![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 3 to 27 of 52. Go back in thread:
Posted by medlib on October 30, 2001, at 5:03:29
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
Dr. Bob--
I believe that the ethics of facilitating a group like PB begin with considering that those who contribute posts are "members", not "patients"--and the host of such a group is an "administrator", not a practicing "clinician." These terms are more than semantic niceties to me, because they specify not only how the group functions, but its responsibilities and limitations. The Internet was created initially to facilitate peer-to-peer communication; your forum has enabled a virtual assemblage of peers whose very illnesses make us unlikely to meet others like ourselves. Your economical interventions, always as a moderator, not an advisor, are what steer PB on a positive course and enable us to be useful to one another.
I use information gained from PB
--as an experiential database of peers (who make up a small atypical segment of the general patient population).
--as a generator of ideas and alternatives, which I research further on my own and discuss with my pdoc.
--as a comparison source for psych drug reactions not covered in available literature.
--as a second opinion on whether an option is worth further research.
--as a source of information sources (which I then evaluate for myself).
--as a grapevine for early word of new treatments and novel uses of existing ones.
--and for hope, when there otherwise doesn't seem to be any.For me, PB boards are most useful over the long term. It's necessary to read for awhile to develop a sense for which posters have useful expertise in which areas. Of course, support from other sources (journal citations, reputable web sites, texts, etc) lends veracity to any individual source. IMHO, anonymous expertise can never be more than a "jumping off point"; but wisdom, empathy and simple responsiveness create value that is a lot more than virtual.
As a poster here, I try to offer *to* others some of what I have found of value *from* others--information I believe may be useful, other web sources, personal experiences. I try to remember to confine my opinions to those requested; try to offer alternatives, not advice; and try to have references available for the info I provide.(I found, however, that always including citations tended to clutter up posts.) If I'm replying to someone unfamiliar to me, I'll repeat the usual caveats, where appropriate.
Well, that's more than enough from me. My background and the classes I've taught on finding and evaluating med info on the net make my responses to other questions unrepresentative, I'm afraid (but also very interested in your findings).
Many thanks for the soapbox---medlib
Posted by akc on October 30, 2001, at 7:28:27
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
As far as trusting a web site, the biggest reason I trust a web site is based on its "reputation." Do I know anything about it? I tend to mainly frequent only sites that I have learned about from others. Sometimes I do "learn" about these sites from another site. For instance, if I am doing legal research (or other research), I may get a link from one site into a new site. However, with that type of research, I am ultimately going to "back it up." That is, I am not going to ultimately base my decision on anything I learn for the first time from a new site.
With a site like Psycho Babble, where it is a bunch of people coming together, my decision whether to "trust" it only comes over time. A site like this is as trustworthy as the people who make up the site.
That then gets to how I decide who I am going to trust. A lot of that is also based on time. The more I read a person's posts, the more I get to know the person, the more I then decide whether I "trust" the person. Given the anonymous nature, I doubt I will ever fully trust a group member the way I do a person in person. But I definitely trust some more than others. Those who seem to put thought into their posts, those who don't name call, respond to every post, who seem to empathize -- these are the things in group members posts that to me are the "clues" that lead me to trust some more than others.
>
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
>
I definitely try to present my information a certain way. I want to be thoughtful in my presentation. I don't want to come across as half-cocked. Information just for information sake is not always helpful, in my opinion. I try to read what has been posted and to tailor my response to that post.akc
Posted by Twain on October 30, 2001, at 7:35:40
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
Psychobabble has been invaluable because many of the patients' real concerns, that are dismissed by doctors and drug companies, are addressed.
I don't completely trust either the PDR or the online support group. I examine everything and try to read between the lines.
For example. Most doctors and drug companies will swear up and down that an anti-depressant does not cause weight gain. Yet online contributors and my own experience tell a different story. What looks like an insignificant and "infrequent" side effect turns out to be all too common.
To the doctor or drug companies a weight gain of 10 or 20 pounds is trivial yet in the real world or nightmare of depression, this adds to the depressed person's problems.
