Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

When Do We Panic?Follow

#102 Aug 07 2014 at 7:04 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
2,574 posts
You know what else has a 100% fatality rate?

Life!

Smiley: schooled
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#103 Aug 08 2014 at 5:49 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,030 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
You know what else has a 100% fatality rate?

Life!

Smiley: schooled

That's what we're led to believe.



Edited, Aug 8th 2014 1:50pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#104 Aug 08 2014 at 7:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
You know what else has a 100% fatality rate?

Life!

Smiley: schooled

Has anyone shared the Word of our Lord Jesus Christ with you today?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#105 Aug 08 2014 at 7:19 AM Rating: Good
******
43,849 posts
And pregnancy is a sexually transmitted disease.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#106 Aug 08 2014 at 7:20 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,030 posts
Sex kills.






Edited, Aug 8th 2014 3:21pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#107 Aug 08 2014 at 9:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
It's a small price to pay.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#108 Aug 08 2014 at 1:09 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,030 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
It's a small price to pay.
Yeppers.





Edited, Aug 8th 2014 9:33pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#109 Aug 08 2014 at 1:20 PM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Samira wrote:
Huh, we're still allowed to say "sucks". For now.


Don't rock the boat, Samira, we might get our snack privileges revoked.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#110 Aug 08 2014 at 1:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
Elinda wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
It's a small price to pay.
Yeppers.
Silly Mantis, you should never sell yourself for that little. At least be one of those spiders that gets to do it twice before they go. Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#111 Aug 08 2014 at 2:01 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,711 posts
Samira wrote:
I don't know if the strains are all that different, or if the numbers reflect the stage and degree of intervention.


The strains are that different. Assuming the current outbreak is of the Zaire variety (the most dangerous), then this is actually a case of the conservative media being more accurate (ie: not downplaying the danger by including stats for other varieties).
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#112 Aug 08 2014 at 2:09 PM Rating: Good
******
43,849 posts
gbaji wrote:
Assuming the current outbreak is of the Zaire variety (the most dangerous), then this is actually a case of the conservative media being more accurate (ie: not downplaying the danger by including stats for other varieties).
The Weapons of Mass Destruction method.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#113 Aug 08 2014 at 3:34 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,711 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Assuming the current outbreak is of the Zaire variety (the most dangerous), then this is actually a case of the conservative media being more accurate (ie: not downplaying the danger by including stats for other varieties).
The Weapons of Mass Destruction method.


If that's obscure code for "correctly identifying the fatality rate for the strain of the virus in question", then yes.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#114 Aug 08 2014 at 3:55 PM Rating: Good
******
43,849 posts
gbaji wrote:
If that's obscure
I hope you're taking steps to reduce the debilitating affects of your Alzheimer's. Smiley: frown

Edited, Aug 8th 2014 5:57pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#115 Aug 09 2014 at 1:59 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,426 posts
The strains are that different.

Gbaji **** in a stall near an epidemiologist, so he's an expert now.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#116 Aug 09 2014 at 2:55 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,976 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
The strains are that different.

Gbaji **** in a stall near an epidemiologist, so he's an expert now.

Now now, he pretty much got the Wikipedia info correct.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#117 Aug 11 2014 at 9:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
gbaji wrote:
Samira wrote:
I don't know if the strains are all that different, or if the numbers reflect the stage and degree of intervention.


The strains are that different. Assuming the current outbreak is of the Zaire variety (the most dangerous), then this is actually a case of the conservative media being more accurate (ie: not downplaying the danger by including stats for other varieties).
Why not say 45%-90%? Since that's the range of fatality for the Zaire strain outbreaks?

If anyone else did miss it, it is a Zaire strain, but appears to be unique and not directly descended from the other outbreaks.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#118 Aug 11 2014 at 10:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
someproteinguy wrote:
Why not say 45%-90%? Since that's the range of fatality for the Zaire strain outbreaks?

This isn't about accuracy, this is about who's right and who's wrong.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#119 Aug 12 2014 at 9:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
Jophiel wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Why not say 45%-90%? Since that's the range of fatality for the Zaire strain outbreaks?

This isn't about accuracy, this is about who's right and who's wrong.
It's almost like you'd think they have more to gain by being wrong than by being right.

Oh, right. Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#120 Aug 12 2014 at 8:02 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,711 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Samira wrote:
I don't know if the strains are all that different, or if the numbers reflect the stage and degree of intervention.


The strains are that different. Assuming the current outbreak is of the Zaire variety (the most dangerous), then this is actually a case of the conservative media being more accurate (ie: not downplaying the danger by including stats for other varieties).
Why not say 45%-90%? Since that's the range of fatality for the Zaire strain outbreaks?


