10Likes
November 19th, 2013, 01:42 AM
Hello Science Forum, I have Morgellons and Lyme Disease. I would be more than happy to answer any questions anyone may have. If I didn't have this disease I would never believe it. The word "Chemtrails" does not exist in the English Dictionary - therefore "Geo-engineering", "Weather Modification" &/or "Cloud Seeding" is the correct terminology. Cheers Jessiegirl
I wanted to leave some links, though it says I am not aloud. Gosh I've wasted half an hour. Could someone please tell me how to start a new line, I hit the ENTER key and nothing happens. Cheers and thank you.Originally Posted by Jessiegirl
That is because there is no such thing.
What do any of those have to do with the subject of this thread?therefore "Geo-engineering", "Weather Modification" &/or "Cloud Seeding" is the correct terminology
After you've made enough posts to establish yourself and show you are not a spam bot- the system lifts the automated restriction on link positng.
A lot of people speak of that issue though I've never experienced it.
It seems to just go away for some people. No idea why.
You have an imaginary disease and an untreated treatable disease.
I am going to go out on a limb here and say that you are a bit crazy.
I wouldn't say Morgellons is an imaginary disease (in fact, I would say this comment is unhelpful as it might deter people from seeking appropriate treatment). It seems pretty clear that it is a special case of delusional parasitosis, which is a real and treatable disease.You have an imaginary disease and an untreated treatable disease.
I am going to go out on a limb here and say that you are a bit crazy.
So it sounds as if Jessiegirl has two real and treatable diseases. The question then is why they are not being treated.
No relevance to Morgellons at all - just wanted to add my 2 cents worth about using the correct terminology.That is because there is no such thing.
What do any of those have to do with the subject of this thread?therefore "Geo-engineering", "Weather Modification" &/or "Cloud Seeding" is the correct terminology
Ok thanks for letting me know.After you've made enough posts to establish yourself and show you are not a spam bot- the system lifts the automated restriction on link positng.
A lot of people speak of that issue though I've never experienced it.
The correct terminology for what?
I came to this science forum to share information - special case of DOP --- ?I wouldn't say Morgellons is an imaginary disease (in fact, I would say this comment is unhelpful as it might deter people from seeking appropriate treatment). It seems pretty clear that it is a special case of delusional parasitosis, which is a real and treatable disease.You have an imaginary disease and an untreated treatable disease.
I am going to go out on a limb here and say that you are a bit crazy.
So it sounds as if Jessiegirl has two real and treatable diseases. The question then is why they are not being treated.
Geo-Engineering.The correct terminology for what?
Strange-do you care to post a link to the peer reviewed research that brought you such a clear conclusion?
Nothing is clear and you are so comfortable with yourself - and think you have all the answers. I haven't come here to argue and it would be good if we could get some real conversation happening. You don't know me, and yet you say "it's pretty clear that I'm a special case of DOP"....because I have the guts to come here for an open honest discussion? There are many assumptions from all that have posted in reply to my first post.I came to this science forum to share information - special case of DOP --- ?I wouldn't say Morgellons is an imaginary disease (in fact, I would say this comment is unhelpful as it might deter people from seeking appropriate treatment). It seems pretty clear that it is a special case of delusional parasitosis, which is a real and treatable disease.You have an imaginary disease and an untreated treatable disease.
I am going to go out on a limb here and say that you are a bit crazy.
So it sounds as if Jessiegirl has two real and treatable diseases. The question then is why they are not being treated.
I don't have time now; there were several links in the other thread. And the Wikipedia article seems to have a reasonably good (brief) summary.
No, I said Morgellons is pretty clearly (based on peer reviewed science) an example of delusional parasitosis. That is a real, treatable disorder so I'm not sure what the problem is.
I can't say anything about you; I don't know you.
What we have here is a clash of science culture, and conspiracy culture. In some ways, I think its good for all involved.
