![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 67 to 91 of 129. Go back in thread:
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 5:43:36
In reply to Re: Desperate » SLS, posted by papillon2 on February 19, 2012, at 22:50:27
> > Topamax treatment must be initiated at a very low dosage and titrated gradually in order to avoid cognitive side effects.
>
> I always thought the cognitive side effects of Topamax were a foregone conclusion. It's good to know they can be avoided by slow titration, kind of like Lamictal and SJS.
>
> Thanks Scott.papallon2,
You wrote,[...it's good to know ...].
Are you accepting the claim in question as fact here? If so, what way do you have to substantiate the claim a fact? If you have some citation other than the claim made here, could you post that citation here now?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 5:47:19
In reply to Re: Desperate, posted by Twinleaf on February 20, 2012, at 1:17:10
> I think it's wonderful that you are able to understand your daughter so well, and describe her symptoms so clearly, despite the enormous distress her condition must be.causing you. I think you are getting some very good suggestions from people who know a lot about bipolar illness; I hope at least one of them really helps her.
>
> One thing caught my attention: how, under stress, she begins to distort her feelings about others' motives. Do you think this is something that psychotherapy might help her with? In addition, if you found a really good therapist, it would be an additional source of support, which might make things a bit easier for you. I realize that she has two neurologically based illnesses, but the interpersonal stresses resulting from them might be helped considerably by a caring therapist.Tl,
You wrote,[...a really good therapist.would be an additional source of support...].
Thanks, I think that's good.
But what criteria constitute a therapist being {a really good therapist} or not?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 5:51:21
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Dr John Breeding, posted by sigismund on February 20, 2012, at 1:23:45
> Actually I misspoke.
>
> It is not the diagnoses so much I have problems with so much as the treatment.
>
> So long as the treatment is not worse than the disease.
>
> ADHD is so obviously culturally mediated.
>
> I must look up the stats from different countries for ADHD. Including non western countries.
>
> I read today that a change in the DSM led to a 200% increase in treatment in a very short time here.
>
> These are my concerns as a parent. (Speaking personally, I would like some amphetamine treatment for myself.) Also as a parent I can imagine how appallingly difficult this is for Solstice.Sig,
YOu wrote,[...so long as the treatment is not worse than the disease...].
Thanks, I think that's good.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 6:32:23
In reply to Re: Lou's thanks-thyroid » Lou Pilder, posted by Phillipa on February 19, 2012, at 20:11:55
> Lou I must congratulate you that you are now posting Thank you's and positive stuff. So appreciative of your comments keep it up. But remember Solstice did ask you not to post on this thread. But since then very nice. Phillipa
Phillipa,
You wrote,[...Lou I must congratulate you...positive stuff..So appreciative of your comments keep it up...].
I would like you and others that think that what I am posting is positive to view the following video.
Lou
To see this video:
A. Pull up Google
B. Type in:
[youtube, CCHR: Drugging Our Children-Side Effects]
usually first
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 7:02:21
In reply to Re: Desperate, posted by Twinleaf on February 20, 2012, at 1:17:10
> I think it's wonderful that you are able to understand your daughter so well, and describe her symptoms so clearly, despite the enormous distress her condition must be.causing you. I think you are getting some very good suggestions from people who know a lot about bipolar illness; I hope at least one of them really helps her.
I agree with this very strongly.
> One thing caught my attention: how, under stress, she begins to distort her feelings about others' motives. Do you think this is something that psychotherapy might help her with? In addition, if you found a really good therapist, it would be an additional source of support, which might make things a bit easier for you. I realize that she has two neurologically based illnesses, but the interpersonal stresses resulting from them might be helped considerably by a caring therapist.
I agree with this very strongly.
You're good.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 7:13:53
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Dr John Breeding, posted by sigismund on February 20, 2012, at 1:23:45
> Actually I misspoke.
>
> It is not the diagnoses so much I have problems with so much as the treatment.
>
> So long as the treatment is not worse than the disease.This is a very difficult issue to address. I have little doubt that many psychotropic drugs affect the young, maturing brain in ways we cannot fully understand. When treating more severe case of ADHD, there is a balance scale of assessing risk versus benefit. You can either let the the child fail at everything in life or risk future untoward effects that are not yet known. Untreated pediatric ADHD often morphs into adult ADHD, so there is no "growing out of it".
