Ritalin Studies
JDrew63929
smoocher
"JDrew63929" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000608123324...@ng-cr1.aol.com...
> http://www.breggin.com/mta.html
Not even worth clicking. Jan, it's BREGGIN for christ's sake.
This is really getting stupid.
Find a REAL authoritative source to cite. Oops, can't?
smoocher
J. Clarke
--
---
--- John
Reply to jclarke at eye bee em dot net
yes
what is your interest in add? are you a self-appointed
savior to any other groups of people with differences you
know nothing about?
virginia
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Christopher Eliot
"Secrets of corporate success", by Lennin
"The Irish guide to sobriety"
"Compassionate Leadership", by Marie Antoinette
"The Peaceful Newsgroup", by ASAD
"In praise of ancient technology", Thomas Edison
"Anatomically Precise Drawing", Pablo Piccasso
"The importance of royal leadership", John Hancock
In article <20000608123324...@ng-cr1.aol.com>,
jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
Mare
green beer with the best of them!! And remember, we aren't only known for
drinking, we also have blarney!! : ) Mare
Christopher Eliot <Empire...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:a_R%4.42520$Ft1.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
B. Chandrasekaran
> news:a_R%4.42520$Ft1.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
> > Some titles from the same bookshelf:
> >
> > "Secrets of corporate success", by Lennin
> > "The Irish guide to sobriety"
> > "Compassionate Leadership", by Marie Antoinette
> > "The Peaceful Newsgroup", by ASAD
> > "In praise of ancient technology", Thomas Edison
> > "Anatomically Precise Drawing", Pablo Piccasso
> > "The importance of royal leadership", John Hancock
The only item above that doesn't belong is the hit on Picasso. He was not
one of those modern artists who coudn't draw (even though his later
paintings might give this impression). His drawings and paintings done from
when he was 15 to 25 show a phenomenal capacity for realistic, subtle
drawing and painting. The man could draw like an angel.
Chandra
Mark Probert
yes,virginia <bellecat...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> what is your interest in add? are you a self-appointed
> savior to any other groups of people with differences you
> know nothing about?
>
I like that. Can I use it? Please?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Christopher Eliot
<cha...@cis.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
That is certainly true, I've seen some of those pictures. But, it's not what
he is known for, and I wasn't being *that* serious. :-)
> Chandra
J. Clarke
>
>
> >In article <00639430...@usw-ex0109-068.remarq.com>,
> > yes,virginia <bellecat...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
>
> >> what is your interest in add?
>
>
>
>
> are you a self-appointed
> >> savior to any other groups of people with differences you
> >> know nothing about?
>
>
Ritalin.
> How did that make me a self-appointed savior?
Well, actually, one of your links was about the dangers of _not_ using
Ritalin, as you would have known if you had actually read it.
But you did not post "facts". You posted links to pages that might or might
not contain facts. And half of them were to pages expressing the views of a
known whacko.
yes
jan said:
And what makes you think I know nothing about it? You have
no idea what I know. Is this a reaction because your veiws
are different than mine?
post your views in your own words, and then we can talk
about what you know.
yes
be my guest, mark. :)
Ann
>The man could draw like an angel.
Yes, but if he *drew* an angel, would we recognize it??? ;->
--
Ann
ann...@thecia.net
Ann
>
>And what makes you think I know nothing about it? You have no idea what I know.
>Is this a reaction because your veiws are different than mine?
No, it's a reaction to you coming into ASAD and posting bullshit from
Breggin. Try really reading the facts that Breggin uses. You won't
find many. Facts, not emotion driven verbage written to scare anyone
who doesn't know any better.
--
Ann
ann...@thecia.net
J. Clarke
> >From: "J. Clarke" nos...@nospam.nospam
> >Date: 06/08/2000 7:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time
> >Message-id:
>
> >But you did not post "facts". You posted links to pages that might or
might
> >not contain facts.
>
>
Nope, no studies there. Studies are published in refereed journals. You
posted no links to such.
> > And half of them were to pages expressing the views of a
> >known whacko.
>
>
> This sounds like an opinion. Please prove it.
It is not my opinion, it is a general consensus. There is a service called
"deja", accessible from http://www.deja.com. Learn to use it.
Mark Probert
jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
>>From: Rich kal...@hawaii.rr.com
>>Date: 06/08/2000 8:07 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>>Message-id:
>
>Rich, if you don't mind I was asking Virginia. I already know
your opinions.
Rich is welcome to express his views. So far, Rich seems to be
batting 1.000 and you have yet to make an impact.
