And Now It Is Pre-cradle To The Grave, And, Beyond?

[dldelancey]

I don't know the cause of bi-polar disorder. Who really does? Does it pre-date medical intervention? By that I mean could it be drug caused? Genetics? Bad thinking? Combo causes? A food allergy? Sugar? Is it really real? Something's happening.

--Brant

"behavior" is an empty vessel so it's a good question

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/bipolar-disorder/DS00356/DSECTION=causes

[anthony]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

Aah! C'mon, Greg. Genetic disorders of the brain (bipolar, ADD) have nothing to do with moral or cognitive mastery!

What one does, behaviorally, with any of them will play its part, of course.

You know that prayer? "Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."

THAT's reality, buddy. The wisdom to know the difference.

[Brant Gaede]

I don't know the cause of bi-polar disorder. Who really does? Does it pre-date medical intervention? By that I mean could it be drug caused? Genetics? Bad thinking? Combo causes? A food allergy? Sugar? Is it really real? Something's happening.

--Brant

"behavior" is an empty vessel so it's a good question

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/bipolar-disorder/DS00356/DSECTION=causes

See, it's speculation, not science, but lathered up with some authority.

--Brant

[moralist]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

Or do you not believe that mental illness has a biological component?

No.

I don't buy into the popular collective societal consensus of the narcoculture.

Greg

[moralist]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

Aah! C'mon, Greg. Genetic disorders of the brain (bipolar, ADD) have nothing to do with moral or cognitive mastery!

What one does, behaviorally, with any of them will play its part, of course.

You know that prayer? "Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."

THAT's reality, buddy. The wisdom to know the difference.

I love that prayer, Tony.

But notice that like all double edged truths, it cuts both ways.

Greg

[moralist]

Substitute the "God" in there with "Reality" and you have Objectivism.

Exactly.

That's what I love about Ayn Rand... her love of reality.

I couldn't care less if she doesn't use the word God.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

Your opinion is not knowledge. It needs to be referenced somehow.

--Brant

begs the question, too, of why the thoughts and emotions were failure-dealt

[dldelancey]

I don't know the cause of bi-polar disorder. Who really does? Does it pre-date medical intervention? By that I mean could it be drug caused? Genetics? Bad thinking? Combo causes? A food allergy? Sugar? Is it really real? Something's happening.

--Brant

"behavior" is an empty vessel so it's a good question

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/bipolar-disorder/DS00356/DSECTION=causes

See, it's speculation, not science, but lathered up with some authority.

--Brant

I agree, although I tend to think the science will catch up.

[dldelancey]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

Or do you not believe that mental illness has a biological component?No.

I don't buy into the popular collective societal consensus of the narcoculture.

Greg

I can respect your position on that. As usual, however, I object to the insulting and condescending language you hurl at those of us who do not agree with you. Which cancels out the respect bit.

[moralist]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

Your opinion is not knowledge. It needs to be referenced somehow.

It's reference is only my personal observations of my own mind, as well as my personal observations of others.

If you do not gain ascendency over your own mind, your life will be a living hell...

...and if you do, your life will be Paradise.

--Brant

begs the question, too, of why the thoughts and emotions were failure-dealt

They're not.

Each person chooses how they deal with their own thoughts and emotions. There's a right way, and an infinite amount of wrong ones.

For those who fail, there are the narcoculture's compensations of dope and alcohol as well as the massive pharmaceutical industry which exists to "manage" the symptoms of their failure without ever touching the cause.

Greg

[moralist]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

Or do you not believe that mental illness has a biological component?

No.

I don't buy into the popular collective societal consensus of the narcoculture.

Greg

I can respect your position on that. As usual, however, I object to the insulting and condescending language you hurl at those of us who do not agree with you. Which cancels out the respect bit.

That's totally understandable, D.

After all, here I am openly speaking heresy against the universally held beliefs of the narcoculture religion, so there is bound to be be some personal offense taken. And I can live with the lack of respect when it comes from that particular religious faith, because I chose another religion.

