# A little more about my Tom Cruise rant



## andymania (Mar 19, 2005)

I did some research about the Church of Scientology after finding out Tom Crusie was a devote member of. No wonder he denounces psychiatry since it is the Church's no.1 enemy. I stumbled upon this great site which tries to inform the public about the dangers of this Church, and that it posts many many secret documents ( including many written by hand from L.Ron Hubbard himself).

All I can say is that this religion/philosophy is just as dangerous as it claims psychology and psychiatry to be.

What a load of sci-fi crap. And off course there is some sort of a deal between the church and all these stupid celebs that are members.

Anyway, yes psychology/psychiatry has a long ways to go before it solves and solidifies any claims. However to say that psychiatry/psychology is a pseudo science is quite effrontery.

All sciences started out as hypotheses, and went through an abudant amount of trial and error before any kind of fact could be declared. This is what is going on with these Anti-depressants. There are side-effects which can be very bad for some and we truly do not know if they can cause some permanent changes. However this is the price you have to pay for science. Without mistakes there can be no progress. Yes, I understand that the pharmaceutical companies make big $$$ of these drugs and probably want people to be depressed, anxious, etc however to give such a label to all the millions of psychologists, researchers who are doing all this work just because of the few big drug companies is an insult. Im sure that there are plenty of researchers/psychologists who really are passionate about there work and want to make a difference.

There are many theories in astronomy and many facts that need to be sought out, yet we do not dare to call it a pseudo-science.

You need to start somewhere and starting with chemical imbalances starts like a good starting point,

-Andy


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

Amen to that !


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

Even within the psychology vs. psychiatry field, the theory of "chemical imbalance" is _hugely_ debated. that doesn't make psychologist scientologist btw :wink: and even when one is willing to accept that theory, then there's still the question of which came first the chicken or the egg. Do our emotions cause the chemical imbalance, or is the chemical imbalance causing our negative emotions?

theories are great, yes, wonderful starting point. but in astronomy you don't start launching ppl into space before you have facts. in psychiatry however, millions of ppl launch their brain into space daily despite being told that maybe only 30-40% might benefit, the rest might get much worse; you might have to go through a series of trial and error before the* right *med for you is found, and that's gonna add a LOT of stress on you CNS, and of course, those side effects...now that's science i'm not willing to count on. but that's just me.

-ru


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Andy,

why dont you lay off on the scientology stuff. Nobody is debating that its a bunch of bs. I think we can all agree on that.

Youre going to get a an arguement tho when you try to compare psychiatry to science. How scientific is a profession that literally votes in disease titles and treats them with drugs that have absolutely no proven mechanism?

I dont agree that this is a science that is slowly advancing. The only thing I see advancing is their marketing strategies.

Not until they can prove their diseases and have a full understanding of how their drugs work, will I ever consider any of this a science. Until then I only consider it greed and wrecklessness.

Joe


----------



## Dreamland (Jun 1, 2005)

Scientolgists need to be publically flogged with a large piece of prosciutto ham, tar and feathered like they did in the American west, and then paraded through the streets of NYC with everyone pointing fingers and laughing at them like the ancient "walk of shame". All Scientology headquarters will susbsequently turned into convention centers for "trekkies", or Star Trek nerds as they're also known, and playgrounds for Dungeons and Dragons misfits.


----------



## Scattered (Mar 8, 2005)

Perhaps you have some issues you haven't worked out yet.


----------



## Dreamland (Jun 1, 2005)

Lighten up scattered!!!! Don't take it all so serious. If I offended you, please let me make it up by inviting you take a lovely dinner at Wolfgang Puck's five star restaurant, followed by a Gondola ride down Newport Harbor, and finally a hot Turkish steam bath.


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

What a waste of a lovely, and expensive, piece of prosciutto. :shock:

Howza bout we try a solid piece of cheap baloney?

:lol:


----------



## M A R S (Jun 24, 2005)

what to know what is realy crazy THIS:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu

_"In Scientology doctrine, Xenu is a galactic ruler who, 75 million years ago, brought billions of people to Earth, stacked them around volcanoes, and blew them up with hydrogen bombs. Their souls then clustered together and stuck to the bodies of the living, and continue to cause people problems today. These events are known to Scientologists as "Incident II," and the traumatic memories associated with them as The Wall of Fire or the R6 implant. The story of Xenu is part of a much wider range of Scientology beliefs in extraterrestrial civilizations and alien interventions in Earthly events, collectively described by L. Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, as space opera."

"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."_


----------



## Dreamland (Jun 1, 2005)

Wow...totally bitchin"!!!! Sounds like those Japanese monster movies I used to watch as a kid, with Ultraman and clan of other Ultramen(Ultra 7, Ultraman Tiga, Ultraman Jack) coming back to earth to work with the Monster Task Force stationed in Tokyo. Or the Epic battles between Mecha-Godzilla vs. Ghidorah/Rodan/Gigan.


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

Scientology probably does suck because it seems to complicate and make people even less likely to still consider that psychiatry makes huges mistakes in its pill dispensing and makes it even harder for the people who have been hurt not helped by psychiatry to have a voice of opinion still.