The difference? Conspiracy culture tends to ask "who", and seek an agency, (person or group of people) to explain events, while science culture tends to ask "what" and seek out phenomena. I understand the OP very well, I understand the non-linear thinking that hooks the geo-engineering to chemtrails, the CIA involvement:
CIA backs $630,000 study into how to control global weather through geoengineering - Americas - World - The Independent
The communication through innuendo to conceal from prying eyes, I get it. And I've seen the TED talks on how particles could be induced into the upper atmosphere to induce cooling in a crisis. I understand how the soft picture all these things come together to create. I know from the general trend of past things, some geo-engineering experiments are almost certainly underway somewhere. But I also do science, and "soft pictures" and "general trends" don't cut it in science. I can't say with any scientific certainty that any geo-engineering experiments are underway. Its just not a hard fact from what I've seen, it remains a sketchy possibility. There are different criteria for truth in the gut felt world of CT and hard science.
The cultural difference is that scientists lean heavily on these hard facts, the known knowns. Things they can build off of. They don't work with maybes, they don't deal with the blurry bigger picture. Its about here and now observables.
You say you have Morgellons. If you want to approach a scientific community about this, don't diagnose it like that, don't jump to any conclusions. Take pictures of the fibers found in your skin, say you don't know what they are, maybe offer some theories: (a fungus? clothing fibers that somehow became embedded?) and ask for ideas for tests to find out the truth through experiment. When its down to tangible things like that, scientists can help you. But it takes a humility on your part, and a directness and honesty. No jumping to conclusions. Scientists demand that humility and honesty out of you because they learned it themselves through having their ideas shot down many times by experiments, until they got razor sharp minds. Respect that and they are powerful friends. Understand they don't pay attention to the things they would have to speculate about, the zoom in on what can be known, what can be mastered. So keep it simple. That is a way to bridge this cultural divide.
edit: And if you're on the science side, for heaven's sake learn to be a little cynical. The world is full of people trying to hide the truth, and people trying to control the flow of information with no regard for truth. Don't blame people for trying to look beyond these facades, even if the picture is a speculative and blurry.
Peace!
Last edited by TridentBlue; November 19th, 2013 at 05:41 AM.
Looking at my wording, yes - it was incorrect.
I should have written something more along the lines of "a delusional condition".
It is a real condition - but it is a disorder of the mind rather than the body.
Maybe she lives in America and can't afford the treatment?
(In any other 1st world country that would be a ludicrous thing to suggest...)
...
From Accordino, R.E. et al., 2008:
"Descriptions of patients claiming to have the disease are strikingly similar, and their symptoms are consistent with that of those diagnosed with delusions of parasitosis. (...) Such a spectrum of symptoms [cutaneous dysesthesia, developing complex stories concerning their disease, etc.] has also been described as an example of a delusional disorder, somatic type (known also as a monosymptomatic hypochondrial psychosis) because the symptoms focus on the delusion itself and do not involve delusions or thought disorder relating to other issues."
2008????????? How quaint.
From Accordino, R.E. et al., 2008:"Descriptions of patients claiming to have the disease are strikingly similar, and their symptoms are consistent with that of those diagnosed with delusions of parasitosis. (...) Such a spectrum of symptoms [cutaneous dysesthesia, developing complex stories concerning their disease, etc.] has also been described as an example of a delusional disorder, somatic type (known also as a monosymptomatic hypochondrial psychosis) because the symptoms focus on the delusion itself and do not involve delusions or thought disorder relating to other issues."
I'm afraid I don't understand that comment. Do you have a reference to a more recent peer-reviewed report paper that refutes that research?
Or, are you just looking for something more modern (because so much can happen in 5 years). A quick search shows up these:
JAMA Network | JAMA Dermatology | Delusional Infestation, Including Delusions of Parasitosis: *Results of Histologic Examination of Skin Biopsy and Patient-Provided Skin Specimens
PLOS ONE: Clinical, Epidemiologic, Histopathologic and Molecular Features of an Unexplained Dermopathy
I'm sure there are plenty more.
There seems to be a reasonable body of evidence that seems to have identified the disorder. Which means there is a good basis for treatment. I'm not sure what the problem with that is.
Last edited by Strange; November 19th, 2013 at 06:36 AM. Reason: spulling
The year of publication is irrelevant to the content of the paper.
You asked a peer-reviewed paper, I provided one.
No, I'm sorry but it is as clear as MUD.No, I said Morgellons is pretty clearly (based on peer reviewed science) an example of delusional parasitosis. That is a real, treatable disorder so I'm not sure what the problem is.
I can't say anything about you; I don't know you.
Peer Reviewed Science? - oh please who are these "Peer Reviewers" - the lingo is BS.
You appear to not know what real is and you know nothing about "Morgellons" and I will even go as far AS SAYING - you know nothing about DOP!
I've never complained about Bugs. You need to be a fly on the wall when a "MORGELLONS" victim visits the doctor.....NOW there's your problem.
Oh gosh look, everyone is on the gravy train...ahh sorry can't show you because this forum won't let me post links or even copy and paste a paragraph.
Around the time DOP was born there was never a mention of FIBERS....and I know of a document that was added too - the word "fibers" and "internet" I think it was the Georgia State Health Department - sorry too long ago to remember.
Okay chaps I'll leave you to hypothesise - that would be a first huh?....I shake my head because any half wit knows that hair like fibers do not live in human skin - now if people start talking and say they have hair like fibers popping out of the skin why would you not want to investigate?....unless of course there was a directive given (just saying).
No offense, but this forum is hurtful, wrong, same old same old, abusive to anyone wanting to speak the truth. We did this years back so you are all wasting your time OR is this part of the contract when you work for a Pharmaceutical company?....LOL
How rude to speak about me like I'm not there - "maybe she can't afford the treatment in America" - I live in Australia and over here we call people like you lot a pack wankers.
Take care.
We appear to be reading a transcription of BatShitCrazy Radio....
I am a peer reviewer for a number of journals and In can assure you BS is kept out of them all. Maybe this is why you can't present any credible references for you daft ideas.
I cannot be the only one who is intrigued by the fact that two threads about Morgellons disease were derailed in a couple of days.
I'm sorry you feel like that. The peer review process in science and technoligy has brought many benefits to society - including your computer and the Internet.
This is a science forum. I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that you wanted to discuss the science of this subject.
Delusional parasitosis was first described in the 1930s and Morgellons in 2002. So I'm not sure what you mean by this statement.Around the time DOP was born there was never a mention of FIBERS
It has been investigated. It seems that you just don't like the results. That is a shame.now if people start talking and say they have hair like fibers popping out of the skin why would you not want to investigate?
Two suggestions. Either try a different browser other than internet explorer, or click on the icon in the upper left that says "switch editor to source mode."I wanted to leave some links, though it says I am not aloud. Gosh I've wasted half an hour. Could someone please tell me how to start a new line, I hit the ENTER key and nothing happens. Cheers and thank you.
It happens on all science based sites. Saw it a couple of times on a medical site (maybe Respectful Insolence?) as well as randomly at other blogs by people debunking pseudo- and anti-science topics.I cannot be the only one who is intrigued by the fact that two threads about Morgellons disease were derailed in a couple of days.
One of the biggest problems with some of these sufferers is that they can finish up giving themselves serious dermatological problems because of the way they try to "treat" the problem.
I remember being horrified by one woman reporting that she was spending most of the day, every day, soaking in the bath and picking all sorts of tiny things out of her skin. And not just plain water, scrubbing with soap and other products is a recipe for disaster when you do it all the time. Most of us would feel better from a day or so spent swimming or lounging around in a spa. But just soaking for week after week while picking at the skin you've already damaged wouldn't do anyone any good. I don't know how typical that sort of behaviour is with people who continually "find" tiny fibres in their skin, but it isn't encouraging.
Actually, as any proper science site, it requires that you provide Evidence to support your claims.
As it should be.
Anyone can claim others are a pack of wankers or that they have unknown objects crawling out of their skin, or falling from the sky or that bigfoot is in his backyard shed roasting hot dogs.
I can claim I'm one of the lizard people and work for the Illuminati repressing Morgellon research. Without evidence, you have exactly diddly squat and it's interesting that ZERO evidence has been shown for many of these claims in decades but a lot of evidence has been shown in support of it being a psychological obsession.
Why don't you try presenting some actual evidence to support the claims you make instead of claiming to "Bring The Truth™" without backing it up in any way? You'd get a lot further and would feel less compelled to attack the character of Objective Thinkers that need evidence to entertain a notion.