Greg

[Selene]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

Playing the Devil's Advocate here, how poetic, Greg might argue that this poor soul has refused to think correctly and has a Devil and a God inside her head and that is her bi-polarity.

I will try to keep a straight face until Greg replies.

[moralist]

Greg might argue that this poor soul has refused to think correctly

No, I wouldn't make that argument because it contains the flawed premise of "thinking correctly", when that has nothing to do with it.

It is the failure to properly deal with thoughts and emotions which causes peoples' problems.

Greg

[anthony]

Greg might argue that this poor soul has refused to think correctly

No, I wouldn't make that argument because it contains the flawed premise of "thinking correctly", when that has nothing to do with it.

It is the failure to properly deal with thoughts and emotions which causes peoples' problems.

Greg

Deal with thoughts and emotions...by telling them: Get Thee Behind Me!

heh.

[moralist]

Greg might argue that this poor soul has refused to think correctly

No, I wouldn't make that argument because it contains the flawed premise of "thinking correctly", when that has nothing to do with it.

It is the failure to properly deal with thoughts and emotions which causes peoples' problems.

Greg

Deal with thoughts and emotions...by telling them: Get Thee Behind Me!

heh.

Very funny!

...except that's just another thought. But the idea is close.

The proper way to deal with thought is to calmly and silently choose whether or not to respond to it with emotion and/or action.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Greg might argue that this poor soul has refused to think correctly

No, I wouldn't make that argument because it contains the flawed premise of "thinking correctly", when that has nothing to do with it.

It is the failure to properly deal with thoughts and emotions which causes peoples' problems.

Greg

Deal with thoughts and emotions...by telling them: Get Thee Behind Me!

heh.

Very funny!

...except that's just another thought. But the idea is close.

The proper way to deal with thought is to calmly and silently choose whether or not to respond to it with emotion and/or action.

Now that's a thought!

--Brant

thanks for sharing

[moralist]

Greg might argue that this poor soul has refused to think correctly

No, I wouldn't make that argument because it contains the flawed premise of "thinking correctly", when that has nothing to do with it.

It is the failure to properly deal with thoughts and emotions which causes peoples' problems.

Greg

Deal with thoughts and emotions...by telling them: Get Thee Behind Me!

heh.

Very funny!

...except that's just another thought. But the idea is close.

The proper way to deal with thought is to calmly and silently choose whether or not to respond to it with emotion and/or action.

Now that's a thought!

--Brant

thanks for sharing

Talking back to your thoughts by telling them to get behind you is just a thought responding to a thought...

...however that idea itself of rejecting the thoughts that aren't good simply by not responding to them at all, is the right course to take. The fact that we can silently wordlessly choose to act completely contrary to our own thoughts reveals the truth that we are not our thoughts. We are that which has the ability to calmly observe and to freely choose which thoughts we will emote to, or act upon.

Greg

[Peter]

I got to thinking about shots and medicines and just to change the pace, here is an old thread about ADD.

What is ADHD? ADHD is classified into two predominant categories – inattention and hyperactivity. The attention deficit in ADHD refers to the inability to pay close attention to details and difficulty sustaining attention to a particular task.

ADHD is a condition that can negatively impact a person’s attention and behavior and can interfere with daily activities at school, at work, at home, and with friends. People who have ADHD have higher levels of inattention, impulsivity, and/or hyperactivity than their peers.

ADHD is one of the most common brain-based disorders that affects about 1 in 10 school-aged children. For more than half of those who have ADHD as a child, symptoms continue into adulthood.

Famous people who have Attention Deficit Disorder ADD or ADHD. Glenn Beck[1] Daniel Bedingfield[2] Terry Bradshaw [3] Richard Branson[4] Jim Carrey [5][6] James Carville [7] Kurt Cobain[8] Jennifer Connelly [9] Zooey Deschanel [10] Cameron Diaz [11] Jason Earles [12] Cammi Granato [13] Forrest Griffin [14] Melissa Joan Hart [15] Salma Hayek [16] Paris Hilton[17] Bruce Jenner [7] Magic Johnson [18] Christopher Knight [19][20] Solange Knowles [21] Heather Kuzmich [22] Courtney Love[23] Howie Mandel [24] David Neeleman [7] Roxy Olin [25] Jamie Oliver[26][27] Mary-Kate Olsen [28] Paul Orfalea [7] Ty Pennington[1] Michael Phelps [29] Michelle Rodriguez [7] Peter Rose[30] Karina Smirnoff[31] Justin Timberlake[32] Liv Tyler [33] Emma Watson [34]

I will now produce the letters in my next post. Peter

[Peter]

From: Nick Glover To: atlantis Subject: ADD ( was Re: ATL: More on "Drug Addiction," Part V!) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:55:03 -0400 Jeff Riggenbach said: >No, Bill, such "conditions" are *not* readily observable! What *is* readily observable is certain behavior! The "conditions" of "alcoholism," "obsessive compulsive disorder," "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder," and so forth, exist only in the minds of psychiatrists bent on turning all problems in human living into medical conditions and diseases -- and, of course, in the minds of their dupes among the general public!

I would say that before making such claims, Jeff may benefit from reading some research on the other side.  I can really only say anything about attention deficit disorder (ADD) because I have only read about it and also have personal experience with it.  Some of what Jeff says is correct.  What is readily observable are only certain behaviors and not an actual disorder.  There is no perfectly objective test that can be used to diagnose ADD.  Certain behaviors lead a psychologist to believe someone is very likely to have ADD.  Also, other disorders that could be causing some of the symptoms need to be ruled out.

Objectively ADD is characterized by distractibility, impulsivity, and restlessness.  These problems must be sustained over one's entire lifetime (ADD is genetic) and not be under the control of the individual.  Another thing to note is that "attention deficit" is a misnomer because the essential problem is attention inconsistency.  People with ADD can sometimes hyperfocus on a task (especially a thing an ADDer enjoys), so just because someone can sometimes focus on tasks does not mean that they don't have ADD if they also frequently have difficulty focusing on tasks.

One thing that is ambiguous about this description is the necessary frequency or severity of problem for it to qualify as ADD.  Psychologists Edward M. Hallowell and John J. Ratey diagnose a patient with ADD when the problems caused by it are significantly affecting the patient's everyday life.  Of course this is subjective, but I think it is evident that someone who is actually unable to focus on some tasks everyday of their life has an actual disorder, so it does seem reasonable to draw a line somewhere and diagnose some people with ADD.

The other difficulty is determining if the individual does actually have control.  Such a thing can to some extent be determined by observed behaviors combined with the patient's actual description of his problems.  In the example cases in Hallowell and Ratey's book _Driven to Distraction_, most cases involve a person who comes to see one of the authors for therapy (I think it's Hallowell) based on vague recommendation from someone else that he may have ADD.  The patient then describes how he really wants to do well in school (or whatever task(s) that are inhibited by his ADD), but he is unable to.  The patient will then go on to blame himself for his difficulties while describing his problems, but the fact that he is chronically unable to do something as simple as focus on the task at hand when he does have a genuine desire to do so makes it seem unlikely that he actually has control.

I also can provide myself as one example of a person who actually has ADD.  I believe in the major principles of Objectivism and believe that productivity is a good thing, and yet I chronically have difficulty concentrating on many things including school work, independent research, posts to Atlantis, etc.  I have tried "willing" myself to concentrate along with trying various environments to try to minimize possible distractions yet I very often manage to be distracted by my own mind by going off on some mental tangent.

Of course Jeff mentioned attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and not ADD, but the hyperactivity is just one very common behavior caused by impulsivity and restlessness, so it makes most sense to consider ADHD one of many subtypes of ADD that is not a separate disorder (because it has the same root causes).

There is also evidence of the actual neurological basis of ADD which is believed to be caused by a chemical imbalance and structural differences between the brains of those with ADD and those without it.  Jeff R. himself noted that every brain is different, so it would make sense for there to be a normal range of differences which consist of normal brains without a disorder, and then the outliers would be considered brains with some sort of disorder (especially when there is some observed behavioral problem).

On one last note, I do not believe ADD is an excuse, but rather an explanation for one's behavior.  A person with ADD should seek treatment recommend by Hallowell and Ratey and learn to cope with their ADD rather than use it as a crutch to excuse lack of productivity and the various other behavioral problem often associated with ADD (which have not been my focus in this post).

References: Edward M. Hallowell and John J. Ratey, _Driven to Distraction_  Edward M. Hallowell and John J. Ratey, _Answers to Distraction_

Nick Glover: Computer Science, Clemson University Homepage: http://hubcap.clemson.edu/~nglover/

"It's good to be open-minded, but not so open that your brains fall out." - Jacob Needleman

From: PinkCrash7 To: atlantis Subject: Re: ATL: ADD in children Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 22:47:21 EDT Nick Glover wrote: >Phyllis' grandson probably suffers from ADD that is exhibited more internally (I am also like this).  This type of person may be distracted by their own thoughts by inadvertently going off on mental tangents when trying to concentrate, and they may impulsively and restlessly move from idea to idea without being able to stay and focus for a long period of time on one single idea.  In this case, the person would be seeking high stimulation inside of their minds rather than from the external world.

>Of course, this isn't a black and white distinction.  I tend to fidget at times, need to get up and walk around to think, and sometimes get distracted externally by looking out the window.  Not too mention that I do occasionally act impulsively with my spending habits (mostly books) or say something rude to someone that I don't really mean.  However, no teacher in school ever suspected I had ADD because I was not a trouble-maker or anything like that and I managed to get grades because I was smart enough to do so with very minimal effort.

I simply don't see the point in using this label ADD.  Your description of yourself is a pretty good description of myself also, sort of like horoscopes, but I have never regarded myself as ADD and I refuse to be labeled ADD.  (Don't you just hate it when somebody says to you in an uppity tone of voice, "You have an attention deficit problem, don't you?" – or maybe that's never happened to you; it's happened to me.)

I'm not denying that certain persons have different types of things going on inside their brains, chemically and so forth, but I reject this whole labeling and categorizing business.  I'm pretty sure that my own daughter, my first, actually had some neurological damage at birth, although I never had her examined by a neurologist, for what does it matter anyway?   It was pretty obvious by the symptoms she exhibited, according to the books I read, and I think if I had I consulted the "experts" they would have had all kinds of special early-interventionist  classes in store for her and drugs to be put on and I would have none of that.  I felt that nobody could understand her the way that I did because I could see their impatience at her behavior. I sensed that some of her behavior was not really under her volitional control, but her heart was in the right place, and I did not want her being subjected to someone's else’s ideas of structure or discipline when they didn't even understand anything about her in the first place.  She thrived best on lots of freedom, mother's milk, and love and affection, and those aren't things you find in the offices of child psychiatrists and the public schools.

It's pretty remarkable, actually, the things that can be overcome by the drive of the human spirit.  She is a wonderful girl, very bright (a top student), beautiful and very dependable.  Yes, she does have a few idiosyncrasies (that's what they have seatbelts and airbags for...), but I am very proud of her for the way that she is learning to take control of her life.  She has recently taken up cross-country running (I find this much more acceptable than table dancing) and it's something that she loves and she thrives it on it.  (I just figured out a couple days ago, when talking to her, that it's the release of endorphins that she craves, not necessarily that she is an exhibitionist or anything. 

I was talking with one of my co-workers recently about ADD and Ritalin – of course, I work at a chiropractic school and chiropractors are generally pretty anti-drug in everything, so I fit in well -- and she was telling me something about a boy diagnosed with ADHD and a particular teacher at his school who apparently didn't buy into all that and the drugging, etc., and so she would take him out of the classroom when he started acting up and on long walks.  His behavior would calm down then and he thrived on this and she would marvel to the others, see, there is nothing wrong with him.

Again, I say it is the environment that needs to change for children regarded as afflicted with ADD and the various variations of this disorders, not the children first.  I don't think drugs are ever the answer for behavior and learning "problems" in children and with perseverance and understanding, I truly believe drugs can be avoided for almost any child.  And not only would children be better off for it, but society would be better off for it as well.  If taking such an approach became the norm, it would have to result in a kinder and freer society, not the repressive and authoritarian one that is often the norm today.

