![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 10 of 10. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by RobiniboR on February 16, 2001, at 16:39:21
I have just visited Dr. Bob's links sections and the website I work on is NOT there.
I would like to have and could use your help in getting http://www.undoingdepression.com listed with the others.
Now, Dr. Bob is not the only website that doesn't list us. Those websites sponsored by pharmaceutical companies don't. There are also some ultra-medically-oriented sites that won't put us on.
CONVERSELY, or should it be PERVERSELY, there are a few VERY IMPORTANT PERSONAL SITES that have decided that because our message is that there ARE things we can do to get better and/or prevent relapses from being as bad as they might be---well, they think that means we do not understand: Some of them want to believe depression is ONLY a chemical imbalance and fixing that is difficult but is the only thing you need to do.So here is a real dilemma for us. Most depression websites are in one of the two camps. Medical or Personal. So if we are unable to get links on most of the Medicals and many of the Personals, lots of people who could be helped by our information (or at least might find it interesting) never get to see it.
Do any of you have any advice for me?
nib
Posted by dj on February 16, 2001, at 20:33:11
In reply to I need help getting a message to Dr.Bob, posted by RobiniboR on February 16, 2001, at 16:39:21
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, dr-bob@uchicago.edu from the bottom of PB page, though he will doubtless reply to you here, in the next 24 hours or so, I imagine.
The book is cited near the bottom of the book page link but the website is not cited there and who know how many people make it to the bottom of the page...
As for the dilemna on links all I can suggest is personal pleas to website owners of websites you would like to be associated with and in turn are willing to link your site to their page. For example you already have a link at http://www.wingsofmadness.com/booksd.htm#depression, which is a very good and informative website. Do you have a link back to them and others that resonate with your husband's message??? Dr. Koop's website, for intance???
Good luck.
dj
Posted by RobiniboR on February 16, 2001, at 22:07:43
In reply to Re: I need help getting a message to Dr.Bob » RobiniboR, posted by dj on February 16, 2001, at 20:33:11
Funny you should mention it...wingofmadness hates our message. Our book is only listed because it is one that sells well and the webmistress lists the top ten sellers. She somehow got the belief that we don't treat depression seriously.
Oh, well,
niborFor example you already have a link at http://www.wingsofmadness.com/booksd.htm#depression, which is a very good and informative website. Do you have a link back to them and others that resonate with your husband's message??? Dr. Koop's website, for intance???
>
> Good luck.
>
> dj
Posted by dj on February 16, 2001, at 23:14:21
In reply to Re: I need help getting a message to Dr.Bob, posted by RobiniboR on February 16, 2001, at 22:07:43
when making your plea to various web-site. You need to use whatever message will get through and the economic one carries weight with those wanting to make money off that portion of their website. And the fact that the book is in the top ten, shows their is an audience.
To expand that audience perhaps you might want to have media interviews arranged with prominent print media who have a web prescence, to help disseminate the message you want to get out...
You might want to hire a PR co-op student who is web savvy to develop and implement and on and off-site campaign for you or a reasonably priced practitioner or see if an agency might provide some pro-bono work in exchange for a portion of fees going to some sort of charitable fund which would further pursue the message or.... it's all about being savvy in your approach...
cheers!
dj
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2001, at 2:36:54
In reply to I need help getting a message to Dr.Bob, posted by RobiniboR on February 16, 2001, at 16:39:21
> I have just visited Dr. Bob's links sections and the website I work on is NOT there.
Sorry, I'm just way too busy to keep that page up to date. But it's also true that I don't always list sites that are more promotional in nature...
Bob
Posted by dj on February 17, 2001, at 6:22:52
In reply to Re: got it » RobiniboR, posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2001, at 2:36:54
>it's also true that I don't always list sites >that are more promotional in nature...
Dr. Bob,
If you have not looked at that webpage or have just glanced at it, it is worth taking a good look at it because there is lots of thoughtful and informative commentary there!!!
dj
Posted by niborr on February 17, 2001, at 9:18:10
In reply to Re: got it » Dr. Bob, posted by dj on February 17, 2001, at 6:22:52
> >it's also true that I don't always list sites >that are more promotional in nature...
>
> Dr. Bob,
>
> If you have not looked at that webpage or have just glanced at it, it is worth taking a good look at it because there is lots of thoughtful and informative commentary there!!!
