![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 7 to 31 of 32. Go back in thread:
Posted by bluedog on November 6, 2002, at 11:09:04
In reply to thanks for the link » bluedog, posted by BeardedLady on November 6, 2002, at 8:51:18
No problem at all.
What I really like about this message board is the sharing of information in a non-confrontational way. This does not mean that there is not any heated debate which is good as long as it doesn't degenerate into personal slanging matches that seem to plague message boards in general. That is why I consider this message board as a breath of fresh air considering that there are contributors from all walks of life contributing to the board)
I have already increased my knowledge on all matters of issues relating to my health (both physical and mental) simply by reading the messages and following the really useful links that people provide.
keep well
Posted by IsoM on November 6, 2002, at 17:02:19
In reply to Re: IsoM, question for you, posted by bluedog on November 6, 2002, at 4:37:01
I wrote a longer answer back but when I clicked to send it, the computer crashed & closed. I had to reboot. I wonder. It only does this with PB, not anything else ever.
Short answer instead. Yes, Andrew Weil is fine for most. A little simplistic but few want it as detailed & explanatory & backed with references like I do. I'm just leery of capitalist gains & people who make money off of common sense. No rant with this message. I got it out of my system before it crashed.
Posted by Mr Beev on November 6, 2002, at 20:36:38
In reply to Re: IsoM, question for you » bluedog, posted by IsoM on November 6, 2002, at 17:02:19
I share your concerns. And one cannot help but note the tight integration of advice and incitements to purchase materials on Weil's site. However, he states that he donates all the after-tax profits from this LLC to his non-profit organization, the Polaris Foundation.
On the other hand, those vehement fellows at Quackwatch have fairly plastered their site with articles that are at least worth a perusal:
http://www.ncahf.org/search/webglimpse.cgi?ID=1&lines=on&query=weil
Mr Beev
Posted by bluedog on November 6, 2002, at 21:48:44
Thanks for your views. It confirmed my own views on the matter.
The only book by Dr Weil that I have read is "eating well for optimum health". My personal belief is that this is his best book and is free of hype or sales-talk and also did not give me the impression that eating a certain diet or taking certain supplements will cure my anxiety and depression but is simply one aspect that could assist my recovery (if that's possible)
I was not persuaded to read any of his other books as they seem to provide a much more "alternative" view of the universe which my sceptical mind has a lot more difficulty accepting. (my impressions only and I emphasize that I havn't read any of his other books but was actually turned off by some of the reviews on these books at Amazon.com)
IsoM.... even though your "rant" was erased (an extremely frustrating experience when your in a ranting mood and you write a whole lot of things "on a roll")I suspect I know along what lines it went. Correct me if I'm wrong but I guess you wrote quite a bit on the difficulty of getting COMPLETELY independant advice in our dog eat dog world of profit and more profit.
This also never fails to frustrate me where apparently good advice or views that seem to concur with my own are really just subtle (or not so subtle sales pitches) and Dr weil is no exception when you look at his site.
I suppose another really good example is a book that I recently read and consider to be an absolutely excellent book called "NO LOGO" by Naomi Klein. This book basically is a scathing work on the state of our commercial world and the marketing dirty tricks that the corporate and big business world get up to, as epitomised by the Mclibel case in England (see the following for a good link on the Mclibel case
http://www.mcspotlight.org/ )But I do remember feeling uncomfortable whilst reading this book thinking that the author in effect is actually joining the very world she is criticising and reporting on and that she probably will make a "killing" from the sales of the book. However the author does recognise this when at her website is written "Naomi's publisher put up a website to help market the product. You can all appreciate the irony." (See
http://nologo.org/about.shtml ).Food for thought I suppose
Posted by bluedog on November 6, 2002, at 21:51:13
In reply to To IsoM and Mr Beev, posted by bluedog on November 6, 2002, at 21:48:44
woops, I didn't mean to start a new thread
Posted by IsoM on November 6, 2002, at 23:49:16
In reply to woops, I didn't mean to start a new thread, posted by bluedog on November 6, 2002, at 21:51:13
Yes, part of my rant was what the subject line is. It's rotten through & through & I do as much as I can not to be a part of it. I reuse, recycle, repair, buy 2nd hand & make my own as much as possible. There's very few things I own that's new except for food - 2nd hand food's not too great. :)
The other part of my rant was that good nutritional & life style advice generally falls on deaf ears. What's the point in people spending money on books, advice, supplements, gym memeberships, & exercise equipment when they're often not used enough or properly? People are getting lazier; smoking, overdrinking, overeating or eating junk, avoiding hard work or activity & making all sorts of poor health choices 'cause it's easier or more 'fun' initially & then suffering the consequences & feeling sorry for themselves. And who ends up paying for the hospital & medical costs needed?
Our environment's bad enough now with pollution, stresses, veggies lacking the nutrition they used to have & other concerns without further contributing to our ill health by our own hand. While there's been advances in some ways, in other ways these very advances have made us overly complacent about our health, thinking that researchers will have a cure or treatment for our problems soon enough.
Anyway, I'm sure you can see where this rant could lead & I don't want others to think I'm judging every overweight person. Lots of time, it's far more complicated than just overeating, or poor life style, but it is a major factor. As one older person said to me "Those who can see the hand-writing on the wall, don't need to. And those who can't, never would see it no matter how plain it was made."
Posted by IsoM on November 7, 2002, at 0:12:02
In reply to Re: IsoM, question for you » IsoM, posted by Mr Beev on November 6, 2002, at 20:36:38
Great link! Thanks, Mr. Beev. I enjoyed reading this 1st article in that link:
http://www.ncahf.org/search/mfs.cgi/home/sbncahf/wg2/archives/1?link=http://www.quackwatch.org/10Bio/biography.html&file=/home/sbncahf/wg2/archives/1/.remote/31.html&line=145#mfs
not just about Weil but more crack pot ideas of others. I knew little of what Weil taught as I think New Age thinking is somewhat out in left field & avoid it but I didn't know he gave stupid advice too.I thought his nutritional advice was fairly conventional, nothing new or different than what you can find anywhere else. Probably most people are knowledgable enough about sensible eating & if his advice was unsound, it would only make them realise that his other advice was unsound too. Best to mix your sales talk with some truth to convince more.
Posted by bluedog on November 7, 2002, at 3:41:20
In reply to Re: IsoM, question for you » IsoM, posted by Mr Beev on November 6, 2002, at 20:36:38
> I share your concerns. And one cannot help but note the tight integration of advice and incitements to purchase materials on Weil's site. However, he states that he donates all the after-tax profits from this LLC to his non-profit organization, the Polaris Foundation.
>
> On the other hand, those vehement fellows at Quackwatch have fairly plastered their site with articles that are at least worth a perusal:
>
> http://www.ncahf.org/search/webglimpse.cgi?ID=1&lines=on&query=weil
>
>
> Mr Beev
>Great link, I wasn't aware of this site.
I new that Weil was "alternative" but I didn't realize just how alternative.
Thanks
Posted by BeardedLady on November 7, 2002, at 7:48:30
In reply to Re: link included... » Mr Beev, posted by IsoM on November 7, 2002, at 0:12:02
I could not find anything in that link about Andrew Weil. It was a court case with someone named Brown and a discussion of alphabiotics.
beardy
Posted by BeardedLady on November 7, 2002, at 7:53:52
In reply to Re: IsoM, question for you, posted by bluedog on November 7, 2002, at 3:41:20
I must be dumb. I went to all the posted links and to all the links on the sites. Where was any information about Weil? All I saw was his name used in bibliographies and an article about his popularity explained, which linked to something that was about something entirely different.
Could someone post an exact link, so I know what is meant by how alternative Weil is? I can't seem to get there.
Maybe you can paste some of it here?
beardy
Posted by BeardedLady on November 7, 2002, at 8:02:30
In reply to Marketing, Advertising, Modern Economics and More » bluedog, posted by IsoM on November 6, 2002, at 23:49:16
My feeling is that Weil's advice (not his product peddling) seems to be pretty mainstream and common sense when one is not reading in-depth materials.
Frankly, one needs no nutritional advice more than eat a balanced diet low in sugar and fat, moderate in fruits, and high in veggies. Exercise for thirty to sixty minutes at least five days a week. Drink enough water for your body weight (about 8 glasses). Get about eight hours of sleep every night.
Beyond this, what's left, really? The diet my doctors recommend most and the diet that really has the most science behind it is The Zone. I know many people who are able to live this way.
But The Zone turns food into medicine and sort of takes the joy out of eating. I'd rather practice moderation in everything I do.
As for nutritional advice falling on deaf ears: so what? Those who make the necessary changes are able to live their lives a little better. Those who don't continue to complain about it. And others try and go on and off the chuck wagon.
Unless you help yourself, there's only so much good advice can do. Na' mean?
beardy
Posted by bluedog on November 7, 2002, at 9:32:13
In reply to Where's Weil? » bluedog, posted by BeardedLady on November 7, 2002, at 7:53:52
> I must be dumb. I went to all the posted links and to all the links on the sites. Where was any information about Weil? All I saw was his name used in bibliographies and an article about his popularity explained, which linked to something that was about something entirely different.
>
> Could someone post an exact link, so I know what is meant by how alternative Weil is? I can't seem to get there.
>
> Maybe you can paste some of it here?