Wasn't that boy Timothy McVeigh said to have been on Ritalin most of his life?  I could be wrong about that, but I think I read it somewhere, and if that's the case, you see what good it did him... Debbie

From: Victor Levis To: Atlantis Subject: Re: ATL: ADD in children Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:01:45 -0400 At 10:47 PM 8/26/2001 EDT, PinkCrash7@aol.com wrote: >Wasn't that boy Timothy McVeigh said to have been on Ritalin most of his life?  I could be wrong about that, but I think I read it somewhere, and if that's the case, you see what good it did him...

I heard he might have been fed breast-milk, too.  And you see what good it did him......

Seriously, Debbie, you said your child thrived on breast-milk, etc., and that you would ignore the advice of other people.  Good for you.

Well, I have also observed my son carefully.  I know what it takes for him to thrive and what it takes for him to fail miserably at the things HE wants to do. If he forgets to take his Ritalin, then 90% of the time, his day is a disaster (on his terms, not just mine, my wife's or his teachers'). If he takes his Ritalin and makes the effort to behave in the way he knows to be right, he usually succeeds at his chosen task. After 5 years of observing this pattern, I know what I am talking about......in his case. Victor Levis

From: "Dave Thomas" To: atlantis Subject: RE: ATL: ADHD and other myths Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:38:23 -0700. Jeff Riggenbach: "So far as I've been able to ascertain, the fact that ADD "is believed to be caused by a chemical imbalance, etc." is on about an equal footing epistemologically with the fact that the existence of human beings is believed to be caused by the creative acts of a bearded old man in the sky; perhaps the books Nick suggests present the "evidence" he refers to?"

But drugs can alleviate the chemical imbalance (or, at least, they can change the observable behavior).  This is different than "take drugs, feel better".  In any case, I'm having trouble with why you're against the "medicalization" of this sort of psychological disorder.  Is it some form of theism?

JR: "This seems to me to be a very considered and reasonable statement, except for one small point.  I certainly agree that every brain is different.  One of the things "hard science" teaches us is that the more complex the organism, the greater the differentiation within the species.  The differences among individual humans are numerous and often dramatic, in a way that is not true for horses or frogs or snakes.  But is it necessarily the case that a difference is a "disorder"?"

Let's look at the facts.  A person is having difficulty concentrating for some reason.  They are unhappy with this.  They would like to be able to concentrate better.  They take a drug.  They are now more able to concentrate and are more able to pursue their goals.  I don't care whether you call ADD a "disorder" or not, but treating it with drugs is no less legitimate than, say, taking LSD to enhance one's creativity.  And doesn't it make sense for someone with ADD to receive "treatment" from a medical professional? Dave

From: Nick Glover To: atlantis Subject: Re: ATL: ADD in children Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:15:48 -0400/ Debbie Clark: >I simply don't see the point in using this label ADD.  Your  description of yourself is  a pretty good description of myself also, sort of like horoscopes, but I have never regarded myself as ADD and I refuse to  >be labeled ADD.  (Don't you just hate it when somebody says to you in  an uppity tone of voice, "You have an attention deficit problem, don't you?"  -- or maybe that's never happened to you; it's happened to me.)

>I'm not denying that certain persons have different types of things going on inside their brains, chemically and so forth, but I reject this whole labeling and categorizing business.  I'm pretty sure that my own daughter, my first, actually had some neurological damage at birth, although I never had her examined by a neurologist, for what does it matter anyway?   It was pretty obvious by the symptoms she exhibited, according to the books I read, and I think if I had I consulted the "experts" they would have had all kinds of special early- interventionist  classes in store for her and drugs to be put on and I would have none of that.  I felt that nobody could understand her the way that I did because I could see their impatience at her behavior. I sensed that some of her behavior was not really under her volitional control, but her heart was in the right place, and I did not want her being subjected to someone's else’s ideas of structure or discipline when they didn't even understand anything about her in the first place.  She thrived best on lots of freedom, mother's milk, and love and affection, and those aren't things you find in the offices of child psychiatrists and the public schools.