>
> dj
Posted by ksvt on February 17, 2001, at 11:47:55
In reply to Thank you for the kind words » dj, posted by niborr on February 17, 2001, at 9:18:10
> > >Robin - I first discovered your husband's book a couple of years ago when I was deciding whether to order another book on depression from Amazon. I checked out the reader reviews on this other book and I noticed that a striking number of reviewers made comments like "this book was good, but the book that really explains depression is Undoing Depression." If memory serves correctly, your husband's book was reviewed very favorably by its readers on Amazon. I'd point to that as an example that you do understand depressions. I admit that your site is certainly promotional in nature, but i agree with dj that there is helpful stuff there. Your husband's contribution to me has not been so much his message, as it has been his ability to express so clearly and eloquently the way a depressed person feels and thinks. There were lots of places in the book where I felt like he was describing me. I know that sounds a little trite but that feeling of connection really has not been there with any other material of that genre. I used to visit the site periodically because I found it reassuring, and somehow made me feel less isolated. I have to say that this site performs that function more for me now, but I don't think that diminishes the value of your site, particularly to people who maybe haven't been around the bend quite as much as it seems the people on this site have been. I do think the Personal sites should be more receptive. Have you tried a link to Mixed Nutz? I think that's how I eventually found my way here, with an intermediate site in between. K
Posted by dj on February 17, 2001, at 15:03:38
In reply to Re: getting the message out, posted by ksvt on February 17, 2001, at 11:47:55
From today's NY Times & backing up some of the thrust of "Undoing Depresion"'s message:
February 17, 2001
THINK TANK
Freud, Influential Yet Unloved
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
--------------------------------------------------
"Jared Diamond, a professor of physiology at the U.C.L.A. School of Medicine, argues that only two scientists in the last 200 years can justifiably be called irreplaceable: Freud and Darwin. In an essay in the February issue of Natural History magazine, he tries to explain why Darwin is so revered and Freud so often reviled. Here are excerpts:< deleted >
I acknowledge a legitimate moral base underlying such Freud-bashing: the human consequences of his scientific errors, and his often ugly interpersonal relations. But there are two other types of Freud-bashing that are not defensible. One consists of pointing out all the new things learned and all the new therapies devised since Freud, as if these represent his failures or demonstrate the uselessness of his work. . . .
The other type of Freud-bashing — much more damaging because it hurts patients — comes from a too-narrow focus on biological psychiatry. I fully accept the importance of biological psychiatry, having devoted some of my own research to problems in that area (neurotransmitters and manic-depressive illness). . . . But now the pendulum has swung to the opposite extreme: psychiatry departments have become bastions of molecular biology, at which much more time is devoted to studying and teaching psychopharmacology than to what are called talk therapies. . . .
To my mind, academe's swing away from talk therapies is tragic. Major advances are still being made in this field — for instance, in crisis counseling and in child and family therapy. . . .
Even specialists in biological psychiatry need thorough training in talk therapies, because it can be difficult to figure out whether a patient's problems have a primarily biological or a primarily nonbiological basis. Even clients whose problems are probably fundamentally biological (such as in manic-depressive illness) tend to have associated psychological issues that need attention. Physicians who rely heavily on prescribing drugs often don't take time to establish a relationship with a patient, regularly forget that the patient and physician are locked in an emotionally charged relationship, and then are surprised at how often patients fail to take the drugs prescribed for them. Understanding that unique two-way relationship was one of the many deep and far-reaching insights that put Freud right up there with Darwin."
For more: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/17/arts/17TANK.html?pagewanted=all
Posted by pat123 on February 17, 2001, at 15:41:16
In reply to Re: getting the message out, posted by dj on February 17, 2001, at 15:03:38
> From today's NY Times & backing up some of the thrust of "Undoing Depresion"'s message:
>
> February 17, 2001
> THINK TANK
> Freud, Influential Yet Unloved
> By THE NEW YORK TIMES
>
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> "Jared Diamond, a professor of physiology at the U.C.L.A. School of Medicine, argues that only two scientists in the last 200 years can justifiably be called irreplaceable: Freud and Darwin. In an essay in the February issue of Natural History magazine, he tries to explain why Darwin is so revered and Freud so often reviled.
Huh ? Just the 2 ? Thats wacky !Pat
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | 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.