Plugging SN?

[Living sucks]

But we can't even be sure that everyone is ingesting a particularly pure form of it, there's no uniformity and the accounts are all subjective and anecdotal so I don't see how a graph could really offer any fantastic data. There are just so many variables that could affect everyone's experiences.

It would help. If everyone only had access to stans guide and pph and not real anecdotes than we would all be led to believe that it's a somewhat blissful method close to that of N. Reading the anecdotes is what allowed me to discern how it might affect me personally.. ie massive internal issues and bad health.

my only reason for commenting on SN is to make sure everyone does research beyond just the guides...bcuz if I expected peaceful exit and had a burning coal instead I'd panic. I have burning coals now from just food.. and I can tell you it is effing painful!!

 

[Walilamdzi]

It would help. If everyone only had access to stans guide and pph and not real anecdotes than we would all be led to believe that it's a somewhat blissful method close to that of N. Reading the anecdotes is what allowed me to discern how it might affect me personally.. ie massive internal issues and bad health.

my only reason for commenting on SN is to make sure everyone does research beyond just the guides...bcuz if I expected peaceful exit and had a burning coal instead I'd panic. I have burning coals now from just food.. and I can tell you it is effing painful!!

The anecdotal accounts are quite worrying, I'm still reading them all... I wonder why exit rates this method...

 

[Quarky00]

But we can't even be sure that everyone is ingesting a particularly pure form of it, there's no uniformity and the accounts are all subjective and anecdotal so I don't see how a graph could really offer any fantastic data.

If it's all subjective and anecdotal , why do you take "hot coal" for as real !? That doesn't make sense .
You can make out for yourself the subjective view like I did
If you have 100 cases , while each is anecdote , together they're not anecdotal but body of evidence

I honestly don't understand what you want . Nothing given is enough for you . Accounts are not reliable -- but the ones you picked? ;) You literally pick and choose what fits your narrative (or fears) .

I wonder why exit rates this method...

Well , it was explained . By PPH (of which ratings I don't respect but their research is reasonable) , by me , and others . You seem to be emphasizing and focusing on the worst symptoms and ignore others .

If that is the case and you found no other answers , cool you've made your point , it might be better for you to move on to a different method rather than obsess about the worst again, and again, and again , and again ... ;) (not saying that in a bad way but as a friend)

 

[Living sucks]

The anecdotal accounts are quite worrying, I'm still reading them all... I wonder why exit rates this method...

Why or what?
Edit. Im asking if you meant why or what exit rates this method ?

 

[Quarky00]

We've been doing this back and forth for more than 14 messages now , some of them quite long and informative . You sound very worried , and perhaps generally distressed , all reasonable and acceptable It's cool , we are here to explore methods , but we seem each repeating ourselves (me and you) . Take the time to research this , read FAQ , read testimonials calmly (if you don't believe it move on) , compare to N or opioids or partial etc . Better not to take every detail as a disaster but look at the big picture and indeed be aware of caveats , faults , and discomfort -- and these exist . I admit it is confusing and effects are individual . Just like a medication -- works for one , has nausea for other , and headache for the third ; and for each case that can be serious or not . That's how reality works . Ctb is complex .

As I have explained , people do their personal assessment . And you can say "I don't know what will happen with SN , for that X% chances of Y discomfort I'm not doing that" . But then what will you do? Are your chances with other methods better? (rhetorical- ask yourself) .That comparison is what makes SN relatively peaceful . But it is not peaceful . Only relatively ... It's not a binary option (yes/no) but shades of grey . And I don't think one can put an objective number on that, like PPH did ... That's why I don't like PPH ratings . However by writing this post (and others) I have at least explained and expanded on the PPH rationale , which is overall pretty solid .

Statistics can describe the probability of bad symptoms . If a member see 20% of strong fast heartbeat , and they are sensitive to that , and do not have propranolol , they might decide to avoid . Another member can say "I'm used to it from anxiety and I will take my benzo" . Another can say "I know it from anxiety and I'm not going through this with ctb/SI" . So statistics can help .

