Rational Recovery + Depression
George A. Booth
: I find this whole debate quite amusing. No mention is made of
: scientific research uncovering the evidence that the brains of
: persons with alcoholism are different from those who don't have it.
Cite it.
: To treat a physical disease with group talk support ONLY to me is
: just plain bizarre--it reminds me of the treatment of
: manic-depression (bipolar disorder) before lithium--some persons
: improved with group and individual support but lots didn't.
I'm completely unfamiliar with bipolar disorder.
: Now
: with lithium, carbemazepine, valproic acid, clozapine, and ECT, more
: than 95% of persons have their symptoms--including relapses--under
: control. Group support is an ancillary, not primary, component of
: treatment.
: The first medication that works for alcoholism is naltrexone. It
: will be followed by others. Although AA and RR will exist, it will
: be more of a ancillary treatment than primary. As a primary
: treatment, it will probably go the way the same way that lobotomy
: did in psychiatry.
Comparing AA/RR to a lobotomy? Faith-healing perhaps, but you're
the one promoting the chemical lobotomy.
Derek M
'ali...@netcom.com (Linda Lipinski)' wrote:
>In article <4c0dti$q...@nic.umass.edu>,
>Flashback <sy...@elevator-bbs.com> wrote:
>>
>>Sure. (Sorry about the long quote BTW) - I just wondered where you got
(from
>>what was posted) that denying the existance/power of god would result in
the
>>loss of social position or loss of life. Just curious. *I* don't see
that,
>>but that's me. *I* do believe in God, but if I'd had any reason to
believe
>>that my belief was an "or else" thing when I was coming to believe, I
very
>>much doubt if I ever would have - I LOVE rebelling against any kind of
>>perceived "authority".
>>
>OK, now I gotcha.
>
>What I was trying to say was that denying what a major segment of society
>accepts as fact is not the way to become popular. If society believes in
>god, and you are loudmouthed about not believing in god, then you can
>count on your name being taken off the "A" list. Also, if they are right,
>and if that god gets pissed off at your dismal failure to believe in him,
>then he's likely to yank the rug out from under you, isn't he? After all,
>by definition, he's got the power of life and death over you, right?
Well, if one is still interested in being popular then I guess it does
matter. But I have learned that I cannot live by other peoples standards
and beliefs. I have to find the beliefs that work for me. Again it comes
down to individual belief. I o not believe in a petty jealous insicure
god. I believe in a god that is unconditionally loving and that includes
loving unconditionally those who do not believe in any form of god.
>
>Maybe I was being too subtle for you, or too obvious, and you were looking
for
>subtlety. ;-)
>
>Actually, the "or else" aspects of belief in a higher power in the 12 step
>movement is one of the things that turned me off. To me, the only reason
>to believe in a god is out of love, not fear. I felt like I was being
>threatened with drunkenness if I didn't come to believe.
Here again you are making generalizations. Some people within some 12 step
fellowships believe this way and preach it. But according to NA you do not
have to believe in god in order to work the steps or find some other way to
live a spiritual program. AA is the group that started the crap about "no
human power could restore us but god could and would if he were sought."
In NA we believe that a higher power can be a human power. By definition 2
or more addicts coming together to help each other stay clean is a power
greater than any one addict. And that is a human power.
Peace on the journey...
>-Lin
--
Derek M. dmo...@usa.pipeline.com
sy...@elevator-bbs.com
-=> Quoting ali...@netcom.com to ** All ** <=-
> Actually, the "or else" aspects of belief in a higher power in the 12
> step movement is one of the things that turned me off. To me, the only
> reason to believe in a god is out of love, not fear. I felt like I was
> being threatened with drunkenness if I didn't come to believe.
OK. That makes sense. I guess I just got an entirely differennt
perception of God asI was getting sober. Although I kep being told that I
should choose my own perception of God, I heard from my sponsor (and people
at meetings) that they'd had to discard the God they'd grown up believing
in, and that the God that they believed in now was in no way a punishing
God. I really doubt that I could believe in my childhood God and stay
sober at the same time.
Steve Wilson
---
ş Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 ş
Derek M
'ali...@netcom.com (Linda Lipinski)' wrote:
>> Come now, Lin! To what end would you *wear* a bikini except to play
>>upon that instinctual drive and to turn a head or two?
>
>Yeah, but you've never seen my figure. I'll leave you wondering which way
>heads would be turning. ;-)
>
I am a nudist and am completely comfortable being seen in the nude by
anyone. But I don't do it to arouse anyone. We shouldn't make assumptions
like the one made above. Isn't that like a rapist saying that "she was
asking for it, just look at the way she dresses?"
Peace on the journey...
>
>
>--
trapper
'DMO...@usa.pipeline.com(Derek M)' wrote:
> By definition 2 or more addicts coming together to help each other stay
clean is a power greater than
>any one addict. And that is a human power.
--
David Vorous
Ed Francell, Jr.
I would be glad to cite every study on alcoholism and brain
differences, but that would take months. So I've picked out a few
"choice" abstacts to stimulate your thinking in the hope that you
will further investigate the subject at your local library (if you
have a medical library nearby, that's the best) I have a stupid 25
line limit that I can't figure out how to get beyond, so I'll have
to summarize abstracts where they are to long. This may necessitate
several replies.
Happy reading,
Ed Francell
Ed Francell, Jr.
Basal ganglia/limbic striatal and thalamocortical involvement in
craving and loss of control in alcoholism.
In: J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci (1990 Spring) 2(2):123-44
The authors explore the possible role of basal ganglia/limbic
striatal and thalamocortical circuits in craving and loss of control
in alcohol abuse and dependence. Alcoholics may suffer from a defect
in the neuronal systems within basal ganglia/limbic striatal and
thalamocortical neuronal circuits, especially within the
striatoaccumbal-ventral pallidal portion of this circuit or its
dopaminergic nigrotegmental modulation. Alcoholic craving may result
from a neurophysiologically driven obsession resulting from
overactivity within the fronto-thalamic neuronal loop, and loss of
control of alcohol consumption may be a neurophysiologically driven
compulsion resulting from further impairment of the basal
ganglia/limbic striatal portion of this circuit caused by the acute
dopaminergic effects of intoxication.
(article posted by Ed Francell)
Ed Francell, Jr.
Serotonin and the biochemical genetics of alcoholism: lessons from
studies of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and
Tourette syndrome.
In: Alcohol Alcohol Suppl (1993) 2:237-41
Studies of children with ADHD and Tourette syndrome, and their
families, show that both the patients and their relatives are at
increased risk for alcoholism, and other behavioral disorders.
Defective serotonin metabolism has been implicated in all of these
disorders. Platelet serotonin and blood tryptophan levels are low in
the patients and both parents. Analysis of pedigrees suggest that a
gene or genes capable of producing a pleiotrophic spectrum of
disorders are inherited from both parents (recessive inheritance),
but affected relatives can express some symptoms (dominant
inheritance). This suggests an intermediate semirecessive-
semidominant inheritance of a common gene affecting serotonin
metabolism for ADHD, Tourette syndrome, alcoholism and related
disorders. Tryptophan 2,3 dioxygenase (TDO2) is suggested as a
possible candidate gene.
(posted by Ed Francell)
Ed Francell, Jr.
Implications of recent neuropsychopharmacologic research for
understanding the etiology and development of alcoholism.
In: J Consult Clin Psychol (1994 Dec) 62(6):1116-26
Recent studies in animals and humans have begun to provide insight
into the neuropsychopharmacologic basis of alcohol consumption and
dependence. Studies involving the serotonergic and opioidergic
neurotransmitter systems have shown the most consistent results.
Concurrent nosologic developments have led to the identification of
subtypes of alcoholism on the basis of their clinical features and
patterns of inheritance of alcoholism. These subtypes, which have
implications for both the etiology and development of alcoholism,
have also been linked theoretically to specific neurotransmitter
systems. Consequently, the typologies both provide a hypothetical
basis for selecting specific pharmacotherapies and have implications
for molecular genetic investigation. This article selectively
reviews the literature in these various areas in an effort to
enhance understanding of the etiology and development of alcoholism.
(posted by Ed Francell)
Ed Francell, Jr.
Meta-analysis of P300 amplitude from males at risk for alcoholism.
In: Psychol Bull (1994 Jan) 115(1):55-73
The P3(00) event-related brain potential (ERP) is used to study the
development of alcoholism by comparing males who have a positive
family history of alcoholism with control Ss who have no such
familial history. Meta-analysis indicated that overall, smaller P3
amplitudes were obtained from males with family histories of
alcoholism compared to controls. Moderator analysis indicated that
paradigms using difficult visual tasks yielded the most reliable
effects. Furthermore, no differences in outcomes were obtained among
studies that recruited positive family history Ss exclusively from
among individuals whose father had received treatment for alcoholism
as compared with other studies. These findings are discussed in the
context of using ERPs as an evaluative tool in the study of
psychopathology.
(posted by Ed Francell)
Ed Francell, Jr.
Reducing the desire to drink. Pharmacology and neurobiology.
In: Recent Dev Alcohol (1993) 11:325-44
The past decade has witnessed major advances in understanding of
neural functioning and neurobiological bases of alcohol consumption.
Concurrent with this, a range of exciting investigations have been
conducted on pharmacologic agents that may curb drinking behavior.
Research is reviewed on several promising medications influencing
neurotransmitter and endocrine systems with particular attention to
the serotonergic and opioid systems. Following this overview,
recommendations are offered regarding research methodology to
support future pharmacotherapy trials.
(posted by Ed Francell)
Ed Francell, Jr.
Inverse relationship between CSF TRH concentrations and the TSH
response to TRH in abstinent alcohol-dependent patients.
In: Am J Psychiatry (1991 Nov) 148(11):1586-8
The authors performed the thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH)
stimulation test and measured CSF concentrations of TRH in 13
abstinent alcohol-dependent subjects. They found an inverse
correlation between the thyrotropin (TSH) response to TRH and
endogenous CSF TRH concentrations. This finding supports the
hypothesis that as the concentration of CSF TRH increases, anterior
pituitary TRH receptor density decreases, resulting in a blunted TSH
response to TRH stimulation.
(posted by Ed Francell)
Ed Francell, Jr.
Development of alcoholism in adoptees raised apart from alcoholic
biologic relatives.
In: Arch Gen Psychiatry (1980 May) 37(5):561-3
Male adoptees raised apart from alcoholic biologic parents were
followed up and compared with adoptees of nonalcoholic biologic
parents. Significant associations were found between adoptee
alcoholism and an alcoholic biologic background and between
childhood conduct disorder and the development of alcoholism as an
adult. None of the environmental factors--psychiatric or alcohol
problems in adoptive family, socioeconomic status of the adoptive
family, or exposure to discontinuous mothering as an
infant--predicted adoptee alcoholism. These findings suggest the
importance of a genetic factor in alcoholism and are in accord with
previous work that failed to show an independent effect of an
alcoholic environment in development of adoptee alcoholism.
(posted by Ed Francell)
Ed Francell, Jr.
As you may have noticed, I have cited a small but reasonably
differing sample of research pointing out differences in the
brains/genetics of persons with alcoholism. I could probably post
thousands of articles, but that would take months.
I suggest that take some time out from reading your Big Book and go
to your nearest library and read about some of the research going on
regarding alcoholism. I think you'll see that alcoholism is a
physical disorder of the brain and that for many people, talk is no
more effective in treating it than talk is for treating cancer,
heart disease or diabetes without some kind of medication in
addition. Groups like A.A. do have their merits and strengths, but
for many people, they are not the complete answer to treating
physical disorders.
I hope your mind is open toward new treatments which will include
anti-craving medications for alcoholism so that persons can recover
faster and easier from these difficult disorders.
Ed Francell
Michael D
or in a.r.a which actually references current research.
Which begs a couple of other questions I haven't seen answered
in these ngs either. This may broaden the picture for us, as
the research you mention is of course very specific and has
quite narrowly defined goals.
If you are able to, please give us some insight into the
following:
1 - Is there a single medical definition of alcoholism accepted
by all the specialties and sub-specialties ?
2 - If not, can you give us some detail of the differences ?
3 - What is the current medical opinion on alcoholism having
more than one cause ?
4 - What are the current treatments medicine offers for
obsessive-compulsive disorder ?
4 seems unrelated, but it is the answer to the "What is
alcoholism" question I personally find most accurate.
Michael D, NB, Canada
Fred Louder
but I supose the alternative is 2,500 lines instead of 25. The more you
post, the better off we'll all be, I'm sure.
Fred L.
.....................................
Professor Edgworth, of All Souls', avoided conversational English,
persistently using words and phrases that one expects to meet only in
books. One evening, [T.E.] Lawrence returned from a visit to London,
and Edgeworth met him at the gate. "Was it very caliginous in the
Metropolis?"
"Somewhat caliginous, but not altogether inspissated," Lawrence replied
gravely.
--Robert Graves, *Goodbye to All That*
.....................................
Fred Louder
>I find this whole debate quite amusing. No mention is made of
>scientific research uncovering the evidence that the brains of
> The first medication that works for alcoholism is naltrexone. It
>will be followed by others.
Dear Ed,
Glad to hear you find this amusing, most of us aren't on line for
amusement, and are attempting to use our brains (which may be as
different as fits the facts, I dare say we all enjoy a little variety)
to cope with rather un-funny issues that concern us in an unabashedly real
life, real-time, one-day-at-a-time context.
Do you suppose you could get over your amusement long enough to
post a follow-up explaining what naltrexone is, and how it works? Does it
crawl up the double helix and sit on the gene that makes Fred drink? Does
it simply make alcohol smell like 5-day-old sweat socks? Or can I take
this medication and then drink "like normal people"--get plastered now and
again, yet choose to stay sober for as long as I wish?
Hoping to get my kicks in 1996,
(Happy new year, anyway)
Fred L.
Ed Francell, Jr.
alcohol dependence in 1994. It is a opiod antagonist, that is, it
blocks opiod receptors in the brain. Opiod (I don't think I'm
spelling that right) receptors are implicated in the reward
mechanisms of alcohol.
Naltrexone is normally given for 90 days, then for short periods
therafter, if needed. Not everyone will respond the same way to it.
It is best combined with some type of therapy, either supportive or
problem-solving. The nice thing about naltrexone, is, when it does
work, a relapse often does not become full-blown, requiring acute or
sub-acute detox. Also, when it works well, the feeling of well
being is enhanced, so the desire to drink is less.
Someone once said to me, "the alcoholic's greatest fantasy is being
able to drink regularly and not lose control". I contend it is not
the drinking that is the fantasy, it is having the feeling of
well-being that drinking often results in. If someone could get the
feeling from a safe, inexpensive pill with minimal side effects,
including no motor side effects (which will happen
eventually-naltrexone is a start) why would someone want to buy a
fifth of Vodka to get the same feeling?
Ed Francell
trapper
'mj...@nbnet.nb.ca (Michael D)' wrote:
>If you are able to, please give us some insight into the following:
>
>1 - Is there a single medical definition of alcoholism accepted by all the
>specialties and sub-specialties ?
not around until a religious group in the early 1930's came up with it. It
was not a medical term until then. I prefer the term "chemical dependancy."
>2 - If not, can you give us some detail of the differences ?
are an addict. I say that if you see your drug usage as causing a problem
in your life - then you have a problem. Many will lie to others about thier
problems, but it is hard to lie to yourself.
>3 - What is the current medical opinion on alcoholism having more than one
cause ?
as many causes for drug addiction as there are addicts.
>4 - What are the current treatments medicine offers for
obsessive-compulsive disorder ?
wonders for OCD's. But I would not relate OCD with a chemical dependancy.
They are two entirely different problems.
David Vorous
Michael D
Thanks for your opinions, I appreciate this. However Ed gave
specific citations in his other posts, and I wondered if he had
something similar for the questions I asked.. I am interested
in research and medical opinion published by medical
professionals.
Take care.
Michael D, NB, Canada
sy...@elevator-bbs.com
-=> Quoting 76604.2161@compuserve to ** All ** <=-
> Happy reading,
> Ed Francell
You're familiar with and can cite every study on alcoholism and brain
differences that's been done everywhere by everyone? Damn.
Derek M
'Ed Francell, Jr. <76604...@CompuServe.COM>' wrote:
Hello Ed,
How are you doin? Just wanted to comment on this, and please remember
that I am only sharing personal opinions and experience, not telling anyone
to stop doing what might be working for them.
>problem-solving. The nice thing about naltrexone, is, when it does
>work, a relapse often does not become full-blown, requiring acute or
>sub-acute detox.
not mean that one is actually worse than another. Depends on the
perspective of the person relapsing. To me there is no difference in a
person who relapses for one night then desides to stop again, simply
because they see where they are headed again. Or the person who relapses
and loses everything short of their life. Using is using, drugs are drugs,
just like you are either pregnant or not pregnent, no such thing as a
little pregnant.
Also, when it works well, the feeling of well
>being is enhanced, so the desire to drink is less.
>Someone once said to me, "the alcoholic's greatest fantasy is being
>able to drink regularly and not lose control". I contend it is not
>the drinking that is the fantasy, it is having the feeling of
>well-being that drinking often results in. If someone could get the
>feeling from a safe, inexpensive pill with minimal side effects,
>including no motor side effects (which will happen
>eventually-naltrexone is a start) why would someone want to buy a
>fifth of Vodka to get the same feeling?
>
a bottle? Sounds like substituting one drug for another. My sense of well
being no longer comes from chemical enhancement. It comes from living life
differently than I used to. Addiction is not just about taking chemicals,
it is also about living a destructive obssesive and compulsive lifestyle.
At least that is what I have found to be true in my case. When I stopped
using I found that the behavior was still there. Changing that behavior
has been a long process that is still continuing but it is that very change
that has allowed me to feel a sense of well being.
Yes for some medication is necessary. But unless one suffers from a
chemical imbalance resulting in A dual personality disorder,
schitzophrenia<sp?> or some other illness, I would suggest trying to stay
clean with out chemical therapy. Give it some time and if this approach
does not work then one can choose the alternative. But one will probably
be quite pleasently surprised if they do try it without substituting one
drug for another.
The very statement that you made above about this drug causing a "sense of
well being" in the person taking it suggests that this is a drug that
alters the mood and personality of the user, the very thing that we were
doing with our drug of choice. That is a big warning sign for me.
Peace on the journey...
--
Dawn Petersen
want alcohol - it just makes your body reject it once taken. So, you'd
really have to be in a recovery process for it to work - you'd choose to
take it or not.
Dawn
In article <DKE8x...@cix.compulink.co.uk>, pee...@cix.compulink.co.uk
("Ms Pat Winstanley") wrote:
> Hi Ed,
>
> > The first medication that works for alcoholism is naltrexone. It
> > will be followed by others.
>
> Not heard of this. What is it, and what does it do?
>
> Pat
>
Klaus
>To George "AA" Booth:
>Ed Francell
There is considerable evidence that NALTREXONE is EFFECTIVE in REDUCING THE
CRAVING for alcohol. The MECHANISM by which it accomplishes this is UNCLEAR:
Swift RM, Whelihan W, Kuznetsov O, Buongiorno G, Hsuing H
Naltrexone-induced alterations in human ethanol intoxication.
Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Brown University Medical
School, Providence, RI.
Am J Psychiatry 1994 Oct;151(10):1463-7
Article Number: UI94379254
ABSTRACT:
OBJECTIVE: Outpatient clinical trials with an opioid antagonist, naltrexone,
found that this agent reduces relapse drinking in abstinent alcoholics. It
is unknown which aspects of intoxication may be affected by naltrexone. The
authors investigated the effects of naltrexone on several subjective and
objective measures of ethanol intoxication. METHOD: In a double-blind
crossover study, 19 nonalcoholic drinkers received a regimen of naltrexone,
50 mg p.o., or placebo on two different occasions, each time followed by a
standard, intoxicating dose of ethanol. Subjective and objective measures of
intoxication including mood, physical sensations, performance changes, and
ethanol pharmacokinetics were determined. As a control for naltrexone
effects, 12 additional subjects received naltrexone or placebo followed by a
non-intoxicating, "placebo" dose of ethanol. RESULTS: Naltrexone augmented
certain sedative and discriminant effects of ethanol and reduced positive
reinforcing effects without affecting psychomotor performance or ethanol
pharmacokinetics. Naltrexone had minimal effects in subjects receiving
placebo ethanol. CONCLUSIONS: The data are compatible with the clinical
findings and suggest that the reduction in ethanol consumption by alcoholics
following naltrexone administration may occur because of greater subjective
intoxication, greater aversive effects, or less positive reinforcement from
ethanol.
There are some date to suggest that alcoholism is mediated by a faulty serotonin
metabolism, but THERE ARE NO conclusive data to suggest that alcoholism is
purely "a physical disorder of the brain", as suggested by Ed.
Volpicelli JR, Clay KL, Watson NT, O'Brien CP
Naltrexone in the treatment of alcoholism: predicting response to
naltrexone.
Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, USA.
J Clin Psychiatry 1995;56 Suppl 7():39-44
Article Number: UI95403301
ABSTRACT:
The pooled results of 99 subjects from our Veterans Affairs population show
that naltrexone-treated subjects had a greater reduction in alcohol craving,
number of drinking days, and alcoholic relapse rates when compared with
placebo-treated subjects. Based on our findings and results from other
double-blind trials of naltrexone, we conclude that naltrexone is a safe and
useful adjunct in the rehabilitation of alcohol-dependent patients.
Increased baseline levels of psychological distress and craving as well as
higher levels of somatic distress, anxiety, phobic anxiety, and
obsessive-compulsive symptoms predicted an increased number of drinking days
during the study. Significant interactions between naltrexone treatment,
initial craving, and somatic distress suggest that naltrexone may be useful
for subjects who present with high levels of craving and somatic symptoms.
Klaus Gierke
trapper
'mj...@nbnet.nb.ca (Michael D)' wrote:
>Hi David.
>
>Thanks for your opinions, I appreciate this. However Ed gave specific
>citations in his other posts, and I wondered if he had something similar
for
>the questions I asked.. I am interested in research and medical opinion
>published by medical professionals.
authenticity though. I would really appreciate it if there is anyone that
could let me know where I could find copies of the JAMA that are this old.
"The Big Book" of Alcoholics Anonymous
As Reviewed In
The Journal of the American Medical Association
The seriousness of the psychiatric and social problem represented by
addiction to alcohol is generally underestimated by those not intimately
familiar with the tragedies in the families of victims or the resistance
addicts offer to any effective treatment.
Many psychiatrists regard addiction to alcohol as having a more
pessimistic prognosis than schizophrenia. For many years the public was
beguiled into believing that short courses of enforced abstinence and
catharsis in "institutes" and "rest homes" would do the trick, but now that
the failure of such temporizing has become common knowledge, a considerable
number of other forms of quack treatment have spring up.
The book under review is a curious combination of organizing propaganda
and religious exhortation. It is in no sense a scientific book, although it
is introduced by a letter from a physician who claims to know some of the
anonymous contributors who have been "cured" of addiction to alcohol and
have joined together in an organization which would save other addicts by a
kind of religious conversion. The book contains instructions as to how to
intrigue the alcoholic addict into acceptance of divine guidance in place
of alcohol in terms strongly reminiscent of Dale Carnegie and the adherents
of the Buchman ("Oxford") movement.
The one valid thing in the book is the recognition of the seriousness of
addiction to alcohol. Other than this, the book has no scientific merit or
interest.
(Reprinted from the Journal of the American Medical Association, October
14, 1939.)
Ms Pat Winstanley
> not
> want alcohol - it just makes your body reject it once taken. So, you'd
> really have to be in a recovery process for it to work - you'd choose to
> take it or not.
Ah... like Antabuse then?
Pat
Ed Francell, Jr.
>is a drug thatalters the mood and personality of the user, the
>very thing that we weredoing with our drug of choice. That is a
Many, not all, alcoholics are not very knowledgable about
medications. They think that all psychotropic medications are
addictive like Valium and refuse to consider taking them. The truth
is, many psychotropics ARE NOT ADDICTIVE AT ALL. Prozac is a good
example. I have seen some alcoholics (not all, mind you)
successfully take meds like Prozac and reduce or eliminate relapses.
In a general sense, Prozac restores a deficit of the chemical
serotonin in the brain like insulin restores a deficit of insulin in
the pancreas. True, some persons will regard taking a pill as a
weakness and would rather battle alcholism without them, however,
this opinion is becoming as silly as saying that taking insulin is a
weakness for a diabetic. As medications are used more widely for
addiction treatment (and their are medications in testing for
cocaine dependence, benzodiazepine dependence, and more for alcohol
dependence) it will be regarded as a strength.
By the way, Schizophrenia is not a "split personality"-that is a
dissociative disorder. Next time you're in the bookstore browse
"Surviving Schizophrenia" by E. Fuller Torrey, M.D. (green cover) to
learn a little about Schizophrenia.
- Ed Francell
dmo...@usa.pipeline.com
'Ed Francell, Jr. <76604...@CompuServe.COM>' wrote:
>In a previous post, Derek writes:
>>is a drug thatalters the mood and personality of the user, the
>>very thing that we weredoing with our drug of choice. That is a
>>big warning sign for me.
>
>Many, not all, alcoholics are not very knowledgable about
>medications. They think that all psychotropic medications are
>addictive like Valium and refuse to consider taking them. The truth
>is, many psychotropics ARE NOT ADDICTIVE AT ALL. Prozac is a good
>example.
shcitzaphrenia or were talking about taking meds like anabuse to control
using. I took anabuse and still used alcohol. I took prozac too when I
was diagnosed as being clinically depressed, while going through withdrawl.
After the withdrawl they took me off of the prozac because they saw how it
was screwing me up. There is a difference between taking meds simply to
substitute them for another drug and taking them for a chemically treatable
illness. Oh, by the way, I do like your analogy about diabetes. I am a
diabetic and I take meds for a heart problem as well. Taking meds for
ligitamit reasons is not unknown to me, just as taking them for a bogus
reason is not unknown to me. All I was talking about was that it would be
better to try abstinance before looking for a chemical slution to chemical
dependancy. Makes sense to me and did not require a rude flame as a reply.
But to each their own.
Peace on the journey....
--
Derek M. dmo...@usa.pipeline.com
Linda Lipinski
Ed Francell, Jr. <76604...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>
>Derek - Antabuse is an aversion treatment - it has nothing to do
>with addressing the underlying deficit in alcoholism. It causes a
>subjectively unpleasant reaction when mixed with alcohol. New
>treatments for alcoholism that block specific receptors are not
>aversion treatments.
> Remember, in my original post I said that Prozac works for SOME
>alcoholics - a minority. I have never heard of Prozac given to
>persons during detoxification - like you apparently were.
Every now and then, some brilliant person thinking about his 12th step
decided that his master's degree could be put to good use by demonstrating
to the world that the reason treatment is so rarely effective is that
it doesn't adequately address the *real* issue behind addiction "XXX".
He then proceeds to transform his local treatment center into a vale
of vegetarianism, zen meditation, mega-vitamin therapy, or whatever.
Same with Prozac. Someone reads an article in Psychology Today that
says that 80% of all recovering people score as clinically depressed
on some scale, and he decided to cure the problem. Everyone that comes
in for detox gets the prozac, at least until his supervisor hears about
it.
--
-Lin
ceri howard
>Ed writes: <snipped>
>
>> But I hope you will accept - and I
>>would like to see you post - that there are many individuals out
>>there who need a somatic treatment (medication) to help them achieve
>>abstinence just as there are those that can achieve abstinence
>>without medication.
>
>With regard to the medications that were being discussed (naltrexone and
>antabuse), propagandizing people into believing they NEED these medications to
>achieve abstinence is just another put down of human capabilities.
Hi there! Did you read what Ed wrote?? He said that **some** people
need medication, not everyone. I would hardly call that "propagandizing
people into believeing they need these medications."
> Sort of like
>saying you NEED to believe it is a "disease" so that you won't feel guilty-- so
>that you can then stop drinking. Caveat emptor -- let the buyer (into this sort
>of philosophy of helplessness) beware.
>
>Once it is understood that there is no absolute NEED for medications and a bunch (snip)
What proof do you have of this?? Is this just based on emotional
rhetoric? Please look at what you are saying and try to understand that
what many of us are saying is that SOMETIMES, not all, people need
medication to help themselves with an addiction.
So, just out of curiousity, do you also think that people who are
depressed should just think themselves out of it?? That schizophrenics
should not take medication because they are faking it? That bipolar
depressives, are just whinning?? If only they would try harder, they
would be better??? It's the same for depressives, not everyone needs
the medication, but some people are quite helped & improved by it.
It's the same for other problems. Sometimes, we need a bit of help,
medically to get better, sometimes we don't. That's an individual
concern, and should be decided by each individual as the problems arise.
>Regards, Dave
>- Go ahead, get hungry; get angry; get lonely; get tired. These common forms of
>human experience can't "jump out and get you."
Wanna bet they can?
-Ceridwyn (who believes that only an individual can decide what is best
for themselves)
David C. Hester
> But I hope you will accept - and I
>would like to see you post - that there are many individuals out
>there who need a somatic treatment (medication) to help them achieve
>abstinence just as there are those that can achieve abstinence
>without medication.
With regard to the medications that were being discussed (naltrexone and
antabuse), propagandizing people into believing they NEED these medications to
achieve abstinence is just another put down of human capabilities. Sort of like
saying you NEED to believe it is a "disease" so that you won't feel guilty-- so
that you can then stop drinking. Caveat emptor -- let the buyer (into this sort
of philosophy of helplessness) beware.
Once it is understood that there is no absolute NEED for medications and a bunch
of other supposed NEEDS for recovery, then one might be wise to avail themselves
of whatever is available (including medications) that one finds helpful until
such time as the cost/benefits of depending on these assistive measures becomes
a liability.
Linda Lipinski
Robert A. Liss <rl...@umabnet.ab.umd.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 8 Jan 1996, David C. Hester wrote:>
>>
>> With regard to the medications that were being discussed (naltrexone and
>> antabuse), propagandizing people into believing they NEED these
>> medications to achieve abstinence is just another put down of
>> human capabilities. Sort of like saying you NEED to believe it
>> is a "disease" so that you won't feel guilty-- so that you can
>> then stop drinking. Caveat emptor -- let the buyer (into this sort
>> of philosophy of helplessness) beware.
>>
>> Once it is understood that there is no absolute NEED for medications and a
>> bunch of other supposed NEEDS for recovery, then one might be wise to
>> these assistive measures becomes a liability.
>
>diabetics to take insulin. After all if some diabetics use their "human
>capabilities" they can control their blood sugar by diet alone. Because
>some can acomplish this, should you condem others who cannot. I am glad
>that you have been able to be so strong and successful. Does that mean
>that you donot consider the possibility that others are not so
>fortunate. Must anyone not as strong as you be considered a moral or
>human weakling? Sorry if this sounds like I am putting you down. I just
>think you should be more generous in face of the facts.
>
>Bob
>
Bob, if I lock you up in a small room and do not allow you insulin if you
are a diabetic, you will die. If you are an alcoholic and I deprive you
of your antabuse, you will not. Ditto Naltrexone. If you an alcoholic
and you choose to drink again, there is no guarantee that you will die.
Well, except that eventually we will all die, and if you are an alcoholic
someone will say that it was your alcoholism that killed you.
--
-Lin
Gary Ensminger
>
>
>With regard to the medications that were being discussed (naltrexone
medications to achieve abstinence is just another put down of human
capabilities.
:::: "propogandizing" seems to indicate an attitude already formed. Is
it "just another put down of human capabilities" to "propogandize" that
people can't quit on their own? Many think so.
Sort of like saying you NEED to believe it is a "disease" so that you
won't feel guilty-- so that you can then stop drinking.
:::: Oh, I think the disease identification means more to debaters than
to alcoholics....although it would seem to make sense that more people
would seek help for a disease than they would some sort of "lack of
willpower" or moral failure. If "disease" doesn't suit your ideas,
that seems to be your business and if it does, that seems to be your
business too. The reality is that it has been considered a "disease"
by institutions and professions that seem to matter. People can beat
this dead horse as long as they like, however.
Caveat emptor -- let the buyer (into this sort
>of philosophy of helplessness) beware.
>
::: Beware of what? Alcoholics are either looking for help or they are
not. If they are looking for help, who cares what it's called...if
not, it doesn't matter anyway. I get the impressions that because you
don't like this concept, there is something bad in store for those who
do....is that right?
>Once it is understood that there is no absolute NEED for medications
and a bunch of other supposed NEEDS for recovery, then one might be
wise to avail themselves of whatever is available (including
medications) that one finds helpful until such time as the
cost/benefits of depending on these assistive measures becomes
>a liability.
::: "absolute" is pretty strong. When someone claims to know precisely
or absolutely something, I am interested in how that can be
demonstrated without fail. You seem to think that alcoholics who come
in for help are some sort of decision making, evaluating apparatus.
Personally, I see it like one who goes to the hospital for surgery or
treatment for a life threatening accident or illness---I'm going to
turn myself over to the experts or professionals and do what they
say...maybe later, as I get better, I will make some of my own
decisions or do an analysis. (I get the impressions from your post and
sometimes, a few others, that deciding to go to recovery for alcoholism
requires a lot of research, analysis, comparisons--you know the smart
shopper--and my personal experience says that's not the case.)