I also look at studies with special interest in the drug's side effects. I may trust the results of a good study (with lots of participants) more than the PDR. But in the end, I weigh (ugh) it all together - the study results, online patients' comments and PDR information.
Posted by Mitch on October 30, 2001, at 10:22:09
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> > I'm supposed to say something [in Washington next week] about: (1) how aware patients in online support groups are of the various online ethics and quality initiatives, (2) to what extent those initiatives influence their use of online resources, (3) what other methods they use to decide whom to trust, and (4) the ethics of facilitating such groups.
> >
> > Any comments on any of the above? (Remember, these are comments I might present.)
>
> Or, looking at it another way, I'd be curious:
>
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?I would be more apt to trust information that is "anecdotal" (experiential) with lots of agreeing and dissenting balance from other people that have had personal experience with the issue in question. If your experiences and questions were "typical" then your doctor probably would have satisfied you and you wouldn't be asking questions *here*.
>
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?I think it is important to have a good intuition and to "present" the info in an accessible and understandable manner to the person who is requesting it.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bob
Posted by Simcha on October 30, 2001, at 11:24:58
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
I follow my inner voice which rarely steers me in the wrong direction. I also check out what I pick up here with my pdoc.
Trusting a web site comes over time. If I read information which turns out to be true and it is helpful over time, I tend to trust it more.
I tend to use others in the group as support. I don't know very many people in my life who are taking psychotropic drugs and who are being treated for depression and OCD. I can see that I am not alone. I can also learn how others have dealt with the same illnesses I have.
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
I pass on information as it relates to me. I try to explain that it is all my subjective experience. When asked for advise I always refer people to their pdoc or their gp. I am not a doctor. My experience may be valuable to another and I know that I cannot make theraputic decisions for anyone else but me. And I only make those decisions after much research and much consultation with my pdoc. In fact I've never gone against the advise of my pdoc. I do decide to follow his advise. There is always a choice. I could always find a second opinion. ;-)
Posted by Bill L on October 30, 2001, at 12:03:49
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
I trust that most posters are honest in relating their experiences with various medications since they generally have nothing to gain by lying. I feel the most confident about something when I read a lot of posts that have the same observation. Therefore, I look for a website discussion group that has a lot of posts. For example, a lot of people claim to gain weight on Paxil. So I think that it must be a reasonably common side effect. Also, a lot of people report AD "poop out". So if my AD poops out in the future, I'll know that it's common and I won't get discouraged. I'll up the dose, augment, or try something else. I think however that the people who participate may be having a somewhat rougher time with treatment than the average person.
When I give advise, I usually try to encourage people to be open to the advise of their doctors and not to be scared off by internet horror stories.
> > I'm supposed to say something [in Washington next week] about: (1) how aware patients in online support groups are of the various online ethics and quality initiatives, (2) to what extent those initiatives influence their use of online resources, (3) what other methods they use to decide whom to trust, and (4) the ethics of facilitating such groups.
> >
> > Any comments on any of the above? (Remember, these are comments I might present.)
>
> Or, looking at it another way, I'd be curious:
>
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
>
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bob
Posted by Elizabeth on October 30, 2001, at 12:28:04
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
I think I can usually tell if a group member or web site creator knows what s/he is talking about. It's not all that easy to fake it. :-) I don't give much credence to people who tend to make oversimplifications or give advice that I know is inappropriate.
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
I try to make it clear where the information comes from (personal experience, impressions of other people's experiences, textbooks, etc.) and how much I trust the information.
HTH
-elizabeth
Posted by Margie on October 30, 2001, at 14:20:43
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
Well, I know I'm pretty new here but I figured out how to trust certain opinions on this site by watching and listening. I poked around for a couple of weeks first and checked out the information that was being dissemanated. I guess I'm saying I give it time and learn to trust. I don't think that it's possible to just trust information without getting to know the person who is giving it to you, as much as you can get to know someone on the internt. Plus, it had a lot to do with the person who runs the site. I've seen Dr Bob trying to regulate improper actions but still trying to keep the peace and not insult anyone. That is a trust garnerer in my case. Someone who appears to actually care.
