Skip to comments.
Utah may feel effect of drug labels (16% of Utahans on Antidepressants ?!)
Salt Lake Tribune ^
| Carey Hamilton
Posted on 03/29/2004 1:26:34 PM PST by gobucks
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
To: MNLDS; redhead
Tell me, do you think lots of the marriages here in MN are abusive shams? Are you suggesting that...
a) the number of Mormon marriages per capita in MN is the same as in UT, or
b) the percentage of Prozac-consuming, married Mormon couples in MN is different than the percentage of Prozac-consuming, married Mormon couples in UT?
Mormons make up 55% or more of the UT population, or so I'm told by my Mormon friends. It's a unique aspect to that state that MN doesn't share. If a study could separate out the Mormon population of both states, and then contrast Prozac consumption between their Mormon and non-Mormon populations, it would probably be a lot more informative. I doubt if that kind of detailed statistical information is publicly available, though.
To: Alex Murphy
I'm simply trying to clarify. Many people on this thread are implying that Mormons are more depressed than other people. And that more of their marriages are abusive.
I'd say, like you, the specific data doesn't exist to support such biases.
42
posted on
03/29/2004 2:31:21 PM PST
by
Choose Ye This Day
("We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way.")
To: MNLDS
I see it more from the perspective of the fallen Wildebeast.
To: stands2reason
The true Knowbetters have no malice, they need none.
To: stands2reason
If you ever get your way, I wouldn't be surprised if one of your victims, when they kill themselves, decides to take you out as well.....and your little fascist demo-dog too my little pretty!!
45
posted on
03/29/2004 2:46:59 PM PST
by
Indie
(We don't need no steenkin' experts!)
To: MNLDS; redhead
I'd say, like you, the specific data doesn't exist to support such biases. Specific data, no. But with better than 50% of Utah's population being professing Mormons, and better than 16% of Utah's population taking Prozac on a doctor's recommendation, I'd say that it's a statistically safe bet to say that 8% of the Utah's Prozac consumption is done by Mormons. And given the study I cited earlier that showed Utah's rate-of-consumption was 300% higher than the national average, one can conclude that Prozac consumption by Mormons is at least 150% higher than the national average. But if you're going to argue that Utah Mormons aren't the ones taking all that Prozac, you would be making the case that the other half of the Utah's population is just unbearably depressed hanging around all those Mormons.
And it's also safe to conclude that, statistically speaking anyway, the only thing more depressing than being a Mormon/Non-Mormon in Utah is being damn near anyone in Maine.
To: MNLDS
So if Mormon marriages aren't more abusive, then why do you think that Mormons are more depressed than other people?
Or are Mormons just more depressing to be around?
47
posted on
03/29/2004 2:56:00 PM PST
by
proudpapa
(of three.)
People want to alter their moods: some use alcohol, others anti-depressants and tranquilizers. Alcohol is frowned on by Mormons so they find prescriptions to be the choice (acceptable because the doc said so).
48
posted on
03/29/2004 3:36:56 PM PST
by
kmiller1k
(remain calm)
To: gobucks
Sounds like the Mormons need to start drinking Coke.
49
posted on
03/29/2004 3:44:08 PM PST
by
bethelgrad
(for God, country, and the Corps OOH RAH!)
To: redhead
I grew up with loads of LDS. All the older brothers of the X clan married the younger sisters of the Y clan. Their mothers were psychotic raising 14 kids while being constained to stay at home and bear more children.
My high school band teacher's wife ran away from home after her 15th kid.
50
posted on
03/29/2004 4:01:53 PM PST
by
annyokie
(There are two sides to every argument, but I'm too busy to listen to yours.)
To: MNLDS
Some of the most beautiful scenery in America.You've got that right!
Camping atop a Wasatch ridge and up on Haystack east of Moab were two of the most memorable places I have ever camped.
I gotta come camping again ... next year,maybe. ;^)
51
posted on
03/29/2004 5:40:27 PM PST
by
headsonpikes
(Spirit of '76 bttt!)
