![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 59 to 83 of 83. Go back in thread:
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 27, 2010, at 7:35:35
In reply to Lou's request-hnkwilms, posted by Lou Pilder on September 26, 2010, at 21:25:57
> Friends,
> Lou
> http://wapedia.mobi/en/Hank_Williams
> songs;
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=wUpnHKmgRWw
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=hUuzrB_TGyk
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xu7li89xvs&feature=related
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=OxBlt2EEKOM> Friends,
Lou
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xu71i89xus&feature=related
http://www.youtibe.com/watch?v=iO4BIFcIUHs&feature=related
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 27, 2010, at 8:06:35
In reply to Lou's request-hnkwilms-luvpskbluz, posted by Lou Pilder on September 27, 2010, at 7:35:35
> > Friends,
> > Lou
> > http://wapedia.mobi/en/Hank_Williams
> > songs;
> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=wUpnHKmgRWw
> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=hUuzrB_TGyk
> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xu7li89xvs&feature=related
> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=OxBlt2EEKOM
>
> > Friends,
> Lou
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xu71i89xus&feature=related
> http://www.youtibe.com/watch?v=iO4BIFcIUHs&feature=related
>
corrections:
Lou
http://hubpages.com/hub/Hank_Williams_Love_Sick_Blues
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xk6j8_patsy-cline-lovesick-blues_music
>
Posted by olivia12 on September 27, 2010, at 14:58:24
In reply to Lou's request-hnkwilms-luvpskbluz, posted by Lou Pilder on September 27, 2010, at 7:35:35
Lou, again, WTF? I have tried to be patient--I have tried to understand where you might be coming from. But, seriously, what is your intent man? Please throw me a bone?
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 27, 2010, at 20:59:57
In reply to Re: Lou's request-hnkwilms-luvpskbluz, posted by olivia12 on September 27, 2010, at 14:58:24
Friends,
Lou
http://www.nndb.com/people/095/000023026
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=10pvTuXmtHs
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 27, 2010, at 21:03:21
In reply to Lou's request-Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on September 27, 2010, at 20:59:57
> Friends,
> Lou
> http://www.nndb.com/people/095/000023026
> http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=10pvTuXmtHs
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 28, 2010, at 5:10:35
In reply to Re: Crazy meds IS crazy » Dymphna, posted by huxley on September 27, 2010, at 2:54:43
> Seriously, bite me.
>
> Maxime> to put it bluntly you are an insensitive cow.
>
> huxleyPlease be sensitive to the feelings of others.
But please don't take this personally, either, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're bad people, and I'm sorry if this hurts you. I don't want anything bad to happen to you. In a crisis, please also get help in person. You may also wish to check out a listing compiled by a poster of helpful web pages on coping with crisis at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/psycho-babble-tips/links/Coping_with_crisis_001012507973
I do hope that you choose to remain a member of this community and that members of this community help you, if needed, to avoid future blocks. Scott, thanks for trying to help this time.
It's up to you to decide whom you interact with. Sometimes interacting with others may be frustrating, staying civil may be a challenge, and new skills may help. If you're open to developing new skills (which I realize may not be why you came in the first place), that's another way in which you may be supported by other posters.
More information about posting policies and tips on alternative ways to express yourself, including a link to a nice post by Dinah on I-statements, are in the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above posts, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by 49er on September 28, 2010, at 17:53:06
In reply to Re: Crazy meds IS crazy » Dymphna, posted by SLS on September 27, 2010, at 5:51:16
> Hi Dymphna.
>
> I don't know anything about you, and I have visited your website on just a handful of occasions. I was disturbed by your words to Maxime. Believe it or not, they would not be considered civil on Psycho-Babble, and the moderators would intervene on everyone's behalf. I don't take ownership of anyone's words but my own. Knowing how emotionally vulnerable and sensitive to criticism mental illnesses can leave one, I try to be communicate with others here with that in mind.
>
>
> - ScottI totally agree Scott.
This part really bothered me:
"If it is you that is responsible for making sure you obtain these medications, in whatever way possible, you are in need of therapy far more than you are in need of a place like CrazyMeds. Please do not ask any more questions along this vein. Your data does not add up, and we have an extremely low tolerance for such things""
I won't comment further as I don't want to be banned but let's just say it didn't feel very civil to me.