@Living sucks , Stan touched on GI issues , ulcers , and also general instincts . He wrote he has a bad memory of drinking strong liqueurs (I think?) and hence he knows that this will evoke strong emotions , so being mentally prepared and some caveats were discussed . Stan did not finish his work , but he did a pretty good job . (not defending him just reviewing the Guide shortly:). Yes testimonials expand on that greatly .

 

[Suez]

For anyone (like me) who has experience with psychedelics, knows that plugging (inserting substance thru corn-hole) is a more effective way of taking substances. It might very well make the difference between vomiting or not.

It will also make the substance more effective, since it bypasses many filters our body has. I can't stress how much of a difference plugging vs oral makes with many substances.

What are your thoughts?

PS You basically dissolve the substance in water (maybe vinegar and coconut milk too) in a syringe WITHOUT needle, stuff it "inside" a good few cm and slowly release. Has a much quicker effect too.

PSS Though you gotta take out the syringe as well, don't wanna be found like that...

Rectal administration of drugs/medicines has been around for a very long time. As a Dr it is a favourable route for some of our patients for a number of reasons. I have not researched this route in this forum for SN. But the great thing about rectal administration is that it has a shorter peak time and a shorter duration. People who often feel nauseus too with medications taken orally can avoid this by taking their medications rectally. But while prescribed medications taken rectally involve proper lubrication and a sterile syringe or applicator, people that take illegal substances rectally usually dont bother with these steps, causing harm to the rectal tissues and membranes resulting in infections etc

I agree that plugging does allow you to bypass various steps that may cause issues, like vomitting etc im just not too sure about how that would be with SN rectally, I need to do my own research. Im all for doing as much research as possible, taking as much of the literature that is available out there and analysing it and bringing it all together and making sense of it before you really start making any real decisions.
There is alot of information available about SN in the resources section here, however there is also an incredible amount available to you that you can access on your own. Dont be discouraged by anyone here disagreeing with you, youve just found out today that what you thought was true about the skin of the mouth and the skin of the anus was true, so you got that right (And i can vouch for that as i have done enough Surgical rotations throughout the years as we all did in training as a MD and even many more years when i did my PhD, so i know the anatomy and microscopy that your seeing in the picture below is correct), so just do your own research, ask your own questions and evaluate everything that you have before coming to any conclusions.
Enjoy learning about the alimentary canal...

There was alot of discussion about whether the skin of the anus and skin of the mouth were one and the same or different. I believe that they did actually evolve together but i wont go into that today. I thought you may be interested however to know that the alimentary tract , also called the Gastrointestinal (GI) tract is the tube that begins at the mouth and terminates at the anus. So yes, one in the same as you were saying in one of your posts. Its about 25 feet long, kind impressive. But it is composed of the same four tissue layers starting from the lumen and moving outwards, these layers are the mucosa, submucosa, muscularis, and serosa, which is continuous with the mesentery

Layers of the Alimentary Canal. The wall of the alimentary canal has four basic tissue layers: the mucosa, submucosa, muscularis, and serosa.

 

[beyond_aquila_rift]

Rectal administration of drugs/medicines has been around for a very long time. As a Dr it is a favourable route for some of our patients for a number of reasons. I have not researched this route in this forum for SN. But the great thing about rectal administration is that it has a shorter peak time and a shorter duration. People who often feel nauseus too with medications taken orally can avoid this by taking their medications rectally. But while prescribed medications taken rectally involve proper lubrication and a sterile syringe or applicator, people that take illegal substances rectally usually dont bother with these steps, causing harm to the rectal tissues and membranes resulting in infections etc

I agree that plugging does allow you to bypass various steps that may cause issues, like vomitting etc im just not too sure about how that would be with SN rectally, I need to do my own research. Im all for doing as much research as possible, taking as much of the literature that is available out there and analysing it and bringing it all together and making sense of it before you really start making any real decisions.
There is alot of information available about SN in the resources section here, however there is also an incredible amount available to you that you can access on your own. Dont be discouraged by anyone here disagreeing with you, youve just found out today that what you thought was true about the skin of the mouth and the skin of the anus was true, so you got that right (And i can vouch for that as i have done enough Surgical rotations throughout the years as we all did in training as a MD and even many more years when i did my PhD, so i know the anatomy and microscopy that your seeing in the picture below is correct), so just do your own research, ask your own questions and evaluate everything that you have before coming to any conclusions.
Enjoy learning about the alimentary canal...