Engendering the unfair stereotype that if you have views, which are anti-psychiatry not just always politically correct, and (pro-psychiatry) that you are just a minority cult or going to be put in a certain reject box scientologist or not, isn't helpful for victims of it.

What about when tardive 'akathisia' drives someone into having suicidal feelings, worse still 'causes' them to attempt to put themselves out the indescribable pain their in and feeling within their spinal column, 
when it activates on neuroleptics, or SSRI's?

Even though it can be treated, this condition/side effect is almost denied being a possible reality, within mainstream psychiatry. Is it then not even more unfair, when someone still has apparently to respect the status of a psychiatrist, otherwise to be ridiculed or possibly called a scientologist or oddity,

on the merits of a psychiatric doctor being intellectual and therefore correct on everything involving their subject, even though being incapable of realising that not everyone, not half as many as publicised reacts to these things in a tangibly benefitting way, and it sometimes costs the patients life.

The fact that this person may have been to medical school for over 10 years, and still doesn't seemingly have a clue about what they are doing, when making people extremely disturbed from the specific side effects of these meds sometimes, is why it is scarier still.

http://www.breggin.com/31-49.pdf

Grandma.


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

(Disclaimer:#764744)

As I have a bellyfull of chemo and a split in my skull, dare I say......yes, I dare.

I enjoy reading that we all dismiss Scientology (as I do) as ridiculous, dangerous, poppy-cock. But, er, just change a few choice word and you get this......

"In Christian doctrine, Jesus is a galactic ruler who, 2005 years ago, walked around performing miracles and converted billlions of people on earth, stacked unbelievers around pyres, and set them on fire. Their souls then went to somewhere called 'hell', joined up with a fallen angel called 'Satan' and continue to cause people problems today. These events are known to Christians as Sin. The story of Jesus is part of a much wider range of Christian beliefs in an loving god, collectively described by hundreds of different people who never knew, saw, or heard of Jesus."

Woof.


----------



## M A R S (Jun 24, 2005)

That's funny but not right, Jesus never set fires.

You would have been able to make it sound more insane.

Adam and Eve and the rib thing.

How the ark had only 2 of every animal and now we have a world full of diverse creatures.

How the world was made in 6 days.

How god HATES gays

How George Bush is doing "Gods" work.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

All religions were created because of mans fear of the unknown. Im guilty of being a bit spiritual at times but in my opinon anybody who simply accepts the current religions as "gospel" is a f-f-f-f-f-f-ool.


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

I personally love the new updated 21st century version of "God", scientologist, Nuwabian, Raelian, whatever...it's all the same basic concept, no different from what we have now. Some Entity(s) whose mailing address is not on planet earth created us and put us here to follow his/their rules. at least the Nuwabians have a nifty video that gosh darn just explains everything...

http://www.nuworldorder.com


----------



## Guest (Jul 12, 2005)

How, just how can you diagnose a person with a disease in a mere 15-30 minutes, which is exactly what psychiatrists do? It is impossible to know what is going on. The psychiatrist is playing the guessing game and he or she doesn't have a clue to whether or not the problem has originated in the brain, the stomach, the thyroid etc... Feelings of anxiety and depression may not even be chemical imbalances in the brain completely. They could be caused by an overly toxic body , hormones, low liver function, bad nutrtional habits etc...Psychiatrists never ask about what you eat, your lifestyle habits, or even check other parts of your body for dysfunction..It cannot be denied that it is all guess work and that is a very dangerous when it comes to the human body. No doubt some people get relief, but there is also no doubt that thousands get debilitating side effects that lead to death and debilitation.

Yes, the church of science is probably a crock of shit. I have not read into what they believe, so I cannot further comment. However, Cruise was right in his sayings about how chemical imbalances are not valid. I totally agree with him there & would gladly support him in a rally against psychiatry.


----------



## Guest (Jul 12, 2005)

My, my. What have we here? Someone who's been to each and every psychiatrist and knows everything that each of them does. Who knew such genius existed here on this lowly flotsam in the middle of the Internet?


----------



## Guest (Jul 12, 2005)

Shutup. I never said I was a genius. However, I have been to 5 psychiatrists and have corresponded with thousands of people all over the web and my community who have been to psychiatrists and I ask them of their experience and it's the same everytime..."15 minutes and a pill."


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Will,

Your reply was lousy.


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

Will do you have the 'Power' to give a more expansive and a response which has constructive purpose?

+ what does flotsam mean please?

Grandma!!!!


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

Yeah!! You just wait till we find out what "lowly flotsam" means. :evil:

Oh, let's see...1. floating wreckage of a ship. Ummm...that might be down on the Euphoria. 2.vagrant improverished people. Ummm...no, I don't think that's us. 3. unimportant miscellaneous material. Hmmm...by any other name - Will. :evil:

Post #3 "My, my. What have we here? Someone who's been to each and every psychiatrist and knows everything that each of them does. Who knew such genius existed here on this lowly flotsam in the middle of the Internet?"

