Nivsch

Member
  • Content count

    579
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About Nivsch

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Location
    Israel
  • Gender
    Male
  1. I find myself in arguments with family when I try to explain how psychiatry - because of my personal process of reducing the drug - and other domains in western health treats our health in a simplified way I cannot agree with. Also I tried to say how our body is smart and can do amazing things to repair itself, under a correct lifestyle, and sometimes I feel that maybe they don't understand it. Maybe they do, but they didn't respond to that and for sure weren't merely as passionate as I am when I said that. Responses I get: 1. "The brain doesn't strive to maintain homeostasis. You give it too much credit" (in refering to the tolerance i said the brain developed to drugs). 2. "We can't rely on nature. In nature people lived only until age of 40yo". 3. "You dont believe in science and you are arrogant." 4. "You think you know the best. Better than psychiatrists and better than people who that is their proffession." Also an elephant can be triggered by these responses. My questions are: 1. What (the hell is) the emotion they feel inside, which makes them defend the western attitude all the time? What they feel inside that makes them not want to rely mainly on nature/on themselves but rather put their trust mainly on doctors? I really want to understand the emotion of the other side better. 2. How can I go meta in those arguments and let go of my attachment to the "natural self care" agenda, and make the conversation more constractive to both sides? I feel emotionally very attached to my view that it feels to me very difficult to really go meta here. Just to say that I know that western attitude can save lives in acute cases and it has its valid in this kind of things. Also I know that the body can't correct itself in every case. I still think my view is much better and more true than their, but i want to bridge between me and them and make them understand me better, and to understand them more.
  2. Of a situation, an emotion, a thought and of what you tell yourself in each case.
  3. I think it doesnt has to be problematic at all if we give only general direction (socializing, therapists, nutrition, mindfulness in moderation, exercise...) and not any specific road and also finish the message with a recommendation to also go to see a doctor.
  4. OCD

    Ok you have to reduce only one drug at a time. The first drug to reduce has to be the accelerator one (paxxet) to make the sedative ones (ariprizol, kiviprid) to function as a buffer from the withdrawal symptoms from paxxet. Start with it, But not without guidance from the site survivingantidepressants.com. open a user there its an exellent site. Also try to do it with a doctor. BUT - in every collision between the reduction phase the doctor will offer and the phase the site will offer (max 10% for every 4 weeks) you must choose the slower one. Also know that nutrition is a crucial ingredient in the succes if the process and for that I recommend you the site "the withdrawal project" and the chapter "the role of nutrition during psychiatric drugs withdrawal".
  5. OCD

    @Rishabh R You have to reduce no more than 10% of the drug at a time and wait no less than 4 weeks after every reduction. Every redaction has to be 10% of the last dose (not the original) so the reductions have to exponentially get smaller. If it will be ok, you may try to reduce the holding time. What the drug's name?
  6. when?? For how long?
  7. I think its more about just to give a general direction to those people in terms of nutrition, physical activity, meditation techniques, detoxes, recommended therapists, life style changes, give them unconditional love etc. Not any sharp recommendation but only show the possibilities and give an healthier direction.
  8. Its difficult to say how much left there is becaue there is a center-left sector that thinks very similar and the "left" is a word people in israel afraid to identify with because of the Netanyahu toxic propaganda during the years. So its better to start from the right lol ? The Right wing, or conservatives, within Israel is like 55% I think. Within the Right there are: Far right which wants to settle in the whole land without any compromises. Moderate Right ("Bibizm") who are not so into the settlement (a little) but still conservatives and traditional. Soft-Right, at least this is how we call it here, which is Right in the state and lands issues but Liberal and much more open to diversities in people lifestyle. Close to the center-left sector. These are the people I saw that moved to the opposite sector to co-operate with during the last years so its not just a name its practically important. The Center-Left sector, or Liberals, is like 25%, but together with the soft right is just a little less from the Right wing sector. Within the Center-Left sector there are: Center-left (surprisingly) which is exactly like Liberals in US I think and not far at all from western europe values. very pro gays, pro minorities... everything you want. Left who wants to get back to 67' with some changes. And there are Arab parties represent 20% of the population who I am much less know about their values but its kind of a mix. Means - The right wing sector is a little bigger but thats enough for him to win election time after time especially with Netanyahu who is very charismatic and plays people minds. But these days more people in the Right stand against Netanyahu because of its extreme low values during the last years so there is a hope. And now we have that military operation which I think the main responsible for the acceleration process in Jerusalem which lead to the current war is Netanyahu after the Center-left almost won him (until the current war). Of course the world see mainly the negative things, overlook the complexity, and cherry pick the Right and the Far Right (the "aphartide" is maybe-maybe only the far right which is just 15%) and decides that this is "Israel". No this is not.
  9. I am not justified the right wing attitude within Israel, but you have to be more nuanced here. There are forces within Israel who are trying right now to establish a left-center government and they are not any less developed than your biased opinion you have just wrote.
  10. The mentality gap between the palestinine government and the Israeli center-left attitude is very high. The palestinine mostly can't understand the language of equality and civil rights and all of that. Therefore we need to meet them in the middle in a purely orange attitude with an economic peace, and only than there is a real hope for the both sides to get closer. Unfortunately Netanyahu chose to throw oil to the fire exactly during the days when the center-left tries to establish a government after he has failed. and the current war is (a big part of it) obviously for political reasons.
  11. Its all good and fine, but I still don't see here the "Insect-eye" of yellow which finds many partial truths in what lower stages say in many situations.
  12. Thank you very much! By "distinction" you mean to points you can learn from lower stages too when you talk with them?
  13. Can you explain what you mean here? What do you mean here that Orange does?