Gary
Gary Ensminger
writes:
>decided that his master's degree could be put to good use by
demonstrating to the world that the reason treatment is so rarely
effective is that it doesn't adequately address the *real* issue behind
addiction "XXX".
:::: The crowd is bigger than that, Lin. I have seen more "expertise"
on alcoholism than I have on football (for example). Besides, everyone
knows it takes a PhD, any PhD will do. In any case, it appears to be
one hell of a problem to solve, wouldn't you say?
Someone reads an article in Psychology Today that
>says that 80% of all recovering people score as clinically depressed
>on some scale, and he decided to cure the problem. Everyone that
comes in for detox gets the prozac, at least until his supervisor hears
about it.
:::: Easy Lin. I made fun of a guy who quoted an article in
"Psychology Today" a while ago and got my come uppance. I guess it
mattters who writes it.
Anti depressants have come in for some bashing (when it hits print, it
stirs proponents and opponents--sells, as they say). I think more than
Psych Today have found some correlation (although correlations doesn't
mean the same thing as "cause") between alcoholism and depression. Of
course, alcoholic is, after all, a depressant, so one might figure that
10-40 years of use and over use might cause *some* depression. So how
do you treat depression, nowadays. With an anti-depressant? Now, I
turned out to be a life long depressant type of the mood swinging
variety. So about 4 years ago, in one of those inert periods I go
through, I went to a doctor and she prescribed Zoloft...and you know,
it worked real well for me. Now the depression may or may not have
been linked to my problem with alcohol, I'll probably never know for
sure but I do know that a seratonin deficiency was relieved and it
produced some very good results for me. A few of my family noticed it
after about a week or so and claimed they didn't have to walk on egg
shells around me any more.
Gary
Robert A. Liss
>
> achieve abstinence is just another put down of human capabilities. Sort of like
> saying you NEED to believe it is a "disease" so that you won't feel guilty-- so
> of philosophy of helplessness) beware.
>
> of other supposed NEEDS for recovery, then one might be wise to avail themselves
> of whatever is available (including medications) that one finds helpful until
> such time as the cost/benefits of depending on these assistive measures becomes
> a liability.
From your logic, I would extrapolate that there is no absolute need for
diabetics to take insulin. After all if some diabetics use their "human
capabilities" they can control their blood sugar by diet alone. Because
some can acomplish this, should you condem others who cannot. I am glad
that you have been able to be so strong and successful. Does that mean
that you donot consider the possibility that others are not so
fortunate. Must anyone not as strong as you be considered a moral or
human weakling? Sorry if this sounds like I am putting you down. I just
think you should be more generous in face of the facts.
Bob
P.S. I guess I have nothing better to do cooped up by the weather
John J. Gwynn
>To me, alt.recovery is a marketplace for ideas -- a forum where all are
>free to present their views, criticize those they disagree with, and hold
>to the ones they choose for themselves. Pathologizing dissent (i.e.,
>accusing those who disagree with one's beliefs of being ego[tistically]-driven
>and frightened is unlikely to deter these ideas from being proclaimed. Nor, in
>the final analysis, do I think you would want that to happen.
>Regards, Dave
>- "Whatever claims reverence risks ridicule." C.S. Lewis
To which I must agree wholeheartedly.
JohnG
Raven Tompkins
>To me, alt.recovery is a marketplace for ideas -- a forum where all are
>free to present their views, criticize those they disagree with, and
hold
>to the ones they choose for themselves. Pathologizing dissent (i.e.,
>accusing those who disagree with one's beliefs of being
ego[tistically]-driven
>and frightened is unlikely to deter these ideas from being proclaimed.
Nor, in>the final analysis, do I think you would want that to happen.
David,
Well, if I didn't want the exchange of ideas and differing approaches to
recovery I'd go off to alt.recovery.na or alt.recovery.aa. I like learning
how different people do this. There's a difference between saying hey
this is what works for me and claiming to know how everyone else looks
at alcoholism and that it's wrong.
There may be people who need the disease concept to relieve guilt, I
don't know. I do know that not all of us do. You talk in your post about
the views people chose for themselves. I'd venture to say that for me
and others on this newgroups that it's not a view, it's a way of life
and the only one that has any effect on our ability to be functoinal,
growing human beings.
There are alot of things on this newsgroup that I don't agree with and
some that I've tried and they didn't work for me. I didn't hear you say
anything about what works for you. All I heard was a proclamation having
to do with people who believe the disease concept being guilt ridden.
Well okay, how does that work to make your life better? HOw does that
translate into daily living beyond being a basis to criticize how others
think?
When I get into criticizing the way others think while being unwilling
to offer any constructive alternatives or share anything about my own
life it's when I am afraid that I am less than, not good enough and it's
a way for me to throw some ego out there and try to feel better.
So what are you into? What does work for you?
Hugs,
Raven
ceri howard
>Derek,
>
>I was just wondering, I have been having problems with my moods, and
>levels of happiness (heavy sarcasm - what happiness?) , so I was just
>curious, about what you think about meds for depression. (I need
>feedback) I will make up my own mind on the matter, but I need some
>advice as well.
>
>I am asking because I am considering taking such medication (tried
>Prozac, yuckkkyyy, did not help) thinking of Effexor ??, or some such
>med, because I am not having a good or successful time coping. My
>partner thinks that it's because all of the past 3 years has finally
>caught up with me (I think it goes back to 7 years, when all of my using
>started!), and my body, mind & sould are saying, hey F-off, we want a
>break. While I try to assure my body & inc that all is well (hey, I have
>a job, great lover, friends, school), the reality is that I am screwing
>up in school. I don't want to be in school, I am realising, but if I
>don't go now, 1: I will not have any money left over to go back next
>year, 2: I won't have a degree so maybe I'll get stuck working at a
>Mc-job (no offense intended). I feel that if I don't finish my year with
>all of my credits, then I'm a big f-up, and don't deserve to live. What
>an f-ed up idea, eh? I hate caring about societal pressures, and yet, in
>my life, I have picked up that if I don't get my degree then I'm a baaad
>person & will be relegated the the nether world of horrible jobs that no
>one wants. Furthermore, I feel that I will be a failure. Silly, but
>that's where I'm at.
>
>Personally, I'd rather get a reasonable job & write my book (which I have
>been doing over the last 6 months (even went to Europe for research!), so
>the book is not an idle "dream", it's my goal. I know what I want to be,
>so why aren't I just doing it??? I find it hard to go outside of the
>norm of society (getting my degree), when all I want to do is pursue my
>writing. I am working on not caring about such things (societal
>pressures).
>
>Hmmm, I don't know. I think that I hang out with too many high achievers
>& I am making myself miserable because of their achievements & what I
>consider to be my lack thereof.
>
>Thanks for listening, you have been a lot of help to me!