Um... because my newfound knowledge from staying at a Holiday Inn Express (AKA: Wiki entry) says that's not correct. While an assortment of strains have fatality rates ranging from around 50% to around 90%, the Zaire strain is the one with the "around 90%" fatality rate.

Quote:
If anyone else did miss it, it is a Zaire strain, but appears to be unique and not directly descended from the other outbreaks.


And the fatality rate of this strain is? Do we have a number yet?

I just don't think it's fair to criticize people for using the correct fatality rate most associated with the strain in question. If it turns out that this particular Zaire strain has a lower fatality rate, then by all means we can correct that. But it's not wrong to start with the existing number until we actually have information to prove otherwise. And it's certainly questionable to slam people for using that number and to suggest they're exaggerating the risks. It comes off more like you're attempting to downplay the risks and/or just find some way to politicize this in an "us versus them" way. Why on earth should concern about bringing infected ebola patients to the US be turned into a partisan political issue? Isn't that kind of ridiculous? It almost seems to me like there are some people who will take whatever conservatives say and disagree with it, not because it's wrong, but because the people saying it are conservatives and the political value of making them look wrong/stupid/whatever is more important than actually being correct.

We're talking about a pretty nasty outbreak going on here. Can we actually just look at the facts of what's going on and not turn this into a political thing?

Edited, Aug 12th 2014 7:03pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#121 Aug 12 2014 at 8:24 PM Rating: Good
******
43,849 posts
gbaji wrote:
Um... because my newfound knowledge from staying at a Holiday Inn Express (AKA: Wiki entry) says that's not correct.
Wikipedia puts the current outbreak at roughly 64%.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#122 Aug 12 2014 at 8:32 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,940 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Um... because my newfound knowledge from staying at a Holiday Inn Express (AKA: Wiki entry) says that's not correct.
Wikipedia puts the current outbreak at roughly 64%.
But what does Palin-TV put it at? That's the only news source that really counts.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#123 Aug 12 2014 at 9:00 PM Rating: Good
******
43,849 posts
I don't know, which Holiday Inn Express are they filming from?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#124 Aug 12 2014 at 9:02 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,940 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
I don't know, which Holiday Inn Express are they filming from?
I don't know, they won't tell you unless you are a paying member.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#125 Aug 13 2014 at 9:14 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
gbaji wrote:
Um... because my newfound knowledge from staying at a Holiday Inn Express (AKA: Wiki entry) says that's not correct. While an assortment of strains have fatality rates ranging from around 50% to around 90%, the Zaire strain is the one with the "around 90%" fatality rate.
Since we like wiki so much, everything on this list that has a species listed as "EBOV" is a Zaire ebolavirus outbreak. The one in DR Congo from 2008-2009 had a 45% mortality rate.

gbaji wrote:
And the fatality rate of this strain is? Do we have a number yet?
1013/1848 or 54.8% since December of last year, you can find it on the same page, or here. There's other similar number out there on different sites. So, say, if you only trust conservative media you can get those numbers here. They're a couple days old, but tell the same story.


gbaji wrote:
We're talking about a pretty nasty outbreak going on here. Can we actually just look at the facts of what's going on and not turn this into a political thing?
It's not, I'm fairly universally against fear-mongering. Remember me not liking the climate change alarmists? Same **** different day.


Edited, Aug 13th 2014 8:17am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#126 Aug 13 2014 at 3:42 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,711 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Um... because my newfound knowledge from staying at a Holiday Inn Express (AKA: Wiki entry) says that's not correct. While an assortment of strains have fatality rates ranging from around 50% to around 90%, the Zaire strain is the one with the "around 90%" fatality rate.
Since we like wiki so much, everything on this list that has a species listed as "EBOV" is a Zaire ebolavirus outbreak. The one in DR Congo from 2008-2009 had a 45% mortality rate.


And the one in Congo had a 90%, and Zaire had 88%, and Congo again had 83%. Point being that of those with listed fatality rate, the top 7 are all of the Zaire variety. The one Zaire strain outbreak with a 45% fatality rate is a clear outlier.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
We're talking about a pretty nasty outbreak going on here. Can we actually just look at the facts of what's going on and not turn this into a political thing?
It's not, I'm fairly universally against fear-mongering. Remember me not liking the climate change alarmists? Same **** different day.