Just my own opinion. I hope I'm not too new to give my opinion.
Posted by susan C on October 30, 2001, at 15:07:33
In reply to Re: How do you decide what to trust?, posted by medlib on October 30, 2001, at 5:03:29
Medlib,
That is what I would say if I could write it. Thank you medlib. Thank you all. Thank you Dr Bobsusan C
>
>
Posted by Dreamy on October 30, 2001, at 15:16:01
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> > I'm supposed to say something [in Washington next week] about: (1) how aware patients in online support groups are of the various online ethics and quality initiatives, (2) to what extent those initiatives influence their use of online resources, (3) what other methods they use to decide whom to trust, and (4) the ethics of facilitating such groups.
> >
> > Any comments on any of the above? (Remember, these are comments I might present.)
>
> Or, looking at it another way, I'd be curious:
>
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
>
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bob1. I begin to trust information when it gets repeated
many times by many different people...such as effexor
withdrawl is aweful.
Especially when it coincides w/the manufactures notes.2. I present information as facts...not opinions.
Posted by JeffH on October 30, 2001, at 15:16:20
In reply to Re: How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Elizabeth on October 30, 2001, at 12:28:04
On looking at information and trusting what you read, it's kind of like quantifying psychic pain.
It's hard to do.When I read about a disaster in a newspaper, perhaps a couple family members killed in an auto accident, I know that the dry reporting in no sense conveys the devastated emotions of the people involved. It's hard for me to be connected.
I lurked for a few months on psycho babble before finally posting, and, before this, I intensely searched anything I could on depression. The research provided good information, but like the newspaper reporting, it was cold, clinical, and didn't seem to touch the suffering I was experiencing.
When I stumbled on psycho babble, wow! Here were not just facts, but the struggles of the posters made me quickly identify with them and their diseases. Trust? I can't help but trust their advice (even though it may sometimes be off base) because their experiences have made a medication or treatment very real and valid to me. Somehow, it's worth more. Believe it or not, I would trust the advice of some posters over some of the doctors I have used in the past.
-- Jeff
Posted by Krazy Kat on October 30, 2001, at 16:10:17
In reply to Re: How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Margie on October 30, 2001, at 14:20:43
Absolutely Not too new to give your opinion! The more the merrier. ;)
- KK
Posted by paxvox on October 30, 2001, at 18:14:51
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
Gee, Dr. B,
We are VERY clearly aware of PB and PSB guidelines! However, once I got through your hoops,I guess I passed.As to whom to trust, and what criteria one should use in this discernment. The most prevalent method of knowing who to trust, is experience on the specific site. See who answers the questions objectively, and better yet, provides links to scientific data to substantiate their answers.
As we have unfortunately seen, some of us, at times have gotten a bit carried away, and had to be temporarily banned from posting (you know who I mean).
Others of us have actually become friends, and communicate privately by email. A few of us have remained loyal to others during times when they have, perhaps, made some controversial postings.
As for ultimate knowledge, I actually research most of my data on a serach engine such as Google. I use the PDR to relate medicine data.
From this particular site, I get generalized support, a chance to vent to somebody who just might understand where I am coming from, or has already been there, as well as the feeling of community. As such, we will always have times of arguments or heated discussion, but ultimately, the apologetic are forgiven.
PAX
Posted by Daveman on October 30, 2001, at 22:09:44
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
Dr. Bob:
What leads me to trust a particular source of information, particularly where psychological medications are the subject, is an open-minded exchange of ideas and the lack of an "agenda". As an example, when I was first put on medication, which included Xanax, I did some web searches and found what I now know to be the "anti-benzo zealots". What I read there terrified me. It was only after doing further research that I realized how biased these sites were, that they were really advocacy sites rather than providers of information. Interestingly, there are now also "anti-SSRI" sites also, which advocate rather than inform (and as an attorney, I sure know the difference!)