I believe Debbie is saying that she objects to "this whole labeling and categorizing business" because she objects a single doctor-prescribed response to a person's label.  However, this doesn't follow.  One can label and categorize people while still realizing they are individuals and have individual differences.  Having ADD means exactly what I have said in previous posts; the sufferer is unable in some cases to control their distractibility, impulsivity, and restlessness.  This does not imply the proper cure for ADD is Ritalin and public school brainwashing for everyone.  I really already explained the many ways that ADD treatment should be tailored to the individual in my post "ADD in Children" that Debbie is responding to.  My guess is that Debbie's real problem is not with labeling people as having ADD, but with the way most psychologists treat such people.  For the record, I generally agree with Debbie's lack of treatment of what might be ADD in her daughter (based on the small amount of information that I do have on the situation).  Of course, I don't see why Debbie wouldn't have had her daughter examined by a neurologist and I don't see a reason that Debbie shouldn't direct her daughter to _Driven to Distraction_ so she can learn about a disorder that she might have and at least learn about the non-drug treatment for ADD.

Debbie Clark: >I don't think drugs are ever the answer for behavior and learning "problems" in children and with perseverance and understanding, I truly believe drugs can be avoided for almost any child.  And not only would children be better off for it, but society would be better off for it as well.

Well, Victor Levis has already mentioned his son in response which saves me from retrieving _Driven to Distraction_ from my roommate again.  Safe to say, there are a few people mentioned in _Driven to Distraction_ who probably need the drug treatment even more than Victor Levis' son.  I will repeat that I do agree that the drug treatment by itself is not generally very effective because the child also needs to work to break bad habits and keep from reforming them.  Also the child may need "coaching" to help establish a good structure for his *individual* needs.  Ideally, an ADD sufferer should hope to get off drug treatment eventually.  Basically, he can use the drug to allow him to form good habits and after a while, he may be able to stop using the drug, but since he has formed good habits now, he will still be able to function productively.  The whole point is that an ADD sufferer often cannot begin forming good habits in the first place without drug treatment.  As I said, based on what Debbie has said, not getting her daughter treated for ADD (if her daughter does have it) seems to have worked out fine, so I don't object to her decision, but other people have more severe ADD that they are not able to work with without drug treatment. Nick Glover: nglover@clemson.edu

From: "Jane Yoder" To: atlantis Subject: ATL: Re: ADD in children Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 7:41:26 -0600 I have been following this thread with interest as my granddaughter, and her family, suffers from multiple ailments in and around a partial diagnosis of ADD. Doctors determine that this child had a slight stroke during birth and the therapies ever since have been continuous and arduous. These concerned parents study and work with specialists and undertake what seems rational to them. They do not use Ritalin now and took the child off the drug as soon as it seemed contra indicated. Because some of the posts contained specific information I e mailed her some from Atlantis. I respect the parents' views who have posted and wish to forward my daughter's reply on the information I sent. I think my child Carol joins the ranks of objective parents in bringing up Stephanie and illustrates my own parenting maxim -- you only learn in your own head.

Welcome home!  How was your trip??? Thank you for the posts...I've read Ratey and Hallowell...probably 1 - 2 years ago.  I do think there are true brain disorders - whether they are chemically, or anatomically or something in origin.  My job is to sift through ALL of STeph's to know what can be assisted with meds, what with diet, and, of course, what with behavior modification/parenting.  I see some of all of her stuff in everyone of us 6...pieces here and there.  And, of course, the severity levels vary as do the impact on our lives. I've joined an e - mail group for families dealing with brain disorders...learning a lot...still researching the bi-polar issues...trying to keep up with the posts...sometimes I get 100 a day!  That's too much for me.  And so with that, I'm off to bed so I can swim in the AM before Mike goes to work. Love, Carol.

From: PinkCrash7 To: atlantis Subject: Re: ATL: ADD in Children Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 01:25:38 EDT Nick Glover wrote: >Could you post what you consider to be good references on the "natural, holistic view that respects the body's innate ability to heal itself"?