Except that there is actually an outbreak going on, and it is actually the worst outbreak of ebola we've yet seen. So I'm not sure how healthy caution isn't called for here. The worst that happens if we exaggerate the fatality rate (and to be honest, does it really matter from a public health perspective whether the rate is 65% or 90%?) is that people take the disease more seriously. How the **** is that not exactly what is needed? I just think that focusing on the accuracy of a number while ignoring the bigger picture seems silly.

The issue was about the wisdom of transporting infected patients into the US for treatment. Whether the fatality rate is 45% or 65% or 85% doesn't really make a difference with regard to that question. It's more a matter of increasing the odds that an outbreak may happen in the US. Given that this particular outbreak seems to have infected a large number of health care workers (who you'd think would be taking precautions against exactly this), I suspect the bigger question is about infection rates, not fatality rates. While it's obviously too early to say for sure, it does seem as though overconfidence by medical professionals regarding the spread of this outbreak has been part of the problem. The bigger point here being that it is too early to say for sure if this strain has some increased ability to spread and that's why it's spread so far. And while I have a great deal of confidence in the folks at the CDC, this is absolutely not the time and place for complacency.


I just think that blasting people who raise concerns about this because their fatality rate numbers may not be completely accurate is totally missing the point. It's like you're looking for a reason to discredit *them*, and not really looking at or responding to the concerns they're raising. And that seems like a totally moronic way to do things.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#127 Aug 13 2014 at 4:50 PM Rating: Good
******
43,849 posts
gbaji wrote:
Except that there is actually an outbreak going on, and it is actually the worst outbreak of ebola we've yet seen.
No it isn't. The worst we've seen was the 90% strain, this one is 54%. What happened in the last 24 hours that you've changed your mind from saying we should be using facts to completely ignoring those very facts? What could have possibly changed in that short amount of time to change your opinion so much? Better question, since you no longer feel facts are relevant, why not just say it is 100% fatal? I mean "Because that's not true" can't really be a valid argument since, derp, neither is 90% but here we are. I mean, 100% is clearly more concerning than 90% after all, and the difference between 90% and 100% is less than 54% and 90%.

Oh, and I'm using 54% total because that's the number the CDC released today. Not quite as reliable as the Holiday Inn Express bellboy, but I don't need to deal with a Jackson Pollock painting either.

Edited, Aug 13th 2014 6:51pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#128 Aug 13 2014 at 5:53 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,426 posts

I just think that blasting people who raise concerns about this because their fatality rate numbers may not be completely accurate is totally missing the point. It's like you're looking for a reason to discredit *them*


No, no, they discredit themselves with silly panic mongering.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#129 Aug 14 2014 at 9:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
gbaji wrote:
And the one in Congo had a 90%, and Zaire had 88%, and Congo again had 83%. Point being that of those with listed fatality rate, the top 7 are all of the Zaire variety. The one Zaire strain outbreak with a 45% fatality rate is a clear outlier.
Oh certainly, it's clearly a bad idea to concentrate too heavily on a data point that lies on the outer edge of the distribution. That's the whole point of this discussion. Is it that hard to report a range, or an average value even? Smiley: rolleyes

gbaji wrote:
Except that there is actually an outbreak going on, and it is actually the worst outbreak of ebola we've yet seen. So I'm not sure how healthy caution isn't called for here.
And the best way to get there is with inaccurate information! Smiley: schooled

gbaji wrote:
The worst that happens if we exaggerate the fatality rate (and to be honest, does it really matter from a public health perspective whether the rate is 65% or 90%?) is that people take the disease more seriously. How the **** is that not exactly what is needed?
I'd argue it does, but I'm guessing we'll just have to disagree on that. People do react different to a 45% survival rate and a 10% survival rate. It's amazing how some people give up fighting when they think they have almost no chance of beating something. Knowing your chance of recovery is 4x higher can be quite a motivator for them.

gbaji wrote:
The issue was about the wisdom of transporting infected patients into the US for treatment.
Smiley: dubious

Um okay. I'm not quite sure why you thought I was talking about that, but go on.

gbaji wrote:
I just think that blasting people who raise concerns about this because their fatality rate numbers may not be completely accurate is totally missing the point. It's like you're looking for a reason to discredit *them*, and not really looking at or responding to the concerns they're raising. And that seems like a totally moronic way to do things.
Who's being complacent? I'm at a hospital here, along with people who have been to the area in the last couple of months. I assure you I'm not walking around in a hazmat suit or anything. My daily routine is exactly the same as any other day. They haven't even sent out anything via e-mail or newsletter here, much less any alert. If we're not on alert, why should your average Joe be? Well, you know, excluding those who might be traveling there and such of course.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#130 Aug 14 2014 at 9:54 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
If we're not on alert, why should your average Joe be?
Because Fox told them to.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#131 Aug 14 2014 at 10:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
If we're not on alert, why should your average Joe be?
Because Fox told them to.
Even Fox had the presence of mind to post better information. Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#132 Aug 14 2014 at 10:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
If we're not on alert, why should your average Joe be?
Because Fox told them to.

Plastic sheeting and duct tape!! Smiley: ducttape
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#133 Aug 14 2014 at 11:07 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,247 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
No it isn't. The worst we've seen was the 90% strain, this one is 54%. What happened in the last 24 hours that you've changed your mind from saying we should be using facts to completely ignoring those very facts?


Far be it from me to be a gbaji apologist, but I think you're off the mark, a little bit. This is the worst outbreak we've seen in terms of numbers infected and dead, even though the mortality rate is lower. So, apples and oranges.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#134 Aug 14 2014 at 11:26 AM Rating: Good
******
43,849 posts
Samira wrote:
So, apples and oranges.
Okay, I can go with that. However it still doesn't justify spreading false information about the situation for no other reason than to incite panic. It only makes things worse.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#135 Aug 14 2014 at 2:35 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,426 posts
It's amazing how some people give up fighting when they think they have almost no chance of beating something.

Yeah, people don't die from "giving up fighting" That myth has to die. People die because their bodies are overwhelmed, not from a lack of determination.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#136 Aug 14 2014 at 2:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
It's fairly common to build entire hospitals that are designed to help out with the mental health side of treatment. A person's mental health does an affect on their chances for survival, and the quality of their eventual recovery. The last thing you need to do is get someone depressed by giving them misinformation and add that extra fatigue to an already difficult struggle. Saying "Wow you're almost certainly going to die" does nothing to help the patient, especially if it isn't true.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#137 Aug 14 2014 at 9:03 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,426 posts
A person's mental health does an affect on their chances for survival, and the quality of their eventual recovery

Nope. Barring actual psychosis or intentional self sabotage, thinking you'll probably die has no adverse effect compared to thinking you'll probably not die. Been studied fairly completely as it would be a great feel good story if positive thinking helped people better survive terminal conditions. It doesn't. I bet it was fun guessing though, huh?

Telling people to "think positively" or "keep fighting" some horrible illness is basically the polite way of saying "shut up about your suffering".

:) The smiley is there to make you healthier.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#138 Aug 15 2014 at 2:49 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
2,574 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
A person's mental health does an affect on their chances for survival, and the quality of their eventual recovery

Nope. Barring actual psychosis or intentional self sabotage, thinking you'll probably die has no adverse effect compared to thinking you'll probably not die. Been studied fairly completely as it would be a great feel good story if positive thinking helped people better survive terminal conditions. It doesn't. I bet it was fun guessing though, huh?

Telling people to "think positively" or "keep fighting" some horrible illness is basically the polite way of saying "shut up about your suffering".

:) The smiley is there to make you healthier.


Smiley: facepalm
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#139 Aug 15 2014 at 6:28 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,030 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Quote:


:) The smiley is there to make you healthier.


Smiley: facepalm

facepalm gave me a stomach ache.

Smiley: clap

My mom was dying from cancer for about 4 years. I can't believe how many times I heard people say stuff like, "she's a fighter", "she has lots to live for", "she'll beat this", even "god will see her through". Bull.

Because she died from the disease, it means she wasn't a fighter?

She had nothing to live for?

God gave her the sinners cold shoulder?

Why would anyone ever die from disease if a bit of positive thinking is a cure-all?







Edited, Aug 15th 2014 2:29pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#140 Aug 15 2014 at 6:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Elinda wrote:
Why would anyone ever die from disease if a bit of positive thinking is a cure-all?

It's not that positive thinking is a cure-all, it's that depressive thinking and giving up hastens the end (and thus diminishes the chance at recovery). A more optimistic attitude staves off those effects but it's not as though rainbows cure viruses.

So goes the thinking. I couldn't possibly care enough to argue with Smash about it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#141 Aug 15 2014 at 7:30 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,030 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Why would anyone ever die from disease if a bit of positive thinking is a cure-all?

It's not that positive thinking is a cure-all, it's that depressive thinking and giving up hastens the end (and thus diminishes the chance at recovery). A more optimistic attitude staves off those effects but it's not as though rainbows cure viruses.

So goes the thinking. I couldn't possibly care enough to argue with Smash about it.

I'm more inclined to think that a depressive thinking may cause someone to not take their prescribed meds, or not eat, sleep or otherwise maintain their body properly - thus hastening the end.

