Jordan Peterson, take 2, let's stay on point, please

[[pi...]]

Yeah, at this point, I feel like this board isn’t the right place for this topic any longer. I’m currently collating a list of alternative therapies with studies to back up their efficacy to perhaps start a thread in the alternative therapies board. Or maybe a support group thread is in order for experimental therapies?

 

Just some thoughts. I hate to say it, but I want a safe space!

 

yeah fair enough. id really like to just see the updates though about those trying the xenon. sorry if we have scared people off. it did spiral, agree.

[[Ma...]]

Benzo withdrawal studies are few and far between and the interest in spending money to conduct them is even less. 

 

Pubmed shows 437 studies when you search for "benzodiazepine withdrawal".

 

Yes, and they're all on rats.

 

The comment I responded to didn't specify the species. But to help you understand this issue, this review summarizes the many human studies on this topic: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1611832

 

yes let me add one more glib one liner to "help you understand" haha - great job maugham

 

heres a link to the free version of Dr Soykas article if anyone wants to read

https://medicinainternaelsalvador.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/tratando-la-dependencia-a-benzodiacepinas.pdf

 

your link has a pay wall dude *sigh*

 

oh hey look colin, maugham the pscyhologist linked a study on 'benzodiazepine withdrawal' that says "The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders" for people in 'benzodiazepine withdrawal". thats literally what you couldnt wrap your head around before in your post. thank maugham for linking to the proof you needed. goood news, now the xenon treatment is 100% relevant according to your standards. welcome to the discussion.

 

thoughts on article -> one small paragraph about 'withdrawal'. same old 2-4 week rebound anxiety blurb. Not one mention of how long withdrawal lasts, no mention of protracted nature of symptoms, no mention of injury or iatrogenic harm. But it does mention how addicts will doctor shop etc. I was prescribed for sleep and took for 6 weeks as prescribed. i didn't doctor shop and wasnt an addict. doesn't seem to be the same thing does it?, its almost like i might be seeking out someone more informed about whats going on with me. its almost like they have no idea what we are talking about and our experience doesn't seem to fit in their category of 'benzodiazepine withdrawal'

 

i think this article in learning about uncertainty in medicine is very relevant to you and Colin. and if you didn't study this principle in your education, it explains why your stressed and having issues with this sought of discussion, your professors failed you if they didn't equip you with the ability to handle the unknown in your medical considerations or opinions. in fact many in the health professions believe its such a big issue that they should be screening people based on this for medical school and any health related courses. Theres a school of thought that says dealing with ambiguity is an innate characteristic and some people cant be helped and should just be screened out of any health related professions cause they cant cope and then do harm to patients with their need to certain about everything. Im starting to see their point!

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6127608/

 

You didn't even quote the whole sentence just the beginning of it totally misrepresenting that article. Cherrypicking is not nice.

 

Here is the the entire sentence (and paragraph):

 

The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders, restessness and agitation, depression and mood swings, psychovegetative symptoms (e.g., tremor), reduced concentration, and sleep disturbances and nightmares.6,45-49 Appetite loss, tachycardia, blurred vision, and dry mouth may also be pres- ent, as may tinnitus, drowsiness, or derealization (a feeling that one’s surroundings are not real). Disorders of perception are relatively common and range from hyperacusis to photophobia to dysesthesia; these symptoms are not pathogno- monic but are characteristic of benzodiazepine withdrawal. Seizures are quite common, espe- cially if the agent is discontinued abruptly. Severe withdrawal symptoms include paranoid thoughts, hallucinations, depersonalization, and withdraw- al delirium. Tables 3 and 4 provide an overview of withdrawal symptoms.6,45,47,49

 

wrong. the rest of the paragraph aka the context doesnt change the point. cherrypicking is fine so long as it isnt misleading. you cherry picked that paragraph out of the article. do we need to upload the whole article print? of course not.

 

We wanted to make a distinction between the symptoms of depression and benzo withdrawal. The symptoms of benzo withdrawal include depression plus many other symptoms. Therefore, the two are not the same.

 

this shows a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of mental illness diagnosis. in psychiatry, there is broad cross over effects. someone who has depression, tends to also have anxiety, and if they have anxiety, they will commonly have elements of Generalized anxiety that cross over with phobias or OCD or ADD and other conditions. Drawing boundaries in psychiatry is hard, and they shift constantly. Does this sound like science?. is there a blood test for any of these illnesses? wheres the lab experiment where they found just one of these diseases? oh you cant find it, right, great science here. thats because psychiatry is very flawed and incomplete and they APPLY what little science there is in an effort to ease suffering (=applied science).

 

what you need to understand is Its mostly social construct and peer review consensus. this is why things go in and out of the Diagnostic Manual (DSM) with the fashions and trends of the day. so when you demand exact boundaries and glibly ask for concrete statements like this, you just look foolish and come across as very ignorant.

 

Sorry, but it's simple math. Depression has depression/anxiety. Benzo dependence has these two plus another 50-100 symptoms. In addition, we don't know what causes depression/anxiety, but we surely know what causes benzo dependence. So there are differences in pathophysiology and symptoms.  There is no glibness, ignorance or foolishness about this. No amount of conflating things will change this.

 

Everything is a social construct, the definitions for all diseases are based on consensus by social humans. This point of yours adds nothing to the discussion.

 

Fear of spiders, ADD, and OCD are also irrelevant.

 

There is no blood test for melanoma, but it surely kills a lot of people. Laypeople may think that there is a blood test for every disease but that's not the case. Just like they believe there is a magic cure for everything, but alas, that is not true either.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[[pi...]]

Benzo withdrawal studies are few and far between and the interest in spending money to conduct them is even less. 

 

Pubmed shows 437 studies when you search for "benzodiazepine withdrawal".

 

Yes, and they're all on rats.

 

The comment I responded to didn't specify the species. But to help you understand this issue, this review summarizes the many human studies on this topic: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1611832

 

yes let me add one more glib one liner to "help you understand" haha - great job maugham

 

heres a link to the free version of Dr Soykas article if anyone wants to read

https://medicinainternaelsalvador.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/tratando-la-dependencia-a-benzodiacepinas.pdf

 

your link has a pay wall dude *sigh*

 

oh hey look colin, maugham the pscyhologist linked a study on 'benzodiazepine withdrawal' that says "The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders" for people in 'benzodiazepine withdrawal". thats literally what you couldnt wrap your head around before in your post. thank maugham for linking to the proof you needed. goood news, now the xenon treatment is 100% relevant according to your standards. welcome to the discussion.

 

thoughts on article -> one small paragraph about 'withdrawal'. same old 2-4 week rebound anxiety blurb. Not one mention of how long withdrawal lasts, no mention of protracted nature of symptoms, no mention of injury or iatrogenic harm. But it does mention how addicts will doctor shop etc. I was prescribed for sleep and took for 6 weeks as prescribed. i didn't doctor shop and wasnt an addict. doesn't seem to be the same thing does it?, its almost like i might be seeking out someone more informed about whats going on with me. its almost like they have no idea what we are talking about and our experience doesn't seem to fit in their category of 'benzodiazepine withdrawal'

 

i think this article in learning about uncertainty in medicine is very relevant to you and Colin. and if you didn't study this principle in your education, it explains why your stressed and having issues with this sought of discussion, your professors failed you if they didn't equip you with the ability to handle the unknown in your medical considerations or opinions. in fact many in the health professions believe its such a big issue that they should be screening people based on this for medical school and any health related courses. Theres a school of thought that says dealing with ambiguity is an innate characteristic and some people cant be helped and should just be screened out of any health related professions cause they cant cope and then do harm to patients with their need to certain about everything. Im starting to see their point!

