CyclingForums
A community for cyclists, gear, training and racing.
General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion
Thread navigation
Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.
Thread details
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
drkoop.com is ahead of you guys on this one, already spinning the research as "dangers of misuse"
and of using Ritalin for "recreation".
Come on folks, earn your keep. Can you come up with better spins than those already started?
Quoted message said:Subject: Mark Probert, David Wright, where have you been?
From: [email hidden] (soft-eng)
Date: 12/24/2003 12:30 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
drkoop.com is ahead of you guys on this one, already spinning the research as "dangers of misuse"
and of using Ritalin for "recreation".Come on folks, earn your keep. Can you come up with better spins than those already started?
They have seen these kind of posts before, they will find a way to trash it, however they would
never admit the truth. They are in favor of pushing drugs.
Jan
(Jan) said:They are in favor of pushing drugs.
Jan
Quoted message said:Jan Drew says:
Quoted message said:I thank God for Neurontin.
Aloha,
Rich
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
The best defense to logic is ignorance.
"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Subject: Mark Probert, David Wright, where have you been? From: [email hidden] (soft-
eng) Date: 12/24/2003 12:30 PM Central Standard Time Message-id:
<[email hidden]>Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
drkoop.com is ahead of you guys on this one, already spinning the research as "dangers of misuse"
and of using Ritalin for "recreation".Come on folks, earn your keep. Can you come up with better spins than those already started?
They have seen these kind of posts before, they will find a way to trash
it,
Quoted message said:however they would never admit the truth. They are in favor of pushing
drugs.
I am in favor of pushing facts. The FACTS are simple...there is no proof that these studies are
relevant to humans.
"Mark ProbertDecember 24, 2002" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Subject: Mark Probert, David Wright, where have you been? From: [email hidden] (soft-
eng) Date: 12/24/2003 12:30 PM Central Standard Time Message-id:
<[email hidden]>Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
drkoop.com is ahead of you guys on this one, already spinning the research as "dangers of
misuse" and of using Ritalin for "recreation".Come on folks, earn your keep. Can you come up with better spins than those already started?
They have seen these kind of posts before, they will find a way to trash
it,Quoted message said:however they would never admit the truth. They are in favor of pushing
drugs.I am in favor of pushing facts. The FACTS are simple...there is no proof that these studies are
relevant to humans.
So much for your cover story about having kids on Ritalin! [FYI, someone truly in that situation
would be at least a little worried, not flippant and quick on the defense.]
The "pushing facts" is a good angle though -- KOLs are expected to retain "credibility" in order to
have maximum market impact.
"soft-eng" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:"Mark ProbertDecember 24, 2002" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:>Subject: Mark Probert, David Wright, where have you been? From: [email hidden] (soft-
>eng) Date: 12/24/2003 12:30 PM Central Standard Time Message-id:
><[email hidden]>
>
>Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
>Quoted message said:Quoted message said:>
>drkoop.com is ahead of you guys on this one, already spinning the research as "dangers of
>misuse" and of using Ritalin for "recreation".
>
>drkoop.comtemplate.aspOpen ↗
>
>Come on folks, earn your keep. Can you come up with better spins than those already started?They have seen these kind of posts before, they will find a way to
trash
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:it,
Quoted message said:however they would never admit the truth. They are in favor of pushing
drugs.I am in favor of pushing facts. The FACTS are simple...there is no proof that these studies are
relevant to humans.So much for your cover story about having kids on Ritalin! [FYI, someone truly in that situation
would be at least a little worried, not flippant and quick on the defense.]
My son's treatment has been well documented for years. You do not have a clue.
I have seen no long term adverse problems with him. He is attending school on a fullscholarship
(talent and hard work based), working part-time and earning a substantial salary as his talent,
creativeness and energy are appreciatred, has lot's of friends, is self sufficient, and enjoys life.
Thus, I see no evidence, from that source, that there is any need for concern. I would think (an
exercise you should try) that any adverse reactions would have maifested themselves after 15 years.
Quoted message said:The "pushing facts" is a good angle though -- KOLs are expected to retain "credibility" in order
to have maximum market impact.
KOL?
