The Marketing of Madness: Are We All Insane?

[precious007]

Seriously, drugs are what makes the world go round.

Drugs are what's destroying the world, not making the world go around ........

[f. bandersnatch]

Drugs are what's destroying the world, not making the world go around ........

The war on drugs is destroying the world. Try to remember that in any twelve step program one of the first things they tell you is that the substance is not to blame for the addiction. Blaming drugs for the worlds problems is like blaming guns for the worlds wars.

[resnor]

I'll let someone else comment on how offensive that probably is to several of our members here, I mean how could you possibly equate bestiality with being gay? And what if pedophiles are naturally that way, I never said we should condone such behavior, just that we should better understand it. But I take offense that you would equate two gay adults having consensual sex together with an adult who seeks out and molests small children. Jesus christ man, cummon.

It was just a question, man. If you are saying that people are born that way, that is what I wonder. It's not meant to be offensive, and you took the conversation to these things, not me.

[heders]

Also, I'm 100% certain it has absolutely nothing to do with a spiritual or soul problem (animals get them too!).

Ever seen a depressed cat? A schizophrenic dog? A bipolar lion?

For sure, animals can get mental problems, but it's ALWAYS when in contact with humans, or manipulated by humans. You won't see it out in the wild.



I don't say that drugs are bad, and I don't say people don't need them (in more extreme cases), but they are widely over-used, as the documentary states. It's all a business now.

[truthwolf1]

I am seeing way more crazies in the neighborhood lately.

We are a overdrugged society that has yet to see the full extent of the madness. The whole drugging of kids at a early age is also quite unreal.

[sgreger1]

Nah.

It doesn't have to be genetic. I think the current thinking now is that much of "gender" is a product of hormonal differences during gestation (it can lead to XX men and XY women - it seems to follow that it could affect brain development too) - any number of things could affect this.

You also have some sort of pseudo-religious thing going on with genetics - all genes don't "have" to do anything - useful or not. Last I heard was about 90% + (obviously this number will decrease as we learn more - and is probably already significantly different - I don't follow this area) didn't appear to have any function.

You also seem to have a theme that if you are born with something it must be genetic, this is false. Consider environmental factors that are known to affect development during gestation - like fetal alcohol syndrome (over 50% of affected become criminals) or things like thalidomide (horrible birth defects (like extra limbs)). Wikipedia lists about 50 "Teratogenic agents": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratogenic

Danielan, none of those things apply to this.

It doesn't have to be genetic. I think the current thinking now is that much of "gender" is a product of hormonal differences during gestation (it can lead to XX men and XY women - it seems to follow that it could affect brain development too) - any number of things could affect this.

Daniellan, we have been seeing this for thousands of years, it does not appear that being gay is anything new to anyone. If this is the case, than it has to have some genetic or other component that keeps it around. If it were only hormonal differences than we would see a few freaks here and there instead of what we see now which is a pretty sizeable amount of the population that has this. To blame it on 1 environmental factor seems wrong because it happens all over the world in every environment, in every culture, and regardless of diet or cultural birthing practices. It has to be something hanging around in the genetics.

"You also have some sort of pseudo-religious thing going on with genetics - all genes don't "have" to do anything - useful or not. Last I heard was about 90% + (obviously this number will decrease as we learn more - and is probably already significantly different - I don't follow this area) didn't appear to have any function."

There is nothing pseudo-religious about it. I don't mean to imply that nature "has a plan" but rather that in the way things are currently set up, nature tends to only keep things around that it needs. Everything we see today is the product of all the evolution that went on prior to today. And the idea that 90% of genes "do nothing" is quickly becoming outdated. They have recently found a lot out about DNA and genetics which shows that, to absolutely no ones surprise, that other 90% of genes they thought did nothing actually do something and that thing we previously thought were dormant are actually taking an active role in forming the person. We are finding that genetics dictates a LOT more than we were previously aware. We havn't decoded it all, but there is growing evidence that much of our behavior is rooted in genetics. Criminals and even pedophiles perhaps seem to even have some basis in it, though criminal behavior is hard to pinpoint since so many environmental factors go into whether or not someone becomes a criminal.