There was alot of discussion about whether the skin of the anus and skin of the mouth were one and the same or different. I believe that they did actually evolve together but i wont go into that today. I thought you may be interested however to know that the alimentary tract , also called the Gastrointestinal (GI) tract is the tube that begins at the mouth and terminates at the anus. So yes, one in the same as you were saying in one of your posts. Its about 25 feet long, kind impressive. But it is composed of the same four tissue layers starting from the lumen and moving outwards, these layers are the mucosa, submucosa, muscularis, and serosa, which is continuous with the mesentery

Layers of the Alimentary Canal. The wall of the alimentary canal has four basic tissue layers: the mucosa, submucosa, muscularis, and serosa.

this is stupid but I envy you for being an MD. maybe in a different life I can be one too. Thanks for being here for us *hugs*

 

[Imgonnadie]

have you ever plugged DMT?

 

[Suez]

this is stupid but I envy you for being an MD. maybe in a different life I can be one too. Thanks for being here for us *hugs*

Im talking to you in a suicide forum!! Even MDs have problems, doesnt matter who you are, where youve come from you know.

 

[Light&DarkDance]

@Suez

Thanks, that's the kind of info and mutual feedback I was looking forward to!

Unfortunately moderators here do nothing about "users" who are here to endlessly argue for the sake of arguing without any valid proof or linking to valid sources. Anyone spreading obvious misinformation should be dealt with. And people even like comments with either wrong or not backed up info...

Discovering new ways and methods is always a risk. But there's no progress without risks, research and outside the box thinking.

have you ever plugged DMT?

N!N-DMT is not plugabble

 

[autumnal]

It would help. If everyone only had access to stans guide and pph and not real anecdotes than we would all be led to believe that it's a somewhat blissful method close to that of N. Reading the anecdotes is what allowed me to discern how it might affect me personally.. ie massive internal issues and bad health.

my only reason for commenting on SN is to make sure everyone does research beyond just the guides...bcuz if I expected peaceful exit and had a burning coal instead I'd panic. I have burning coals now from just food.. and I can tell you it is effing painful!!

From this post, it seems like you might have misunderstood the resources. Nowhere in either the PPH or Stan's Guide is SN referred to as or implied to be 'somewhat blissful'. Blissful implies strong happiness or euphoria, such as you might experience from opioids (including N) or cannabis. Neither of the guides have to my knowledge ever described SN as anything remotely like 'somewhat blissful'. They have however suggested it may be relatively peaceful, either by using such terminology or by inference. 'Peaceful' just refers the absence of distress, and 'relatively' means comparatively or relative to. So SN is not guaranteed to be completely peaceful, but it is comparatively peaceful compared to alternative methods. It is by every admission less peaceful than N, which could be regarded as completely peaceful and remains the absolute gold standard for euthanasia and suicide.

I note you do refer to stomach pain from eating food. It is certainly true that there are some gastrointestinal conditions than make SN either more likely to fail or more likely to be distressing or painful. But it's important to understand that these are exceptions to the rule.

It is also important to remember that anecdotal accounts have a large number of shortcomings. Firstly, there is generally no guarantee that they are even real. Note that I am not suggesting that every or even many accounts are fabricated, however I would point out that even one falsely planted negative depiction of SN has the potential to create a huge mass of panic, doubt and argument on the board, which would be a very tangible win for the anti-suicide activists. Secondly, a significant number of anecdotal accounts involve failure to follow the protocol, either by glaring omission or, at the very least, by not using the optional extras which increase peacefulness. Thirdly, people in the anecdotes may have additional medical conditions or other factors which make them a significant variation from the 'normal' or average person taking SN, or from the hypothetical person described in either of the guides. Either they may fail to disclose these conditions, may not consider them relevant to their account, or may disclose them but the reader of the anecdotes fails to take them into account when relating it back to their own potential experience.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

From this post, it seems like you might have misunderstood the resources. Nowhere in either the PPH or Stan's Guide is SN referred to as or implied to be 'somewhat blissful'. Blissful implies strong happiness or euphoria, such as you might experience from opioids (including N) or cannabis. Neither of the guides have to my knowledge ever described SN as anything remotely like 'somewhat blissful'. They have however suggested it may be relatively peaceful, either by using such terminology or by inference. 'Peaceful' just refers the absence of distress, and 'relatively' means comparatively or relative to. So SN is not guaranteed to be completely peaceful, but it is comparatively peaceful compared to alternative methods. It is by every admission less peaceful than N, which could be regarded as completely peaceful and remains the absolute gold standard for euthanasia and suicide.