> ADHD is so obviously culturally mediated.
I am baffled by this. What do you mean?
> I must look up the stats from different countries for ADHD. Including non western countries.
Oh. You mean reporting practices and diagnostic criteria vary. There might also be a difference in treatment practices. I don't know. What do you think?
Do you believe that the disease itself is culturally mediated?
- Scott
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 7:18:12
In reply to Lou's response-dhawerpsr » sigismund, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 5:51:21
> Sig,
> YOu wrote,[...so long as the treatment is not worse than the disease...].
> Thanks, I think that's good.Thanks. I think that's good that you think that's good.
- Scott
Posted by Solstice on February 20, 2012, at 7:34:21
In reply to Lou's reply-postvpstuph » Phillipa, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 6:32:23
You are causing me so much pain. I can hardly go to my own thread without dissolving into tears because of what you are doing. You have shamelessly hijacked my thread with your own agenda, and there is nothing 'caring' or constructive about it. It just speaks so much hatred toward me.
It really hurts me that this is being allowed to continue. People need to be protected from the harm you cause.
Solstice
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 7:37:51
In reply to Lou's request-phahct? » papillon2, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 5:43:36
> > > Topamax treatment must be initiated at a very low dosage and titrated gradually in order to avoid cognitive side effects.
You excised this line from the following post.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010913.html
My words included the following:
"I can't guarantee anything. If I were a doctor, and observed this in many of my patients and in those of my colleagues, I could be more confident in saying such things."
Be careful not to post my words out of context. I will not tolerate it.
> Just because someone posts concerning their promotion of a drug for children to take, their promotion could be short of the full understnding of the drug that they are promoting."
You are not aware of the extent of my education, both in and post schooling. I believe you are intimating that I am not to be considered seriously because I "could be short of the full understnding of the drug" Using the term "could be" doesn't immunize you from incivility for your using the words that follow. I feel accused and put-down.
> ...the drug that they are promoting.
What do you mean by "promoting"? Do you think I have motives to suggest the efficacy of drugs for reasons that are not altruistic? I feel accused and put-down.
I have decided to not report your post to administration this time. Please be careful in your treatment of my words in the future.
- Scott
Posted by Solstice on February 20, 2012, at 7:42:43
In reply to Re: Desperate, posted by Twinleaf on February 20, 2012, at 1:17:10
> I think it's wonderful that you are able to understand your daughter so well, and describe her symptoms so clearly, despite the enormous distress her condition must be.causing you. I think you are getting some very good suggestions from people who know a lot about bipolar illness; I hope at least one of them really helps her.
>
> One thing caught my attention: how, under stress, she begins to distort her feelings about others' motives. Do you think this is something that psychotherapy might help her with? In addition, if you found a really good therapist, it would be an additional source of support, which might make things a bit easier for you. I realize that she has two neurologically based illnesses, but the interpersonal stresses resulting from them might be helped considerably by a caring therapist.
Hi Sigi.. thanks for stopping by.Yes, my daughter has a marvelous therapist that played a very large role in stabilizing my daughter three years ago. She's been involved with this situation, but it gets more difficult because my daughter has these distortion problems going on, and she vasscillates between wanting to see T, and crying out that no one is listening to her. My observation is that her treatment providers listen with tremendous caring and are very responsive, but my daughter gets these paranoid ideas and thinks they only listen to me. It's not true - I haven't even been involved in her therapy sessions other than when I'm called in at her request, but her mind is just not working 'with' her right now. That said, the therapist is fabulous and it helps me a lot to know I'm not holding this thing together on my own, for sure.
Solstice
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 8:03:16
In reply to Lou's reply-postvpstuph » Phillipa, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 6:32:23
> > Lou I must congratulate you that you are now posting Thank you's and positive stuff. So appreciative of your comments keep it up. But remember Solstice did ask you not to post on this thread. But since then very nice. Phillipa
>
> Phillipa,
> You wrote,[...Lou I must congratulate you...positive stuff..So appreciative of your comments keep it up...].
