sydthebeat wrote: » https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/generalized-anxiety-disorder/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20361045https://www.nhs.uk/mental-health/conditions/generalised-anxiety-disorder/diagnosis/ maybe you should as a physical exam should be part of the diagnostic process
stephen_n wrote: » The physical exam is to rule out other causes, not identify anxiety. .
stephen_n wrote: » .Also GAD is not what Osaka is experiencing. In fact she is experiencing the exact opposite.
If you present with palpitations and a resting heart rate of 130
sydthebeat wrote: » of course there are medical diagnoses of anxiety issues, its boxed off as a "disorder" when its an issue beyond acceptable health limits. Anxiety can a symptom of many deeper medical issues. there's medical thresholds to be met in order to diagnose it, often including a physical examination, and there are scaled metrics to compare diagnoses to. if you picked up the phone tomorrow to your employer and said "im feeling anxious, i wont be in for a week" you can be damn sure they will look for a medical cert to confirm this. however, thats the whole point here. If naomi is unable to carry out her professional duties due to her anxiety, then she needs to be stood down until she gets treatment until she can.
sydthebeat wrote: » maybe you should re-read what i actually said and not what you think i said... and again, anxiety is a symptom........ are you her personal physician with access to her medical records?
stephen_n wrote: » You said in the bolded bit that the physical examination is used to diagnose it. It is not used to diagnose it, it’s used to rule out other medical issues. A clinical psychologist with no medical background what so ever can give a diagnosis of GAD. No I’m not her personal anything. You seem to think you have inside knowledge though. I’m basing my opinion on what she said. You are the one trying to diagnose her with a disorder.
Zzippy wrote: » Playing tennis is her career. Winning tennis matches is literally her job. You can make the argument that media duties are essential but others will disagree. We have as much right to hear Osaka's views as we do to know the injury status of a Leinster rugby player. If a rugby player can decide to keep his injury status private, why can't Osaka decide to keep her views to herself? Doing interviews benefits sponsors. Sponsors can choose not to sponsor an athlete who doesn't do interviews. If an athlete decides to risk her income by refusing interviews, that should be her right. She should not be forced to do them at penalty of not being able to compete in a tennis tournament - her actual job. Tournaments benefit from players abilities, their image rights, the interest they bring. Why should they have access to the player's inner thoughts, or to put them in situations that cause anxiety?
sydthebeat wrote: » LOL absolutely the opposite. im saying that it appears at the moment she has a lack of a diagnosis, and that is problematic for her job obviously. as for the physical exam, if you cant grasp why a physical exam is carried out as part of a diagnosis of an anxiety / stress condition then Unfortunely there's no amount of explaining that will help. it takes some leap of faith logic to claim that carrying out an exam to rule out other factors doesn't form part of the diagnostic process.
Podge_irl wrote: » The interviews benefit the sponsors of the tournament who have paid and contributed to her prize money. Her personal sponsors are not the issue here and I am not surprised they have come out to support her. The duties are essential insofar as they are what she has contractually agreed to. Also she is not obliged to say anything specific during the interviews - your comparison makes no sense. A proper comparison would be a captain and coach refusing to do any interviews at team announcements/before games/after games and that would not be accepted either.
Former Former Former wrote: » But per my original point, Osaka is not such a person. She has no problem putting herself in the spotlight when it suits. Even now, she could have just told us she was withdrawing for personal reasons but she chose to put all this out there. Fair play to her for doing so, and she came across really well in her statement, but it's contradictory to say that we should respect her privacy when she herself is the one putting her personal info out there.
Zzippy wrote: » Coaches have done exactly that in the past. Alex Ferguson refused to speak to BBC for years. I just find the pile-on by pundits, journalists and indeed posters here, on someone who has stated she has mental health issues, distasteful. For all the talk about destigmatising mental health, when someone high profile does come out and talk about mental health, she is ridiculed and derided for it. Thank God I've never suffered depression or severe anxiety, but while I can't profess to know anything about it, I can listen to those who do and show some empathy and understanding. Something that is sorely lacking in some it seems.
Zzippy wrote: » People are entitled to divulge whatever personal info they want, or none at all. Their choice. Whatever information she voluntarily disclosed is her business, and you are not entitled to any more than that. And yes, you absolutely should respect her privacy beyond that, not criticise her because she disclosed what she did.
sydthebeat wrote: » I'm not the one who's gone all the way around the clock from "there's no such thing to a diagnosis of anxiety" to "you're using the diagnosis of anxiety in the wrong way" I'm not a medical professional and obviously you aren't either so let's leave it there and say we disagree with each other
Former Former Former wrote: » Oh that's OK then, I was worried it was me you had a problem with. Look, if you're genuinely concerned about mental health, would you not share any concern about the numbers of people throwing out "my mental health" at the drop of a hat? Are you not worried that, far from destigmatising mental health, it will trivalise it? And thus people with really serious issues aren't taken as seriously as they should be? BTW I never suggested that Naomi Osaka couldn't/shouldn't have issues because she's earning 50 million a year. That's a total misrepresentation. What I said was that if tennis is causing her issues, then maybe she needs to look at different careers.
molloyjh wrote: » She struggles with depression and anxiety. I can't imagine how difficult it must be for some to put themselves out in front of the world like that, especially now with the way media and social media can be. In one way I understand the "its part of the job" perspective, but at the same time these people are human beings. Being good at the fundamentals of her job, ie the tennis, doesn't have to go hand in hand with being an extrovert who is completely okay with being front and centre in the media. If a doctor is great at medicine but crap with people (we've all had experience of that I'm sure) or if a builder is great at construction but rubbish at costing stuff does that mean they shouldn't be doing the job? Or does it mean that they should get suitable supports to allow them to do their job? And how does that logic apply to pro athletes? Could her coach speak for her or could she hire someone to do it in her place? Or should she just not be a pro athlete?
swiwi_ wrote: » The guy is a little bit too attached to his octopus but nevertheless “My octopus teacher” is pretty cool. Didn’t realise how amazing those creatures are, nor that they eat lobster.
stephen_n wrote: » It doesn’t cover it in the program but how they change colors is amazing. They are basically living RGB monitors, with each cell controlled by a nerve ending. Swapping in and out pigmentation to camouflage themselves perfectly. The ability for their brain to interpret the visual image of what they are swimming over. Then translate it into all those nerve endings is quite amazing.
Rory McIlroy cited “personal reasons” for pulling out of the pre-tournament pro-am and cancelling a scheduled press conference ahead of the Memorial Tournament. McIlroy’s agent did not immediately respond to a request for more information.
Zzippy wrote: » Rory McIlroy pulls out of Memorial pro-am citing ‘personal reasons’ Just disgraceful. I mean, doing press is part of the job. Not just playing golf. Letting down the tournament sponsors and pro-am folks? For "personal reasons"! Pfft! :rolleyes:
sydthebeat wrote: » ?? he pulled out of the competition !!he wasnt trying to play the competition and refusing to do media work or is there some other situation you are implicitly referring to that hasnt been widely reported?
Zzippy wrote: » Um, he literally is playing the competition, which starts today. He pulled out of the pro-am, which is a sponsor's obligation, and the press conference, also presumably a contractual obligation. I presume Piers Morgan and many others will be swift to pile on...
sydthebeat wrote: » Sweet jesus this stuff isn't hard.... He pulled out of the pro am (a competition in itself) and didn't do the associates press conference. Didn't play the competition, didn't do the press. He's playing in the memorial trophy and IS doing the media. Osaka wanted to play the competition and NOT DO the media. Do you at all see the difference here???
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/ad289898c0c6dda7e667bf900ae26d0c.svg)