The point is, that when it comes to the subject of medication, there is nothing that is all good or all bad. As I indicated in a post a couple of months ago (in an exchange with Cam), the search for truth when it comes to meds reminds me of Hegelian logic; the truth is neither the "thesis" (i.e., the claim by the manufacturer that a particular medication is some sort of wonder drug) nor the "antithesis" (i.e., the claims by those who blame all their problems on their medications and/or their side effects), but rather is a "synthesis", i.e., a sober analysis of both positive and negative aspects and a reasoned determination as to an appropriate course of therapy.
Therefore, information which is balanced and fair is trustworthy, whereas that which comes from an advocacy viewpoint (either by the manufacturers or the debunkers) is suspect. In this regard, Psycho-Babble is the most balanced site I have seen on these issues, which is why I've stuck around even though I've been basically in full remission from my depression for many months now (due in part to medication, specifically Celexa, about which I share information with others on this site). I joined several other Boards but lost interest when I realized that any questioning of the "accepted truth" on those Boards opened me up to attack. I was even personally "analyzed" in a post by a particular psychiatrist who runs an anti-anxiety site when I questioned his blanket condemnation of SSRIs! I still cannot believe he abused his authority in this fashion (my own doc described it as "dangerous" when it came up in one of our sessions).
I hope this is of some use to you. If you would like to communicate directly with me on this or any other subject, just let me know and I will send you my email address.
Dave
Posted by Cam W. on October 30, 2001, at 23:50:58
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?Experience, and a lot of reading. I trust another group member if they can clarify &/or substantiate any claims they make (ie. if they know what they are talking about, and can prove it).
I don't know if I fully trust any site, implicitely. Like all scientific information, any "truth" today can become an "untruth" as new information is discovered. I believe that if you can find some posters who know what they are talking about (ascertained by my knowledge and experiences), and state their opinions objectively (sans emotionality), I am more likely to return to that site. Sites that preach or tend to support one view become stale very fast.
>
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?I try to pass on any knowledge I have learned from what I have read &/or what I have seen clinically. I try to clarify the source of my answer according to where I came across the information. I try to answer the question in language that the poster can understand, using analogies where necessary.
- Cam
Posted by judy1 on October 31, 2001, at 0:02:43
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
Probably of all the mental health sites I've read, I've found this to be the most factual- to the point of references being supplied. I realize that everyone has a different reaction to a drug, but many times I've spoken to my computer savvy shrink about x number of people suggesting a particular strategy for symptoms. As for the emotional support, I selfishly hold on to that. Hope this helps- judy
Posted by Thrud on October 31, 2001, at 1:49:39
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
If the writer(s) seems knowledgeable (I guess I judge that by how logical and 'lucid' they seem) then that initially leads to some trust regarding the information they provide. I then go to the Google search engine to get more details/verify what they have said.
As for trusting a website, only the confidentiality/encryption issues matter to me.> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
I pass on my personal experiences only and try to be objective: not 'pushing' or 'trashing' anything in particular.
Thrud
Posted by HenryO on October 31, 2001, at 3:09:28
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
Well Bob, may I call you Bob? I only get the barest direction and new concepts online. I hear other peoples experiences with meds, doctors and DEPRESSION, then I talk to my doctor. I discuss any and all issues with him. I mean there are some srewballs on-line. I mostly use psycho-babble to validate my reality by identifying with others. But I one does read some interesting things. Also, sometimes, valuable things. Thank you.
Posted by Mitchell on October 31, 2001, at 7:22:53
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
Most information can be trusted to reflect the unique perspective of the information provider. For better or worse, this site can be trusted to reflect a perspective of individuals who prefer a pharmacological approach to treatment of mental health problems. In reading this site, I might develop more trust for that approach as a valid choice more than I might otherwise, in so far as I better understand the ambitions and limitations of psychopharmacology. The site also tends to confirm my suspicions about the limitations of a pharmacological approach. At its best, for me, this site inspires further research.