In article <[email hidden]>,
soft-eng said:Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
Dear Anonymous [censored],
Why are you trying to drag me into this? I've not been particularly active on the whole Ritalin
thing, unlike Mr. Probert. However, he's perfectly right -- there's absolutely no way to know if
this research has any relevance at all to humans. Did you maybe happen to notice this sentence from
the article:
It's an open question whether what passes for depression in lab rats has anything to do with
depression in humans.
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
Quoted message said:Subject: Re: Mark Probert, David Wright, where have you been?
From: [email hidden] (David Wright)
Date: 12/28/2003 12:12 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>In article <[email hidden]>, soft-eng
Quoted message said:Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
Dear Anonymous [censored],
Showing the dangers of Ritalin brings out the best in the debunkers.
Quoted message said:Why are you trying to drag me into this? I've not been particularly active on the whole Ritalin
thing, unlike Mr. Probert. However, he's perfectly right
No, he is making excuses. Rats and mice are used in reseach for a reason. He only uses this excuse
for Ritalin.
-- there's absolutely no way to know if this research
Quoted message said:has any relevance at all to humans.
Using rats and mice for research is unheard of. I guess all research should stop.
Quoted message said:Did you maybe happen to notice this sentence from the article:
It's an open question whether what passes for depression in lab rats has anything to do with
depression in humans.
Did you happen to notice this??
Preteen Ritalin May Increase Depression
Early Use of ADHD Drug Alters Brain, Rat Studies Show
By Daniel DeNoon WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Brunilda Nazario, MD on Monday, December 08, 2003
Dec. 8, 2003 -- Ritalin use in preteen children may lead to depression later in life, studies of
rats suggest.
But early use of Ritalin and other stimulant drugs seems to permanently alter animals' brains.
****That raises concerns that the same thing might be happening in children who take these drugs for
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)***.
The findings come from a research team led by William A. Carlezon Jr., PhD, director of the
behavioral genetics laboratory at McLean Hospital and associate professor at Harvard Medical School.
The study appears in the Dec. 15 issue of Biological Psychiatry
"Rats exposed to Ritalin as juveniles showed large increases in learned-helplessness behavior during
adulthood, suggesting a tendency toward depression," Carlezon says in a news release. "These rats
also showed abnormally high levels of activity in familiar environments. [This] might reflect basic
alterations in the way rats pay attention to their surroundings."
Ritalin, Cocaine, and the Brain
Ritalin and cocaine have different effects on humans.
** But their effects on the brain are very similar.***
When given to preteen rats, both drugs cause long-term changes in behavior.
One of the changes seems good. Early exposure to Ritalin makes rats less responsive to the rewarding
effects of cocaine. But that's not all good. It might mean that the drug short-circuits the brain's
reward system. That would make it difficult to experience pleasure -- a "hallmark symptom of
depression," Carlezon and colleagues note.
The other change seems all bad. Early exposure to Ritalin increases rats' depressive-like responses
in a stress test.
"These experiments suggest that preadolescent exposure to [Ritalin] in rats causes numerous complex
behavioral adaptations, each of which endures into adulthood," Carlezon and colleagues conclude.
"This work highlights the importance of a more thorough understanding of the enduring
neurobiological effects of juvenile exposure to psychotropic drugs."
Those who drug their kids should have real concerns about these issues, rather than dismiss them.
Jan
"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:In article <[email hidden]>, soft-eng
Quoted message said:Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
Dear Anonymous [censored],
Why are you trying to drag me into this? I've not been particularly active on the whole Ritalin
thing, unlike Mr. Probert. However, he's perfectly right -- there's absolutely no way to know if
this research has any relevance at all to humans. Did you maybe happen to notice this sentence
from the article:It's an open question whether what passes for depression in lab rats has anything to do with
depression in humans.
I was hoping that Softie would answer and I could ask Softie just that question.
Softie seemed to be looking for an argument instead of rational discussion.
"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Subject: Re: Mark Probert, David Wright, where have you been? From: [email hidden]
(David Wright) Date: 12/28/2003 12:12 AM Central Standard Time Message-id:
<[email hidden]>In article <[email hidden]>, soft-eng
Quoted message said:Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
Dear Anonymous [censored],
Showing the dangers of Ritalin brings out the best in the debunkers.
