6 ms·

Sorry but that attitude is extremely dangerous. Maybe you have a less severe case that's manageable without treatment but that's not the case for everyone. Mani

Sorry but that attitude is extremely dangerous. Maybe you have a less severe case that's manageable without treatment but that's not the case for everyone. Mania states are actively brain damaging and can blow into full-on psychosis. There is no lifestyle change, diet or essential oil that's going to stop that from happening for folks with a severe bipolar disorder, which is absolutely a disease since it destroys your brain if left unchecked. Spreading such misinformation can lead to people not seeking treatment and getting hurt. Your case is absolutely not the canonic case for people with bipolar disorder.

podgaj 6y ago
Less sever case!!! Ahahahahhah! Uhm, no, I assure you this is not the case. Hospitalized four times, suicide attempts, psychosis, hallucination, on permanent disability, my mother and brothers have it and attempted suicide, my nephew, suicide. At one pint I was on lithium, zyprexa, lamictal, and prozac all at the same time. They also thought I had MS at times because of all the neurological stuff that was happening. You can say what you want, but they found I have problems metabolizing amino acids (BH4 deficiency) and this is fixed by a low protein diet. (More technically, I have GCH1 deficiency.) Now I only need Klonopin in emergency cases. But watching my exposure to oxidative stressors is important because it destroys BH4. And you do not even know what causes Bipolar disorder so how the hell could you know what might help it? And this is another problem, no matter how good we feel with lifestyle changes, no one will believe us or even think we were ever sick. They tel me stress is a trigger for my illness yet they make me homeless and do not provide me with stable housing.
- least 6y ago
  Different treatments affect different people differently. This isn't particularly controversial, but the layman suggesting that they know better than scientists/doctors is kind of dangerous. There is of course room to be skeptical and ultimately you know what's going on better in your head than anyone else does, but that's not really actionable across an entire population of people suffering from something similar to you. It's also dangerous because you're telling people they don't have a problem they need to address and that if they do address it, they just need to eat differently, neither of which are applicable broadly to people with bipolar disorder. Medications that didn't work for you might work for them and are worth pursuing.
  - slothtrop 6y ago
    > the layman suggesting that they know better than scientists/doctors is kind of dangerous That's a strawman.
    - podgaj 6y ago
      Thank you. Yes, a strawman and so frustrating since I literally have the metabolic and genetic proof that I found out what was causing my mood disorder. And as a result the doctors are providing better and different treatment. This what this "layman" discovered.
      - least 6y ago
        Do you or don't you have a disorder? In the first post you made in this thread you very clearly stated you don't. Now you're saying you do. The problem with your post is that you very discretely stated that you don't have a disorder even though you admit to being bipolar. Despite the fact that your "difference" has pushed you to suicide attempts, psychosis, and more. The fact that an effective treatment for you specifically was a low protein diet (which by your own admission still didn't remove the requirement for medication) doesn't make it not a disorder. The attitude is dangerous because you are spreading misinformation about something you are suffering from, which in turn can result in someone else being harmed.
        zepto 6y ago
        The viewpoint that bipolar (and other brain differences) is a difference rather than a disorder can enable a person to have self compassion, and find peace and self acceptance, even though the condition will continue to affect them. The idea that it’s a disorder and can be treated as such is a reasonable hypothesis for medical science to pursue, but that is all it is. Outside of that it’s just a source of stigma and misinformation.
        least 6y ago
        The viewpoint is based in the reality we live in where we stigmatize abnormality. The correct response isn't to try and normalize abnormality, but to try and remove the stigma surrounding it. Suggesting that it is normal actually creates a stigma for those who are suffering from it from pursuing treatment because they're supposed to feel that way because it's "normal."
- Pelic4n 6y ago
  Thanks for your insights and sorry for having supposed you had a less severe case, but all of that happened to you and you think it's not a disorder or a disease ?
  - tremon 6y ago
    Stop labeling someone who doesn't want to be labeled.
  - podgaj 6y ago
    Disease: A particular distinctive process in the body with a specific cause and characteristic symptoms. Disorder: Irregularity, disturbance, or interruption of normal functions. Syndrome: A number of symptoms occurring together and characterizing a specific disease. I do not care which it is. I just focused on my symptoms and what made them worse and what made them better. To me is is a difference, that is the best way I can put it.
ColanR 6y ago
> Spreading such misinformation can lead to people not seeking treatment and getting hurt. Misinformation? Unless you have expert knowledge in that domain - and unless the alternatives podgaj describes have been exhaustively eliminated by a body of peer-reviewed research - you have absolutely no justification to label that as misinformation.
- SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
  > and unless the alternatives podgaj describes have been exhaustively eliminated by a body of peer-reviewed research - you have absolutely no justification to label that as misinformation. That's not how that should work. If I say that my farts cure cancer, it's not the job of peer-review research to disprove me, and until then we all just assume that the information I'm giving is good.
  - ColanR 6y ago
    > until then we all just assume that the information I'm giving is good. Fallacy of the excluded middle. There's other alternatives to a) saying it's outright false and b) saying it's outright true. I'm saying it shouldn't be labeled "misinformation" without extensive evidence to back it up, just as you're saying it shouldn't be labeled "truth" without the same level of evidence. Instead, it's actually possible that we could discuss the theory as if it might be true, or false, until there's sufficient evidence to rule out one or the other. It's Pelic4n's refusal to do this that I take issue with.
    - SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
      Ok, so misinformation may be too strong a word - really it's just unfounded, so that labeling IS wrong. I still think we need to treat it as false until we have evidence it works. I'm sure you wouldn't treat my farts as curing cancer if I made the claim unless there was proof.
      - ColanR 6y ago
        Glad we agree on the essentials. There was anecdotal evidence to back up the claim, however; it's not "unfounded." While that's not enough evidence to make any real claims, it is enough evidence to have a conversation. A conversation is a prelude to an exploration, and an exploration is a prelude to a hypothesis, which is the beginning of an experiment. An experiment is where we obtain the evidence to begin to say that it might be true, or false. It's entirely possible to think about something and even discuss it without labeling it as either true or false - to be simply agnostic. We don't need to jump to conclusions. If we aren't jumping to conclusions, then it would be incorrect to say that we treat it as false, just as it would be incorrect to say that we treat it as true.
captainredbeard 6y ago
I recommend looking into the few longitudinal studies for dopaminergic illness involving anti-psychotics -- the new "front line" bipolar treatment -- and long term prognosis. The severity and frequency of episodes increases.

podgaj 6y ago

Less sever case!!! Ahahahahhah! Uhm, no, I assure you this is not the case. Hospitalized four times, suicide attempts, psychosis, hallucination, on permanent disability, my mother and brothers have it and attempted suicide, my nephew, suicide. At one pint I was on lithium, zyprexa, lamictal, and prozac all at the same time. They also thought I had MS at times because of all the neurological stuff that was happening. You can say what you want, but they found I have problems metabolizing amino acids (BH4 deficiency) and this is fixed by a low protein diet. (More technically, I have GCH1 deficiency.) Now I only need Klonopin in emergency cases. But watching my exposure to oxidative stressors is important because it destroys BH4. And you do not even know what causes Bipolar disorder so how the hell could you know what might help it? And this is another problem, no matter how good we feel with lifestyle changes, no one will believe us or even think we were ever sick. They tel me stress is a trigger for my illness yet they make me homeless and do not provide me with stable housing.

least 6y ago
Different treatments affect different people differently. This isn't particularly controversial, but the layman suggesting that they know better than scientists/doctors is kind of dangerous. There is of course room to be skeptical and ultimately you know what's going on better in your head than anyone else does, but that's not really actionable across an entire population of people suffering from something similar to you. It's also dangerous because you're telling people they don't have a problem they need to address and that if they do address it, they just need to eat differently, neither of which are applicable broadly to people with bipolar disorder. Medications that didn't work for you might work for them and are worth pursuing.
- slothtrop 6y ago
  > the layman suggesting that they know better than scientists/doctors is kind of dangerous That's a strawman.
  - podgaj 6y ago
    Thank you. Yes, a strawman and so frustrating since I literally have the metabolic and genetic proof that I found out what was causing my mood disorder. And as a result the doctors are providing better and different treatment. This what this "layman" discovered.
    - least 6y ago
      Do you or don't you have a disorder? In the first post you made in this thread you very clearly stated you don't. Now you're saying you do. The problem with your post is that you very discretely stated that you don't have a disorder even though you admit to being bipolar. Despite the fact that your "difference" has pushed you to suicide attempts, psychosis, and more. The fact that an effective treatment for you specifically was a low protein diet (which by your own admission still didn't remove the requirement for medication) doesn't make it not a disorder. The attitude is dangerous because you are spreading misinformation about something you are suffering from, which in turn can result in someone else being harmed.
      - zepto 6y ago
        The viewpoint that bipolar (and other brain differences) is a difference rather than a disorder can enable a person to have self compassion, and find peace and self acceptance, even though the condition will continue to affect them. The idea that it’s a disorder and can be treated as such is a reasonable hypothesis for medical science to pursue, but that is all it is. Outside of that it’s just a source of stigma and misinformation.
        least 6y ago
        The viewpoint is based in the reality we live in where we stigmatize abnormality. The correct response isn't to try and normalize abnormality, but to try and remove the stigma surrounding it. Suggesting that it is normal actually creates a stigma for those who are suffering from it from pursuing treatment because they're supposed to feel that way because it's "normal."
Pelic4n 6y ago
Thanks for your insights and sorry for having supposed you had a less severe case, but all of that happened to you and you think it's not a disorder or a disease ?
- tremon 6y ago
  Stop labeling someone who doesn't want to be labeled.
- podgaj 6y ago
  Disease: A particular distinctive process in the body with a specific cause and characteristic symptoms. Disorder: Irregularity, disturbance, or interruption of normal functions. Syndrome: A number of symptoms occurring together and characterizing a specific disease. I do not care which it is. I just focused on my symptoms and what made them worse and what made them better. To me is is a difference, that is the best way I can put it.

ColanR 6y ago

> Spreading such misinformation can lead to people not seeking treatment and getting hurt. Misinformation? Unless you have expert knowledge in that domain - and unless the alternatives podgaj describes have been exhaustively eliminated by a body of peer-reviewed research - you have absolutely no justification to label that as misinformation.

SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
> and unless the alternatives podgaj describes have been exhaustively eliminated by a body of peer-reviewed research - you have absolutely no justification to label that as misinformation. That's not how that should work. If I say that my farts cure cancer, it's not the job of peer-review research to disprove me, and until then we all just assume that the information I'm giving is good.
- ColanR 6y ago
  > until then we all just assume that the information I'm giving is good. Fallacy of the excluded middle. There's other alternatives to a) saying it's outright false and b) saying it's outright true. I'm saying it shouldn't be labeled "misinformation" without extensive evidence to back it up, just as you're saying it shouldn't be labeled "truth" without the same level of evidence. Instead, it's actually possible that we could discuss the theory as if it might be true, or false, until there's sufficient evidence to rule out one or the other. It's Pelic4n's refusal to do this that I take issue with.
  - SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
    Ok, so misinformation may be too strong a word - really it's just unfounded, so that labeling IS wrong. I still think we need to treat it as false until we have evidence it works. I'm sure you wouldn't treat my farts as curing cancer if I made the claim unless there was proof.
    - ColanR 6y ago
      Glad we agree on the essentials. There was anecdotal evidence to back up the claim, however; it's not "unfounded." While that's not enough evidence to make any real claims, it is enough evidence to have a conversation. A conversation is a prelude to an exploration, and an exploration is a prelude to a hypothesis, which is the beginning of an experiment. An experiment is where we obtain the evidence to begin to say that it might be true, or false. It's entirely possible to think about something and even discuss it without labeling it as either true or false - to be simply agnostic. We don't need to jump to conclusions. If we aren't jumping to conclusions, then it would be incorrect to say that we treat it as false, just as it would be incorrect to say that we treat it as true.

captainredbeard 6y ago

I recommend looking into the few longitudinal studies for dopaminergic illness involving anti-psychotics -- the new "front line" bipolar treatment -- and long term prognosis. The severity and frequency of episodes increases.