As long as the site substantially conforms to its claims, I consider it a trustworthy forum. I don't trust the claims of the site to represent the middle ground or a consensus opinion of what is civil or acceptable on the Internet or in society. The standards of the site don't reflect society's standards but rather the standards of the individual administrator. And the reliability of the forum does not infer reliable information - rather it infers that the information substantially reflects the unique perspectives of the participants. I presume that the forum has tended to self-select a group of participants who share common ideas, so this site cannot be trusted to represent a complete consideration of the full spectrum of all possible valid approaches.
I would trust some people here to drive my car, if I were in the passenger seat. I wouldn't trust anyone here enough to loan them my car, unless I had further information about their background and their intentions. I would not trust anyone here enough to accept their recommendation of an appropriate medication for me. I suspect much information I find here is provided to reinforce the providers' individual preferences more so than it is to help me achieve my unique personal goals. But understanding others' experiences can help me improve my social skills and thereby to improve my personal coping skills.
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
I try to provide information in a form that I hope will promote critical thinking. I also tend to present information in a way that responses will help me better understand the information, and better understand why the information was important to me.
"If you want somebody you can trust, trust yourself."
-Bob Dylan
Posted by Krazy Kat on October 31, 2001, at 8:52:22
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
Information -- Known credibility in a field, i.e. published reports. Also, repeated information about a certain subject.
Web Site -- The tone set by the adminstrator is important. Frankly, the look and set up of the site affect me. I don't read the regulations, unless forced to. Gee, maybe that quiz wasn't such a bad idea afterall.;)
Group members -- Intuition. I think you have to be pretty open to communicate with people on the internet - take what they say at face value, until you start to suspect otherwise. If not, you wouldn't have a fighting chance to make connections or gain support. That's why when posters such as "gldngdss" or whatever it was invade a space, it is trying.
2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?Absolutely try to present it in a certain way. Don't ever want folks to think I have a medical background or such for some reason - that it's just personal experience. But that should be clear on this, or any, support site. Reason and some caution are valid here.
Thank You, Dr. Bob! This is the only site I visit for support. The others just don't make the mark. Not even close.
- KK
Posted by JohnX2 on October 31, 2001, at 11:27:29
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
Bob,I haven't read all the prior posts, but here is
my take on trust. I've learned alot and experienced
a lot on many different meds that work in a
certain way or have certain side effects. If
I see someone posting responsees to questions in
a manner that is consistent with what I would say
in my areas of "knowledge", then I generally
trust this person's statements on issues
that I am not familiar with.With regards to presentation of information,
I have found that I tend to overload people
with medical specifics as to why I recommend
a over b or question someone's action. My
tendency to be difficult to understand was
made clear to me in a group therapy that
I attended. My audience here is not typical of
my own circle of acquaintances.-john
> > I'm supposed to say something [in Washington next week] about: (1) how aware patients in online support groups are of the various online ethics and quality initiatives, (2) to what extent those initiatives influence their use of online resources, (3) what other methods they use to decide whom to trust, and (4) the ethics of facilitating such groups.
> >
> > Any comments on any of the above? (Remember, these are comments I might present.)
>
> Or, looking at it another way, I'd be curious:
>
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
>
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bob
Posted by JohnX2 on October 31, 2001, at 12:13:33
In reply to Re: How do you decide what to trust? » Dr. Bob, posted by JohnX2 on October 31, 2001, at 11:27:29
I wanted to mention that some people do a really
good job of posting specific references to claims
that they make. I am generallt sloppy and don't
do this, but usually it is when I see an unanswered
question and would like to at least give the
person some iota of a response.Also, btw, my 1st psychiatrist accused me
of having anti-social personality disorder. ;)I have found a lot of reliable information on
the web, and also chased the farces. But on this
newsgroup the information is generally reliable.
If someone posts something in error, generally
there will be a follow up by someone else.One thing that does worry me greatly about an
environment like this is the fact that the
audience on psycho-babble is probably not
representative of the typical psychiatric
population. A lot of people go into the doctor
get a zoloft,paxil,effexor prescription and 2
weeks later feel awesome. I doubt these are the
types of people lurking on this news group, and
it makes me fear that people may dismiss the
more traditional treatment approaches.-john
>
> Bob,
>
> I haven't read all the prior posts, but here is
> my take on trust. I've learned alot and experienced
> a lot on many different meds that work in a
> certain way or have certain side effects. If
> I see someone posting responsees to questions in
> a manner that is consistent with what I would say
> in my areas of "knowledge", then I generally
> trust this person's statements on issues
> that I am not familiar with.
