Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
It's not really a matter of opinion you can agree with or disagree with. Years worth of statistics show a great number of people committing suicide after regaining their sight. The rate could be higher among people who lose their sight but that doesn't change anything.
?
it would show a powerful correlation between curing blindness and a lower suicide rate, at least in a population confined to those who lost their sight at some point I suppost
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
It's not really a matter of opinion you can agree with or disagree with. Years worth of statistics show a great number of people committing suicide after regaining their sight. The rate could be higher among people who lose their sight but that doesn't change anything.
I am aware that it is only my opinion. I was just saying those I've been around feel the oppisite of suicidal.
Originally posted by inimalist
LOLwut?
It seems people are saying that people with restored sight have higher suicide rates than the population average.
Why?
Edit - For example: Sight is restored to a person that lost sight or at least the ability to function with sight. That person commits suicide after sight is restored, and it was due to the restoration. Why? Somethinig bridges the gap between sight restoration and suicide...and it's psychological, obviously. What is it? Or, what are they?
Originally posted by dadudemon
It seems people are saying that people with restored sight have higher suicide rates than the population average.Why?
Edit - For example: Sight is restored to a person that lost sight or at least the ability to function with sight. That person commits suicide after sight is restored, and it was due to the restoration. Why? Somethinig bridges the gap between sight restoration and suicide...and it's psychological, obviously. What is it? Or, what are they?
🙂 it's more your word choice. "psychological causality" can only be determined through an experiment, whereas discerning the motives behind actual events would be like a form of psychological archeology.
and even if statistical correlations can be found, there are dozens of possible interpretations, not to mention that this assumes the nearly Victorian idea that there must be a "theory of suicide" in which we can explain how suicides happen, rather than the more relevant perspective that focuses on unique and similar contexts between people to discern why they performed any behaviour.
Originally posted by inimalist
🙂 it's more your word choice. "psychological causality" can only be determined through an experiment, whereas discerning the motives behind actual events would be like a form of psychological archeology.
I was expecting an experiement, yes. Not a "survey", for sure.
It's easy to split apart the groups:
Restored Sight Not Suicide
Restored Sight Suicide
Control - Standard population without sight problems.
A person may try to commit suicde, but be unsuccessful. (But could have succeeded in even a slightly different environment, same method.)
Those would be used for comparative analysis. (Compare the findings with those that survived their attempt.)
I do know that there are ways ot measuring a person's state in a lab environment...meaning, it doesn't have to be a "pillow session" with their primary psychologist.
In other words, it doesn't have to be in investigation into those that have died, rather, it could be an investigation in those that live up till their deaths.
However, I suspect that the introduction into a "lab" situation might taint the "samples" and create too much of an awareness of a suicide potential...and produce results that are too close to population average.
Originally posted by inimalist
and even if statistical correlations can be found, there are dozens of possible interpretations, not to mention that this assumes the nearly Victorian idea that there must be a "theory of suicide" in which we can explain how suicides happen, rather than the more relevant perspective that focuses on unique and similar contexts between people to discern why they performed any behaviour.
OMG. 😆
Yes, I'm fully aware that people are snowflakes.
That's why I corrected my self and posted:
"Somethinig bridges the gap between sight restoration and suicide...and it's psychological, obviously. What is it? Or, what are they?"
If there exists a statistical significance that exceeds the mean, there is/are reason/s for the significance and I want to know that/those reason/s.
If it is lots of reasons, there will be reasons more frequent than others. The top reasons could be isolated and mitigation techniques developed. Such as: having the Ophthalmologist meet with both the future patient and a suicide mental health professional, before the surgery, and discuss things. Then follow up 3-5 times after surgery, with the psychologist to see how they are doing. That frequency could be determined by the study: it could be once a week, once a month, it could be like a Fibonacci sequence up to having it 8 weeks apart.
I do know that indiviuals that get most of their stomach removed, have to see a mental health professional BEFORE the surgery, so I don't see there being a problem for the eye surgery as well.
It's just that, suicides post-op being higher than population average, seems very counterintuitive, so I have to know why or the whys.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I was expecting an experiement, yes. Not a "survey", for sure.It's easy to split apart the groups:
Restored Sight Not Suicide
Restored Sight Suicide
Control - Standard population without sight problems.
A person may try to commit suicde, but be unsuccessful. (But could have succeeded in even a slightly different environment, same method.)
Those would be used for comparative analysis. (Compare the findings with those that survived their attempt.)
I do know that there are ways ot measuring a person's state in a lab environment...meaning, it doesn't have to be a "pillow session" with their primary psychologist.
In other words, it doesn't have to be in investigation into those that have died, rather, it could be an investigation in those that live up till their deaths.
However, I suspect that the introduction into a "lab" situation might taint the "samples" and create too much of an awareness of a suicide potential...and produce results that are too close to population average.
OMG. 😆
Yes, I'm fully aware that people are snowflakes.
That's why I corrected my self and posted:
"Somethinig bridges the gap between sight restoration and suicide...and it's psychological, obviously. What is it? Or, what are they?"
If there exists a statistical significance that exceeds the mean, there is/are reason/s for the significance and I want to know that/those reason/s.
If it is lots of reasons, there will be reasons more frequent than others. The top reasons could be isolated and mitigation techniques developed. Such as: having the Ophthalmologist meet with both the future patient and a suicide mental health professional, before the surgery, and discuss things. Then follow up 3-5 times after surgery, with the psychologist to see how they are doing. That frequency could be determined by the study: it could be once a week, once a month, it could be like a Fibonacci sequence up to having it 8 weeks apart.
I do know that indiviuals that get most of their stomach removed, have to see a mental health professional BEFORE the surgery, so I don't see there being a problem for the eye surgery as well.
It's just that, suicides post-op being higher than population average, seems very counterintuitive, so I have to know why or the whys.
sure
Originally posted by dadudemon
It seems people are saying that people with restored sight have higher suicide rates than the population average.Why?
Edit - For example: Sight is restored to a person that lost sight or at least the ability to function with sight. That person commits suicide after sight is restored, and it was due to the restoration. Why? Somethinig bridges the gap between sight restoration and suicide...and it's psychological, obviously. What is it? Or, what are they?
It's pretty ****in simple dude. They'd forgotten how shitty the world looks and how fat everybody is, and once they were reminded they couldn't handle it.
Obviously they forgot how to ''see''.
Our brain is used to decoding things the way it does - we can tell a difference between a painting an something that is real life, those who's sight has been restored, cannot.
They cannot tell distance, cannot tell hight, cannot tell if something is a drawing or real life.
This takes training and rehabilitation. Perhaps some people are just unable to cope, or unable to re-adapt.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Obviously they forgot how to ''see''.
Our brain is used to decoding things the way it does - we can tell a difference between a painting an something that is real life, those who's sight has been restored, cannot.
They cannot tell distance, cannot tell hight, cannot tell if something is a drawing or real life.This takes training and rehabilitation. Perhaps some people are just unable to cope, or unable to re-adapt.
it's even more severe than that actually. for instance, if a kitten is raised in an environment where there are no horizontal lines, it never develops the ability to see them properly.
people blind from birth would be missing the neuro-architecture that even carries the signals from photons through the optic tract, to say nothing about the low level processing upon which depth perception and the like are based.
also, though less important, it is not your visual system that distinguishes between real and fake. in fact, tour visual system processes cartoon animation and reacts to it as if it were real, however, later and higher order processing can put the visual information in context. theoretically, this ability would still be functional in blind people, just any connections with the visual system would be minimal at best.
Originally posted by Robtard
Who in the hell would go and raise a kitten in an environment without horizontal lines?
scientists
I don't think we are allowed to do that anymore. there are awesome earlier studies that measured development it the kitten's eyes were forced shut, and how much recovery was seen if the eyes were opened at various developmental points.
we can quibble ethics all you want, but those studies man, nothing excites manlike neuroplasticity