Quoted message said:Why are you trying to drag me into this? I've not been particularly active on the whole Ritalin
thing, unlike Mr. Probert. However, he's perfectly rightNo, he is making excuses. Rats and mice are used in reseach for a reason.
He
Quoted message said:only uses this excuse for Ritalin.
-- there's absolutely no way to know if this research
Quoted message said:has any relevance at all to humans.
Using rats and mice for research is unheard of. I guess all research
should
Quoted message said:stop.
Quoted message said:Did you maybe happen to notice this sentence from the article:
It's an open question whether what passes for depression in lab rats has anything to do with
depression in humans.Did you happen to notice this??
Jan, did you read the above paragraph, where the researchers themsevles noted the limitation of
their research. That is called H O N E S T Y in research and is something you do not comprehend. The
Alties never do such a thing.
Regurgitation snipped.
"Mark ProbertDecember 27, 2002" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:In article <[email hidden]>, soft-eng
Quoted message said:Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
Dear Anonymous [censored],
Why are you trying to drag me into this? I've not been particularly active on the whole Ritalin
thing, unlike Mr. Probert. However, he's perfectly right -- there's absolutely no way to know if
this research has any relevance at all to humans. Did you maybe happen to notice this sentence
from the article:It's an open question whether what passes for depression in lab rats has anything to do with
depression in humans.I was hoping that Softie would answer and I could ask Softie just that question.
Softie seemed to be looking for an argument instead of rational discussion.
An answer was posted to this -- while this is a sensible position for the researchers, there is in
fact a reason why rats are used in so many lab studies. Rats are considered similar to humans in
many respects.
While this study is not the final answer, this is certainly reason to take pause.
I just think drugs provide an "easy answer" to too many parents. Some children can be hard to deal
with, that's just part of being a parent. AND of being a teacher. Teachers and schools have been
taking the easy way out in pushing parents into medications. But juvenile rebellion can be
healthy, and in fact sign of a highly creative (and therefore restless) mind. It needs to be
channeled, not excised.
Native Americans had a "Ritalin" too. It was a drug they gave to troublesome kids. They probably
gave it to the one who would have invented the wheel -- no doubt the kid was way too unruly. (The
stupid kid kept talking about this "round thing" that would make pulling things easier, just
wouldn't keep shut and do as others did. Well, the "Ritalin" took care of him.)
"soft-eng" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:"Mark ProbertDecember 27, 2002" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:In article <[email hidden]>, soft-eng
<[email hidden]> wrote:
>Hey guys, I haven't seen any coverups starting on this yet:
>Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
Dear Anonymous [censored],Why are you trying to drag me into this? I've not been particularly active on the whole
Ritalin thing, unlike Mr. Probert. However, he's perfectly right -- there's absolutely no way
to know if this research has any relevance at all to humans. Did you maybe happen to notice
this sentence from the article:It's an open question whether what passes for depression in lab rats has anything to do with
depression in humans.I was hoping that Softie would answer and I could ask Softie just that question.
Softie seemed to be looking for an argument instead of rational
discussion.
Quoted message said:
An answer was posted to this -- while this is a sensible position for the researchers, there is in
fact a reason why rats are used in so many lab studies. Rats are considered similar to humans in
many respects.
However, after doing some extensive reading,. I find no clear cut support for the concept that they
acvtually simulated depression in the rats.
Quoted message said:While this study is not the final answer, this is certainly reason to take pause.
All studies are. However,when there has been shown no connection to humans, as in several notorious
animal studies, then there needs to be some real study on humans. So far,there is no human evidence
of this effect.
Quoted message said:I just think drugs provide an "easy answer" to too many parents.
I am really tired of hearing this. It is utter [censored]. Parents of AD/HD kids work at least twice
as hard as those parents who do not have to deal with AD/HD kids. And they do work at it. Medication
is often the last resort, after trying numerous useless remedies as they do not want to be
stigmatized by this [censored] line of yours, and they waste years of the kids childhood which
develops problems for the child. Medication benefits the kids. Period.
Some children can be hard to deal with, that's
Quoted message said:just part of being a parent. AND of being a teacher.
See above.
Quoted message said:Teachers and schools have been taking the easy way out in pushing parents into medications. But
juvenile rebellion can be healthy, and in fact sign of a highly creative (and therefore restless)
mind. It needs to be channeled, not excised.