>
> With regards to presentation of information,
> I have found that I tend to overload people
> with medical specifics as to why I recommend
> a over b or question someone's action. My
> tendency to be difficult to understand was
> made clear to me in a group therapy that
> I attended. My audience here is not typical of
> my own circle of acquaintances.
>
> -john
>
>
>
>
> > > I'm supposed to say something [in Washington next week] about: (1) how aware patients in online support groups are of the various online ethics and quality initiatives, (2) to what extent those initiatives influence their use of online resources, (3) what other methods they use to decide whom to trust, and (4) the ethics of facilitating such groups.
> > >
> > > Any comments on any of the above? (Remember, these are comments I might present.)
> >
> > Or, looking at it another way, I'd be curious:
> >
> > 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
> >
> > 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 31, 2001, at 23:34:40
In reply to Re: How do you decide what to trust?, posted by JohnX2 on October 31, 2001, at 12:13:33
Hi, everyone,
Thanks for all your responses -- and positive feedback!
But is everyone really so careful all the time? If so, are concerns about the quality of information online exaggerated? Do we not need to worry about unreliable information because it'll just be ignored?
I realize another issue is that people here might not be a representative sample of all people online...
Bob
Posted by JohnX2 on November 1, 2001, at 0:17:22
In reply to Re: Is everyone really so careful all the time?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 31, 2001, at 23:34:40
I have a question for you. I suspect you may
be elusive. ;)
What is your take on the quality of information
posted on this board?-john
> Hi, everyone,
>
> Thanks for all your responses -- and positive feedback!
>
> But is everyone really so careful all the time? If so, are concerns about the quality of information online exaggerated? Do we not need to worry about unreliable information because it'll just be ignored?
>
> I realize another issue is that people here might not be a representative sample of all people online...
>
> Bob
Posted by Joey on November 1, 2001, at 1:55:16
In reply to How do you decide what to trust?, posted by Dr. Bob on October 30, 2001, at 1:56:11
> > Hello. I just joined this board, and I usually trust people whose semantic or language "cues" seem credible or authentic. For me, I usually trust those who are to-the-point, consistent in their thoughts, or who really resonate to what I wrote.
From an ethical point of view, I try very hard to use the pronoun "I" as much as possible to get accross that it's just my own, personal point of view. And in the world of psychiatric medication, I have never found this to me more true; namely, that everyone has different bodily reactions to medications, as well as ways of dealing with their own psychosis. I have personally found it helpful to be in this group because one, it's structured very well; two, I have found people who are going through the same things I am, even if they don't seem to know what to do--just the fact that they're out there helps; three, I have found it easy to trust some of the voices coming across on this board and was introduced to some ideas I hadn't even thought of.
I think that as long as people are aware of the risks encountered when non-professionals are expressing their opinions about serious matters, I think it's okay; however, I don't think it would hurt to also advise non-professional writers on boards like these that, due to the serious nature of these groups, that they respect the medical histories and complexities facing others.
Hope things go well in Washington. And thanks for creating this board. It personally helped me out.I'm supposed to say something [in Washington next week] about: (1) how aware patients in online support groups are of the various online ethics and quality initiatives, (2) to what extent those initiatives influence their use of online resources, (3) what other methods they use to decide whom to trust, and (4) the ethics of facilitating such groups.
> >
> > Any comments on any of the above? (Remember, these are comments I might present.)
>
> Or, looking at it another way, I'd be curious:
>
> 1. From the perspective of someone looking for information, how do you decide what information to trust? What leads you to trust a web site? Another group member?
>
> 2. From the perspective of someone providing information, do you just pass it on, or do you try to present it in a certain way?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bob
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.