49er
Posted by SLS on September 28, 2010, at 18:26:03
In reply to Re: Crazy meds IS crazy, posted by 49er on September 28, 2010, at 17:53:06
Hi 49er.
How are you doing, by the way? Well, I hope.
- Scott
Posted by 49er on September 29, 2010, at 5:04:40
In reply to Re: Crazy meds IS crazy » 49er, posted by SLS on September 28, 2010, at 18:26:03
> Hi 49er.
>
> How are you doing, by the way? Well, I hope.
>
>
> - ScottHi Scott,
Thanks for asking.
Pretty well.
Like alot of people, dealing with unemployment although I am currently working a temp job.
How are you doing?
49er
Posted by SLS on September 29, 2010, at 5:29:50
In reply to Re: Crazy meds IS crazy, posted by 49er on September 29, 2010, at 5:04:40
> > Hi 49er.
> >
> > How are you doing, by the way? Well, I hope.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> Thanks for asking.
>
> Pretty well.
>
> Like alot of people, dealing with unemployment although I am currently working a temp job.
>
> How are you doing?
Still treading water. I've been worse, though. Right now, it appears that I am responding somewhat to Nardil. I am definitely better on it than off it. I'll try to remain patient. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 29, 2010, at 20:10:11
In reply to Re: Crazy meds IS crazy, posted by 49er on September 28, 2010, at 17:53:06
> > Hi Dymphna.
> >
> > I don't know anything about you, and I have visited your website on just a handful of occasions. I was disturbed by your words to Maxime. Believe it or not, they would not be considered civil on Psycho-Babble, and the moderators would intervene on everyone's behalf. I don't take ownership of anyone's words but my own. Knowing how emotionally vulnerable and sensitive to criticism mental illnesses can leave one, I try to be communicate with others here with that in mind.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> I totally agree Scott.
>
> This part really bothered me:
>
> "If it is you that is responsible for making sure you obtain these medications, in whatever way possible, you are in need of therapy far more than you are in need of a place like CrazyMeds. Please do not ask any more questions along this vein. Your data does not add up, and we have an extremely low tolerance for such things""
>
> I won't comment further as I don't want to be banned but let's just say it didn't feel very civil to me.
>
> 49erFriends,
I would like for you to nootice the skill that Dymphna used in the post in question. She saw that a combination of drugs could cause death as has been reported in the liturature. Now she may know that combinations of drugs are what is belived by many to have killed many famous people. People like Elvis and John Balushi, and Hank Williams and many others. I think that she gives a higher priority to having members be warned of the potential of death than to civility. And anyway, she is the moderator in charge and could be thinking of protectinng the members health and safety.
You see, when chemicals are taken, there could be a life or death situation.
Now reading dymphna's post in queston, she uses logic to cover what could be all the bases. First she addresses as to if the drugs were prescribed by one Dr, and then by more than one Dr. And then she writes,[... [IF} it is you that is responsible...]. Now she is covering if the drugs are taken outside of being prescribed although the grammatical structure could b interpretted differently, but I lean to that she was covering the possibility of a Dr not being involved in the obtaining of the drugs, but she asks if it is, and I do not see her stating that the drugs were obtained without a Dr prescribing because she opens with the statement with {IF}.
One way tha could happen is if the person had taken the drugs previously as being prescribed in the past and some were shelved and then recalled later. Another way is if the drugs can be obtaned by mail, legally. If there is self-medicating, then I think that Dymphna was covering that possibility.
I think that she coverd the possibilities and the members there could then have a logical explanation for what she posted to make their own determination as to take such a combination of drugs.
She then states something that I think means that the site that she moderates does not want to foster the taking of those combinations. Now that is something as to their TOS as she explained here in this thread. The TOS can be a legal aspect of these internet forums. If someone died taking the combination of drugs in question, and the TOS of that forum was against such, and Dymphna did not sanction the post, then could it be possible that she could be held liable for the member's death in some jurisdictions because of indifference and/or negligence?