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6127608/

 

You didn't even quote the whole sentence just the beginning of it totally misrepresenting that article. Cherrypicking is not nice.

 

Here is the the entire sentence (and paragraph):

 

The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders, restessness and agitation, depression and mood swings, psychovegetative symptoms (e.g., tremor), reduced concentration, and sleep disturbances and nightmares.6,45-49 Appetite loss, tachycardia, blurred vision, and dry mouth may also be pres- ent, as may tinnitus, drowsiness, or derealization (a feeling that one’s surroundings are not real). Disorders of perception are relatively common and range from hyperacusis to photophobia to dysesthesia; these symptoms are not pathogno- monic but are characteristic of benzodiazepine withdrawal. Seizures are quite common, espe- cially if the agent is discontinued abruptly. Severe withdrawal symptoms include paranoid thoughts, hallucinations, depersonalization, and withdraw- al delirium. Tables 3 and 4 provide an overview of withdrawal symptoms.6,45,47,49

 

wrong. the rest of the paragraph aka the context doesnt change the point. cherrypicking is fine so long as it isnt misleading. you cherry picked that paragraph out of the article. do we need to upload the whole article print? of course not.

 

We wanted to make a distinction between the symptoms of depression and benzo withdrawal. The symptoms of benzo withdrawal include depression plus many other symptoms. Therefore, the two are not the same.

 

this shows a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of mental illness diagnosis. in psychiatry, there is broad cross over effects. someone who has depression, tends to also have anxiety, and if they have anxiety, they will commonly have elements of Generalized anxiety that cross over with phobias or OCD or ADD and other conditions. Drawing boundaries in psychiatry is hard, and they shift constantly. Does this sound like science?. is there a blood test for any of these illnesses? wheres the lab experiment where they found just one of these diseases? oh you cant find it, right, great science here. thats because psychiatry is very flawed and incomplete and they APPLY what little science there is in an effort to ease suffering (=applied science).

 

what you need to understand is Its mostly social construct and peer review consensus. this is why things go in and out of the Diagnostic Manual (DSM) with the fashions and trends of the day. so when you demand exact boundaries and glibly ask for concrete statements like this, you just look foolish and come across as very ignorant.

 

Sorry, but it's simple math. Depression has depression/anxiety. Benzo dependence has these two plus another 50-100 symptoms. In addition, we don't know what causes depression/anxiety, but we surely know what causes benzo dependence. So there are differences in pathophysiology and symptoms.  There is no glibness, ignorance or foolishness about this. No amount of conflating things will change this.

 

Everything is a social construct, the definitions for all diseases are based on consensus by social humans. This point of yours adds nothing to the discussion.

 

Fear of spiders, ADD, and OCD are also irrelevant.

 

There is no blood test for melanoma, but it surely kills a lot of people. Laypeople may think that there is a blood test for every disease but that's not the case. Just like they believe there is a magic cure for everything, but alas, that is not true either.

 

you do a biopsy for melanoma, and then a histopathology screen to look for malignant cells. theres a biological test for the disease presence, thats the point. that means its biologically constructed. not socially. theres no biological foundations to mental illness, its PURE social construct. Theres whole textbooks on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Mental_Illness. and thats not a laymen book, thats a foundational textbook for psychology and psychiatry. the profession openly acknowledges this. its astonishing you dont know what im talking about when you say your not a laymen. you certainly sound like one.

[[Ma...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

[[Ma...]]

Benzo withdrawal studies are few and far between and the interest in spending money to conduct them is even less. 

 

Pubmed shows 437 studies when you search for "benzodiazepine withdrawal".

 

Yes, and they're all on rats.

 

The comment I responded to didn't specify the species. But to help you understand this issue, this review summarizes the many human studies on this topic: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1611832

 

yes let me add one more glib one liner to "help you understand" haha - great job maugham

 

heres a link to the free version of Dr Soykas article if anyone wants to read

https://medicinainternaelsalvador.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/tratando-la-dependencia-a-benzodiacepinas.pdf

 

your link has a pay wall dude *sigh*

 

oh hey look colin, maugham the pscyhologist linked a study on 'benzodiazepine withdrawal' that says "The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders" for people in 'benzodiazepine withdrawal". thats literally what you couldnt wrap your head around before in your post. thank maugham for linking to the proof you needed. goood news, now the xenon treatment is 100% relevant according to your standards. welcome to the discussion.

 

thoughts on article -> one small paragraph about 'withdrawal'. same old 2-4 week rebound anxiety blurb. Not one mention of how long withdrawal lasts, no mention of protracted nature of symptoms, no mention of injury or iatrogenic harm. But it does mention how addicts will doctor shop etc. I was prescribed for sleep and took for 6 weeks as prescribed. i didn't doctor shop and wasnt an addict. doesn't seem to be the same thing does it?, its almost like i might be seeking out someone more informed about whats going on with me. its almost like they have no idea what we are talking about and our experience doesn't seem to fit in their category of 'benzodiazepine withdrawal'

 

i think this article in learning about uncertainty in medicine is very relevant to you and Colin. and if you didn't study this principle in your education, it explains why your stressed and having issues with this sought of discussion, your professors failed you if they didn't equip you with the ability to handle the unknown in your medical considerations or opinions. in fact many in the health professions believe its such a big issue that they should be screening people based on this for medical school and any health related courses. Theres a school of thought that says dealing with ambiguity is an innate characteristic and some people cant be helped and should just be screened out of any health related professions cause they cant cope and then do harm to patients with their need to certain about everything. Im starting to see their point!

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6127608/

 

You didn't even quote the whole sentence just the beginning of it totally misrepresenting that article. Cherrypicking is not nice.

 

Here is the the entire sentence (and paragraph):

 

The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders, restessness and agitation, depression and mood swings, psychovegetative symptoms (e.g., tremor), reduced concentration, and sleep disturbances and nightmares.6,45-49 Appetite loss, tachycardia, blurred vision, and dry mouth may also be pres- ent, as may tinnitus, drowsiness, or derealization (a feeling that one’s surroundings are not real). Disorders of perception are relatively common and range from hyperacusis to photophobia to dysesthesia; these symptoms are not pathogno- monic but are characteristic of benzodiazepine withdrawal. Seizures are quite common, espe- cially if the agent is discontinued abruptly. Severe withdrawal symptoms include paranoid thoughts, hallucinations, depersonalization, and withdraw- al delirium. Tables 3 and 4 provide an overview of withdrawal symptoms.6,45,47,49

 

wrong. the rest of the paragraph aka the context doesnt change the point. cherrypicking is fine so long as it isnt misleading. you cherry picked that paragraph out of the article. do we need to upload the whole article print? of course not.

