![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 12 of 12. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Else on July 4, 2001, at 17:38:47
Get a load of this please:http://www.who-umc.org/adrespherics/glossary/glossary.htm
«Dependence indicator: This field flags ADR terms that are indicators of possible drug dependence. Please note that in the old Type D list only reports on 'drug dependence' and 'drug abuse' were listed whereas in the Combinations/Associations Database the number of 'dependence terms' has been extended to also include: 'Withdrawal syndrome', 'Withdrawal syndrome neonatal', 'Withdrawal convulsions', 'Stupor', 'Amnesia', *****'Euphoria'****** and 'Emotional lability'. The flagged terms are selected from the result of a study performed by the UMC aiming to find terms that could be used to forewarn of possible drug dependence. The result from this study is an internal report. Dependence indicators are marked (Y); for all other terms this field is blank. (This field is only used in Cumulus)»This is a bit off topic but am I the only one who finds it revolting that the United Nations (through the World Health Organization) works really hard to make sure no one on the planet *suffers* from drug-induced euphoria?
Posted by Elizabeth on July 4, 2001, at 22:14:12
In reply to Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by Else on July 4, 2001, at 17:38:47
> This is a bit off topic but am I the only one who finds it revolting that the United Nations (through the World Health Organization) works really hard to make sure no one on the planet *suffers* from drug-induced euphoria?
I could argue that it's completely on-topic. And yeah, you're right. (On the other hand, a drug's ability to cause euphoria is a strong indicator that it's possible to become addicted to that drug.)
-elizabeth
Posted by Else on July 4, 2001, at 22:25:38
In reply to Re: Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good » Else, posted by Elizabeth on July 4, 2001, at 22:14:12
> > This is a bit off topic but am I the only one who finds it revolting that the United Nations (through the World Health Organization) works really hard to make sure no one on the planet *suffers* from drug-induced euphoria?
>
> I could argue that it's completely on-topic. And yeah, you're right. (On the other hand, a drug's ability to cause euphoria is a strong indicator that it's possible to become addicted to that drug.)
>
> -elizabethVery true, but it's still kind of freaky that an international organization would be so concerned with controlling what drugs people are allowed to take *everywhere* around the world. Kind of Orwellian, you know what I mean.
Posted by annalaura on July 5, 2001, at 2:24:10
In reply to Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by Else on July 4, 2001, at 17:38:47
Check this out: quite interesting.
>
http://neuropharmacology.com/
Posted by Else on July 5, 2001, at 8:10:20
In reply to Re: Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by annalaura on July 5, 2001, at 2:24:10
> Check this out: quite interesting.
> >
> http://neuropharmacology.com/Oh I've checked this out a million times already. And I suscribe to it entirely although I do think sometimes they tend to brush some nasty side-effects under the carpet. Still, it's one of the rare sites (except for this one of course) I consider to be a reliable source of info on psychotropic drugs. Plus, I particularly like the essay "The Hedonistic Imperative". I agree with the ideas expressed although I do think at times they sound unrealistic and utopian (but I guess that's the point). I think people who believe prolonged physical or emotional pain has a useful purpose are a bit delusional.
Posted by AMenz on July 5, 2001, at 11:46:28
In reply to Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by Else on July 4, 2001, at 17:38:47
There is a definite bias among psychiatrists to prevent at all costs hypomania in bipolars-even if hypomania is euphoric. Mild depression does seem to be perceived as preferrable.
I think the reason is two fold. Some assumption in the medical profession that hypomanic states signal a serious risk of full blown mania, which can be life threatening. (I don't see why this bias is justified when full blown mania does is not part of BPII.)
Secondly, hypomanics are difficult to control The depressed on the other hand are more pliant.
> Get a load of this please:http://www.who-umc.org/adrespherics/glossary/glossary.htm
> «Dependence indicator: This field flags ADR terms that are indicators of possible drug dependence. Please note that in the old Type D list only reports on 'drug dependence' and 'drug abuse' were listed whereas in the Combinations/Associations Database the number of 'dependence terms' has been extended to also include: 'Withdrawal syndrome', 'Withdrawal syndrome neonatal', 'Withdrawal convulsions', 'Stupor', 'Amnesia', *****'Euphoria'****** and 'Emotional lability'. The flagged terms are selected from the result of a study performed by the UMC aiming to find terms that could be used to forewarn of possible drug dependence. The result from this study is an internal report. Dependence indicators are marked (Y); for all other terms this field is blank. (This field is only used in Cumulus)»
>
> This is a bit off topic but am I the only one who finds it revolting that the United Nations (through the World Health Organization) works really hard to make sure no one on the planet *suffers* from drug-induced euphoria?
>
Posted by kid_A on July 5, 2001, at 12:26:00
In reply to Re: Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by annalaura on July 5, 2001, at 2:24:10
another one... somewhat interesting:
Posted by Else on July 5, 2001, at 19:40:09
In reply to Re: Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by AMenz on July 5, 2001, at 11:46:28
> There is a definite bias among psychiatrists to prevent at all costs hypomania in bipolars-even if hypomania is euphoric. Mild depression does seem to be perceived as preferrable.
>
> I think the reason is two fold. Some assumption in the medical profession that hypomanic states signal a serious risk of full blown mania, which can be life threatening. (I don't see why this bias is justified when full blown mania does is not part of BPII.)
>
> Secondly, hypomanics are difficult to control The depressed on the other hand are more pliant.Very true. When I am in a good mood (not hypomanic, just feeling good and confident) I get what I want. Not just from doctors, from anyone. Sometimes I think if it wasn't for this stupid dysthymia I'd be really rich and famous by now. But doctors prefer me as a vegetable. I feel I have this huge power that doctors want to keep a lid on and I hate it. I hate the whole stupid puritanical system basically. Please explain to me why doctors want to prescribe mood-stabilizers as soon as I start to sound smarter (or perhaps more arrogant) than they do? I've never been psychotic, manic or even had a clear hypomanic episode. What are they so afraid of? I'm REALLY opinionated and read a lot of studies. I suppose they don't like that.
I realise all of this probably sounds a bit grandiose. I do exagerate a lot.
Posted by Elizabeth on July 6, 2001, at 1:07:04
In reply to Re: Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by Else on July 5, 2001, at 19:40:09
> Very true. When I am in a good mood (not hypomanic, just feeling good and confident) I get what I want. Not just from doctors, from anyone.
Not surprisingly, shy people are less popular and less well-liked than are non-shy people. They are also less interpersonally effective. This probably has something to do with it.
> Please explain to me why doctors want to prescribe mood-stabilizers as soon as I start to sound smarter (or perhaps more arrogant) than they do?
Well, arrogance *can* be a sign of mania. I don't know *how* arrogant you start sounding < g >. They're probably not used to patients who know what they're talking about, so instead of taking it in stride, they pathologise it. It might be partially an ego thing too, as you suggest: in particular (IME), it's a rare doctor who can stand to be corrected.
-elizabeth
Posted by AMenz on July 6, 2001, at 15:34:45
In reply to Re: Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by Else on July 5, 2001, at 19:40:09
YOu may sound grandiose. But so do a lot of men with or without accomplishments. Grandiosity may have some basis in fact of the greater abilities a person experiences in subhypomanic states. If you don't crash from there, I say what's wrong with a mild form of hypomania.
> > There is a definite bias among psychiatrists to prevent at all costs hypomania in bipolars-even if hypomania is euphoric. Mild depression does seem to be perceived as preferrable.
> >
> > I think the reason is two fold. Some assumption in the medical profession that hypomanic states signal a serious risk of full blown mania, which can be life threatening. (I don't see why this bias is justified when full blown mania does is not part of BPII.)
> >
> > Secondly, hypomanics are difficult to control The depressed on the other hand are more pliant.
