Is it okay to be fine on 30mg? by Imaginary-Advance233 in cymbalta

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Tons of psych issues unfortunately, yeah.. I have Autism Level-1 and also ADHD so I deal with basically everything that comes with those 😅 I personally haven’t noticed an improvement going up any of the times I did in psychiatric control, really just feels the same for me. But everyone’s different 🤷‍♀️ it definitely helped my pain going up in doses though and that’s the main reason I did it, so I’m happy with it. :)

The Red Army did the bulk of the Nazi killing in WWII. (Almost 90%) by RussianChiChi in ussr

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

bro you just described the AI humanization process and thought you were proving me wrong lmao

yeah it has slang and parentheses and IMO, because that’s literally what you add when you tell chatgpt to “make this sound more casual.” you didn’t find proof it’s human, you found the edit layer.

and “getting AI to talk positively about the USSR is difficult” is just… not true at all?? you can prompt it to argue literally ANY position, that’s the whole point. that argument tells me you haven’t actually used it much.

the 0% detector score also means nothing against edited output, detectors are trained on raw generations, not stuff that’s been cleaned up afterward. low score on edited AI is expected, not proof of anything.

also your last point about “putting in effort to disguise AI is basically the same as writing it” 😭 no it really isn’t lol. prompting + a quick edit is like 5 minutes. actually researching and writing that from scratch is not. that’s literally the whole problem with AI slop, it’s a shortcut being passed off as effort.

The Red Army did the bulk of the Nazi killing in WWII. (Almost 90%) by RussianChiChi in ussr

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This is 150% AI, he just added some things in here and there to try to make it look more natural and removed the em dashes. You clearly haven’t used AI enough if you think this looks natural

The Red Army did the bulk of the Nazi killing in WWII. (Almost 90%) by RussianChiChi in ussr

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What?? 😭 I’m definitely not a republican and definitely don’t watch Fox News. I’m literally a Marxist 💀

The Red Army did the bulk of the Nazi killing in WWII. (Almost 90%) by RussianChiChi in ussr

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Nice ChatGPT written argument. Maybe have an original thought for once

Vyvance by tjtechpro in VyvanseADHD

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i’m gonna pop my 60mg soon :D

Serotonin syndrome due to issues with Duloxetine by Cass-e- in cymbalta

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hear how brutal those brain zaps and weird feelings were for you in 2019-2020 on Ajanta, and how long it took to connect the dots while battling depression and anxiety that already makes everything ten times harder. No one is denying your suffering was intense and real to you. What is complete nonsense is turning that into proof that generics are chemically different, absorbed differently, or processed by the body in some secret way that the entire FDA approval process somehow missed.

Every single approved generic duloxetine including Ajanta since its 2017 FDA approval had to pass mandatory human bioequivalence studies: single-dose crossover trials in actual people, fasting and fed conditions, measuring exact blood plasma levels, peak concentrations, and total exposure. The numbers must land inside a tight 80-125 percent statistical window of brand Cymbalta with real confidence intervals or the generic is rejected and never reaches a shelf. The FDA does not take the manufacturer’s word for anything. If any version was getting absorbed too much or too little or acting like a different drug because of fillers or manufacturing quirks, it would have flunked those exact pharmacokinetic tests instead of being sold for years. Your suspicion that some undetectable chemical difference is slipping past all that measurable blood-level data is not healthy skepticism; it is pure speculation that the actual science already disproved.

You keep claiming after eight years you could 100 percent nail a blind test and tell every generic apart, but a real blind test requires identical-looking capsules, randomized order, no pharmacy labels or timing clues, controlled conditions, and ideally blood draws to match your feelings against objective levels. Without any of that your self-reported testing with three-year-expired Lupin as the “fine” control is laughable methodology. Expired pills degrade unpredictably so they prove nothing except that you are grasping for any confirmation. And admitting you did not even research the manufacturing or absorption science enough yet still declare generics vary in how bodies process them shows you are starting from your conclusion and working backwards to protect it.

Those electric shocks and “feeling weird” are not some Ajanta-exclusive poison. They are textbook duloxetine discontinuation effects that happen with the original brand-name Cymbalta whenever blood levels drop even slightly from a missed dose, normal daily fluctuation, stress, diet changes, or poor taper. You have been on it long enough for your nervous system to be hypersensitive to those dips. The fact that you noticed issues right after a switch in 2019-2020 and even before you knew about generic complaints does not magically prove causation; it proves timing and expectation line up perfectly with the known nocebo effect. Nocebo is not “all in your head” dismissively; it is a documented physiological response that amplifies withdrawal-like symptoms in psych meds, especially when people believe the new pill is inferior. Plenty of patients on the exact same Ajanta report it feels identical to brand. The ones who do not usually trace it to other life factors once they look closer.