 

We wanted to make a distinction between the symptoms of depression and benzo withdrawal. The symptoms of benzo withdrawal include depression plus many other symptoms. Therefore, the two are not the same.

 

this shows a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of mental illness diagnosis. in psychiatry, there is broad cross over effects. someone who has depression, tends to also have anxiety, and if they have anxiety, they will commonly have elements of Generalized anxiety that cross over with phobias or OCD or ADD and other conditions. Drawing boundaries in psychiatry is hard, and they shift constantly. Does this sound like science?. is there a blood test for any of these illnesses? wheres the lab experiment where they found just one of these diseases? oh you cant find it, right, great science here. thats because psychiatry is very flawed and incomplete and they APPLY what little science there is in an effort to ease suffering (=applied science).

 

what you need to understand is Its mostly social construct and peer review consensus. this is why things go in and out of the Diagnostic Manual (DSM) with the fashions and trends of the day. so when you demand exact boundaries and glibly ask for concrete statements like this, you just look foolish and come across as very ignorant.

 

Sorry, but it's simple math. Depression has depression/anxiety. Benzo dependence has these two plus another 50-100 symptoms. In addition, we don't know what causes depression/anxiety, but we surely know what causes benzo dependence. So there are differences in pathophysiology and symptoms.  There is no glibness, ignorance or foolishness about this. No amount of conflating things will change this.

 

Everything is a social construct, the definitions for all diseases are based on consensus by social humans. This point of yours adds nothing to the discussion.

 

Fear of spiders, ADD, and OCD are also irrelevant.

 

There is no blood test for melanoma, but it surely kills a lot of people. Laypeople may think that there is a blood test for every disease but that's not the case. Just like they believe there is a magic cure for everything, but alas, that is not true either.

 

you do a biopsy for melanoma, and then a histopathology screen to look for malignant cells. theres a biological test for the disease presence, thats the point. that means its biologically constructed. not socially. theres no biological foundations to mental illness, its PURE social construct. Theres whole textbooks on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Mental_Illness. and thats not a laymen book, thats a foundational textbook for psychology and psychiatry. the profession openly acknowledges this. its astonishing you dont know what im talking about when you say your not a laymen. you certainly sound like one.

 

You mentioned blood test in your previous comment. No biopsy or histopathology.

 

Psychology and psychiatry are two different things, let's not conflate the two. There are clear symptoms of mental illnesses and the diagnosis is based on that. Nobody said a disease has to be diagnosed based on blood tests. There are plenty of official psychiatry textbooks around. What you listed is not one of them. It's a 60-year-old fringe publication.

[[pi...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

its just not sinking in. you need to read these things Im linking, they explain clearly, with steps how your wrong.

 

You: "there is no distinction between science and applied science"

 

okay great, we have a starting point for some learning. admitting ignorance is the first step. well done.

 

lets go...

 

"Basic Science develops basic information to explain and perhaps predict phenomena in the natural world.

 

Applied science is the use of scientific processes and knowledge as the means to achieve a particular practical or useful result. This includes a broad range of applied science related fields, including engineering and medicine.

 

so anyone who can use Wikipedia, is more informed than you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_science. yikes!

 

heres a nice educational source with lots of pictures to help:

 

https://www.easyuni.com/applied-and-pure-sciences/

 

and look at all the uni degrees in this field. SO odd, cause according you, this isn't a thing and has no distinction from science. apparently its distinct enough to study at university. how strange? what are all those people doing studying something that doesn't exist.

[[pi...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

[[Ma...]]

Wrong. The applied science wikipedia page you noted does not mention any distinction between science and applied science. In academia people use the scientific method to answer medical questions. Hypothesis, experiments, statistics, results, conclusions. That's how the clinical, in other words medical, trials are done.

[[pi...]]

Benzo withdrawal studies are few and far between and the interest in spending money to conduct them is even less. 

 

Pubmed shows 437 studies when you search for "benzodiazepine withdrawal".

 

Yes, and they're all on rats.

 

The comment I responded to didn't specify the species. But to help you understand this issue, this review summarizes the many human studies on this topic: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1611832

 

yes let me add one more glib one liner to "help you understand" haha - great job maugham

 

heres a link to the free version of Dr Soykas article if anyone wants to read

https://medicinainternaelsalvador.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/tratando-la-dependencia-a-benzodiacepinas.pdf

 

your link has a pay wall dude *sigh*

 

oh hey look colin, maugham the pscyhologist linked a study on 'benzodiazepine withdrawal' that says "The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders" for people in 'benzodiazepine withdrawal". thats literally what you couldnt wrap your head around before in your post. thank maugham for linking to the proof you needed. goood news, now the xenon treatment is 100% relevant according to your standards. welcome to the discussion.

 

thoughts on article -> one small paragraph about 'withdrawal'. same old 2-4 week rebound anxiety blurb. Not one mention of how long withdrawal lasts, no mention of protracted nature of symptoms, no mention of injury or iatrogenic harm. But it does mention how addicts will doctor shop etc. I was prescribed for sleep and took for 6 weeks as prescribed. i didn't doctor shop and wasnt an addict. doesn't seem to be the same thing does it?, its almost like i might be seeking out someone more informed about whats going on with me. its almost like they have no idea what we are talking about and our experience doesn't seem to fit in their category of 'benzodiazepine withdrawal'

 

i think this article in learning about uncertainty in medicine is very relevant to you and Colin. and if you didn't study this principle in your education, it explains why your stressed and having issues with this sought of discussion, your professors failed you if they didn't equip you with the ability to handle the unknown in your medical considerations or opinions. in fact many in the health professions believe its such a big issue that they should be screening people based on this for medical school and any health related courses. Theres a school of thought that says dealing with ambiguity is an innate characteristic and some people cant be helped and should just be screened out of any health related professions cause they cant cope and then do harm to patients with their need to certain about everything. Im starting to see their point!

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6127608/

 

You didn't even quote the whole sentence just the beginning of it totally misrepresenting that article. Cherrypicking is not nice.

 

Here is the the entire sentence (and paragraph):

 

The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders, restessness and agitation, depression and mood swings, psychovegetative symptoms (e.g., tremor), reduced concentration, and sleep disturbances and nightmares.6,45-49 Appetite loss, tachycardia, blurred vision, and dry mouth may also be pres- ent, as may tinnitus, drowsiness, or derealization (a feeling that one’s surroundings are not real). Disorders of perception are relatively common and range from hyperacusis to photophobia to dysesthesia; these symptoms are not pathogno- monic but are characteristic of benzodiazepine withdrawal. Seizures are quite common, espe- cially if the agent is discontinued abruptly. Severe withdrawal symptoms include paranoid thoughts, hallucinations, depersonalization, and withdraw- al delirium. Tables 3 and 4 provide an overview of withdrawal symptoms.6,45,47,49

 

wrong. the rest of the paragraph aka the context doesnt change the point. cherrypicking is fine so long as it isnt misleading. you cherry picked that paragraph out of the article. do we need to upload the whole article print? of course not.