> I would like you and others that think that what I am posting is positive to view the following video.
> Lou
> To see this video:
> A. Pull up Google
> B. Type in:
> [youtube, CCHR: Drugging Our Children-Side Effects]
> usually firstFriends,
If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you read the following.
The following is about the fallacy of {false dilemma}. This is usually concerning giving only two choices when there could be more than just two. It is sometimes called the {either/or} fallacy.
In the link here, there are other fallacies mentioned also and I would like for you to look at the {straw man} fallacy , for I intend to post more about this as long as the rule of three does not apply.'
Lou
http:///grammer.about.com/od/fh/g/falsedilterm.htm
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 8:05:36
In reply to LOU, posted by Solstice on February 20, 2012, at 7:34:21
"> >" = Solstice's post to Lou Pilder.
> > You are causing me so much pain. I can hardly go to my own thread without dissolving into tears because of what you are doing.Lou Pilder: I hope you take into consideration how your posting behavior is affecting other people, particularly when they are in a vulnerable state.
Lou Pilder: You described your concerns quite well using a single post. I dare say that you are harassing the initiator of this thread. I'll let administration determine that. I'm sure you realize that harassment is considered to be uncivil.
> > You have shamelessly hijacked my thread with your own agenda, and there is nothing 'caring' or constructive about it. It just speaks so much hatred toward me.
Lou Pilder: I would like to see you initiate your own thread dealing with the issue of the safety of pscychotropic drugs. I am sure you will find people quite happy to participate. Posting your own threads will increase the probability that people will view them, thereby optimizing your potential to forward your agenda to save lives. This is not a bad agenda. I don't find the word "agenda" to be pejorative. Pursuing agendas is an important function in a free society. However, I would not want you to launch a series of endless posts along one of my threads in order to further your agenda. For now, nothing is stopping you from doing this. It would be a favor to me if you would consider my wishes in this.
> > It really hurts me that this is being allowed to continue. People need to be protected from the harm you cause.
Lou Pilder: This is a pretty strong statement made by the initiator of this thread. Perhaps you could take into consideration her feelings when deciding on whether or not to accede to her requests of you.
Lou Pilder: I find your new posting tactics to be quite clever.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 8:06:51
In reply to Lou's request-phalzdhelemmah, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 8:03:16
> > > Lou I must congratulate you that you are now posting Thank you's and positive stuff. So appreciative of your comments keep it up. But remember Solstice did ask you not to post on this thread. But since then very nice. Phillipa
> >
> > Phillipa,
> > You wrote,[...Lou I must congratulate you...positive stuff..So appreciative of your comments keep it up...].
> > I would like you and others that think that what I am posting is positive to view the following video.
> > Lou
> > To see this video:
> > A. Pull up Google
> > B. Type in:
> > [youtube, CCHR: Drugging Our Children-Side Effects]
> > usually first
>
> Friends,
> If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you read the following.
> The following is about the fallacy of {false dilemma}. This is usually concerning giving only two choices when there could be more than just two. It is sometimes called the {either/or} fallacy.
> In the link here, there are other fallacies mentioned also and I would like for you to look at the {straw man} fallacy , for I intend to post more about this as long as the rule of three does not apply.'
> Lou
> http:///grammer.about.com/od/fh/g/falsedilterm.htm
Posted by Twinleaf on February 20, 2012, at 8:09:36
In reply to Re: Desperate » Twinleaf, posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 7:02:21
Thank you, Scott - that was so kind of you. As you know, I have a very high regard for your posts and try not to miss any of them.
Solstice just posted that she has got that aspect of the situation covered really well. She just needs the best possible ideas for medical treatment, as she has been saying.
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 8:11:57
In reply to correction- Lou's request-phalzdhelemmah, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 8:06:51
> > > > Lou I must congratulate you that you are now posting Thank you's and positive stuff. So appreciative of your comments keep it up. But remember Solstice did ask you not to post on this thread. But since then very nice. Phillipa
> > >
> > > Phillipa,
> > > You wrote,[...Lou I must congratulate you...positive stuff..So appreciative of your comments keep it up...].