>
>Take care & know that I am here to listen to you as well.
>
>-Ceridwyn (sitting in her winter wonder-where-I-am-land).
>
Raven Tompkins
> I have picked up that if I don't get my degree then I'm a baaad
> person & will be relegated the the nether world of horrible jobs that no
> one wants. Furthermore, I feel that I will be a failure. Silly, but
> that's where I'm at.
>
not silly-that's exactly what most of us told. When I got into recovery
I'd been kicked out of the university for failing two semesters of
classes due to failing to show up for class. I went back after a year
with the intention of completing a double major in philosophy and fine
arts.
I am happy to say today that I am a college dropout. I quit, although
doing it scared me alot, because the piece of paper wasn't important to
me. It was important to my parents, society, etc but I was the one
spending all the time chasing it.
> Personally, I'd rather get a reasonable job & write my book (which I have
> been doing over the last 6 months (even went to Europe for research!), so
> the book is not an idle "dream", it's my goal. I know what I want to be,
> so why aren't I just doing it??? I find it hard to go outside of the
> norm of society (getting my degree), when all I want to do is pursue my
> writing. I am working on not caring about such things (societal
> pressures)
>
Do it! Do it! DO it! Go Ceri! My dream is to someday be a working
writer. Since I dropped out of school I've never worked in McDonalds.
I've done farm work, cooked in restaurants, worked as a tech in a
treatment center and worked in a green house. Right now I do Unix stuff
for Indiana University, the school I dropped out of. I get a twisted
sense of amusement out of that.
During all of this I have written and written and written. I've done
some things to work on shfting my external sense of value and self
esteem from what pays me rent to my writing. Which is really damn hard
as whenever some one asks "what do you do?" it's the job they want to
know about and rate you based on. I've moved to saying I'm a writer when
people ask me that. At times it feels pretentious and I feel stupid, but
it is what I am. The job that pays the rent isn't that important to me.
It does pay the bills and I'm grateful for it, but it's just my day gig.
The writing is what comes from my soul.
And I've seen myself get better too. This past summer I had my first
essay come out in a book-a real live book and they paid me for it too!!!
That was another first. It wasn't much but everything I've had published
in the past I got paid in copies of the publication.
I've been working on a novel for two years now and have a little over
100 pages of it in almost final draft. A friend of mine, who is also
working in a novel, and I get together once a week and go over each
others stuff. She's pretty much gone the same route I have. She has a
degree in journalism and is driving a bus and writing.
> Hmmm, I don't know. I think that I hang out with too many high achievers
> & I am making myself miserable because of their achievements & what I
> consider to be my lack thereof.
>
> Thanks for listening, you have been a lot of help to me!
>
> Take care & know that I am here to listen to you as well.
I will no doubt take you up on that offer
>
> -Ceridwyn (sitting in her winter wonder-where-I-am-land).
Hugs,
Raven
John J. Gwynn
>Personally, I'd rather get a reasonable job & write my book (which I have
>been doing over the last 6 months (even went to Europe for research!), so
>the book is not an idle "dream", it's my goal. I know what I want to be,
>so why aren't I just doing it??? I find it hard to go outside of the
>norm of society (getting my degree), when all I want to do is pursue my
>writing. I am working on not caring about such things (societal
>pressures).
I don't think the pressure can be wholly attributed to "societal
pressures." Clearly you are the source of some of that pressure as
well. To the extent that you believe, really believe, that failing to
finish the degree this year is a "failure." What I mean is that even
though you state your unequivocal awareness of such social (external)
pressures and make a conscious decision not to let them influence you,
there remains a part of you (internal) that feels this as failure.
It is my experience that the energy required to manage such
emotionally complex dynamics, in my case, turns out to be greater than
the energy required to "just do it" as the saying goes. College can
sometimes come down to just jumping through the requisite hoops like a
trained seal.
But hey, when I graduated I wore a huge black gown that made me look
like a giant walrus (I was quite a bit heavier than I am now.) I
attended the ceremony with my (now ex) wife and oldest daughter.
Looking at pictures of that day I can see the triumph in my eyes and
remember the inexpressible feelings as none of my family were there.
This degree thus drawing a line in the sand separating me from my
family and friends as I moved toward the unknown... You see, where I
came from a high school diploma was a monumental acheivement. The
quality of even that acheivement has deteriorated to a horrifying and
stark extent.
>Hmmm, I don't know. I think that I hang out with too many high achievers
>& I am making myself miserable because of their achievements & what I
>consider to be my lack thereof.
I was recently thinking about how valuable friends can be,
particularly friends who, by example, inspire me to greater things.
There are things about poverty that transcend the economic realities,
creating emotional and spiritual deprivation.
>-Ceridwyn (sitting in her winter wonder-where-I-am-land).
Still snowing in New England!
JohnG
Gary Ensminger
>
>It is my experience that the energy required to manage such
>emotionally complex dynamics, in my case, turns out to be greater than
>the energy required to "just do it" as the saying goes. College can
>sometimes come down to just jumping through the requisite hoops like a
>trained seal.
>
::: It is, at that. A willingness to do as you are instructed is a big
part. Doing (he says noting his own contradiction), I think is always
superior to thinking.
>Looking at pictures of that day I can see the triumph in my eyes and
>remember the inexpressible feelings as none of my family were there.
>This degree thus drawing a line in the sand separating me from my
>family and friends as I moved toward the unknown...
::: Funny, John. I graduated from the University of Minnesota, and my
wife, children, and her family were there. None of mine were. That
event seemed to mark a turning point in my life too. I was "in my own
world." I think you know what I mean.
You see, where I
>came from a high school diploma was a monumental acheivement. The
>quality of even that acheivement has deteriorated to a horrifying and
>stark extent.
::: That may say more about age than place. It used to be a big deal
where I was from too, but that was the 50's and that was Arkansas delta
cotton country. I left town the morning after graduation.
Gary......
Ed Francell, Jr.
>Bob, if I lock you up in a small room and do not allow you insulin
>if you are a diabetic, you will die. If you are an alcoholic and
>I deprive youof your antabuse, you will not. Ditto Naltrexone.
>If you an alcoholic and you choose to drink again, there is no
>guarantee that you will die. Well, except that eventually we will
>all die, and if you are an alcoholicsomeone will say that it was
>your alcoholism that killed you.
Well, locking someone up in a small room is one way to look at it.
However, if we lock persons with insulin-dependent diabetes (not all
persons with diabetes need insulin) in a room (assuming there is
food and water in there) with all the insulin they wanted, they
would not die (in your simplistic reasoning). However, if we locked
a person with the most severe forms of alcoholism in a small room
with all the alcohol they wanted, they would die (again, assuming
food or water). The latter situation has been replicated with
specially bred alcoholic rats and certainly would happen with
humans, if the experiment was ethical.
Ed Francell
ceri howard
>It (my degree) was important to my parents, society, etc but I was the one spending all the time chasing it.
>During all of this I have written and written and written. I've done
>some things to work on shfting my external sense of value and self
>esteem from what pays me rent to my writing. Which is really damn hard
>as whenever some one asks "what do you do?" it's the job they want to
>know about and rate you based on. I've moved to saying I'm a writer when
>people ask me that. At times it feels pretentious and I feel stupid, but
>it is what I am.
I know what you mean. I am trying to say that I am a writer as well. I
am still doing my research on my book, I still am spending $ on buying
books to do my research as well. I can't wait to have it done, it will
mean more to me than any degree could ever mean. This is my baby, my
creation, and I love writing it! I am working at a real estate office to
pay the bills while I'm in school & then will probably go back to the
gov't (nice $, but really BORRRRRRRIIINNNGGG) or back to a company I used
to freelance edit for. Wait & see, wait & see.
>
>And I've seen myself get better too. This past summer I had my first
>essay come out in a book-a real live book and they paid me for it too!!!
>That was another first. It wasn't much but everything I've had published
>in the past I got paid in copies of the publication.
That's great! What a sense of joy that must have been for you. I used
to publish my own history "zine" which went out across my province, not a
big mailing list, but I did charge $12/yr which people actually paid!
Mostly it paid for itself, but I loved publishing & editing it.
>
>I've been working on a novel for two years now and have a little over
>100 pages of it in almost final draft. A friend of mine, who is also
>working in a novel, and I get together once a week and go over each
>others stuff. She's pretty much gone the same route I have. She has a
>degree in journalism and is driving a bus and writing.
>
Yes, a friend of mine who is a teacher, has just finished her opus after
5 yrs of writing it (but she did get 2 degrees during this time, super
snide & jokingly sarcastic "bitch" muttered by me at this point! :) ).
Me, I am nowhere near finished, but I am enjoying getthing there. Last
year I went to France & England to visit the sites where my character
lived and died. She was a 12th century queen and was quite the
hell-raiser. The buildings were equisite, sigh. My degree is in medieval
history, so I found the entire trip very pleasing, and spritually
fulfilling.
Thanks for sharing about your writing. I feel like I'm part of a nice
community filled with people such as yourself. My community is made up
of many different places and people & I'm very glad to have met you &
really enjoy getting to know you. Let me know when you will be having
more things published, I'm cheering for you!
Abientot chere ami,
-Ceridwyn
Gary Ensminger
>
>>>
>One important point is if this condition is persistent. I have little
>knowledge & understanding of depression (can we call it inappropriate
>pessimism? ;~) ) and I think you could benefit by talking to someone
>who does.
::: Did someone call? I would say (again) that depression is best
handled by doctors. However, in the interest of perhaps
identification, let's try this: First, depression is not a bad word..
it is a condition which exists. It is often no fun, but it does have
the advantage of experiencing thoughts which wouldn't occur except
under those circumstances, so in essence, you get another look at
yourself. It can be interesting if one can manage to understand that
it is not usually something one can control by will power, attitude, or
reciting catchy phrases. If a catchy phrase pulls you out of
depression, there probably is a good chance you are mis-diagnosed. You
were probably suffering from a bad attitude which is separate and
distinct from depression.
In my personal experience, depression can last for a short time or a
long time (insert values, I didn't always keep track but know that
anyway). Getting an understanding and a feeling for when depression is
upon you will help you deal with it. That is, depression becomes an
"it", another facet of yourself which you can observe. That is a whole
nother topic, by the way, but observing oneself or facets of oneself is
a genuine asset to not only recovery, but to just general living. We
seem to have this capacity (although many don't use it) to "back off"
from ourselves. To view ourselves. Let's put it this way. When you
talk to yourself, didn't it ever occur that the voice talking and the
heart listening were not in the same place. It's tough to describe,
you almost have to be there. Nonetheless, it is a real phenomena.
You can interpret it in many ways to suit your desires, I suppose. I
like to think that there is actually more than one of me and that there
is a me (or a significant part of me) which is sane, rational,
understanding, objective, grandly intuitive, wise, and compassionate.
Some people refer to it as their conscience, but I think it does more
than give you a twinge about right and wrong. It sort of observes all
these things that go on inside your body and mind and can actually
intervene in some cases. It certainly is and should be the final
arbiter of acts taken. Does this make any sense?
Depression. Oh yes. Depression apparently has a range of
manifestations from manic-depressive states to mood swings to even a
bad hair day apparently. I would say that mood swings are a prevalent
variety. Mood is, it seems, greatly affected by chemical balances or
imbalances in the body. That could suggest a whole lot of things
including the use of alcohol or drugs to counter but that's another
controversy.
I say, grasp your depression. Hug it, if you like. It is yourself
talking to you. It may just be telling you that your body is
chemically out of balance or even your worldview bears an examination.
Hide it, if you like but don't rebuke it. It will get nasty with you,
if you do that. And the body has multitudes of ways to make your mind
pay for its folly.
According to something I just perused, a good portion of psychotherapy
is based on humans repressing their feelings and emotions. So just
talk to your depression: say something like "what is it, for
chrissakes, that you are trying to tell me?"
I do know that early sobriety is often marked by sometimes
>quite severe mood swings and periods of *innapropriate pessimism* and
>I'm sure that things do get better with time.
::: I have to think about that things get better with time...that's an
old brew, prescribed most often when one is helpless, I believe. I
think things don't necessarily get better if you ignore them, for
example. Not being able to cuss your parents back when they cussed you
meant that your repressed it because you would get smacked. Good
reason, but repressed, nonetheless....(see what makes for a teenager?)
::: I think I'm repeating myself but I do that often just to see if I
remember what I believe...... Love is not just the heights of ecstacy,
it is also the depths of suffering and misery...you can't just do part
of it. Life is similar. It rains on the just and the unjust, as I
once read. This means the good guys don't always win, like those lying
hypocrites told me when I was a kid...and I believed it, like the naive
trusting sucker that I was told to be. OK. Sour grapes. Yeah,
ecstacy is better than misery..I won't argue that. But don't think for
a minute you are going to be exempt and if you are wise, really wise,
you will look closely, maybe closer at your misery than your ecstacy.
That's all you're getting from me....):>
Gary
ceri howard
Here in Toronto, we have the same thing occuring. Last summer a pair of
them decided to nest atop a building in the downtown banking area (lots
of suits!). The nest was right in front of a place where many
people liked to go and smoke, which inturn made the moma Peregrin nervous
while she was sitting on her eggs, and later when the chicks were being
fed, the birds wouldn't even approach the nest until all humans had left.
To help wiith this, the local nature group took to calling the office
of the person in question, thereby making the smoker run inside to catch
the call.
It worked & the family of birds are doing quite well!
Take care & thanks for the story.
-Ceridwyn