 

We wanted to make a distinction between the symptoms of depression and benzo withdrawal. The symptoms of benzo withdrawal include depression plus many other symptoms. Therefore, the two are not the same.

 

this shows a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of mental illness diagnosis. in psychiatry, there is broad cross over effects. someone who has depression, tends to also have anxiety, and if they have anxiety, they will commonly have elements of Generalized anxiety that cross over with phobias or OCD or ADD and other conditions. Drawing boundaries in psychiatry is hard, and they shift constantly. Does this sound like science?. is there a blood test for any of these illnesses? wheres the lab experiment where they found just one of these diseases? oh you cant find it, right, great science here. thats because psychiatry is very flawed and incomplete and they APPLY what little science there is in an effort to ease suffering (=applied science).

 

what you need to understand is Its mostly social construct and peer review consensus. this is why things go in and out of the Diagnostic Manual (DSM) with the fashions and trends of the day. so when you demand exact boundaries and glibly ask for concrete statements like this, you just look foolish and come across as very ignorant.

 

Sorry, but it's simple math. Depression has depression/anxiety. Benzo dependence has these two plus another 50-100 symptoms. In addition, we don't know what causes depression/anxiety, but we surely know what causes benzo dependence. So there are differences in pathophysiology and symptoms.  There is no glibness, ignorance or foolishness about this. No amount of conflating things will change this.

 

Everything is a social construct, the definitions for all diseases are based on consensus by social humans. This point of yours adds nothing to the discussion.

 

Fear of spiders, ADD, and OCD are also irrelevant.

 

There is no blood test for melanoma, but it surely kills a lot of people. Laypeople may think that there is a blood test for every disease but that's not the case. Just like they believe there is a magic cure for everything, but alas, that is not true either.

 

you do a biopsy for melanoma, and then a histopathology screen to look for malignant cells. theres a biological test for the disease presence, thats the point. that means its biologically constructed. not socially. theres no biological foundations to mental illness, its PURE social construct. Theres whole textbooks on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Mental_Illness. and thats not a laymen book, thats a foundational textbook for psychology and psychiatry. the profession openly acknowledges this. its astonishing you dont know what im talking about when you say your not a laymen. you certainly sound like one.

 

You mentioned blood test in your previous comment. No biopsy or histopathology.

 

Psychology and psychiatry are two different things, let's not conflate the two. There are clear symptoms of mental illnesses and the diagnosis is based on that. Nobody said a disease has to be diagnosed based on blood tests. There are plenty of official psychiatry textbooks around. What you listed is not one of them. It's a 60-year-old fringe publication.

 

wrong. psychology and psychiatry are overlapping disciplines that target the same populations in most cases, conflation of the two is commonplace and necessary in both professional and laymens discourse. the clear symptoms are decided at committee through peer review and expert consensus. do you understand what peer review and expert consensus is? Every single one of the official textbooks on psychology or psychiatry will acknowledge immediately the limitations of psychiatry and psychology in this regard. usually in the history of the introduction session or sometimes in the chapters themselves. Your just wrong on this again. that 60 year old book is a landmark foundational book of the field. its referenced by professors in the field all the time. The fact you dont know about it speaks to your ignorance or how things really are. labeling it 'fringe' doesn't help you. In point of fact, even Jordan Peterson used to teach based on this book when he was a professor at Harvard. he was a professor of psychology at Harvard, you studied pharmacology, whose the expert on this one eh?

 

lol added bonus i got to mention Jordan peterson, back on topic for thread, yay!

 

[[Ma...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

You didn't shut down anything. You listed one article, and I countered with another.

 

I'm sorry the other things you said I'm not following. When did I say anything about authoritative sources? I don't remember using the word "authoritative". Please quote where I said this if you can. What I said is that only the scientific method can answer questions.

 

I'm not arguing what others argue. That makes no sense. What others? Who are you talking about? When did I say the mainstream can not be wrong? Again, please support by citing relevant text.

 

 

[[Ma...]]

Benzo withdrawal studies are few and far between and the interest in spending money to conduct them is even less. 

 

Pubmed shows 437 studies when you search for "benzodiazepine withdrawal".

 

Yes, and they're all on rats.

 

The comment I responded to didn't specify the species. But to help you understand this issue, this review summarizes the many human studies on this topic: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1611832

 

yes let me add one more glib one liner to "help you understand" haha - great job maugham

 

heres a link to the free version of Dr Soykas article if anyone wants to read

https://medicinainternaelsalvador.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/tratando-la-dependencia-a-benzodiacepinas.pdf

 

your link has a pay wall dude *sigh*

 

oh hey look colin, maugham the pscyhologist linked a study on 'benzodiazepine withdrawal' that says "The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders" for people in 'benzodiazepine withdrawal". thats literally what you couldnt wrap your head around before in your post. thank maugham for linking to the proof you needed. goood news, now the xenon treatment is 100% relevant according to your standards. welcome to the discussion.

 

thoughts on article -> one small paragraph about 'withdrawal'. same old 2-4 week rebound anxiety blurb. Not one mention of how long withdrawal lasts, no mention of protracted nature of symptoms, no mention of injury or iatrogenic harm. But it does mention how addicts will doctor shop etc. I was prescribed for sleep and took for 6 weeks as prescribed. i didn't doctor shop and wasnt an addict. doesn't seem to be the same thing does it?, its almost like i might be seeking out someone more informed about whats going on with me. its almost like they have no idea what we are talking about and our experience doesn't seem to fit in their category of 'benzodiazepine withdrawal'

 

i think this article in learning about uncertainty in medicine is very relevant to you and Colin. and if you didn't study this principle in your education, it explains why your stressed and having issues with this sought of discussion, your professors failed you if they didn't equip you with the ability to handle the unknown in your medical considerations or opinions. in fact many in the health professions believe its such a big issue that they should be screening people based on this for medical school and any health related courses. Theres a school of thought that says dealing with ambiguity is an innate characteristic and some people cant be helped and should just be screened out of any health related professions cause they cant cope and then do harm to patients with their need to certain about everything. Im starting to see their point!

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6127608/

 

You didn't even quote the whole sentence just the beginning of it totally misrepresenting that article. Cherrypicking is not nice.

 

Here is the the entire sentence (and paragraph):

 

The  most  common  psychological  withdrawal  symptoms are anxiety and panic disorders, restessness and agitation, depression and mood swings, psychovegetative symptoms (e.g., tremor), reduced concentration, and sleep disturbances and nightmares.6,45-49 Appetite loss, tachycardia, blurred vision, and dry mouth may also be pres- ent, as may tinnitus, drowsiness, or derealization (a feeling that one’s surroundings are not real). Disorders of perception are relatively common and range from hyperacusis to photophobia to dysesthesia; these symptoms are not pathogno- monic but are characteristic of benzodiazepine withdrawal. Seizures are quite common, espe- cially if the agent is discontinued abruptly. Severe withdrawal symptoms include paranoid thoughts, hallucinations, depersonalization, and withdraw- al delirium. Tables 3 and 4 provide an overview of withdrawal symptoms.6,45,47,49

 

wrong. the rest of the paragraph aka the context doesnt change the point. cherrypicking is fine so long as it isnt misleading. you cherry picked that paragraph out of the article. do we need to upload the whole article print? of course not.

 

We wanted to make a distinction between the symptoms of depression and benzo withdrawal. The symptoms of benzo withdrawal include depression plus many other symptoms. Therefore, the two are not the same.

 

this shows a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of mental illness diagnosis. in psychiatry, there is broad cross over effects. someone who has depression, tends to also have anxiety, and if they have anxiety, they will commonly have elements of Generalized anxiety that cross over with phobias or OCD or ADD and other conditions. Drawing boundaries in psychiatry is hard, and they shift constantly. Does this sound like science?. is there a blood test for any of these illnesses? wheres the lab experiment where they found just one of these diseases? oh you cant find it, right, great science here. thats because psychiatry is very flawed and incomplete and they APPLY what little science there is in an effort to ease suffering (=applied science).

 

what you need to understand is Its mostly social construct and peer review consensus. this is why things go in and out of the Diagnostic Manual (DSM) with the fashions and trends of the day. so when you demand exact boundaries and glibly ask for concrete statements like this, you just look foolish and come across as very ignorant.

 

Sorry, but it's simple math. Depression has depression/anxiety. Benzo dependence has these two plus another 50-100 symptoms. In addition, we don't know what causes depression/anxiety, but we surely know what causes benzo dependence. So there are differences in pathophysiology and symptoms.  There is no glibness, ignorance or foolishness about this. No amount of conflating things will change this.

 

Everything is a social construct, the definitions for all diseases are based on consensus by social humans. This point of yours adds nothing to the discussion.

 

Fear of spiders, ADD, and OCD are also irrelevant.

 

There is no blood test for melanoma, but it surely kills a lot of people. Laypeople may think that there is a blood test for every disease but that's not the case. Just like they believe there is a magic cure for everything, but alas, that is not true either.

 

you do a biopsy for melanoma, and then a histopathology screen to look for malignant cells. theres a biological test for the disease presence, thats the point. that means its biologically constructed. not socially. theres no biological foundations to mental illness, its PURE social construct. Theres whole textbooks on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Mental_Illness. and thats not a laymen book, thats a foundational textbook for psychology and psychiatry. the profession openly acknowledges this. its astonishing you dont know what im talking about when you say your not a laymen. you certainly sound like one.

 

You mentioned blood test in your previous comment. No biopsy or histopathology.

 

Psychology and psychiatry are two different things, let's not conflate the two. There are clear symptoms of mental illnesses and the diagnosis is based on that. Nobody said a disease has to be diagnosed based on blood tests. There are plenty of official psychiatry textbooks around. What you listed is not one of them. It's a 60-year-old fringe publication.

 

wrong. psychology and psychiatry are overlapping disciplines that target the same populations in most cases, conflation of the two is commonplace and necessary in both professional and laymens discourse. the clear symptoms are decided at committee through peer review and expert consensus. do you understand what peer review and expert consensus is? Every single one of the official textbooks on psychology or psychiatry will acknowledge immediately the limitations of psychiatry and psychology in this regard. usually in the history of the introduction session or sometimes in the chapters themselves. Your just wrong on this again. that 60 year old book is a landmark foundational book of the field. its referenced by professors in the field all the time. The fact you dont know about it speaks to your ignorance or how things really are. labeling it 'fringe' doesn't help you. In point of fact, even Jordan Peterson used to teach based on this book when he was a professor at Harvard. hes a professor or psychology at Harvard, you studied pharmacology, whose the expert on this one eh?

 

lol added bonus i got to mention Jordan peterson, back on topic for thread, yay!

 

They have different names. Hence they are different. Really, Jordan Peterson taught from the 60-year-old fringe book? That doesn't mean anything, he is not a psychiatrist. Jordan Peterson is an anecdote.

[[pi...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

You didn't shut down anything. You listed one article, and I countered with another.

 

I'm sorry the other things you said I'm not following. When did I say anything about authoritative sources? I don't remember using the word "authoritative". Please quote where I said this if you can. What I said is that only the scientific method can answer questions.

 

I'm not arguing what others argue. That makes no sense. What others? Who are you talking about? When did I say the mainstream can not be wrong? Again, please support by citing relevant text.

 

wrong. i referenced the BMJ review which is tier 1 of the level of evidence medical science

 

heres the levels: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/  see section 6

 

1. Evidences obtained by meta-analysis of several randomized controlled research (RCR). - THIS IS ME HERE!

1b.Evidences from only one RCR.

2a.Evidences from well designed controlled research RCR.

2b.Evidences from one quasi experimental research.

3.Evidences from non experimental studies (comparative research, case study), according to some, for example Textbooks.

4.Evidences from experts and clinical practice - THIS IS YOU!

 

you know whats not on that list - EXPERT OPINION! - which is what you referenced. your level of evidence isnt even considered. And this is me being kind and generous to your bad points, because your guy is a oncologist, hes not even an expert in this field so he doesnt warrant consideration at all.

 

WRONG AGAIN. Ive also demonstrated it using all 100% scientific method points and established norms. Some recognition of how wrong you are would be nice.

 

 

[[Ma...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

Here is some info for you about STEM from US Dept. of Education website (https://www.ed.gov/stem).

 

In an ever-changing, increasingly complex world, it's more important than ever that our nation's youth are prepared to bring knowledge and skills to solve problems, make sense of information, and know how to gather and evaluate evidence to make decisions. These are the kinds of skills that students develop in science, technology, engineering, and math—disciplines collectively known as STEM. If we want a nation where our future leaders, neighbors, and workers have the ability to understand and solve some of the complex challenges of today and tomorrow, and to meet the demands of the dynamic and evolving workforce, building students' skills, content knowledge, and fluency in STEM fields is essential. We must also make sure that, no matter where children live, they have access to quality learning environments. A child's zip code should not determine their STEM fluency.

 

 

[[pi...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

Here is some info for you about STEM from US Dept. of Education website (https://www.ed.gov/stem).

 

In an ever-changing, increasingly complex world, it's more important than ever that our nation's youth are prepared to bring knowledge and skills to solve problems, make sense of information, and know how to gather and evaluate evidence to make decisions. These are the kinds of skills that students develop in science, technology, engineering, and math—disciplines collectively known as STEM. If we want a nation where our future leaders, neighbors, and workers have the ability to understand and solve some of the complex challenges of today and tomorrow, and to meet the demands of the dynamic and evolving workforce, building students' skills, content knowledge, and fluency in STEM fields is essential. We must also make sure that, no matter where children live, they have access to quality learning environments. A child's zip code should not determine their STEM fluency.

 

yeah thats baby stem. real stem that defines the fields happens at universities. what does this government slogan have to do with the discussion.

[[Ma...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

You didn't shut down anything. You listed one article, and I countered with another.

 

I'm sorry the other things you said I'm not following. When did I say anything about authoritative sources? I don't remember using the word "authoritative". Please quote where I said this if you can. What I said is that only the scientific method can answer questions.

 

I'm not arguing what others argue. That makes no sense. What others? Who are you talking about? When did I say the mainstream can not be wrong? Again, please support by citing relevant text.

