Posted by ryanz on January 18, 2007, at 0:12:58
In reply to PLEASE tell me we have not resorted to this., posted by halcyondaze on January 17, 2007, at 22:04:57
> Quoting Peter Breggin on THIS board?
I did not "quote" anyone, nor did I post any of my own thoughts and comments pertaining to it. And just who are you to decide what information is mentioned on this board, particularly when it pertains to a published scientific paper in a medical journal?
>
> Come on.That's your own personal opinion of Breggin which some share and some do not. One of the reasons why this paper is relevant is because he lists a lot of negative findings by other ECT researchers that's been swept under the rug or forgotten about. Even if one does not like Breggin himself, the mere listing of references to negative studies on ECT is by itself enough to make the paper valuable.
The same goes with Sackeim and colleagues whom some respect and some hate. Sackeim admitted in video testimony to receiving money from the manufacturer of shock devices and providing advice to them at the same time he was receiving grant money from the government to investigate potential damage from ECT, while not publicly disclosing this in violation of the law and in violation of the honor code followed by researchers who submit entries to medical journals. Nevertheless, I posted a link to information from him as well recently. Sackeim's studies are referenced by the APA.
> Let's consider the source here.
People can read and decide for themselves whether a particular article is of value or not and compare it with other information on their own. They do not need you to do it for them. And that's the idea. There will be no consensus here or anywhere where else when it comes to papers by well-known major ECT opponents like Breggin, or to historical proponents like Fink and Sackeim. People should be able to read the controversial positions by well-known voices from both sides along with other information.
> I guess you're prepared to stop all of your > psychiatric medication, as he advocates?
All I did was post a URL linking to a published scientific paper that he authored. That's it. The only thing in my posting was a URL. I served neither as a an advocate or as an opponent to his views. Stop misrepresenting.
And if Breggin feels that antidepressant medications are overmarketed, overprescribed and often inappropriate for many of the millions of people taking these drugs, then people have a right to know about the position he is taking and his reasons for this regardless of whether you or I or anyone else disagrees with position. He did, afterall, write a book about it which was talked about on major news networks and he is a very well-known and experienced psychiatrist and researcher who is entitled to his opinion and the right to share his opinion and reasoning with others.
>I am truly ashamed to be posting here if this is >the kind of standard we are now holding >ourselves to
Well, feel free to stop posting. I won't argue with you on that, especially if you're going to be incredibly rude along with misrepresenting the actions and intentions of others. I did absolutely nothing to deserve being treated this way in thread. All I did was post a simple URL to a published medical study for purposes of sharing information after which I was personally attacked by you and Karen. I never even wrote about my personal opinion on ECT or my personal experience with it on this board.
The people who behaved inappropriately in this thread are you and Karen, and I offer no apology to her or to you for posting posting a simple html link to a published medical paper.
poster:ryanz
thread:722043
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20070113/msgs/723494.html