>You are the one who told me to come here Rich, I didn't know
this group
>existed. You wanted me to come and talk with all these people
who could open my
>eyes.
It is not your eyes that are closed.
>I have already told you that I have talked with parents for 38
years and
>has their kids ten hours a day. I have seen the effects of
Ritalin, probably
>much more than you.
So, tell us the effects.
>I base my opinions on these 38 years of experience. Because my
opinions (
>backed by facts)
Post YOUR facts.
are different than yours, you made an attempt to trash me as a
>person. That says a whole lot about you Rich.
So far, your track record is a non-starter. Citing Brggin and
Merrow, who are easily shown to be liars, is a non-starter.
>I can agree to disagree. Can you?
When it comes to facts, no. It is either true or not. Not some
mealy-mouth new age bullshit.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Mark Probert
jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
>
>
>>In article <00639430...@usw-ex0109-068.remarq.com>,
>> yes,virginia <bellecat...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>
>>> what is your interest in add?
>
>My interest is in NOT drugging kids.
>
> are you a self-appointed
>>> savior to any other groups of people with differences you
>>> know nothing about?
>
>Virginia, you sound angry.
So, you ARE a self-appointed savior. Glad we got that out of the
way!
>I posted some facts about the dangers of Ritalin.
>How did that make me a self-appointed savior?
By posting in a support group where people are dealing withthe
problems and the post consists of utter bullshit. Breggin has no
clue as to the facts re MPH use. He is a documented liar.
>And what makes you think I know nothing about it? You have no
idea what I know.
>Is this a reaction because your veiws are different than mine?
No. It is a reacion becuse you posted bullshit by a proven liar.
We use RealLogic, not AltLogic in this group. We prefer facts to
overblown know-nothingisms.
Mark Probert
>>Message-id:
>
>>But you did not post "facts". You posted links to pages that
might or might
>>not contain facts.
>
>
>Well read them again. They were studies. That is facts.
They were NOT studies. Merrow is not a doctor, but a bit TV
producer. Breggin is a demonstrable liar, and had never
published a research study in a peer reviewed journal.
Try again.
>> And half of them were to pages expressing the views of a
>>known whacko.
>
>This sounds like an opinion. Please prove it.
No, stupid, you prove they are right. YOU offered them, and the
burden is on you.
Mark Probert
jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
>>From: yes,virginia bellecat...@hotmail.com.invalid
>>Date: 06/08/2000 8:38 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>>Message-id:
>
>>jan said:
>>And what makes you think I know nothing about it? You have
>>no idea what I know. Is this a reaction because your veiws
>>are different than mine?
>>
>>
>>about what you know.
>>
>>virginia
>
>
came to your
>conclusions?
>
>Please answer that before we go on.
>
>I have talked with many closed minded people, it appears that
you are, so why
>waste my time?
You came into this group and posted your blather. You prove your
blather. You made the claim, so back it up.
You do not set the rules.
J. Clarke
news:20000608235904...@ng-ca1.aol.com...
> jdrew said:
>
> ">post your views in your own words, and then we can talk
> >about what you know.
> >
> >virginia
>
>
> Would that be a waste of my time Virginia? "
>
>
is.
>
> I find it so depressing that someone who has taught for 38 years (and so
> presumably developed some passing familiarity with librarie somewhere) has
> latched on to the internet -- and seems to think that a URL proves
something.
>
> Just proves that you can lead a horse to books, but you can't make her
think.
If this person has been teaching for 38 years, that would put her in her
late 50s I believe. That is a generation which for the most part still buys
into the "computer says so" fallacy. It's amazing what many people will
accept if it comes out of a computer. I remember having a long argument
with my boss to the effect that the results of an analysis I had performed
did not pass reality check, and that I couldn't figure out why without
running a test to get some measurements. He insisted on going with them
anyway because they came out of the computer. Of course he got creamed by
the customer. Then he came back and complained at me. My response was to
ask him to reread my memo of such and such date. He became rather
shamefaced at that point.
Of course there are individuals of that generation and earlier who do not
buy into that fallacy, but most of them are "computer scientists".
J. Clarke
"JDrew63929" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000609003312...@ng-mf1.aol.com...
> >From: "J. Clarke" nos...@nospam.nospam
> >Date: 06/08/2000 8:57 PM US Eastern Standard Time
> >Message-id: <39406...@news3.prserv.net>
> >
> >"JDrew63929" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:20000608223145...@ng-mf1.aol.com...
> >> >From: "J. Clarke" nos...@nospam.nospam
> >> >Date: 06/08/2000 7:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time
> >> >Message-id:
> >>
> >> >But you did not post "facts". You posted links to pages that might or
> >might
> >> >not contain facts.
> >>
> >>
> >> Well read them again. They were studies. That is facts.
> >
> >Nope, no studies there. Studies are published in refereed journals. You
> >posted no links to such.
>
>
>
>
> Wrong. Try again. I did indeed post studies.
In what refereed journals were they published, and how is it that they were
posted on web sites other than those maintained by said journals in
violation of said journals' copyrights?
> >> > And half of them were to pages expressing the views of a
> >> >known whacko.
> >>
> >>
> >> This sounds like an opinion. Please prove it.
> >
> >It is not my opinion, it is a general consensus. There is a service
called
> >"deja", accessible from http://www.deja.com. Learn to use it.
>
>
>
> Nice try.....now post some proof.
Sorry, doesn't work that way. You posted the link to Breggin, now you back
it up. Why have you not yet checked the many discussions which have been
held in the past about that idiot? Do you not have access to the Web? Do
you not know how to use a Web browser? Has your ISP blocked deja for some
reason? Are you simply too lazy to be bothered? Are you too stupid to
figure out how to type http://www.deja.com/usenet and then type "Breggin"
into the search block? What exactly _is_ your problem with doing your
homework?
I am under no obligation whatsoever to prove anything to you, and in fact
your continued insistence on proof that you are too lazy to obtain for
yourself is about to earn you a place in the twit filter.
---
J. Clarke
> >From: Rich kal...@hawaii.rr.com
> >Date: 06/08/2000 9:47 PM US Eastern Standard Time
> >Message-id: <ogm0kso6cilmn6egs...@4ax.com>
> >
> >On 09 Jun 2000 02:35:30 GMT, jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>I have talked with many closed minded people, it appears that you are,
so
> >why
> >>waste my time?
> >
> >
> >
> > What were you saying about making belittling remarks to people
> >Jan????? And you accused ME of belittling people just because they
> >disagreed with me. Look in the mirror honey. Hopefully it will not
> >break:-)
>
>
>
> You've lost it Mr Jacobson. Perhaps too much sun from all those nudie
hikes??
>
>
> >Aloha,
> >
> >Rich
> >
> >
> >--------------------------------------
> >---------------------------------------
> >
> >I have my own life experiences to go by.
> >
> >I don't need to do any math.
> >
> >ka & g
>
> Say what about belittling?
>
> Should I add a sig line about your rather particular hiking habits?
>
> No I wouldn't lower myself.
>
> Jan
Oh, go for it. You've made enough of a fool of yourself already that you
may as well complete the job.
J. Clarke
> J. Clarke said:
>
> "If this person has been teaching for 38 years, that would put her in her
> late 50s I believe. That is a generation which for the most part still
buys
> into the "computer says so" fallacy."
>
>
> compter-literate, but in my opinion, anyone with a college degree who
can't
> separate fact from unsupported opinion -- on the internet or anywhere
else --
> should perhaps some of their college tuition back.
>
> Clearly they were educated badly. I find it troubling to see this coming
from a
> teacher.
I had trouble dealing with it coming from experienced rocket scientists, but
so it came.
JDrew63929
>In article <00639430...@usw-ex0109-068.remarq.com>,
> yes,virginia <bellecat...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> what is your interest in add?
My interest is in NOT drugging kids.
are you a self-appointed
>> savior to any other groups of people with differences you
>> know nothing about?
Virginia, you sound angry. I posted some facts about the dangers of Ritalin.
How did that make me a self-appointed savior?
And what makes you think I know nothing about it? You have no idea what I know.
Is this a reaction because your veiws are different than mine?
Jan
Rich
>
>
>>In article <00639430...@usw-ex0109-068.remarq.com>,
>> yes,virginia <bellecat...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>
>>> what is your interest in add?
>
>
>
>My interest is in NOT drugging kids.
Do you think anyone is interesting in "drugging kids" as you put it??
Do you think that parents with children who have ADHD have not
explored other treatments before agreeing to put their children on
Ritalin which often helps their condition??
Parents agree to put their children on medication because it works and
often with few side effects.
Btw this is a support group and to attack these well meaning parents
from giving helpful medication by saying that they are "drugging"
their children is quite insensitive of you. But sensitivity is not one
of your strong points, now is it?? But narcissism seems to be. And
narcissists have great difficulty experiencing empathy.
>
> are you a self-appointed
>>> savior to any other groups of people with differences you
>>> know nothing about?