It is NOT juvenile rebellion, which is quite distinctive from AD/HD. by your claiming this, I know
that you do not even know the diagnostic protocol for AD/HD nor the diagnostic standards.
Quoted message said:Native Americans had a "Ritalin" too. It was a drug they gave to troublesome kids. They probably
gave it to the one who would have invented the wheel -- no doubt the kid was way too unruly. (The
stupid kid kept talking about this "round thing" that would make pulling things easier, just
wouldn't keep shut and do as others did. Well, the "Ritalin" took care of him.)
Yes, you are clueless about AD/HD or have an agenda that you are not shairing.
In article <[email hidden]>,
soft-eng said:"Mark ProbertJanuary 1, 2004" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Native Americans had a "Ritalin" too. It was a drug they gave to troublesome kids. They
probably gave it to the one who would have invented the wheel -- no doubt the kid was way too
unruly. (The stupid kid kept talking about this "round thing" that would make pulling things
easier, just wouldn't keep shut and do as others did. Well, the "Ritalin" took care of him.)Yes, you are clueless about AD/HD or have an agenda that you are not shairing.
Can you get it through your head that people may actually believe that mindless pharmacological
profiteering can really destroy a society?
People believe all kinds of things. Some people believe the Earth is flat.
Quoted message said:In which case, assuming one doesn't want the society to self-destruct, one has little choice but to
start sowing some doubts.
Well-informed doubts would better serve society, don't you think?
Quoted message said:I actually do believe so-called ASD is for the most part nothing but a profiteering-generated
epidemic that's going to have real impact in a generation or two.
See my remarks above about what people believe. For some reason, it seems to help you to believe
that there are no hyperactive kids, it's just that all of their parents are incompetent, and if only
you were in charge, you'd put a stop to that right quick.
Quoted message said:Having seen AD/HD kids, I do not personally agree that it is a real disease in any way, shape or
form. Mercury-impact is, and some mercury-impacted kids may have been diagnosed as AD/HD.
Otherwise, AD/HD is simply a _psychological_ label.
So are depression and schizophrenia and paranoia. Do you feel that these are just "normal variation"
and should be ignored?
Quoted message said:But this is a personal observation, those who have bought into the ease of Ritalin of course will
have other observations.
The "ease of Ritalin" is just another myth. It's not a miracle cure.
Quoted message said:A complicating factor is the tremendous "natural" parentage issue in the US. My personal feeling is
that natural parents will go the extra mile before putting the kids in danger. Others will be quick
on the easy solution.
God, it is just *so* easy for the uninvolved, like you, to dismiss ADHD as simply due to lazy
parents. It would be amusing to stick you in their situation and watch you fail to remedy the
situation in spite of your enormous moral superiority.
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
"Mark ProbertJanuary 1, 2004" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Native Americans had a "Ritalin" too. It was a drug they gave to troublesome kids. They probably
gave it to the one who would have invented the wheel -- no doubt the kid was way too unruly.
(The stupid kid kept talking about this "round thing" that would make pulling things easier,
just wouldn't keep shut and do as others did. Well, the "Ritalin" took care of him.)Yes, you are clueless about AD/HD or have an agenda that you are not shairing.
Can you get it through your head that people may actually believe that mindless pharmacological
profiteering can really destroy a society? In which case, assuming one doesn't want the society to
self-destruct, one has little choice but to start sowing some doubts.
I actually do believe so-called ASD is for the most part nothing but a profiteering-generated
epidemic that's going to have real impact in a generation or two. Fortunately, girls haven't been
impacted by this epidemic as much, so they may have to take the full burden of running the society,
because the high-testoterene boys -- those that would have normally run the society -- are out of
the running, having a tough task simply in keeping up because of their neurological damage.