This leads to an interesting problem, because on one end we can't fault people for doing what they are genetically programmed to do, but at the same time to have a peacefull society we can't let pedophiles run the street. So what do we do? Do we let our "feelings" about it lead the charge, or do we let pure logic and science dictate how we move forward? Personally I don't know the answer to this, because I personally am not willing to excuse any criminals or pedophiles just because nature makes them do it.

Anyways, those genes all do something, we just havn't cracked 90% of it yet. Don't think all that shit is there for nothing because it is not.

You also seem to have a theme that if you are born with something it must be genetic, this is false. Consider environmental factors that are known to affect development during gestation - like fetal alcohol syndrome (over 50% of affected become criminals) or things like thalidomide (horrible birth defects (like extra limbs)). Wikipedia lists about 50 "Teratogenic agents": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratogenic

But can you link fetal alcohol syndrome or thalidomide poisoning to being gay? No, that's the thing, all the evidence suggest that it isn't some terrible defect they got from some deficiency or poisoning, but rather something that naturally happens to a certain percentage of the population. While I cannot currently link being gay to genetics, you cannot link being gay to fetal alcohol syndrome or something else environmental in nature. Completely normal families with normal kids end up this way, the old concept that being gay must be the product of abuse is outdated and there is no evidence that childhood trauma or anything leads to being gay.


All i'm saying is that if your born with it, it likely has a root in genetics. Environmental factors can almost be rules out because we see gay people in every culture and environment, so what would they all hav ein common that would cause this? And it's been happening for thousands of years, what environmental factor has stayed consisten during that whole time? Just because gays don't give birth to other gays directly doesn't mean it's not genetic, it may just be more recessive than we thought, only showing up every several generations. We don't know, but we do know that subjective reports claim that this starts at birth. If this is true and it does start at birth, than I don't see any reason to not believe it is genetic in nature.

[Speedoape]

Hell. I thought this was a college basketball thread....and. I knew I was gay when I was 10. Born this way. It is what it is.

[sgreger1]

It was just a question, man. If you are saying that people are born that way, that is what I wonder. It's not meant to be offensive, and you took the conversation to these things, not me.

No that's a completely legitimate question. My answer would be that we just continue doing things like we always have, if society deems something acceptable, than it is acceptable, if they deem it is not, than it simply is not. There was a time when slavery was acceptable and a time when sacrificing yourchildren to the sun god's was acceptable, what we believe is right and wrong changes a lot as time goes by. I think that society has shunned pedophiles and bestiality types because they harm others in their actions, and we generally look down on that kind of behavior. Gays on the other hand are two consenting adults doing stuff with each other, which as far as I am aware harms no unwilling 3rd party or anything, so generally I would say that if it ain't bothering no one, than why make a big deal out of it?



Nature makes us inclined to eat food throughout the day, this is acceptable because it doesn't hurt anyone.
If nature makes you inclined to sleep with people of the same gender, I would say this is acceptable because it doesn't hurt anyone.
If an old man rapes a child or some hick starts pluging up the donkey, than I would say that it isn't acceptable because in both scenarios it involves harming an unwilling 2nd party, there is no consent.

[sgreger1]

Ever seen a depressed cat? A schizophrenic dog? A bipolar lion?

For sure, animals can get mental problems, but it's ALWAYS when in contact with humans, or manipulated by humans. You won't see it out in the wild.



I don't say that drugs are bad, and I don't say people don't need them (in more extreme cases), but they are widely over-used, as the documentary states. It's all a business now.

It's the walls man, they make you crazy. Living inthe concrete jungle, being so seperate from nature. I think these are some of the factors that lead to mental illness, particularly depression, it's livign in the city man. Plus, the humans water supply is tainted with old pharmaceuticals and other nasty chemicals so it wouldn't surprise me if it's all the lithium they are putting in the water in some places lol. When animals live with humans and they start drinking from their water sources. I noticed the same thing, animals can weather anything except beign domesticated for some reason. There are few animals that handle domestication very well. Then again, I wouldn't expect animals to cope with the human habitat as well as a human would. Humans have the ability to understand what is going on, the dog who suddenly finds himself locked in someones 1 bedroom apartment doesn't know wtf just happened to him.

[Roo]

Population Control

[Speedoape]

Population Control

Im doing my part.....

[sgreger1]

Maybe it's a common hormonal difference? Maybe it's multiple environmental factors? i.e., maybe it is related to inadequate vitamin D during pregnancy? All around the world people spend more time indoors... (This is probably BS - but the point is that this is as valid of a theory as "It MUST be genetic".)

