Friday, 7 January 2011
Creative commons publication on artifificial intelligence and neuroscience
Artificial Intelligence in
Neuroscience and Systems Biology:
Lessons Learnt, Open Problems,
and the Road Ahead
Guest Editors: Daniel Berrar, Naoyuki Sato, and Alfons Schuster
http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/specialissues/0532010001.pdf
Neuroscience and Systems Biology:
Lessons Learnt, Open Problems,
and the Road Ahead
Guest Editors: Daniel Berrar, Naoyuki Sato, and Alfons Schuster
http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/specialissues/0532010001.pdf
Wednesday, 5 January 2011
First do no harm or suck on my chocolate salty balls
So here's what I'm thinking. The Hippocratic Oath is either bullshit and shouldn't be taken from doctors or it should be implemented.
When antipsychotics were used on the elderly they harmed. 1,800 people every year were killed unnecessarily. That's a fucking big harm. That's more than the murder rate in the UK. And yet somehow the Royal College of Psychiatry and the Royal College of Physicians managed to get away with a Homer-esque "doh!".
First do no harm. To me that sort of means first do no harm, then second...do no fucking harm. Of course I'm an idealist who uses whatever I can to make my point...so do no fucking harm.
The treatment with antipsychotics exposes the fallacy. They were used as chemicals will alter behaviour. People would fight against the use straitjackets but they'd be the safer option. Better still, change society. Stop killing the elderly with drugs used for society's convenience or stop calling yourselves doctors.
You bunch of fucking numpties. It's so damn obvious but perhaps I've just smoked enough skunk to see the sense in the idea that if medicine is going to indoctrinate its members with the Hippocratic Oath then it's going to have to do antistigma of symptoms. Otherwise doctors who peddle psychiatric drugs for convenience must be barred. The Hippocratic Oath is the first thing every doctor takes. It gives them status above politicians who can pick and chose what they do versus what they say.
Or else it can such on my chocolate salty balls. Put them in your mouth and suck them.
When antipsychotics were used on the elderly they harmed. 1,800 people every year were killed unnecessarily. That's a fucking big harm. That's more than the murder rate in the UK. And yet somehow the Royal College of Psychiatry and the Royal College of Physicians managed to get away with a Homer-esque "doh!".
First do no harm. To me that sort of means first do no harm, then second...do no fucking harm. Of course I'm an idealist who uses whatever I can to make my point...so do no fucking harm.
The treatment with antipsychotics exposes the fallacy. They were used as chemicals will alter behaviour. People would fight against the use straitjackets but they'd be the safer option. Better still, change society. Stop killing the elderly with drugs used for society's convenience or stop calling yourselves doctors.
You bunch of fucking numpties. It's so damn obvious but perhaps I've just smoked enough skunk to see the sense in the idea that if medicine is going to indoctrinate its members with the Hippocratic Oath then it's going to have to do antistigma of symptoms. Otherwise doctors who peddle psychiatric drugs for convenience must be barred. The Hippocratic Oath is the first thing every doctor takes. It gives them status above politicians who can pick and chose what they do versus what they say.
Or else it can such on my chocolate salty balls. Put them in your mouth and suck them.
ECT: a good video by someone who it worked for
I wonder if there are any studies on exorcism?
The TED.com broadcast on ECT mentions how ancient healers used to use
certain herbs which caused convulsions and perhaps these herbs could
have been used in exorcisms. By accident they could have been causing
the same seizures as ECT causes which temporarily seem to treat mental
dsorder (or possession) though after treatment the effects compared to
sham ECT are the same.
http://www.ted.com/talks/sherwin_nuland_on_electroshock_therapy.html
The speakers amazing. He's getting people to laugh about ECT. This video
will be used in the future to show how sick early 21st century
psychiatrists were.
The pseaker had ECT 30 years ago and it's clearly worked for him.
He speaks about how his life made him depresssed.
He speaks about how the medical staff were going to do a pre-ftromtal
lobotomy. They'd gotten together and decided this was the best course of
acti0n. Luckily the resident doctor in charge of his care resisted the
pressure to use this technique. The speaker never knew any of this was
going on at the time.
They used ECT instead. He describes it's effects as remarkable.
What's great about this video is the guy's honesty. He makes a really
good point at the end.
Tuesday, 4 January 2011
Ebay shopping tips - buying clothes
A lot of people might not want to buy second hand clothes. They'd be ok
hiring a suit but there's something about buying clothes secondhand that
makes some people think twice.
hiring a suit but there's something about buying clothes secondhand that
makes some people think twice.
Smart shoppers know fashion is fickle and what's in last season is only
out this season if you hang out with people who know about fashion.
Otherwise for most people it's how you put together a set of clothes and
how you wear them. I just chuck on whatever and hope for the best but I
used to care about how I dressed. Chosing the right clothes to fit a
look can have great impact.
It's more risky with ebay because it's not possible to feel the fabrics
or check for little details as well as the risk of getting a well worn
item. Charity shop biying is a better way to get all the important
information. Getting size right is also a lot harder with ebay.
Thankfully I'm no longer fussy about this aspect either. It's rare
occassions where I have to look good where I have clothes which fit and
look smart. Those are culled from ewhatever else I buy from ebay and
wear everyday.
The trick is to find sellers who are selling a lot of their clothes. If
they're the right size then a lot of their clothes will be the same size
and if you pick something that you like then there's a good chance that
the seller has other similar items. Getting lots of items from one
seller means you can save on postage. This is the biggest problem with
buying clothes on ebay. Something which costs £1 on auction can cost a
few pounds to post. Getting lots of clothes from the same seller means
the postage can be combined and there's less packaging needed.
The usual tips apply. Buy from sellers with good feedback. Buy through
paypal. Use recorded delivery for larger purchases.
I might buy 4 or 5 items from the same seller of which I'd hope that all
are wearable and as described. One or two might not fit. I can still
wear them, resell them or drop them off in a charity shop. The savings
are huge. A lot of people take great care of their clothes and good
brands use good materials so the items look new. I tend to seek brans
because I expect they'll have better made clothing. Premium clothing
feels different. The materials are so much better. The designs can often
be better for my shape which is tall and thin rather than tall and
bigger which is what a lot of the very cheapest line of cloithing are
cut to, e.g. Asda-bought trousers. I can a good quality pair of trousers
for secondhand for the same price as I can get a pair of trousers from
Asda but the cut, material and look will be much better.
I was given a £200 Selfridges voucher as thanks for taking photos at a
mate of mine's wedding. I just couldn't spend it. I'd get so much
clothing for that money. In Selfridges, even in the sales, I'd walk out
with a few items. In the end I gave it to a charity to auction. Now I'm
just spending £20-30 to buy a few second hand tops which look ok and
probably fit.
It's also the most ethical form of shopping I think. It's best to
collect the clothing in person but since nothing new is created and the
only transport is post there's the least impact on the environment. It's
recycling rather than consumption.
I could buy from charity shops but few have the clothes I'm looking for.
They're often targeted at women though they can be a good place to get
mens suits if you know charity shops in the right area. Instead I give a
£1 donation for every purchase I make on Ebay, even for the smallest
item. Well, most purchases anyway. If I pay cash on collection I stick a
pound in the local newsagents charity box or give in other ways. This is
on top of all the other giving I do of course. It's just an added thing
with my purchases. I get such a bargain i don't feel bad giving some of
it to charity.
That's the great thing about EBay. Things can be so cheap if your
expectations shift slightly. The difference in function and form between
products a year or two behind the times and the latest ones, even with
technology, is small but appreciable. With clothing it's a lot smaller.
The cost difference between a brand new pair of designer jeans at retail
price and a bargain pair on Ebay is massive. I bought a FCUK suit jacket
that can't have been more than a few years old and was in excellent
conditon for £1 with £4 postage. The seller had put it in the vintage
section instead of the suit section. It's such a bargain that making a
small donation is rational.