 

wrong. i referenced the BMJ review which is tier 1 of the level of evidence medical science

 

heres the levels: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/  see section 6

 

1. Evidences obtained by meta-analysis of several randomized controlled research (RCR). - THIS IS ME HERE!

1b.Evidences from only one RCR.

2a.Evidences from well designed controlled research RCR.

2b.Evidences from one quasi experimental research.

3.Evidences from non experimental studies (comparative research, case study), according to some, for example Textbooks.

4.Evidences from experts and clinical practice - THIS IS YOU!

 

you know whats not on that list - EXPERT OPINION! - which is what you referenced. your level of evidence isnt even considered. And this is me being kind and generous to your bad points, because your guy is a oncologist, hes not even an expert in this field so he doesnt warrant consideration at all.

 

WRONG AGAIN. Ive also demonstrated it using all 100% scientific method points and established norms. Some recognition of how wrong you are would be nice.

 

The clinical trials I saw all concluded there is no treatment for benzo withdrawal. Thank you for confirming this. That's where we started from and you came around.

 

 

[[Ma...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

Here is some info for you about STEM from US Dept. of Education website (https://www.ed.gov/stem).

 

In an ever-changing, increasingly complex world, it's more important than ever that our nation's youth are prepared to bring knowledge and skills to solve problems, make sense of information, and know how to gather and evaluate evidence to make decisions. These are the kinds of skills that students develop in science, technology, engineering, and math—disciplines collectively known as STEM. If we want a nation where our future leaders, neighbors, and workers have the ability to understand and solve some of the complex challenges of today and tomorrow, and to meet the demands of the dynamic and evolving workforce, building students' skills, content knowledge, and fluency in STEM fields is essential. We must also make sure that, no matter where children live, they have access to quality learning environments. A child's zip code should not determine their STEM fluency.

 

yeah thats baby stem. real stem that defines the fields happens at universities. what does this government slogan have to do with the discussion.

 

The word STEM refers to child education.

[[pi...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

You didn't shut down anything. You listed one article, and I countered with another.

 

I'm sorry the other things you said I'm not following. When did I say anything about authoritative sources? I don't remember using the word "authoritative". Please quote where I said this if you can. What I said is that only the scientific method can answer questions.

 

I'm not arguing what others argue. That makes no sense. What others? Who are you talking about? When did I say the mainstream can not be wrong? Again, please support by citing relevant text.

 

wrong. i referenced the BMJ review which is tier 1 of the level of evidence medical science

 

heres the levels: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/  see section 6

 

1. Evidences obtained by meta-analysis of several randomized controlled research (RCR). - THIS IS ME HERE!

1b.Evidences from only one RCR.

2a.Evidences from well designed controlled research RCR.

2b.Evidences from one quasi experimental research.

3.Evidences from non experimental studies (comparative research, case study), according to some, for example Textbooks.

4.Evidences from experts and clinical practice - THIS IS YOU!

 

you know whats not on that list - EXPERT OPINION! - which is what you referenced. your level of evidence isnt even considered. And this is me being kind and generous to your bad points, because your guy is a oncologist, hes not even an expert in this field so he doesnt warrant consideration at all.

 

WRONG AGAIN. Ive also demonstrated it using all 100% scientific method points and established norms. Some recognition of how wrong you are would be nice.

 

The clinical trials I saw all concluded there is no treatment for benzo withdrawal. Thank you for confirming this. That's where we started from and you came around.

 

Finally Exposed!!!! Hooray. You will not and you CANNOT dispute this point on its merits so you are de facto admitting 100% that you are wrong. so your brain panicked and went for another snide remark thats not on topic.

 

case closed. mission accomplished. roll out the banners. send out the marching band!!!

 

your not arguing in good faith, i knew that. but now Ive demonstrated it. you've also demonstrated your views aren't principled, reasonable, or logical.

 

as far as im concerned, your argument died on this hill. this is a fundamental pillar of the discussion and your whole point about the scientific method hinged on this. and you abandoned all your principles to ignore it and move on to make another snide remark thats not clever or useful or helps your case.

[[pi...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

Here is some info for you about STEM from US Dept. of Education website (https://www.ed.gov/stem).

 

In an ever-changing, increasingly complex world, it's more important than ever that our nation's youth are prepared to bring knowledge and skills to solve problems, make sense of information, and know how to gather and evaluate evidence to make decisions. These are the kinds of skills that students develop in science, technology, engineering, and math—disciplines collectively known as STEM. If we want a nation where our future leaders, neighbors, and workers have the ability to understand and solve some of the complex challenges of today and tomorrow, and to meet the demands of the dynamic and evolving workforce, building students' skills, content knowledge, and fluency in STEM fields is essential. We must also make sure that, no matter where children live, they have access to quality learning environments. A child's zip code should not determine their STEM fluency.

 

yeah thats baby stem. real stem that defines the fields happens at universities. what does this government slogan have to do with the discussion.

 

The word STEM refers to child education.

 

haha why would you believe that? who told you this?

[[Ma...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

Here is some info for you about STEM from US Dept. of Education website (https://www.ed.gov/stem).

 

In an ever-changing, increasingly complex world, it's more important than ever that our nation's youth are prepared to bring knowledge and skills to solve problems, make sense of information, and know how to gather and evaluate evidence to make decisions. These are the kinds of skills that students develop in science, technology, engineering, and math—disciplines collectively known as STEM. If we want a nation where our future leaders, neighbors, and workers have the ability to understand and solve some of the complex challenges of today and tomorrow, and to meet the demands of the dynamic and evolving workforce, building students' skills, content knowledge, and fluency in STEM fields is essential. We must also make sure that, no matter where children live, they have access to quality learning environments. A child's zip code should not determine their STEM fluency.

 

yeah thats baby stem. real stem that defines the fields happens at universities. what does this government slogan have to do with the discussion.

 

The word STEM refers to child education.

 

haha why would you believe that? who told you this?

 

I cited evidence from the US Dept. of Education website. Any argument against this needs to be supported by evidence.

[[Ma...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

You didn't shut down anything. You listed one article, and I countered with another.

 

I'm sorry the other things you said I'm not following. When did I say anything about authoritative sources? I don't remember using the word "authoritative". Please quote where I said this if you can. What I said is that only the scientific method can answer questions.

 

I'm not arguing what others argue. That makes no sense. What others? Who are you talking about? When did I say the mainstream can not be wrong? Again, please support by citing relevant text.

 

wrong. i referenced the BMJ review which is tier 1 of the level of evidence medical science

 

heres the levels: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/  see section 6

 

1. Evidences obtained by meta-analysis of several randomized controlled research (RCR). - THIS IS ME HERE!

1b.Evidences from only one RCR.

2a.Evidences from well designed controlled research RCR.

2b.Evidences from one quasi experimental research.

3.Evidences from non experimental studies (comparative research, case study), according to some, for example Textbooks.

4.Evidences from experts and clinical practice - THIS IS YOU!

 

you know whats not on that list - EXPERT OPINION! - which is what you referenced. your level of evidence isnt even considered. And this is me being kind and generous to your bad points, because your guy is a oncologist, hes not even an expert in this field so he doesnt warrant consideration at all.

