Post
by macliam » Mon Feb 21 2022 1:23pm
Sorry bb, individual cases do not make trends, nor are all "diagnoses" honest.
There are two watchwords that were drummed into me when I studied physiology and biochemistry - these are individual variations and specificity. This is specifically about drugs and their effects and side-effects, but carries over into everything else (most things boil down to the impact of a chemical reaction on a human being). What this means is firstly, that any one person will react to a given substance in an individual way - but not everyone will react in the same way; and secondly, that anything will have a range of effects, both good and not so good. One person will tolerate a substance better than the next, but equally the reaction to the substance may not be for the same reason. Only by looking across very large samples can the overall impact be judged (unless, of course, it's something like Curare or Arsenic!). However, even with these last two, there are circumstances where their effects can be used positively (e.g. the use of miniscule amounts of Curare to temporarily paralyse the heart during surgery).
Secondly there is the "fashion" effect and miscategorization. The former explains why some "issues" seem to become very "popular"... as an example, in France people believe that their liver affects their well-being far more than in the UK - and there is a massive disparity between the number of people diagnosed with liver problems there and here. The latter is where a "popular" category is used to cover some effects which don't really belong there.... the growth of the Autism "spectrum" over the last 40 years is one example.
So the best you can hope for is that you are given a treatment that relieves the symptoms you exhibit - but trying to generalize this into things being "good" or "bad" is meaningless.
Just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get me