There is a pill for every ill especially in this country. I love the satirical slant! As a doctor I'm sure you must be cautious with your words and this was the perfect solution. So happy to have found you my fellow Daltonite;)
Hmmm... So instead of "Love the sinner, not the sin", we've gone for "Love the sinner, but permanently wreck his metabolism"... Seems like chemical straightjackets, nothing more...
Reminded me of Lily the Pink and they who invented medicinal compounds! I enjoyed your article, and will consider another approach to my low mood, maybe gratitude meditation ...
Really enjoy your creative writing! Thought provoking. I tell my patients depression and anxiety are ultimately spiritual issues. Cardinal Manning (19th c., Britain) said, "All of human conflict is ultimately theological". It's true. What you believe about God and where you, a human, stand before Him is at the root of all conflict...especially depression and anxiety. And yet, we prescribe meds in flux as if meds are THE answer. I've begun telling my patients they need a spiritual fix. Sure meds can be of some help...but they aren't the answer. We, as physicians, need to know better than to blindly trust Pharma for answers they aren't licensed to give.
Do you also tell that to women with post partum depression? While I have always always been careful not to take mind altering drugs, I learned a few things with having ppd. A little progesterone was all it took for a remarkable change to occur. It was CERTAINLY not a spiritual problem. I’ve had spiritual depression and it’s completely different. I think your take would be extremely unhelpful to people dealing with certain physical things, and probably quite harmful to the patient actually.
This is very good. It’s good to laugh at the “progress” made in medicine. We need more humor in these crazy days of distrust of the medical/Pharma/gov’t complex. I once had a priest friend who said [“after years of hearing thousands of confessions, the majority of sinners have just one or a few “predominant faults” which they end up committing over and over again, despite their best efforts to avoid them.”] In light of your post, perhaps a solution to this might be, in addition to a normal penance of a few prayers, a hefty co-pay per absolution. Hit ‘‘em where it hurts: in the wallet.
I love what you guys at Sensible Medicine are doing. However, given the current moment in time we are living I believe it would be helpful if you turned your educated eyes toward the multiple studies that claimed to prove Covid vaccine efficacy and are the central pillar of continued coercion of the population. Given the number of people involved, this is the single most important medical issue at this time. In my state, many organizations still have vaccine mandates (particularly medical organizations) and many are lamenting the number of exceptions currently allowed.
Norman Fenton and Martin Neal have done great work exposing what is possible the most impactful statistical manipulation to support this narrative. The nearly universally accepted but logically inconsistent policy to delay recognition that an individual is vaccinated for some arbitrary timeframe (one or two weeks after 2nd shot). To make this even more egregious they did so without creating and tracking a 3rd category (pre-effective vaccinated) but counted those who received a shot but for whom the arbitrary period of time had not passed as unvaccinated. Most tracking data and studies used these definitions in their analyses.
The link below shows in a simple manner how such definitions alone can impact outcomes to indicate high initial effectiveness which wanes quickly even when the assumption is that the vaccine had 0% effectiveness.
The link below explores this matter further including listing many studies that used these logically flawed definitions in their analyses resulting in very questionable outcomes and conclusions.
Is there some flaw in Mr. Fenton's and Martin's logic which explains why using the accepted definitions without tracking a 3rd category does not result in erroneously slanting results toward vaccine effectiveness? If not, this may be the single largest impactful example of scientific malfeasance. This seems such a simple mistake that it is hard to imagine that scientists that work with statistics on a regular basis could make the same mistake across multiple studies and tracking statistical analyses.
I am also disappointed in how much scrutiny these decent guys have failed to have with vaccines. Prasad just caught the extreme healthy user bias in one study. He doesn't realize the issue is equally catastrophic in basically all covid vaccine studies.
On a contrary note, there are two medications (flibanserin and bremelanotide) approved for hypoactive sexual desire disorder in women, so the pharmaceutical industry claims to increase your level of lust if you want more of it. Similarly for dronabinol for appetite stimulation to make one more gluttonous.
Clever analysis Adam and Michael! 👏 Our emotions are evolved brain adaptations that can indeed be targeted for biological intervention (usually badly at this stage of the science).
A paradigm shift from the "soul" to the "self" to the "mind/brain" is working its way through the culture, and stirring up a lot of existential angst and fighting. Usually generating more heat than light.
As a minister I'd like to argue with this article but I'm not sure where to begin. It feels too right to be wrong. But allow me a couple of days off my anti-depressant and perhaps I can respond.
There is a pill for every ill especially in this country. I love the satirical slant! As a doctor I'm sure you must be cautious with your words and this was the perfect solution. So happy to have found you my fellow Daltonite;)
Hmmm... So instead of "Love the sinner, not the sin", we've gone for "Love the sinner, but permanently wreck his metabolism"... Seems like chemical straightjackets, nothing more...
Intellectually stimulating write up. A lot was going through my head reading this. . .
Reminded me of Lily the Pink and they who invented medicinal compounds! I enjoyed your article, and will consider another approach to my low mood, maybe gratitude meditation ...
I can’t tell if this article is satire or not.
Funny but prefer science on this site.
Really enjoy your creative writing! Thought provoking. I tell my patients depression and anxiety are ultimately spiritual issues. Cardinal Manning (19th c., Britain) said, "All of human conflict is ultimately theological". It's true. What you believe about God and where you, a human, stand before Him is at the root of all conflict...especially depression and anxiety. And yet, we prescribe meds in flux as if meds are THE answer. I've begun telling my patients they need a spiritual fix. Sure meds can be of some help...but they aren't the answer. We, as physicians, need to know better than to blindly trust Pharma for answers they aren't licensed to give.
Do you also tell that to women with post partum depression? While I have always always been careful not to take mind altering drugs, I learned a few things with having ppd. A little progesterone was all it took for a remarkable change to occur. It was CERTAINLY not a spiritual problem. I’ve had spiritual depression and it’s completely different. I think your take would be extremely unhelpful to people dealing with certain physical things, and probably quite harmful to the patient actually.
This is very good. It’s good to laugh at the “progress” made in medicine. We need more humor in these crazy days of distrust of the medical/Pharma/gov’t complex. I once had a priest friend who said [“after years of hearing thousands of confessions, the majority of sinners have just one or a few “predominant faults” which they end up committing over and over again, despite their best efforts to avoid them.”] In light of your post, perhaps a solution to this might be, in addition to a normal penance of a few prayers, a hefty co-pay per absolution. Hit ‘‘em where it hurts: in the wallet.
Brilliant—sharp yet kind, puts us all in this together. Thank you.
I love what you guys at Sensible Medicine are doing. However, given the current moment in time we are living I believe it would be helpful if you turned your educated eyes toward the multiple studies that claimed to prove Covid vaccine efficacy and are the central pillar of continued coercion of the population. Given the number of people involved, this is the single most important medical issue at this time. In my state, many organizations still have vaccine mandates (particularly medical organizations) and many are lamenting the number of exceptions currently allowed.
Norman Fenton and Martin Neal have done great work exposing what is possible the most impactful statistical manipulation to support this narrative. The nearly universally accepted but logically inconsistent policy to delay recognition that an individual is vaccinated for some arbitrary timeframe (one or two weeks after 2nd shot). To make this even more egregious they did so without creating and tracking a 3rd category (pre-effective vaccinated) but counted those who received a shot but for whom the arbitrary period of time had not passed as unvaccinated. Most tracking data and studies used these definitions in their analyses.
The link below shows in a simple manner how such definitions alone can impact outcomes to indicate high initial effectiveness which wanes quickly even when the assumption is that the vaccine had 0% effectiveness.
https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/the-illusion-of-vaccine-efficacy
The link below explores this matter further including listing many studies that used these logically flawed definitions in their analyses resulting in very questionable outcomes and conclusions.
https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/the-very-best-of-cheap-trick
Is there some flaw in Mr. Fenton's and Martin's logic which explains why using the accepted definitions without tracking a 3rd category does not result in erroneously slanting results toward vaccine effectiveness? If not, this may be the single largest impactful example of scientific malfeasance. This seems such a simple mistake that it is hard to imagine that scientists that work with statistics on a regular basis could make the same mistake across multiple studies and tracking statistical analyses.
I am also disappointed in how much scrutiny these decent guys have failed to have with vaccines. Prasad just caught the extreme healthy user bias in one study. He doesn't realize the issue is equally catastrophic in basically all covid vaccine studies.
Wrong question. It should be...if big pharma commits a sin, is it really a sin?
On a contrary note, there are two medications (flibanserin and bremelanotide) approved for hypoactive sexual desire disorder in women, so the pharmaceutical industry claims to increase your level of lust if you want more of it. Similarly for dronabinol for appetite stimulation to make one more gluttonous.
I love this article
Great article. Funny on the face of it, but it really does make one go "hmmmm."
Nice work!
Clever analysis Adam and Michael! 👏 Our emotions are evolved brain adaptations that can indeed be targeted for biological intervention (usually badly at this stage of the science).
A paradigm shift from the "soul" to the "self" to the "mind/brain" is working its way through the culture, and stirring up a lot of existential angst and fighting. Usually generating more heat than light.
As a minister I'd like to argue with this article but I'm not sure where to begin. It feels too right to be wrong. But allow me a couple of days off my anti-depressant and perhaps I can respond.
Soo good.