Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
I say good for Quentin Tarantino
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2060460" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>First, I think you're incorrectly using "causal association". It would be a causal association if SSRI's were clinically proven to cause violence. The pattern was acknowledged in my post. Violent people tend to become patients for which SSRI's are used as a treatment for their mental issues. That doesn't mean that SSRI's caused their violence. If they were perfectly normal to begin with, why would they ever require treatment with SSRI's? They aren't. Tens of millions of people in this country take prescription medications to deal with social, mental and chemical issues that manifest as daily issues in their lives. You point to a list of 65 episodes of violence and try to infer a link that's causal? That would fall well below the statistical margin of error for the study pool, which is the entirety of the population that takes SSRI's on a daily basis.</p><p></p><p>If your point is to infer that SSRI's are present factors in school shootings, I'd say that gasoline is a present factor in most car wrecks. A far more logical inference would be that perhaps for this small percentage of people treated with SSRI's, perhaps they are not in fact a good candidate for treatment with anything other than iron or lead?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2060460, member: 1132"] First, I think you're incorrectly using "causal association". It would be a causal association if SSRI's were clinically proven to cause violence. The pattern was acknowledged in my post. Violent people tend to become patients for which SSRI's are used as a treatment for their mental issues. That doesn't mean that SSRI's caused their violence. If they were perfectly normal to begin with, why would they ever require treatment with SSRI's? They aren't. Tens of millions of people in this country take prescription medications to deal with social, mental and chemical issues that manifest as daily issues in their lives. You point to a list of 65 episodes of violence and try to infer a link that's causal? That would fall well below the statistical margin of error for the study pool, which is the entirety of the population that takes SSRI's on a daily basis. If your point is to infer that SSRI's are present factors in school shootings, I'd say that gasoline is a present factor in most car wrecks. A far more logical inference would be that perhaps for this small percentage of people treated with SSRI's, perhaps they are not in fact a good candidate for treatment with anything other than iron or lead? [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
I say good for Quentin Tarantino
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom