no i'm with berti on this one. it's kind of bullshit. it's a pretty thought, but silly and immature.

i have some up close intimate personal in depth experience with the bipolar disorder, i assure you the problem isn't the "rest of the world is crazy" or that "i'm special! they won't recognize i'm special!" what a juvenile thought and an absolute cop out.

ok watched that bipolar guy's video. I actually agree with the dude, there is a destination for mental health. Too bad i don't like his explanations, his source materials, the way he uses the word "soul"..... frankly the guy scares me. or i pity him. something.

The first thing I did was dig up the full blogs that Stan takes excerpts from and read them in context. Some of the excerpts take on very different meanings in their full context. When he refers to "starving" her, for example, he's talking about sending her to bed without dinner when she refused to eat what was made. This was something recommended by her doctor. I think most kids are "starved" this way at some point in their life and I don't think anyone ought to be screaming "child abuse" because a child refuses to eat their dinner.

That Stan would blatantly manipulate the facts to agree with his version of the story tells me not to trust anything he says. I then went and looked over some of his other content and found a lot of was what I would categorize as wingnut conspiracy theories.

Of course I'm not playing apologist for the parents. Whether they were right or wrong is another argument. My point is that the people in this thread, Stan's blog, and elsewhere, who are making their own diagnosis based on what they saw on Oprah, read in the LAT and/or saw in this video clip have no basis or qualifications to do so.

>> ^Whacky:

xxovercastxx said: "If you look at the rest of the blog you link to, it's a blog about how medication is bad, doctors are evil and everything is a conspiracy"
Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion; though the vast majority of the information written about in post on this blog are backed up by substantial evidence (there is also many humorous, satirical, and personal opinion pieces). I have to wonder if you took the time to actually do any research about what you read before dismissing it off the cuff xxovercastxx?
Of course anyone that wants to play apologist for these parents that are "admitted" abusers are entitled to their opinions (and there are many). I guess they are also many people that excuse our main stream media writing reports that excludes key related facts in their articles.
http://bipolar-stanscroniclesandnarritiv
e.blogspot.com/2009/07/los-angeles-times-reporter-defends.html
If that's what you coin wacky, then so be it.

I'm not sure why you're addressing some of this to me because a lot of it has nothing to do with what I said. I don't give a shit what the father's diagnosis is nor did I even allude to it. He's no more qualified to make a diagnosis than you, me, bipolar stan, or all the people leaving abusive comments on his blog. That was my whole point; that professionals have given her a diagnosis of schizophrenia and for some reason you, bipolar stan and a horde of internet warriors think you know better and you're all citing each other as supporting evidence.

I'm not sure what kinda fucked up glasses you're looking at this through to think they're parading her around for attention. They seem to be doing the same sort of things that lots of parents with children with mysterious/unusual conditions/illnesses do: get them exposure in the hopes of finding someone who can help.

Could bipolar stan be right? Sure. Young Earth Creationists could be right too, but since they can't back up their claims, I don't take them very seriously. Why should I listen to bipolar stan? Because lots of other people think along the same lines? See sentence 3 of this paragraph.

>> ^ponceleon:

Sorry, but just because the father, who has blogged about beating and starving his own child in order to deal with her behavior, says that his diagnosis is the right one doesn't make it so.
Again, if you had read my post, you'd see that I'm not saying that this is absolutely Munchausen, I'm just saying that these people are a BIT too media-hungry... Oprah, LATimes, etc... they seem like attention whores and frankly I think it is a good idea to question ANYONE who is more concerned about getting media coverage than anything else.
Is the blog I posted a bit whacky in general? Sure. Is it possible they are right? Are there a BUNCH more people who seemed to have the same idea? Yup.
Just because you find a doctor who is willing to go along with Munchausen by proxy doesn't make the diagnosis correct. I'd say by the very comments here in the sift that there is a lot of debate as to what exactly is going on with this girl and to dismiss the idea that the parents might be a bit nuts themselves is very dangerous

xxovercastxx said: "If you look at the rest of the blog you link to, it's a blog about how medication is bad, doctors are evil and everything is a conspiracy"

Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion; though the vast majority of the information written about in post on this blog are backed up by substantial evidence (there is also many humorous, satirical, and personal opinion pieces). I have to wonder if you took the time to actually do any research about what you read before dismissing it off the cuff xxovercastxx?

Of course anyone that wants to play apologist for these parents that are "admitted" abusers are entitled to their opinions (and there are many). I guess they are also many people that excuse our main stream media writing reports that excludes key related facts in their articles.

http://bipolar-stanscroniclesandnarritive.blogspot.com/2009/07/los-angeles-times-reporter-defends.html

If that's what you coin wacky, then so be it.

Sorry, but just because the father, who has blogged about beating and starving his own child in order to deal with her behavior, says that his diagnosis is the right one doesn't make it so.


Again, if you had read my post, you'd see that I'm not saying that this is absolutely Munchausen, I'm just saying that these people are a BIT too media-hungry... Oprah, LATimes, etc... they seem like attention whores and frankly I think it is a good idea to question ANYONE who is more concerned about getting media coverage than anything else.

Is the blog I posted a bit whacky in general? Sure. Is it possible they are right? Are there a BUNCH more people who seemed to have the same idea? Yup.