I also tend to doubt the accuracy of trying to determine how many gay people we had 100 years ago. The social stigma probably tended to keep a lot of it under wraps - or there was less of it - 100 years later I don't think you could accurately determine which is the case. So, as far as we know - it could be getting more prevalent.



Yes, my disconnected earlobes and ability to roll my tongue have led me to my position as global dictator! bwah ha ha ha!



Yes, including mis-steps, random mutations, viral injected junk and dead-ends.



No, that wasn't what I was trying to do. I was pointing out that issues during gestation could lead to changes - that your "It must be genetic" argument is far from conclusive. Do I know what the cause is? No, of course not. Is there any reason to think that it is genetic? Not that I am aware of. It should be pretty easy to check. We, as you point out, have a lot of gay people. We can extract DNA efficiently. It should be a matter of doing so, then looking for patterns (easier then decoding and understanding every single gene). If there is no pattern over a large population - then there is probably no genetic basis. (which doesn't make it "wrong" or "evil" or "their fault" or a "choice" - it just makes it not genetic).



All I'm saying is that is not true in any meaningful way MANY "problems" that people are born with are not genetic problems.



That would rule out "nurture" arguments, but not specifically point to genetics.

Your points are all valid and I can't provide any evidence that you are incorrect. But it seems aparent that it isn't some deficiency, at least not one that we've found. I know that certain chemicals in pharmaceuticals (and other thing slike plastics) have been known to turn animals gay (bulls for example), so perhaps there is a chemical component to this. I don't know, but I wish I could find the link to where I was talking with this guy on another forum, he laid out the case for this so well I just wish I could find it to post it here. My google searches are not turning up the desired results so I will have to wait till I find it again. It was so interesting because I had never heard a plausible explanation for it so far from science until I read this. Don't know how much of the scientific community agrees with this theory I am talking about though, could be just 1 fringe guy who did that one study, I have no idea. Seemed legit though, but you know my bullshit sensor isn't always running at 100% capacity.

[JMo]

Ever seen a depressed cat? A schizophrenic dog? A bipolar lion?

For sure, animals can get mental problems, but it's ALWAYS when in contact with humans, or manipulated by humans. You won't see it out in the wild.



I don't say that drugs are bad, and I don't say people don't need them (in more extreme cases), but they are widely over-used, as the documentary states. It's all a business now.

The reason you don't 'see' it in the wild is because they don't survive long enough for you to 'see' it.

But institutionalized animals get mental illnesses all the time, and it's more than the environment or 'contact with humans.' It's in the gene code.

You overgeneralize way too much. There is very little black and white to life. Try opening your mind a little. It doesn't make your point of view any less viable.

[precious007]

lmao,

I highly doubt animals can have mental issues....

they more like neurological issues rather than mental issues :^)

[JMo]

What's the difference?

Mental illness is physiological. Emotions are physiological. Your thoughts and feelings and desires and hopes and values are all physiological. I know it's hard for a lot of us to realize and accept, but human beings are just animals, so why does it seem weird that 'lower' animals have similar problems we do?

Some people in this thread seem to think mental illness is some vaporous mysterious thing that happens to people for no apparent reason.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...d&searchtype=a

As I said, the fact that we care for our mentally ill and also that mental illness does not necessarily mean a complete loss of function means that mental illness stays longer in the gene code in humans and it makes animal problems more difficult to observe.

But they still get them:

The Origin and Evolution of Mental Illness
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...d&searchtype=a

Schizophrenia in Dogs
http://www.floridapetpages.com/artic...niaInPets.html

K-9 Mental Disorders
http://www.vetinfo.com/dneuro.html#A...erly%20sheltie

Mouse Model of Schizophrenia
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-htd072707.php


I mean all you have to really do is think about an acid trip. LSD interrupts acetylcholine and stimulates dopaminergic and cholinergic receptor sites. Schizophrenia is linked to overactive dopamine receptor sites, that's why dopaminergic inhibitors like tranquilizers help alleviate the symptoms of shizophrenia in some people. This is science people!

http://www.springerlink.com/content/l86v60511168481p/

There's a huge difference between saying that the drug companies might push too many drugs on people and saying that they don't work at all and it's all bullshit. They damn well do.