Evidence. This is yet another of the ones where evidence of something has been tested extensively but the results have been rejected by the proponents of an extraordinary explanation rather than the very ordinary outcomes of testing.Without evidence, you have exactly diddly squat and it's interesting that ZERO evidence has been shown for many of these claims in decades but a lot of evidence has been shown in support of it being a psychological obsession.
Without fail, testing of the fibres that people find "emerging" from their skin has shown that they are ordinary fibres from clothing and household items, from the exterior of the skin rather than emerging from the body. I suspect that a lot of people aren't really aware of just how much stuff is attached to even the cleanest skin - let alone all the little critters that live in and around our bodies - which would go part of the way, initially, to explaining why the scientific explanation is so unwelcome to them. That there is no possible way to get rid of them seems to make it even more desperately urgent that Some. Other. Way. must be found to "get them off of me!!"
And there really is something extra going on as well. Many of us have conditions that are well known, well described, easily tested and readily diagnosed - and there is nothing that can be done about them apart from some pain relief or other aids to functioning. It can be depressing or upsetting and, in my own case, I can remember occasionally wanting to have a particular related (auto-immune) disease diagnosed because then I'd get medication that might ease some symptoms.
Accepting unwelcome diagnoses of all kinds can be a trial. If people claiming this condition would be willing just to have counselling for support and coping, just as many people do for other conditions, then they might get some benefit. But this seems to be one of those areas where people feel it's more important to be right than to be happy (or at least happier).
I suppose there is also an element of thinking that a psychological problem is not "real" disease, or that it implies you are "crazy". Obviously, neither of these are true.
I think that this is one of the biggest problems. This stereotype makes it harder for people to get proper treatment as well as to accept proper treatment.
I think this is valid; I also think Strange's comment is valid. It's hard to accept a diagnosis that other people may immediately attach a stigma to, regardless of whether or not that stigma makes any sense at all.
Jessiegirl strikes me as following that stigma, rather than being willing to examine the evidence. This then requires Jessiegirl to not supply any evidence on her own behalf because she knows already it won't hold up. It then becomes easier to claim that the "Sheeple" are dismissing it slight of hand rather than admit they couldn't support the claim.
Do psychosomatic symptoms have any real legitimate scientific basis?
If so, perhaps many of the symptoms of Morgellon's disease are psychosomatic in origin.
If there's no such real thing as psychosomatic, then ignore that previous sentence.
Definitely. I don't often get stressed at work but when I do it tends to manifest as physical symptoms. And then there is the placebo and nocebo effects; both well supported by evidence.
Effectively, yes. But the word can also have negative connotations because it may be thought of as "imaginary" when it is very real.If so, perhaps many of the symptoms of Morgellon's disease are psychosomatic in origin.
I'm not familiar with the word "nocebo". Is that when a medicine doesn't work because you don't believe it will help?
*cough* google *cough*
I hope that future threads about Morgellons disease do not suffer from the same fate;
otherwise this disease could become another Trash Can subject, such as aether theories.
It is when something that is harmless causes harm solely because the person believes it will.
A classic example is people who believe that Wi-Fi routers make them ill: they have real physical symptoms but these do not correlate with the presence of a Wi-Fi transmitter, but just the victims' belief that there is one.
That's helpful.
That's helpful.
Disclaimer: Do not visit this site when you are an hypochondriac.
Ah right. So in some ways it's similar to the expression "worrying yourself sick".It is when something that is harmless causes harm solely because the person believes it will.
A classic example is people who believe that Wi-Fi routers make them ill: they have real physical symptoms but these do not correlate with the presence of a Wi-Fi transmitter, but just the victims' belief that there is one.
So what's it called when a medicine doesn't work because you don't think it will? I've had that happen to me before.
I'm not sure. That might be included in some definitions of nocebo (after all, not being effective [or as effective as it should be] is a form of harm).
Homeopathy?
never mind
Last edited by NAZWA; November 26th, 2013 at 12:55 AM. Reason: don't worry about it
| « Microscopy and "Morgellons" | New Train Embankment Experiment » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
