5 ms·

I realize I am being downvoted so perhaps this is settled in literature. I know PTSD can be traumatic and takes different forms I suppose my confusion still c

I realize I am being downvoted so perhaps this is settled in literature. I know PTSD can be traumatic and takes different forms I suppose my confusion still comes from the fact that stopping intrusive thoughts is measured as good. But what if these intrusive facts are needed (just like therapy) to process things in the long run? I would understand if someone could ran a (very costly) experiment that said "Taking this over the course of 5 years lowered the amount of outbursts/negative behaviors someone took" but this is just measuring thoughts. Presumably, if there had been another group that had been in a therapy group after seeing this traumatic film it is highly possible the number of times someone thought about the film (which is what they were measuring) would have gone up - but would that be bad?

renewiltord 4y ago
Sure, these are all possibilities. With sufficiently able individuals who are sufficiently informed, we simply create the treatment and permit the individuals to select as required. For instance, the patient can choose to either suffer temporarily with the hope of the future positive outcome for the suffering or they can choose the immediate solution. If the patient is not sufficiently able to choose due to being mentally unable and the drug is likely to bring them back to lucidity, then it is obvious that bringing them into a lucid state is the logical path, so we should recommend administering the drug. For my part, I've noticed that people who dwell on these traumas have a hard time. Meanwhile I've suffered numerous things that many of these people claim have led to debilitating mental illness and I operate in a space of mental comfort. So, should I encounter another trauma event, I'll take the forgetting drug. And presumably you, believing otherwise, should refuse it. P.S. Here's a thought experiment for you: What if the MMR-2 vaccine instantaneously kills people at the age of 60. It was introduced in 1963 and this year is 2022, so the first recipients are not yet 60. So you simply cannot prove that it does not do this. You have a son. How do you reason whether to risk the possibility of instantaneously killing your son when he hits 60 vs the risk of him contracting any of Measles, Mumps, or Rubella?
- mplewis 4y ago
  Removing a traumatic incident from your conscious memory doesn’t remove the trauma from you. The body keeps the score, and your brain is only a small part of the feedback loops that make you you.
  - renewiltord 4y ago
    I don't know man. I don't carry that much pain. My life is great and I can tell the tale without suffering the pain.
lazide 4y ago
PTSD is a disorder because people aren’t clearing or processing these things successfully and it becomes disruptive to their life. Sometimes it destroys their lives. If someone successfully processes the trauma in a way that isn’t disruptive, they by definition don’t have PTSD anymore. What you’re saying is a bit like saying someone who suffers from persistent, terrible constipation, to the point it causes them health issues should ‘just poop’. If they could on their own, they wouldn’t have the problem!
- fasthands9 4y ago
  I don't really know if the poop analogy works here. If you were going to extend it here then this drug effectively makes you not feel like you have to poop - so instead it keeps the bile piling up in your intense for a few more days. Sure you prevent yourself from pooping but you do have to remove that eventually. Perhaps therapy is an intervention where they really can remove that waste from you with minimal invasiveness? And that's the argument here? But I still sorta think there is a measurement error here where taking a drug to not think about something so you can only think of it while with others is delaying the issue, not solving it.
  - lazide 4y ago
    If you’re looking for alternative analogies, feel free to use a colostomy one here if you want. The point remains - saying ‘but can’t you just x’ when the problem is they can’t just x doesn’t really get you anywhere.

renewiltord 4y ago

Sure, these are all possibilities. With sufficiently able individuals who are sufficiently informed, we simply create the treatment and permit the individuals to select as required. For instance, the patient can choose to either suffer temporarily with the hope of the future positive outcome for the suffering or they can choose the immediate solution. If the patient is not sufficiently able to choose due to being mentally unable and the drug is likely to bring them back to lucidity, then it is obvious that bringing them into a lucid state is the logical path, so we should recommend administering the drug. For my part, I've noticed that people who dwell on these traumas have a hard time. Meanwhile I've suffered numerous things that many of these people claim have led to debilitating mental illness and I operate in a space of mental comfort. So, should I encounter another trauma event, I'll take the forgetting drug. And presumably you, believing otherwise, should refuse it. P.S. Here's a thought experiment for you: What if the MMR-2 vaccine instantaneously kills people at the age of 60. It was introduced in 1963 and this year is 2022, so the first recipients are not yet 60. So you simply cannot prove that it does not do this. You have a son. How do you reason whether to risk the possibility of instantaneously killing your son when he hits 60 vs the risk of him contracting any of Measles, Mumps, or Rubella?

mplewis 4y ago
Removing a traumatic incident from your conscious memory doesn’t remove the trauma from you. The body keeps the score, and your brain is only a small part of the feedback loops that make you you.
- renewiltord 4y ago
  I don't know man. I don't carry that much pain. My life is great and I can tell the tale without suffering the pain.

lazide 4y ago

PTSD is a disorder because people aren’t clearing or processing these things successfully and it becomes disruptive to their life. Sometimes it destroys their lives. If someone successfully processes the trauma in a way that isn’t disruptive, they by definition don’t have PTSD anymore. What you’re saying is a bit like saying someone who suffers from persistent, terrible constipation, to the point it causes them health issues should ‘just poop’. If they could on their own, they wouldn’t have the problem!

fasthands9 4y ago
I don't really know if the poop analogy works here. If you were going to extend it here then this drug effectively makes you not feel like you have to poop - so instead it keeps the bile piling up in your intense for a few more days. Sure you prevent yourself from pooping but you do have to remove that eventually. Perhaps therapy is an intervention where they really can remove that waste from you with minimal invasiveness? And that's the argument here? But I still sorta think there is a measurement error here where taking a drug to not think about something so you can only think of it while with others is delaying the issue, not solving it.
- lazide 4y ago
  If you’re looking for alternative analogies, feel free to use a colostomy one here if you want. The point remains - saying ‘but can’t you just x’ when the problem is they can’t just x doesn’t really get you anywhere.