Wusiks Spam Practices are Unacceptable

[Numanoid]

Is it that an illness is something that you recover from and a disorder is something you have to live with? I have a neurological disorder I live with it everyday it doesn't get better other people have pain during illness like a stomach ache that gets better.

OK, so an illness (cureable) is more "preferable" than a disorder (not cureable) in that regard.

Though neither are what anybody would want

[Jace-BeOS]

I wasn't addressing autism. Autism isn't "mental illness".

According to Wikipedia Autism is a Neurodevelopmental disorder which is a mental disorder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurodeve ... l_disorder

What's the difference between a disorder and an illness?

Is it that an illness is something that you recover from and a disorder is something you have to live with? I have a neurological disorder I live with it everyday it doesn't get better other people have pain during illness like a stomach ache that gets better.

A disorder describes a condition of abnormal function, not the cause. It could be caused by disease, genetic errors, environmental conditions, etc.

"Illness" used to be a term that defined specific and observable biochemical pathology, usually involving infectious agents, but the term has been widened to encompass non-physically-observable phenomena, specifically human behavior.

This change in usage came about due to psychiatric practitioners attempting to seek legitimacy for their specialty by medicalizing it, trying to insert it into the umbrella of healthcare (that previously only included that which can be observed on a physical level). This got the healthcare industry to include "behavioral issues" under health insurance, but don't think of that as a wholly charitable humanitarian action: it also got them many more paying clients (those with lesser financial means).

As I said above, this "legitimacy" did help to change the stigmas, but it didn't solve stigmatization itself. Now people are embracing opinion-manufactured labels to defend their legitimate misery (and I do mean legitimate) but they're also willingly considering themselves "broken", which has its own cadre of negative consequences, often worsening conditions because of belief in their inevitability.

The hypothesis of "chemical imbalances" was the tool with which psych practitioners sought medical healthcare legitimacy. That hypothesis was never proven correct and the industry has been slowly pulling back from it, but the damage has been done because it's now an accepted idea by the general populous, including acceptance by seemingly credible "experts" (no, doctors aren't necessarily scientists).

As a side note, it's stunning to see people who self-describe as "science-minded" attack with "that's antiscience!!" when I post this info. The only "positive" studies for psych drugs and depression, for example, indicate no significant benefit compared to placebo. Then there's the funding of such positive studies...

There is no known observable biochemical cause of so-called mental illness (except dementia and some chromosomal disorders).

http://cepuk.org/unrecognised-facts/no- ... al-causes/

I've checked the above organization as much as I could and found no scientologist connections. Yes, scientologists are against psychiatry, but for selfish reasons: psychiatry is their number one competitor!

[Jace-BeOS]

You may or may not be able to recover from an illness. The usage of the word does not require recovery.

[Numanoid]

The usage of the word does not require recovery.

But it is a possiblility, unlike if struck by a disorder?

[Hink]

I gotta say things are different nowadays. It is REALLY nice to see so many understand and caring people about a mental disorder. Not that long ago a lot of people didn't even believe they were real.

It's good and bad. On one hand, people are not being condemned for character flaws and "weakness" as much as they used to. On the other hand, a lot of normal human emotion is being pathologized and the resulting behavior is being medicalized so companies can sell drugs at it. It's changed from one stigma to another: Instead of being told you have bad character, they're telling you you're broken.

Basic human emotions like mourning of loss and justifiable hurt, confusion, and/or anger (at abusers on a personal or professional level) are being turned into excuses to drug people. Telling them they're suffering a "broken brain" isn't addressing the cause. Normalizing being broken is normalizing using drugs to "fix" it. Normalizing drugs to fix undesirable human emotion is de-normalizing natural human behavior.

Don't be fooled. Psychiatry isn't currently driven by science. It's driven by opinion. The American DSM is not written via a scientific analysis of human behavior. It is a document created by committees. The DSM V committee was even protested by some of its own members who quit in protest of the lack of scientific objectivity.

Psych drugs don't treat the causes of undesirable emotions or behaviors; they only impact symptomology (and create their own further symptoms and dependencies/addictions). Short term, a tweaked state can be useful (calm someone down). Long term, it changes people's biology. The claim of the "chemical imbalance" is a myth. The only "imbalance" is what long-term drugging creates.

http://cepuk.org/unrecognised-facts/myt ... imbalance/

I've never met anyone born broken. I've only ever met people who were broken by others or by toxic societal features or by unfortunate experiences (or combinations of these). Throwing labels on people and putting them into drug treatment programs doesn't address the cause of their suffering. As long as we continue to ignore the causes, we as a civilization will continue to manufacture these problems.

so you're going to ignore those who were deprived of oxygen at child birth causing disabilities and developmental issues? I mean I think that is indeed quite literally being born broken

[Jace-BeOS]

I gotta say things are different nowadays. It is REALLY nice to see so many understand and caring people about a mental disorder. Not that long ago a lot of people didn't even believe they were real.

