From: The Heretic's Corner
Thanks to all who responded.
First I think it is necessary to make sure that we know where FACTS
end and THEORY begins. PLEASE (not kidding) correct me if I err-
The currently accepted belief on Parkinson's or the "Lame Brain
Theory includes the following FACTS, I believe:
FACT (1) At Autopsy the PD patients brain shows loss of Substantia
Nigra.
FACT (2) Scans done on living PD patients show a deficiency of dopamine
at times.
Am I correct?
I believe this is where FACT ends and THEORY begins? Y/N?
From this the THEORY is that the loss of substantia nigra found at
autopsy is the cause of the dopamine deficiency which is
the cause for the PD symptoms that the patient had while living? Y/N?
This theory includes some FACTS but dismisses other FACTS as
"phenomenons" in order to keep the LAME BRAIN theory.
Other FACTS that should be given equal weight as any other FACTS are:
It has been shown for YEARS that Parkinson's patient's symptoms
GO AWAY (paradoxical kinesias) at times with medication not being a
factor. I have experienced these phenomenons many times, but you
don't have to believe me, look it up in the books on Parkinson's,
or just listen awhile on this list and you'll get plenty of examples.
For example, Barb Mallut wrote:
The thing that gets me in the MOST trouble lately - with physicians,
Social
> Security, etc, is that I simply don't LOOK like I have PD when I'm being
> examined or interviewed. I've rested well the day before the appointment, and
> have carefully timed my meds to get maximum benefit from them which gives me
> about 3 to 4 decent hours a day... sometimes less, depending, and the rare
> very-good-day - depending (if the moon is in the right quarter or something)
> <damn unpredictable disease!>. Each time I get checked by an MD lately, I
> get that "You don't LOOK at all Parkinsonian," and they note in my records
> that I'm doing very well.... which is true for having had the disease as long
> as I've had it... but they ALSO think LOOKING well is the SAME as FEELING
> well! It's NOT!!! They never ASK me how I feel or what symptoms I may be
> having, presuming I gather, that if THEY don't SEE symptoms, well then, by
> golly, I dont' have any!
or Don's:
>[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> don't know what my nero put me on couple days ago. all i know last i went
> to bed at 9pm did not wake till 6am we had bad rain and wind did not hear
> it. vivian said i done lot less tharshing and my legs don't hurt as much.
Those are just two examples but it is a FACT that is accepted but
characterized as a "phenomenon".
This FACT (paradoxical kinesia) CONFLICTS with the LAME BRAIN THEORY:
IF the LAMEBRAINers may say:
I have the symptoms because I don't have dopamine.
THEN I may say:
If I don't have the symptoms, I have dopamine.
And that's exactly what I say.
To explain these "phenomenon" they come up with some pretty WILD
sounding theories:
(1) THE PUDDLE ON THE BRAIN THEORY. Somewhere in that head of yours,
is a "reservoir" of dopamine, a secret cache, hidden away somewhere
that for some mysterious reason springs a LEAK and gives you some
dopamine. WILD!!!
(2) One doctor had the PARALYSIS OF THE WILL THEORY. His far out
notion was that the patient somehow had a paralyzed will, at times.
(I'd venture a guess that if he tried THAT ONE on BARB M. he would
have had (since I'm so good with medical terms) a SUDDEN ACUTE ONSET
OF TEMPOROMANDIBULAR JOINT PAIN, or a jacked jaw as someone less
eloquent might put it.
Another FACT is the symptoms and course of the disease is completely
individualized, varies among individuals by as much as 40 years
from diagnosis to disability among PD patients, and the symptoms are
almost custom made for each PD patient. These FACTS CONFLICTs with
the LAME BRAIN THEORY.
My theory, the NOT THEORY, accepts all the FACTS that the LAMEBRAIN
THEORY does, but also fits with the other FACTS that I have mentioned.
They SUBSTANTIATE my theory, but CONFLICT with the LAMEBRAIN THEORY>.
You may say, one THEORY is just as good as another. But that is not
true. We should CHOOSE the theory that agrees with the most facts.
If this were a criminal case and the LAMEBRAINers were the prosecution,
they wouldn't get anywhere with this much CONFLICTING EVIDENCE.
It makes NO SENSE WHATEVER with their theory.
We should not allow anyone to dismiss FACTS to uphold a THEORY.
We should go on the premise that when something happens there is a
REASON for it. It should not be disregarded. We may not KNOW the
reason, but we should be very hesitant to accept any THEORY that
blatantly DISAGREES with known FACTS.
Us NOT's would say that the reason Barb M was so much better at the
doctor's office was that they have good filters and also there is
probably an allergen source at her home that is not at the doctor's
office, her cats? perhaps.
Us NOT's would say the reason Don was better that day was the RAIN.
It reduced the airborne allergens.
The LAMEBRAINers would say, BEATS US, STRANGE, DUNNO.
Thanks
& More Discussion Later
Please comment.>
Janet [log in to unmask]