Well, obviously you didn't know such a genius existed. Now...shoo, before a house lands on you.

terri

P.S. I just have a thing about smart a$$es. Brings out the flotsam in me. :lol:


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

Mmmmmmmm....flotsam. Slobber. It's what keeps the world turning.


----------



## Guest (Jul 13, 2005)

Flotsam...reminds me of a dish they'd serve in a greek restraunt or something.


----------



## person3 (Aug 10, 2004)

Pure Narcotic:



> No doubt some people get relief, but there is also no doubt that thousands get debilitating side effects that lead to death and debilitation.


Whoa whoa whoa. A) The people who are at risk for death and debilitation VERY OFTEN already have psychological or chemical conditions so severe that whatever shift the medication provides will send them over the edge.

B) that statement seemed very strong, as if you were implying that Psychs leave a scorched earth of ruined patients in their wake. But the reality is you have SOME uncomfortable patients, SOME satisfied patients, and VERY FEW PATIENTS WHO EXPERIENCE EXTREME EFFECTS.

Let's keep this real.


----------



## Guest (Jul 13, 2005)

Person 3,

You are very naive when it comes to this subject. I was one of those who experienced the severe and debilitating side effects, and I never had a horrible pre existing disorder. Nobody knows the percentages as far as it goes with patients who experience the extreme side effects, withdrawal etc... but it is very bold of you to say that all of these people had severe pre existing disorders. We can say SOME experience it, FEW experience it, NONE experience it, who knows? From what I have read, there are petitions against benzos, anti depressants and anti psychotics on the internet with signatures ranging in the thousands. I would call that more than SOME, wouldn't you?

Some of these people may have been complete whackos, but a good percentage of them were just regular folks struggling with lifes issues and looking for an escape, and ended up in the shrinks office complaining because they were depressed over a lost job, divorce etc..

I realize you take drugs and back up psychiatry because you don't know the other side like i do. That is cool..Just think before you speak and perhaps do some research.


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

Pure Narcotic I agree with you.

'Person3' you wrote that some people have prexisting disorders might push someone very close to the edge over the edge.

Whether or not you believe that is true or not, or whether the person just became ill on the medication depending on the particular patient, is it still important not to disposably push any patient 'over' the edge, when these meds do hurt people so that nobodies life is lost, just because not 'every' person gets what would be self-measured as a bad reaction? It seems a little non-equal.

I disagree with your view because its not accurate, but its cool I don't think an argument like situation will help either. You must be unaware yet or unknowing about the details some of the specific side effects like 'tardive akathisia' which causes absolutely unbearable suffering for example, of some of these tablets.

Grandma!


----------



## person3 (Aug 10, 2004)

Neal, with all due respect, I believe you to be the naive one.

Why? Because I know your personality. I know from what you post on here and what I've seen from you that psychology plays a huge role in why you suffered. But because you don't want to admit that, you are keeping yourself in a hole.

And actually I DO know the other side. I have HAD DRUGS HAVE DEBILITATING EFFECTS ON ME. more than you could imagine. But, they were the same drugs that when i took years prior in a DIFFERENT mindset, they did not effect me at all. It was NOT the drugs. It was me.

If I had not stopped blaming the drugs for what I felt they "did" to me, I would have not ever gotten on the road to recovery.

A lot of people don't want to admit that it's more THEM and their psychology than the drugs. The drugs can only do so much.

Also you have to remember, naive one, that a lot of these people take these drugs with certain preconceptions about them BECAUSE THEY ARE PSYCH DRUGS. If you take a drug that will effect how you feel when you already feel bad, it is a risk. Because the reason why you feel bad my have to do wtih your damn personality.

dont even.


----------



## person3 (Aug 10, 2004)

grandma,

my actual point to neal was this:

the debilitating effects of psych drugs are being over-amplified by a few people on this board. YES people can suffer from the drug, and deeply, and it is absolutely true. but people are looking at this in a very black and white context. The amount of people that have suffered from a psych drug is no larger a percentage than the amount of people that have suffered from ANY OTHER DRUG. IF YOU TAKE A DRUG YOU TAKE A RISK. duh. doesn't take much to figure that out.

but another thing is, the type of personality that most often acquires dp is the kind of person that is FAR too eager to blame drugs or society or something else for what is happening to them. The root of DP is ignoring the parts of YOU that are wrong with YOU and instead blaming outside factors. It's about lying to yourself. So when I see people go on and on and on and on about how a disproportionate number of people suffer severely from psychiatric meds as opposed to any other meds, and that this risk is so huge as to deter or stop OTHERS from seeking treatment, I suspect something's a little wrong here with what they are saying.

I used to do this too, remember. And you know what? I was jealous of the people who benefitted from Zoloft and Effexor, the drugs that "ruined" me. I would lash out on these drugs because I was so jealous that those same drugs could HELP other people and I could not BEAR to face that fact. It made me feel left out in an odd way.

I think there might be some hidden feelings of this kind of jealousy behind some of the anti-med zealots around here. There is too often a hidden motivation behind someone's words when they are too extreme or black and white on an issue.


