I have a cousin who has had this done to twice that I'm aware of - she's bipolar, manic depressive (if that's not redundant, I don't know that much about it) and she claims it really helped her.
I thought the goal of the procedure was to burn away parts of the brain.
I thought the goal of the procedure was to burn away parts of the brain.
Nope, to stimulate more neural pathways - at least, that's what people think happens. Some people think it adjusts the brain's chemistry.
SB: "she's bipolar, manic depressive (if that's not redundant, I don't know that much about it)"
Yes, they're the same. Bipolar is the clinical term, MD is the common term.
Check it out;
http://www.bcmamedicalmuseum.org...org/
collections
I couldn't find anything about electroshock.
there are all kinds of theories about why it works... but anyone that says they know for a fact how it works is completely full of shit.
What I would like to know is who was the first to say "let's try this" and why did they think it would work?
So, you're suggesting that the medical industry tries one thing, and if it doesn't work, tries something else? Say it isn't so.
God only knows Ghog.
"anyone that says they know for a fact how it works is completely full of shit." -- Nate
Smartest woman I ever met said "Doctors are glorified mechanics."
I use that quote frequently. It seems to be true.
Hell, MM, most I run into are glorified pharmacists.
Doc, I got run over by a tractor: take a pill.
Doc, I hear voices: take a pill.
Doc, I my left little toe nail grows faster than my right little toe nail: take a pill.
actually its... I got run over by a tractor: Call an orthopedic surgeon... then take a pill.
As if there were any doubt that most libertarians are petulant retards that could probably benefit from a little shock therapy themselves...
http://www.reason.com/news/show/...how/
129640.html
You're a retard if you think Reason is intellectual consistent on anything. They're so all over the map it's silly to call it a libertarian or even freedom-related rag.
Other than their consistent "make drugs legal", they can't "reason" their way out of a paper sack.
I don't see much of the exceptionally stupid there Bill. Looks like its most made up of the ordinary stupid so commonly found.
So, you're suggesting that the medical industry tries one thing, and if it doesn't work, tries something else? Say it isn't so.
Oh come on Nate. You gotta admit this is a special kind of stupid;
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime? Without any doubt. The most important issues at stake today have nothing to do with "left-vs-right" (and those who think so are reflex troglodytes.) No, the issue is light-vs-dark, in the sense that we have been subjected to a kleptocratic raid that depended upon one thing—quashing every possible system of accountability. Especially the U.S. Civil Service. If Obama does nothing else—passes no new laws or initiatives—he will save us simply by expelling those 10,000 enemies of accountability and promoting from within the Civil Service. Only then can we properly argue which civil servants are useful and which aren't.
1. Who are you voting for in November? Barack Obama. All my life I've been waiting for a black president; Obama's not monumentally unqualified, and his solid-if-boring book at least had some unkind words for teachers unions. Also my kids like him.
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime? This election probably is the most important. Obama appears to be against wars of aggression, while McCain is clearly a war-monger. More generally, Obama is clearly deliberative and thoughtful and—while he won't often reach the same conclusions as I or other libertarians would reach—he's preferable to McCain, who relies on "gut feelings" and is as intellectually non-curious as George W. Bush.
1. Who are you voting for in November? Barack Obama, since he's a genuine leader, with a good program for cleaning up Washington, and will be very good for business.
1. Who are you voting for in November? Barack Obama, because he most exemplifies Reason and Free Minds (sorry, the country is in no mood for Freer Markets). The contrast between his discernment and eclecticism and the Republican ticket’s impulsiveness and idiot populism is vastly more important than any differences in their adherence to libertarian first principles.
Oh, keeping in mind that it's the libertarian intelligentsia that's saying this stuff.
Its hardly the libertarian inteli-whatever. its a media outlet that calls itself libertarian while clearly advocating policy that is anything but.
I grant you.. that' stupid. Very stupid... but not unheard-of stupid.
What's amusing is the ignorance exposed.
Compare that attitude to the attitude of black leaders in the pre-jackie robinson days. Back then they knew "good enough" was no where near good enough. They knew the first black player had to be better than everyone else. he had to be above reproach.
Now?
Hell.. anyone will do.
Why?
Because the ability to predict future events has been lost.
Because the ability to predict future events has been lost.
You mean they lost the Palentir?
palentir's couldn't predict the future. they were like mideval television cameras / monitors all combined.
Nate, we need to decide an official beer of the ilk. I'm thinking though, in my early stages here, that this could become like a theological dispute, no real agreement, I see bad stuff, a vision, of...just stuff, that's bad. I could be wrong, but...let me sip here....what was I saying... Yeah, beer, bad stuff, upheaval...awesome.
What I would like to know is who was the first to say "let's try this" and why did they think it would work?
Ghog | 10.30.08 - 3:00 pm | #
____________
It was probably an accident of some sort , like someone with a mental condition got a very bad shock and was later found to have reduced symptoms.
I am of the opinion hat the vast majority of scientific advances throughout history were simply accidents that an observant person made use of.
How did that discover that clay could be fired and made stronger and watertight?
Someone probably left a clay pot too close to the fire and later found that it had hardened. Then they experimented.
palentir's couldn't predict the future. they were like mideval television cameras / monitors all combined.
Don't let your 'facts' and 'truths' get in the way of my lame jokes.
What I would like to know is who was the first to say "let's try this" and why did they think it would work?
Ghog | 10.30.08 - 3:00 pm | #
____________
It was probably an accident of some sort , like someone with a mental condition got a very bad shock and was later found to have reduced symptoms.
I'm guessing lightening was involved. I knew a guy who was shocked when a building we were in was struck. It took a long time for him to get back to normal even from a mental and personality standpoint.
But anonymous is correct - a lot of discoveries were accidents. I think it was the last penicillin discovered that was found stuck to a guy's golf club.
Electro-shock therapy was invented in Italy, where a doctor observed pigs being electrocuted prior to execution. The shock seemed to put the pigs to sleep, then they were killed. The doctor thought to try the electrocution part on violent insane people to calm them down - thus was electro-shock therapy born.
Slaughter House Medicine?
Slaughter House Medicine?
That would be the medicine developed during the War of Northern Aggression.
Jamie, I thought Shiner Bock was the beer of the ilk?
Could a possible theory why electro shock works is because the brain runs on what I would call low grade electronic impulses? If they get screwed up the electroshock corrects them. Again, just my thoughts.
Rebooting...
This is off-topic, but I'm wondering - how likely is it for patients in anaesthesia to wake up during the procedure but still be totally paralyzed? Or..to not really go under at all, but still be paralyzed?
I've heard some bizarre horror stories on the Health network!
Beer of the Ilk...is whatever Jamie's drinking!
I was on a two-hour flight back home this week with a kid this might have helped.
What do you think is the nominal age, where this treatmemt might help?
I truly believe some kids are born "crazy". They don't just "turn" crazy, at a certain age.
We all saw them, growing up, and going to school with them. They were nuts from get-go.
And you can still see them....still nuts, but some have manageged to haave successful lives.
Commenting by HaloScan