To: Alex Murphy
I noticed Maine was second place too. Utah, I get. I lived there too. Beautiful place, beyond words. Being Mormon, though .... that's a tuffy. I would have thought being in new jersey would be the ticket to depression surely.
But maine? Do mormons live in maine I wonder?
52
posted on
03/29/2004 5:53:24 PM PST
by
gobucks
(http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
To: gobucks
I would have thought being in New Jersey would be the ticket to depression surely. ROTFL! You owe me a new keyboard and monitor.
To: proudpapa
I think increased levels of depression may stem from the high incidence of people named for a combination of both parents: LuVern, LaDell, LaVell, etc.
54
posted on
03/29/2004 6:44:08 PM PST
by
Choose Ye This Day
("We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way.")
To: Alex Murphy
If you ask most Utahns why they're depressed, they'd probably say it's all the Californians that move there and then drive like maniacs.
Personally, I think it's the native-born Utahns who are a menace to society behind the wheel. I'd be depressed if I had to commute I-15 every day, too...But what do I know? I'm a small-town Midwestern boy...
55
posted on
03/29/2004 7:05:13 PM PST
by
Choose Ye This Day
("We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way.")
To: annyokie
Interesting. I know very many LDS families--possibly more than you--and yet I don't know anyone with 14 or 15 children in their family. I know several families with 7 or 8 kids (which would be WAY too many for us). 14 or 15 kids? Those families would be few and far between.
56
posted on
03/29/2004 7:10:02 PM PST
by
Choose Ye This Day
("We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way.")
To: headsonpikes
Have you ever gone around to (what I call) the back side of the Wasatch range, southeast of Salt Lake City? You go out to Park City, then head south, down toward Heber City and Midway. Off to the east side of Bald Mountain, there's the Jordanelle Reservoir...one of the MOST gorgeous locations I've ever seen. I've never camped around there, but it would be a beautiful place to go boating, etc.
57
posted on
03/29/2004 7:15:18 PM PST
by
Choose Ye This Day
("We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way.")
To: headsonpikes
Pictures don't do it justice:
58
posted on
03/29/2004 7:23:55 PM PST
by
Choose Ye This Day
("We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way.")
To: MNLDS
I don't mean to insult anyone. I know many (at least four families, that qualifies as many, to my mind) who birthed more than ten children.
I am Roman Catholic and I'm grossed out about the unfettered birthing that my foremothers and some of my sister do/did.
I think big families, say six are good. But anything larger than that, to my mind is overkill. Who can focus enough attention on mega amounts of children?
(Full disclosure: my ex was the ninth of ten and he is and was a mess. My former SIL who married his second eldest brother said she though he never got enough attention as an infant when my MIL left him in the hospital for three weeks when he was prematurely born.
Additionally, I rememeber sitting around by the pool and chatting with the ladies whose children/grandchildren were learning to swim and having one grandmother remark to me:
"X was friends with Y?" (My ex and one of her sons.) "I don't know. They were so many." (Too many kids, after I asked her to clarify.
She was quite a lovely woman in manner, but mothering 14 choldren is too much to ask.
Flame away fecund FReepers.
59
posted on
03/29/2004 7:41:57 PM PST
by
annyokie
(There are two sides to every argument, but I'm too busy to listen to yours.)
To: annyokie
I also think 14 children is overkill--well, technically it would be over
birth, now wouldn't it? At least it would be for me. We have 3 wonderful kids, and that's plenty. I could never handle 7 or 8, much less a dozen or 15. Some families can, however, and if they do it well, more power to 'em, I guess.
(By "well" I mean that the children's basic needs are provided for, the family is financially stable and not dependent on government assistance, the children get enough one-on-one time with parents and feel loved, their grades are good, etc. If parents can't at least provide these basics, well, they may need to...show some restraint.)
60
posted on
03/29/2004 7:53:43 PM PST
by
Choose Ye This Day
("We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson