this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
36 points (76.5% liked)
Casual Conversation
2260 readers
352 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I assumed that you have some sort of nerve pain like your friend and it would be unbearable.
Digestive issues are textbook examples of psychosomatic problems so I am less surprised that they didn't help you. Maybe in what they are saying is a kernel of a truth but that's not for me to judge as I have my own life to live and you have yours.
I have high hopes that therapy will help you.
I am basically Socrates. And now I don't know what to do with that lack of knowledge. Maybe I should build a time machine and stroll around in an ancient Greece or study philosophy with my inflated ego. /j
So symptoms can appear before a supposed cause has happened?
I never had any problems with mood as a kid. Now that I can't work, I do.
Hmm.
Almost as if there was a correlation. Which leads me to journals and basically logs of my shit I have. Which quite clearly show the correlation. Also sleep diaries (band recorder from wrist) from the better part of a year, and still. They said I don't need sleep studies (which me and my psychiatrist were pushing for) as "just give him more antipsychotics".
There literally isn't and I've personally studied this personal issue for my entire fucking life, and know what helps what doesn't and what is psychosomatic and what isn't. As I've gone through all variations, such as when I fast, pretty much all of the problems go away, only to be replaced by the alight ones the fasting causes, but they're nothing in comparison. Then I can stress myself out in any ways and still have none of those psychosomatic symptoms.
Maybe people should accept doctors are people and people can make mistakes. But no. So they can't accept anything has been wrong and I could have a point. And they can't even defend their bullshit, but when I made a complaint to the ombudsman, quoting ICD-10 and the current local doctoral guidelines, still nothing, "Nah nothing wrong done, you're just a junkie."
I the problems since I was a kid. I started smoking weed the first time around 17-18.
Most of my current psychosomatic issues come from the rage I get from having to deal with people like you
sorry. I shouldn't have said that. I made a bunch of assumptions and I have really strong desire to help people, so I have made a mistake.
I would also be outraged if some armchair expert or worse an actual expert spew lies towards me and my situation. Even if I can't offer a solution at least I can be emphatic towards your suffering and your struggle.
I can't really offer you much other than virtual hug or a prayer to a higher power for a better tomorrow. Take care of yourself as it seems that no one else will.
It's alright man.
I can see you clearly mean well.
I'm just very frustrated about that. Slightly triggering.
Thanks. I still have at least 1.5 years of therapy left and he's a really good British guy, and people don't get be homeless in Finland too easily, so that's a bonus. The people and systems just suck and the rightwing government is making them shittier as fast as they can.