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

(soon)


----------



## Guest (Jul 14, 2005)

LoL Person 3, this argument will go no further because you quite frankly are being quite pretentious and such a debate will just make us both walk around in circles. You think you are right with your theories and I think I am right..There is no convincing us otherwise, so why argue about beliefs within us that cannot be changed? Your words and analysis of my personality do not change a thing about me and beliefs, nor will my analysis on psychiatric drugs and my experience change a thing about you and your beliefs. So lets leave it at that.


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

> So lets leave it at that.


No, please don't - continue bickering.


----------



## Guest (Jul 14, 2005)

God lives, martinelv!


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

> God lives, martinelv!


eh?


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

I think it safe to say the p3 is the naive one. Either that or shes so doped up on her beloved rec and psych drugs that she doesnt know what shes saying(typing). Something has to explain her posts.


----------



## Welshlad (Jul 11, 2005)

I don't think there's any need to argue about this. There are side efects to all medicinal drugs, even paracetamol. The fact is that not even the researchers, doctors or psychiatrists know exactly what happens or all the possible side effects when people take pshycoactive medicinal drugs. It takes years to determine what receptors a certain chemical activates and where in the brain it has certain effects. Add to that the fact that mental illness causes a state of imbalance in the brain it is hardly surprising that some people suffer reactions that are unexpected. It is not helpful to blame doctors, psychiatrists or any other person on this site for that. Their just doing their job.

tis also true that how you feel about taking the drug will also have a significant effect on how it effects you. After all, feelings are just pathways full of chemical rections.

I do agree therefore that a lot more should be done to assess what drugs are, and are not suitable for patients with conditions like our own. Both sides of this argument are RELEVANT. Nobody is right or wrong.

now kiss and make up :lol:


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

Disagree with you mostly and know different Welshlad... Although I think that most psycho-active substances including psych meds have the abillity to personify or intensify someones feelings, this is not the whole picture at all to explaining the unpredictability of many of the current medicines in the psych. family.

Besides even if you think thats true, saying that the drug is a gamble and that it works only for some if your in a good mood about taking it in the first place or not apprehensive about its effects, then its seems funny that its being given to treat depression of which the symptoms are always of a negative nature.

Funnily enough a lot of people who decide to try this may be being told it is to 'raise' their mood because of the drugs percieved or marketted benefits, would it be then be normal to request they are not depressed already and that this is the only way it will enhance their mood?

If thats true, it sounds about as scientifically sensible as saying that wine will make you cheery, if your already in a good mood, but if your in a bad mood it'll make you more miserable.

Insulin for diabetes is drugs for depression is not a cross-comparable argument to most if not all of how effective current psych med's are, because there is nowhere near the same precision or understanding of their nature, compared to insulins effect on 1 thing.

Even most psychiatrists will admit there is no understanding of how exactly they work. We don't know enough about the brain yet to completely understand the nature of chemical imbalance.

[hr]
Your right that 'all' meds have side effects even parecetamol has side effects this is true. Infact anything foreign used in the body will have alterations and effects on the body, whether it be parecetomal, paxil or taking a sports supplement.

But isn't more important, the 'extent' to which a side effect causes harm or the significance? such as when an effect is either dangerous, fatal, or causes excruciating suffering and pain.

You just don't understand the 'extremity' of people's appauling reactions to this stuff or the specific and nameable awful side effects which are selfishly under-researched and bypassed or even forgotten as significant in favour of the drug.

If you are sayin in the way it comes across, then at current you don't have an educated clue that some of these side-effects can't possibly be to do with just a will of a person's mind to their preconceived idea of what the medicine will do to them.

That would be similar to saying that someone who took Phen-Fen who was scared or apprehensive about taking it, is why they may have suffered heart valve damage, which of course is impossible.

Grandma.


----------



## Welshlad (Jul 11, 2005)

I do agree that alot of these side effects need to be further researched (see my first post), but that's more the fault of the pharmaceutical companies as all they think about is money. As long as there's a market for their drugs they'll do anything to get out of researching side-effects, that pisses me off sometimes.

And your right, I have no experience of these side effects because I've chosen not to take any medication. The medication only masks the symptoms. The only cure is to find a way to reduce anxiety / negative thought toward the dp itself and that includes its causes and symptoms.

I sympathise with you that you've had bad experiences with meds. I was just giving an answer as to why these things happen. As I said, nobody is right or wrong on this issue in what they have said.

cya


----------



## Welshlad (Jul 11, 2005)

grandma-stole-my-wheels said:


> That would be the equivilent of saying that some of the people who took Phen-Fen were scared or apprehensive about taking it, and that's why they suffered heart valve damage.


 Of course that could not be the case. Phen-Fen's target site isn't in the brain. You have no ability to change the functioning of your other organs by thinking, but that is possible with the brain.

So, for example if you were not convinced that a drug would work for you felt bad about taking it that may affect its action.

