[Magdalen] Drug research.

Sat Aug 27 20:09:44 UTC 2016

Pot calling the kettle black?

You know what you were doing.

On Aug 26, 2016 3:43 PM, "Allan Carr" <allanc25 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My mother had paranoid schizophrenia and was treated with shock
treatments, before thorazine was available. She hated those treatments and
I think they made her worse. Since she was in a mental asylum, indigent,
and not a US citizen, she was deported back to her home country where she
died of cancer a few years later. I was sixteen when she was deported and
living with an uncle. I never saw her again.
> I wish she had been born a few years later when thorazine was available.
I wanted to give the group more information about thorazine, not nitpick
you. You really need to get over yourself.
>
>
> > On Aug 24, 2016, at 11:02 PM, James Oppenheimer-Crawford <
oppenheimerjw at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you, Ann, for bring the matter up.  Perhaps it would be good to
say a
> > bit more.
> >
> > Disagreement is not the issue at all.  It's that the original post might
> > have something questionable in it, and this is brought up by someone
else.
> >
> > A sharpshooter is one who finds some mistake in the text of another and
> > instead of pointing it out the person involved, blats it to the entire
> > list. You can almost sense the glee in their text. Of course, if
> > confronted, they just say, "I was only pointing out the facts."  I have
to
> > say I am very seldom the target of these, because, having been attacked
a
> > number of times, I know I have to have my facts straight. And I
certainly
> > did recently, the claims of someone, based on the sterling research
source
> > of Wikipedia notwithstanding. But I see it happen to others on this list
> > all the time, and it is almost never helpful. (Ahem -- in my opinion
> > anyway, it seems like it just derails the discussion for little purpose)
> >
> > It happens all the time: someone makes some point in a post, and then
> > someone else posts to the entire list that the person had some factual
> > mistake in their post.  This needless interference distracts from what
the
> > other person was trying to say, and of course it lessens the likelihood
> > that that other person will speak up in the future.  Let's face it. We
all
> > enjoy that rush of having the real facts.  When we can say, "Whoa! You
got
> > it a bit wrong there, but I on the other hand, have the actual truth.
Hey,
> > here are the URLs to prove it!" And in many cases, the matter is
virtually
> > irrelevant to the discussion matter, but is a major distractor to
> > discussion.
> >
> > Certainly there are cases where the information might be potentially
> > harmful if not remedied immediately, and one might wish to bring that up
> > publicly, but that's usually not the case here.  And of course, there's
the
> > matter of the person who sees something they know (or think they
"know") is
> > not right, but does not wish to take the time to send a private email.
If
> > they do that, there is a classy way to do it, and a not so classy way
to do
> > it.
> >
> > I've been guilty of that, and I'm sorry I have. I would like to think I
> > know a little better.  I have been really trying to be a better poster,
and
> > to a large extent, I think I've improved. I try to make comments off
list.
> > It doesn't take that long and it's unnecessary to air our dirty laundry
in
> > public -- unless our main desire IS attacking the other person, of
course.
> > In some cases, I think the people involved are in a lot of pain and are
not
> > having a very good life, and they feel a lot of rage, and sometimes it
just
> > gets spilled out in an attack email. We are all actually doing what we
can.
> > Every one of us is fighting some kind of battle.
> >
> > I don't mean to condemn folks who choose a different way of making
> > corrections, but I do wish they would think a bit more about the pall it
> > puts on the entire list whenever that happens.  For everyone who knows
the
> > sender, there are a number of lurkers who are saying, "Good Lord! I will
> > NEVER  post to this list!" We know how many folks just read but never
post.
> > I submit that there's a reason for that.
> >
> > The listowners can confirm or deny that our numbers grow smaller year by
> > year.
> >
> > James W. Oppenheimer-Crawford
> > *“A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not
preserved,
> > except in memory. LLAP**”  -- *Leonard Nimoy
> >
> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Ann Markle <ann.markle at aya.yale.edu>
wrote:
> >>
> >> Jim, I'm not sure what you mean by "sharpshooter."  Does this mean
anyone
> >> who dares disagree with you?  I realize you've worked in mental
health.  I
> >> also realize you cite one anecdotal incident, which doesn't mean
Thorazine
> >> for pregnancy was common medical practice.  We also don't know what
other
> >> kinds of symptoms this RN you knew was exhibiting, many of which might
have
> >> indicated prescription of an antipsychotic med.  Margaret, who has
worked
> >> in medicine/academia for her career, might have something informed to
say
> >> about the origins of Thorazine, as well.  My impression is that this
was a
> >> factual discussion, not "sharpshooting," whatever that is.  Sorry you
> >> experienced it as some kind of assault, but just sayin', it didn't look
> >> like that to a disinterested observer who likes you both a lot.
> >>
> >> Ann
> >>
> >> The Rev. Ann Markle
> >> Buffalo, NY
> >> ann.markle at aya.yale.edu
> >>
> >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:30 PM, James Oppenheimer-Crawford <
> >> oppenheimerjw at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I saw that. It's aimed at the psychiatric angle, so it doesn't talk
about
> >>> the other stuff.
> >>>
> >>> The point was that many medicines started out in a very different
> >> category
> >>> than that in which they became well known.
> >>>
> >>> I am really tired of sharpshooters. Not surprised, but tired.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> James W. Oppenheimer-Crawford
> >>> *“A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not
preserved,
> >>> except in memory. LLAP**”  -- *Leonard Nimoy
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Allan Carr <allanc25 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorpromazine
> >>>>
> >>>> In the section headed "History", it was developed as a better
> >> alternative
> >>>> to a drug used to calm surgical patients. It was quickly tested in a
> >>> mental
> >>>> hospital, with a dramatic effect on a manic patient who was
discharged
> >> in
> >>>> three weeks.
> >>>> It was marketed as Thorazine, replaced such treatments as shock
therapy
> >>>> and psychosurgery and quickly emptied mental hospitals of patients
with
> >>> all
> >>>> sorts of psychoses.
> >>>> It also led to the discovery of antidepressants.
> >>>> If I recall correctly, there are 30,000 homeless living on the
streets
> >> of
> >>>> Los Angeles, many of them psychotic. I'm not sure if most of them
> >> reject
> >>>> treatment with drugs like Thorazine.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Aug 17, 2016, at 2:25 PM, ME Michaud <michaudme at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thorazine was the first anti-psychotic (early 1950s)
> >>>>> but IIRC was developed with the hope that it would treat malaria.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In its rudimentary clinical trials it was found to have other
> >>> potentials.
> >>>>> -M, who remembers patients with Tardive dyskinesia
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wednesday, August 17, 2016, James Oppenheimer-Crawford <
> >>>>> oppenheimerjw at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> No.
> >>