![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 5 to 29 of 29. Go back in thread:
Posted by LostBoyinNC on June 22, 2000, at 21:00:30
In reply to Anyone in vagus nerve study?, posted by anita on June 20, 2000, at 21:25:35
> Hi,
>
> I have an opportunity to join a vagus nerve stimulator study (for depression) and I'm just wondering if anyone here has done this yet. Does anyone know how stimulating the vagus nerve is supposed to help with depression?
>
> anitaDont waste your fucking time. Vagus nerve stimulation is another overhyped research hype...like rTMS. rTMS turned out to be hype. I should know as I participated in the study. VNS is bullshit hype too. All the money they are spending on these bogus clinical studies for modalities that DONT WORK are sickening. Also are a huge waste of money which could be better spent on developing better meds for depression or trying to figure out why meds poop out.
My advice is dont waste your mental energy on experimental crap like rTMS and Vagal nerve stimulation. Instead, find a really good Psychopharmacologist. Not just another dime a dozen fruitcake psychiatrist who claims they are a "psychopharmacologist" when they really are just plain old vanilla Pdocs. Find a REAL psychopharmacologist...hard to find but worth their weight in gold. Also, consider ECT...it does work.
Eric
Posted by BBob on June 22, 2000, at 22:46:59
In reply to Re: Dont bother, posted by LostBoyinNC on June 22, 2000, at 21:00:30
I want to point out the vulgar, mean-spirited, closed-minded tone of the lostboy post. A widely accepted school of thought holds that for many, medications alone can never treat symptoms of depression, but that social support and/or counseling are important parts of an effective treatment plan. Dogma might serve to complicate mental distress.
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have an opportunity to join a vagus nerve stimulator study (for depression) and I'm just wondering if anyone here has done this yet. Does anyone know how stimulating the vagus nerve is supposed to help with depression?
> >
> > anita
>
> Dont waste your fucking time. Vagus nerve stimulation is another overhyped research hype...like rTMS. rTMS turned out to be hype. I should know as I participated in the study. VNS is bullshit hype too. All the money they are spending on these bogus clinical studies for modalities that DONT WORK are sickening. Also are a huge waste of money which could be better spent on developing better meds for depression or trying to figure out why meds poop out.
>
> My advice is dont waste your mental energy on experimental crap like rTMS and Vagal nerve stimulation. Instead, find a really good Psychopharmacologist. Not just another dime a dozen fruitcake psychiatrist who claims they are a "psychopharmacologist" when they really are just plain old vanilla Pdocs. Find a REAL psychopharmacologist...hard to find but worth their weight in gold. Also, consider ECT...it does work.
>
> Eric
Posted by Anna P. on June 23, 2000, at 10:25:57
In reply to bothersome post, posted by BBob on June 22, 2000, at 22:46:59
> I want to point out the vulgar, mean-spirited, closed-minded tone of the lostboy post. A widely accepted school of thought holds that for many, medications alone can never treat symptoms of depression, but that social support and/or counseling are important parts of an effective treatment plan. Dogma might serve to complicate mental distress.
>
> I want to mention that Eric must have the multi personality disorder.
I read some of his posts on alt.depression.medication that are supportive, even compassionate, whereas the other posts are like that above.
Posted by LostBoyinNC on June 24, 2000, at 8:00:01
In reply to bothersome post, posted by BBob on June 22, 2000, at 22:46:59
> I want to point out the vulgar, mean-spirited, closed-minded tone of the lostboy post. A widely accepted school of thought holds that for many, medications alone can never treat symptoms of depression, but that social support and/or counseling are important parts of an effective treatment plan. Dogma might serve to complicate mental distress.
>
BBob, what was bothersome about my post? All I was doing was telling the TRUTH. You probably read some of my other posts over on the other NG and dont like my views. Big deal...do you think I care? Tell the truth about things and people get mad. The fact of the matter is rTMS is a joke and Vagal nerve stimulation is probably a joke too. I get irked when people get their hopes up over something that is experimental, they spend a lot of money on hotels and going away to have the procedure done and they get nothing out of it. Kinda gets on my nerves...you know? Just cause Im not sugarcoated and tell the truth does not mean I am a bad person nor are my posts bad.take care,
Eric
Posted by LostBoyinNC on June 24, 2000, at 8:03:14
In reply to Re: bothersome post: Multiple personality disorder, posted by Anna P. on June 23, 2000, at 10:25:57
> > I want to point out the vulgar, mean-spirited, closed-minded tone of the lostboy post. A widely accepted school of thought holds that for many, medications alone can never treat symptoms of depression, but that social support and/or counseling are important parts of an effective treatment plan. Dogma might serve to complicate mental distress.