> > > I would like you and others that think that what I am posting is positive to view the following video.
> > > Lou
> > > To see this video:
> > > A. Pull up Google
> > > B. Type in:
> > > [youtube, CCHR: Drugging Our Children-Side Effects]
> > > usually first
> >
> > Friends,
> > If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you read the following.
> > The following is about the fallacy of {false dilemma}. This is usually concerning giving only two choices when there could be more than just two. It is sometimes called the {either/or} fallacy.
> > In the link here, there are other fallacies mentioned also and I would like for you to look at the {straw man} fallacy , for I intend to post more about this as long as the rule of three does not apply.'
> > Lou
> > http:///grammer.about.com/od/fh/g/falsedilterm.htm
>
> corrected:
> http://grammer.about.com/od/fh/g/falsedilterm.htmcorrection to correction
http://grammar.about.com/od/fh//g/falsedilterm.htm
Posted by Solstice on February 20, 2012, at 8:14:31
In reply to Re: Desperate » Twinleaf, posted by Solstice on February 20, 2012, at 7:42:43
I apologize, Twin.. I don't know where I saw Sigi's name that had me thinking I was replying to Sig.. but I'm distressed and typing through tears.
I'm being bullied in the most insidious of ways... and my daughter deserves better than for her mother to be bullied when she's trying to get help for her. I don't understand why it's being allowed to continue. No one should come here to get help with medications, and have to cope with a bully repeatedly implying that they are killing their child. Thank God my daughter doesn't read this place. It would probably trigger a major hospitalization-worthy episode if she read all this hateful stuff Lou keeps saying.
:-(
Maybe I'll wake up and all those posts will have been deleted from my thread...
Solstice
> > I think it's wonderful that you are able to understand your daughter so well, and describe her symptoms so clearly, despite the enormous distress her condition must be.causing you. I think you are getting some very good suggestions from people who know a lot about bipolar illness; I hope at least one of them really helps her.
> >
> > One thing caught my attention: how, under stress, she begins to distort her feelings about others' motives. Do you think this is something that psychotherapy might help her with? In addition, if you found a really good therapist, it would be an additional source of support, which might make things a bit easier for you. I realize that she has two neurologically based illnesses, but the interpersonal stresses resulting from them might be helped considerably by a caring therapist.
>
>
> Hi Sigi.. thanks for stopping by.
>
> Yes, my daughter has a marvelous therapist that played a very large role in stabilizing my daughter three years ago. She's been involved with this situation, but it gets more difficult because my daughter has these distortion problems going on, and she vasscillates between wanting to see T, and crying out that no one is listening to her. My observation is that her treatment providers listen with tremendous caring and are very responsive, but my daughter gets these paranoid ideas and thinks they only listen to me. It's not true - I haven't even been involved in her therapy sessions other than when I'm called in at her request, but her mind is just not working 'with' her right now. That said, the therapist is fabulous and it helps me a lot to know I'm not holding this thing together on my own, for sure.
>
> Solstice
Posted by papillon2 on February 20, 2012, at 8:48:31
In reply to Sorry Twin!, posted by Solstice on February 20, 2012, at 8:14:31
Solstice, I think you are doing a good job in very trying circumstances. You know your daughter the best. Please take gentle, loving care of yourself so you can continue to be there for your children.
Try to avoid the temptation to open Lou's posts if you can. It is not worth the distress it is causing you. Hopefully a moderator will respond soon.
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 8:59:28
In reply to Sorry Twin!, posted by Solstice on February 20, 2012, at 8:14:31
> I'm distressed and typing through tears.
>
> I'm being bullied in the most insidious of ways... and my daughter deserves better than for her mother to be bullied when she's trying to get help for her. I don't understand why it's being allowed to continue.I want to make you aware of the "Notify Administrators" button at the bottom of this page. I recommend that you use it.
I wish I could somehow get into your head and immunize you from being upset by certain posts. Others might also be upset by these posts. I would hope that they notify administration as well.
It might be best, for now, to avoid posts by a poster whose words upset you. They should be easy to identify.
