Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Talk / Re: Healthy Lifestyle Drop-in Centre
« Last post by Sunny Clouds on 25 Jan 2022 09:00PM »
PS I went in a few shops today on my way to and from a couple of other places such as the post office, and looked at chocolate cookies and biscuits.  I told myself no, no, no.  Another woman and I reading the packets agreed that we wish they'd simply label them calories per packet and that they'd do smaller packets.

Then I bought some 'low sugar' biscuits, kidding myself it makes much difference, but I bought two packets, yes, two, excusing myself because they were on special offer.  I ate both.  I've just looked at the packets.  2000 calories, give or take.  I bet if I'd read that before I bought them, I'd have left them on the shelf.  I was dishonest with myself.

This is what I was doing a couple of years back, stopped, started again, stopped, started again.

I'm so annoyed with myself and trying to say "Yes, but at least I now feel guilty and I now accept I've got to tackle it,  and at least I'm not doing it every day."

Next task - have another go at finding things I think of as 'yummy treats'.  Bananas were good for that until I started eating whole bunches.  I was doing well last year with a mixture of nuts & seeds & raisins but then started eating whole handfuls of the raisins.

The mad thing is that I don't feel better having eaten the biscuits, and I knew I wouldn't.  Is it like this when people who have an alcohol or tobacco problem use too much?  (I've got some wine in front of me.  I poured a small amount (maybe an inch or less) into the bottom of a mug and topped up with hot water.  I did that about four hours ago and have drunk a bit over half. 

I have to get to the bottom of precisely what triggers me about biscuits so I can do better.  I've managed to tackle most of my puzzle addiction by looking at each puzzle and, more and more, thinking "Oh, that's boring."  I conceptualised it as a waste of money to do puzzles I don't find interesting rather than a waste of money not to do all the puzzles.

Hang on, I'd forgotten - smoked mackerel feels like a treat.  I look at the price and think "Eek!"  But what the expletive am I spending on biscuits?  Ok, smoked mackerel will be my next treat.

Also, I didn't eat quite all the biscuits (no, that's not excusing myself) - but within the cartons, there are sachets of biscuits and there's one little sachet left.  I've just written the calories on it and put it in my kitchen where I'll see it every time I go in.
Talk / Re: Healthy Lifestyle Drop-in Centre
« Last post by Sunny Clouds on 25 Jan 2022 07:38PM »
Guess what, Ally, you've sort of less-upset-ified me!  I worry about being too longwinded then thought "Ally's worried about upsetting people?  Oh, for heaven's sake, anyone that knows Ally knows she wouldn't deliberately upset people over stuff like this.  If anyone got upset by her views, they wouldn't read her stuff anyway..."

Hmm.  Maybe I worry too much about boring people or losing their interest?  They don't have to read what I write.

Talk / Re: 'Limping' as positive - compensating
« Last post by Sunny Clouds on 25 Jan 2022 07:33PM »
 :f_yikes: :f_laugh:
Talk / Re: Healthy Lifestyle Drop-in Centre
« Last post by ally on 25 Jan 2022 05:51PM »
Fiz you’re perfectly right.  Sometimes, I think I spend too much time worrying about upsetting other people. 
Talk / Re: Healthy Lifestyle Drop-in Centre
« Last post by Fiz on 25 Jan 2022 04:32PM »
It doesn't offend me Ally, it just doesn't make sense to say anymore doesn't have mental health the same way it wouldn't make sense to say someone doesn't have physical health. The only way someone wouldn't have physical health would be if they were dead and it's the same with mental health. We either have good physical or mental health or we have problems with our physical or mental health if that makes sense. Not at all offended ☺️
Talk / Re: 'Limping' as positive - compensating
« Last post by lankou on 25 Jan 2022 04:28PM »
It was a very long time before I understood the joke about a form of contraception for men is a bit of wood in one shoe because it makes you limp.
Talk / Re: Healthy Lifestyle Drop-in Centre
« Last post by ally on 25 Jan 2022 03:32PM »
Fizz, I’m never sure how to mention MH issues.  I’d hate to offend anyone, so, use MH over all scenarios.  What I meant was I’m not suffering from any MH ailments, like some on this forum are.  I can feel anxious at times, or, down.  However, not enough to seek medical help.  If I ever unwittingly say the wrong things, please correct me.  I’ve learnt a lot on this forum about MH issues in general that I didn’t know about.  When working I always thought that those suffering from panic attacks, depression etc were not given enough support in the workplace.  Some colleagues looked on them as being weak.  I thought the opposite.  They were strong,  battling to remain in work with the health problems they had. 
Talk / 'Limping' as positive - compensating
« Last post by Sunny Clouds on 25 Jan 2022 02:53PM »
Something I may have mentioned recently and I know I say it to others is how a few years back it suddenly dawned on me that we see limping the wrong way round.  We focus on what's negative about the bit of the body that isn't working normally, not how wonderful it is the way other parts of the body compensate for it.  I know that in the days when I used to run, one of my legs used to seriously compensate for the other, permanently injured in an accident.

The penny dropped on that after someone told me I think too much and I realised that it's a pet hate of mine when people tell me that, using a variety of terms such as over-thinking, over-analysing etc.

I began to realise how much for me, analysing or consciously thinking about things that others might do automatically is compensating for past 'mis-thinking'.  I became focussed (again, perhaps 'wrongly') on my own mis-thinking based on cultural norms and upbringing before realising how common it is and how denied it is.

I'm not talking about 'wrong' conclusions, and I'm not talking about 'news' and 'events' etc.  I'm talking about everyday cultural assumptions.  My usual example of something that plagued me is the stock phrase "Ignore the bullies and they'll go away."  But "Can't you take a joke?" bullies don't, and the general acceptance of the bog standard advice leads to victim-blaming the person being bullied, who's in a no-win situation.

Yet becoming consciously aware of that and consciously developing techniques for dealing with it could be seen as 'positive limping'./

I wonder what else we do that could be seen as 'positive limping'. 

Not just how we use our bodies and minds differently but also our equipment.  Maybe seeing using a mobility aid such as a walking stick or wheelchair not as a 'disability thing' but as the equivalent of a climbing axe or wheelbarrow or sturdy walking shoes.  I love seeing snazzy wheelchairs and walking sticks.

Again, on equipment, I've shared a moan with many other deafies, particular older ones, about modern hearing aids.  We talk about how when we were kids back in the dark ages, there was a phrase  "Boys don't make passes at girls that wear glasses."  I haven't read that said anywhere for a long time. 

But I remember how it was picked up on by contact lens sellers to sell their products.  Then I remember very bright plastic-rimmed metal glasses in the eighties.  Who now would hesitate to wear very noticeable glasses lest the boys/girls would see them as ugly?

But hearing aids.  Oh dear.  They're supposed to be tiny.  Wonderful.  You can fumble with them.  You can drop them and lose them easily.  I had a couple of pairs where I couldn't actually insert them without actually changing all the settings.  Beep, beep, beep.  I long for the old ones I wore years ago, with a big volume dial.  And as for putting the batteries in, aargh.

But imagine if we saw hearing aids not as indicators of what's wrong with the hearing but as snazzy must-have show-off gadgets or accessories.  What if the NHS, instead of offering brown & grey (to match and hide behind hair), they offered grown-ups (not just children) bright colours?  Big "Look at what I've got!" show-off hearing aids?

I think we're maybe heading that way with the sort of hearing aids that are linked to smartphones.  I've come across people using their phone earpieces as some sort of hearing aids, though not being a smartphone user, I'm not familiar with the technology.  But why couldn't something be as noticeable and sometimes brightly coloured as some phone/computer ear thingies be the sort of thing we see hearing aids like in the future?

So what 'limping' thought patterns, behaviours, body movements, equipment etc. would you like people to see as "Wow!" not "Oh dear, defective"?
Talk / Re: Healthy Lifestyle Drop-in Centre
« Last post by Sunny Clouds on 25 Jan 2022 01:30PM »
Playing on ideas of nature vs nurture.

It doesn't have to be one versus the other.

Take something physical.

Let's say someone gets skin cancer.  There could be various causes, but let's just look at one scenario.

Factors could include the genetic make-up that leads to their having very pale skin, i.e. skin that's very poorly protected from the sun.  So someone with very dark skin would be far less vulnerable to skin cancer triggered by UV-exposure.  But that doesn't mean that someone with very dark skin couldn't get skin cancer, whether relating to UV light or otherwise.

Either way if UV light is the trigger, whether someone can afford sunscreen, there are lots of variables that could be relevant, e.g. whether they live somewhere where it's the cultural norm to use it, what the local cultural dress norms are, their personal dress preferences, housing, education/risk awareness, job (location, getting there, uniform etc.) etc.

Then there are what I'll broadly call 'environmental pollutants' or 'dangerous chemicals'.  So it might not be sunlight that's the issue at all.  As time goes by, scientific knowledge of skin cancer risks increases.

It now appears also that things like diet may be relevant to cancer not only in organs relating to digestion but overall,  and that individuals may have genetic general cancer risk variation.

But any human, so far as I'm aware, is vulnerable to developing cancer, it's just that some people have variations that make them more vulnerable.  I don't pretend to know whether there are any that make it likely you'll get skin cancer even if you've no exposure to anything we're currently aware can cause skin cancer, but this is when I'll mention something about my own view of 'causes'.

You see, mostly when we see things as having a single cause, we disregard 'normal' environment/situation.  But the combination of things we don't notice because they're 'normal' and something else can be relevant.

We notice it in relation to allergies, but think then of how it took ages to work out about 'sick building syndrome' and mould, which still leaves us with the argument over what's allergy and what's a normal immune response and...aargh (very personal, I've got an atopy problem).

You can, I hope, see my point, though.

( keep reading...)

We all have natural variations in our vast numbers of genes, but masses and masses of individual variations relating to our gestation, our birth, our upbringing, our environment etc. become relevant.

Even something as simple as whether one person is taught a strategy for dealing with something and another isn't.  Or accidentally finds one.

I remember suddenly becoming very aware about something about myself about a decade ago.  I was attending a new exercise class and did an exercise throwing and catching a club and dropped it about three times, then carried on.  Suddenly the instructor got anxious.  She said no wonder I was dropping the clubs, I kept closing my eyes.

No, I told her, it was when I closed my eyes to throw and catch that I stopped dropping them.  My eyes don't track properly, but my body knows where the clubs are.

Ironically, it was throwing and catching with eyes closed that a few years later gave me to realise that ataxia was suddenly worsening big-time.

In short (you thought I'd never get there) I don't think that genetic variation and life experiences are either/or.  I think it's more complicated than that.  I'll also leave you with the fashionable word 'epigenetics'.
Talk / Re: Healthy Lifestyle Drop-in Centre
« Last post by Sunny Clouds on 25 Jan 2022 11:28AM »
We have so much in common with our views.

I think there are practical difficulties to removing labelling, but then you'd expect someone with a background in the areas of linguistics and law to say that.

I think some degree of labelling and categorisation is necessary for the purposes of research and service provision.  We need definitions.

I think there's a need for ways of labelling things like a service you provide or a problem you're looking for ways to help people deal with, whether that's making it go away or teaching them strategies to deal with or, heaven forfend, helping them to get the rest of the world to accep them and adapt for them; but getting rid of seeing people as 'disordered', please do!

I wonder what sort of person ever thought that 'disorder' was a helpful term to use anyway?  As I type that, a penny's dropped.   It's the sort of person that sees the whole of 'mental health' as a single specialty.

Or if it's carved up, it's not carved up in the manner in which physical health is.

That being said, there's a lot that can be learnt from physical health in terms of things like stigma and labelling.  So much that's been changed, though not always for the better, but often so.

But what I do think is a problem is this grouping of symptoms in a way that seems, in practice, to work out very badly for people, coupled with absurdities supposedly to reduce stigma but all too often increasing it.

E.g. we keep being told we have to get rid of the 'stigma' attached to 'mental health'.  Well maybe there'd be a bit less stigma if those supposedly trying to tackle the stigma hadn't re-branded psychiatry as 'mental health'.  Not just 'mental health problems' but 'mental health' even where it's very clear that what's meant is 'mental health problems'.

We get psychiatric hospitals re-branded as 'centres' or 'houses' or whatever with silly, random names.  Well, ok, you can do that with a hospital, but usually there's still something.  If you've an old building that belonged to the Snooty family and became the local hospital, it'll be the Snooty Hospital or Snooty Clinic.  But if you stick the, erm, people with 'mental health' in there, it'll suddenly become the Sardine Centre or something.  I can think of a couple of psychiatric units with names so outwith ordinary people's vocabulary that according to taxi drivers I've discussed this with, they try, stumble over the words, then say something like "Oh, you know, the loony bin."

Meanwhile, so long as the only powers psychiatrists still have are to label people, medicate people, lock people up or tick boxes to send them elsewhere, we'll have silly labelling.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10