> >
> > I want to mention that Eric must have the multi personality disorder.
> I read some of his posts on alt.depression.medication that are supportive, even compassionate, whereas the other posts are like that above.
Hmmmmm thats funny. None of my doctors think I have multiple personality disorder. I just get irritated when I read stupid stuff is all. I let people know that I think their ideas are STUPID. Like your idea about me having multiple personality disorder is stupid. All I do is tell the truth and am very direct and frank. Some people hate me cause of that. Big deal...do you think I care?Eric
Posted by harry b. on June 24, 2000, at 8:56:03
In reply to Re: bothersome post, posted by LostBoyinNC on June 24, 2000, at 8:00:01
> You probably read some of my other posts over on the other NG and dont like my views.
>What is "the other NG?"
hb
Posted by Cam W. on June 24, 2000, at 11:37:26
In reply to Re: bothersome post: Multiple personality disorder, posted by LostBoyinNC on June 24, 2000, at 8:03:14
Eric - Actually, I do think you care; I just think that you are a very lonely person. It's not about other people stupid ideas, it's about your vulgar, derogatory, demeaning writing style and your egocentricity. Psuedo-intellectualism cannot replace the work it takes to acquire knowledge.
It seems that you have learned that the only way you can get people to listen to you, is to get them mad and have them react to you; not unlike a spoiled child at a cocktail party. Most of us can reign these emotions when we become adults. This has nothing to to with multiple personalities, it has to do with your level of maturity.
BBob only posted because you and he share similar insecurities and he wants us to jump all over you, like we did him, when he posted some derogatory tripe. Actually, there are those of us on this board who probably think that Lost Boy is BBob.
Please try to act like an adult, here. Respect others' points of view and if you disagree, debate your side with a well thought out, referenced answer. Then you will be a welcome participant.
Sincerely - Cam
Posted by paul on June 24, 2000, at 14:50:04
In reply to Re: bothersome post: Multiple personality disorder » LostBoyinNC, posted by Cam W. on June 24, 2000, at 11:37:26
the "other ng" is the alt.support.depression.medication newsgroup. while there may be a few similarities between eric and whatever-his/her-name-is's writing style, there's one HUGE difference. eric made a suggestion a long while back re: sleep and vitamins which made a substantial improvement in the quality of my sleep. in other words, he helped someone-me-out. all i have ever seen WHOOZIT do is be an abrasive, three-or-four faced waste of time whose posts come from a place i am tearfully glad i'll never understand. i have yet to see bobb or whoever educate, inform, ar support. i HAVE seen him/her email me veiled, toothless, and ridiculous threats, assinine assertions and other comments that kept me in stitches for hours and generally do his/her damnedest to lower the quality of an otherwise stellar group. indeed-i have NO IDEE why he/she even posts here. does anyone??
pcl
illigitamae non carborundum
Posted by LostBoyinNC on June 24, 2000, at 15:01:37
In reply to Re: bothersome post: Multiple personality disorder » LostBoyinNC, posted by Cam W. on June 24, 2000, at 11:37:26
> Eric - Actually, I do think you care; I just think that you are a very lonely person. It's not about other people stupid ideas, it's about your vulgar, derogatory, demeaning writing style and your egocentricity. Psuedo-intellectualism cannot replace the work it takes to acquire knowledge.
>
> It seems that you have learned that the only way you can get people to listen to you, is to get them mad and have them react to you; not unlike a spoiled child at a cocktail party. Most of us can reign these emotions when we become adults. This has nothing to to with multiple personalities, it has to do with your level of maturity.
>
> BBob only posted because you and he share similar insecurities and he wants us to jump all over you, like we did him, when he posted some derogatory tripe. Actually, there are those of us on this board who probably think that Lost Boy is BBob.
>
> Please try to act like an adult, here. Respect others' points of view and if you disagree, debate your side with a well thought out, referenced answer. Then you will be a welcome participant.