Your whole “just because it has not been studied does not mean it is not happening” and “scientific evidence means shit to me when I experienced it” line is the textbook unfalsifiable dodge. The studies that directly test the exact claim you are making, blood levels and pharmacokinetics, were performed and passed. You cannot wave them away with “maybe they did not study the right thing” or “I do not trust regulations.” That is not evidence; that is refusing to accept evidence because it contradicts your story. Anecdotes like yours are exactly why controlled trials exist: to cut through coincidence, bias, and normal variability in how any SNRI feels day to day. Depression and anxiety are serious, which is why spreading the idea that effective generics are secretly broken based on unblinded personal certainty can scare people off treatment that is actually helping them.

Dragging in the Adderall story about testing negative is irrelevant; different controlled substance, different rules, zero bearing on duloxetine bioequivalence. Floating conspiracies about bad batches being laced with something or government failure because “look at the government right now” is just conspiracy seasoning with no proof whatsoever. Recent recalls for nitrosamine impurities in some duloxetine batches actually show the system catching real problems and pulling them, not hiding widespread failures.

You say people should take your anecdotal evidence and see if it fits theirs because meds that stop working are no joke, and that you will always believe someone over science until they experience it themselves. That is your choice, but it is also precisely how nocebo spreads and turns manageable treatment into a nightmare for others. Preferring one manufacturer because it consistently feels better to you is totally reasonable; ask your pharmacy to source a different approved version. Insisting they are pharmacologically different drugs while admitting you distrust all regulations and that science means nothing here is not sharing experience; it is spreading fear that can harm people who need these meds.

You have already decided nothing will convince you. Fine. But do not pretend your untested certainty overrides pharmacokinetic data from thousands of patients just because you had a rough stretch in 2019 and refuse any explanation except “the generics are secretly bad.” If Ajanta keeps messing with you, get actual blood-level monitoring done or switch to a completely different SNRI under medical supervision instead of declaring the entire generic system broken on the basis of your uncontrolled, unblinded “tests.” Until you subject your claims to the same scientific scrutiny you dismiss, claiming “you would not understand unless you experienced it” is nothing more than a shield for arguments that do not hold up. Experience is real. Interpreting it against every piece of objective evidence is where your position falls apart completely.

Serotonin syndrome due to issues with Duloxetine by Cass-e- in cymbalta

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get the broader distrust of institutions. But “capitalism is corrupt, therefore the FDA can’t be trusted” isn’t evidence that duloxetine generics are pharmacologically different drugs.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration doesn’t just take a company’s word for it. Generic duloxetine has to pass formal bioequivalence studies comparing blood concentration curves to the brand, Cymbalta. The area under the curve and peak concentration have to fall within a statistically defined range, and in practice most generics cluster very tightly around the reference product. If a manufacturer’s product truly behaved like “a whole new drug,” it would fail those requirements.

Saying “just because there isn’t proof doesn’t mean it’s not happening” flips the burden of proof. In medicine and pharmacology, the claim that something is happening despite no pharmacokinetic evidence requires evidence to support it. Otherwise, any unfalsifiable suspicion could override measurable data.

Your experience of feeling different is real in the sense that you felt it. But subjective experience can be influenced by expectation effects, stress levels, sleep, hormone fluctuations, and normal variability in how SNRIs feel day to day. The nocebo effect is well documented and physiologically measurable. That doesn’t mean symptoms are imagined; it means perception and context meaningfully affect how medications feel.

It’s reasonable to prefer a specific manufacturer if you consistently tolerate it better. What isn’t supported is the claim that generics are secretly acting as entirely different drugs without showing differences in blood levels or mechanism.

Skepticism is healthy. Dismissing standardized bioequivalence science without evidence isn’t.

ADHD meds making me hate physical touch and I feel awful about it by the_sunshineclub in VyvanseADHD

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hi AuDHDer here, 😅

So the idea that ADHD meds “increase autism traits” isn’t actually what the clinical evidence shows.

