It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ATS and Mental Illness

page: 15
38
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


My stance is this, I keep trying to make it clear but it seems some people fail to understand. When a member on ATS comes on to the boards and writs a thread saying something outrageous followed by “i have a significant mental health diagnosis symptomatic of delusions” they should be banned. On ATS we have allot of threads that promote the idea that the medical establishment is wrong, medication is bad for you and your mental illness is not a mental illness but rather you are special and sprits are talking to you. Claims like this are not only complete rubbish but also dangerous to a person who is in a venerable stat of mind as the result of a mental illness and there for in an ideal world I would like to ban them. Note that if they admit to having such an illness then the diagnostic tools would not be needed as my proposal would mean banning them just for admitting it.

I am aware of the problems that come along with this, legally for example I don’t think it could be done, and I know there could be other problems assonated with this idea. That is why I would like to see greater moderation of threads about mental illness. The winder purpose of this thread however was not to discuss the idea of banning a person who is confessed to being mentally ill rather it was for other members of ATS to discuss their views on what mental illness is. By all means if you agree with me because it would like to see some mentally ill members banned tell me, but don’t use it to attack me personally. Regardless of what you say that quote was a personal attack ageist me and not my mythology.




posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Once again a lot of contradictory statements that add up to nothing clear, where you imagine you are explaining well, some premise that you have failed to explain contextually to date in the way you imagine people will then respond as you intend.

By your own admission you are now stating that:

A. Your reasoning is flawed and has no legal basis or rational to it.
B. That you were simply inviting conversation (trolling) on a limited aspect of the Original Post.

Which is why it probably wasn’t a good idea to include other things in the Original Post that you specifically have discovered in retrospect you don’t want to have as part of the dialogue and discussion because they aren’t things you can rationally, logically and soundly make a case for and as a result tend to discredit and cast everything in a different light than you had envisioned.

So honestly for an Original Poster to be this many pages into their very own thread and still struggling to define the thread is evidence of a poorly thought out theory, hastily offered to elicit discussion along emotional hot button lines.

You really don’t have to be a Rhodes Scholar to figure that out.

What you are advocating in that poorly descriptive way is holding all people accountable for statements that they have made, that may in fact be false and purposefully said as being false, by assuming that they are true and punishing them as such.

Further that you don’t believe that the majority of ATS members are capable of making a sound and rational determination when it comes to something say like abandoning their chemo therapy for a capsaicin regimen because someone promoted it here on ATS.

Which simply opens another door, since you claim to be in the mental health field, as to whether you fear a loss of revenue from people who might abandon traditional drug and treatment regimens for alternatives, or whether you are genuinely concerned that the alternative might do them harm.

This though is also problematic as many drugs approved by the FDA here in the United States are years later taken off the market because of scores of lawsuits involving death and other debilitating side effects that the rush to get the drug to market didn’t properly study in the first place.

So your logic is flawed here too, since we know traditional medicines aren’t being properly researched, we know there is little chance that many of the alternative remedies being promoted here on ATS have been thoroughly researched either.

In its most virtuous form your argument hinges on a misplaced belief that people are not capable of rendering good decisions for themselves, so any potentially bad advice must be censored.

Yet clearly as your own thread demonstrates bad advice and bad ideas are rejected by the majority.

So you are then in fact left having to advocate that the majority be stripped of certain inalienable rights and freedoms in order to protect the minority, and in essence victimizing everyone to prevent victimization of just a few.

All of which relies on the belief that there are some victims.

So once again, these are all complaints, personal complaints backed up by no research that substantiates any of it.

Are there some victims documented here on ATS who have fallen prey to bad medical advice? You haven’t published any such research.

Are there any studies that show alternative and holistic cures don’t work and lead to death or violence on the part of ATS members?

You haven’t provided any.

So in reality all you are doing is promoting some poorly substantiated personal theories without one shred of factual evidence to make them credible.

Chances are if you weren’t the author of these theories you would be demanding proof. Bin Laden blew up the world trade centers, do you have proof he didn’t! If not he did!

So when people promote something you disagree with, you logically and rationally demand proof, yet when you are promoting an idea based along emotional hot button issues yourself, you offer none, and would like to keep the conversation away from the theories validity just to get people to rant on the emotional hot buttons.

All I am trying to do here believe it or not is to get you to see, that you are exactly like every other ATS member you decry and want to place yourself apart from and above.

By displaying how yes, in fact you too, will do all the very same things when it does come to promoting yourself and your theories.

Welcome to ATS, you will learn the lay of the land eventually.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown

My stance is this, I keep trying to make it clear but it seems some people fail to understand. ... On ATS we have allot of threads that promote the idea that the medical establishment is wrong, medication is bad for you and your mental illness is not a mental illness but rather you are special and sprits are talking to you. Claims like this are not only complete rubbish but also dangerous to a person who is in a venerable stat of mind as the result of a mental illness and there for in an ideal world I would like to ban them.


While it is clear that this is your opinion, it is far from clear that this is fact.

It might seem to you to be common sense that it's bad for someone in a fragile/delusional state to read these things, it seems like common sense to me that a person in a fragile/delusional state may read these things regardless of whether they've been banned or not, and that the social interaction involved in discussing these things rather than being alienated and isolated from the ability to discuss them could be beneficial.

We have in fact seen testimony of that benefit in this thread.

I haven't looked at the literature recently, but I did do a PubMed search on similar issues when I was involved in a previous incarnation of this thread (different OP, same claims). That was probably a year and a half ago, and what I found was that the evidence was not conclusive on either side, but especially not on the side that participation in online communities (even ones a lot further out on the fringe than this one) was harmful. There's a lot of hand-wringing and a lot of concern, but very little evidence.


That is why I would like to see greater moderation of threads about mental illness.


I agree that threads about mental illness require extra sensitivity. But we probably come at it from different angles. I think they should be (and are) monitored for T&C violations, not for questionable claims that can be debated on the thread (like that all psych medication is an evil mind-control conspiracy).


The winder [sic] purpose of this thread however was not to discuss the idea of banning a person who is confessed to being mentally ill rather it was for other members of ATS to discuss their views on what mental illness is.


I've read the OP several times now and that wasn't clear to me. It's an interesting question, but one that might be better served by a new thread.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Whist we have seen testimony that it has been advantageous we have also seen testimony that it has led to problems for people with a significant mental health problem. And I absolutely understand the problems with banning, but I think is a good idea, it would prevent them from posting this might encourage them to leave the site, it would also stop people fuelling their delusions.




Originally posted by americandingbat


I've read the OP several times now and that wasn't clear to me. It's an interesting question, but one that might be better served by a new thread.


I made the purpose of the thread quite clear, this thread was not to talk about the issue of banning, it just seems to have turned into that.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Your twisting my words, I think there might be a legal problem with it however I don’t know enough about it, I am quite open about the problems. This tread was not designed to troll it was to discuss everyone’s views on mental illness on ATS and in general. You are specifically focusing on one part of the OP and effectively trying to manipulate me into a corner were I will say “yeah ok your right”. I am not going to do that, I don’t mind you disagreeing with me that’s find, just stop expecting me to agree with you.

I would not lose any money or gain any money as a result of the drugs people take personally or otherwise. People who are living with a significant mental health illness in some cases do not have the capability to make rational decisions for themselves. Also if I recall there was somebody who posted on this thread about how he directly blames ATS for his friends mental illness getting worse.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
Whist we have seen testimony that it has been advantageous we have also seen testimony that it has led to problems for people with a significant mental health problem. And I absolutely understand the problems with banning, but I think is a good idea, it would prevent them from posting this might encourage them to leave the site, it would also stop people fuelling their delusions.




Originally posted by americandingbat


I've read the OP several times now and that wasn't clear to me. It's an interesting question, but one that might be better served by a new thread.


I made the purpose of the thread quite clear, this thread was not to talk about the issue of banning, it just seems to have turned into that.


reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Once again you keep advocating banning while claiming that the thread is not an advocacy for banning.

That notion is prominently displayed in your original post, as well as being prominently displayed in your most recent and last post.

So why then do you keep claiming you are not doing precisely what it is you are doing, and that is advocating banning members based on some loose criteria that has no science, clinical study, or legallity involved with it.

Clearly people feed their own delusions not ATS, as it is deluded to claim again and again you aren't doing, what you are in fact doing again and again, which is promoting banning.

So here we are with the old don't believe your own lying eyes believe me, don't do as I do, do as I say methodology so many take exception too here on ATS.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Your twisting my words, I think there might be a legal problem with it however I don’t know enough about it, I am quite open about the problems. This tread was not designed to troll it was to discuss everyone’s views on mental illness on ATS and in general. You are specifically focusing on one part of the OP and effectively trying to manipulate me into a corner were I will say “yeah ok your right”. I am not going to do that, I don’t mind you disagreeing with me that’s find, just stop expecting me to agree with you.

I would not lose any money or gain any money as a result of the drugs people take personally or otherwise. People who are living with a significant mental health illness in some cases do not have the capability to make rational decisions for themselves. Also if I recall there was somebody who posted on this thread about how he directly blames ATS for his friends mental illness getting worse.



No in fact I am not twisting your words. Dictionaries are remarkable things, when you understand the meaning of words. You simply are having a difficult time recognizing what your own words are in fact saying.

I do think it’s very interesting that you feel I am attempting to manipulate into a corner to attempt to force you to say something you don’t want to say.

Have these feelings of paranoia been with you your entire life, or is this simply an admission that you use words to manipulate others towards saying what you want them to say, and fear that others must be doing the same.

Human behavior fascinates me; I have made a life long study of it by the way.

The good news is unlike some I don’t fear people’s differences, rather I prefer to celebrate them.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
Whist we have seen testimony that it has been advantageous we have also seen testimony that it has led to problems for people with a significant mental health problem.


We have seen first-hand testimony that it's been beneficial, and second-hand testimony (from a friend, not a mental health expert) that it was harmful.

We have no way of knowing what would have happened in any case without ATS. That's one of the big problems with this topic. No matter what, unless you can point to statistical studies, you're arguing counterfactuals in case studies.


And I absolutely understand the problems with banning, but I think is a good idea, it would prevent them from posting this might encourage them to leave the site, it would also stop people fuelling their delusions.


I'm trying to avoid going into the banning issue too much, because I think that's played out. It's hard because like it or not that was a significant point in your OP -- that people who admit to a diagnosis of some form of delusion mental illness and make claims that some people might take as evidence of delusion should be banned, that posts claiming that psychiatry/psychology/medication are a scam should be banned, and that posts saying what seems to be a delusion could be evidence of special insight should be banned. There are problems with all three branches of that (those regarding banning the member have been hashed and rehashed and you seem to recognize that it's not feasible).

Rather than focus on your suggestions for amendments to how the site is run, I'm trying to look at the evidence that backs your argument, and I'm finding it lacking. There's an assertion that this will be harmful but no evidence given to back that assertion.


I made the purpose of the thread quite clear, this thread was not to talk about the issue of banning, it just seems to have turned into that.


You do finish out your OP saying that we should post any thoughts we have on mental illness, but that's only one sentence and follows several paragraphs of your suggestions about how things should better be handled.

It seems more on-topic to point out the flaws in your argument (the weakness of the evidence that posting/browsing on ATS is overall more harmful than beneficial) than to talk about any random thoughts I may have on mental illness more generally.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Read the OP, right at the end I said this

“I am starting this as a tread to discuss everyone’s views on mental illness so any views you have on any aspect of mental illness feel free to contribute.”

I set out my views on mental illness on ATS, and then I invited everybody else to shear their views its was really quite simple or so I thought. In hindsight it might have been better to say that at the start rather than at the end and write it the other way around. Regardless my views would still have been the same.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Right so now you’re trying to paint me as some kind of idiot who does not understand his own words or what he is saying. Get over yourself, please I don’t care how you perceive you self but your coming over as incredibly arrogant. I have seen firsthand a grown man screaming because his schizophrenia is so bad he starts to self harm by ripping chucks of flesh out of his body thinking ET had panted chips. I have seen how these horrible illnesses really affect people, have you, what is it that qualifies you to tell me I am wrong, can you prove that I am wrong.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


There is a developed art to thread writing, however clearly a central theme to your opening piece is advocating banning members you consider to have mental disorders based on an unscientific approach to diagnosing them.

You have repeated that theme throughout, by disingenuously denying that was any significant part or purpose of the thread, while continuing to promote the banning of members all along and throughout.

So in reality that’s just strong circumstantial evidence, of using a broader based discussion to invite more opportunities to piggyback your theme of lets ban anyone Kevin thinks is crazy.

Which to date you haven’t missed on opportunity to attempt to do.

Now you would have us believe you have become an unintentional victim of your own published words even while you keep promoting them?

Alrighty then!



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Right so now you’re trying to paint me as some kind of idiot who does not understand his own words or what he is saying. Get over yourself, please I don’t care how you perceive you self but your coming over as incredibly arrogant. I have seen firsthand a grown man screaming because his schizophrenia is so bad he starts to self harm by ripping chucks of flesh out of his body thinking ET had panted chips. I have seen how these horrible illnesses really affect people, have you, what is it that qualifies you to tell me I am wrong, can you prove that I am wrong.


Really am I? So this paranoia is a recurring theme I take it? Are we too understand then that you are trying to tell us you are ashamed to admit that at some previous point in your life you were kidnapped by space aliens and implanted with a device you desperately wanted to get out of your body to the point you were incarcerated?

Yet the nice folks from the government through some drugs and therapy convinced you it didn’t happen and you were just crazy, this made you happy, the government happy and the aliens happy, and you really just want for everyone to be happy!

Sure you do Kevin, sure you do!



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Fine I want to ban every member of ATS who has a mental illness that causes paranoid delusions because I think it is in the best interests of that person’s mental welfare. I make no excuses for it if you disagree with me fine disagree I don’t really care. I like how you seem to be assuming that you have everything mastered, you don’t and neither do I. That last post really was not in very good taste, shows your true colours, you only care about being right you don’t care about the people who are directly affected by this and that is the difference between me and you.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by zroth
 


I am assuming you are talking about the use of lithium as a mood stabiliser. I don’t know if you’re in the UK or even if this practice is universally throughout the UK but I know that in some parts of Scotland anyone on lithium is given regular checkups and blood tests by their CPN and the whole things is managed very well imo. I really do completely agree with you about the average westerner receiving most social stimulation through TV and DVD’s.


Wow wow wow! Lithium is number 3 on the table of elements (3rd oldest substance in the universe), it is used for making batteries and for stabilising nuclear warheads during transport. It is toxic...with side effect including coma and death. It stops the creative parts of the mind functioning AT ALL which is a form of torture in itself.

It is found in the body at a level of something like 0.000000001ml/l and the medication aims to reach a therapeutic dose of between 0.5 and 1.5ml/l. Would you like to work out the percentage increase in that 'delicate chemical balance of the brain that simply cannot be measured.

When on lithium you have to ensure you take enough water or you may go into toxic shock....if you exercise and excessively sweat you may go into toxic shock. That stuff is dangerous. And its being prescribed for non-fatal conditions.

Don't tell me its well managed in scotland. Scotland has some of the most apalling mental health care in the country...i'm sure none of the staff will think that. Changing the attitudes toward mental health treatment in scotland would put most of them out of a job. horrendous.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Fine I want to ban every member of ATS who has a mental illness that causes paranoid delusions because I think it is in the best interests of that person’s mental welfare. I make no excuses for it if you disagree with me fine disagree I don’t really care. I like how you seem to be assuming that you have everything mastered, you don’t and neither do I. That last post really was not in very good taste, shows your true colours, you only care about being right you don’t care about the people who are directly affected by this and that is the difference between me and you.


Really could you please indicate the studies that have showed any positive effect banning someone with a mental illness from an Internet Site has been displayed to have.

In fact I would wager such studies would conclude the opposite rather instead, that shunning such people only increases their isolation and paranoia, and thwarts them from reaching out to others to build healthier social skills.

No Kevin you are simply wrapping your desire to dominate and control people in the guise of helping people to deflect away from it's true nature.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by christina-66
 


No were I am it’s really quite good, the biggest problem we have is a lack of full beds on the wards for specific specialised care. When it come to the management of the lithium it’s the blood testing’s and that’s done regularly depending on the patient I think. I am quite in impressed by your knowledge of lithium. Heath care is Scotland is generally quite good but it could always be better and we do have allot of problems with general public health as a result of our famously unhealthy life style. Health care can always be better, we do have a issue with the so called post code lottery and like I said lack of specialised beds but the management of drugs meets with the national standards as far as I am aware. As for attitudes there is a massive campaign on just now through things like Seeme, SamH and form the Scottish executive (lots of anti-suicide stuff just now. The NHS are coastally trying to change attitudes, in fact its a bit of a pain because i honestly am not aloud to use words like “nuts” around any service user.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


I am talking about this site specifically were most of its content is conspiracy related, i don’t think any study has been commissioned that looks at the effects of conspiracy sites on mental illness but if you can find one please feel free to show us. I know that ATS will never condone banning member, all I am saying is that it’s what i would like to see and it is not my intention to “control” people. Also there are allot of way’s to reach out to people, i don’t think blocking somebody form a website would be a big deal. Lets face we both disagree with each other so why are we bothering to continue.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
"Fine I want to ban every member of ATS who has a mental illness that causes paranoid delusions because I think it is in the best interests of that person’s mental welfare."

And they say patients are paranoid because peopple are out to get them. Why do mental health professionals keep proving these delusions to be true.

The OP is offensive in its arrogance as is the above quote. It takes two to make a conspiracy a reality. Two people that's all. Is the OP trying to tell us that there is NO such thing as conspiracy? That IS delusional.

Psychiatry has a real problem in that it cannot by any means justify or prove its claims of treatment. It cannot 'cure' any condition. It has however set about spreading its net for a wider customer base....and we keep letting it.

The social model needs to be looked at again. A customer of mine, a psychiatrist, wrote a book on the subject early in his career. Published in 38 languages and revised 3 times it is still in use today to train psychiatric nurses. He told me his book is a load of BULL. He was simply jumping on the bandwagon of contemporary thinking at the time to advance his career. He concurs. It is the way people have been treated that affects them....abuse,life circumstances, stresses, environment etc. Not some inherent genetic chemical imbalance...that is simply invention by pharmaceutical giants for profit (big profits) The chemical imbalance is a consequence of psychosis NOT the cause of it.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Kevin the ONLY stigma I have EVER found with anyone re mental health has been from mental health professionals. It is they who require the ad campaign NOT the public.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by christina-66
 


If people disagree with me on this I am ok with that. I understand it is controversial but it’s just my opinion. Just wondering what is the name of your friend there is a change i have read his book.




top topics



 
38
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join