Just because you find a doctor who is willing to go along with Munchausen by proxy doesn't make the diagnosis correct. I'd say by the very comments here in the sift that there is a lot of debate as to what exactly is going on with this girl and to dismiss the idea that the parents might be a bit nuts themselves is very dangerous.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

From what I can tell it has come under a lot of scrutiny and criticism from people who have no idea what they're talking about. The father refers to them, in his blog, as people "prepared to make (or refute) a diagnosis based on 44 minutes of television, newspaper articles, or even what I have written on this blog" and it seems pretty accurate.
He is completely up front about the accusations of abuse in his blog and has been investigated several times.
If you look at the rest of the blog you link to, it's a blog about how medication is bad, doctors are evil and everything is a conspiracy. I also looked around to see if the blogger listed any sort of relevant qualifications, but I'm not seeing any.
>> ^ponceleon:
Just FYI, while schizophrenia is a real and horrible thing, this case in particular has come under a lot of scrutiny as being possible a case of Munchhausen Syndrome by proxy. To be short with it, this is the parents either consciously or unconsciously projecting the illness on their child in order to seek attention.
I'm not trying to minimize the disease where it is real, but there was something quite exhibitionist and attention-getting about the way the parents were parading her around in the video that made me suspicious and when I googled it, there were a lot of claims that this wasn't quite passing the legitimacy sniff test.
Something isn't right here, but it might not be schizophrenia...
Have a look at this:
http://bipolar-stanscroniclesandnar
ritive.blogspot.com/2009/07/6-year-old-jani-schofield-schizophrenic.html

From what I can tell it has come under a lot of scrutiny and criticism from people who have no idea what they're talking about. The father refers to them, in his blog, as people "prepared to make (or refute) a diagnosis based on 44 minutes of television, newspaper articles, or even what I have written on this blog" and it seems pretty accurate.

He is completely up front about the accusations of abuse in his blog and has been investigated several times.

If you look at the rest of the blog you link to, it's a blog about how medication is bad, doctors are evil and everything is a conspiracy. I also looked around to see if the blogger listed any sort of relevant qualifications, but I'm not seeing any.

>> ^ponceleon:

Just FYI, while schizophrenia is a real and horrible thing, this case in particular has come under a lot of scrutiny as being possible a case of Munchhausen Syndrome by proxy. To be short with it, this is the parents either consciously or unconsciously projecting the illness on their child in order to seek attention.
I'm not trying to minimize the disease where it is real, but there was something quite exhibitionist and attention-getting about the way the parents were parading her around in the video that made me suspicious and when I googled it, there were a lot of claims that this wasn't quite passing the legitimacy sniff test.
Something isn't right here, but it might not be schizophrenia...
Have a look at this:
http://bipolar-stanscroniclesandnar
ritive.blogspot.com/2009/07/6-year-old-jani-schofield-schizophrenic.html

Just FYI, while schizophrenia is a real and horrible thing, this case in particular has come under a lot of scrutiny as being possible a case of Munchhausen Syndrome by proxy. To be short with it, this is the parents either consciously or unconsciously projecting the illness on their child in order to seek attention.

I'm not trying to minimize the disease where it is real, but there was something quite exhibitionist and attention-getting about the way the parents were parading her around in the video that made me suspicious and when I googled it, there were a lot of claims that this wasn't quite passing the legitimacy sniff test.

Something isn't right here, but it might not be schizophrenia...

Have a look at this:

http://bipolar-stanscroniclesandnarritive.blogspot.com/2009/07/6-year-old-jani-schofield-schizophrenic.html

alizarin is clearly a bipolar nut case because his recollection of events are off. Take this guy off the streets!

>> ^Raaagh:
>> ^alizarin:
This whole thing reminds me of a Harvard study I read about in college - The psychologist shows people a picture of two men having an argument in a subway train. One has a razor in his hand the other is unarmed. When people were shown the image briefly and then asked who was holding the razor 50% said it was the black man, when it was actually the white man. I failed that test then and it was sobering - you can be racist and not realize it or intend it. I think I'd pass it today but I don't think the average person would....

You read the study? And you participated?

>> ^NordlichReiter:
I wonder how he got into the service. I think he suffers from Bipolar Disorder.


Back then all that was required to enlist was bend over and spread your cheeks while the military doctor shined a flashlight up your ass. If no light came out your mouth or eyes, then you were cleared for duty.

I wonder how he got into the service. I think he suffers from Bipolar Disorder.

dude, i just cant watch him anymore.
its not funny, hes actually dangerous.
you should see what kind of mess hes made of my bipolar drug addled sister.

He did receive a lot of opposition, but he also met with quite a bit of success. He was appointed the chair of experimental physics in Graz and of theoretical physics at the University of Munich, so he certainly wasn't on the outside of the scientific establishment at the time and he had a number of supporters for his theory. The opposition certainly didn't help with his unhappy state of affairs at the end, though.

I'm not really arguing that the title is wrong, I just don't like calling the life of a man that accomplished so much tragic for my own reasons.

>> ^MycroftHomlz:
He met with some really heavy opposition during his time. And while I think he may have been bipolar, the vast majority of the scientific community outright rejected his theories. Certainly saying the equation killed him is a hyperbole, but his life was most definitely tragic. He believed without evidence in atoms came up with probabilistic theories that were seen as in direct opposition to Newtonian Mechanics. For most his life people rejected his theories... that wears on people.

He met with some really heavy opposition during his time. And while I think he may have been bipolar, the vast majority of the scientific community outright rejected his theories. Certainly saying the equation killed him is a hyperbole, but his life was most definitely tragic. He believed without evidence in atoms came up with probabilistic theories that were seen as in direct opposition to Newtonian Mechanics. For most his life people rejected his theories... that wears on people.

I don't mean to be picky, but I don't like the title. I don't think you can call his life tragic just because it ended in a way most of us wouldn't choose. The presentation here is a little over dramatic, I think, but it does make the story entertaining. But saying that his equation for entropy killed him or that his life was a tragic struggle against the established view of science is a little off the mark. He did suffer from bipolar disorder, but that seems more unfortunate than tragic.