It's good and bad. On one hand, people are not being condemned for character flaws and "weakness" as much as they used to. On the other hand, a lot of normal human emotion is being pathologized and the resulting behavior is being medicalized so companies can sell drugs at it. It's changed from one stigma to another: Instead of being told you have bad character, they're telling you you're broken.

Basic human emotions like mourning of loss and justifiable hurt, confusion, and/or anger (at abusers on a personal or professional level) are being turned into excuses to drug people. Telling them they're suffering a "broken brain" isn't addressing the cause. Normalizing being broken is normalizing using drugs to "fix" it. Normalizing drugs to fix undesirable human emotion is de-normalizing natural human behavior.

Don't be fooled. Psychiatry isn't currently driven by science. It's driven by opinion. The American DSM is not written via a scientific analysis of human behavior. It is a document created by committees. The DSM V committee was even protested by some of its own members who quit in protest of the lack of scientific objectivity.

Psych drugs don't treat the causes of undesirable emotions or behaviors; they only impact symptomology (and create their own further symptoms and dependencies/addictions). Short term, a tweaked state can be useful (calm someone down). Long term, it changes people's biology. The claim of the "chemical imbalance" is a myth. The only "imbalance" is what long-term drugging creates.

http://cepuk.org/unrecognised-facts/myt ... imbalance/

I've never met anyone born broken. I've only ever met people who were broken by others or by toxic societal features or by unfortunate experiences (or combinations of these). Throwing labels on people and putting them into drug treatment programs doesn't address the cause of their suffering. As long as we continue to ignore the causes, we as a civilization will continue to manufacture these problems.

so you're going to ignore those who were deprived of oxygen at child birth causing disabilities and developmental issues? I mean I think that is indeed quite literally being born broken

No, not at all. I'm addressing "mental illness" as a bad term and the current (broken) model for treatment in psychiatry. I'm not addressing physical damage that causes brain dysfunction. There's a lot of that. It's both fascinating and depressing. It's our number one teacher on brain function (when things are injured we learn what parts of the brain are related to which functions of the brain/body).

Edit: I have met people who sustained injury at birth or birth defects. I'm not addressing these issues in my above comments.

[Daags]

Also, while I think it's a bit beyond the pale to talk about someone's mental health, I also agree that that the mental health of the business owner has fuckall to do with their compliance with legal email practices.

I know you're not making any explicit suggestion about how it was brought up, but for the record it should be noted that the developer's 'mental health' concerns were brought up by someone who comes across as a bit of an apologist, and was brought up in an effort to mitigate people's anger and frustration at this guy's constant disregard for other people and their details and all that entails.

it is not the situation where someone came along and said 'can you believe this f**ker ? still spamming me. who knows what else he's doing with my personal & financial details. this is what happens when you deal with someone who is mental'

so, let's be clear on that, for the record, that the alleged mental health concerns of the business owner in question and their possible corelation to his unethical practises was not brought up by an irate mob or individual, but by someone trying to mitigate the complaints people are making.

in some ways i share your aversion to the topic, but I am specifically averse to someone raising these mental health issues as an excuse, or apology, or mitigation for an astounding, flagrant, sustained disregard for basic business obligations to people's privacy.


So on this mental health topic, let me briefly say that anyone who claims to have some intimate knowledge of mental health should be very familiar with 'primary gain' and 'secondary gain' ... which boils down to 'i don't have to do this' or 'i can get away with this' because 'i have a condition'. it is often a major hurdle in helping recovery, since the primary/secondary gain they've either fallen into or created for themselves is too beneficial to give up.

but lets shitcan the mental health aspect to all of this, because it does not matter.
what this dev/business owner is doing is outrageous ... and how he's still afforded a legitimate presence on the board here is not in line with forum precedence. someone mentioned crysonic earlier on, that's a good example, but who was that troll that used to be everywhere on this forum creating drama and one-man hate-campaigns against devs if they didn't give him something he wanted ? he would always try to justify his behaviour due to his 'back pain' and 'ocd' .... if i'm not mistaken, didn't he get the boot too ? ... and all he did was cause forum drama. as far as i'm concerned, what this dev/business owner is doing is really what's beyond the pale in what is supposed to be a legit audio forum with a strong commercial base.

[braj]

I brought it up because William brought it up by posting a Youtube video about it, and mentioning it in his latest email 'spam'. And I'm not an apologist for his business practices, but a bit of sympathy for each other's struggles does help.

[Hink]

well I'm not here to argue about it, I've also heard it it said people choose mental illness. On the other hand when it came to my kid with very bad ADHD I kept pushing to stop the meds which we did and which was the best decision we made. I clearly see both sides but I do not see either as being concrete and each being very unique to the individual and not something to throw a blanket over with "never" or "always" statements. Then of course there is also the matter of genetics and I really do not think either one of us is qualified to absolutely claim whether or not they do play a part in mental illness.