By the way I've just found a very interesting research paper on this subject by an italian research group on:

The influence of seratonin transporter polymorphism and other polymorphisms of the seratonin pathway on the efficacy of antidepressant treatments

To summarise it is saying that they are looking into the effects and side- effects different antidepressants will have on different people with a differant genetic susceptability.[/u]


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

Phen-fen actually was a 'brain' drug, but not really labelled in the same category as current psych meds (ie. like SSRI's) etc., but it did work on the brain, it partly effected dopamine.

But one specific side effect caused heart-valve damage, which is why it was banned.



> You have no ability to change the functioning of your other organs by thinking, but that is possible with the brain.


Besides, your thinking 'can' have an effect on the way areas such as your heart work, if you are excited or nervous, or learning to get through a panic attack, the response travels and begins from the brain, and your thinking.

But when a drug causes a side-effect or specific negative symptom which is physical, that the drug has directly caused, and people react differently, it can't possibly be a product of someones thinking (ie. tardive dsykinesia for example).

Dealing with a panic attack, through a psych med or through your own resolve or thinking, are two completely different attitudes in looking at (that) particular problem.

Grandma.


----------



## Welshlad (Jul 11, 2005)

good point. This is a complicated issue, like all mental health stuff, just hope other people are asking these questions and doing something about it.


----------



## sming (May 7, 2005)

> The medication only masks the symptoms.


Speak for yourself, sunbeam. My thinking has changed quite radically since starting Lexapro and Buspar. I would argue that that is changing the cause, since I personally feel bad after thinking certain thoughts rather than "just feeling bad".

I'd been trying to change my thinking for 6 years via REBT, CAT and CBT with little impact. These drugs have changed my thinking. I would not call that "masking the symptoms".

Pete
p.s. where abouts in Wales you from? I'm a Bangor lad.


----------



## Welshlad (Jul 11, 2005)

ok, u guys win on this one.

Think I've been putting thinking in the same category as emotion.I could do with thinking a bit more myself sometimes.

I'm from the Rhondda, but I spend half the year in Edinburgh at Uni.

How'd u end up in NYC then?


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

The field of "medicine" in its classic sense is an art, not a science.

However, the method by which substances are determined to have specific actions on other substances is "science" in its classic sense.

All I know about antidepressants is that:

- The drugs themselves were initially formulated for a very different purpose (I cannot recall what it was but I'm sure you can find it via Google) and *a side effect *of that original drug or drugs was that the patients reported that *their moods improved*.

- There's a chemical "clean-up crew" in the brain that removes neurotransmitters after a neuron "fires." The drugs do not create anything; they make the clean-up crew behave less efficiently, that is, the clean-up crew leaves serotonin behind and fails to "uptake" or "clean up" all of it.

- Technically, antidepressants are removing the symptoms not by "masking" them, that is, by covering them with some other symptom. They are stopping the clean-up crew from doing its job completely.

- Scientific studies have led many a good mind to conclude that there is a genetic *disposition* for depression, which means not that depression is inherited, but that the chance of a trigger igniting, so to speak, the disposition toward depression *is* inherited. Google for _twin studies depression_.

---------

Doctors are not policemen; if patients and their families are so incapable of recognizing aberrant behavior or thoughts and refuse to consult their physicians, you can never avoid the possibility that a person will go berserk. Heck, they go berserk without drugs.

If there is over-prescription of psychotropic drugs, it is a political problem that needs to be addressed by the whole society. I personally believe that only psychiatrists should prescribe psychotropic drugs in consultation with a patient's family doctor or GP. This would permit a greater level of patient review, IMO, and greater protections.

So let's be agreed that the field of medicine is an ART, not a science. It takes interpretation and knowledge to treat a person. But the substances themselves are subject to the SCIENTIFIC METHOD, and maintaining there are no grounds for their continued use is a symptom of the general ignorance of a vast portion of so-called Western civilization.

What were those Columbine monsters doing during their afternoons? Where were their parents? I think it is unconscionable to place the blame for the creation of these monsters onto the field of medicine. No, parents have screwed up really badly. I hold them responsible, and I really think they should pay for their willingly standing by and allowing the monsters to be taken completely over by Satan. That's what they did. Don't blame the doctors, please.

Sojourner


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

. soon .


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

Sojourner said:


> - The drugs themselves were initially formulated for a very different purpose


tuberculosis.



> - Technically, antidepressants are removing the symptoms not by "masking" them, that is, by covering them with some other symptom.


but you are artificially increasing serotonin instead of addressing why it became low in the first place...so that _is_ masking the problem. and no, to date there's no conclusive evidence that depression can be genetic.



> They are stopping the clean-up crew from doing its job completely.


two things. no one really knows *why* an increase in Serotonin in the synapse _sometimes_ improves mood. fact is AD's don't work for everyone so it seems logical to conclude that there's more to it than just increasing Serotonin levels. and no one knows what that is yet.

the other even more important issue is that resting/reuptake Serotonin is not garbage, it's not always destroyed. it's used to make Melatonin (that's why ppl on SSRI's usually have problems with insomnia) and it's also used to make 5-HIAA a Serotonin metabolite that when low can lead to all kinds of problems, like aggression, violence, suicide, etc...you can't interrupt the natural cycle and expect no consequences.