 

WRONG AGAIN. Ive also demonstrated it using all 100% scientific method points and established norms. Some recognition of how wrong you are would be nice.

 

The clinical trials I saw all concluded there is no treatment for benzo withdrawal. Thank you for confirming this. That's where we started from and you came around.

 

Finally Exposed!!!! Hooray. You will not and you CANNOT dispute this point on its merits so you are de facto admitting 100% that you are wrong. so your brain panicked and went for another snide remark thats not on topic.

 

case closed. mission accomplished. roll out the banners. send out the marching band!!!

 

your not arguing in good faith, i knew that. but now Ive demonstrated it. you've also demonstrated your views aren't principled, reasonable, or logical.

 

as far as im concerned, your argument died on this hill. this is a fundamental pillar of the discussion and your whole point about the scientific method hinged on this. and you abandoned all your principles to ignore it and move on to make another snide remark thats not clever or useful or helps your case.

 

The problem is you're not remembering who said what. You said I talked about authoritative sources. Well, I didn't. You have not been able to confirm I said this. When I asked you to quote where I said this, you just skipped this whole point. In fact, another poster mentioned this but not me and in another context. You even argued with that poster about it.

 

In a 180 degree turn away from your original endorsement of a hypothesis based on an educated guess for the potential for xenon to help benzo sufferers, you are now suddenly a champion of the role of high level evidence based on scientific data. Yet, you don't accept the fact that there are no randomized clinical trials or metaanalyses to show that xenon or any other agent can help benzo withdrawal. This is what you said you believe in. This is what you said: "1. Evidences obtained by meta-analysis of several randomized controlled research (RCR). - THIS IS ME HERE!". Nevertheless, you still think that a hypothesis based on non-existing information from an anecdotal case (Jordan Peterson) is valid despite the fact that it is not based on metaanalysis or clinical trials.

 

You say that "medicine is a sub branch of engineering". What? Where do you get this from? Here is the definition of engineering: "the branch of science and technology concerned with the design, building, and use of engines, machines, and structures". And here is the definition of medicine: "the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease".

 

 

[[pi...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

You didn't shut down anything. You listed one article, and I countered with another.

 

I'm sorry the other things you said I'm not following. When did I say anything about authoritative sources? I don't remember using the word "authoritative". Please quote where I said this if you can. What I said is that only the scientific method can answer questions.

 

I'm not arguing what others argue. That makes no sense. What others? Who are you talking about? When did I say the mainstream can not be wrong? Again, please support by citing relevant text.

 

wrong. i referenced the BMJ review which is tier 1 of the level of evidence medical science

 

heres the levels: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/  see section 6

 

1. Evidences obtained by meta-analysis of several randomized controlled research (RCR). - THIS IS ME HERE!

1b.Evidences from only one RCR.

2a.Evidences from well designed controlled research RCR.

2b.Evidences from one quasi experimental research.

3.Evidences from non experimental studies (comparative research, case study), according to some, for example Textbooks.

4.Evidences from experts and clinical practice - THIS IS YOU!

 

you know whats not on that list - EXPERT OPINION! - which is what you referenced. your level of evidence isnt even considered. And this is me being kind and generous to your bad points, because your guy is a oncologist, hes not even an expert in this field so he doesnt warrant consideration at all.

 

WRONG AGAIN. Ive also demonstrated it using all 100% scientific method points and established norms. Some recognition of how wrong you are would be nice.

 

The clinical trials I saw all concluded there is no treatment for benzo withdrawal. Thank you for confirming this. That's where we started from and you came around.

 

Finally Exposed!!!! Hooray. You will not and you CANNOT dispute this point on its merits so you are de facto admitting 100% that you are wrong. so your brain panicked and went for another snide remark thats not on topic.

 

case closed. mission accomplished. roll out the banners. send out the marching band!!!

 

your not arguing in good faith, i knew that. but now Ive demonstrated it. you've also demonstrated your views aren't principled, reasonable, or logical.

 

as far as im concerned, your argument died on this hill. this is a fundamental pillar of the discussion and your whole point about the scientific method hinged on this. and you abandoned all your principles to ignore it and move on to make another snide remark thats not clever or useful or helps your case.

 

The problem is you're not remembering who said what. You said I talked about authoritative sources. Well, I didn't. You have not been able to confirm I said this. When I asked you to quote where I said this, you just skipped this whole point. In fact, another poster mentioned this but not me and in another context. You even argued with that poster about it.

 

In a 180 degree turn away from your original endorsement of a hypothesis based on an educated guess for the potential for xenon to help benzo sufferers, you are now suddenly a champion of the role of high level evidence based on scientific data. Yet, you don't accept the fact that there are no randomized clinical trials or metaanalyses to show that xenon or any other agent can help benzo withdrawal. This is what you said you believe in. This is what you said: "1. Evidences obtained by meta-analysis of several randomized controlled research (RCR). - THIS IS ME HERE!". Nevertheless, you still think that a hypothesis based on non-existing information from an anecdotal case (Jordan Peterson) is valid despite the fact that it is not based on metaanalysis or clinical trials.

 

You say that "medicine is a sub branch of engineering". What? Where do you get this from? Here is the definition of engineering: "the branch of science and technology concerned with the design, building, and use of engines, machines, and structures". And here is the definition of medicine: "the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease".

 

thats all wrong as well and i can easily address all that but im not letting you slip away again. Your very much like a politician, very slippery. and i want to point out what your doing. You made an assertion (arrogantly mind you), and i provided evidence to prove that was categorically false. and now you want to move on and rehash some other minor discussion point from the past. No!

 

Forget all that. Address the point. then we can move on and i can explain to you why your wrong, even when your trying desperately to change the subject.

 

oh and heres the verbatim quote so you cant wiggle out of this one:

 

"Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave."

[[Sh...]]

Agree with pinky. You've been exposed maugham1.

[[pi...]]

wrong. its the idea of evidence based medicine. medicine isn't a science, its an applied science which isn't the same thing. Xenon like anything else is fair game as long as it follows the evidence based medicine approach.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3789163/

If you check out wiki pages for most drugs it says: How it works is not entirely clear. Even for the old drugs like paracetamol. Medicine really isn't a science. From anthropological standpoint it's far closer to superstition, a collection of ritual practices to deal with specific symptoms. Witch doctors gave you Ayahuasca, modern psychiatrists give you SSRIs, neither of them knows how it works.

 

this is very insightful. its amazing how most people who work or study medicine dont gain this insight until very late in life. I wish more people understood the limitations of western medicine and how flawed it really is. It didnt really sink in for me until this whole experience. I should of known when saw how "iatrogenic" was always a leading cause of death and disease in the 'causes' section for so many conditions. Medical errors are the third leading cause of death after cancer and heart disease.

 

And I don't disagree with the point that we don't fully understand how drugs work. But medicine is a science. Just like in any science, we don't understand everything and we never will. Nevertheless, we strive to have an ever better understanding of the processes and mechanisms. Western medicine is mostly not flawed, but incomplete.

