User talk:Sno2

Your edit to Hydrogen

I removed your message from Talk:Hydrogen. New talk page messages are posted at the bottom, not the top, and should have a heading like this one.

Your addition did not belong because it was written at a juvenile level far below what is appropriate at this site. Even if it were not, it has an inappropriately editorial tone, and doesn't really belong at that article anyway. The way, the truth, and the light 22:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't edit my user page

Post to my talk page, not my user page. Please follow standard Wikipedia practice with regard to messages - you might think messages belong at the top, but everyone else posts at the bottom. You can use your watchlist to detect new messages. The way, the truth, and the light 00:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You found other talk pages, you can surely find mine. The way, the truth, and the light 00:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you found how to get to my talk page. Please post any more replies to me here; I'm watching it. The way, the truth, and the light 11:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Thermodynamic cycles

Hi Sno2 - You have edited Template:Thermodynamic cycles as if Pseudo Stirling cycle and Adiabatic Stirling are different, but the Pseudo Stirling cycle and Adiabatic Stirling is the same according to the last source (see figure on page 6). --Glenn 07:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine - thanks - I will add a newline in a moment. --Glenn 09:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: CFS comment

Hi, I'm not sure if you reviewed recent discussion in the CFS talk page regarding 'stress' (I think a lot of it was under the Protection section), but this is an area where there is wide disagreement. A few notions:

the term stress is poorly defined (or at least there are significant differences in how individuals define it for themselves) leading to misunderstandings
strong value judgements are often associated with the word stress (this is not our fault, but it still needs to be a consideration)
CFS sufferers have been marginalized or ridiculed for decades, so it is understandable for them to be concerned with statements which appear not to take the illness seriously (I am not saying this was your intent -- in fact I am sure it was not your intent -- but nonetheless broad statements alluding to recovery simply by reducing/avoiding stress are inflammatory)
none of your comments are referenced, yet in the field of CFS research they remain controversial
GET is a controversial therapy, and while some studies have shown in has limited effectiveness, other research and patient reporting have shown that it can cause significant harm in some CFS patients. Using words like "especially effective" when describing GET could be seen as POV as there is no mainstream evidence supporting such a glowing claim
monitored exercise, meditation, tai chi, etc. are beneficial, I'm sure, but not simply because they are "calming". What this says to a CFS patient is "relax and chill out and you'll get better". This is not the message CFS patients need to hear. This also appears to be POV: I am not aware of any studies showing that existing in a calming environment is enough to alleviate symptoms

Another voice is certainly welcome in the CFS debate. There is a lot of contentious material in this page, and unfortunately there is little agreement (in large part because the disease still so poorly understood by the scientific community).

Certainly if you want to put the material back in, I will not revert it again, but I hope you will keep in mind some of my comments here.

This is an interesting subject and if you wish to talk further, either on my Talk page or on the CFS talk page, I will look forward to hearing from you. Cheers. --- Taroaldo 08:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm in agreement with Taroaldo. Moreover, there is plenty of evidence that CGT and GET have no curative effect whatsoever. Guido den Broeder 10:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guido...Where in my comment do I say anything about a cure...?? What I say is that that these two therapies seem to cause some relief of symptoms in some people and I say that this probably occurs due to relief of stress.

If I am incorrect and I insinuate that there is a cure, how would you suggest I reword my comment....??

Thanks for your help.....sno Sno2 11:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote:

Practices/therapies that reduce stress appear to be effective in reducing symptoms in some CFS sufferers. Reportedly effective appear to be Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, and Graded Exercise Therapy. See CBT and GET, below. Other calming (stress reducing) individual practices that may relieve stress such as knitting, tia chia, meditation, etc. appear to help reduce symptoms in some people.

You are suggesting that CBT and GET are very effective in reducing symptoms and that people will be able to function normally. That would constitute a cure. There is no research that supports this, despite many efforts, and practice shows the opposite. Also, these therapies are not directed at reducing stress, and they are not 'calming strategies', quite the contrary. Nor is swimming, btw. Nothing is known about the effect of meditation etc. Anti-depressants are sometimes used to help patients sleep, but often the side effects are bad. Regards, Guido den Broeder 11:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guido....have reworded the comment above to try and remove any suggestion that there is a cure.

