Oldhead:
The still from the video with “The Lancet”, was the image Youtube made the default thumbnail. I was offered the choice between that thumbnail, and two thumbnails which would have been unflattering to my conversation partners.
If you have time, and if you can put your finger on it, I would like to know how to these videos in a way that doesn’t come across as patronizing to my guests. The goal is to summarize the research, and show salient parts of conversations in where people evaluate the it.
Going forward, I am thinking it might be more effective if I do the explaining off camera, or in clips separate from the conversations. I think I get how it can come across as patronizing when I actually film myself as I explain the research to people and answer their questions about it. Is that a better approach? Would you recommend something different? Thanks!
Also, I am looking forward to a time when we better understand how psychosis occurs in different people; psychosis may have different underlying mechanisms. Perhaps more specific diagnostic categories that don’t lump all kinds of people together would be received as more respectful and less stigmatizing. When doctors use general terms for big categories of unusual people, this has a lot in common with recoiling and describing from a distance. Doctors who are diagnosing may appear to disgusted or contemptuous when constrained by current DSM categories, even if the doctors are well-intentioned and empathic.
Thank you for the encouragement, Rachel777! I interviewed some veterans yesterday on camera about suicide, and they say the conversations helped. The open question is whether this kind of teaching can help others in the public who can relate to them.
Thank you, Cissy! That means a lot, and I will check out ACEs Connection. What is your twitter handle, if you don’t mind sharing?
Report comment
LavenderSage:
I will look up Dr. Mickey Nardo’s work. Appreciate the lead.
Report comment
Oldhead:
The still from the video with “The Lancet”, was the image Youtube made the default thumbnail. I was offered the choice between that thumbnail, and two thumbnails which would have been unflattering to my conversation partners.
If you have time, and if you can put your finger on it, I would like to know how to these videos in a way that doesn’t come across as patronizing to my guests. The goal is to summarize the research, and show salient parts of conversations in where people evaluate the it.
Going forward, I am thinking it might be more effective if I do the explaining off camera, or in clips separate from the conversations. I think I get how it can come across as patronizing when I actually film myself as I explain the research to people and answer their questions about it. Is that a better approach? Would you recommend something different? Thanks!
Report comment
Also, I am looking forward to a time when we better understand how psychosis occurs in different people; psychosis may have different underlying mechanisms. Perhaps more specific diagnostic categories that don’t lump all kinds of people together would be received as more respectful and less stigmatizing. When doctors use general terms for big categories of unusual people, this has a lot in common with recoiling and describing from a distance. Doctors who are diagnosing may appear to disgusted or contemptuous when constrained by current DSM categories, even if the doctors are well-intentioned and empathic.
Report comment
“rosehip neuron”
Very interesting — a neuron found only in humans, which could be a clue to specifically human neuropsychiatric disorders! Thanks!
Report comment
Advocate for yourself!
Report comment
Thank you.
And please let me know if this starts to descend into a New Age melodrama!
Report comment
Thank you!
Report comment
It can have side effects, including cardiovascular side effects. It isn’t completely safe, as I understand.
Report comment
Thank you for the encouragement, Rachel777! I interviewed some veterans yesterday on camera about suicide, and they say the conversations helped. The open question is whether this kind of teaching can help others in the public who can relate to them.
Report comment