Monday, 3 January 2011
Thoughts on psychosis
So I r just had a moment where my dad, unconsciously, scratched his armpit. I thought nothing of it but I thought to think about the moment.
In times when I've experienced psychosis that gesture could have been experienced differently. It could have been seen as a gesture that I was ape-like or a Neanderthal. The gesture I dismiss could have been experienced as though either my dad or my other entity through my dad's unconscious gesture was telling me I was ape-like.
This is about interpretation of unconscious actions perhaps. But it's not enough to dismiss it like that. The experience, were I experiencing psychosis in full flight, would be the gesture had significance and there was intent or communication behind it. It is experienced like this not interpreted consciously to mean something different. The experience is so rapid - during psychosis there is no conscious part of the thought process, it's in instantaneous experience to feel communication this way.
What a person does with it is important. Had I experienced the moment I describe when I was experiencing psychosis I can still develop coping mechanisms or ways to maintain a grip on external consensus reality. Whether consensus reality is the totally of reality or just a bit that's easily understood by everyone I still have to live in it. So during the acute phase I had to hold everything in. One part was developing a conscious process of weighing the realities and trying to do this with a scientific mind as well as an understanding of people. It would range from just being confident that though mind control was possible it was highly unlikely. Though experiencing my computer communicate it ways it couldn't or shouldn't I had to try to grip on to the fact that it may not be real because the majority of the my time with computers has been experienced the way other people experience them. These gestures which may mean nothing or have extreme significance. had to be lived with as a practicality as having little to no significance.
This doesn't mean the communication is dismissed though. Whatever was speaking, whatever I felt, has a purpose and reason. So in this instance I think I can interpret to mean I'm ape-like. I'm backward, I'm dishevelled, uncivilised, perhaps even a child though i think the communication was more about an evolutionary throwback rather than a childish manner. I can take that on board. I know I'm like that it many ways. Some of my views on mental health my be from the Stone Age. Sone of my thinking is possibly that backward as well. What Ido with this information is the next question.
In times when I've experienced psychosis that gesture could have been experienced differently. It could have been seen as a gesture that I was ape-like or a Neanderthal. The gesture I dismiss could have been experienced as though either my dad or my other entity through my dad's unconscious gesture was telling me I was ape-like.
This is about interpretation of unconscious actions perhaps. But it's not enough to dismiss it like that. The experience, were I experiencing psychosis in full flight, would be the gesture had significance and there was intent or communication behind it. It is experienced like this not interpreted consciously to mean something different. The experience is so rapid - during psychosis there is no conscious part of the thought process, it's in instantaneous experience to feel communication this way.
What a person does with it is important. Had I experienced the moment I describe when I was experiencing psychosis I can still develop coping mechanisms or ways to maintain a grip on external consensus reality. Whether consensus reality is the totally of reality or just a bit that's easily understood by everyone I still have to live in it. So during the acute phase I had to hold everything in. One part was developing a conscious process of weighing the realities and trying to do this with a scientific mind as well as an understanding of people. It would range from just being confident that though mind control was possible it was highly unlikely. Though experiencing my computer communicate it ways it couldn't or shouldn't I had to try to grip on to the fact that it may not be real because the majority of the my time with computers has been experienced the way other people experience them. These gestures which may mean nothing or have extreme significance. had to be lived with as a practicality as having little to no significance.
This doesn't mean the communication is dismissed though. Whatever was speaking, whatever I felt, has a purpose and reason. So in this instance I think I can interpret to mean I'm ape-like. I'm backward, I'm dishevelled, uncivilised, perhaps even a child though i think the communication was more about an evolutionary throwback rather than a childish manner. I can take that on board. I know I'm like that it many ways. Some of my views on mental health my be from the Stone Age. Sone of my thinking is possibly that backward as well. What Ido with this information is the next question.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)