Let's look at this in another situation. Suppose one member tells another member to take a particular drug. Then the member has a child born with horrific birth defects as a resuklt of taking the drug that she was told by the other member to take. Now the moderator, let's say, did not intercede with a warning about the possibility of birth defects. Could the moderator be held liable if she/he knew or {should have known}? You see, Dymphna may think that it is her duty to know because she is the moderator. It is my conviction that she knows a great deal about the chemical structure of drugs that act on the central nervous system and was alarmed at reading the drug combination in question.
Lou
Posted by olivia12 on September 29, 2010, at 20:22:45
In reply to Lou's views-in defense of Dymphna, posted by Lou Pilder on September 29, 2010, at 20:10:11
While I'm not quite sure what your post is getting at, I am very impressed that you said something using concrete words Lou. Maybe I am a bit dull-minded, but I could never really understand the A,B,C,D format of questions or the video references you seem to be into. My sincere thanks Lou:)
Posted by 49er on September 29, 2010, at 20:40:28
In reply to Re: Crazy meds IS crazy » 49er, posted by SLS on September 29, 2010, at 5:29:50
> Still treading water. I've been worse, though. Right now, it appears that I am responding somewhat to Nardil. I am definitely better on it than off it. I'll try to remain patient. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.
>
>
> - ScottHi Scott,
I will keep my fingers crossed that your response to Nardil continues in a positive direction.
49er
Posted by chujoe on September 30, 2010, at 20:28:55
In reply to Lou's views-in defense of Dymphna, posted by Lou Pilder on September 29, 2010, at 20:10:11
>>People like Elvis and John Balushi, and Hank Williams...<<
Didn't these folks die of cocaine, barbiturates, and especially alcohol? Are we talking about psych meds here? None of the currently popular anti-depressants were even available when Elvis died. I haven't read the whole string of posts in this thread, so maybe I'm off-base here, but this kind of mixing apples and oranges strikes me as unhelpful.
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 3, 2010, at 9:08:30
In reply to Lou's views-in defense of Dymphna, posted by Lou Pilder on September 29, 2010, at 20:10:11
> > > Hi Dymphna.
> > >
> > > I don't know anything about you, and I have visited your website on just a handful of occasions. I was disturbed by your words to Maxime. Believe it or not, they would not be considered civil on Psycho-Babble, and the moderators would intervene on everyone's behalf. I don't take ownership of anyone's words but my own. Knowing how emotionally vulnerable and sensitive to criticism mental illnesses can leave one, I try to be communicate with others here with that in mind.
> > >
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> > I totally agree Scott.
> >
> > This part really bothered me:
> >
> > "If it is you that is responsible for making sure you obtain these medications, in whatever way possible, you are in need of therapy far more than you are in need of a place like CrazyMeds. Please do not ask any more questions along this vein. Your data does not add up, and we have an extremely low tolerance for such things""
> >
> > I won't comment further as I don't want to be banned but let's just say it didn't feel very civil to me.
> >
> > 49er
>
> Friends,
> I would like for you to nootice the skill that Dymphna used in the post in question. She saw that a combination of drugs could cause death as has been reported in the liturature. Now she may know that combinations of drugs are what is belived by many to have killed many famous people. People like Elvis and John Balushi, and Hank Williams and many others. I think that she gives a higher priority to having members be warned of the potential of death than to civility. And anyway, she is the moderator in charge and could be thinking of protectinng the members health and safety.
> You see, when chemicals are taken, there could be a life or death situation.
> Now reading dymphna's post in queston, she uses logic to cover what could be all the bases. First she addresses as to if the drugs were prescribed by one Dr, and then by more than one Dr. And then she writes,[... [IF} it is you that is responsible...]. Now she is covering if the drugs are taken outside of being prescribed although the grammatical structure could b interpretted differently, but I lean to that she was covering the possibility of a Dr not being involved in the obtaining of the drugs, but she asks if it is, and I do not see her stating that the drugs were obtained without a Dr prescribing because she opens with the statement with {IF}.
> One way tha could happen is if the person had taken the drugs previously as being prescribed in the past and some were shelved and then recalled later. Another way is if the drugs can be obtaned by mail, legally. If there is self-medicating, then I think that Dymphna was covering that possibility.
> I think that she coverd the possibilities and the members there could then have a logical explanation for what she posted to make their own determination as to take such a combination of drugs.