Please continue having a dialogue with the posters along this thread. Most of them seem determined to correspond with you despite the appearance of posts that upset you. I don't see that they are distracted by those posts that upset you. Many of us want to talk to you. I, for one, am not distracted by other posts. I hope you continue to post. Please do not capitulate. You have too much at stake not to continue this dialogue.
You are a very strong and determined mother. Don't quit now.
There is some precedence for the use of topiramate (Topamax) in treating mixed-state that are resistant to other treatments. However, at this time, I am not promoting it over the other treatments being considered.
http://www.psycom.net/depression.central.topiramate.html
http://www.bipolardisorderliving.com/bipolar-disorder-topamax/
Keep the best and throw out the rest.
- Scott
Posted by Solstice on February 20, 2012, at 9:16:21
In reply to Re: Desperate » Solstice, posted by papillon2 on February 20, 2012, at 8:48:31
> Solstice, I think you are doing a good job in very trying circumstances. You know your daughter the best. Please take gentle, loving care of yourself so you can continue to be there for your children.
>
> Try to avoid the temptation to open Lou's posts if you can. It is not worth the distress it is causing you. Hopefully a moderator will respond soon.I've opened a few of them - but believe it or not, most I haven't. Unfortunately, as I run my cursor over a post in the thread, it shows me the first couple of sentences, and it's hard to avoid my cursor point hitting his posts that are above or below someone else's. That said, I've read enough of Lou's mantra that I don't have to open it. To just wake up and see five posts in a row with Lou's name on it - I don't have to read it to know what's in it. I know his agenda.. and hijacking a thread to defeat it is at the top of his list, whether her acknowledges it or not.
I am so grateful that he has not yet succeeded in thwarting my attempt to get help from the community.. because everyone has been wonderful at posting all their various ideas and experiences.
And I do hope admin shows up and puts a stop to it. :-(
Thanks for letting me know that you care, papi..
Solstice
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 9:21:18
In reply to Re: Solstice thread. » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 7:37:51
> > > > Topamax treatment must be initiated at a very low dosage and titrated gradually in order to avoid cognitive side effects.
>
> You excised this line from the following post.
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010913.html
>
> My words included the following:
>
> "I can't guarantee anything. If I were a doctor, and observed this in many of my patients and in those of my colleagues, I could be more confident in saying such things."
>
> Be careful not to post my words out of context. I will not tolerate it.
>
> > Just because someone posts concerning their promotion of a drug for children to take, their promotion could be short of the full understnding of the drug that they are promoting."
>
> You are not aware of the extent of my education, both in and post schooling. I believe you are intimating that I am not to be considered seriously because I "could be short of the full understnding of the drug" Using the term "could be" doesn't immunize you from incivility for your using the words that follow. I feel accused and put-down.
>
> > ...the drug that they are promoting.
>
> What do you mean by "promoting"? Do you think I have motives to suggest the efficacy of drugs for reasons that are not altruistic? I feel accused and put-down.
>
> I have decided to not report your post to administration this time. Please be careful in your treatment of my words in the future.
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
It is posted here that I took a line from such and such a post. But I did not.
Here is the poost in this thread that iis the subject here. I wouuld like for you that are interested to click on the link first, and then read the rest of my defense of myself here.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010901.html
now if you have clicked on that and examined it, you could see that the line that the other pposter here, came from this post which is not the same as the postt that I am said to have taken the sttatement out of.
Then, the post here in the link talks about taking Topomax. As I understand the grammatical structure of the statement, it is offering Topomax as something that the mother could have the child take which in my understanding of the word {promotion}, could include as that as being advocated. If there is another post about Topomax, I am not referring to that post, for the poster that I replied to posted the statement that is in the link to the post that I have posted the link to here.
There is much more to this....
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 9:34:57
In reply to Lou defends himself-phalzaakeue » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 9:21:18
> > > > > Topamax treatment must be initiated at a very low dosage and titrated gradually in order to avoid cognitive side effects.
> >
> > You excised this line from the following post.
> >
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010913.html
> >
> > My words included the following:
> >
> > "I can't guarantee anything. If I were a doctor, and observed this in many of my patients and in those of my colleagues, I could be more confident in saying such things."