I note you do refer to stomach pain from eating food. It is certainly true that there are some gastrointestinal conditions than make SN either more likely to fail or more likely to be distressing or painful. But it's important to understand that these are exceptions to the rule.

It is also important to remember that anecdotal accounts have a large number of shortcomings. Firstly, there is generally no guarantee that they are even real. Note that I am not suggesting that every or even many accounts are fabricated, however I would point out that even one falsely planted negative depiction of SN has the potential to create a huge mass of panic, doubt and argument on the board, which would be a very tangible win for the anti-suicide activists. Secondly, a significant number of anecdotal accounts involve failure to follow the protocol, either by glaring omission or, at the very least, by not using the optional extras which increase peacefulness. Thirdly, people in the anecdotes may have additional medical conditions or other factors which make them a significant variation from the 'normal' or average person taking SN, or from the hypothetical person described in either of the guides. Either they may fail to disclose these conditions, may not consider them relevant to their account, or may disclose them but the reader of the anecdotes fails to take them into account when relating it back to their own potential experience.

With the exception of the first sentence, and the last statement of what others fail to do as it feels a touch negating, it's my opinion that you eloquently described and defended your stance. I found it valuable, rational, well thought-out, and therefore compelling, worthy to be considered when making an empowered, self-determined assessment regarding the method.

 

[beyond_aquila_rift]

Im talking to you in a suicide forum!! Even MDs have problems, doesnt matter who you are, where youve come from you know.

oh certainly. I know you're here for your own reasons. One of my friends is an MD and she struggles with a lot of mental health issues. I didn't mean that you are immune from all this, just that I look up to doctors for what they do and I think in another life I would have been one. That's all. Even in the midst of your own issues you're still here helping and offering your knowledge. Idk if that makes more sense. I didn't mean to minimize your own feelings at all!

 

[Notwinnernotawin]

That's interesting. I was thinking about it the other day. If I get SN I might do it both ways.

 

[Living sucks]

From this post, it seems like you might have misunderstood the resources. Nowhere in either the PPH or Stan's Guide is SN referred to as or implied to be 'somewhat blissful'. Blissful implies strong happiness or euphoria, such as you might experience from opioids (including N) or cannabis. Neither of the guides have to my knowledge ever described SN as anything remotely like 'somewhat blissful'. They have however suggested it may be relatively peaceful, either by using such terminology or by inference. 'Peaceful' just refers the absence of distress, and 'relatively' means comparatively or relative to. So SN is not guaranteed to be completely peaceful, but it is comparatively peaceful compared to alternative methods. It is by every admission less peaceful than N, which could be regarded as completely peaceful and remains the absolute gold standard for euthanasia and suicide.

Nope! I don't misunderstand any of the resources. You misunderstand me! I was being half sarcastic using the words somewhat blissful as a response to Walilamdzi, knowing they have been posting and questioning several methods and their concerns about SN and their concern over the bias towards SN. To which I share concerns. So it was more of a personally tailored response to a specific member.

I take the time to notice user names and recognize their posting history as a way to familiarize myself with them. This helps me in how I might respond to each user personally instead of responding like a robot citing definitions, finding fault in their words and nitpicking to the point of exhaustion.

 

[Walilamdzi]

Nope! I don't misunderstand any of the resources. You misunderstand me! I was being half sarcastic as a response to Walilamdzi, knowing they have been posting and questioning several methods and their concerns about SN and their concern over the bias towards SN. So it was more of a personally tailored response to a specific member.

I take the time to notice user names and recognize their posting history as a way to familiarize myself with them. This helps me in how I might respond to each user personally instead of responding like a robot citing definitions, finding fault in their words and nitpicking to the point of exhaustion.