>
> Sincerely - CamNot really lonely Cam...Im too numb to feel very lonely most of the time. I would say totally disgusted and cynical is more the description for me. I feel there are a lot of people who are very very stupid in this area called psychiatry and mental health...both Pdocs and patients. Lots of stupidity. Thats why I am disgusted and cynical. Thats why I replied to the VNS post...because I honestly believe VNS is a waste of time and the HUGE amount of money being spent on it as a depression treatment I feel is probably a total waste of money. That makes me angry and that is why I post that way.
Do you know there are hardly ANY clinical trials ANYWHERE that focus on treatment resistant clinical depression? Besides rTMS and VNS of course, and they dont work well. There are none to very few clinical trials out there specifically targeted to the large number of people out there who are medication resistant for one reason or another and dont want to spend their life getting ECT all the time. Then you hear about the money and energy being spent on rTMS and VNS and it makes me sick.
Nobody with any real credibility anywhere is seriously working on trying to fix the treatment resistant depressed person. We are the forgotten lost child that nobody gives a damn about.
I am not BBob by the way. A couple days ago was the first time I even visited this website in a month at least. I would not pick such a stupid name as BBob anyways even if I did want to do that. Sorry dude...you are wrong about the BBob thing.
Eric
Posted by SLS on June 24, 2000, at 15:39:15
In reply to Re: bothersome post: Multiple personality disorder » LostBoyinNC, posted by Cam W. on June 24, 2000, at 11:37:26
Hi Cam.
:-)
- Scott
Posted by SLS on June 24, 2000, at 15:56:05
In reply to Anyone in vagus nerve study?, posted by anita on June 20, 2000, at 21:25:35
> Hi,
>
> I have an opportunity to join a vagus nerve stimulator study (for depression) and I'm just wondering if anyone here has done this yet. Does anyone know how stimulating the vagus nerve is supposed to help with depression?
>
> anita
Hi Anita,I'm sorry that I can't provide you with any personal accounts of VNS. I met a woman a few weeks ago who was going to Boston for treatment, but I don't know when I'll be able to find out how she does with it.
From what I can see, VNS is more effective than rTMS (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation). Mark George, MD, of the Medical University of South Carolina helped pioneer both treatments. He expressed his belief to a friend of mine that VNS shows much greater effectiveness than rTMS, and recommended it for her. She has tried many, many drugs.
I would recommend that you take the time to inventory all of the drug treatment regimens you have tried. Perhaps there are some major strategies you haven't tried yet.
I hope someone who has themself tried VNS replies to your question.
Good luck.
- Scott
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 26, 2000, at 22:09:30
In reply to Re: bothersome post: Multiple personality disorder, posted by LostBoyinNC on June 24, 2000, at 8:03:14
> I just get irritated when I read stupid stuff is all. I let people know that I think their ideas are STUPID. Like your idea about me having multiple personality disorder is stupid. All I do is tell the truth and am very direct and frank.
Please be civil. If that means keeping what you consider to be the truth to yourself, then please do that. Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 26, 2000, at 22:09:44
In reply to Re: bothersome post: Multiple personality disorder » LostBoyinNC, posted by Cam W. on June 24, 2000, at 11:37:26
> your egocentricity [and] Psuedo-intellectualism...
> not unlike a spoiled child at a cocktail party...
Please be civil. Maybe when responding to the style, rather than the substance, of someone's post, it would be a good idea to count to 10? Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 26, 2000, at 22:09:58
In reply to the other ng-for harry b./response to cam w. too » Cam W., posted by paul on June 24, 2000, at 14:50:04
> all i have ever seen WHOOZIT do is be an abrasive, three-or-four faced waste of time whose posts come from a place i am tearfully glad i'll never understand...
Please be civil, even when provoked. Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Cam W. on June 26, 2000, at 22:46:17
In reply to Re: bothersome post: Multiple personality disorder, posted by Dr. Bob on June 26, 2000, at 22:09:44
> > your egocentricity •[and]• Psuedo-intellectualism...
>
•Taken out of context; 2 separate sentences and trains of thought.> > not unlike a spoiled child at a cocktail party...
>
•perhaps not the best choice of similie, but closest to what I thought (my opinion).
> Please be civil. Maybe when responding to the style, rather than the substance, of someone's post, it would be a good idea to count to 10?•When that style is abrasive and threatening, how can anyone respond to the claims without feeling that he or she would be the next victim of a verbal assault (even if the verbal assault is directed towards a therapy and not directly at any person)
•I will back everything that I said in the offending (?) post.
