Of course I can: http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=13e2512e5f015bbf759368227fbf43b2 And its not just medical professional "opinion" you're seeing. Its the result of real science. That's a somewhat confused paragraph, but I'll address what *I think* is the key point. Yes, there is no good treatment / cure for schizophrenia. Eventually there probably will be (in your lifetime even). No, not really. Understanding a problem doesn't mean a solution magically becomes available. Don't know. I don't recommend mind-altering drugs for anyone. I think you're under the impression that I some how support something unrelated. No. Of course. I even provided you with a link so you can educate yourself; however, it only works if you have the ability and willingness to understand. Those are two factors that I cannot help you with. Appeal to emotion and pseudo-authority.
ok lets take a look at this link: key word susceptibility: inconclusive...yes? Points out a possible link to a gene that has implications for a state that may result in schizophrenia type symptoms. But this is not describing what it is but merely that they are researching possible genetic predispositioning to a state that has been described IMO falaciously as a mental disorder. dare I Say more.... I wonder what else DISC1 supports within the mental structures of the mind/body? I bet they have no idea....yet they are prepared to contemplate genetic modification I guess to find out....how many human monstrosities will they create I wonder... Answer: None![mainstream] because believe it or not there are incredibly good thinkers out there who would prevent such an error of judgement from occurring. Mind you "illegal" gene mods may occur unfortunately. CC you really need to apply a bit of critical assessment to what you read about this stuff. You obviously have a massive facination with it but you really need to qualify the info you read better. They are at this stage pointing the finger to a possible genetic link up that generates a state of "mind" that produces what is commonly referred to and IMO falaciously, as mental disorder. This is not describing the condition but merely reinforcing their ignorance of what that condition / state actually is. A bit like saying " I don't like the brown irises/eyes so I am going to remove the genetic material that I believe is responsible for it" That doesn't state why we have people with brown irises now does it, just merely how inconvenient they might be to some people. Talk to an iridologist and you will find a very upset person at the notion of genetic eye color removal. In the other thread someone mentioned: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=100106&page=6 my response: >>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< So you have made a grand claim: You have responded to: with: and have failed in your first attempt. care to try again?
You do realise when they (being psychiatrists) suggest that something like schizophrenia can be Heredatory, they like to try and catalogue it as a genetic malfunction. They don't tend to take into consideration that if a child lives with a parent that suffers the condition, that over time the childs psychiatry can be affected because of their proximity more than their genetics. As for the condition, there is no single cure because there is no single condition. The current psychiatric method of deploying drugs to whitewash a persons brain to barely be humanly functional is never going to achieve a cure.
Crunchy Cat and others, You look for evidence of psychic phenonema. try this thread: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2553647#post2553647 Psychic blocking occuring that is so blatantly obvious.... and I can show you numerous other threads with similar implications. If you can explain how apparently clever and smart posters can fail to express the most obvious solutions so badly and behave so intolerantly with out resorting to psychic phenonema as a casuation I'd like to hear it.
Incorrect. It means if you have the gene, you are susceptible to developing schizophrenia organically. You should re-read the paragraph and understand what it means as well. The paragraph you originally quote describes exactly what it is. Maybe you didn't understand the technical language, so I'll put it into regular every-day english: DISC1 regulates the migration of new neurons in the adult brain. When the levels of DISC1 are altered during adult neurogenesis, newborn neurons speed up / slow down and overshoot / undershoot their intended targets within the hippocampus. When the neurons finally reach their destinations, they forge a wacked-out number of connections with neighboring cells. In other words, a normal brain has a sycnrhonized method of signal processing. A schizophrenic brain is out-of-sync... like a poorly tuned radio station. Are you complaining that its not fully understood how DISC1 does what it does? Remember, you only asked me for the "what"... not the "how". Don't know. It probably provides a survival advantage. They will probably test things out on mice first silly. Not really. It is apparent that you didn't understand all the content that you read. I do understand it on the other hand. Incorrect. They are pointing out a neural regulation gene that is out of whack when people's brains become schizophrenic. They are also pointing out that mis-regulation makes you susceptible to schizophrenia. Its very clear what it is... I can spell it out and show it to you. What I cannot do is make you understand or accept it. Are you worried that medical technology might get to the point where it can "remove" your schizophrenia? Is that a big concern for you? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! To date, there is no evidence that paranormal anything exists. So no, nobody is researching "how" paranormal phenomena works because there is no phenomena (the "what" part) to study. I only failed to make you understand / accept the content of the article. My claim wasn't to make you understand / accept. My claim was to show what schizophrenia was. I can't do much more beyond that unless you have questions about the technical aspects of the article.
What exactly is "psychic blocking"? The question sounds like: "If you can explain how *subjective judgement* posters fail to *subjective outcome* and behave in a *subjective manner* without resorting to *magic* then let me know". That question is simply flawed and exemplifies the ol' "god of the gaps" argument... that is... if "I don't understand... then 'God' did it".