> >
> > Be careful not to post my words out of context. I will not tolerate it.
> >
> > > Just because someone posts concerning their promotion of a drug for children to take, their promotion could be short of the full understnding of the drug that they are promoting."
> >
> > You are not aware of the extent of my education, both in and post schooling. I believe you are intimating that I am not to be considered seriously because I "could be short of the full understnding of the drug" Using the term "could be" doesn't immunize you from incivility for your using the words that follow. I feel accused and put-down.
> >
> > > ...the drug that they are promoting.
> >
> > What do you mean by "promoting"? Do you think I have motives to suggest the efficacy of drugs for reasons that are not altruistic? I feel accused and put-down.
> >
> > I have decided to not report your post to administration this time. Please be careful in your treatment of my words in the future.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Friends,
> It is posted here that I took a line from such and such a post. But I did not.
> Here is the poost in this thread that iis the subject here. I wouuld like for you that are interested to click on the link first, and then read the rest of my defense of myself here.
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010901.html
> now if you have clicked on that and examined it, you could see that the line that the other pposter here, came from this post which is not the same as the postt that I am said to have taken the sttatement out of.
> Then, the post here in the link talks about taking Topomax. As I understand the grammatical structure of the statement, it is offering Topomax as something that the mother could have the child take which in my understanding of the word {promotion}, could include as that as being advocated. If there is another post about Topomax, I am not referring to that post, for the poster that I replied to posted the statement that is in the link to the post that I have posted the link to here.
> There is much more to this....
> LouFriends,
In my defense of mysef here, notice in the link here in question that Topomax is referred to as a {tool}. So it could be {one more} tool.
The grammatical structure leads me to believe in regards to the accepted definition of these words that there is a promotion here for the drug Topomax to be included in the drugs that the mother is giving the child via the psychiatrist/doctor that is the prescriber of the drugs. Now I know that the maker of Topomax has run into legal trouble when Topomax is used for psychiatric disorders when it is an ant-seizure drug. (off-lable use}. A lot of the information that I get concerning these drugs comes from transcripts of the cross-examination of defendants in trials concerning these drugs in the last 20 years or so.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 9:53:12
In reply to Lou defends himself-, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 9:34:57
> > > > > > Topamax treatment must be initiated at a very low dosage and titrated gradually in order to avoid cognitive side effects.
> > >
> > > You excised this line from the following post.
> > >
> > > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010913.html
> > >
> > > My words included the following:
> > >
> > > "I can't guarantee anything. If I were a doctor, and observed this in many of my patients and in those of my colleagues, I could be more confident in saying such things."
> > >
> > > Be careful not to post my words out of context. I will not tolerate it.
> > >
> > > > Just because someone posts concerning their promotion of a drug for children to take, their promotion could be short of the full understnding of the drug that they are promoting."
> > >
> > > You are not aware of the extent of my education, both in and post schooling. I believe you are intimating that I am not to be considered seriously because I "could be short of the full understnding of the drug" Using the term "could be" doesn't immunize you from incivility for your using the words that follow. I feel accused and put-down.
> > >
> > > > ...the drug that they are promoting.
> > >
> > > What do you mean by "promoting"? Do you think I have motives to suggest the efficacy of drugs for reasons that are not altruistic? I feel accused and put-down.
> > >
> > > I have decided to not report your post to administration this time. Please be careful in your treatment of my words in the future.
> > >
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> > Friends,
> > It is posted here that I took a line from such and such a post. But I did not.
> > Here is the poost in this thread that iis the subject here. I wouuld like for you that are interested to click on the link first, and then read the rest of my defense of myself here.
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120212/msgs/1010901.html
> > now if you have clicked on that and examined it, you could see that the line that the other pposter here, came from this post which is not the same as the postt that I am said to have taken the sttatement out of.
> > Then, the post here in the link talks about taking Topomax. As I understand the grammatical structure of the statement, it is offering Topomax as something that the mother could have the child take which in my understanding of the word {promotion}, could include as that as being advocated. If there is another post about Topomax, I am not referring to that post, for the poster that I replied to posted the statement that is in the link to the post that I have posted the link to here.
