Sunday 3 September 2017

Addendum to the Previous Post about Parkinson's Receptibility to Dopamine, and also Something of Psycheparous

Related post: Article: Asthma drugs may reduce Parkinson’s risk (yet another lap around the same track)

I've explained this before, and it deserves representation wherever talking about dopamine treatment for an ailment like Parkinson's, where the contemporary medical practitioner's presumption is that dopamine treatment of the ailment works at first, but eventually loses its effectiveness.


With most all dopaminergics, when a person takes them, they're increasing both dopamine-availability, and adrenergic influence in their brain.

The more that dopamine is increased, the easier it is for a brain to connect information across synapses, to sync considering processes, and to process work to its conclusion and free up that pipeline space within a brain. However, as adrenergic influence is increased, the faster the brain tries to work, and the more dopamine is required to handle the increased workload of the brain. So, increasing adrenergic influence alongside dopamine is applying antithetical influences, and does a lot to undermine the goal of attending to states that are in need of an increase of dopamine, such as the dopamine deficiency ailment of Parkinson's.

When people taking dopaminergic drugs like meth get wired out, twitchy, and agitated, that's because of the adrenergic influence on the brain's processes over time outpacing the more temporary sought dopamine boost that those drugs give. The influence of the dopamine increase is immediate, and positive, but the influence on processes from the adrenergic increases is more inlaid, compiling over time, and lasting after the dopaminergic influence and benefit has worn off.

When taking dopaminergic Parkinson's medication, it initially helps because it is increasing dopamine, and that's always giving a positive work capacity boost to the brain, which immediately alleviates away as much of the top-layer negative impacts of the ailment as there is supplemented dopamine to address. But, at the same time, the brain is also being fed an increase in adrenergic influence, which will be feeding the source of the ailment all the while in the background.

So, over time, dopaminergics become less effective, not because dopamine stopped being what the brain needs, but because the adrenergic influence that was simultaneously being administered as a consequential component to the dopaminergic influence has contributed towards accelerating the ailment to the point that the dopamine aspect of the medication is no longer a significant influence against the ailment.

There aren't many dopaminergics that do much to inhibit adrenergic influence, but cocaine is one of them, and is what makes it such an effective treatment for mental stress ailments. I would say that if cocaine was used, rather than the various medicines that are currently used to treat Parkinson's, that there wouldn't be witnessed the same eventual ineffectiveness of the dopamine treatment as the ailment overcame its reach. And if used with understanding of Psycheparous to manage the movement of signals in a person's brain, then a full cure is in reach of anybody.

Keep in mind that what I've said would only apply to pure cocaine, as the things that street cocaine is cut with frequently add negative adrenergic influence of their own.


Conventional medicine is mired in an identity crisis, where it can't make up its mind whether it wishes to be good, or to be evil; whether it wants to cure people, or accomplish its ideology. When treating an ailment with part cure, part poison, then there isn't a full will present to cure that ailment, and the practitioner's interests are divided, and they end up failing to do good.

If asking a doctor: Do you want to cure this person, or not?

They might say: Yes, I want to cure that person.

And if it is then said to them: OK, so do what will cure that person.

Then their mind detaches itself from the context of the discussion, and they default into a programmed ideological determination of: We don't want to give people things that encourage non-medical substance use.

Which means that their honest answer to the question of 'Do you want to cure this person whose ailment is cause by lack of this specific thing, relative to the influence of these other things?' is: No, I do not want to cure that person - because the word 'cure' in that context is a stand-in which represents doing the very thing that is the person's cure. It's like a pointer, that references a container in which is held the considerations that fulfill the meaning of Cure for that particular person's situation.

Just as Jesus said 'you cannot serve mammon and God,' it is also true that a person cannot simultaneously serve ideology and still do what is good. An ideology is something that a person determines and sets up to replace the truth as their guide.


Just as considerations are polar, the signals that are considering through a person's brain present a workload for that brain. That workload carries a value to it, and dopamine-availability also presents a value of work potential. When there isn't enough dopamine to address presented workloads, it is possible for the workloads to do damage to that brain, as those signals are being pulled through the brain by Reason with force. Things can break, splintering one process into many that each need the same value of dopamine as the former one process did. Also, considering can collapse, and call fall into failure, including a failure that keeps considering over and over as a negative loop. And considerings that collapse into each other can form a black hole-like force, made by their compounding polarities all directing towards a point that draws in other consideration... and this is how granfalloons become created, as considerations are pulled out of the truthful context that gives them their meaning.

However, likewise, when a mind is filled positive truthful belief, the considering of that mind lifts it up with great strength into ever-greater truth, being the example of 'to whoever has, more will be given.' And many things will continually be resolved in that person, with them progressively filling up with light as they do so. Such considering represents the 'streams of living water' that Jesus spoke of, which he said become a 'spring of water welling up to eternal life.' As I've said, life is the movement created by considering, and considering is the movement created by considerations being considered by and flowing through other considerations.


No comments:

Post a Comment