>
> beardy
Here is some pasted information as requested"The Natural Mind (1972) is mainly a criticism of American drug policy and an exposition of Weil's views on the interaction of psychedelic drugs with the mind. It also expounds his general philosophy of mind-body relations upon which much of his later writings on health and healing is based. The seventh chapter, entitled "A Trip to Stonesville," should be required reading for all who would understand the origins of Weil's belief in the healing power of the mind. It is a startling document -- a sharply drawn manifesto of New Age biology, a direct challenge to the scientific basis of conventional medicine, and a revealing window on Weil's style of thought. And, since a theory of mind-body relations is central to most current formulations of alternative medicine, this chapter must be considered one of the movement's most important philosophical statements. It merits a detailed examination.
According to Weil, many of his basic insights about the causes of disease and the nature of healing come from what he calls "stoned thinking," that is, thoughts experienced while under the influence of psychedelic agents or during other states of "altered consciousness" induced by trances, ritual magic, hypnosis, meditation, and the like. He cites some of the characteristics of "stoned thinking" that give it advantages over "straight" thinking; these include a greater reliance on "intuition" and an "acceptance of the ambivalent nature of things," by which he means a tolerance for "the coexistence of opposites that appear to be mutually antagonistic." In Weil's view, intellect, logic, and inductive reasoning from observed fact are the limited instruments of "straight" thinking, and should be subservient to guidance by the intuitive insights that are gained during states of altered consciousness and "stoned" thinking."
I consider these views pretty alternative. For the full article where this quote came from heres the link
http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/weil.html
Dr Weils arguments can however be quite seductive and even though I am a cynic from way back I sometimes find myself wanting to agree with some of his views...however my views can also be said to be tainted due to my frustration with mainstream medicine.regards
Posted by Mal on November 7, 2002, at 10:26:02
In reply to I guess I'm less of a pessimist. » IsoM, posted by BeardedLady on November 7, 2002, at 8:02:30
Beardy, I do know what you mean, and I agree with just about everything you said. I am a big believer in personal responsibility. Yeah, I could stand to lose a few pounnds, but I am the one who ate what I wanted and who laid around and didn't get to exercising every day like I should have.
This is not to say I don't admire the lifestyle IsoM is living. Sometimes I wish life were simpler and slower, like the pioneers lived it. Our grown-up toys are nice, but sometimes our possessions just weigh us down with responsibilities. I have relatives who are very much into the "self sufficient" idea, and if I lived nearer to them, I suppose I would work a little harder at it, too.
Anyhow, I can't blame anybody for trying to make a living in the world we live in, because the poioneers are long gone, and somebody has to pay the insurance company!
Just some thoughts...
MAL
Posted by Mr Beev on November 7, 2002, at 11:23:42
In reply to To IsoM and Mr Beev, posted by bluedog on November 6, 2002, at 21:48:44
Thank you for the recommendation of "No Logo"; I shall look it up. I have read a boatload of similar, fascinating books, but they hardly make for uplifting reading!
It is a good policy to stay skeptical. Dr Weil, for example, may have Harvard degrees, look like a jolly Santa, may well be completely sincere - unfortunately it does not follow that he is right. This is one reason I always keep the Quackwatch Supersearch ready to hand. They are quite conservative - even reactionary - but they appear to be truly a non-profit labour of love - and one notes there are no product banners on their site.
Best Regards,
Mr Beev
Posted by Mr Beev on November 7, 2002, at 11:31:39
In reply to Marketing, Advertising, Modern Economics and More » bluedog, posted by IsoM on November 6, 2002, at 23:49:16
Once again, IsoM, you have taken the words right out of my mouth! The sad fact of it is that, ultimately, our health maintenance is our own responsibility and requires continuous hard work. I have been through dozens of rigorous vitamin, mineral, herb regimens, all to no avail, but the glorious ease of popping a pill (except for certain pharmaceuticals when I am in extreme disarray) has never worked like sustained, vigorous exercise. A difficult path for a lazy fellow like myself! I read somewhere that exercise has proven signficantly effective in ameliorating all but the worst cases of anxiety and depression in something like 95% of the cases.
Mr Beev
Posted by BeardedLady on November 7, 2002, at 13:49:31
In reply to Re: Where's Weil? » BeardedLady, posted by bluedog on November 7, 2002, at 9:32:13
As a former dabbler in mind alterations, I have to say I've had some wonderful revelations under the influence of very small amounts of LSD (say a quarter of a hit of paper).
In fact, I might have gone my whole life without an orgasm had I not experienced it on LSD first! I think something like 70% of women are unable to achieve orgasm, so I consider myself pretty lucky!
beardy
Posted by bluedog on November 7, 2002, at 21:58:25
In reply to I think I like him even more now! » bluedog, posted by BeardedLady on November 7, 2002, at 13:49:31
I think that when you suspend logical thinking, by whatever means, your body then does what it is naturally supposed to do.
I also agree with Weil that too much logical thinking can get in the way of being healthy and
I fully agree with the mind body connection.My problem is that my own "logical mind" never switches off unless I am under the influence of drugs (my drug of choice used to be alcohol). Unfortunately suspending my logical thinking with alcohol was terrible for my health (both physical and mental)
I'm actually in a catch-22 situation. When I'm straight my thinking damages my health (especially my mental health) but using drugs to switch off my logical mind also damages my health. (I know CBT is supposed to help with unhealthy thinking but I've had very limited success going down this track)
I own 2 dogs and sometimes think I can learn a lot from my dogs (cat owners probably have the same view) When my male dog was attacked by another dog recently his immediate healthy response was to defend himself. In this situation he snarls and snaps, raises his hackles and he may be agitated for a few minutes after the fight but within minutes he has completely forgotten about the entire incident and he's back to his usual happy self. He does not beat himself up with stupid thoughts of "I should've reacted differently" or "my god I should have stood up for myself more, I'm a failure and loser and not masculine enough and that cute labrador down the road will never let me sniff her bum now". The female also does not think "I just stood there, I didn't do anything, I'm a total failure, I should have jumped in and protected my little buddy". The bizarre thing is that these are the sorts of things that actually went through my own mind long after the incident was over.
Humans unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective) have inherited a conscious
mind. The flip side to any positives of a conscious mind is of course the suffering brought about by mental illness, and traditional medicine has had limited success in reducing this suffering.This is why I think Dr Weils perspectives on medicine are so seductive, but also why I think he's so alternative.
It's that damn logical mind.
keep well
p.s by the way, despite some of his views I still like Dr Weil. I suppose the question to ask yourself is ...If I was suffering from an illness, If Dr Weil was my local GP would I trust him to treat my illness?
My answer to this question would be a resounding Yes.
Posted by bluedog on November 8, 2002, at 9:41:07
In reply to Re: IsoM, question for you, posted by bluedog on November 6, 2002, at 4:37:01
Something weird seems to have happened to my posts- the same post seems to be repeated several times under different headings when I definitely posted something different under each of those headings. I don't know if it's my system or something that's happened on the message board?
Oh well!!
Posted by Dinah on November 8, 2002, at 9:46:18
In reply to What the......!!!!!!!!?psychobabble, posted by bluedog on November 8, 2002, at 9:41:07
Didn't this used to be two threads, with a disclaimer at the top of one that only one thread was intended?
Perhaps Dr. Bob merged the two threads and something odd happened along the way.
Just a guess.
Posted by BeardedLady on November 8, 2002, at 12:23:13
In reply to What the......!!!!!!!!?psychobabble, posted by bluedog on November 8, 2002, at 9:41:07
...what you said in that post snafu? I had written about LSD, to refresh your memory (my post is also gone).
beardy
Posted by bluedog on November 8, 2002, at 19:35:48
In reply to Re: I'll bet I know...., posted by Dinah on November 8, 2002, at 9:46:18
Dinah
I think you are right.
I have now had a chance to check out this whole thread and it appears that in merging the threads a lot of the posts suddenly provided a link to my original post rather than to what the poster actually wrote.
Does this mean that what the posters wrote is gone forever or is it possible for Dr Bob to fix the problem?
Posted by bluedog on November 8, 2002, at 19:44:40
In reply to could you tell me... » bluedog, posted by BeardedLady on November 8, 2002, at 12:23:13
Beardy
I'm hoping that Dr Bob can fix the problem so that you'll see my response.
I have to rush out now (it's already a sunny Saturday 9 November where I am), but if Dr Bob can't fix the problem I'll try and recreate my post when I get home later on.
Regards
Posted by Dinah on November 8, 2002, at 21:02:04
In reply to Re: I'll bet I know.... » Dinah, posted by bluedog on November 8, 2002, at 19:35:48
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2002, at 2:50:12
In reply to Re: I'll bet I know.... » Dinah, posted by bluedog on November 8, 2002, at 19:35:48
Posted by BeardedLady on November 9, 2002, at 7:40:55
In reply to Re: I think I like him even more now! » BeardedLady, posted by bluedog on November 7, 2002, at 21:58:25
Ah! No wonder you weren't eager to recreate that post! It was good and long.
You're right, of course, about drugs being unhealthy and about negative thoughts being equally unhealthy. But I don't think drugs cause a suspension of logic. Logic would tell you NOT to think these negative thoughts; logic would tell you to behave like your dogs.
What some drugs can do is relax you enough to not care, to not let those negative thoughts influence your thinking.
The key is to figure out how to relax and go with the flow, something I (and possibly you) have trouble doing.
It's nice to agree with someone who has good grammar!
beardy
Go forward in 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.