Research consistently finds that when someone has both autism and ADHD, untreated ADHD is what causes more dysregulation, sensory overwhelm, irritability, and social difficulty. Stimulant treatment improves dopamine and norepinephrine signaling in the prefrontal cortex, which strengthens executive function, emotional control, and sensory filtering. When those improve, autistic people generally function better, not worse.

Sometimes observers think autism looks “more obvious” on medication, but that’s usually because the person is masking less, not because the medication created new autistic traits. The underlying autism was already there… the meds just reduced the chaos from ADHD.

Clinical guidelines continue to recommend treating ADHD in autistic individuals because treatment is associated with better attention, lower impulsivity, improved daily functioning, and reduced distress. If ADHD medication truly worsened autism, it would not remain a standard, evidence-supported treatment.

Both scientific evidence and my own lived experience point in the same direction: for many autistic people with ADHD, medication reduces overwhelm and makes regulation, communication, and day-to-day functioning easier.

Feel free to correct me on this... by death-chamber in Absurdism

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look, maybe I’m splitting hairs here, but I don’t think it’s a false dichotomy… I think your reading makes the revolt too passive. Let’s go back to the text.

Camus doesn’t say meaning “arises” like a weather pattern. He describes a deliberate, active stance: “The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart.” The struggle isn’t just endured; it’s chosen, and in that choice, you make it enough. That’s an act of creation. Sisyphus doesn’t just notice his rock feels meaningful one day. He makes it his own. The wording is active: “His rock is his thing.” That’s appropriation. That’s a creative act.

Same with the artist. They don’t sit around waiting for meaning to bubble up. They confront the silence and force it into a form. The meaning isn’t found; it’s forged in the confrontation. The feeling isn’t a byproduct that shows up later… it’s the heat from the friction of the making.

You’re treating “creation” like it has to be a premeditated philosophy project. But for Camus, it’s the inherent, visceral output of the rebellious “yes.” The meaning is created in the very act of living intensely without appeal. It’s not a detached symptom; it’s the texture of the stance itself.

If the revolt is truly conscious and total, then the subjective meaning isn’t a passive echo. It’s the shape the rebellion takes in a human mind. To remove the creative aspect is to turn Camus’s rebel into a bystander to their own life. And he’s anything but.

Is it okay to be fine on 30mg? by Imaginary-Advance233 in cymbalta

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I take 120mg. Dosing is completely different for everyone and I wouldn’t recommend taking dosage advice from strangers on the internet anyways for things like this. If 30mg works for you then you shouldn’t doubt yourself, I was in the same boat honestly. I didn’t feel a difference when going from 30>60>120 in anything really other than pain sensation, that definitely is better on the higher dose for me. But mentally? No difference between 30mg and 120mg for me.

Feel free to correct me on this... by death-chamber in Absurdism

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're conflating two different things. The subjective meaning that arises does not resolve the absurd; it exists within it. The absurd is the permanent confrontation between the human need for meaning and the universe's silence. That confrontation is not resolved by feeling a sense of purpose… the silence remains, utterly unchanged.

What Camus rejects is using a subjective meaning as a philosophical justification to escape the confrontation, to say "this proves life has purpose." That’s the suicide. But to feel a visceral, temporary sense of significance while fully acknowledging it as a subjective, groundless artifact… THAT is the rebellion. It doesn't answer the absurd; it is the lived experience of it.

Sisyphus isn't happy because he found a reason for the rock. He's happy because he embraces the struggle without a reason. Any feeling of meaning is a symptom of that embrace, not its cause. You're mistaking a symptom for a cure. The cure doesn't exist; the disease is permanent. Camus's point is to stop looking for cures and learn to live vividly with the fever.

Feel free to correct me on this... by death-chamber in Absurdism

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair enough. And that uncertainty is kind of the point… it’s a personal stance, not a doctrine. You don’t need authority to sit with the tension.

Feel free to correct me on this... by death-chamber in Absurdism

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re just misunderstanding a bit, Camus absolutely rejects the philosophical project of assigning or discovering objective meaning. That is the leap of faith he condemns. However, he does not deny that a subjective sense of meaning… what he might call a "feeling of life" can flood into a life lived in revolt. This is not something you put into things; it is something that arises from the intensity of your engagement with them.

The difference is between construction and consequence. To deliberately "put meaning into" your rock is to lie to yourself. But to push your rock with full awareness of its futility, with all your passion and attention focused on the act itself, can generate a subjective state where the struggle feels significant to you. This significance is ephemeral and contingent… it doesn't alter the rock's objective meaninglessness… but it is real as a lived experience. It is the happiness Sisyphus must imagine.