> Don't blame the doctors, please.


maybe not for columbine, but I'll always blame *my* GP for pulling a 15 mins and a pill and no explanation...7 months later i'm still horribly addicted to that pill. :evil: :evil:

-ru


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Hi Rula,

What drug are you addicted to?


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

Rula,

Yes, I think your doctor was negligent for doing that.

With regard to the genetic disposition, my understanding is that the evidence strongly suggests that it is so. Nothing is ever "conclusive" in science because no experiment or research can cover ALL variables in one study.

Thanks for filling in some of the details.

There has to be a way to get off whatever drug you say you are addicted to. I hope you find it soon.


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

dakotajo said:


> What drug are you addicted to?


your favorite Joe, Klonopoison. I'm tapering right now, and it's so much fun. :roll:

I'm not trying to deter anyone here from taking whatever meds they're comfortable with and feel might help. I do agree that mindset has a lot to do with how effective these meds can be. I'm not even opposed to the idea of masking symptoms as long as one is working to figure out what's causing them in the first place. But doctors who aren't even psychiatrists (not just my GP) keep prescribing meds for longer than their recommended *safe* usage guidlines. That's 3-4 weeks for benzos, and 6 months to a year for AD's. Use them longer and you're opening the door to a brand new set of problems.

Sajourner, I can only speak for my own brand of depression. I have 9 siblings, we all lived through the same civil war, the same constant daily fear of death/who's gonna bomb our house next? or will it be a car bomb today (i nearly died of one). we all dealt with the same alcoholic father too, but none of my siblings have ever seen a psychiatrist, been diagnosed depressed or taken an anti-anxiety med. genetic? I doubt it.

-ru


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Hi Rula,

Im sorry to hear that. I thought I remembered you saying you were taking klonopin. Im glad to hear you are tapering slowly. Im sure you will do fine.

I was naive and I trusted doctors. I didnt do the proper research about the drug they were so willing to give me. I was warned that benzos were addictive but my doctor told me that if I truly had anxiety there was a good chance I wouldnt become dependent. Boy, does that make sense??? he didnt explain to me that benzos are physically and psychologically addicting. Nobody is immune to physical addiction. Its just so insane to me how doctors are so willing to exchange one problem(anxiety, which can be dealt with without drugs) for alot bigger one(addiction). It just sends you out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Joe


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

I forgot to ask you something. When did you first experience chronic dp/dr? Was it before or after the klonopin? Ive read alot of stories of people who have picked up this symptom while on these drugs or in withdrawal and after they are off and given some time for their brain to "heal", the dp went away.

Ray Nimmo(benzo.org) told me he first experinced dp/dr in withdrawal from valium and had it 24-7 for 18 straight months. One day he said he woke up and it was gone and that was the beginning of his valium withdrawal recovery.

I still feel dp/dr is related to sertonin and Ive always wondered if benzos reduce the output of serotonin which causes thes symptoms of depression, anxiety and even dp/dr. It just takes along time for the brain to get back to its pre-drug state.

Joe


----------



## Guest (Jul 15, 2005)

> Ray Nimmo(benzo.org) told me he first experinced dp/dr in withdrawal from valium and had it 24-7 for 18 straight months. One day he said he woke up and it was gone and that was the beginning of his valium withdrawal recovery. Ray Nimmo(benzo.org) told me he first experinced dp/dr in withdrawal from valium and had it 24-7 for 18 straight months. One day he said he woke up and it was gone and that was the beginning of his valium withdrawal recovery.


Not a very reliable source


----------



## enigma (Feb 18, 2005)

rula said:


> your favorite Joe, Klonopoison.


I _love_ klonopin! Mmmmmmmmmmm......................*candy*! 

e


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

dakotajo said:


> I forgot to ask you something. When did you first experience chronic dp/dr? Was it before or after the klonopin?


After the klonopin for sure. but, for me I know dp is nothing more than a symptom of anxiety, and my anxiety went sky high when I goggled the word Benzo and came across the benzo forum. Then it got even worse when I tried to cold trukey after just 3 weeks, bad idea.



> Ray Nimmo(benzo.org) told me he first experinced dp/dr in withdrawal from valium and had it 24-7 for 18 straight months. One day he said he woke up and it was gone and that was the beginning of his valium withdrawal recovery.


never heard of DP dissapearing over night like that. it leaves like it comes on, gradually...Grandma's DP was actually Benzo induced, and it took him around 18 months or so after the cold turkey to completely recover. right Grandma?



> Ive always wondered if benzos reduce the output of serotonin which causes thes symptoms of depression, anxiety and even dp/dr.


they do. it's in the Ashton manual.


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

Rula wrote:
Sajourner, I can only speak for my own brand of depression. I have 9 siblings, we all lived through the same civil war, the same constant daily fear of death/who's gonna bomb our house next? or will it be a car bomb today (i nearly died of one). we all dealt with the same alcoholic father too, but none of my siblings have ever seen a psychiatrist, been diagnosed depressed or taken an anti-anxiety med. genetic? I doubt it.

----

Where do you live -- Northern Ireland?