I do agree with the general premise that allowing one to blame an illness instead of taking one's own responsibility in some cases is out of hand. This is one of my chief problems with 12 step programs, I was not going to recover by being powerless and stating I am powerless is self defeating. With a CBT program (I used rational recovery) instead I was empowered with the tools to confront my addiction and not submit to it.

So I really get your point, I feel I have to say something because of my own PTSD. Sadly PTSD is an abused diagnosis and a bit of a buzzword diagnosis now but there are many for which it is real. But really, could someone be born with PTSD? Perhaps if you look an atypical scenario once again it might be prudent to avoid "never" or "always" statements.

Once again though you do make a very good point and therein lies a very sticky wicket

[Daags]

well I'm not here to argue about it, I've also heard it it said people choose mental illness. On the other hand when it came to my kid with very bad ADHD I kept pushing to stop the meds which we did and which was the best decision we made. I clearly see both sides but I do not see either as being concrete and each being very unique to the individual and not something to throw a blanket over with "never" or "always" statements. Then of course there is also the matter of genetics and I really do not think either one of us is qualified to absolutely claim whether or not they do play a part in mental illness.

I do agree with the general premise that allowing one to blame an illness instead of taking one's own responsibility in some cases is out of hand. This is one of my chief problems with 12 step programs, I was not going to recover by being powerless and stating I am powerless is self defeating. With a CBT program (I used rational recovery) instead I was empowered with the tools to confront my addiction and not submit to it.

So I really get your point, I feel I have to say something because of my own PTSD. Sadly PTSD is an abused diagnosis and a bit of a buzzword diagnosis now but there are many for which it is real. But really, could someone be born with PTSD? Perhaps if you look an atypical scenario once again it might be prudent to avoid "never" or "always" statements.

Once again though you do make a very good point and therein lies a very sticky wicket

hear, hear.

(i know this post was not directed at me, btw)

[Jace-BeOS]

No one "chooses" to suffer.

I'm unaware of over-diagnosis of PTSD.

While I've never heard any association between birth and PTSD, I wouldn't be surprised if certain genetic makeups resulted in some people being more susceptible to developing PTSD in their lives (given trauma experiences). It has been suggested that genital mutilation shortly after birth can cause subtle PTSD-like behavior.

Sensitivity isn't a bad thing. It does leave certain people more vulnerable to harm though.

[Bombadil]

The last DSM manual that I knew and used, many moons ago, was the III-Revised. I remember peeking at the DSM IV, and saw 'Oppositional Behaviour Disorder,' which basically attached a label connoting psychopathology to stubborn children. That, at least, is how I perceived it. Label 'em, and drug 'em. Some validation of R.D. Laing's and Erving Goffman's view of psychiatry.

[Jace-BeOS]

The last DSM manual that I knew and used, many moons ago, was the III-Revised. I remember peeking at the DSM IV, and saw 'Oppositional Behaviour Disorder,' which basically attached a label connoting psychopathology to stubborn children. That, at least, is how I perceived it.

I agree with your perception of it. It hasn't improved, since.

[ghettosynth]

I brought it up because William brought it up by posting a Youtube video about it, and mentioning it in his latest email 'spam'. And I'm not an apologist for his business practices, but a bit of sympathy for each other's struggles does help.

On the one hand, I'm with you there, what I object to in this thread is people speculating about what his condition might be and then riffing off of that conversation. To me that's beyond rude and none of anyone's business here. None of you are his doctor so STFU and mind your own business.

On the other hand, frankly, I don't want to watch cringe worthy videos of people going on about their mental illness on KVR. While I understand where you were coming from, it wasn't sent to KVR it was sent to you so it is a small violation of privacy in a sense. I get it, if it's on youtube it's not really private, but sharing it here does give it a wider audience than was intended. In any case, empathy for mental illness does not mean that it's allowed to be an excuse. If you're too mentally ill to run your business as the law requires, then maybe you should do something else. In any case, while I understand your goal and your desire to elicit compassion, I don't think that it (posting of mental illness videos) has a place here even if the person in question posted the video themselves.

[Daags]

I brought it up because William brought it up by posting a Youtube video about it, and mentioning it in his latest email 'spam'. And I'm not an apologist for his business practices, but a bit of sympathy for each other's struggles does help.

On the one hand, I'm with you there, what I object to in this thread is people speculating about what his condition might be and then riffing off of that conversation. To me that's beyond rude and none of anyone's business here. None of you are his doctor so STFU and mind your own business.

On the other hand, frankly, I don't want to watch cringe worthy videos of people going on about their mental illness on KVR. While I understand where you were coming from, it wasn't sent to KVR it was sent to you so it is a small violation of privacy in a sense. I get it, if it's on youtube it's not really private, but sharing it here does give it a wider audience than was intended. In any case, empathy for mental illness does not mean that it's allowed to be an excuse. If you're too mentally ill to run your business as the law requires, then maybe you should do something else. In any case, while I understand your goal and your desire to elicit compassion, I don't think that it has a place here even if the person in question posted the video themselves.

+1