Having seen AD/HD kids, I do not personally agree that it is a real disease in any way, shape or
form. Mercury-impact is, and some mercury-impacted kids may have been diagnosed as AD/HD. Otherwise,
AD/HD is simply a _psychological_ label. Psychology is far from an exact science. Since drug sales
are involved, I see this as another one of profiteering-driven labels. Kids vary in their mental
makeups. Some are simply more restless, and have short attention spans. This is not a "disorder" but
"normal variation". It may even be related to high creativity. I know I was bored out of my skull
during school, and most of the time could never tell what the teacher was saying if one asked me --
I had zero reason to focus attention on the teacher. I also got into my share of trouble. I am glad
nobody was around to feed me Ritalin because of all of that, and because of various companies'
bottom lines.
But this is a personal observation, those who have bought into the ease of Ritalin of course will
have other observations.
A complicating factor is the tremendous "natural" parentage issue in the US. My personal feeling is
that natural parents will go the extra mile before putting the kids in danger. Others will be quick
on the easy solution.
"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:In article <[email hidden]>, soft-eng
Quoted message said:"Mark ProbertJanuary 1, 2004" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...Quoted message said:> Native Americans had a "Ritalin" too. It was a drug they gave to troublesome kids. They
> probably gave it to the one who would have invented the wheel -- no doubt the kid was way too
> unruly. (The stupid kid kept talking about this "round thing" that would make pulling things
> easier, just wouldn't keep shut and do as others did. Well, the "Ritalin" took care of him.)Yes, you are clueless about AD/HD or have an agenda that you are not shairing.
Can you get it through your head that people may actually believe that mindless pharmacological
profiteering can really destroy a society?People believe all kinds of things. Some people believe the Earth is flat.
Quoted message said:In which case, assuming one doesn't want the society to self-destruct, one has little choice but
to start sowing some doubts.Well-informed doubts would better serve society, don't you think?
Quoted message said:I actually do believe so-called ASD is for the most part nothing but a profiteering-generated
epidemic that's going to have real impact in a generation or two.See my remarks above about what people believe. For some reason, it seems to help you to believe
that there are no hyperactive kids, it's just that all of their parents are incompetent, and if
only you were in charge, you'd put a stop to that right quick.Quoted message said:Having seen AD/HD kids, I do not personally agree that it is a real disease in any way, shape or
form. Mercury-impact is, and some mercury-impacted kids may have been diagnosed as AD/HD.
Otherwise, AD/HD is simply a _psychological_ label.So are depression and schizophrenia and paranoia. Do you feel that these are just "normal
variation" and should be ignored?Quoted message said:But this is a personal observation, those who have bought into the ease of Ritalin of course will
have other observations.The "ease of Ritalin" is just another myth. It's not a miracle cure.
Quoted message said:A complicating factor is the tremendous "natural" parentage issue in the US. My personal feeling
is that natural parents will go the extra mile before putting the kids in danger. Others will be
quick on the easy solution.God, it is just *so* easy for the uninvolved, like you, to dismiss ADHD as simply due to lazy
parents. It would be amusing to stick you in their situation and watch you fail to remedy the
situation in spite of your enormous moral superiority.
Well said, David.
It is jerks like Softie who really [censored] me off.
[email hidden] (David Wright) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Having seen AD/HD kids, I do not personally agree that it is a real disease in any way, shape or
form. Mercury-impact is, and some mercury-impacted kids may have been diagnosed as AD/HD.
Otherwise, AD/HD is simply a _psychological_ label.So are depression and schizophrenia and paranoia. Do you feel that these are just "normal
variation" and should be ignored?
Like I said, psychology is not an exact science. It's at the level of medical sciences of a few
centuries ago. Did they have some remedies that worked? Yes, definitely. Were all their remedies and
theories valid? Not at all.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:But this is a personal observation, those who have bought into the ease of Ritalin of course will
have other observations.The "ease of Ritalin" is just another myth. It's not a miracle cure.
Now you are being disingenuous.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:A complicating factor is the tremendous "natural" parentage issue in the US. My personal feeling
is that natural parents will go the extra mile before putting the kids in danger. Others will be
quick on the easy solution.God, it is just *so* easy for the uninvolved, like you, to dismiss ADHD as simply due to lazy
parents. It would be amusing to stick you in their situation and watch you fail to remedy the
situation in spite of your enormous moral superiority.
If you had read earlier messages, you would have noticed I have my own share of burdens. But yes, I
do feel it is superior to actually think about the issues rather than just take authority-viewpoint
as the final truth. In fact, I think that's true for all endeavors of life. Authority-repetitioners
do not significantly advance knowledge. Questioners do. That's always been the case. Always will be.