How does practice show the opposite...?? CBT is based on the idea that the way you think about something effects the way you feel about it. If you can change the way you think about something that causes you stress then the stress will no longer be felt. An example from my own life is the stress my wife felt when her mother, who is an alchoholic, would call her when she was drunk. My wife was unable to hang up on her because she felt it would be disrespecting her mother. When she agreed that she would be able to hang up, if her mother was in a psych hosp as a patient, because her mother would then be "sick" I pointed out to her that when her mother was drunk she was "out of her mind", the same as being mentally ill. When she started thinking about it like that she was able to start telling her mother to "call me back when you are sober" and hang up on her. This change in thinking greatly reduced the stress her mother used to cause her.

CBT in my case was the first and biggest thing that allowed me to handle this disease. It worked quickly and once I learned the idea I was able to apply it myself. However it is much easier to do if you do it with a therapist.

Light exercise has been shown in many studies to reduce stress. Also expanding your physical envelope allows a person to accomplish more of what they might want to do. The more that you can do, that you wish to do, the less stress you will feel. Since it has been shown that exercise can cause symptoms to increase, it may be dangerous to try to exercise, however that does not negate the effect that light exercise may have on some people. Sno2 12:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CBT/GET My Point of View (POV)

I do not see why there is any argument about CBT being helpful and in some cases helpful enough to allow a person to function in a normal way. It is pretty well agreed that both physical and mental stress can cause the symptoms of CFS to worsen. Stress in my case and probably in most cases is a big trigger, at least as bad as physical stress. Forced physical exercise, even when you force yourself, has a double whammy, forcing yourself, or having someone else push you, causes mental stress along with the physical. I have found that CBT is a quick way to lessen the mental stress of everyday living and problems and in my case helped me accept my illness, also decreasing stress. My stopping "fighting the illness", which I learned to do after five years, was the best thing I could have done. I had to learn to live within my boundaries which which CBT helped. Just because CBT is a psych type of treatment (talk therapy), does not automatically make CFS a psych illness. By the same token the depression that results from not being able to do what you think you should and want to do but are not able to does not automatically make it a psych illness.

Light exercise has been shown in many studies to reduce stress. Also expanding your physical envelope allows a person to accomplish more of what they might want to do. The more that you can do, that you wish to do, the less stress you will feel. Since it has been shown that exercise can cause symptoms to increase, it may be dangerous to try to exercise, however that does not negate the effect that light exercise can have on some people.

You are entirely correct: you do indeed not see it. This may be due to the CBT that you received. The goal of this psychotherapy is to change the way you think. Can you remember your thoughts from before you had the therapy? Guido den Broeder 14:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guido....of course I can....and have occasionally, at first, started to go back into the thinking that was causing me trouble.....overall I would describe it as anger at the docs, myself and everyone around me..I had to change my thinking to understand their point of view....also needed to stop thinking about what I had as something that had a cure...and begin to think and plan how I could live with it...when I was able to do that things started to get better....since then if I run across something that really starts bothering me I either do what I can to cure the something....or try to change my thinking about it in such a way that it does not bother so much....if I let little things start to pile up on me after about six months I am back in the hosp.....and since the hosp to me is like a jail I do whatever I need to in order to stay out.

Changing your thinking does not mean brainwashing, where you do not remember what you thought before...<grin>....

Have you ever partaken of CBT therapy, if not where are you getting your ideas about it...?? Why do you seem to feel that it cannot possibly be of any help along with GET in reducing symptoms in some people... just because these therapies work at times does not prove one way or the other what the original cause or causes were. I can easily imagine were the cause starts with a virus, the virus is killed by the body, but the damage the virus did to the brain causes a continued response that we call CFS. In some people this damage can be corrected by the body leading to a cure over time....in others the damage is permanent and increases over time. This damage effects the bodies response to stress, etc....etc.... (by the way this is the path that some researchers are thinking for depression and bi polar disease) If you are concerned CFS may be a psych illness, what would you call it if my imaginary path were true...?? Would it be a viral disease, or a psych one....??