I'm not sure why anyone is bothered by me investigating multiple methods, obviously I'm going to look into any that might be viable. I meant why, what I wrote. Why exit rates it highly.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I'm not sure why anyone is bothered by me investigating multiple methods, obviously I'm going to look into any that might be viable. I meant why, what I wrote. Why exit rates it highly.

Perhaps it is that people are troubled by outliers, by someone who does things differently. If they don't understand why, their response is that it is suspicious until they understand. Like thinking one sees a monster, until they realize it was a trick on their perception from the play of light and shadow across a knot in the trunk of a tree. There is relief in knowing what's really going on. And in an environment such as SS, suspicions and fear are already heightened, such as being in a dark wood. Danger lurks without and within.

When you explained to me in another thread why you do as you do, you opened up my understanding. I have gained appreciation for what you do and how you do it, and appreciation for you as you are. I repeat here with sincerity, thank you for that.

 

[Living sucks]

I'm not sure why anyone is bothered by me investigating multiple methods, obviously I'm going to look into any that might be viable. I meant why, what I wrote. Why exit rates it highly.

Oh shit sorry! That's not how I meant that! Ugh. My initial wording, saying somewhat blissful was the sarcasm, intended to appeal to you and your concerns about SN, which mirror my own, it was not intended sarcasm AT you for searching methods!
i hope that clears this up..

I take the time to notice user names and recognize their posting history as a way to familiarize myself with them. This helps me in how I might respond to each user personally instead of responding like a robot citing definitions, finding fault in their words and nitpicking to the point of exhaustion.

I meant this genuinely.. it helps me determine sincerity vs desperation vs troll etc. it helps me in my response to each person
@Walilamdzi I believe your search and concerns are real and I was not being sarcastic TO you. I agree with you about concerns.

 

[Walilamdzi]

@Living sucks Oh hey! No worries, some users have been a bit annoyed with my anxieties revolving around different methods, sorry for the misunderstanding :)

 

[wanderinglost]

When is the last time you put citric acid or kitchen salt in your ass?

I lolled a bit too long at this and nearly had tea coming from my nose XD

 

[Quarky00]

There was alot of discussion about whether the skin of the anus and skin of the mouth were one and the same or different. I believe that they did actually evolve together but i wont go into that today. I thought you may be interested however to know that the alimentary tract , also called the Gastrointestinal (GI) tract is the tube that begins at the mouth and terminates at the anus. So yes, one in the same as you were saying in one of your posts. Its about 25 feet long, kind impressive. But it is composed of the same four tissue layers starting from the lumen and moving outwards, these layers are the mucosa, submucosa, muscularis, and serosa, which is continuous with the mesentery

It is not "the same tissues" . The tongue and stomach and anus are not the same . If you are MD I'm a unicorn ..

 

[Suez]

It is not "the same tissues" . The tongue and stomach and anus are not the same . If you are MD I'm a unicorn ..

"Mouth and anus" can you not read i did not say tongue. Yes you are a unicorn if you dont understand the difference between the too.

It is not "the same tissues" . The tongue and stomach and anus are not the same . If you are MD I'm a unicorn ..

Do you understand what an alimentary canal is???? it starts at one end (the mouth) and ends at another. (the anus). Look at the diagram because clearly you dont know, nor understand, even when it is broken down for you. Do you know what it is composed of???? The tissue layers that remain the same from one end of the alimentary canal to the other, from the lumen moving outwards to the serosa a continuous mesentery. But i know thats a bit much, so ill leave it at that because what your doing has nothing to do with physiology (because if you did not get what i said then?????) and EVERYTHING to do with YOU Quarky. Im not sure what your problem is with me, but singling me out to try and make me look stupid is just making you look pathetic and petty because anyone with a brain could go and search the anatomy of the alimenatry canal and see what i have said is fact so you are only embarrassing yourself.