"soft-eng" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:"Mark ProbertJanuary 1, 2004" <[email hidden]> wrote
in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Native Americans had a "Ritalin" too. It was a drug they gave to troublesome kids. They
probably gave it to the one who would have invented the wheel -- no doubt the kid was way too
unruly. (The stupid kid kept talking about this "round thing" that would make pulling things
easier, just wouldn't keep shut and do as others did. Well, the "Ritalin" took care of him.)Yes, you are clueless about AD/HD or have an agenda that you are not shairing.
Can you get it through your head that people may actually believe that mindless pharmacological
profiteering can really destroy a society?
If that were occurring I would be concerned. However, since it is not occurring, except in the
"minds" of the utterly clueles, it is of no concern. IOW, you are worried about something that does
not exist. Some would call it paranoia. I call it utter stupidity, as the former is a diagnosis, and
I am not qualified to diagnose, but, I am qualified to determine stupidity.
In which case, assuming one doesn't want
Quoted message said:the society to self-destruct, one has little choice but to start sowing some doubts.
Said doubts being called red herrings.
Quoted message said:I actually do believe so-called ASD is for the most part nothing but a profiteering-generated
epidemic that's going to have real impact in a generation or two. Fortunately, girls haven't
been impacted by this epidemic as much, so they may have to take the full burden of running
the society, because the high-testoterene boys -- those that would have normally run the
society -- are out of the running, having a tough task simply in keeping up because of their
neurological damage.Having seen AD/HD kids, I do not personally agree that it is a real disease in any way, shape
or form.
Havce you lived with them? Have you seen to struggles they go through just to fit in to a small
degree? Do you se the social tortures they suffer?
I have.
My son was ostracized, tormented, harrassed, etc because of his differences. One of his
principal torturers just died this week after a seven year battle with leukemia. Normally, I
fell horridly sad when a child dies. In this case, considering what he did to my son, I feel
empty, but, in no way sad.
Mercury-impact
Quoted message said:is, and some mercury-impacted kids may have been diagnosed as AD/HD. Otherwise, AD/HD is simply a
_psychological_ label.
Horseshit. There is a quickly growing body of evidence showing the physiological differences in the
AD/HD brain.
Quoted message said:Psychology is far from an exact science. Since drug sales are involved, I see this as another one
of profiteering-driven labels.
See above re my opinion wrt this line of [censored].
Quoted message said:Kids vary in their mental makeups. Some are simply more restless, and have short attention spans.
This is not a "disorder" but "normal variation".
Hogwash. The lack of ability to focus attention in AD/HD is way out of the area of normal variation.
Quoted message said:It may even be related to high creativity.
My son is highly creative, medicated or not. It is irrelevant.
Quoted message said:I know I was bored out of my skull during school,
Probably due to the lack of a good whacko conspiracy theory.
Quoted message said:and most of the time could never tell what the teacher was saying if one asked me -- I had
zero reason to focus attention on the teacher. I also got into my share of trouble. I am glad
nobody was around to feed me Ritalin because of all of that, and because of various companies'
bottom lines.
Again, horseshit.
Quoted message said:But this is a personal observation, those who have bought into the ease of Ritalin of course will
have other observations. A complicating factor is the tremendous "natural" parentage issue in the
US. My personal feeling is that natural parents will go the extra mile before putting the kids in
danger. Others will be quick on the easy solution.
Again, and for the last time, it is not easy, and, those who make that claim are [censored], IMNSHO.
In article <[email hidden]>,
(soft-eng) said:[email hidden] (David Wright) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:God, it is just *so* easy for the uninvolved, like you, to dismiss ADHD as simply due to lazy
parents. It would be amusing to stick you in their situation and watch you fail to remedy the
situation in spite of your enormous moral superiority.If you had read earlier messages, you would have noticed I have my own share of burdens. But yes,
I do feel it is superior to actually think about the issues rather than just take authority-
viewpoint as the final truth.
That's nice, but it is only "superior" if your mind is truly open enough to accept when
"conventional" science is actually correct about something (or at least more correct than the
"alternative" science being considered). Otherwise, such thought is merely an example of how (as
William James put it), "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely
rearranging their prejudices," and therefore of no more value than that of the "authority-
repetitioner," as you call him.
