"John H." <johnhkm at overhere.com.au> wrote in message
news:MDYa9.17113$Cq.683728 at ozemail.com.au...
>> "Kenneth Collins" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:0kwa9.5613$p%3.429909 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...> > Hi John.
> > I expect that the augmented-sunlight correlation actually 'points' to
> > a functional correlation that has to do with the 'stress' a Mother
> > endures while she's carrying her Infant.
>> No, in the MS studies it was found that in spite of lack of sunlight some
> populations have v. low MS rates. The current opinion is that such
> populations have high intakes of vitamin D via fish. I agree, MS is an
> immunological condition, I don't really think schizophrenia is an
autoimmune
> disease except in the broadest sense; which is easier for me than most
> because I don't subscribe to the idea that the immune system can so
clearly
> delineate self from non-self.
>> > Get it? Augmented exposure to sunlight tends to correlate either with
> > relative-absence of 'leisure', or relative-abundance of 'leisure',
> > either of which constitute 'stressors', the first, via its
> > 'coersiveness', the latter via its tendency toward 'lack of focus'.
> > In both conditions, the Mother's TD E/I tends to go relatively-high,
> > which means that the Mother's biochemistry tends to go commensurately
> > 'willi-nilli', which, can communicate to the fetus via shared
> > biochemical factors, thus, impacting fetal development.
>> Nothing to get, flawed assumption as above.
>> > So, I suggect that the 'sunlight correlation' needs to be explored in
> > terms of what it means with respect to these other factors.
> >
> > Because, let's face it, if 'augmented sunlight' were, itself,
> > schizophrizogenic, then, back in our evolutionary roots, there'd be
> > only 'schizophrenics', 'cause folks were in-sunlight, abundantly.
>> You've inverted it, its lack of sunlight.
>> > The next thing is with respect to 'early-onset' wide-spread
> > cell-loss. As is discussed in AoK, Ap8, this can occur as a function
> > of a Child experiencing long-term "consistent inconsistency". My
> > studies lead me to Assert that any Child can be driven to
> > 'schizophrenai' via experiencing of long-term "consistent
> > cinonsistancy".
>> If your argument is true we should all be schizophrenic because our
culture
> is consistently inconsistent.
>>> > The cell-loss derives in TD E/I-minimization, which 'blindly' and
> > automatically 'eliminates' any neural activation that can be
> > eliminated via TD E/I-minimization without resulting in TD E/I(up).
> >
> > 'Eliminated' neural activation correlates to cell-atrophy.
>> Cell loss precedes loss of activation, cell loss precedes noticeable
> cognitive decline. In depression it is overactivation of the hippocampus
> that creates a problem not under activation.
One of the best (or most likely to be relevant and important)
interpretations of what this and related brain-areas of activity (1.)
'is/are doing', and (2.) how it got to be 'hyped' in the first place, is
IMO -- whilst not closing my mental doors to the possibility of
contributory and in some cases key-important: genetic predispositional
'causes', and chemical-environmental, bacterial, prionic, and viral
vandalisms --:
(1.) These readings reflects a chronic (though for obvious neurometabolic
reasons often noticably 'ebbing and flowing') "Primal Pain" (for which I
have provided a complementary definition and lavel, namely CURSES, in the
short version, and CCKHHURSES, in one of the long versions) AND its
suppression.
(2.) [I shall again mention this cause of CURSES to you the way I usually do
because nobody wants to be led by the nose to (and almost have the nose
dipped in the notion of) "selective HibernationT imploring type situations"
without getting some reward in return! The reward being the by me built-in
septic humor.]
The cause of depression (and of (from) mundanely or creatively constructive
mania and (to) completely crazy such) that we *least of all* want to
acknowledge and 'theoretically absorb' ranges from *traumatizing*
(=selective Hibernation imploring) environmental influences (or 'lived
situations') that impact so slowly and subtly and often from so early in
life as to be 'imperceptive', to the 'classical' *shell-shock*
cliché/example of fast and dramatic traumatizing experiences (or
situations).
And I shall finish-off this comment with the euphemism that you yourself
(yourselves) almost already wrote:-
It is *normally* not easy for *normal* people to focus their attention fully
enough on these major causes (SHITS come CURSES) of 'mental-motivational'
and psychosomatic "dis_eases" precisely because of how **"consistently
inconsistent our culture is"**.
If you (two) or anyone else like me to *again* post my main 'tightly
science-aligned' Web-site reference for this my position of opinionated
overview, just let me know!
> You are making the same logical
> error so many 'pseudo Freudians' make: that mental illness is something
> about aberrant information processing. Look at the range of pathologies,
> neuropathologies cannot be so circumscribed, your paradigm compels you to
> ignore the bleedin obvious: genetic defects(nuclear and mtDNA),
> immunological insults, autoimmune responses, exogenous nasties. A model
that
> doesn't evolve is dead.
Don't be so sure! Cockroaches have been around a fair while -- that's how
perfect they are! ;-)
Cheers,
Peter
--
This post of mine was, as my posts almost always are, stingily sponsored by
EAIMC Internetional Ptd. Lty., and *not just* jotted in justifiable though
author-image jeopardizing jester, but - by jove! - also with some equally
well warranted serious intent.