Oh, happy day!     I would recommend "Today's Chiropractic" magazine, the world's leading magazine on chiropractic, which is also online and can be found at http://todayschiropractic.com/ There is a particularly interesting article in the current issue pertaining to vaccinations, plus more.  Also, the author of that article has an interesting site and you can click into it at the end of the article.

I would also like to mention that I just received a memo in my e-mail today inviting all the faculty and staff at the university I work at, which is Life University (publisher of the aforementioned magazine) to a presentation on Thursday by the Life University Research Center, online at http://www.life-research.edu/

One of the two topics to be presented is "Can Chiropractic Care Effectively Modify the Attention Levels and Behaviors Exhibited in Children Diagnosed with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder?"  I plan to attend and will share with Atlantis what I learn from it.  (I would like also like to mention -- in case anyone here knows of this -- it is true that our university, which houses the world's largest school of chiropractic, is presently on academic probation and at risk of losing its accreditation, but that that has nothing to do with the profession of chiropractic itself, of which I am an avid supporter and grateful patient.)

Now, unfortunately, both my internet is not working, nor is my WebFerret (search engine), and I am unable to give you any more links except what's in my head (my bookmarks do no good because there are hundreds in there, none of them organized, and I can't find a thing :-), so I will just tell you some things off the top of my head that I like.

Ivan Illich wrote an interesting book entitled, "Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health (1975), which I always liked very much. He also wrote, "Deschooling Society", another great book.  (Somebody on this list recently had an Ivan Illich quote on their sig -- I forget now who it was.)

The Couple to Couple League and La Leche League both provide books and articles that I like pertaining to natural family planning and breastfeeding respectively.  La Leche League is online at www.lalecheleague.com and I can't remember where the Couple to Couple League is at.  Sheila Kippley and her husband are the founders of CCL and besides their book on natural family planning, she also wrote a fascinating book entitled (to the best of my memory), "Breastfeeding and Child Spacing: The Ecology of Natural Mothering".

NAPSAC is a great source on home birth (okay, I've forgotten now exactly what the letters stand for, but it has something to do with childbirth).

Michel Odent, M.D., author of "Birth Reborn", and others, has some profound things to say on natural childbirth and natural health in general.

Dr. Robert Mendelson, M.D. (now deceased, and not the same one who used to - or perhaps still does - write for Parenting Magazine) wrote lots of books criticizing the medical establishment, including the book, "How to Have a Healthy Child in Spite of Your Doctor".

John Robbins is a marvelous writer on health, the author of "Diet for a Small Planet" (I think) and more, including a great book in criticism of the medical establishment several years ago which I loved so much, I gave it away 3-4 years ago to a chiropractic student who I also loved, and have missed ever since.     (An interesting side note, I believe John Robbins was the son of the Baskin-Robbins guy.)

Dr. Dean Ornish, M.D., is my favorite heart doctor and has written a number of books which have been of immense support to me as I used to suffer some rather serious chest pains (and refused to see a cardiologist, though I had been referred to one both by a physician and by the chiropractic clinic) -- with his last one (last one that I read anyway) more spiritually oriented than medically oriented, entitled, "Love & Survival: The Scientific Basis for the Healing Power of Intimacy".  (I no longer suffer chest pains, by the way, which I attribute predominantly to chiropractic care and the caring social support that I receive in the workplace.)

My favorite all-time parenting magazine, Mothering Magazine, has always been at the forefront in reporting on all aspects of health and parenting and lots of other issues and is also online, I think at  ww.mothering.com. It has always carried articles by leading doctors in the field, such as Michal Odent, as well as articles by regular moms and dads.  It has also covered the whole vaccination issue pretty thoroughly, presenting both sides of it. (There are also a lot of critical books about vaccination out there, a number of which sprinkle my bookshelves.)

Well, I'm sure I left some things out and there is probably lots for me still to explore, but that gives you at least an idea of the things I've been interested in over the years and still am. By the way, one of the biology professors in my department is a graduate of Clemson University.  Debbie