> > There is much more to this....
> > Lou
>
> Friends,
> In my defense of mysef here, notice in the link here in question that Topomax is referred to as a {tool}. So it could be {one more} tool.
> The grammatical structure leads me to believe in regards to the accepted definition of these words that there is a promotion here for the drug Topomax to be included in the drugs that the mother is giving the child via the psychiatrist/doctor that is the prescriber of the drugs. Now I know that the maker of Topomax has run into legal trouble when Topomax is used for psychiatric disorders when it is an ant-seizure drug. (off-lable use}. A lot of the information that I get concerning these drugs comes from transcripts of the cross-examination of defendants in trials concerning these drugs in the last 20 years or so.
> LouFriends,
Now Scott writes that he has seen Topomax do wonders for a condition. Now there then is a testamonial for that Topomax could do wonders for others, which is a type of promotional technique used in marketing to promote what is wanted for prople to buy.
But I say to you, that I have seen many ruined lives of people that took Topomax. One is a friend of mine, a lovely woman, whose future as a lawyer has been stopped for she can not pass the state bar exam. Her memory has been damaged, as she has gone from a top graduate to one that can not remember what she had learned in law school. She has taken the exam 4 times and failed. Now the loss of memory happened after she was taking the drug. I guess one could argue that the loss of memoryy is from something else. But when over and over people show this type of cognative dysfunction after they took topomax, it could go a long way for people to make their own determination a to if the drug caused it or not.
Now Scott states that one could avoid the cognative issues if they take it innitially in a particular way. I have never seen any report that confirms that. If there is one, I ask for you to post a link to it here, now.
Lou
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 10:05:58
In reply to Lou defends himself-, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 9:34:57
Lou Pilder.
Thank you for replying to my question.
> > > ...the drug that they are promoting.
> > What do you mean by "promoting"? Do you think I have motives to suggest the efficacy of drugs for reasons that are not altruistic? I feel accused and put-down.> Then, the post here in the link talks about taking Topomax. As I understand the grammatical structure of the statement, it is offering Topomax as something that the mother could have the child take which in my understanding of the word {promotion}, could include as that as being advocated.
I feel accused. You are paraphrasing my words and substituting "advocate" for "promote". You now add "advocate" as if the definitions for these two words were the same. I did not promote Topamax. "Promote" is the word you first used to describe my behavior. You did not use the word "advocate".
SLS: "One more tool to be aware of is Topamax. It works for mixed states, as does Depakote. Topamax treatment must be initiated at a very low dosage and titrated gradually in order to avoid cognitive side effects. 100 mg may be all that is needed. I have seen it work wonders for mixed states. Topamax is known to produce weight loss, just in case that is an issue."
This is simply education and support.
Just to address your characterization my use of my grammer, I think it would have been appropriate for you to have included a quotation of my words so that they could be scrutinized. I did not suggest that anyone take Topamax. Clearly, I suggested that the poster be aware of the existence of Topamax. I did not promote nor advocate that it be used.
I do advocate the use of Topamax for bipolar disorder. I currently do not promote it. Perhaps I will in the future.
Promote:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/promote
"to encourage the sales, acceptance, etc., of (a product), especially through advertising or other publicity."
This is not a question of grammer. It is a question of diction.
- Scott
Posted by Zyprexa on February 20, 2012, at 10:10:41
In reply to Desperate, posted by Solstice on February 18, 2012, at 21:08:07
Perphenazine might work. Its a typical AP that is well sedating, might calm her down. Oh ya its not weight gaining. I find it fairly effective. I'm schitzoaffective. Which is schitzophrenia and bipolar. I used to get racing thoughts, irritable, etc.
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2012, at 10:22:21
In reply to Lou defends himself-topotragehdeigh, posted by Lou Pilder on February 20, 2012, at 9:53:12
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2656323/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11215835
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15519117
Also: Dodson WE, Kamin M, Kraut L, et al. Topiramate titration to response: analysis of individualized therapy study (TRAITS) Epilepsia. 2003;37:61520.
- Scott
Go forward in 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.