What specifically do I not see...??...your first sentence is confusing to me....do not understand what you are saying...

have fun....sno Sno2 18:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But that is not what ME/CFS is. The immune system is fighting a real infection, or more than one, it's not erroneously stuck in active-mode. The brain damage, meanwhile, causes cognitive, autonomous and motor dysfunction. So this gets me wondering, how you got diagnosed with CFS. Guido den Broeder 22:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhhhh.....I see, you are convinced you know what the disease is and why it occurs....even if just about every researcher/physician in the world is not...and you are here to force your view on others....correct...???

Just like you think you know everything there is to know about CBT therapy...by the way did you read the response in the section above this where I gave an example of CBT in my wifes case...??

I recieved a psych disability diagnoses way before anyone ever thought that CFS was a real disease....have been fighting this thing since the early 70's...I happen to agree with you that it is an active virus....but I at this time would give it a 60 percent chance that I am right...am open to learning that I am wrong....not like you....<grin>

have fun......sno Sno2 05:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to read, for starters,

Byron M. Hyde (ed.) (1992), "The Clinical and Scientific Basis of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis / Chronic Fatigue Syndrome", Nightingale Research Foundation, Ottawa, ISBN 0-9695662-0-4

before judging my opinions. Guido den Broeder 09:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come on...you must realize that one persons opinion, no matter how correct it may sound, has to be challenged and either proven or disproven by others before it is accepted as proven science. As far as I am able to determine no ones ideas have been proven one way or the other as far as CFS is concerned. There is still arguement going on as to wether ME and CFS are the same thing. As far as we are concerned we do not know if I am talking about CFS and you are talking about ME...or if we are talking about the same thing. Everything remains up in the air until things are proven by being verified by others. Until then everything is a hypothesis. Including whatever you and I think and whatever byron hyde has published in his book.

have fun.....sno Sno2 09:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This publication is not 'one person's opinion'. It contains 75 articles by all the prominent researchers that were present at the first world conference. It is commonly known as 'the bible of ME'. Guido den Broeder 10:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sno2. You described CBT as a way to better cope with CFS, and I agree with you. The problem is some earlier researchers have implied that CFS is an acquired "abnormal illness belief" that leads to physical deconditioning, "hypervigilance of symptoms" and "somatic attributions"; where CBT is aimed at correcting these abnormalities. This makes some sense when these are actually hindering potential recovery, but are not scientifically sound when attempting to explain the entire symptom complex. You said CBT has helped you live better within your boundaries, but in the past patients have been pushed to ignore these boundaries (and you know very well what happens when you do). I think stress plays a bigger role than "beliefs", but again not the entire explanation; removing stress and coping better with it doesn't guarantee recovery. Coupled with stories of CFS patients being abused in psychiatric institutions, as well as the perception that public opinion about CFS is poor, many people within the CFS community have become sensitive to the mention of CBT or anything resembling a psychosocial approach. This cringing is obviously an understandable "backlash", although it may reduce the number of people who would otherwise be helped with such an approach. - Tekaphor 02:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tek...I realized I would be attacked over the GET and cognative therapy when I read the NICE challange by patient groups....I guestimate about 80 percent of it was against these two things...however I did not expect that the attack would be semi personnel claiming that what I wrote was my personnal opinion...thought they would attack the document and address what I wrote one thing at a time...however now realize they could not attack individual things as the document presents them as theories not hypothesis...and all they had was hypothesis to attack with...guido was the only one that attacked as he should he attacked the document...I also wish that people would have brought up their objections when I first posted the document instead of waiting until I posted to the fatique page...do not understand the reason for that...

I think that the reason the page is messed up is that everyone thinks that whatever their symptoms or ideas are, that proves them scientifically...or should prove them scientifically....<g>....maybe my post with a definition of hypothesis and theory will give people something to think about....I am sure more people saw it on the discussion page then posted about it....thank you for giving me this chance to vent...<g>...every bit of reduced stress helps....have fun.....sno Sno2 04:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]