It is quite sad how conventional medicine and alternative/herbal medicine oppose each other more than they cooperate.

I could sometimes really do with the help of a qualified herbalist/alternative practitioner who a) has had as much medical training as any doctor, b) has an open mind and c) a willingness to keep informed of the most up-to-date research and to think of alternatives for patients not helped by conventional treatment choices d) who isn’t against conventional medicine.

Because what happens right now is that people like me go online and do their research on their own. But us without medical training aren’t really qualified to do that kind of thing. I certainly feel very unsure and incompetent. Alternative is to go to one of the self-taught people who are also unreliable.

But what can I do? There isn’t anywhere I could go with my questions. No specialists I could consult about dosage and possible side-effects. They’d think I’m one of the trouble-maker flat-earthers. No doctor I could take the results of a new study to and ask whether we might test it on me as well. In my dreams, that doctor would then do more thorough research and figure out the best treatment plan or tell me this is too risky to try. That kind of thing is what I’d really like.

I wish that if it became quite clear conventional treatment is not working OR if the patient prefers herbal treatment as a first option, they would be provided with alternatives. You don’t actually need to start the treatment of depression with selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, for example. The doctor could ask the patient if they might prefer to try natural remedies first (like with many diseases you start with the milder stuff first if it is possible) and if these don’t work, gradually get more aggressive.  St. John’s Wort has been studied sufficiently as far as I know. 5-HTP seems more innocent as well and appears to have sufficient evidence about its effectiveness.Why not these over SSRIs?

Reality is that if you want to try either, you got to go to Doctor Google, unless you are very lucky and your doctor is open-minded.

And so, as the world polarises in every field, both sides lose and are stupider for it.

I wish one of the epic heroes of Charlton Heston’s would descend and fix the world.


Would someone please, please tell Google not to give me endless pages of Chinese (and other) machine-translated websites when I search for things in my native language. A filter, please, for omitting machine-translations from the results.

#2019 #sucks #googlesucks #discrimination #money #pleasestop

Zeitgeist is a very suspicious thing

The more I read stuff and observe stuff, the more I feel that zeitgeist is a lie, an over-simplification like gender. Something we cling to for its clarity as it makes the world appear logical and coherent, but which is really narrow-minded and limiting. Half the population sometimes does not live accordingly. I think that’s significant.

Postmodernist meaninglessness

Reading legal documents is sometimes worse than any postmodernist work of doom and gloom and general lack of meaningfulness.

Marriage turns into an economic contract and child custody laws make the child into a property of the parents. The child’s life is thus neatly split between two parents, because the right of both parents to see their child equally is superior to the child’s right to a stable, settled environment. But it’s not really that. I could envision a teenager who may even enjoy the change of scene. It’s the tone of these things. The extreme regulation, the splitting of hairs to achieve equality.


I encountered an opinion that for an intellectually stimulating and rich life one requires money. The reasoning being that otherwise you cannot go to the theatre, travel, go to concerts and participate in various courses.


LOL. Stupid wannabe educated middle class narrow-mindedness at its best.

Job market absurdism

I saw an ad for the job of a translator, translating technical and legal documents.

The requirements – and yes, requirements – included having a positive attitude to life.

I don’t think pessimists would make for any worse translators. The only place where they would not be great is the service sector.

So who do I complain to about this sort of personality-based discrimination? It has nothing to do with a person’s actual skills and ability to translate.

Why, what with all manner of discrimination types being discussed to death, has practically no one pointed out the extreme discrimination that goes on in the job market? Why is it okay to discriminate based on some qualities and not others?

On pathologisation

I was sitting in a lecture the other day and the topic was developmental, emotional and behavioural disorders in childhood and early adolescence.

I couldn’t believe my eyes nor ears when the figures were displayed on the board. 20% of children and young people suffer from some mental disorder?!! 30!!? Jesus effing Christ.

Where are those disordered children? Are they really hidden away from us, being home-schooled or taught at specialized institutions? But how can you hide as large a proportion of society as 20-30%. You could not. When I went to school, and I went to more than one and came in contact with at least 100 children and teenagers, almost no one had a psychological disorder. I’m not making this statement as a doctor or psychologist, I’m making this statement as a human being assessing other human beings. Nearly all children and teens I encountered were mentally healthy individuals to me. I was a mentally healthy individual. Some of us had certain qualities that made us different. I was shy. Excruciatingly shy, but I never thought of myself as being mentally disordered. Nor did I think so of anyone else, even if they were hyperactive, highly-strung or uninterested in studying. With the exception of two people, who indeed seemed ‘very different’ on some deeper, fundamental level. In hindsight, they may have had an autism spectrum disorder. That still accounts for roughly 2%.

Furthermore, a large proportion of children, but more so adolescents and adults go through their life undiagnosed. It strikes me as being particularly common with depression, eating disorders and various anxiety disorders. If we add all the undiagnosed people to the list of the diagnosed, wouldn’t that add up to a half of the population? Is it really right to classify half of the population as mentally disordered?

The good and bad of pathologising

I do not think that pathologization is all evil. Its chief merit lies in helping people with personal difficulties find themselves, adjust better and hopefully be more successful in life. Here and there, I’ve spotted the opinion that the label of a specific disorder helps people. Instead of feeling ‘weird’ and all alone, trying to fight for your position in society against overwhelming odds and personal disadvantages, you suddenly belong. The responsibility and the need to fight are eliminated. You have a disorder and that explains all your problems and exempts you from needing to be strong, a social success, or whatever it is your particular disorder keeps you from being, but society expects of you.

All good, isn’t it?

It is and it isn’t. For example, introverts struggle too. And are often glad and relieved to learn more about it. It achieves the same thing for them – they belong, no longer feel weird and learn to adopt (hopefully) a positive attitude to their personality.

Why can’t hyperactivity be just a quality? Anxiety (milder forms)? Depression? Who is shy and who has a social anxiety disorder? Who draws the line? Should we draw the line so that to pathologize a large proportion of society or should we restrict the label of ‘disorder’ to a minority of extreme cases, in the end?

It probably does not require an explanation that I support the latter. Google catatonic schizophrenia and suddenly, nearly everyone with ADHD and mild to moderate depression seems a perfectly healthy human being.

What pathologization achieves is that it limits both the individual with the supposed disorder and the perceptions others have of them. Everything begins to revolve around the disorder.  The person may start avoiding certain situations as incompatible with their disorder (without actual necessity), may restrict their social interactions to people also suffering from the same disorder, may turn down job offers as incompatible with their condition (even if they wouldn’t really be). They may adopt a victim position, alienating others, or they may be treated as a disorder and not as an individual, with many other qualities besides the disorder.

The following is not a mental disorder, but the analogy works very well. A little while ago I read about a woman who had lost her left arm in a work accident. Since then, she has lived the life of a ‘proper’ disabled person, attending disabled person’s Christmas parties and having disabled people as friends. I read this and thought – it is only an arm, for heaven’s sake, she could have lived like anyone else if she wanted to! Maybe not done certain activities and jobs, but otherwise….