>
>
>Virginia, you sound angry.
LOL. Do you notice Jan how you think everyone who disagrees with you
is angry? Have you considered whether it is YOU that is angry and that
you are projecting??
I posted some facts about the dangers of Ritalin.
>How did that make me a self-appointed savior?
Facts??? heheehheeheheheheheheheehhehe,
How do you distinguish fact from fantasy Jan??
You also think it is a fact that you had mercury poisoning from
amalgams.
You also think it is a fact that you were infected with the loa loa
parasite.
So I question your cognitive ability to distinguish fact from fantasy.
>
>
>And what makes you think I know nothing about it?
Take a guess Jan.
You have no idea what I know.
>Is this a reaction because your veiws are different than mine?
And who were you saying that was sounding angry Jan??
More projection. It is YOU who gets angry for people who disagree with
you. You just can't see it. Must be that plank in your eye:-))
JDrew63929
>Date: 06/08/2000 7:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id:
>But you did not post "facts". You posted links to pages that might or might
>not contain facts.
Well read them again. They were studies. That is facts.
> And half of them were to pages expressing the views of a
>known whacko.
This sounds like an opinion. Please prove it.
Jan
Rich
>>From: Rich kal...@hawaii.rr.com
>>Date: 06/08/2000 8:07 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>>Message-id:
>
>Rich, if you don't mind I was asking Virginia. I already know your opinions.
I realize that you don't want me to express my opinion here. If you
JUST wanted Virginia to reply then email is more appropriate. This is
an open unmoderated newsgroup in which anyone can reply. I chose to do
so. Send email next time if you want to exclude others from replying.
>
>You are the one who told me to come here Rich,
Yep. And now I (and probably many in this newsgroup) am regretting
it:-))
I didn't know this group
>existed. You wanted me to come and talk with all these people who could open my
>eyes.
Yeah. And I could see now that was probably delusional thinking on
my part:-))
I have already told you that I have talked with parents for 38 years
and
>has their kids ten hours a day.
Yes you did.
I have seen the effects of Ritalin, probably
>much more than you.
The issue is not whether you have seem the effects of Ritalin over 38
years. The issue is whether your perceptions are accurate or
distorted by your obvious disdain of conventional medicine.
After all when I asked if you EVER saw Ritalin help any of these
children you said that it may work at first but then they need to
increase the dose and the children get worse.
It is funny how many of the folks in this support group have had a
very different experience with Ritalin. This fact suggests to me that
your perceptions may be quite distorted, along with many of your other
statements which I believe are distortions of reality.
>
>I base my opinions on these 38 years of experience.
I realize that you think that because you have 38 years of experience
means that your opinions are more valid than someone with less
experience. Sometimes MORE is NOT better. And many might say that you
are a case in point:-)))
Because my opinions (
>backed by facts)
I asked you before how you define *fact* and you have not had a chance
to answer. Perhaps you can now.
You say that your opinion is that a child is rarely if ever helped by
Ritalin in the long run. Is THAT a fact?? If so then how do you
explain all the satisfied parents of children with ADHD and the
children themselves in the long run??
Perhaps you think that they are wrong and that you are right.
You will find in this newsgroup that most of the people who have
children on Ritalin are generally satisfied with the treatment.
Why don't you just lurk here and listen to what people say rather than
trying to cram your opinion (NOT fact) down everyone's throat??
are different than yours, you made an attempt to trash me as a
>person.
With all due respect Jan, you are your own worst enemy. Your posts
speak for themselves.
That says a whole lot about you Rich.
In your opinion of course, right Jan??? And we could agree to disagree
what exactly that says about me:-))
JDrew63929
>Date: 06/08/2000 8:38 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id:
>jan said:
>And what makes you think I know nothing about it? You have
>no idea what I know. Is this a reaction because your veiws
>are different than mine?
>
>
>post your views in your own words, and then we can talk
>about what you know.
>
>virginia
Would that be a waste of my time Virginia? I asked you why you came to your
conclusions?
Please answer that before we go on.
I have talked with many closed minded people, it appears that you are, so why
waste my time?
Jan
Rich
>
>I have talked with many closed minded people, it appears that you are, so why
>waste my time?
Don't you love these self referential posts???
What were you saying about making belittling remarks to people
Jan????? And you accused ME of belittling people just because they
disagreed with me. Look in the mirror honey. Hopefully it will not
break:-)
Aloha,
JDrew63929
>Date: 06/08/2000 8:07 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id:
Rich, if you don't mind I was asking Virginia. I already know your opinions.