>
> Very true. When I am in a good mood (not hypomanic, just feeling good and confident) I get what I want. Not just from doctors, from anyone. Sometimes I think if it wasn't for this stupid dysthymia I'd be really rich and famous by now. But doctors prefer me as a vegetable. I feel I have this huge power that doctors want to keep a lid on and I hate it. I hate the whole stupid puritanical system basically. Please explain to me why doctors want to prescribe mood-stabilizers as soon as I start to sound smarter (or perhaps more arrogant) than they do? I've never been psychotic, manic or even had a clear hypomanic episode. What are they so afraid of? I'm REALLY opinionated and read a lot of studies. I suppose they don't like that.
>
> I realise all of this probably sounds a bit grandiose. I do exagerate a lot.
Posted by Else on July 6, 2001, at 20:01:36
In reply to Re: Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good » Else, posted by Elizabeth on July 6, 2001, at 1:07:04
> > Very true. When I am in a good mood (not hypomanic, just feeling good and confident) I get what I want. Not just from doctors, from anyone.
>
> Not surprisingly, shy people are less popular and less well-liked than are non-shy people. They are also less interpersonally effective. This probably has something to do with it.
>
> > Please explain to me why doctors want to prescribe mood-stabilizers as soon as I start to sound smarter (or perhaps more arrogant) than they do?
>
> Well, arrogance *can* be a sign of mania. I don't know *how* arrogant you start sounding < g >. They're probably not used to patients who know what they're talking about, so instead of taking it in stride, they pathologise it. It might be partially an ego thing too, as you suggest: in particular (IME), it's a rare doctor who can stand to be corrected.
>
> -elizabethI had this doc who had about 5 different diplomas on his wall and seemed intent on making me cry like that was the whole point of my being there. I hated his guts.
Like I said, I do exagerate. When I re-read what I wrote yesterday, I thought I sounded like an egomaniac. It's not really that bad. Sometimes I act really pushy because it's difficult for me to be assertive.
What I dislike about my current doctor is that he seems to have made up his mind about me the first time he saw me and is unwilling to revise his opinion in any way. He seems to think: "Well, she is borderline so I can't prescribe these drugs because she will become addicted or attempt suicide." He seems to think he has me all figured out and gauges everything I say in light of that.
Posted by Else on July 6, 2001, at 20:14:17
In reply to Re: Proof the WHO doesn't want us feeling TOO good, posted by AMenz on July 6, 2001, at 15:34:45
> YOu may sound grandiose. But so do a lot of men with or without accomplishments. Grandiosity may have some basis in fact of the greater abilities a person experiences in subhypomanic states. If you don't crash from there, I say what's wrong with a mild form of hypomania.
>
> > > There is a definite bias among psychiatrists to prevent at all costs hypomania in bipolars-even if hypomania is euphoric. Mild depression does seem to be perceived as preferrable.
> > >
> > > I think the reason is two fold. Some assumption in the medical profession that hypomanic states signal a serious risk of full blown mania, which can be life threatening. (I don't see why this bias is justified when full blown mania does is not part of BPII.)
> > >
> > > Secondly, hypomanics are difficult to control The depressed on the other hand are more pliant.
> >
> > Very true. When I am in a good mood (not hypomanic, just feeling good and confident) I get what I want. Not just from doctors, from anyone. Sometimes I think if it wasn't for this stupid dysthymia I'd be really rich and famous by now. But doctors prefer me as a vegetable. I feel I have this huge power that doctors want to keep a lid on and I hate it. I hate the whole stupid puritanical system basically. Please explain to me why doctors want to prescribe mood-stabilizers as soon as I start to sound smarter (or perhaps more arrogant) than they do? I've never been psychotic, manic or even had a clear hypomanic episode. What are they so afraid of? I'm REALLY opinionated and read a lot of studies. I suppose they don't like that.
> >
> > I realise all of this probably sounds a bit grandiose. I do exagerate a lot.God, that sounded awfully pretentious didn't it. Still, it's better to be pretentious than modest in my opinion. It's certainly more effective as a way of getting what you want in life.
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.