annafdd

"Is ti normal to have women on board, cooking and looking after the workers?"

"Well, yes. Many of the workers are women themselves."

Later on, person in the studio interviewing a worker just off the Safe Scandinavia who doesn't actually know anything about this particular incident:

"There were many problems and controversy about allowing women on the Royal Navy ships, does working alongside women cause any tension or problems?"

Seasoned rig worker: "Er... no. Not at all. No problem. As a matter of fact, in some sectors the women workers outnumber men, and no, we just get along fine."

I happened on the Mind website (I am deliberately not linking to it). I had been there other times, when I was very depressed and desperately in need of help, and found nothing, not even a useful phone number.

Today I had a better look, thinking that as a lifelong depressive, I might at least find advocacy interesting.

Well, I had a look at their literature.

"Making sense of antidpressants" tells you that antidepressant medication is no more useful than placebo, that it is addictive, and that depression "goes away on its own".

"Understanding depression" has the same message, with such gems as:

What can I do to help myself?

Depression has one major characteristic that you need to be aware of when thinking about what you can do to defeat it. It can feed on itself. In other words, you get depressed and then you get more depressed about being depressed. Negative thoughts become automatic and are difficult for you to challenge. Being in a state of depression can then, itself, become a bigger problem than the difficulties that caused it in the first place. You need to break the hold that the depression has on you.

An important thing to remember is that there are no instant solutions to problems in life. Solving problems involves time, energy and work. When you are feeling depressed, you may well not be feeling energetic or motivated to work. But if you are able to take an active part in your treatment, it should help your situation.

Translation: get over it. Depression is a "life problem". And you should "take an ative part in your treatement".

I have no words for how angry this makes me feel. Depression is not a life problem, it's a sickness. It's not a moral fault, and "getting over yourself" is not a solution. People have life problems all the time and they don't get depressed. People with a genetic predisposition react to the same stressors by developing depression. It's not their fault, they are not stupid, weak, lazy or unable to cope with life.

It then goes on:

Fighting negative attitudes
Try to recognise the pattern of negative thinking when you are doing it, and replace it with a more constructive activity. Look for things to do that occupy your mind.

This is true but incredibly unhelpful. A whole therapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, exists exactly to help people do this. A facile "try to fight negative attitudes" only succeeds in reinforcing self-criticising attitudes that are part and parcel with depression. CBT in part devoted precisely in fighting these attitudes. As for looking for things to do that occupy your mind - this guy has obviously never been in a major depressive episodes. I don't even know where to start. People are not only unable to work, they can't get off their beds, can't eat, can't even watch tv when they are depressed. It is one of the markers of depression that people lose interest in activities and tasks that they previously enjoyed.

Activity is good for the mind
Although you may not feel like it, it’s very therapeutic to take part in physical activities, for 20 minutes a day. Playing sports, running, dancing, cycling, and even brisk walking can stimulate chemicals in the brain called endorphins, which can help you to feel better. (See Mind guide to physical activity.)

This helps when you are able to do it. And even then, it's at best an ameliorating factor. Exercise does not cure depression. I wish it did. And I speak from the point of view of somebody who has a very good understanding of exactly how helpful it is - a lot.

Caring for yourself
You need to do things that will improve the way you feel about yourself. Allow yourself positive experiences and treats that reinforce the idea that you deserve good things. Pay attention to your personal appearance. Set yourself goals that you can achieve and that will give you a sense of satisfaction.

Look after yourself by eating healthily. Oily fish, in particular, may help alleviate depression. Don’t abuse your body with tobacco, alcohol or other drugs, which make it worse.


Pay attention to your personal appearence. Right, this guy has not even seen anybody in a depressive episode. And as for not beating up on yourself, how about not phrasing the good advice about acohol and drugs in a way that is not as fucking judgemental? "Abusing", right. The issue here is not abuse, it's that alcohol is a depressive, that it can compound impulsivity and poor judgement, and that people with depression are more easily prey of addictions. Same goes for drugs. Tobacco is bad for you, but it's hardly worse for depressives than for other people.

And then we get to the real therapies. Which one is the first?

Alternative and complementary therapies
Practitioners of complementary and alternative medicine concern themselves with the person as a whole, and don't merely treat their symptoms. They can take more time with you than a GP can.

Practitioners may offer treatments such as acupuncture, massage, homeopathy and herbal medicine that many people with depression have found helpful. St John's Wort is one of the herbal remedies that have become very popular, and may help to lift your mood. But if you are already taking other medication, it may not be safe to combine them. Consult your pharmacist or GP for more information.


I am speechless. Totally speechless.

Then we get to the treatements parts. I won't bore you with the whole lot, save to say that antidepressants are constantly put down. I will just insert another reason to hate NICE:


The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) published guidelines on the treatment of depression, in December 2004. These suggest that, for mild depression, antidepressants are not appropriate because the hazards outweigh the benefits. Suggested treatments include watchful waiting – a recognition of the fact that depression often goes away without treatment – guided self-help, short-term talking treatments such as cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), and exercise programmes.

I hope NICE revised their guidelines according to more recent research, but I suppose not. In fact, "mild" depression is still depression, and although it is true that a depressive episode goes away of its own, leaving depression untreated increases the likelihood of episodes recurring, becoming more serious, more protracted and the intervals between them shorter.

Depression is a physical sickeness, and leaves scars, it leaves physiological modifications in the brain that can be seen at the cellular level. They are progressive and irreversible. This is why treating depression early and completely is now seen as the more prudent course.

For more severe depression antidepressants are appropriate, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI)s are suggested because their side effects are usually better tolerated than those of the alternative types of antidepressants. However, combining a psychological treatment with medication maybe the most effective course for severe depression.

This is more or less the only factually correct information I can find in the whole page.

Now, what is the first book on the "Further reading" list?

Beyond Prozac: healing mental distress without drugs Dr T. Lynch (PCCS Books 2004)

What can I say? Drugs saved my life. I have had it all - psychotherapy, psychoanalisys, hospitalization, CBT. I have read extensively on depression and I have seen my own experience. The only thing that worked were CBT and drugs. I am not putting psychotherapy down, it's useful and helpful. But it does not cure depression - in fact, it may well be that depression cannot be cured. The fact that pharma companies make an obscene amount of money out of antidepressant is not a good reason to consider them inappropriate.

The fact is, a chillingly high proportion of people with depression, and major depression at that, are not treated at all. A lot of these kill themselves. A lot of those who are treated are non-compliant. (This is particularly true of bipolar and manic depressive sufferers, where suicide is a high risk and noncompliance common).

The last thing people who suffer from depression need, from the charity that is supposed to advocate for them no less, is the message that pills don't work, they are not necessary, they are bad for you, and that there is no effective treatment for depression.

I mean, I have felt discouraged reading this stuff, and I bloody know better.

This kind of "information" kills people.

I know I'm preaching to the choir and I know this kind of vileness actually wins elections, but...

WHAT KIND OF ETHICS IMBECILES THINKS THAT PUNISHING CHILDREN BECAUSE THEIR PARENTS ARE NOT MARRIED IS "MORAL"?

To clarify: one of the Tories' great ideas for tackling the problem of "inner cities violence", aka "moral decline of our societies", aka "those teenage niggers swarming all over our cities and shooting each other because their slutty mothers can't keep their legs together*", is to give better tax credits, all things being equals, to families composed of X number of children and two lawfully married partners.

Think about it: Family A has mom and two children. Mom earns 4,000 pounds a year (and frankly I am boggled at how three people can live on that).

Family B has mom, dad and two children. Mom and dad both work and pull in 9,000 pounds a year (because, and this is cold statistics, all things being equal dad will earn more than mom).

With this new shiny wonderful scheme, the children of family A (who have less money per capita) will get less money than the children of family B.

This is, you know, moral in the Tories' book.

To be fair, Labour made noises in exactly the same direction. The rationale for it is this: "violence in inner cities" aka all the rest (subtext is the same for Labour) is the result of [black] fathers not sticking around to care for their children. Therefore, we will create a monetary incentive for the two parents to marry. This will magically keep them together, stop dad pissing away all his money, hit the kids, hit the mom, or just walk off at the first opportunity.

The (well, one of the) zany thing is that this applies only to parents who DO stick together but not marry. Because if dad says, "hey, you got pregnant? How come? Thought you were on the pill? What do you mean you told me you weren't? Must not have heard. Anyway that thing is nothing to do with me, see ya around honey", it's not as if a tax incentive to get married is going to sway things. What will happen is that the mother will get punished for, well, for being slutty, I guess.

Anyway, what stopped them was that Gordon Brown, who may be a cold-hearted conservative but is not completely stupid at a moral level, explained it thus on the Today programme: "First of all, what about widows, widowers, and spouses that get deserted by their partner? Why on Earth should they be punished further? And as for people who decide not to marry, I may disapprove but it is not any business of the governament to tell people how to live their lives"

But, I mean, really, do you really have to go through college-level philosophy to get this kind of reasoning?

And don't get me started on Bush vetoing the s-Chip bill because "it goes against the principles of free market".

What is WRONG with these people? I mean, I happen to think that adults have just as much rights to be cared for and helped as kids, but most people have a NOT THE CHILDREN button. Fair enough, obvious evolutionary value, I'm fine with it. (I like children and I am all for protecting them. It's only that I'm for recognizing that adults have value too).

But why oh why the button gets engaged full time, creating murderous frenzy, when it's a matter of people watching pictures of kids having sex online - and completely, totally, absolutely, mysteriously misses being even touched by kids being deprived of schooling, health care, time with their parents, adequate clothing, and God forbid leisure time?

What's WRONG with people?


*For the record, the Tory candidate for Mayor of London said: "We will take away the free bus pass for all those minority teenagers who have made the upper deck of our buses their own version of a glorified getaway car." Quote unquote. This was the same man who had called London's citizens of color "piccaninnies" (I think he said he meant it affectionately) and said that they have "watermelon smiles".

This has to be listened to to be believed. I listened to it and I almost didn't believe it myself.

Ok, on the usually reliable World Service (I sleep with the radio on lately) I have just heard some kind of preacher/priest say that George Bush is "a very bright guy". Well, he knows him personally and I don't but if Bush is so Bright, he certainly hides it pretty well.

Meanwhile I have been woken up by a very painful sore throat and I am seriously considering an aspirin and a hot chocolate to dampen its effect on my stomach lining.

I hit Googlenews and the first article I read is this. Apparently for the organizer of the NYC (of all the places!) St. Patrick Parade, gays and Irish are like Nazis and Jewish. Oh, and, and I quote:

The chairman of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, defending his organisation's longstanding exclusion of gay marchers, claimed that allowing the Irish Lesbian and Gay Organisation (Ilgo) to participate would set a precedent. "If we let the Ilgo in, is it the Irish Prostitute Association next?" he asked.

Thus insulting by implication another group who's never done any harm to the Irish (unlike many other groups including the Irish themselves), and that as a matter of fact received understanding and inclusion by one leading Catholic figure, to wit, one Jesus of Galilee.

Now the guy who said that Bush is bright is going on on how the use of condoms helps the spread of AIDS.

I think I need that asprin. And especially that hot chocolate.

From matociquala, this amazing, lucid, funny, profoundly wise article from Kurt Vonnegut's son Mark.

Twisting Vonnegut's views on terrorism

By Mark Vonnegut | December 27, 2005

FOR THE past month or so it's been said and repeated that my father supports terrorism. The desire to have it be true is almost palpable. If novelist Kurt Vonnegut supports terrorism, then maybe all critics of the war are on some level proterrorist.

It's my fervent hope that if I'm alive at 83, I'll have enough left in my tank to make people this angry.

My father cares not a fig about the Middle East. He's never been there, doesn't think about their art or writing, may or may not be able to pick out some of their capitals and important rivers on a map. His true heroes are Abraham Lincoln and Mark Twain.

He doesn't listen to me. When he was going to go on national television he told me he was going to call for the impeachment of President Bush. I told him he'd do better talking about growing up in Indiana in the Depression, how people took care of each other, how much he has loved and celebrated freedom. Kurt Vonnegut calling for the impeachment of Bush is not news.

Like most people, my father can be wrong. I'll bet you can take most 83-year-olds out to lunch and they'll say one or two stupid things. It wouldn't be that surprising if he had said something outrageous and unforgivable, but the plain fact of it is that he didn't.

At no point did he say that blowing yourself up in a crowd of people was a good thing to do. What most outraged his interviewer was Kurt's disinclination to dismiss the terrorists as mentally ill. He said that suicide bombers believed that they were dying for a just cause and that he imagined they were probably brave people. It was all speculation. Neither he nor his interviewer had any knowledge about suicide bombers or radical Islam. Nowhere in the interview did he say anything in support of terrorism, though I'm quite sure he enjoyed horrifying his interviewer by skating around it. Kurt, every so often, will play with people a little.

What Kurt can do better than most people is reframe things and turn them around in a way that creates a new perspective. Even if you disagree with that perspective, the plausibility and novelty of his vision are enough to make you think. We need to think a little more, not less.

Kurt loves to be gloomy and tragic. It's a loss to him that his life has mostly gone so well. He envies Twain and Lincoln their literary talents, but also their dead children. If my sisters and I were a little more devoted, we would have drawn straws. More than once or twice I've been fed to the teeth with my father's negativity and provocative posturing, but that doesn't make him un-American or proterrorist.

If these commentators can so badly misunderstand and underestimate an utterly unguarded English-speaking 83-year-old man with an extensive public record of exactly what he thinks, maybe we should worry about how well they understand an enemy they can't figure out what to call.

The outcome in Iraq will not depend on what we believe and how hard we believe it.

I'm not an expert on the Middle East or terrorism or the use of military force or politics. It's all I can do to know a little bit about how to help people raise their kids and what to do when they get sick. When a war happens, I just hope it gets over with quickly so that how we take care of children becomes more important again.

I didn't like the '60s because it was too important what people who had nothing to do with the war thought about it. From the beginning I have hoped our leaders were right but feared that they might be wrong. I hoped we would be welcomed as liberators.

I take care of military families. Their sacrifices are very real. The harm done them by this war is very real. Our government won't even give them decent medical insurance. I hope I can be forgiven for hoping we can give them decent strategic thinking and a better understanding of the enemy we're asking them to fight.

I hope I'm wrong, but if the people actually in charge of this war can't listen and think better than the people beating up my dad, it's not good news for military families and no amount of flag waving will make it so.