You are the one who told me to come here Rich, I didn't know this group
existed. You wanted me to come and talk with all these people who could open my
eyes. I have already told you that I have talked with parents for 38 years and
has their kids ten hours a day. I have seen the effects of Ritalin, probably
much more than you.
I base my opinions on these 38 years of experience. Because my opinions (
backed by facts) are different than yours, you made an attempt to trash me as a
person. That says a whole lot about you Rich.
I can agree to disagree. Can you?
Jan
Christopher Eliot
> [...] I have seen the effects of Ritalin, probably much more than you.
It is a fallacy to say that you can "see" effects of anything. Causality is
invisible. You can make observations, but you must reason about the theory
connecting those observations to their cause.
JDrew63929
>Date: 06/08/2000 9:55 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <i0Z%4.43034$Ft1.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>
Been there, done that.....38 years,,,,,,,,,
Jan
Tralalaah
"Well read them again. They were studies. That is facts."
No, Jan. Internet sites are not "studies," and many of them do NOT contain
"facts."
Breggin's sites in particular do not contain "facts," and "studies" is not a
word recognized in scientific research.
Tralalaah
">From: Rich kal...@hawaii.rr.com
>Date: 06/08/2000 8:07 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id:
Rich, if you don't mind I was asking Virginia. I already know your opinions.
"
Rich, if you don't mind, thank you for posting. The rest of us welcome your
opinions and don't really give a flying fig if Jan "already knows your
opinions" or not. She may be the center of HER universe, but she is not the
center of the universe.
I would rather not read any more descriptions of her shortcomings, but only
because we can all figure it out for ourselves. When you post on ADHD you make
an interesting read. :)
Tralalaah
">post your views in your own words, and then we can talk
>about what you know.
>
>virginia
Would that be a waste of my time Virginia? "
Tralalaah
">Well read them again. They were studies. That is facts.
They were NOT studies. Merrow is not a doctor, but a bit TV
producer. Breggin is a demonstrable liar, and had never
published a research study in a peer reviewed journal.
Try again."
If Jan objects to "opinions," then the first thing to take a dive should be
Merrow's travesty of journalism.
In fact, I think that segment should be used in journalism classes to
demonstrate that honest journalists must not fall in love with notions and
promote them, instead of ... well ... acting like a professional journalist.
JDrew63929
>Date: 06/08/2000 8:57 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <39406...@news3.prserv.net>>news:20000608223145...@ng-mf1.aol.com...
>> >From: "J. Clarke" nos...@nospam.nospam
>> >Date: 06/08/2000 7:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>> >Message-id:
>>
>> >But you did not post "facts". You posted links to pages that might or
>might
>> >not contain facts.
>>
>>
>
>posted no links to such.
Wrong. Try again. I did indeed post studies.
>> > And half of them were to pages expressing the views of a
>> >known whacko.
>>
>>
>> This sounds like an opinion. Please prove it.
>
>It is not my opinion, it is a general consensus. There is a service called
>"deja", accessible from http://www.deja.com. Learn to use it.
Nice try.....now post some proof.
Jan
JDrew63929
>Date: 06/08/2000 9:47 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <ogm0kso6cilmn6egs...@4ax.com>
>
>On 09 Jun 2000 02:35:30 GMT, jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
>
>
>>
>>I have talked with many closed minded people, it appears that you are, so
>why
>>waste my time?
>
>
>Don't you love these self referential posts???
>
> What were you saying about making belittling remarks to people
>Jan????? And you accused ME of belittling people just because they
>disagreed with me. Look in the mirror honey. Hopefully it will not
>break:-)
You've lost it Mr Jacobson. Perhaps too much sun from all those nudie hikes??
>Aloha,
>
>Rich
>
>
>--------------------------------------
>---------------------------------------
>
>I have my own life experiences to go by.
>
>I don't need to do any math.
>
>ka & g
Say what about belittling?
JDrew63929
>Date: 06/08/2000 9:43 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <7kl0ks8g49v7ivhkh...@4ax.com>
>>>Date: 06/08/2000 8:07 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>>>Message-id:
>>
>
>JUST wanted Virginia to reply then email is more appropriate. This is
>an open unmoderated newsgroup in which anyone can reply. I chose to do
>so. Send email next time if you want to exclude others from replying.
Well I did just that with tralalaah......she didn't want to discuss *why* she
thought my statement of * I guess you don't think twins aret close*......was a
mean spirited statement
.
>>You are the one who told me to come here Rich,
>
>Yep. And now I (and probably many in this newsgroup) am regretting
>it:-))
Good. Maybe you won't be so eager to trash people in the future. That was your
whole reason to crosspost in the first place.
