I responded to the posts against Molly's "experience" because I felt they were harsh, out of line, and could not be catagorized as tactics used in a "reasonable debate". It had no significance to me if those words came from a moderator or not. However, the fact that I have been admonished by moderators for saying things that I consider less harsh, led to my bringing this issue up. If one is in a position to enforce moderation, and do not follow their own admonitions, it makes the situation worse, as you have indicated.
For example, two pedeophiles are caught plying their trade. One is a construction worker, the other is a priest. Should they both receive the same punishment? In my opinion, one who preaches against sin and works in a place that should be considered a safe haven for children, should get a harsher punishment because they are violating the trust that they promote. I must say that I don't understand the gender comment. If Molly's name was Moe, I would have had the same reaction, as I am sure she would have. I also thought that ridiculing someones "belief" (although she stated it as "experience"), falls outside of the reasonable debate guidelines urged by moderators. On Aug 8, 2:11 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > There's been a > > > cure for being stressed out and mildly depressed that humans have used for a > > thousand years. It's called three friends and a Pub. > > Ruba dub dub, three friends in a tub. I like it. Throw in some > bourbon or a nice smooth scotch and I'll be right over. > > This discussion group is better then a soap opera. More drama then a > Health Care Reform Bill town hall discussion. Maybe I'm a male > chauvinist pig but I'm seeing a little Men are from Mars; Women are > from Venus action going on here. I'm not surprised Molly is feeling a > little picked on lately but I don't see any bad behavior from any > moderators either. Sometimes those in authority seem to be bullying > when they are being nothing of the sort simply because we know they > have authority over us. I don't see any abuse here at all but that > may be because I agree with Ian and Chris in this debate. > > I find it discombobulating when someone I respect deconstructs my > beliefs or worse, shows ridicule for them. This doesn't make it their > fault I'm so insecure. Sometimes, it makes me re-evaluate my beliefs. > Sometimes it makes me re-evaluate my respect for my fellow > interlocutor. Always I learn something. > > dj > > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Chris Jenkins<[email protected]> > wrote: > > What you saw on TV the other day was implicitly wrong. Prozan is an SSRI, > > and has a specific and complex brain functionality. > > > Additionally, the citation you provided is cleverly styled to appear to be > > the APA website, but by navigating to the root domain, we see that it is in > > actuality a virulently anti-psych website: > > >http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/ > > > This tends to color their data a bit, no? > > > Here are some links to non-biased, peer reviewed studies at PubMed, the > > general repository for scientific research in the US, directly addressing > > the question of SSRI versus placebo. > > >http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11405969?ordinalpos=1&itool=Entrez... > > >http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19468281?ordinalpos=9&itool=Entrez... > > >http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18922243?ordinalpos=25&itool=Entre... > > > Here's a great quote: > > > "In a 10-week randomised, double-blind trial in patients with panic > > disorder, escitalopram (flexible doses 5-10 mg/d) was significantly more > > effective than placebo in reducing the panic attack frequency, with a faster > > onset of action than citalopram." > > > In fact, in all the studies that I've seen where the efficacy of the > > medication over placebo dropped to less than 30%, they were 'mild to > > moderate' cases to begin with. > > > In other words, the Prozac didn't help much because there wasn't much of a > > chemical problem there to help with. Those cases should have been referred > > to psychologists, not psychiatrists. Blaming the medication for not fixing a > > problem that is not chemical in nature is downright silly. There's been a > > cure for being stressed out and mildly depressed that humans have used for a > > thousand years. It's called three friends and a Pub. > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:28 AM, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I found this article that claims that the placebo effect accounts for > >> 50% of the improvement in depressed patients taking anitdepressents, > >> while only 27% is due to the actual drug. I also saw something on TV > >> the other day stating that Prozac was basically a sugar coated > >> placebo. This seems to support a lot of what Molly is saying. > > >>http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/1996-APA-placebo-vs-SSRI.htm- Hide > >>quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