Your evidence is anecdotal, not scientific. The twins studies were scientific. Remember also that it's the disposition only that's thought to be genetic, and what may have been a "trigger" for you may not have been a "trigger" for your siblings.

But, of course, the bottom line is that what science may "say" today can be erased tomorrow with a new study. :roll:


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

Sojourner said:


> Where do you live -- Northern Ireland?


LOL. cuz my father was an alcoholic? no, i was born in Lebanon, not typcially known as the land of alcoholism 



> Your evidence is anecdotal, not scientific. The twins studies were scientific. Remember also that it's the disposition only that's thought to be genetic, and what may have been a "trigger" for you may not have been a "trigger" for your siblings.


The point I was trying to make, and didn't make clearly, is that IF a genetic predisposition existed, and environmental factors clearly existed, and given the number of sooo many siblings, then the odds of depression being triggered should be higher than 1 in 10. I'm not even talking about a DP trigger, no 3-hour panic attack, just a depression trigger.

The scientists are now leaning towards the combo-special theory, it's genetic+environmental+organic. Personally I'm a big beleiver in the organic theory *alone*, as long as your diet is solid, you're rested and you exercise, your body knows how to blanace out its own chemical; doesn't matter what traumatic events come your way, your body can heal itself. Depression rates are highest in the west where really, let's face it, traumatic events/life problems relative to other parts of the world really are insignificant...but our diet sucks and our food is inorganic and lacks nutrients.

A famous psychiatrist (i believe it was Adler but I could be wrong) said and i'm paraphrasing, "One day it will be discovered that all psychological problems have their roots in something organic".

but you're right, scientist will switch gears again, and they'll decide maybe that the real cause of depression is not having used the word flotsam cleverly in a sentence, by the age of 21.

-ru


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

Ru,

"You wrote: "LOL. cuz my father was an alcoholic?"

The above thought is YOUR thought -- please do not project such evil things onto me, okay? It was never my thought. I do not participate in the inferior and immoral form of thinking involved in such stereotyping and I would prefer not to be accused of it.

I was trying to think of an English-speaking country that one could say had a "civil war" -- perhaps Zimbabwe...

But now it sounds like you live in the West, where we haven't a care in the world, so I'm more confused about where you are -- of course it doesn't really matter... but what's the point of talking at all if we don't make sense?

You also wrote: "The scientists are now leaning towards the combo-special theory, it's genetic+environmental+organic."

I thought that was what I was implying -- that it isn't JUST genetics....

Anyway, wherever you are, stay out of trouble, will 'ya????? :lol: 
---


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

Sojourner said:


> Ru,
> 
> The above thought is YOUR thought -- please do not project such evil things onto me, okay? It was never my thought. I do not participate in the inferior and immoral form of thinking involved in such stereotyping and I would prefer not to be accused of it.


man, chill...i don't even think an irish person would call that an *EVIL* and immoral from of thinking. I have many Irish friends, I live on top of an Irish bar, and they think joking about their drinking is funny! exaggerated political correctness is a sickness of american society only. you should try being not so PC sometimes, it's fun.



> I was trying to think of an English-speaking country that one could say had a "civil war" -- perhaps Zimbabwe...


relax! i know that's what you were thinking dude. but why assume i only speak english?



> but what's the point of talking at all if we don't make sense?


 not sure what part didn't make sense to you. *i don't agree with the gentic argument, at all*, simple enough? but i am sure of one thing, this conversation is now pointless. :lol: :lol:

enjoy ur day...


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

Rula,

All I can say is that you are obviously not a student of history. It's one thing to laugh with people you know in an intimate setting when everyone knows there's nothing seriously meant by it, but far different to jump to a conclusion that someone is saying something because of a negative stereotype.

You are also ignorant, evidently, of the utterly despicable and EVIL history of the treatment of the Irish in America, the Jews in Germany, etc., and the blacks in America.

How could anyone be this dense?

That you "don't agree with the gentic (sic) argument, at all" is amusing, but meaningless. Your opinion on that is worthless to me, frankly. Anybody who thinks racial and ethnic so-called jokes are "funny" is truly among the mentally deranged in our world.


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

:roll: :roll: :roll:

ahem, maybe sajourner you forgot that *you* made the completely baseless guess that I was Irish. no wait, your lame excuse was it's cuz I speak english, that should cover just about 2/3 of the world's population. maybe you should ask yourself why the devil made you ask that question.

your knowledge of foreign cultures is about as deep as your knowledge in anything else really. I mean my name is RULA and I have 10 siblings, and you guessed Ireland?

I'm just amazed at how good christian ppl like you who often bring up things like evil and satanic forces acting in the world, actually are so far removed from having *any* qualities that Christ would've loved for you to have. your faith is about as shallow as your words.

But Sajourner, seriously, I can't seem to make this site stop emailing me despite turning email notifications off! so pleeeease pleeeease stop replying to this thread, wouldn't you just *love* this message board without me on it?? hmm?


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

rula said:


> ahem, maybe sajourner you forgot that *you* made the completely baseless guess that I was Irish. no wait, your lame excuse was it's cuz I speak english, that should cover just about 2/3 of the world's population. maybe you should ask yourself why the devil made you ask that question.