Crunchy Cat, and yes we are still waiting.... to repeat myself: all you have done is indicate what may precipitate a condition often incorrectly labeled as schizophrenia. You have not shown what schizophrenia is. You have only confirmed for the board how much effort money is being devoted to progress/reinforce their own ignorance of what they are attempting to find a solution to. am I wrong? if so why? You claimed to be able to prove that science knows WHAT schizophrenia is and have only provided what? merely a possible genetic link to a predisposition to a condition that is unable to be explained - schizpophrenia [ not the link persee]. and I might add you are normally way to smart to make such a mistake.
attacking me for your own error I see.... I think you need to put your explanation side by side the actual article and do a bit of work. in fact if i have the time I might do it as well and we can compare prejudices and bias. if i recall they do not even understand what DISC1 does...as they are only making investigations based on poor understanding. or allows the race called humans to exhibit creativity and a will to go on living with out thoughts of suicide due to oppressive and ineffective medical interventions. who knows ...care to speculate using a living human ? Currently the stats for the USA range around 25% diagnosed end up dead by suicide with in the first 3 years of diagnosis. Now that's good medicine! and quality speculation using a living human being. Mice have been diagnose with schizophrenia! wow news headlines! and whats more mice have a completely different cognisant/volition system attacking me again due to your own ignorance and dare I add the descriptor "arrogantly" as well. No, they are pointing out their theories with no real conclusions yet to be made. And they have still not shown what Schizophrenia is. what is it then? we are still waiting..... like they removed the ozone in our atmosphere, build nukes a plenty and a few other little nasties...yep..very... amazing what science has done in it's arrogance and ignorance...truly amazing.. so you never heard of the saying "being so blinded by your own arrogance you can't see a damn thing".... still waiting...
You know of course CC that when it scomes to life and living there is a hell of lot more involved than mere genetics. if it "the human" was just merely genetics then we should as competent scientists take a couple of kilograms of carbon, some water, some silica and few other elementary non-animated [dead] objects and create life and then maybe with a bit of time [ like a few billion years] create sentient life. So you think we can stuff about with the genome and somehow be confident we don't ultimately extingiush that life. arrogance! begahd!
Proof of psychic paranormal activity willnever be able to be proved empirically until the human race as a collective is ready for it to be proved. as yet Humans have demonstrated way too much paranoia about this subject [as seen by it' growing dependancy on psycho tropic drugs, which immediately forces the "Global mind" into self presevation and removes any possibility of globally acceptable proofs or evidences. Classic examples: One jesus Christ was discredited, flogged and strung up on a cross and left to die for exhibiting paranormal activity, any sector of the community that has been involved in occult practice have historically been persecuted, from witches [ remember Salem ]to Knights Templa to Freemasonary to name a few. Example: the USA Government [ aka the people of the USA ] would be extraordinarilly concerned if it knew that top secret information about it self and it's citizens was readilly available via psychic means. People rely and are extremely dependant upon the secrecy/privacy of their minds. It is only when that dependancy is controlled and rational [ free of rampant paranoia] that evidence will ultimately be presented. Even if you have people volunteering for telepathic trials this does not rule out the impact of other paranoid persons interfering to protect their inner secrets. The problem is obvious and the effect is what I have labelled "pandoras safe" An example of which is currently being displayed in the thread quoted and also in this thread by yourself. Demonstrated mainly by your impossible to support arrogant statements and irrational bias and the strong inclination to attack by discreditation. Which is exactly the behaviour that condemns people to a sub existance as schizophrenics in the first place. Discredited and alienated...due to the fear that the truth of psychic paranormal ability may be revealed as credible.
As humorous side note: You know of course that the Rand Foundation have offerred 1 million USD if someone can empirically prove psychic paranormal activity to be real? but did you know also, when I checked the small print in 2007, that it requires the successul person who takes the $1mil to grant Rand foundation exclusive marketing rights? So on the face of it they are offering a prize they know will never be given yet hedge their bet by demanding exclusive marketing rights to the successful person or group. I find this rather amusing for some reason...not sure why! Around the world the current total amounts to approximately $30 million USD at last count [2007] all with similar exclusivity requirements. The net marketing worth of a successful person or group would exceed this vaue by many times. Not to mention most likely gain psychic access to all of the worlds Government and personal secrets. Whats that worth do you think? It reminds me of that silly sci fi movie [ Mars attacks I think it was called] where by the MArtian commander looks over the planet and says " Nice planet! I'll take it!"
As a factual side note I'd like to point out that it's actually JREF: the James Randi Educational Foundation. The RAND Corporation is an R&D (hence the name) and advisory institution. Really? Please point out the relevant small print in the rules. Marketing isn't even mentioned. And, on the face of it you've managed to misname the relevant party and make a claim that appears to be false. Is that amusing? It (your comments and claims) reminds me of a strawman.
Hmm I do apologise...I see that they have amended the document since I communicated with them in 2007.
can you provide a copy of the applications terms and condition prior to 1st of April 2007. the document you have cited is a replacement for an earlier document that was available prior to the 1st of April. 2007 and if it still consistant then obviously I am mistaken and shall withdraw my assertion and delete/edit the relevant post.
I can't find one. But then I shouldn't have to. The claim was yours (and twice shown to be incorrect - all you've done is shift the goal posts). There is this from the Wiki entry: Which would indicate that the prior form also included nothing about marketing.
eh doesn't matter I am sure there are copies floating around to find on the net... however it is interesting that we have a Rand proponent on the board with a very intimate knowledge of JREF. Do you know why I was banned from JREF and do you know the three threads that were run there?
Who? If you're referring to me you're wrong. Google takes 5 minutes at most... It's no good asking me. I've never previously looked at JREF until tonight. (But I was aware of the difference between Randi and RAND - I have a few of the latter's publications). Disclose? Er, I have an inordinate fondness for extremely sour apples. Is that any good?
do you have a link then to the archives you pulled that pdf document out of - a link that is publically available and accessable? I have not been able to find a public link or navigation system to the archive yet. The research folder that held that pdf file is a secure folder at the Rand web site not accessable to the public as far as I can tell.