Is your mind open enough to admit when evidence shows a particular "alternative" remedy to be
ineffective?
Quoted message said:In fact, I think that's true for all endeavors of life. Authority-repetitioners do not
significantly advance knowledge.
That's a very simplistic (and not entirely correct) generalization. Many great advances in
scientific knowledge have come from building on the theories that prevailed at the time the
scientists who made these advances worked. Einstein's theories explained the deficiencies in
Newton's Laws (acknowledged by scientists of the era) that occur when velocities approach the speed
of light. Watson and Crick showed how DNA encodes genetic information, building on previous
observations that DNA did somehow encode genetic information. The history of physics and chemistry
are full of examples of scientists who started with the understood orthodoxy of the day and built
upon it to advance human knowledge signficantly.
Quoted message said:Questioners do. That's always been the case. Always will be.
Again, one must remember to take the generality that only questioners significantly advance
knowledge with a grain of salt, as it is a generality with some very significant caveats. It is also
a conceit that pseudoscientists and quacks frequently wrap themselves in, the conceit that they are
the poor persecuted lone voice of truth because they are correct and conventional science is wrong.
That conceit is only rarely justified. Unfortuately, it is a conceit that many not familiar with the
methods and history of science frequently fall for. (Apparently it is a conceit you seem quite
susceptible to, given your clear contempt for the grind of real science.)
Sadly, only a VERY few of the "questioners" to whom you refer actually ever significantly advance
human knowledge. The vast majority of them do not. Indeed some of them actually hinder human
knowledge by questioning scientific orthodoxy that just happens to be correct (or at least
demonstrably far more correct than the ideas they are using to challenge said orthodoxy). For every
Galileo, Copernicus, or Semmelweis, who questions the scientific orthodoxy or dogma of the day and
thereby advances human knowledge significantly, there are thousands of "questioners" who are never
heard of again and disappear into the obscurity of history. The reason they are never heard of again
is because they were wrong and their "questioning" led them to dead ends or incorrect conclusions.
It's human nature to remember the "questioners" who happen to be correct and to forget those many
more questioners who were wrong.
Science is more or less an incremental process punctuated by occasional rapid advancement when a new
idea supplants an old one based on new evidence. (Examples of rapid advancement: Einstein's Theory
of Relativity, the discovery of the double helical structure of DNA, Darwin's Theory of Evolution by
Natural Selection, the discovery of oncogenes.) Indeed, this is probably true of most human
endeavors. It is easy to heap scorn upon the "authority-repetitioners," as you call them, but
without them scientific advancement would not happen (or would happen much more slowly), as the
basis upon which these geniuses make their leaps into the unknown is usually largely built by them
and later confirmed by them. More importantly, not infrequently, work by these "authority
repetitioners" DOES significantly advance human knowledge.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you inconvenience me with questions?"
In article <[email hidden]>,
Orac said:Sadly, only a VERY few of the "questioners" to whom you refer actually ever significantly advance
human knowledge. The vast majority of them do not. Indeed some of them actually hinder human
knowledge by questioning scientific orthodoxy that just happens to be correct (or at least
demonstrably far more correct than the ideas they are using to challenge said orthodoxy).
Actually, a clarification I thought of as I hit the "Post" button: Scientific ideas are always being
questioned and tested. This is a good thing and is how science advances. Old theories are questioned
on the basis of new evidence and eventually supplanted by new theories when evidence and
experimentation warrant it. These new theories are then subject to the same question. Such
"questioning" only hinders human knowledge when it is deceptive or has a complete disregard for the
existing evidence (as, sadly, much pseudoscience is) and leads many to reject better explanations
for natural occurrences.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you inconvenience me with questions?"
