Claims – Sunflower

Posted on February 15, 2023 by sunflower0311

Section 17

“Daddy will be really happy,” she told the German shepherd sitting on her kitchen floor. “Of course, he’s too cranky to be happy about anything, and he’ll be mad because Katie won’t eat it because I spent all day makin’ it and the only thing she wants to eat right now is pancakes.”

This part is an attributive claim because the author is saying that Brennan said that to her dog.

Later, she reminds me that Lasagna Night can come apart in an instant, if Caleb has a “bad PTSD moment.”

This part is a casual claim because it refers to a cause and effect. The cause would be Caleb having a bad PTSD moment and the effect would be Lasagna Night coming apart.

These are supposed to be her easy months, she sighs, April and May and June, before the anniversaries of his worst firefights

This part is a comparative claim because they referred to the worst of the firefights.

 That’s usually September through January, the “really bad” months, whereas in the spring, she gets a bit of “vacation,” time to clean up the house and catch up on work, rest.

This is another comparative claim because it refers to September through January as “really bad” months comparing that they are worse than the other months.

She used to ask Caleb what was wrong, why he was coiled so tight and poisonous, screaming and yelling at everybody. That just agitated him more. Now, she lets it go, until eventually, after a couple of days or weeks of refusing to leave the house, or refusing to stay home and just disappearing outside, he comes to her. Haven’t you noticed I’m having a bad time? he’ll ask.

This section has two attributive claims because it refers to something Brennan said and then refers to something Caleb had asked. The author is taking their word for it, the author was not actually there.

 he says he cannot get it out of his head, about how if he had caught that fucking sniper, that enemy sniper he’d been trying to get, that’d been following them around, terrorizing their unit, if he’d have managed to kill him like he was supposed to, then the sniper wouldn’t have gotten off the shot that killed his buddy.

This section has an attributive claim and a casual claim. The attributive claim refers to what Caleb is saying because the author was not there to actually hear him say that. The casual claim refers to the cause of if he had caught the and killed the sniper then the effect would be that his buddy would not be dead.

Posted in PTSD Claims, Sunflower | 1 Comment

PTSD claim- MellowTacos

Posted on February 15, 2023 by mellowtacos

Section 15 opens with a factual claim , “AA claims that circumstances or conditions exist beyond doubt”. Trials are being held to see if MDMA, a drug containing ecstasy, will help people that are suffering from PTSD. The goal is that this drug will help them verbalize their emotions in effort to create a less frightening association with the event. 

The author states a numerical claim when he says “In one small study, trauma victims given beta-blockers within six hours of the incident had a 40 percent less likelihood of developing PTSD.”

A credibility claim is when the author cannot take direct credit for the claim. The author does this when quoting Alain Brunet. “But as of yet, “pharmacologically, there’s no magic bullet,” he says”.

The author ends paragraph one of section 15 with stating the evaluative claim, “‘we’re much less effective at treating more complex PTSD’ with traditional therapy”.  An evaluative claim evaluates “ the effectiveness of a course of action”. 

Paragraph two of section 15 begins with an Analogy claims that states “Like traumatic brain injury. Researchers posit that TBI can make the brain more vulnerable to PTSD”. This specific claim refers to the findings of similarities. That same sentence then ends with a categorical claim saying, “it can exacerbate its symptoms of exhaustion, agitation, confusion, headaches”. In this example it’s specifically listing symptoms of PTSD

A causal claim is made when the author says “as for TBI, well, “there is no cure”. A causal claim is asserts the cause and effect.

Posted in MellowTacos, PTSD Claims | 1 Comment

Claims – Oatmealvibes

Posted on February 15, 2023 by oatmealvibes

BEGIN THE ONE-HOUR EXERCISE: Section 7

  • We await the results of the 20-year, 10,000-family-strong study of impacts on Iraq and Afghanistan veterans’ kin, the largest of its kind ever conducted, that just got underway.

This first part of the sentence is a numerical claim because the author states how long the study has been going on and how many families were involved in the study. The second part of the sentence is a factual claim as the study being the largest of its kind can be quantified and proved. It’s non-disputable.

  • Meanwhile, René Robichaux, social-work programs manager for US Army Medical Command, concedes that “in a family system, every member of that system is going to be impacted, most often in a negative way, by mental health issues.”