I don't think the average human can internally fight a disease through forceful thought, and while it certainly makes for a good story, I don't think undying 'love' will pull someone through.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#142 Aug 15 2014 at 7:53 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,247 posts
Depression, not feeling a little blue but actual depression, is known to, well, depress the immune system.

That's a far cry from saying that the opposite is true, and a smile can actually serve as an umbrella. (Doesn't work, I tried it.)
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#143 Aug 15 2014 at 8:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Well, it's not a literal umbrella, Samira.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#144 Aug 15 2014 at 8:21 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,247 posts
But that's the only kind that does me any good! Smiley: mad
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#145 Aug 15 2014 at 8:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Maybe if you got that lip surgery it would!
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#146 Aug 15 2014 at 9:14 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
Elinda wrote:
I don't think the average human can internally fight a disease through forceful thought, and while it certainly makes for a good story, I don't think undying 'love' will pull someone through.
Not particularly just in response to you or anything, but it was a particularly good quote to quote. Smiley: wink Below is a random scattering of whatever showed up quickly when I searched for stuff:

Effects of social relationships on survival for women with breast cancer: A prospective study
Quote:
In addition we found significant and indepedent effects on survival of: number of supportive friends, number of supportive persons, whether the woman worked, whether she was unmarried, the extent of contact with friends and the size of her social network. Thus, the woman's social context, particularly contexts of friendship and work outside the home, are statistically important for survival.


Depression Following Myocardial Infarction Impact on 6-Month Survival

Quote:
Conclusion. —Major depression in patients hospitalized following an Ml is an independent risk factor for mortality at 6 months. Its impact is at least equivalent to that of left ventricular dysfunction (Killip class) and history of previous Ml. Additional study is needed to determine whether treatment of depression can influence post-MI survival and to assess possible underlying mechanisms.(JAMA. 1993;270:1819-1825)


Religious attendance increases survival by improving and maintaining good health behaviors, mental health, and social relationships
Quote:
Weekly attendance was also associated with improving and maintaining good mental health, increased social relationships, and marital stability. Results were stronger for women in improving poor health behaviors and mental health, consistent with known gender differences in associations between religious attendance and survival. Further understanding the mechanisms involved could aid health promotion and intervention efforts.


Subjective State of Health and Survival in Elderly Adults
Quote:
The self-rating of health was found to be an important psychosocial parameter in the evaluation of health status, in determining the prognosis of an elderly person, and in analyzing survival.


No health without mental health
This one is a good one there are links to 270 different papers there detailing the importance of mental health on a bunch of things including: HIV/Aids, Cardiovascular disease, Diabetes, malaria, Tuberculosis, generic injuries, etc. In some cases you're increasing the chances of coming sick, in other cases you're talking about the speed and quality of the recovery, sometimes there's a direct impact on mortality (probably the most relevant to this discussion), and there's plenty of papers showing the opposite as well (i.e. traditional illness -> mental illness -> die).

Predictors of survival among hemodialysis patients: Effect of perceived family support.
Quote:
Estimated 5-year mortality rates among low family support patients were approximately 3 times higher than estimated mortality for high support patients. Differences in patient adherence to the dietary and medication regimens failed to explain the significant effect of family support.


And that's enough of google scholar for the moment. The pump is beeping something about going over-pressure in the other room, and I should probably go take a look at it. Smiley: lol
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#147 Aug 15 2014 at 10:10 AM Rating: Good
******
43,849 posts
Speaking of psycho-ologilistic stuff, how long should I play Hide and Seek with a five year old? We started five minutes ago, and I found her feet sticking out from under her bed giggling. When should I reveal I found her?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#148 Aug 15 2014 at 10:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,841 posts
You can wait until they're calling for you loud enough that the neighbors can hear, about that point you have to break down and go find them though. No traumatic hide-n-seek games. Smiley: lol
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#149 Aug 15 2014 at 10:39 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I believe protocol is to stand by her bed saying "I wonder where she could be?" and maybe 'accidentally' nudge her foot with your own. Then leave for a minute and return to say "gotcha".

Sitting on the bed is optional depending on the bed height, your weight and the chance of crushing your child.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#150 Aug 15 2014 at 10:58 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,849 posts
Did as instructed. Called out, pretended to leave, and sat on the footboard of her bed and waited for her to get bored and crawl out. Then I caught her. Was fun. Now for some peanut butter and banana sandwiches. Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#151 Aug 15 2014 at 11:20 AM Rating: Excellent
It's like hide and seek for the whole asylum.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 65 All times are in CDT