> She then states something that I think means that the site that she moderates does not want to foster the taking of those combinations. Now that is something as to their TOS as she explained here in this thread. The TOS can be a legal aspect of these internet forums. If someone died taking the combination of drugs in question, and the TOS of that forum was against such, and Dymphna did not sanction the post, then could it be possible that she could be held liable for the member's death in some jurisdictions because of indifference and/or negligence?
> Let's look at this in another situation. Suppose one member tells another member to take a particular drug. Then the member has a child born with horrific birth defects as a resuklt of taking the drug that she was told by the other member to take. Now the moderator, let's say, did not intercede with a warning about the possibility of birth defects. Could the moderator be held liable if she/he knew or {should have known}? You see, Dymphna may think that it is her duty to know because she is the moderator. It is my conviction that she knows a great deal about the chemical structure of drugs that act on the central nervous system and was alarmed at reading the drug combination in question.
> LouFriends,
Now I think that Dymphna is a concientious moderator. You see, she may have legal advice concerning what is known as criminal negligence and could have sanctioned the post in question with that in mind along with the other aspects of her moderation of that forum.
Now depending on the jurisdiction, Dymphna could have been aware of the concepts of criminal negligence and might foresee the consequences as a result of letting the post go or letting it stand without comment to point out that the combination of he drug(s) are contrindicated. The consequences listed in the liturature include death.
The concept of criminal negligence in many jurisdictions involves that someone could have the knlowlege to know that, in the case at hand, the combination of drug(s) could cause death and that the death(s) could be {avoidable} if the combinations that are contrindicated are pointed out, which she did. Now then a reasonable person standard looks at the moderator's knowlege of if the moderator could pose another to the risk of injury or death by what is known as {nonfeasance} or in the language of these forum, letting the post stand or letting it go.
But there is much more to this...
Lou
Posted by olivia12 on October 3, 2010, at 18:04:22
In reply to Lou's views-in defense of Dymphna-krihmnheg, posted by Lou Pilder on October 3, 2010, at 9:08:30
Huh?
Posted by Maxime on October 5, 2010, at 18:57:30
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Maxime » huxley, posted by Dr. Bob on September 28, 2010, at 5:10:35
Wow, banned from one site and then blocked for a week on another. That is a record I am sure! :)
I spent this last week posting on Crazy Meds. It's a good board but threads don't advance very quickly. I think because there are so many categories (which can useful to find info on a certain med quickly).But I am glad to back at PB.
Posted by Maxime on October 5, 2010, at 19:09:35
In reply to Lou's views-in defense of Dymphna, posted by Lou Pilder on September 29, 2010, at 20:10:11
But Lou, my psychiatrist would never put me on meds or a combo of meds that could harm me. And the pharmacy always double checks if I am on a strange combination of med. They call my psychiatrist to see if mistake has been made.
Dymphna would NOT be held responsible if a combination of meds harmed me in any way (or harmed anyone else in any way). My doctor would be responsible. Dymphna doesn't know my history with meds. And I am sorry, but I disagree with you when you say that Dymphna knows a lot about meds. I don't believe she does. She was just quoting information that she found on the internet. I am not trying to put anyone down, but I am stating the facts.
Posted by olivia12 on October 5, 2010, at 19:12:09
In reply to Re: blocked for week, posted by Maxime on October 5, 2010, at 18:57:30
Glad to see you are back Maxime--I personally like your candor:)
Posted by Phillipa on October 5, 2010, at 20:14:13
In reply to Re: blocked for week, posted by olivia12 on October 5, 2010, at 19:12:09
Ditto. Phillipa
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 7, 2010, at 14:32:55
In reply to Re: Lou's views-in defense of Dymphna » Lou Pilder, posted by Maxime on October 5, 2010, at 19:09:35
> But Lou, my psychiatrist would never put me on meds or a combo of meds that could harm me. And the pharmacy always double checks if I am on a strange combination of med. They call my psychiatrist to see if mistake has been made.
>
> Dymphna would NOT be held responsible if a combination of meds harmed me in any way (or harmed anyone else in any way). My doctor would be responsible. Dymphna doesn't know my history with meds. And I am sorry, but I disagree with you when you say that Dymphna knows a lot about meds. I don't believe she does. She was just quoting information that she found on the internet. I am not trying to put anyone down, but I am stating the facts.