The author uses a credibility claim as the author references René Robichaux, a social-work programs manager for the US Army Medical Command. It’s factual that Robichaux talks about how PTSD not only impacts the person but also the family system.

  • Mostly what the program provides is couples’ counseling. Children are “usually not” treated, but when necessary referred to child psychiatrists—of which the Army has 31.

This sentence is a casual claim with a numerical claim at the end. The program is “mostly” couples counseling but there’s also help for children through child psychiatrists. The numerical claim is that the Army has 31 child psychiatrists.

  • Of course, the Army only helps families of active-duty personnel. It’s the Department of Veterans Affairs that’s charged with treating the problems that can persist long past discharge. But “if you asked the VA to treat your kids, they would think it was nonsense,” says Hofstra’s Motta.

This small paragraph has a casual claim, attributive claim, and factual claim all into one. The Army only helping families of active duty is casual because it asserts the circumstances and preconditions that the Army will help those families only if they’re still on active-duty and not veterans. It’s factual that the Department of Veterans Affairs is tasked with treating problems past discharge. It’s attributive that they’re quoting Hofstra Motta to help support their claim by signaling they’re showing us someone else’s claim.

  •  “Our goal is to make the parents the strongest parents they can be,” says Susan McCutcheon, national director for Family Services, Women’s Mental Health, and Military Sexual Trauma at the VA; according to Shirley Glynn, a VA clinical research psychologist who was also on the call, “for the vast majority of people with the secondary traumatization model, the most important way to help the family deal with things is to ensure that the veteran gets effective treatment.”

The paragraph has a credibility claim that could also be an attributive claim. The author is showing the claim of another person(s) while also naming the person(s) and their profession(s), in this case, Susan McCutcheon, national director for Family Services, Women’s Mental Health, and Military Sexual Trauma at the VA and Shirley Gylnn a VA clinical research psychologist. They share their claims on helping military families that are dealing with PTSD.

  • In cases where children themselves need treatment, these VA officials recommended that parents find psychologists themselves, though they note “this is a good time [for the VA] to make partners with the community so we can make good referrals.” Or basically: “You’re on your own,” says Brannan.

There is a mixture of recommendation claims and attributive claims. It’s recommended that parents find their children a psychologist making the proposal that they should or they will be “on their own.” It’s attributive because they’re putting Brannan’s claims that it’s a good time to get good referrals on child psychologists before it’s too late.

Posted in OatmealVibes, PTSD Claims | 1 Comment

Purposeful Summaries – Anonymous123

Posted on February 15, 2023 by anonymous123
  1. Do Multivitamins Really Work?

It seems counterintuitive that vitamins which are supposed to make you healthier can actually harm you. The Vitamin Shoppe is a chain that is growing year by year in sales which sells you vitamins. Now what if those 700 million dollars worth of vitamins actually don’t do anything. Well they don’t, in fact data suggest that these vitamins as nutritional as we are told. A study in 2009 actually claims that multivitamins don’t help prevent chronic illness. They study also proved that vitamins do not protect you from heart disease and lung, breast, and colon cancer. And also taking multivitamins can even make you exceed the recommended daily amounts of that vitamin which is very dangerous.

2. A Meditation on Elderly Animals

It seems counterintuitive that keeping elderly animals alive can actually be cruel. We all believe that there is nothing better than life. And we also can agree that letting go over an elderly animal can be devastating. But at times the animals may not even feel like the life is worth living. As animals get older their suffering increases. And that leads us to think about putting the animal down the help ease their pain. But for others keeping them alive is so they can push off their own pain and suffering at the expense of their animals.

3. Vancouver combats heroin by giving its addicts the best smack in the world

It seems very counterintuitive to give a heroine addict heroine. In Vancouver they created safe called Insite. This is place where heroine addicts can go and shoot up some heroine under nurse supervision. Now, they believe this is a good idea as it is a way to supervise the addicts so they aren’t really at great risk of an overdose. But, does giving heroine to a heroine addict really help anything. If people can go and freely get heroine then what is stopping addicts from continuing their addiction. Feeding heroine to addicts everyday is just as dangerous to their bodies as it is the risk of overdosing.

Posted in Anonymous123, Purposeful Summary | Leave a comment

Claims — Shazammm

Posted on February 15, 2023 by Samantha Szumloz

Section 21: 

Who he is now is a handsome guy in his 60s with a white beard, big but well kept, who refers to his wife as “my bride” after nine years. Hanging around their trailer one day, I see them handle each other with immense patience, even when their computer takes forever to load and they can’t find the files they’re looking for because they’ve been crappily cataloged and it’s not clear whose fault that is. Charlene has long, graying dark hair parted down the middle and super-serious eyes, which she has to lower to compose herself for a minute when I ask her, alone, if she saved Steve’s life. “He loves me a lot,” she answers. “I’ve never known love like this. He is…awesome.”

  • This paragraph is a perfect example of an illustrative claim. The author’s descriptive language regarding Steve and Charlen’s physical appearance and relationship paints an ideal picture of two old people in love. There is also an example of a causal claim in this paragraph. When the reporter asks Charlene if she saved Steve’s life, she takes a moment to take in what he says. The reader can tell that the reporter brought up Charlene’s deep emotions to the surface {cause and effect}. The segment detailing Steve and Charlene’s process with the computer search is an evaluative and illustrative claim because the reporter is evaluating or analyzing the couple’s dilemma with vivid, almost poetic detail. The evaluative claim especially shows through in the line “forever to load.” That line is based on the perception of the reporter. I would also like to add that the reporter writes like he is an expert on Steve and Charlene’s life because he witnessed their personal life firsthand.    

These most recent years, Steve is funnier—after all, he’s not just any Carson; his dad and Johnny were first cousins—but it’s not all good days. Sometimes, Charlene says, “I can feel him slipping down—it’s like this…vortex, this hole. And I try to grab him, like, ‘No! Don’t go down there!’ He can still get really depressed.” And hypervigilant. He doesn’t like living on Five Cent Ranch Road, which runs through a decidedly vulnerable valley.

  • The segment “his dad and Johnny were first cousins” is a factual claim because it is an undeniable fact that they are cousins. I would also say that these sentences are examples of categorical claims because it is detailing Steve’s PTSD symptoms. Things like hypervigilance and depression can be categorized as PTSD symptoms. 

“She saved my life,” Steve says of Charlene, without my asking. Of the soldiers coming home with PTSD now, he says, “You need time. You need time, and perspective.” Decades after his service, the VA rated Steve at 100 percent PTSD disabled, but he’s found his way to his version of a joyful life. Although, he qualifies, he saw guys get thrown around in explosions the way Caleb got thrown around in explosions, but he can’t say how their lives turned out in the long run because in his war, with that less-advanced gear, those guys usually died.

  • Due to witnessing soldiers die in battle, Steve has severe, lifelong PTSD. This paragraph is an example of a causal claim because of the author’s choice in writing about Steve’s traumatic war experiences after reporting that he still qualifies as “100 percent PTSD disabled” despite him finding joy in his life. This can also be a factual claim because the VA rating Steve as 100 percent PTSD disabled is indisputable. The author mentioning Caleb can also be seen as an analogy claim since it is linking two people together, or “claiming a similarity of one thing to another,” according to Professor Hodges definition of an analogy claim.         

Finally, Steve and Charlene find what they’re looking for on their computer: pictures of the land they bought nearby. Steve’s building an artist’s studio for Charlene on it, and eventually, hopefully, a house for the two of them. At the very top of a largely uninhabited hill, it will be hell—and sometimes impossible—to get down in winter because of the snow, but Steve doesn’t care, and wants to grow old with Charlene and die up there. At that elevation, with that vantage point, it’s one of the most defensible pieces of land in town.

  • This part of the piece can be considered as an illustrative claim since the reporter goes into almost poetic detail about the hill Steve wants to use to build a house and art studio on. The segment “it’s one of the most defensivle pieces of land in town” can also be seen as a causal and evaluative claim because it is clearly taken from the words of Steve, who is suffering from PTSD. His PTSD probably drove him to buy this hill because it is defensible, or can easily be protected from potential dangers. The fact that the reporter mentions the elevation and vantage point of the hill is also extremely evaluative.  

In the Vines’ household in Alabama, at any unpredictable time of night, the nightmare starts in Iraq.

“The desert sun is blinding, invasive; all eyes blink roughly with under-eyelid dust. It smells like blood, even before the shot slices through the Humvee and strikes Caleb in the chest. The vehicle stops, the other four guys get out, hollering, the rest of the unit firing their weapons, that awful echo at the end of an M16 round. Someone’s yelling for the medic and an indiscernible string of noises seeps out of Caleb’s mouth while he’s dying. He’s dying. He’s bleeding warm and fast, and he’s not going to make it.

‘Our brains can do such odd things,” Brannan says after she wakes up, shaky, the next morning. “Still don’t get how I can so vividly dream of somewhere I’ve never actually been.’”

  • In this section of the piece, Brannan is having a nightmare about her husband getting shot in the chest while fighting in Iraq. These lines can be seen as categorical claims because it brings Brennan’s hypervigilance to life for the reader. Her having war-related nightmares puts her in the group of veteran wives who are traumatized by their husbands’ PTSD symptoms.   
Posted in PTSD Claims, Shazammm | 7 Comments

PTSD Claims-PinkHeart84

Posted on February 15, 2023 by pinkheart84

I was tasked with analyzing the claims within Section 20.

“Personal tragedy, suicide, depression, alcohol and drug use, reliving terror,” he rattles off as consequences. “Stress-related health problems—cardiovascular, immunologic. Heart attacks, stroke, and even dementia.”

 This is a Categorical Claim because it lists several examples of the consequences of PTSD and the symptoms. 

This is a Factual claim because it lists the facts of what may happen from PTSD.

“Residential rehab programs, and motor vehicle accidents because people with PTSD self-medicate and crash cars; the cost of domestic violence; the cost of children and grandchildren of combat vets witnessing domestic violence.”

This is a Factual Claim because it is stating facts on what people do to deal with their PTSD.

This is a Categorical Claim because it lists multiple consequences of PTSD.

This is a Evaluative Claim because it demonstrates that car crashes are a result of PTSD and adds the cost of kids observing violence as a cost of PTSD.

“The chaplain assured him that he shouldn’t feel bad about killing gooks, but the chaplain was paid by the Army, and who took moral advice from a chaplain carrying a .38? Back at home, Steve drank wildly.” 

This is a Proposal Claim because it says The word “shouldn’t”.

This is a Evaluation Claim because he ignores advice from the Chaplain who carries a .38

This is a Attributive Claim since it brings up a conversation that the Author didn’t see.

“He rattles off as consequences.”

This is an Attributive Claim the author uses because he brings in another person’s claim. 

“Charles Marmar, a New York University professor who was on the team of the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study, the most comprehensive study of combat stress ever conducted…”

This would be a Comparative Claim because the word “most” is used which shows comparison.

“There are an estimated 100,000 homeless vets on the street on any given night.”

This is a Ethic claim because it judges the homeless vets.

This is also a factual claim because it gives facts on a number of homeless vets. 

“There were 2.4 million soldiers deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, and while no one is sure what PTSD among them will ultimately cost us, either, everyone agrees on one thing: If it’s not effectively treated, it won’t go away.”

This is a factual claim because it states how many soldiers were deployed. 

This is a casual claim because it says what would happen if it is not treated. 

“When Caleb checked into his VA inpatient therapy in 2010, more than two-thirds of his fellow patients were veterans of Vietnam.”

This is a factual claim because it states how many patients were veterans.

Posted in PinkHeart, PTSD Claims | 3 Comments

PTSD Claims – Giants19

Posted on February 15, 2023 by giants19

Section 3

It’s kind of hard to understand Caleb’s injuries. Even doctors can’t say for sure exactly why he has flashbacks, why he could be standing in a bookstore when all of a sudden he’s sure he’s in Ramadi, the pictures in his brain disorienting him among the stacks, which could turn from stacks to rows of rooftops that need to be scanned for snipers. Sometimes he starts yelling, and often he doesn’t remember anything about it later. They don’t know exactly why it comes to him in dreams, and why especially that time he picked up the pieces of Baghdad bombing victims and that lady who appeared to have thrown herself on top of her child to save him only to find the child dead underneath torments him when he’s sleeping, and sometimes awake. They don’t know why some other guys in his unit who did and saw the same stuff that Caleb did and saw are fine but Caleb is so sensitive to light, why he can’t just watch the news like a regular person without feeling as if he might catch fire.

I believe that this is an illustrative claim. I came to this conclusion because it feels like this text really tries to put you in Caleb’s shoes, and utilizes imagery very well to make you empathize with him. This claim tells a story, and makes you feel deep emotions.

Some hypotheses for why PTSD only tortures some trauma victims blame it on unhappily coded proteins, or a misbehaving amygdala. Family history, or maybe previous trauma.

I believe this is an attributive claim because the author attempts to provide some sort of reasoning for why PTSD happens, but strictly mentions other peoples hypotheses.

Whatever is happening to Caleb, it’s as old as war itself. The ancient historian Herodotus told of Greeks being honorably dismissed for being “out of heart” and “unwilling to encounter danger.” Civil War doctors, who couldn’t think of any other thing that might be unpleasant about fighting the Civil War but homesickness, diagnosed thousands with “nostalgia.” Later, it was deemed “irritable heart.” In World War I it was called “shell shock.” In World War II, “battle fatigue.”

I believe this claim to be a categorical one. I think this because in all of the instances listed, they all fell under the category of what people used to refer to PTSD as. This text illustrates how little we formerly knew about PTSD, and gives nice listed examples of things we got wrong about it throughout history.

It wasn’t an official diagnosis until 1980, when Post Traumatic Stress Disorder made its debut in psychiatry’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, uniting a flood of Vietnam vets suffering persistent psych issues with traumatized civilians—previously assigned labels like “accident neurosis” and “post-rape syndrome”—onto the same page of the DSM-III.

This is a factual claim. It states things that actually happened and can not be refuted and is used to hit the hammer on the nail in regards to just how quickly PTSD became a serious thing in our society.

But whatever people have called it, they haven’t been likely to grasp or respect it. In 1943, when Lt. General George S. Patton met an American soldier at an Italian hospital recovering from “nerves,” Patton slapped him and called him a coward. In 2006, the British Ministry of Defence pardoned some 300 soldiers who had been executed for cowardice and desertion during World War I, having concluded that many were probably just crippled by PTSD.

I believe this to be a comparative claim. The author is comparing how the disease of PTSD is viewed today in contrast to how it was viewed throughout history. This stark contrast paints a picture of how far we have come and how long it took us to get that far.

Posted in Giants, PTSD Claims | 1 Comment

Claims- blueee

Posted on February 15, 2023 by blueee04

Section 14

Kateri’s full-time job—as a VA nurse, actually—she could no longer manage his emotional plus physical problems: rheumatism consults, neuro consults for TBI, plus a burning rash on both feet he got in Fallujah in 2004. 

  • This is a categorical claim because it names the several examples of physical problems that James Peterson has after coming back from Iraq. Its also an evaluative claim because this is arguable, others could manage and it’s quite odd how a nurse can’t deal with what she takes care of on a daily at work.

Chemical exposure, stress reaction, no one knows, but the skin cracks and opens up raw with lesions sometimes.

  • This is a factual claim because Kateri isn’t sure what exactly is causing her husbands skin to react the way it is. There is also a casual claim because the cause isn’t known, these are just guesses of what it might be.
  • Evaluative claim because there are judgements made that the cause of the skin problem may be from stress or chemical exposure…all based on the guys pass but what if its just some type of allergy he picked up over the years or something passed down by genetics.
  • Categorical claim because there are several beliefs of what could be causing the skin to be reacting the way it is.
  • Ethical claim because his pass, when he was on the battlefield… is blamed for the reason his skin is cracking.

Kateri writes me that just moments after the injection, he “went from balls-to-the-wall PTSD to BOOM chill.”

  • This sentence is a credibility claim or attributive claim because it states who is responsible for the following claim.

“When you’ve become hypervigilant, the place you are most functional is on the battlefield,” McGill’s Brunet explains.

  • This statement is a factual claim because McGill’s Brunet is saying the place you are most functional is on the battlefield, when your’e alert but that depends on who the person is. Some may not agree with this. This is an opinion.

