Suicide Is NEVER an Option

Yeah middle ear symptoms regarding the stapedial, tensor tympani, and middle ear myoclonus? I think these could result from/be combined with inner ear damage, sort of like an over protection mechanism. The middle ear may also be physically damaged as well. But I know Japongus is very much focused on middle ear symptoms, and if I recall he doesn't put much merit in the inner ear stuff like synaptopathy/glial scarring.

I personally think not only can it all be involved, but that it is all connected. Inner ear damage, untreated/not healed, resulting in middle ear symptoms. In cases of acoustic trauma, the startle reflex stuff may actually be physically damaged as well as the inner ear.

Think about the wide range of symptoms a degenerated disc in the back, or an untreated broken bone can result in, all sorts of peripheral symptoms...

 

Well Pulec wasn't fixing the ears, he was cutting the cochlear nerve and making them deaf. His large and life-long experience at cutting the cochlear nerve didn't have a successful reproduction in another study by another doctor and apparently we're all supposed to forget it ever happened, for no reason whatsoever because why would one study be more important than another. At the same time as he published Jastreboff was publishing his own theories, so it looks like they both just avoided each other and we're supposed to collect the breadcrumbs of their communicative incompetence. This is a great example of how neuroplasticity just means some schmuck looking at pictures on an MRI.

 

In my case of reverberation I do put synaptopathy as a possibility, and I was exposed a number of hours in a nightclub and a heavy metal concert. I'm with astrid when she says ''it could be any part of the auditory system''. It could all be a chain, but a neurological one. There's no proof for this limbic habituation nonsense we get shoved down our throats.

 

Dunno about that, I have enough trying to understand parts of the ear as is. As I pointed above, someone should ask Harold Kim or Marsha Johnson how much they know about the doctors that might have said this or if they were just wildly speculating untested theories.

 

The inner ear is mentioned in this paper https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14689642 I've been looking it as I recall from 18 years ago before my second acoustic exposure trauma that trimetazidine worked to reduce the tinnitus. I'm wondering if a blood labyrinth barrier would be affected by noise trauma, so not all theories about the inner ear involve newly discovered pain fibers Maybe its all just homeostasis affecting neurology transport or something, and then if your tinnitus happens to be of a certain kind like mine of a low vibratory type, then it'll mean you get hyperacusis with the package as the tinnitus would be reacting like usual, but it would be felt not just heard, and the vibratory feeling would be the hyperacusis. But there are more theories, it can be elsewhere like in the middle ear. This would also explain why Hain reports positive results with grommets for H, as they're linked to homeostatic changes in the inner ear in other papers for things like fullness and menieres.

 

I have no doubt that this is true in many cases. Thing is, the research isn't there to say one way or another. That's how far we still have to go. The middle-ear arguably is reachable, and study-able. There just isn't much being done.

 

There are even more angles. The tensor tympani could be exerting pressure on the inner ear, so all it would take is for the tendon to change its appropriate tenseness to cause a huge bunch of issues.

 

Hmm, not too sure about that @Sen. Don't forget those with religiously driven motivations and all those folk in various death cults, happily guzzling down the 'koolaide' joyously and with a song in their hearts, confident in the knowledge that they will soon 'crossover' and be dining with their creators that very night. I suspect some of them were tinnitus sufferers too, which may have helped them along. Two birds, one stone.

 

They don't want to die either. They believe they are going to continue living on another plane of existence.

I don't think anyone genuinely wants to die. It's always more complicated than that.

 

I think it's usually along the lines of "I don't want to die, I just want the pain to end". Sometimes, there is no other way.

 

You're muddying the meaning of the words 'to die' here and we could also argue the meaning of the word 'wants', in your context. Yes it's complicated, but I do suspect the concept of the 'death wish' really is a thing.

 

To me,at least, I finally got the meaning of Shakespeare`s famous words from Hamlet!
Both, regarding its relevance and how hard it is to answer/make a decision!

“To be, or not to be: that is the question”

– Hamlet (Act III, Scene I)

One of the most used quotes in the English language it is part of the famous soliloquy by Hamlet on the moral legitimacy of suicide in an unbearably painful world. This is the starting of the soliloquy and Hamlet wonders: to live or not to live.

 

I can. You cannot wish to die and yet have your life be "perfectly fine" at the same time. That is impossible. We have a biological imperative to survive. If what you mean is their external lives are perfectly fine (finances in order, decent relationships with friends/loved ones, etc.) but they still wish to die, than their internal lives are NOT "perfectly fine". Something is off. If someones internal life is "perfectly fine", they will not have a death-wish. It makes no sense.

 

Do you see a very severe desease part of the internal or external life?

 

Internal life, for sure. Having any sort of malady is going to affect your mood.

Let me state here very clearly: I can understand why someone with severe tinnitus would want to take their own life. My previous post was addressing the point that someone should be allowed to kill themselves even if their life is perfectly fine. In my opinion, that is a silly statement, since absolutely no one with lives that are perfectly fine kill themselves.

 

Sen meant it hypothetical

 

Yes, Definately internal

 

Ok. But I contend that even as a hypothetical it is unrealistic.

 

Yes. I 've asked Sen what he meant with ' hypothecial' but I didn't get a reply.
There is always an underlying reason

 

The keyword was "if." It's not a real life example, it's a hypothetical example; an imaginary scenario.

The argument wasn't that someone with a perfect life would kill themselves, the argument was that they should have the right to.

 

Understood, but it's a useless hypothetical in that it doesn't make sense.

The best philosophical argument I can come up with regarding your other points is to look life from the view of your potential future self. If your condition were to improve, you would be doing a disservice to your future self.

 

Which part of it doesn't make sense?

 

The part where it would even be conceiveable that a person who was "perfectly fine" would kill themselves. It just doesn't happen. Look, I am all for thought experiments, I was a philosophy major. But for a thought experiment to lead somewhere useful, then the premises has to be sound. In this case, in my opinion, it is not.

 

I agree that it doesn't happen. It's a hypothetical situation.

The point was that anyone should be allowed to end their own life irrespective of circumstance. I didn't think it was that confusing. Sorry for making it unclear.

 

This right here is what I was trying to get at with my objection. It doesn't happen, so no use even stating it.

But no apologies necessary. I can tell from your posts that I am interacting with someone of above average intelligence. Have you studied any Philosophy or taken a critical thinking class?

 

Sen is pretty cool.

 

IMO assisted suicide should be granted for our condition should we choose it, even if we don't go through with it at least it will be comforting to know that there is a painless way out.

I am not even remotely interested in living another 40-50 years like this and having no option except the obvious is inhuman.

 

This person should have no obligation to convince anyone else that he or she is NOT perfectly fine. The fact that they want to commit suicide is proof that they are unhappy about something - unhappy enough to take their own life.

 

You're not reading my post correctly.

 

I should have read the entire thread before commenting. Sorry.