There you go again. I've told him to get lost and go look for you, and evidently he has found you.

My guess was wrong, but hardly baseless. Many people around the world who speak English do not know or use the childish abbreviations for words -- which are suitable for instant messaging, but not serious discussion -- that you do.



rula said:


> your knowledge of foreign cultures is about as deep as your knowledge in anything else really. I mean my name is RULA and I have 10 siblings, and you guessed Ireland?


You have a delusion that you are God -- I see that now. You think you know what I know about "foreign cultures" but you actually know nothing about what I know. Again you are projecting your own deficits onto me, because you reveal by what you say that you cannot even see the well-known and rather fundamental connection between the idea of Catholic Irish and extremely large families. It's a factual connection based on religion. I had never heard of the "Troubles" spoken of as a civil war, which is the connection my mind came up with.

Your "name" should have told me something? :roll: You should do stand-up, you know. I hate tell you, but my name is NOT Sojourner. 
:roll:



rula said:


> I'm just amazed at how good christian ppl like you who often bring up things like evil and satanic forces acting in the world, actually are so far removed from having *any* qualities that Christ would've loved for you to have. your faith is about as shallow as your words.


You don't know whether I am good or not; that's another problem you have. You cannot see that objecting to the projection of your internal prejudices onto others is a moral act. You don't know what "good" is because you think rebuking evil is NOT good. Well, I don't believe you really think that; you just think that you meant nothing serious by it. Your lack of knowledge of "foreign cultures" is evident. You obviously have no idea how sensitive to these things Americans are. You think you are "innocent," but like with the discussion of a genetic factor in mental illnesses, you don't want to be disturbed by the facts.

Ethnic and racial alleged humor is not funny. Genocide is not funny. Accusing people of using ethnic stereotypes is as evil as having the stereotypes yourself.

Oh, yes, I am shallow for asking where you lived and for confronting you and your twisted assumption that I was applying a stereotype the way you do. I am shallow for *your *behavior -- for *your connecting in your own mind alcoholism and Ireland* and then projecting that on me -- and laughing about it as if your accusation was some kind of "gotcha"?



rula said:


> But Sajourner, seriously, I can't seem to make this site stop emailing me despite turning email notifications off! so pleeeease pleeeease stop replying to this thread, wouldn't you just *love* this message board without me on it?? hmm?


Yes, stand-up is definitely where you will succeed, rula. Sorry, but I cannot help you with this, but you can conquer this on your own. See the little key with the word "Delete" written on it? Use it.


----------



## grandma-stole-my-wheels (Nov 17, 2004)

Hi Sojourner/Argument maker!, I just chose to remove my post where I said I thought you should stay on this forum, because of reading the almost laughably strange and religously interconnected weird things, you have written to Rula. (about something to do with the power of Satan or you deciding that she thinks she is a god or something lol).

Grandma. 
(goodbye!)


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

I said nothing weird about religion. I said stereotyping people was evil.

Rula said the devil made me say something to her, and I responded with a joke about sending the devil over to her.

I don't care what you think, actually, because your tool is defective.


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

> because your tool is defective


Please elaborate. :?


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

Have the buttons been changed on this site? I seem to be noticing new colors and doo-dads, but maybe I'm hallucinating.

My tool must be defective, too. :lol:


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

I think they have. I've noticed some subtle changes as well, but then again - I may be hallucinating as well. Folie a deux perhaps Sojourner.


----------



## bright23 (Jun 6, 2005)

"I don't care what you think, actually, because your tool is defective."

That's genius. Truly.


----------



## [rula] (Jan 16, 2005)

Sojourner said:


> You don't know whether I am good or not; that's another problem you have.


here's what I/WE all know: you're belligerent, you're rude, you're offensive, you're explosive, you have too much anger inside you. you don't hesitate to call ppl on a *support board* things like "coconut" "dense" or "retarded". does it make you feel good about yourself somehow? you don't edit yourself when you speak, your form of communication is incredibly ineffective. case in point, when you claimed to want to leave the board, no one who knows you tried to stop you. but if you insist, sure i'm God.



> Ethnic and racial alleged humor is not funny. Genocide is not funny. Accusing people of using ethnic stereotypes is as evil as having the stereotypes yourself.


Genocide? stick to one argument at a time, preferably one that's relevant to the topic.

I had my Irish friend and my Irish boyfriend read this thread and they both laughed their ass off at your twisted logic, and your obvious inability to admit that *YOU* made the connection in your head before I even said anything. but don't freak, no one thought you were evil for doing it.



> Rula said the devil made me say something to her, and I responded with a joke about sending the devil over to her.


pure genius again, but i was being sArCAsTIC (some more of my childish writing for ya!)

-r


----------



## Sojourner (May 21, 2005)

If you were honest, you would go back and read the posts and see that you made the connection, not I. Alcoholism never played a part in my guessing that it was Ireland -- but family size did.

And as a matter of fact, several people did ask me to stay. But facts never seem to matter to you, so take care and try to stay out of trouble over there.


----------