 

[Suez]

oh certainly. I know you're here for your own reasons. One of my friends is an MD and she struggles with a lot of mental health issues. I didn't mean that you are immune from all this, just that I look up to doctors for what they do and I think in another life I would have been one. That's all. Even in the midst of your own issues you're still here helping and offering your knowledge. Idk if that makes more sense. I didn't mean to minimize your own feelings at all! ❤

No i understand that, Im sorry if the way i responded to you in any way sounded like i thought you were minimizing my feelings because i certainly didnt take that from what you were saying. I enjoy medicine, more so the interaction i have with patients, that the best aspect of it for me. I said to someone else in another post that sometimes when i cant be found on the ward its because im hold up in a cubicle with a patient, the curtains pulled, me on the bed next to them with my feet up, either talking or watching tv with them. Sometimes the best medicine is just talking, sometimes its touch, sometimes not having to say anything at all, just being there when theyre scared. Thats why i went into medicine in the first place. I like to when i can, give advice if i think it will help, 99% of people here are very greatfull for any advice so thats nice, but its certainly not always wanted, theres always someone i guess, this thread, is a good example of that.

 

[autumnal]

Nope! I don't misunderstand any of the resources. You misunderstand me! I was being half sarcastic using the words somewhat blissful as a response to Walilamdzi, knowing they have been posting and questioning several methods and their concerns about SN and their concern over the bias towards SN. To which I share concerns. So it was more of a personally tailored response to a specific member.

I take the time to notice user names and recognize their posting history as a way to familiarize myself with them. This helps me in how I might respond to each user personally instead of responding like a robot citing definitions, finding fault in their words and nitpicking to the point of exhaustion.

I'm glad to hear you haven't misunderstood the resources as first appeared.

While I am aware of quite a few users and their individual posting history, and tailor my responses to this nuance, I nonetheless generally take what people say on factual matters at face value, not because I am robotic or too concrete but because this is how the average user unaware of such history might also interpret things.

So when someone makes what look like factually inaccurate comments about SN, and I mean seriously inaccurate rather than just 'nitpicking', I consider it important to correct these or seek further clarification, both of which I did politely in my response. You should appreciate that your intended sarcasm did not come across in your post itself when viewed outside of some longer comment arc with @Walilamdzi. I would also point out there was apparently sufficient ambiguity in your response that even @Walilamdzi initially misunderstood your intended meaning. This is the context in which I encountered your post, and the same context in which any other user might do so, that is to say either skimming a thread rather than reading every post in detail, or while viewing a thread from the newest posts at the end and working backwards. When viewed as a standalone post, there were apparent 'fault in your words' that needed addressing. Now that you have clarified that these were meant sarcastically, this is no longer the case. But these is no need to criticise me personally for taking the sensible and cautious stance based on the initial information provided.

 

[Suez]

@Quarky00, I can confirm with a high level of confidence that you are not a unicorn. Granted, I am not an MD, either.



@Suez

Your post history...

Childhood schizophrenia, prison term, heroin addiction...and then licensed doctor? How does a convicted felon get a license to practice medicine with firearms charges? Although you would have been licensed 20-ish years ago, current New Zealand regulations say that in order to get licensed, a felon must be able to prove that the offense for which they were convicted would not make them a danger to the public. What were the regulations when you got your license? Can you document that?

Sometimes you say you have a PhD in pharmacology, sometimes you speak of it as if you only have some understanding.

You called a regimen for taking meds a regime. No doctor would make that mistake, but a regular forum member would. They do all the time. In general, you don't communicate like a doctor, you write like someone with maybe a high school level of education, or a BA at best. It is impossible that you completed a Ph.D and don't have better writing, argument, and analytical skills. A Ph.D dissertation is a professional publication. At that level, even a pure scientist must know how to spell a whole lot of technical words, know what a proper noun is, properly use grammar and punctuation, organize thoughts, and reference sources. One cannot reach that level relying on someone to write their papers for them. This isn't a matter of something like dyslexia or the occasional forgiveable misuse of punctuation; your writing style demonstrates a lack of education, training, and applied experience, even if you were a scientist whose forte was not writing.

Your story changes regarding how long you lived with your mother when she had cancer. Sometimes you were a full-time caretaker and not working, other times not. You sometimes speak as if you're currently practicing, other times as if you stopped working when your mother was sick, you recently said you're not working at all, and in this current thread you said that, in the present, you work on a ward and sit on patients' beds with them. Btw, what legit doctor would risk their license by doling out advice on a forum? No disclaimers, nothing to protect yourself legally. You just jump in to random conversations and spout sciencey-sounding stuff, and then get defensive when questioned, not informative.

Leaving some of your posts here to demonstrate your consistent inconsistencies:


The only thing I believe is that you have a history of drug addiction, because your defensive techniques when questioned or called out are those of a low-level manipulator who uses their wiles to get and stay high, not someone with the advanced level of intelligence required to get an MD.

View attachment 36335

View attachment 36336

 

[Quarky00]

@Suez

Your post history...

Childhood schizophrenia, prison term, heroin addiction...and then licensed doctor? How does a convicted felon get a license to practice medicine with firearms charges? Although you would have been licensed 20-ish years ago, current New Zealand regulations say that in order to get licensed, a felon must be able to prove that the offense for which they were convicted would not make them a danger to the public. What were the regulations when you got your license? Can you document that?

Sometimes you say you have a PhD in pharmacology, sometimes you speak of it as if you only have some understanding.

You called a regimen for taking meds a regime. No doctor would make that mistake, but a regular forum member would. They do all the time. In general, you don't communicate like a doctor, you write like someone with maybe a high school level of education, or a BA at best. It is impossible that you completed a Ph.D and don't have better writing, argument, and analytical skills. A Ph.D dissertation is a professional publication. At that level, even a pure scientist must know how to spell a whole lot of technical words, know what a proper noun is, properly use grammar and punctuation, organize thoughts, and reference sources. One cannot reach that level relying on someone to write their papers for them. This isn't a matter of something like dyslexia or the occasional forgiveable misuse of punctuation; your writing style demonstrates a lack of education, training, and applied experience, even if you were a scientist whose forte was not writing.

Your story changes regarding how long you lived with your mother when she had cancer. Sometimes you were a full-time caretaker and not working, other times not. You sometimes speak as if you're currently practicing, other times as if you stopped working when your mother was sick, you recently said you're not working at all, and in this current thread you said that, in the present, you work on a ward and sit on patients' beds with them. Btw, what legit doctor would risk their license by doling out advice on a forum? No disclaimers, nothing to protect yourself legally. You just jump in to random conversations and spout sciencey-sounding stuff, and then get defensive when questioned, not informative.

Leaving some of your posts here to demonstrate your consistent inconsistencies:

Indeed member's behaviour is suspicious: this repeating of "medical" credentials over so many posts while giving "medical opinion" to "help members" . People who repeat their credentials so many times while providing harmful misinformation are not to be trusted . Regardless , this thread has been derailed so many times and it's a source of arguments , misinformation , and confusion . @Hasssssuùuu

Suez said:
I completed a Bachelors degree in Science/Transferring to Medicine, became a Doctor, can you believe. As if I hadnt had enough study I even completed a PhD

Suez said:
I had qualifications now which meant i could try to get into University and that what i did. I went to University, I studied and became a Doctor, an MD and went on to do further study to complete a PhD.

Suez said:
As a Dr it is a favourable route ...

Suez said:
I am an MD, but i did not see it in my capacity as an MD at that time.

Suez said:
While I am an MD, Im also a PhD (Scientist)

Suez said:
I am a qualified MD and I also hold a PhD

Suez said:
I am an MD & also hold a PhD (Pharmacology). So research is something that Im particularly proficient at

Suez said:
I am an MD, not a Pharmacist, but i have a reasonable understanding of pharmacology

Suez said:
I enjoyed reading your post and it was nice to see a fellow PhD (PhD in Pharmacology, Im also an MD) in the forum too

 

[wanderinglost]

 

[Living sucks]

You should appreciate that your intended sarcasm did not come across in your post itself when viewed outside of some longer comment arc with @Walilamdzi. I would also point out there was apparently sufficient ambiguity in your response that even @Walilamdzi initially misunderstood your intended meaning.

There was no misunderstanding between Walilamdzi and I until I had to explain my choice of wording. They were only confused by my explanation, Bcuz They thought I meant I was being sarcastic towards their behavior and not by my original post to them. Which was easily cleared up.

It would help. If everyone only had access to stans guide and pph and not real anecdotes than we would all be led to believe that it's a somewhat blissful method close to that of N. Reading the anecdotes is what allowed me to discern how it might affect me personally.. ie massive internal issues and bad health.

my only reason for commenting on SN is to make sure everyone does research beyond just the guides...bcuz if I expected peaceful exit and had a burning coal instead I'd panic. I have burning coals now from just food.. and I can tell you it is effing painful!!