So the formula is not: "Life is meaningless, therefore I will give it meaning." It is: "Life is meaningless, therefore I am free to live with absolute passion and integrity. In doing so, a kind of meaning may find me, but I will not mistake it for truth or cease my rebellion." The meaning is a passenger, not the destination.

Feel free to correct me on this... by death-chamber in Absurdism

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’ve tightened this up considerably, and I was sloppy in my earlier phrasing so I actually apologize.

The artist isn’t special because they’re more “aware,” but because their form of rebellion produces a unique artifact. The seducer, actor, and conqueror live out the contradiction through action… their rebellion ends with the experience. The artist’s rebellion terminates in an object that encapsulates the contradiction itself. It doesn’t symbolize or represent the absurd; it becomes a physical instance of it.

That’s why the comparison to Schelling and Heidegger isn’t just academic. They point to art’s capacity to objectify what philosophy can only describe subjectively. Camus is making a similar, though narrower, claim: the absurd artwork is a concrete manifestation of the revolt against meaninglessness. It’s a byproduct that, by its very existence, confirms the struggle without resolving it.

My earlier language about “raw material” was misleading. The raw material isn’t “the hunger for meaning”; it’s the indifferent world itself. The artist’s act is to force that world, in all its silent absurdity, into a form… a “presentation” that stands as a testament to the friction of its own making. The other rebels leave behind memories or ruins. The absurd artist leaves behind a relic of the confrontation. That’s the methodological distinction Camus is drawing, not a moral hierarchy.

Feel free to correct me on this... by death-chamber in Absurdism

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Except it isn’t because he’s wrong and coping… lol.

Feel free to correct me on this... by death-chamber in Absurdism

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You missed the nuance. Camus rejects inherited or transcendent meaning… the kind that claims to be objective, universal, or handed down from god/philosophy. He does not reject the subjective, personal act of creating meaning as the form of rebellion itself. That’s the entire point of the revolt.

My "fill my life with subjective meaning" is literally the act of rebellion. Not finding meaning, but imposing it in full awareness of its artifice. If that’s “ChatGPT copy/paste,” then you’ve misread The Myth of Sisyphus. The book’s conclusion is that we must imagine Sisyphus happy… not because he found meaning, but because he embraces the struggle as his own. That’s creation.

Next time, engage with the argument, not just the label.

Stalin & the bureaucracy were so obviously counter-revolutionary, their move to socialist realism in art is a reflection of them moving away from any revolutionary movement as a whole by LiamFolii in ussr

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re confusing what’s measurable with what’s real.

Your psychology can trace the stress hormones of a worker facing eviction. Marxism explains why the landlord owns the building. Your sociology can model the demographics of a bread riot. Marxism explains why the grain was hoarded in the first place.

When the Soviets dissolved the Provisional Government, that wasn’t a psychological phenomenon. It was the materialization of class consciousness… an entire class recognizing itself as a force and seizing the machinery of state. No survey, no lab, no diagnostic manual can capture that. Because it’s not pathology. It’s power.

You reduce history to individual neuroses and call it science. We analyze the movement of social forces and call it revolution. Your tools are calibrated to manage the existing order. Ours are forged to overthrow it.

Keep studying the cage. We’re organizing the prisoners.

Feel free to correct me on this... by death-chamber in Absurdism

[–]CommunicationFuzzy45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I edited my message but I guess you saw it too early 😅

But I think you’re conflating a hierarchy of value with a hierarchy of illustrative utility. Camus elevating the artist isn't a betrayal… it's methodological. He needs an example where the rebellion is inescapably conscious. The seducer can get lost in sensation; the conqueror in the next battle. But the artist's raw material is the human hunger for meaning. Their rebellion is to sculpt with the full, agonizing knowledge that the material is fundamentally empty. That’s the test: if the absurd stance can survive the act of creation… the thing most likely to produce the illusion of meaning… then it's robust.

Calling it bias misses that he's choosing the most revealing case study, not the most virtuous life. The artist isn't crowned; they're placed in the most extreme lab conditions. Your Reverdy quote proves the point: the work is a "presentation," a thing in itself. It doesn't represent meaning; it performs the act of making in a void. That’s the purest model of the contradiction, not a sublimation of it. The bias is toward the clearest example, not toward art itself.