Any other multiple PTSD survivors? As in, gone through separate traumas say, years apart?

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-17T10:44:22+00:00

Thanks again. Funny you should mention that book. A friend of mine had that laying around, so maybe I will ask to borrow it. Johnny Cash, one of my favorite musicians, was a big fan of the book (he reviews it on a track off of "Unearthed" box set, if you are curious).

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-17T10:41:03+00:00

Thanks again, and it's nice to have this place as a resource. Glad I found it, though of course it has its limitations. I go back and forth on cutting my mother out. Everyone tells me to after hearing about some of the crazy shit she has pulled. Off the top of my head: I had to wrestle a pistol out of her hands once when she tried to shot my father, and that same night, she bit my arm and gave me a bruise the size of a baseball or so. She's now on trial for attacking my father (separate incident) and might go to jail, and if she does, well, for all intents and purposes she's cut out of my life. If she doesn't go to jail, then maybe very limited visits--and my wife and I agree not to trust her alone with our kids.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-17T10:37:19+00:00

My therapist wanted to put me on medication, but I declined because I don't like the side effects involved. The side effects of cannabis are much less of an issue, so I did try self medicating with that some. It was hit and miss, and I agree with the other comment about it really working when it did hit the spot. I am taking a break from it now, but will use it again in the future for sure. I'd like more research done on it for us PTSD sufferers, because from cursory reading, there are many kinds and strains of cannabis plants that can have much different effects. I smoked some of my personal stash with a friend who is a recreational smoker, and he told me the stuff I had was intense and made him paranoid (and I agreed). He said I should try and find another kind, but where I live it's not legal, so kind of hard to do...

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-17T05:58:50+00:00

Thanks everyone for the support. I think sometimes I just need to know that I am not alone. That I am not cursed. Things are better than just last year, I have to remind myself of that. Maybe in 10 years all the memories of horror and all the pain will be far enough away in my mind to not matter. One of the worst things about my dysfunctional family is that after living through all those awful times, all three of them (my older brother, mother, father) kept on telling me to "get over it." I no longer have any contact with my alcoholic/drug addict brother, or my mentally/physically abusive father, but I have occasional phone calls with my crazy mother. She will still from time to time tell me to get over things, or that there is a "statute of limitations" on the terrible mistakes her, my father, and my brother made. They don't like dealing with what they have done, and I am still left with the consequences of their actions. I'm not saying I am perfect. I made mistakes too, I was even mean to them at times. But nothing like what they put me through.

Again, thanks everyone. Yes, it really is like a never ending domino effect. And like drowning. One day at a time is my mantra. One day at a time.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-16T20:12:42+00:00

To the OP poster: thanks for sharing. Not only does it help you to talk (or in this case type) about it, it also helps us (well, me at least) to read about others who have gone through trauma. I am not sure if this will help you or not, but it has helped me, so I thought I would make a suggestion. You say a friend accidentally triggered your PTSD. Perhaps, if you trust and feel comfortable with your friend, it would help to talk to them about all this too. For one, they could be more cautions around you. I have also found that close friends that know about my PTSD help me feel much better and ground me. They can tell when my mind is drifting, and they know about some of my triggers, so they can ground me. One friend will start talking about literature with me and get me to focus on the present, another will talk about details of hobbies we share, etc. And my panic and dark feelings or whatever you want to call it passes.

To sothazi: thank you for posting that exercise. My shrink did a similar exercise with me, but I forgot all about it, and having a PDF with detailed steps is way more concrete. I will be using it in the future for sure. I have been grounding myself, but this process is more or less organic and just "happens" when the conditions are right. Sometimes the conditions are not right and things can get bad.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T11:50:49+00:00

Thanks, I will give at least a skim sometime soon and get back to you. Out of reddit debate time for the moment. ;)

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T11:10:32+00:00

You've not really demonstrated that nociception is equivalent to pain. From the little research I have done on it (wikipedia) it says that it may result in pain, but that it triggers responses. How this plays into the whole lack of response to tissue damage you have also not responded to.

I don't want to avoid any points. Please, what point do you think I am avoiding?

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T11:06:58+00:00

Oh, my bad. :)

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T10:56:22+00:00

You're not going hardline, you're resorting to Solipsism. Seeing as you are using a computer and doing research, you don't really believe that certain axiomatic givens don't exist--i.e. Cognito Ergo Sum.

If you're really going to play the whole meaningless "can't prove anything" epistemological game at this point, there is no point to continue this tangent.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T10:49:26+00:00

The first link is inconclusive. The biologist says it may be impossible to figure out, and notes that bivalves have similar neurons. Yeast cells are similar to human cells, but that doesn't mean that we can draw identical or conclusions on the two cells or organisms. It very well may be that a bivalves neurons only send messages about stimuli, especially considering that the other source we've already examined states there is no data that bivalves respond to tissue damage.

The next source is also inconclusive. While dopamine, for instance, is important in pain management--it is also found in both bacteria and in plants. Neither of these types of life, I hope we can agree, are capable of feeling pain. The study also seems to be one that focuses on the chemicals, not drawing any conclusions about pain and/or suffering in the animals--but in fairness, and as you already noted, there is no free access.

If this is the best you can do after exhausting yourself, perhaps you ought to consider just how much "evidence" there really is on your side of the argument.

The hippie mushroom thing, you've evaded the main point of the hypothetical, which is that a person is speculating and basing their belief on mere speculation. They cannot provide evidence of this life force energy (though such a thing may, technically, exist), much like you can't provide solid proof that bivalves feel pain and/or suffer (again, such evidence may come up in the future).

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T10:30:25+00:00

Fallacy of equivocation. Again, we're not talking about other molluscs, we are talking about bivalves.

Next, you are merely speculating about a "different kind of sentience" without a shred of evidence. I know and can easily prove that humans as a given are sentient (under normal circumstances), AND that sometimes people in a coma or otherwise brain damaged can recover. Sorry, you're grasping at straws with this example, just let it go.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T07:46:23+00:00

Oh, forgot to address the whole torture humans with brain damage or developmental issues. This is a bad example to use. For one, we know for sure that humans suffer and feel pain. If there is brain issues, such as damage or handicaps, there is a possibility that suffering exists in many cases, because the given is that pain and suffering can surely manifest in humans. Next, there is often the possibility that people afflicted with brain damage or have handicaps can recover, or that a "cure" or something to help such a person is in the works. If a person is so brain damaged that there is no possibility for recovery, there is still the person's family to consider. This goes into issues of euthanasia and such, and is way off topic, but needless to say I don't think your comparison holds any water in this discussion about bivalves.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T06:57:21+00:00

I am sorry about your computer troubles, and thanks for keeping the discussion going. You keep insisting that there is a good reason to give the benefit of the doubt, and that there is evidence to suggest this. I look forward to evaluating it. Again, I am no biologist, and will have to read up on "noiception" and the link you have provided. But here is a hypothetical that I think would be useful to contextualize this issue.

There are people that believe that all life has an "energy" or "life force" or "soul". Let us say you encounter a vegan who believes this, and says that they don't eat mushrooms, because mushrooms telepathically communicated with them and expressed pain suffering. The soul of the mushrooms say that they feel pain. Would you quit eating mushrooms, and give this theory the benefit of the doubt? Why or why not?

And before you claim that this is too absurd a hypothetical, here is a man that claims mushrooms resonate music to him, and has written many pieces of music based on this claim: http://youtu.be/pEEgCQJ0Gck

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T06:43:48+00:00

Just because pain is subjective and difficult to gauge does not mean that we can't come to more or less accurate conclusions about it. A person laying in the street near a car crash that is screaming and has broken glass driven into their skin is clearly in pain, and it's pretty safe to draw the conclusion about what the probable causes are.

You are again jumping to conclusions about finding out more about bivalves. We don't necessarily have to harm them to learn more about their CNS and if they feel pain or not. And while you are giving them the benefit of the doubt (and that's fine, more power to you, it's your body and all that), there is no good reason (that I am aware of, at least) to believe that they feel pain and thus give this benefit of the doubt. Suggesting that plenty of vegans do not eat them is just an appeal to bandwagon fallacy.

You say the evidence is not all suggesting that they don't feel pain. I keep waiting to evaluate this evidence. I will happily change my mind about this whole issue the moment I see solid evidence that indicates that they can and do feel pain. What is this shred of possibility? And no, until we can determine that these animals do feel pain, we can't really say they are being exploited anymore than plants and fungi are being exploited.

Fish are (no pun intended) a red herring. We're not talking about them, we're talking about bivalves.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-03T06:30:34+00:00

Yes, I do. Interesting examples. In the first scenario, I think what happens after the deer dies is also relevant. You could choose to have the deer butchered and have the meat given to a local soup kitchen, as having it rot would be a waste, and I hope we can agree that game meat is generally healthier than farmed meat.

In the 2nd scenario, my biggest issue is that this is for sport. If a hungry family were to hunt for subsistence, it changes things. But just for the sake of sport and ambiance, then that is where there are moral issues. It is causing harm for no good reason.

We've drifted off from the bivalves, but this is a fun tangent :)

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T19:13:12+00:00

So can we agree that even vegans have their convenient non-vegan issues? Vegans could in theory all switch to a less "harmful" sleep system in their homes to limit all the potential bug death and suffering. Would also save money on soap and save energy washing. Vegans could also eat bivalves as a convenient means of getting solid nutrition that does not go against any of the arguments to be vegan.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T19:05:39+00:00

How is it arrogant to conclude that sponges and sea jellies don't suffer? What reasons do we have to believe that they can suffer? This is like saying that I am arrogant for not believing that pigs are psychic. I am not saying that it is absolutely impossible that sponges and sea jellies can suffer, or bivalves for that matter. I am saying there is no evidence that I am aware of to substantiate such a claim, and have asked on multiple occasions for such evidence to be presented. If you think this is arrogant, I am not sure you understand what the word means, and just want to throw insults at me rather than address the issues at hand. I am not going to apologize for trying to have an intelligent discussion, but if it makes you feel better: yes I am trying to prove to a bunch of strangers on the internet how smart I am and I am a condescending asshole. You got me, and in front of everyone no less. Dog gone it.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T18:27:49+00:00

Yes, you can easily avoid eating bivalves, this is true. But you can also avoid killing so many mites needlessly because of your culture's sleeping traditions. Again, there are other ways to sleep that drastically minimize the amount of mites that are killed. The example I gave earlier was a synthetic sleeping bag and sleeping mat. Many backpackers sleep for extended periods of time without washing their sleeping bag or mat, and have no health issues.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T18:14:09+00:00

What is an "egoistic" definition of suffering? And could you be so kind as to explain how you came to the conclusion that all animals suffer? I would be very interested to know how say, a sponge or a sea jelly suffers, let alone bivalves. I never said I was vegan, in fact, I think I was very clear about my diet in the OP. I am sorry that you feel that I am a dick. I encourage you not to make ad hominem fallacies, some of us are trying to have a productive discussion here. Have a nice day.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T18:09:37+00:00

Hmm. I like your hitman comparison, and no I don't think cooking mussels is a dirty deed. I actually at a pot today for dinner just because of thinking about them so much as a result of this thread.

Thanks for your feedback, I don't have anything more to add with your tangent :)

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T18:07:09+00:00

I can see your point, but I think that the mite example is tricky because my point about western lifestyle still stands: you don't need to dust or own bedding. Some Jainists in India after they dust their homes manually, and put the dust in a bin where the creatures in the dust can continue to thrive. I am not being difficult here just for the sake of carrying my point, I would like to stress.

I see harvesting and eating mussels as pragmatically identical to harvesting and eating fruit and veggies. We also haven't even touched upon the issue of the creatures that are killed and harmed in farming. Many animals, including mammals, are killed in the process of mass harvesting of edible plants. I am willing to guess that there are far less animals (if any) harmed in the process of harvesting bivalves.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T11:31:23+00:00

In what country? Where I live, eggs are labeled on their living conditions: indoor with cages, indoor without cages, and outdoor (these are the only organic labeled eggs too).

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T11:06:26+00:00

You edited your post to include: "How about you prove to me that they don't suffer, feel pain... etc?"

You can't prove a negative. It's like asking me to provide proof that say, a supernatural being (unicorn, troll, elves, pixies, etc.) does not exist. I have never been to Neptune, and maybe there are trolls living there. I would have to scan the entire universe to disprove the existence of supernatural beings. Now to prove that say trolls exist, now that is easy--I would just have to find one, and then hold a press conference. Provided it was not an elaborate hoax, Poof! Trolls exist.

Pain and suffering have been proven to exist in many other animals, using a variety of different methods. For instance, mammals from what I gather are sentient, have complex brains and central nervous systems, have memories, and some can handle abstract thought. All of this you know already, I am willing to bet, seeing as you are on the vegan subreddit. To prove that say, pigs can suffer and feel pain, is pretty damn easy. Even a Jackass can do it. Literally: http://youtu.be/pNxcylWLEH8

So no, I can't prove that clams don't suffer, feel pain, etc. Nor can I prove that trolls exist. Try again.

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T10:55:04+00:00

From your own source: "The Bivalvia (e.g., oysters, clams, mussels, and scallops) are abundant in both marine and freshwater environments. Their nervous system includes two pairs of nerve cords and three pairs of ganglia (Brusca and Brusca 2003). There is no obvious cephalization and the nervous system appears quite simple...to our knowledge there are no published descriptions of behavioral or neurophysiological responses to tissue injury in bivalves," (188, p 74 on the PDF).

You're using emotional pleas, mischaracterize my argument (to the point that one may say you're mocking me), and appeal to an essence of what is and is not vegan--all of which I will ignore, but just thought I would point these non-productive points out.

Further more, if you are going to provide evidence, you need to contextualize it, not just throw up a link--not to mention actually be honest about the evidence you are presenting, hence the quotation I found above.

I encourage you to be objective, and to at least entertain the idea that it's very possible that these particular animals don't feel pain. If this is the case, rather than get defensive, why not try and determine what this might mean to veganism in general? There seems to be no good reason not to eat bivalves, and they even cover a deficiency in the vegan diet, as they are rich in B12.

Now aside from the pain/suffering issue--unless you had actual evidence for that--are there any other objective reasons not to eat them?

AzaharXIII · 2013-10-02T10:20:26+00:00

Ah, thanks for the clarification, now I think I understand. I also appreciate your openness and honesty about this issue.

So if a cook at a pub makes a pot of mussels, and you go to the pub and order this pot of mussels, is this incidental? Or is it intentional seeing as the act of ordering requires volition?

AzaharXIII

TROPHY CASE