> I didn't know this group
>>existed. You wanted me to come and talk with all these people who could open
>my
>>eyes.
>
>Yeah. And I could see now that was probably delusional thinking on
>my part:-))
Oh no......surely NOT.......delusional thinking on your part??
> I have already told you that I have talked with parents for 38 years
>and
>>has their kids ten hours a day.
>
>Yes you did.
>
>
>
> I have seen the effects of Ritalin, probably
>>much more than you.
>
>The issue is not whether you have seem the effects of Ritalin over 38
>years. The issue is whether your perceptions are accurate or
>distorted by your obvious disdain of conventional medicine.
Doesn't fly Rich..........my disdain with conventional medicine......was AFTER
I retired. I know you have a hard time with the fact that the docs who couldn't
find my problem because it wasn't in the recipe book...........in your opinion
that is an innaccurate distortion. However you are wrong. if I had waited for
conventional....I would be six feet under.
>After all when I asked if you EVER saw Ritalin help any of these
>children you said that it may work at first but then they need to
>increase the dose and the children get worse.
Exactly. It seems there are a few honest MD's who agree.
> It is funny how many of the folks in this support group have had a
>very different experience with Ritalin. This fact suggests to me that
>your perceptions may be quite distorted, along with many of your other
>statements which I believe are distortions of reality.
Hey you are free to believe anything you want. From what I have seen in 38
years, drugging kids isn't right, and I am talking about many who were given
Ritalin waaay before they were six. There is NOTHING right about that, but
that is what many doctors do..........
>>I base my opinions on these 38 years of experience.
>
>I realize that you think that because you have 38 years of experience
>means that your opinions are more valid than someone with less
>experience. Sometimes MORE is NOT better. And many might say that you
>are a case in point:-)))
If you weant to dismiss 38 years of experience, it only shows your ignorance.
Experience has always been the best teacher.
But perhaps you don't know that.....yet?
> Because my opinions (
>>backed by facts)
>
>I asked you before how you define *fact* and you have not had a chance
>to answer. Perhaps you can now.
>
>You say that your opinion is that a child is rarely if ever helped by
>Ritalin in the long run. Is THAT a fact?? If so then how do you
>explain all the satisfied parents of children with ADHD and the
>children themselves in the long run??
I can't attempt to explain all people, but I wonder what the time period is for
all these satisifed parents? You keep forgetting that I have had 38 years
expience. Time enough to see these kids grow up and then tell me of their own
experience with Ritalin. Not to mention the family I knew with the child who
committed suicide...........
> Perhaps you think that they are wrong and that you are right.
>
>You will find in this newsgroup that most of the people who have
>children on Ritalin are generally satisfied with the treatment.
That's sad. I simply think there are better ways than to give kids
drugs......and then tell them to just say no. That simple makes NO sense.
.
>Why don't you just lurk here and listen to what people say rather than
>trying to cram your opinion (NOT fact) down everyone's throat??
That's interesting Rich. I posted some websites with studies which are facts.
That isn't cramming anything down anyones' throat. I believe you owe my an
apology.
> are different than yours, you made an attempt to trash me as a
>>person.
>
>With all due respect Jan, you are your own worst enemy. Your posts
>speak for themselves.
That's a cop out Rich. Are you proud of what you did today? If so it says much
about you Rich. I could have given my diagnoses of you, but I think it would
be childish.
> That says a whole lot about you Rich.
>
>In your opinion of course, right Jan??? And we could agree to disagree
>what exactly that says about me:-))
>
>Aloha,
>
>Rich
>
>
>--------------------------------------
>---------------------------------------
>
>I have my own life experiences to go by.
>
>I don't need to do any math.
>
>ka & g
We could. You don't see any belittling sig lines in my posts Rich. That's says
a lot about you.
Jan
Tralalaah
>JUST wanted Virginia to reply then email is more appropriate. This is
>an open unmoderated newsgroup in which anyone can reply. I chose to do
>so. Send email next time if you want to exclude others from replying.
Well I did just that with tralalaah......she didn't want to discuss *why* she
thought my statement of * I guess you don't think twins aret close*......was a
mean spirited statement..."
You really shouldn't discuss email in public, because if you continue to
grossly distort what you sent to me (which was mostly slanderous assertions
regarding someone else) -- the temptation to make it public might be
overwhelming.
Suffice it to say that the email you sent me was not a good stimulus for
interesting, engaging discussion, so yes, I did suggest we not email any more.
I didn't want to hear any more of your explanations about someone else whom I
have come to like and respect.
Christopher Eliot
jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
Are you saying you can see causality?
> Jan
>
>
Tralalaah
Ann
>You say that your opinion is that a child is rarely if ever helped by
>Ritalin in the long run. Is THAT a fact?? If so then how do you
>explain all the satisfied parents of children with ADHD and the
>children themselves in the long run??
Well, if that's her opinion, she's found her rare instance in my son.
Ritalin helped him immensely.
--
Ann
ann...@thecia.net
Ann
>Wrong. Try again. I did indeed post studies.
No, you didn't. You posted Breggin's warped interpretations of
studies. Why can't you see that? Either do the research we've all
told you to do or go away. Do you actually think you are the first to
come through here spouting Breggin's shit? You are old news.
--
Ann
ann...@thecia.net
John Palmer
>You are the one who told me to come here Rich, I didn't know this group
>existed. You wanted me to come and talk with all these people who could open my
>eyes. I have already told you that I have talked with parents for 38 years and
>has their kids ten hours a day. I have seen the effects of Ritalin, probably
>much more than you.
>
>I base my opinions on these 38 years of experience. Because my opinions (
>backed by facts) are different than yours, you made an attempt to trash me as a
>person. That says a whole lot about you Rich.
>
>I can agree to disagree. Can you?
I can't.
It sounds to me like you're in favor of letting lives be ruined
because you don't like "Ritalin" (why does everyone have to pound that
particular drug? Why not the nice, simple phrase "medications used to
treat ADHD"?). Now, I can agree to let you continue to hold a
misguided opinion, but not to simply suggest that it's not an
important enough issue to debate, as if it's a difference in opinion
as to who should be the next US President.
--
Everything I needed to know in life I learned in Kindergarten. Like:
Once you pull the pin on Mr. Hand Grenade, he is no longer your friend.
John Palmer
>>From: "Christopher Eliot" Empire...@mediaone.net
>>Date: 06/08/2000 9:55 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>>Message-id: <i0Z%4.43034$Ft1.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>
>>
>>jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
>>
>>> [...] I have seen the effects of Ritalin, probably much more than you.
>>
>>
>>It is a fallacy to say that you can "see" effects of anything. Causality is
>>invisible. You can make observations, but you must reason about the theory
>>connecting those observations to their cause.
>
>Been there, done that.....38 years,,,,,,,,,
You know, there's one little itty bitty thing wrong with your "38
years". It's meaningless.
You could be lying about your experience. You could be lying
about your observations. You could be lying about what happened, or
simply misremembering. (Please, demonstrate a minor facility with
critical thought, and don't demand to know if I'm accusing you of
lying.)
Now, scientists have figured that out, and they've come up with
*ALL* kinds of ways of cancelling out both lies and misperceptions.
In toto, it's often referred to as "the scientific method".
It's better than all the whining in the world.
Do you have any evidence utilizing the scientific method?
Hint: Merrow's work was as a journalist. Breggin pretended to
critique a few studies, and has cited studies that directly
contradicted what he cited them for.
Ann
>Would that be a waste of my time Virginia? I asked you why you came to your
>conclusions?
You are wasting everyone's time here on ASAD, why shouldn't someone
waste yours?
>
>Please answer that before we go on.
Please go away so we don't have to go on.
>
>I have talked with many closed minded people, it appears that you are, so why
>waste my time?
Pot kettle black. You are in an attention deficit support group. You
are making baseless attacks on medications that greatly help people.
And your mind is completely open? How sad for you to be so blind.
--
Ann
ann...@thecia.net
Mark Probert
jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
>>From: "Christopher Eliot" Empire...@mediaone.net
>>Date: 06/08/2000 9:55 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>>Message-id: <i0Z%4.43034$Ft1.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>
>>
>>jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
>>
>>> [...] I have seen the effects of Ritalin, probably much more
than you.
>>
>>
>>It is a fallacy to say that you can "see" effects of anything.
Causality is
>>invisible. You can make observations, but you must reason
about the theory
>>connecting those observations to their cause.
>
>Been there, done that.....38 years,,,,,,,,,
>
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
Ommmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years....Ommmmm 38 years.....
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Mark Probert
jdrew...@aol.com (JDrew63929) wrote:
>>From: "J. Clarke" nos...@nospam.nospam
>>Date: 06/08/2000 8:57 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>>Message-id: <39406...@news3.prserv.net>
>>
>>"JDrew63929" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:20000608223145...@ng-mf1.aol.com...
