Are we telling people the wrong thing ?

[[lo...]]

Who knows .. I believe the "epilepsy" (if that was what it was) was caused by extreme stress as a teenager and extreme diets (possibly harming the brain) .. there may have been something sensitive there from birth (only speculating here) .. but there is surely something wrong with my brain, of that I am convinced (but cannot prove it).  Doctors would try to say it is all to do with mental health issues .. I would disagree, cannot prove it ..  my central nervous system is clearly very sensitive ... as that explains most of my health problems over a lifetime .. but of course mental health was also an issue.

 

Will never know fully what has happened to me, and in a way it doesn't matter, I am where I am and can only deal with the reality of today.

 

Drugs suppressed brain for 40 years ... hell unleashed when drug taken away - that is just a fact ..  >

[[Aj...]]

The problem is the brain is so complex we still know very little about it really. Trillions of signals being sent constantly.

 

There are scanners other than MRI that can show stuff but they are rare in UK. There are only a handful of SPECt and PET scanners and even if they show something there is little that can be done for most brain problems.

 

Part of the problem is that we are told Western medicine can cure stuff, that you get ill and you either die or get better. People don’t talk a lot about chronic illness unless they experience it and when it is something hard to diagnose or understand that is even harder to deal with.

[[lo...]]

The problem is the brain is so complex we still know very little about it really. Trillions of signals being sent constantly.

 

There are scanners other than MRI that can show stuff but they are rare in UK. There are only a handful of SPECt and PET scanners and even if they show something there is little that can be done for most brain problems.

 

Part of the problem is that we are told Western medicine can cure stuff, that you get ill and you either die or get better. People don’t talk a lot about chronic illness unless they experience it and when it is something hard to diagnose or understand that is even harder to deal with.

 

What should have happened with me is that the medical profession should have recognised in 1975 that I had suffered an adverse reaction to Nitrazepam, I should have come off the drug at that point, I had lost quarter of my body weight, I could have put the weight back on, then taken it from there, help for MH issues .. who knows, I might have fully recovered.

 

The brain is so very complex, I only really appreciate that now. I am amazed I have recovered as much as I actually have since 2013.

[[Aj...]]

Yes, they should have spotted that Fiona!

 

MH stuff was even worse than it is now back in the ‘70s.

[[Sy...]]

I'm quite sure there's a cure for cancer as well but more money can be made by big pharma when people are sick. Come to think of it Cannabis has been known to cure cancer in some people.

 

There are so many things wrong with your theory, it is difficult to know where to start. Firstly, 'cancer' is a collective name for very many different diseases, with very different causes and ways they might be treated or cured. Secondly, the financial benefits stemming form a 'cure' for just one of the larger cancers would be astronomical - well worth selling. Thirdly, there are already cures for many cancers. Fourthly, pharmacology is really hard. Fifthly, give me an effin break.

 

LOL What theory?? Big pharma is a billion dollar industry that makes money off of people being sick. PERIOD!!  Watch the series The Sacred Plant. You will learn all about the evils of the pharmaceutical companies and patients’ stories about how cannabis cured them of various cancers. Stop trying to start an argument where none needs to be started.

 

There ya go. Glad to be of assistance.

Bless your heart. Enjoy the holidays.

[Guest [bl...]]

Blue Waters said

 

If there are no numbers, how does the logic stand?

 

 

 

So I want to be respectful, but inferential and propositional logic are pretty well established foundational tenants of rationality Even empiricism and science itself is limited by logic in that the results of science can only be seen as a working hypothesis that has showed a consistency up until now, but cannot make logical claims about the future without a certain leap of faith. If you are not familiar with propositional logic please look up Frege, as much as a kind of hate some of his conclusions

 

I guess I would add empiricism really tends to work for measurement on natural phenomenon and very much less effective in measuring human activity Maybe you could outline how you would go about measuring an inclination towards a given activity?

 

 

  Part of what I am suggesting is that quantities can be compared in the abstract For instance a one time pill that cures everything should, given certain understandings, cost less than a pill you take everyday for a lifetime There can be confounding factors to this of course but there is a undeniable logic at work on some level in my opinion I understand this is not the exact argument I have made and that is intentional to try to demonstrate the logic in the form of an example

 

So that was a very profound post you made and I am thoroughly intimidated by your knowledge of logic. I don't mean to correct you but i do wish to take you up on the things from logic that you wish to carelessly impute here. inference, deduction and propositions are grammars of logic and they are empty without axioms. you seem to arrogate a statement, "chronic illnesses are more profitable for pharma than a one time cure" to the status of a foundational principle of propositional calculus. How did you make this leap of faith?

 

aside: i want to discuss foundations of logic and number theory with you if you feel inclined to. i will only learn from the exercise.

 

aside2: frege and hilbert were ruined by godel who proved that math was all axioms and zero grammar?  in the long run?

 

[[Aj...]]

Blue Waters said

 

If there are no numbers, how does the logic stand?

 

 

 

So I want to be respectful, but inferential and propositional logic are pretty well established foundational tenants of rationality Even empiricism and science itself is limited by logic in that the results of science can only be seen as a working hypothesis that has showed a consistency up until now, but cannot make logical claims about the future without a certain leap of faith. If you are not familiar with propositional logic please look up Frege, as much as a kind of hate some of his conclusions

 

I guess I would add empiricism really tends to work for measurement on natural phenomenon and very much less effective in measuring human activity Maybe you could outline how you would go about measuring an inclination towards a given activity?

 

 

  Part of what I am suggesting is that quantities can be compared in the abstract For instance a one time pill that cures everything should, given certain understandings, cost less than a pill you take everyday for a lifetime There can be confounding factors to this of course but there is a undeniable logic at work on some level in my opinion I understand this is not the exact argument I have made and that is intentional to try to demonstrate the logic in the form of an example

 

So that was a very profound post you made and I am thoroughly intimidated by your knowledge of logic. I don't mean to correct you but i do wish to take you up on the things from logic that you wish to carelessly impute here. inference, deduction and propositions are grammars of logic and they are empty without axioms. you seem to arrogate a statement, "chronic illnesses are more profitable for pharma than a one time cure" to the status of a foundational principle of propositional calculus. How did you make this leap of faith?

 

aside: i want to discuss foundations of logic and number theory with you if you feel inclined to. i will only learn from the exercise.

 

aside2: frege and hilbert were ruined by godel who proved that math was all axioms and zero grammar?  in the long run?

 

Sometimes I really wish this site had a ‘like’ button!

 

 

[[Rx...]]

The world is full of seriously bad.  It's full of seriously good too, but yes, the seriously bad can be overwhelming.    This speaks to everything including the field of medicine.  I've lost faith in humanity as a whole at times, so I'm just grateful for the good that exists.  Discernment is key.

[Guest [sa...]]

It makes sense that making profit at the expense of the well-being of other people is more valuable than any morality, law, or sense of what is right. Which is why no Consumer/Survivor community will ever win against the establishment in this economic war. If you don't whore yourself to them for profit, someone else will. Which is why even people here have been promoting the myth of mentall illness and telling good about psychiatry.

 

Evolution is a bitch.

[[Ma...]]

"chronic illnesses are more profitable for pharma than a one time cure" to the status of a foundational principle of propositional calculus

 

 

Where did I say this?

[Guest [bl...]]

"chronic illnesses are more profitable for pharma than a one time cure" to the status of a foundational principle of propositional calculus

 

 

Where did I say this?

 

http://www.benzobuddies.org/forum/index.php?topic=212515.msg2745114#msg2745114

[[Lo...]]

Sometimes I wonder if someone who had never been on a benzo before would be able to understand much of anything in this thread. Feels very abstract and hard to digest from a newbie's perspective. Sometimes I log off, and read some threads, pretending I'd never taken a benzo. It is an interesting experience to approach it that way. I do like to post having that sort of outsider's perspective in mind, too.

[[Ma...]]

"chronic illnesses are more profitable for pharma than a one time cure" to the status of a foundational principle of propositional calculus

 

 

Where did I say this?

 

http://www.benzobuddies.org/forum/index.php?topic=212515.msg2745114#msg2745114

 

Here are the sum total of my posts on this thread

 

 

 

' Without commenting on the truth of our present situation,it seems perfectly reasonable to posit that continued care of chronic disease is more profitable than curing said conditions'

 

 

 

 

'Sorry to disagree The logic I am suggesting is inferential. Sure it is nice to have empirical data to support it But the lack of such numbers is not in and of itself a refutation of the logic. Nor is it likely to be possible to gather such numbers in a comprehensive or meaningful way.

 

Lets also be clear the D, development, in R and D is a bit of a euphemism We should just call it advertising It is my understanding no other western democracy allows commercial advertising on television and other forums that are allowed here. Plenty of evidence that the pharmaceutical industries receive plenty of subsidies from their interconnections with university and other government funded research And for all of this we are tied with Cuba for life expectancy, one of the worst among the western democracies One of the highest rates of iatrogenic deaths as well'

 

 

'So I want to be respectful, but inferential and propositional logic are pretty well established foundational tenants of rationality Even empiricism and science itself is limited by logic in that the results of science can only be seen as a working hypothesis that has showed a consistency up until now, but cannot make logical claims about the future without a certain leap of faith. If you are not familiar with propositional logic please look up Frege, as much as a kind of hate some of his conclusions

 

I guess I would add empiricism really tends to work for measurement on natural phenomenon and very much less effective in measuring human activity Maybe you could outline how you would go about measuring an inclination towards a given activity?

 

 

  Part of what I am suggesting is that quantities can be compared in the abstract For instance a one time pill that cures everything should, given certain understandings, cost less than a pill you take everyday for a lifetime There can be confounding factors to this of course but there is a undeniable logic at work on some level in my opinion I understand this is not the exact argument I have made and that is intentional to try to demonstrate the logic in the form of an example'

 

 

 

Obviously no such quote exists At some discussion forums blatant misquoting of others can get one in trouble, apparently it is not a problem here As a matter of fact it earns you some wanna be likes from some folks

 

Sylvia S Thanks for the supportive comment

 

[Guest [bl...]]

MattNapa, let it go. It is not important. 

[[Ma...]]

It was all so axiomatic

[[...]]

I think my new washing machine is called an "axiomatic"??. PSVT=