Kateri, despite wishing her system hadn’t learned to run at a heightened state, at this point is like a drug addict, needing stimulation to maintain it.

  • The above sentence is an analogy claim because it compares Kateri’s needing of stimulation to a drug addict. She’s used to how her husband usually acts so it’s not normal for her not to be in a heightened state, it’s something she’s grown to do all the time.

Posted in Blueee, PTSD Claims | 4 Comments

Claims–SinatraMan17

Posted on February 15, 2023 by adamreim

I was tasked with analyzing the claims within Section 5.

“Secondary traumatic stress has been documented in the spouses of veterans with PTSD from Vietnam. And the spouses of Israeli veterans with PTSD, and Dutch veterans with PTSD.”

The beginning of this section uses Factual Claims and Causal Claims to inform the reader of developments in cases of traumatic stress. The phrase “has been documented” tells us this isn’t speculation and has evidence backing it up. In addition, the nature of the claim connecting a cause (PTSD partners) and an effect (spouses with trauma), makes it also a Causal Claim.

“In one study, the incidence of secondary trauma in wives of Croatian war vets with PTSD was 30 percent. In another study there, it was 39 percent.”

This section is a Numerical Claim. It cites a study that was done on Croatian War veterans’ spouses and brings up two different data figures from two iterations of the study.

“‘Trauma is really not something that happens to an individual,’ says Robert Motta, a clinical psychologist and psychology professor at Hofstra University who wrote a few of the many medical-journal articles about secondary trauma in Vietnam vets’ families. ‘Trauma is a contagious disease; it affects everyone that has close contact with a traumatized person”

This segment uses Factual Claims, Credibility Claims, and Definition Claims to enlighten the reader deeper into what trauma really is. The author first tells us why we can trust the quoted information we’re about to receive, in the form of a detailed look into their credentials. Then the author quotes the professor’s definition of what trauma is and how it affects those around it. This claim is a Definition as well as Fact.

“Katie Vines, the first time I meet her, is in trouble. Not that you’d know it to look at her, bounding up to the car, blondish bob flying as she sprints from her kindergarten class, nice round face like her daddy’s. No one’s the wiser until she cheerfully hands her mother a folder from the backseat she’s hopped into. It contains notes about the day from her teacher.

‘It says here,’ Brannan says, her eyes narrowing incredulously, ‘that you spit on somebody today.’

‘Yes ma’am,’ Katie admits, lowering her voice and her eyes guiltily.

‘Katie Vines.’ Brannan was born here in Alabama, so that’s drawled. ‘Wah did you do that?’”

The author uses an Illustrative Claim and Evaluative Claim here to paint us a mental picture of a scene taking place, and evaluate how PTSD and Trauma connect to it. The scene describes a young person’s troublesome actions at school in descriptive language and direct dialogue.

Posted in PTSD Claims, SinatraMan | 1 Comment

Claims-G00dSoup

Posted on February 15, 2023 by g00dsoup

Hovda says some of the Army’s best doctors implied that if soldiers were told they needed rest after concussions, it was going to usher in an epidemic of fakers, or retired guys claiming disability way after the fact.
In terms of evaluative claims, the following would be an example. It is as a result of the circumstances the soldiers have lived through that they are assessing their judgement at this moment. Obviously, if the soldiers were told that they could rest after a concussion, that would give them an excuse as to why they should be given the right to rest.

“There’s good rehabilitation strategies: learn what your deficits are, learn that you’re not going crazy, that you just can’t do what you used to do,”
The claim that is being made here is an evaluative one. As the author discusses two rehabilitation strategies in the article, this can be argued in light of the author’s discussion of them. You might not find learning about your weaknesses to be the most effective strategy for you.

“The human brain has an enormous amount of plasticity. New cells are born every day. New connections can be made. The good news is, teleologically speaking, if we didn’t have the ability to recover from brain injury, we’d have ended up as somebody’s breakfast.”In short, brain plasticity refers to the ability of the brain to change its connections or rewire itself to accommodate new information. In the absence of this ability, any brain, not just the human brain, would not be able to develop from infancy to adulthood or to recover from a brain injury.

Posted in G00dSoup, PTSD Claims | 1 Comment