•Sorry Dr.Bob - That is my opinion and may banish, at your will.
•Sincerely - Cam W.
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 27, 2000, at 22:19:09
In reply to Civility? » Dr. Bob, posted by Cam W. on June 26, 2000, at 22:46:17
> > Please be civil. Maybe when responding to the style, rather than the substance, of someone's post, it would be a good idea to count to 10?
>
> When that style is abrasive and threatening, how can anyone respond to the claims without feeling that he or she would be the next victim of a verbal assault...Maybe it would be better just not to respond?
Bob
Posted by BBob on June 28, 2000, at 18:14:46
In reply to Re: Civility?, posted by Dr. Bob on June 27, 2000, at 22:19:09
Dr. Bob's refereeing in this thread is somewhat balanced, though he still fails to consistently call every foul commited against his self-imposed standard of civility. To his credit, in other threads he has mentioned the limited time he has avaiable to ref the site, and the tendency for others to say what needs to be said.
As the paragon of netequette (LOL!), I feel entitled to say that in my "bothersome post" reply I treaded the intricate line of critiquing the style of lostboy's post without counterattacking.
Lostboy incorrectly presumed that I posted because I disagree with him. Rather, I posted because generalizations coupled with obscenities failed to inform me why lostboy opined that the named therapies did not work. I expect discussion of the particular merits, contraindications and falacies related to various therapies. Such information provides substance for thought. An object of consideration that does not present substantive material for more detailed analysis tends to frustrate cerebral processes. Frustrated cerebral processes sometimes seem to causally correlate with emotional excitation.
This reader has a broad tolerance for divergant opinions, but is bothered by sentences that do not convey information to explain those opinions and that are littered with irrelevanet terms (such as obscenities). Of course, I am only bothered in as much as I let myself be bothered. There is plenty to do besides reading this site and trying to make scientific sense out of the random musings reflected here. I would just like my limited time here to be somewhat informative, and don't mind advocating against ill-contrived attacks. Put some mental uumph into it if something is really worth attacking. A well conceived logical presentation can present a formidable challenge.
Another poster aparrently sympathized in part with lostboy, but could not restrain himself from slandering (for the umpteenth time) my board name. Perhaps that reader does not read every post on the board, or he would find that others seem to find my posts at times informative, educational and supportive. In fact, none less than Doctor Bob himself has acknowledged the helpful nature of some of my posts. The Society for the Beafication of BBob, et al, has downloaded a copy of that historic Dr. Bob post to be placed in a prominant location in BBob's Museum of Iconoclasism soon to be opened near Times Square.
The licensed pharmacist from Canada who replied to unspecified postings of mine as "derogatory tripe" would do well to site the particular passage that he critiques. My recollection is that the most potentially derogatory personal assessment for which I have been chastized is one in which that I used a standard common to the Department of State, that of FUNDAMENTALISM, to describe my impression of a particular person. I should have analyzed the position as such, rather than the person, and would have been better protected if I had defined fundamentalism in the context in which I used the term.
Oh, I forgot - there was that one exchange with Dr. Bob when I shared my analysis of his aggression. That could be construed as derogatory, I suppose. Of all I have tried to discuss on this board, it strikes me as odd that the only information some can recall is how I sometimes have reacted when challenged. It is because of this tendency toward stereotyping that I resorted to using other names when I have valuable information or want to share a personal perspective - I don't want to be discredited simply because if the four letters I attach in the name box.
One of the early lessons I learned as a journalist was that it is never safe or fair to attribute motive. When we don't waste time speculating about why somebody did something we don't understand, we have more time available in which to try to understand what they did or said. If we care enough to want to understand....
BBOb
> > > Please be civil. Maybe when responding to the style, rather than the substance, of someone's post, it would be a good idea to count to 10?
> >
> > When that style is abrasive and threatening, how can anyone respond to the claims without feeling that he or she would be the next victim of a verbal assault...
>
> Maybe it would be better just not to respond?
>
> Bob
Posted by LostBoyinNC on June 29, 2000, at 0:13:52
In reply to Re: Civility?, posted by BBob on June 28, 2000, at 18:14:46
> Dr. Bob's refereeing in this thread is somewhat balanced, though he still fails to consistently call every foul commited against his self-imposed standard of civility. To his credit, in other threads he has mentioned the limited time he has avaiable to ref the site, and the tendency for others to say what needs to be said.