>>> >From: "J. Clarke" nos...@nospam.nospam
>>> >Message-id:
>>>
>>> >But you did not post "facts". You posted links to pages
that might or
>>might
>>> >not contain facts.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well read them again. They were studies. That is facts.
They have been read, re-read, and re-re-read. There are NO
facts, but opinions. You may call them facts, but, calling a
duck a cow still does not provide milk.
>>Nope, no studies there. Studies are published in refereed
journals. You
>>posted no links to such.
>Wrong. Try again. I did indeed post studies.
Sorry, dingy, but you are wrong. There were not studies, just
opinions. Find me a Medline cite of a clinical study that was
published in a peer reviewed journal where Breggin is the author.
Do not come back until you do.
[Shhh...no one tell s/h/it what Medline is.....]
>>> > And half of them were to pages expressing the views of a
>>> >known whacko.
>>>
>>>
>>> This sounds like an opinion. Please prove it.
>>
>>It is not my opinion, it is a general consensus. There is a
service called
>>"deja", accessible from http://www.deja.com. Learn to use it.
>
>
>
>Nice try.....now post some proof.
No, YOU post some real proof, not those lame excuses for a valid
opinion.
Tralalaah
"> Jan
Oh, go for it. You've made enough of a fool of yourself already that you
may as well complete the job.
"
What Jan doesn't realize is that a revelation of hiking in the nude only makes
him more interesting.
Hey -- you suppose he took pics on his last vacation? OK -- who has a good
scanner??? :)
cici_aychar
broadcast; if so, please correct me.
Didn't people get on about the broadcast's misinformation and general lack
of anything scientific so much that PBS apologised to its viewers and
promised to be more careful when choosing programmes to air?
--
CiCi
"Tralalaah" <tral...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000609001315...@ng-ca1.aol.com...
> Mark Treborp said:
>
> ">Well read them again. They were studies. That is facts.
>
Joe Parsons
wrote:
>I could be wrong on this, it has been quite awhile since the Merrow
>broadcast; if so, please correct me.
It was broadcast in October, 1995.
>
>Didn't people get on about the broadcast's misinformation and general lack
>of anything scientific so much that PBS apologised to its viewers and
>promised to be more careful when choosing programmes to air?
That would be a good thing, if they did it. I'm not aware it. Maybe it was
like one of those "erratum" entries in the paper--big story on the front page,
two-line retraction on page 6, beneath the fold. :)
Joe Parsons
==========================================================
Frequently Asked Questions for alt.support.attn-deficit
and other resources for dealing with attention deficit
disorder are at http://www.cyber-mall.com/asad/
Chris Leithiser
>
> In article <00639430...@usw-ex0109-068.remarq.com>,
> yes,virginia <bellecat...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > what is your interest in add? are you a self-appointed
> > savior to any other groups of people with differences you
> > know nothing about?
> >
>
> I like that. Can I use it? Please?
>
"He specialized in giving helpful advice to people who were happier than
_he_ was." --Tom Lehrer
Chris Leithiser
>
> >In article <00639430...@usw-ex0109-068.remarq.com>,
> > yes,virginia <bellecat...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
>
> >> what is your interest in add?
>
>
So, don't.
Mark Probert
<cici_...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>I could be wrong on this, it has been quite awhile since the
Merrow
>broadcast; if so, please correct me.
>
general lack
>of anything scientific so much that PBS apologised to its
viewers and
>promised to be more careful when choosing programmes to air?
>CiCi
I believe you are right. Has Merrow been seen since this yellow
journalism was on?
>"Tralalaah" <tral...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20000609001315...@ng-ca1.aol.com...
>> Mark Treborp said:
>>
>> ">Well read them again. They were studies. That is facts.
>>
>> They were NOT studies. Merrow is not a doctor, but a bit TV
>> producer. Breggin is a demonstrable liar, and had never
>> published a research study in a peer reviewed journal.
>>
>> Try again."
>>
>>
>> If Jan objects to "opinions," then the first thing to take a
dive should
>be
>> Merrow's travesty of journalism.
>>
>> In fact, I think that segment should be used in journalism
classes to
>> demonstrate that honest journalists must not fall in love
with notions and
>> promote them, instead of ... well ... acting like a
professional
>journalist.
>>
>>
>
>
>
yes
"He specialized in giving helpful advice to people who were
happier than _he_ was." --Tom Lehrer
i love that!
i think it says it all, but jan, if you want me to respond
personally, feel free to email me. just don't send me any
bullshit links,ok?
virginia
email address: bell...@hotmail.com
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful