 |
 |
hi dennis john wrote to you: >Dennis, in many (if not most) cases, the knowledge >that one has clinical depression (CD) comes well >before the diagnoses of of PD. CD is often used >as a marker for the onset of PD even though the >diagnoses of PD is years later. and then you wrote to john: >I don't doubt it John, but your statement is a >classic example of what I termed blanket statements. >It carries the implication that CD is a sine qua non of PD forgive me for 'butting in' on this but i'm lost, dennis i don't understand your perception of john's statement how does it carry the implication that cd is a sine qua non of pd? if one has cd and then is later diagnosed as having pd the cd can then possibly be used as confirmation of the pd diagnosis since in the 40-50% pd/cd contingent the cd frequently can show up first [as in my case] *** slight tangent *** hmmm this is interesting i haven't even thought of it this way myself i always thought, well i've had cd off and on for a long time, and now i have pd, but never really made any 'consecutive' connection *** back on track *** from my point of view, john's statement says nothing about cd being a marker for all pd diagnoses can you help me understand your point of view? your syber-sybling janet janet [log in to unmask]