"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (soft-
eng) said:[email hidden] (David Wright) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...Quoted message said:Quoted message said:God, it is just *so* easy for the uninvolved, like you, to dismiss ADHD as simply due to lazy
parents. It would be amusing to stick you in their situation and watch you fail to remedy the
situation in spite of your enormous moral superiority.If you had read earlier messages, you would have noticed I have my own share of burdens. But
yes, I do feel it is superior to actually think about the issues rather than just take authority-
viewpoint as the final truth.That's nice, but it is only "superior" if your mind is truly open enough to accept when
"conventional" science is actually correct about something (or at least more correct than the
"alternative" science being considered). Otherwise, such thought is merely an example of how (as
William James put it), "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely
rearranging their prejudices," and therefore of no more value than that of the "authority-
repetitioner," as you call him.Is your mind open enough to admit when evidence shows a particular "alternative" remedy to be
ineffective?Quoted message said:In fact, I think that's true for all endeavors of life. Authority-repetitioners do not
significantly advance knowledge.That's a very simplistic (and not entirely correct) generalization. Many great advances in
scientific knowledge have come from building on the theories that prevailed at the time the
scientists who made these advances worked. Einstein's theories explained the deficiencies in
Newton's Laws (acknowledged by scientists of the era) that occur when velocities approach the
speed of light. Watson and Crick showed how DNA encodes genetic information, building on previous
observations that DNA did somehow encode genetic information. The history of physics and chemistry
are full of examples of scientists who started with the understood orthodoxy of the day and built
upon it to advance human knowledge signficantly.Quoted message said:Questioners do. That's always been the case. Always will be.
Again, one must remember to take the generality that only questioners significantly advance
knowledge with a grain of salt, as it is a generality with some very significant caveats. It is
also a conceit that pseudoscientists and quacks frequently wrap themselves in, the conceit that
they are the poor persecuted lone voice of truth because they are correct and conventional science
is wrong. That conceit is only rarely justified. Unfortuately, it is a conceit that many not
familiar with the methods and history of science frequently fall for. (Apparently it is a conceit
you seem quite susceptible to, given your clear contempt for the grind of real science.)Sadly, only a VERY few of the "questioners" to whom you refer actually ever significantly advance
human knowledge. The vast majority of them do not. Indeed some of them actually hinder human
knowledge by questioning scientific orthodoxy that just happens to be correct (or at least
demonstrably far more correct than the ideas they are using to challenge said orthodoxy). For
every Galileo, Copernicus, or Semmelweis, who questions the scientific orthodoxy or dogma of the
day and thereby advances human knowledge significantly, there are thousands of "questioners" who
are never heard of again and disappear into the obscurity of history. The reason they are never
heard of again is because they were wrong and their "questioning" led them to dead ends or
incorrect conclusions. It's human nature to remember the "questioners" who happen to be correct
and to forget those many more questioners who were wrong.Science is more or less an incremental process punctuated by occasional rapid advancement when a
new idea supplants an old one based on new evidence. (Examples of rapid advancement: Einstein's
Theory of Relativity, the discovery of the double helical structure of DNA, Darwin's Theory of
Evolution by Natural Selection, the discovery of oncogenes.) Indeed, this is probably true of most
human endeavors. It is easy to heap scorn upon the "authority-repetitioners," as you call them,
but without them scientific advancement would not happen (or would happen much more slowly), as
the basis upon which these geniuses make their leaps into the unknown is usually largely built by
them and later confirmed by them. More importantly, not infrequently, work by these "authority
repetitioners" DOES significantly advance human knowledge.--
Orac
Nicely said.
May I add the discovery of prions to your list of examples? Dr. Stanley Prusiner prevailed with his
theory of "protein only" prions against stubborn resistance from the scientific establishment. Yet
his hypothesis built on prior understanding of the structure and nature of neuronal proteins
(authority repetition). In science, the truth prevails, and in 1997 Dr. Prusiner received the Nobel
prize in medicine.
Conventional knowledge of the nature of the world is often shown to be incomplete and occasionally
shown to be wrong. But the brave people who challenge and change that knowledge are, without
exception, starting from a position of thorough education in and understanding of what is known in
their field. The smug notion that because science is often proved wrong one need not study science
to "think" of better ideas is arrogant and wrong. It is easy to spout pontifically that "ADHD is
not a disease" and then argue silly semantics, when one has no knowledge of the research that has
been done on the nature of ADHD and associated pharmacology, and the base of understanding that
has resulted.
In other words, "softeng" has a stooloma.
--Rich
Active in the last 60 minutes
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.