The anecdotal accounts are quite worrying, I'm still reading them all... I wonder why exit rates this method...

Nope! I don't misunderstand any of the resources. You misunderstand me! I was being half sarcastic using the words somewhat blissful as a response to Walilamdzi, knowing they have been posting and questioning several methods and their concerns about SN and their concern over the bias towards SN. To which I share concerns. So it was more of a personally tailored response to a specific member.

I take the time to notice user names and recognize their posting history as a way to familiarize myself with them. This helps me in how I might respond to each user personally instead of responding like a robot citing definitions, finding fault in their words and nitpicking to the point of exhaustion.

I'm not sure why anyone is bothered by me investigating multiple methods, obviously I'm going to look into any that might be viable. I meant why, what I wrote. Why exit rates it highly.

Oh shit sorry! That's not how I meant that! Ugh. My initial wording, saying somewhat blissful was the sarcasm, intended to appeal to you and your concerns about SN, which mirror my own, it was not intended sarcasm AT you for searching methods!
i hope that clears this up..

I meant this genuinely.. it helps me determine sincerity vs desperation vs troll etc. it helps me in my response to each person
@Walilamdzi I believe your search and concerns are real and I was not being sarcastic TO you. I agree with you about concerns.

@Living sucks Oh hey! No worries, some users have been a bit annoyed with my anxieties revolving around different methods, sorry for the misunderstanding :)

 

[Suez]

Indeed member's behaviour is suspicious: this repeating of "medical" credentials over so many posts while giving "medical opinion" to "help members" . People who repeat their credentials so many times while providing harmful misinformation are not to be trusted . Regardless , this thread has been derailed so many times and it's a source of arguments , misinformation , and confusion . @Hasssssuùuu

Oops yeh sorry proud of how i got to get there and the years of training i put in,when being proud to be a Dr and telling people you are has to mean that you arent hmmm ......oh and while providing harmful information....OMG...oh you mean Autumnals disclaimer than contains incorrect information??..this
"vomiting is an instinctive reaction by the stomach to poison being detected following ingestion of SN"

There are two anatomically and functionally distinct units in the brain that control vomiting, the vomiting centre and the chemo receptor trigger zones (CTZ) which sense chemical abnormalities and through interplay with dopaminergic neurotransmitters and Nitric Oxide a co-ordinated emetic response signal is sent to effector organs like the gut resulting in a series of contraction of smooth muscles and expulsion otherwise known as vomiting, so nothing to do with an instinctive reaction by the stomach but an instinctive reaction by neuronal sensors signalling a response resulting in a reflexive muscle action.

 

[autumnal]

Oops yeh sorry proud of how i got to get there and the years of training i put in,when being proud to be a Dr and telling people you are has to mean that you arent hmmm ......oh and while providing harmful information....OMG...oh you mean Autumnals disclaimer than contains incorrect information??..this
"vomiting is an instinctive reaction by the stomach to poison being detected following ingestion of SN"

There are two anatomically and functionally distinct units in the brain that control vomiting, the vomiting centre and the chemo receptor trigger zones (CTZ) which sense chemical abnormalities and through interplay with dopaminergic neurotransmitters and Nitric Oxide a co-ordinated emetic response signal is sent to effector organs like the gut resulting in a series of contraction of smooth muscles and expulsion otherwise known as vomiting, so nothing to do with an instinctive reaction by the stomach but an instinctive reaction by neuronal sensors signalling a response resulting in a reflexive muscle action.

I had considered it fairly apparent that my initial comment, with which you still take such issue and have obsessed over for all this time, was a simplification for the purposes of brevity. Nobody was meaning to imply, least of all me, that the stomach was reacting independently from the brain. Nonetheless, if you had simply chosen to politely mention any such ambiguity back at the time, I would have been more than happy to correct my statement, and would have regarded your feedback as helpful and coming from a position of expertise. But instead you chose to go in a very different direction of nonsensical rants, general evasiveness and personal attacks fuelled by some kind of apparent grudge against me, all seemingly from that one initial comment about vomiting. While I am not somehow involved in it having occurred, I'm certainly not disappointed to see you are now well and truly reaping what you have sown.