>
> maxime,
You wrote, [...Dymphna would not be held responsible if a combination of meds harmed me in any way (or harmed anyone else in any way). My doctor would be responsible...].
I am unsure as to what authority, if any, you used here to state that. You do say that the doctor could be responsible, so if the doctor could be responsible, then could also anyone else that is an accessory to others taking a combination of drugs that could be harmful be also responsible?
Now Dymphna may have had extensive training in being a moderator of a forum invloving psychotropic drugs. She may have wanted to know her exposure to liability before she undertook the position of moderator.
Now if she did, she could have been advised of what is known as negligence and also {criminal negligence}. Now criminal negligence has the generally accepted meaning that as a result of negligence a death or serious injury happened. A serious injury in that type of forum could be something like dystonia as in tardive dyskinesia or other serious injuries.
There could have been the question as to if she has a fudiciary duty there. She also could have been concerned about civil fraud or misrepresentation. Another concern could have been {lack of supervision} and other concerns involving what her purpose is in moderating the forum. That could be determined by the TOS there and the forum's mission statement and other criteria, if any, along with the laws in the jurisdiction in question.
Now as to if she would be liable if someone took the combination of drugs in question and she left the post to stand, or let it go, as in internet parlance, and the person taking the combination of drugs died or sufferd a serious injury, I do not think that one in her position would want to be in a situation where she could think that she {could} be held liable.
Let's look at it this way by looking at another type of injury. Suppose a forum allows hatred toward a group of people by fostering racial hatred and a member of that class is attacked emotionally and psychologically on the forum and the moderator allows it by being indifferent to the posts or even saying that the rules have been drafted to allow the racial hatred statements that could arrouse, let's say, antisemitic feelings. And then bullying goes on and a member suffers the infliction of emotional distress from it along with humiliation and embarressment and feelings of unworthiness and defamation. Could the moderstor be held liable for the psychological/emotional injuries to that member if they dd not sanction the post(s)? Could they claim that they were {too busy} to intercede? Could they claim that they did not see the posts?
Lou
Posted by Maxime on October 7, 2010, at 19:50:40
In reply to Lou's reply-in defense of Dymphna Crazymeds » Maxime, posted by Lou Pilder on October 7, 2010, at 14:32:55
Lou, I really don't think it works that way. We don't even know who Dymphna is. She is on the internet, she is virtual. She could be a man for all we know!
Anyhow, I don't want to talk about Dymphna anymore. She doesn't deserve the bandwidth.
Take care Lou.
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 8, 2010, at 17:04:23
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-in defense of Dymphna Crazymeds » Lou Pilder, posted by Maxime on October 7, 2010, at 19:50:40
> Lou, I really don't think it works that way. We don't even know who Dymphna is. She is on the internet, she is virtual. She could be a man for all we know!
>
> Anyhow, I don't want to talk about Dymphna anymore. She doesn't deserve the bandwidth.
>
> Take care Lou.Friends,
It is written here,[...she doesn't xxxxx bandwidth...].
Now Dymphna the moderator of Crazy Meds has posted about a combination of psychotropic drugs. That moderator could have knowlege concerning crimminal negligence and may think that if the post was not flaged that someone could die or be seriously injured from the taking of the combination of psychotropic drugs listed.
If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, or just want to know if the concept of criminal negligence could be applied to that moderator if the post was not addressed, I am requesting that you read the following article.
Lou
To read this article,
A. Bring up google
B. Type in;
[Psychotropic drugs, Activists Take Eli Sale of Zyprexa]
The article is by Dr. Ann Blake Tracy
Posted by Phillipa on October 8, 2010, at 20:43:08
In reply to Lou's request-Crazy Meds -criminal negligence?, posted by Lou Pilder on October 8, 2010, at 17:04:23
What do you all think time to end this thread. Me thinks me gone. Phillipa
Posted by Maxime on October 8, 2010, at 21:51:00
In reply to Re: Lou's request-Crazy Meds -criminal negligence?, posted by Phillipa on October 8, 2010, at 20:43:08
> What do you all think time to end this thread. Me thinks me gone. Phillipa
Bless you! YES! Like I said in my above post, it doesn't deserve the bandwidth!
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.