>
> As the paragon of netequette (LOL!), I feel entitled to say that in my "bothersome post" reply I treaded the intricate line of critiquing the style of lostboy's post without counterattacking.
>
> Lostboy incorrectly presumed that I posted because I disagree with him. Rather, I posted because generalizations coupled with obscenities failed to inform me why lostboy opined that the named therapies did not work. I expect discussion of the particular merits, contraindications and falacies related to various therapies. Such information provides substance for thought. An object of consideration that does not present substantive material for more detailed analysis tends to frustrate cerebral processes. Frustrated cerebral processes sometimes seem to causally correlate with emotional excitation.
>
> This reader has a broad tolerance for divergant opinions, but is bothered by sentences that do not convey information to explain those opinions and that are littered with irrelevanet terms (such as obscenities). Of course, I am only bothered in as much as I let myself be bothered. There is plenty to do besides reading this site and trying to make scientific sense out of the random musings reflected here. I would just like my limited time here to be somewhat informative, and don't mind advocating against ill-contrived attacks. Put some mental uumph into it if something is really worth attacking. A well conceived logical presentation can present a formidable challenge.
>
> Another poster aparrently sympathized in part with lostboy, but could not restrain himself from slandering (for the umpteenth time) my board name. Perhaps that reader does not read every post on the board, or he would find that others seem to find my posts at times informative, educational and supportive. In fact, none less than Doctor Bob himself has acknowledged the helpful nature of some of my posts. The Society for the Beafication of BBob, et al, has downloaded a copy of that historic Dr. Bob post to be placed in a prominant location in BBob's Museum of Iconoclasism soon to be opened near Times Square.
>
> The licensed pharmacist from Canada who replied to unspecified postings of mine as "derogatory tripe" would do well to site the particular passage that he critiques. My recollection is that the most potentially derogatory personal assessment for which I have been chastized is one in which that I used a standard common to the Department of State, that of FUNDAMENTALISM, to describe my impression of a particular person. I should have analyzed the position as such, rather than the person, and would have been better protected if I had defined fundamentalism in the context in which I used the term.
>
> Oh, I forgot - there was that one exchange with Dr. Bob when I shared my analysis of his aggression. That could be construed as derogatory, I suppose. Of all I have tried to discuss on this board, it strikes me as odd that the only information some can recall is how I sometimes have reacted when challenged. It is because of this tendency toward stereotyping that I resorted to using other names when I have valuable information or want to share a personal perspective - I don't want to be discredited simply because if the four letters I attach in the name box.
>
> One of the early lessons I learned as a journalist was that it is never safe or fair to attribute motive. When we don't waste time speculating about why somebody did something we don't understand, we have more time available in which to try to understand what they did or said. If we care enough to want to understand....
>
> BBOb
>
BBob, what does the above mean in plain English? You cant write worth a shit.Eric
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 29, 2000, at 4:35:02
In reply to Re: Civility?, posted by LostBoyinNC on June 29, 2000, at 0:13:52
> You cant write worth a shit.
That's not civil. I'm going to block this handle.
Bob
Posted by noa on June 29, 2000, at 8:25:48
In reply to Re: Civility?, posted by BBob on June 28, 2000, at 18:14:46
Bobb, what you wrote makes sense, but I just want to ask why you didn't just ask Lostboy to explain his reasons for his opinions--just ask straightforwardly and non-critically?
Posted by BBob on June 29, 2000, at 17:56:08
In reply to Re: Civility? , posted by noa on June 29, 2000, at 8:25:48
> Bobb, what you wrote makes sense, but I just want to ask why you didn't just ask Lostboy to explain his reasons for his opinions--just ask straightforwardly and non-critically?
His stance did not seem to me to be that approachable. I got the impression he considered his position to be axiomatic. He did not imply an interest in offering further explanation.
The bulk of my reply was toward the anti-BBob slant that developed in the thread, my goal being to debunk stereotypes in favor of and in support of more thourough consideration of all people. Uppity of me, eh?
Posted by stjames on June 29, 2000, at 22:51:35
In reply to Re: please be civil, posted by Dr. Bob on June 29, 2000, at 4:35:02
Wow...the train has left the tracks. Please folks, this place is a unique one on the internet
and greatly needed. Please take this thread off list. Lets get back on track, back to giving and receiving help, support and information.saint james
Posted by paul on June 29, 2000, at 22:55:51
In reply to Re: Civility? , posted by BBob on June 29, 2000, at 17:56:08
i don't read all of whoozit's tripe because i've had quite enough of it and have better things to do than try to find worth in the faceless scribblings of someone who has personally proved to me that his often two-faced (or more) warblings simply aren't worth my time. he was given the suggestion long ago about starting his own ng. i wish he'd do it and leave us to the purpose of this group-increasing-not DECREASING self-awareness and mental health. i wonder though-who else HAS the many-named one festooned with one of his side-splitting emails? and i still want to know-WHY do you, whatever your name is, bbob, peter, whatever-post at all?
pcl
Posted by BBob on June 30, 2000, at 18:13:24
In reply to Re: Civility? , posted by paul on June 29, 2000, at 22:55:51
> i still want to know-WHY do you, whatever your name is, bbob, peter, whatever-post at all?
I will treat this as a legitimate question, though I admit I have doubts and regret somewhat bringing this singed thread onto a new page.
I first posted on this site in an effort to find information comparing the neurotropic profile of controlled substances to that of licensed psychopharmacueticals. My posting produced useful results. (though it would help if st james would repost those URLs such as ? map.com ? - I can’t seem to find them in the archives...)
Upon further reading, I found this site to comprise a rich and diverse dialogue about a subject about which I read quite a lot - neurophysiology, neuropsychology, mental functions, and mental health.
When it became apparent that my atypical perspective at times tended to inflame some people on the site, I quietly abstained from posting. After a short while, some people started asking me to post so I joined in again, and was met with warm regard upon my return.
I continue to post because I find the site informative. I also find it challenging to negotiate the range of personalities who participate in the site. In some cases, I have found that some people seem to grow when they realize I am not so threatening even though my point of view is not entirely consistent with theirs. I grow by understanding a perspective I would otherwise categorically reject.
Further, I find it useful to write in an interactive forum that offers immediate review of my musings on topics about which I will likely find myself writing professionally sometime. It is easier to recognize nuance in my own statements when others point it out to me, and it is best to test for errors in my perception among a limited, concerned readership before the error is repeated many times over in a printed publication. Beyond that, simply writing to a well-informed, personally concerned, interactive audience seems to improve my ability to write lively copy on a demanding deadline.
I posted the second time in this thread and again now because I don’t think it is very supportive of me to set an example of tolerating abuse toward myself that seems to stem from someones contempt for my distinct perspective. I may be different, but that does not mean you can hate me and get away with it. Tolerating hatred toward myself would set a bad example, as would returning hatred for hatred.
Perhaps some of my posts have been similar to yours in this thread, paul - perhaps inflammatory and off-topic, but I strive to avoid prolonged wholesale contempt for a person as you seem to exhibit here. I observe that inflamed nerves on this site often heal, and perceived offenses often are forgiven. If, in the heat of a moment, my analysis of someone’s behavior blurs into personal criticism, I try to get over it. So should you, paul.
Stop campaigning against me. Let go of this hatred before it poisons you.
Posted by SLS on July 1, 2000, at 9:14:18
In reply to Re: Decency, posted by BBob on June 30, 2000, at 18:13:24
Dear Bob,
Hi.
I just wanted to say that I read your post "Linguistic thought and disassociation" and thought it was real good. It was worth my while not to completely avoid your name. I'm glad I read it. You certainly offered me an opportunity to learn. Thank you.
I never bothered to read any more of your posts along the "lithium vs placebo" thread beyond the one that I found worth my while to comment on.
> I posted the second time in this thread and again now because I don’t think it is very supportive of me to set an example of tolerating abuse toward myself that seems to stem from someones contempt for my distinct perspective. I may be different, but that does not mean you can hate me and get away with it. Tolerating hatred toward myself would set a bad example, as would returning hatred for hatred.
Perhaps now you can understand my motivation.
> If, in the heat of a moment, my analysis of someone’s behavior blurs into personal criticism, I try to get over it.
There was no heat at that moment.
> Let go of this hatred before it poisons you.
I'm trying.
Sincerely,
Scott
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.