but I sincerely doubt it).
My 2¢ - Cam
Posted by akc on August 31, 2001, at 7:48:18
In reply to It's Not About Religion, posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 1:28:50
Zo,
You might be right regarding Sal. But in my mind -- in my sick mind -- when I see these posts, I am very triggered because of my past and my hangups with religion. But I suffered some pretty intense abuse (for lack of a better word) in the name of religion. So for me, it is all about religion. Yes, you are right -- I have no compassion right now for Sal. Pretty shitty for someone who is suppose to be practicing a twelve step program. But that is where I am at. I am glad for Sal's sake that you are able to offer him some compassion -- but don't put up the blinders this direction. There are two sides to every story.
akc
Posted by Krazy Kat on August 31, 2001, at 10:18:52
In reply to It's Not About Religion, posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 1:28:50
Zo:
I'm glad you mentioned this, because we should look at the "why" behind the offense. When someone with a mental illness starts acting differently, the first question should be why? Or when anyone starts acting differently. We often lash out at the other person who is acting "crabby" instead of saying, "Wow, I bet they're under a lot of stress," or some such.
I am surprised he hasn't been banned for some of this behavior. But I'm also surprised no one else thought to question how He was doing. He's been here a long time.
Hmmm...
- K.
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 31, 2001, at 11:26:09
In reply to Re: It's Not About Religion » Zo, posted by Cam W. on August 31, 2001, at 2:46:37
> Have you noticed, that whenever asked for credentials, he never replies? And thus let people assume that he has a deeper understanding of what he is posting, than he really does.
People might assume that, but they might also assume the opposite. BTW, a while ago I collected a few links on the quality of information:
http://www.dr-bob.org/quality.html
If there's something else I should add, just let me know...
> Someone who does not have an educated understanding of the material should only be offering personal experience, or the experiences that they heard from others.
So reporting on something they read would be excluded? People can learn so much on their own, it would be a shame not to let them share that...
> The backlash against Sal was bound to occur the way it did, and Sal is mainly responsible for the way it came out. Hopefully this will be a good learning experience for him...
Sal is responsible for what he does -- and those who lash back are responsible for what they do. Hopefully this will be a good learning experience for all of us.
Bob
Posted by Cam W. on August 31, 2001, at 12:12:22
In reply to Re: It's Not About Religion, posted by Dr. Bob on August 31, 2001, at 11:26:09
> > Have you noticed, that whenever asked for credentials, he never replies? And thus let people assume that he has a deeper understanding of what he is posting, than he really does.
>
> People might assume that, but they might also assume the opposite. BTW, a while ago I collected a few links on the quality of information:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/quality.html
>
> If there's something else I should add, just let me know...
>
• Dr.B - I understand what you are saying, but like many people, I seldom surf other pages than the message boards. I really should, but hey, I went to university, so I can't be expected to read directions and rules. Alas, knowing it all does have it's downside ;^) I also understand the limitations of the internet. Sometimes it scares me that people will take my word as gospel, without getting a second opinion (but then again, maybe I am often the second opinion - I hope).
>
> > Someone who does not have an educated understanding of the material should only be offering personal experience, or the experiences that they heard from others.
>
> So reporting on something they read would be excluded? People can learn so much on their own, it would be a shame not to let them share that...
>
• Good point (an ace down the center line, actually). Yes, stuff one reads should be shared, but not offered as advice (or, more importantly, prescribing) unless one "understands" the implications of what one reads. I don't mean "fully understands", that is not necessary, but a basic knowledge of background material is essential. One should do more than cruise Medline, cut and paste, for answers to the questions. Explanations are sometimes more important than the facts. If someone has read something somewhere, they usually will state that fact.• Personally, even if I am only partially sure of an answer, or I think someone has more experience in a certain area, I will pass off a question addressed to me. I don't pretend to be all-knowing (unless it's to my advantage) and I think I have a decent grasp of my limitations. When we go beyond our limitations one to many times, and start to "assume", we make an "ass" of "u" and "me" (I really can't believe I typed that).
>
> > The backlash against Sal was bound to occur the way it did, and Sal is mainly responsible for the way it came out. Hopefully this will be a good learning experience for him...
>
> Sal is responsible for what he does -- and those who lash back are responsible for what they do. Hopefully this will be a good learning experience for all of us.
>
• Cool. I'd just like to let go of this thing, because somehow I feel responsible for starting a lot of it. As you know, I am a Western Canadian (ie. ballcapped redneck - sorta), so I do have trouble not speaking my mind. Hey, I am working on it, honestly.sign me - Minion of Dr.Bob (satan doesn't have a good dental plan).
Posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 16:15:42
In reply to It's Not About Religion, posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 1:28:50
It means refraining from judgement, attack, abandonment.You know. All those things you would hate having done to you.
Zo
Posted by Odonata on August 31, 2001, at 16:41:26
In reply to Re: It's Not About Religion, posted by Dr. Bob on August 31, 2001, at 11:26:09
>
>
> Sal is responsible for what he does -- and those who lash back are responsible for what they do. Hopefully this will be a good learning experience for all of us.