 

It would be appreciated if you could provide some support for your statement that medical errors are the third leading cause of death. I strongly believe that you won't be able to.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.full - BMJ estimate that they have stood behind despite naysayers like yourself.

 

"I strongly believe that you won't be able to" this sentence in particular is very revealing. Your viewpoints are guided by your feelings and beliefs, not the evidence base. At best, you can dispute that 'medical injury' should be included in 'medical error'. or you can quibble over some other language distinction. But the estimates are legitimate. your flat out uninformed or wrong again, sadly. although its predictable at this point.

 

I say again. medicine isn't a science, its an "applied science". these aren't the same things. you need to educate yourself on this. medicine is a sub branch of engineering. remember STEM at university? "science, engineering, technology and mathematics". there's a reason these are distinct fields and they're not all just called SCIENCE. I can elaborate on this point if you need more help understanding the difference? this should help you. its a ncbi article so your mind can lower its belief system shielding to think through it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190445/

 

more links proving your wrong about main point:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

 

Your contention is a myth: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-medical-errors-really-the-third-most-common-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s-2019-edition/

 

No, there is no distinction between science and applied science. Science is based on the scientific method. Poor Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave.

 

I don't see what STEM for high school kids has to do with the medical sciences.

 

wrong. the BMJ stands by their assessment despite the criticisms from this article and others which amounts to quibbles about language and how they measure "error" which i preemptivelyt shot down in my original post. So, just for the record, your now proactively switching from your first position which was 1) trust authoritative sources to 2) now arguing the same thing that everyone has been pointing out all along about how the mainstream has myths and can be wrong. which is it? you have literally painted yourself into a corner on this one. either way you lose cause your taking both sides now, well done. you've knocked yourself out by being intellectually inconsistent. the irony.

 

real STEM is university level - how do you not know this stuff if you went to uni. crying out to Francis bacon isn't going to bail you of the hole your digging for yourself lol.

 

whats next

 

Here is some info for you about STEM from US Dept. of Education website (https://www.ed.gov/stem).

 

In an ever-changing, increasingly complex world, it's more important than ever that our nation's youth are prepared to bring knowledge and skills to solve problems, make sense of information, and know how to gather and evaluate evidence to make decisions. These are the kinds of skills that students develop in science, technology, engineering, and math—disciplines collectively known as STEM. If we want a nation where our future leaders, neighbors, and workers have the ability to understand and solve some of the complex challenges of today and tomorrow, and to meet the demands of the dynamic and evolving workforce, building students' skills, content knowledge, and fluency in STEM fields is essential. We must also make sure that, no matter where children live, they have access to quality learning environments. A child's zip code should not determine their STEM fluency.

 

yeah thats baby stem. real stem that defines the fields happens at universities. what does this government slogan have to do with the discussion.

 

The word STEM refers to child education.

 

haha why would you believe that? who told you this?

 

I cited evidence from the US Dept. of Education website. Any argument against this needs to be supported by evidence.

 

you know education goes on AFTER high school right?.....you know what they call high school "STEM" when you get to university?

 

Answer: STEM

 

 

[[Co...]]

you do a biopsy for melanoma, and then a histopathology screen to look for malignant cells. theres a biological test for the disease presence, thats the point. that means its biologically constructed. not socially. theres no biological foundations to mental illness, its PURE social construct. Theres whole textbooks on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Mental_Illness. and thats not a laymen book, thats a foundational textbook for psychology and psychiatry. the profession openly acknowledges this. its astonishing you dont know what im talking about when you say your not a laymen. you certainly sound like one.

 

Thomas Szasz, the author of The Myth of Mental Illness, and his relationship with CCHR (Scientology):

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Szasz#Relationship_to_Citizens_Commission_on_Human_Rights

 

In 1969, Szasz and the Church of Scientology co-founded the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) to oppose involuntary psychiatric treatments. Szasz served on CCHR's Board of Advisors as Founding Commissioner.[32] In the keynote address at the 25th anniversary of CCHR, Szasz stated, "We should all honor CCHR because it is really the organization that for the first time in human history has organized a politically, socially, internationally significant voice to combat psychiatry. This has never been done in human history before."[33]

 

In a 2009 interview aired by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Szasz explained his reason for collaborating with CCHR and lack of involvement with Scientology:

 

    Well I got affiliated with an organisation long after I was established as a critic of psychiatry, called Citizens Commission for Human Rights, because they were then the only organisation and they still are the only organisation who had money and had some access to lawyers and were active in trying to free mental patients who were incarcerated in mental hospitals with whom there was nothing wrong, who had committed no crimes, who wanted to get out of the hospital. And that to me was a very worthwhile cause; it's still a very worthwhile cause. I no more believe in their religion or their beliefs than I believe in the beliefs of any other religion. I am an atheist, I don't believe in Christianity, in Judaism, in Islam, in Buddhism and I don't believe in Scientology. I have nothing to do with Scientology.[34]

 

Make what you will of Szasz's attempt to explain his involvement with CCHR. But - at best - it demonstrates a lack of critical thinking skills.

 

I also point to the reviews of Szasz ideas by Robert Evan Kendell and Edward Shorter detailed at the same Wiki page:

 

Kendell - (former) Chief Medical Officer of Scotland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Szasz#Kendell's_views

 

Shorter - historian of psychiatry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Szasz#Shorter's_views

 

It is beyond unpersuasive to use the very old, and highly discredited ideas of someone deeply involved with Scientology's efforts to outlaw psychiatric practice (and to, incidentally, replace it with their own therapeutic practices: Dianetics).

[[Co...]]

its just not sinking in. you need to read these things Im linking, they explain clearly, with steps how your wrong.

 

You: "there is no distinction between science and applied science"

 

okay great, we have a starting point for some learning. admitting ignorance is the first step. well done.

 

lets go...

 

"Basic Science develops basic information to explain and perhaps predict phenomena in the natural world.

 

Applied science is the use of scientific processes and knowledge as the means to achieve a particular practical or useful result. This includes a broad range of applied science related fields, including engineering and medicine.

 

so anyone who can use Wikipedia, is more informed than you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_science. yikes!

 

heres a nice educational source with lots of pictures to help:

 

https://www.easyuni.com/applied-and-pure-sciences/

 

and look at all the uni degrees in this field. SO odd, cause according you, this isn't a thing and has no distinction from science. apparently its distinct enough to study at university. how strange? what are all those people doing studying something that doesn't exist.

 

Finally Exposed!!!! Hooray. You will not and you CANNOT dispute this point on its merits so you are de facto admitting 100% that you are wrong. so your brain panicked and went for another snide remark thats not on topic.

 

case closed. mission accomplished. roll out the banners. send out the marching band!!!

 

your not arguing in good faith, i knew that. but now Ive demonstrated it. you've also demonstrated your views aren't principled, reasonable, or logical.

 

as far as im concerned, your argument died on this hill. this is a fundamental pillar of the discussion and your whole point about the scientific method hinged on this. and you abandoned all your principles to ignore it and move on to make another snide remark thats not clever or useful or helps your case.

 

Colour key:

Robust debate is fine, Pinky. But you are being combative, even deliberately provocative. Enough.

Ironic, that.