>
> BobHi Bob This an excellent site explaining critical thinking
http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/main.htmlI think everyone could learn a great deal here particularly in the section about fallacies and non-rational persuasion.
Posted by akc on August 31, 2001, at 16:42:18
In reply to Compassion Does Not Mean Agreement, posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 16:15:42
>
> It means refraining from judgement, attack, abandonment.
>
> You know. All those things you would hate having done to you.
>
> ZoMy two cents post refrained from those things. I felt that Sal's posts on gays and lesbians did those things. I lose compassion for those who would condemn me without knowing me -- who would say that because I am ______, I am a sinner, condemn to hell. That judgment lacks compassion, and in return, I find it hard to return compassion. Especially, when the person flaunts that belief in my face. I work very hard to remain civil, even when I am angry. To play by the rules.
All I ask of you is to see it from my side also. Sal may be acting out because of something going on in his life, but his actions hurt -- his choice of words strike a wound in me (and probably others on this board) as much as some others' words might strike a wound in him. Your running to his defense -- drawing a sword -- lashing out -- just adds to my wounds.
When I wrote my two cents on religion, I was trying not to strike out at Sal. I was really trying to give my viewpoint on how the issue should be handled in general on the board -- where it belonged and didn't belong. I have reread that post several times today, and can't see where I provoked. This is a huge triggering issue for me. If I thought I could win the battle, I would fight for no religious talk on any of the boards. I was trying for what I thought was a logical solution -- so Vulcan of me.
So I'll gain compassion for Sal when I start seeing it in him towards me -- when I begin to be treated with some respect -- when I am not treated as a person who is condemned to hell for just being a full fledged out and out lesbian. It is hard to have compassion for someone who believes that about you.
akc
Posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 17:17:40
In reply to Re: Compassion Does Not Mean Agreement » Zo, posted by akc on August 31, 2001, at 16:42:18
> So I'll gain compassion for Sal when I start seeing it in him towards me --
Unfortunately, compassion isn't a wait-for-the-other-to-go-first matter. By definition.
I'm very sorry you're hurt. I am not a bit in agreement with Sal. What I'm really talking about is the *quality* of our response.
It still makes more sense to detach a bit, don't you think? To notice that Sal has been "off" this week? That he may, then, be in trouble with his meds?
Best,
Zo
Posted by NikkiT2 on September 1, 2001, at 7:08:26
In reply to Re: Compassion Does Not Mean Agreement » akc, posted by Zo on August 31, 2001, at 17:17:40
Zo,
Many people here ARE worried about Sal, and have expressed their worry about his meds in mnay mnay posts. Sal insists that self medication is fine, but I think we are witnessing the fact that self medicvation can be bad. he does seem to be in trouble some how right now, and I for one wish he would see a doctor.
If you can manage to get him to see that, great, but I fear he will continue to self medicate.
Nikki
> > So I'll gain compassion for Sal when I start seeing it in him towards me --
>
> Unfortunately, compassion isn't a wait-for-the-other-to-go-first matter. By definition.
>
> I'm very sorry you're hurt. I am not a bit in agreement with Sal. What I'm really talking about is the *quality* of our response.
>
> It still makes more sense to detach a bit, don't you think? To notice that Sal has been "off" this week? That he may, then, be in trouble with his meds?
>
> Best,
> Zo
Posted by Mair on September 1, 2001, at 16:47:17
In reply to Re: It's Not About Religion » Dr. Bob, posted by Cam W. on August 31, 2001, at 12:12:22
> > >" I do have trouble not speaking my mind. Hey, I am working on it, honestly." Minion of Dr.Bob (satan doesn't have a good dental plan).
Cam - it's frequently more interesting to read the comments of someone who feels passionatly about something. I know you sometimes fly off the handle a little, but what you say is usually right on the mark. I also don't think you should feel guilty about starting this, if in fact you did. What bothers me the most is that Sal doesn't add any caveats to the information he posts. Even if he doesn't change (and he gives no appearance of even reading these posts), then hopefully the uninitiated might and pick up the valuable message that they need to understand the limitations of the way information is exchanged. From that perspective, this has been a valuable discussion. Thanks
Mair
Posted by Zo on September 1, 2001, at 18:33:57
In reply to Re: Compassion Does Not Mean Agreement » Zo, posted by NikkiT2 on September 1, 2001, at 7:08:26
>Sal insists that self medication is fine
He does? Has he no doctor?
But Nikki, what I sense is that you're looking for a rule, here: Self-medication Is Bad. And I think Rules, in this game, are not only hard to find, they simply don't work.
Neither obeying one's doctor's every word nor going it completely alone make any sense. Getting well has to be a more organic, inclusive, responsive -- and responsible -- process. At first glance, this way seems full of pitfalls, and Sal an example.
Sal is an example of something. . .but I'm not sure it's "The Dangers of Self-Medicating." Plenty of bipolars, if that's what he is, ignore their doctors. Mania and hypomania are like the addict' denial. . .maybe even moreso. I mean, you feel good, what could be wrong with that?!
Just some thoughts,
Zo
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | 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.