Army combat veteran's call for help lands him in jail

For years, Ryan Broderick has been trapped inside his mind, watching a constant reel of explosions that rocked the Army vehicles he had scrubbed of blood during three combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Since January, Broderick has been stuck inside a real jail, fortified by cinder blocks, surrounded by barbed wire. The government that Broderick upended his life to serve locked him up in Edgecombe County, about 75 miles east of Raleigh.

The term “co-morbidity” describes two or more disorders or illnesses occurring in the same person. They can occur at the same time or one after the other. Co-morbidity also implies interactions between the illnesses that can worsen the course of both.

Establishing which came first or if one caused the other and why can be difficult

The term "co-morbid" has three definitions:

to indicate a medical condition existing simultaneously but independently with another condition in a patient (this is the older and more "correct" definition)

to indicate a medical condition in a patient that causes, is caused by, or is otherwise related to another condition in the same patient (this is a newer, non-standard definition and less well-accepted).

to indicate two or more medical conditions existing simultaneously regardless of their causal relationship

I can tell you from personal experience that being in very stressful, life threatening situations can cause all kinds of "abnormal" responses from individuals ranging from "heroic" to complete "meltdowns". Every person reacts differently. It's not an excuse for threatening someone but it is a very plausible explanation.

You tube video/documentary.
Shell Shock 1914-18

The definition cited is simply from an article which shows the co-morbidity of PTSD and psychosis in recent studies. It’s not rocket science. It’s the first quote “scholarly” article that appears in google science with the search terms PTSD and psychosis.

I’m getting real sick of the knuckle dragging Neanderthals on this site with at best a 6th grade reading level comprehension. It’s like most Freepers lately, are all elderly and retired and have nothing better to do than act like petulant 17 year old children arguing simply for the sake of arguing.

I need to loosen my tin foil hate or I’m going to begin to believe that most posters are paid trolls sent by leftists to FR whose sole purpose is to make “conservatives” look like stark raving lunatics.

My quote says “newer non-standard definition and less well-accepted” it does not say “not accepted”. I then posted a 50+ minute video about the first studies of PTSD in World War One which you probably won’t and/or didn’t watch so I reposted the link with the video advanced to the last 3 minutes of the BBC documentary which summarizes the entire video and said so in my post. You probably didn’t bother to watch that either.

In the last 17 years the level of discourse on this site has degenerated to nothing more than “I know you are but what am i ...” like childish rants.

People don’t even bother to read what has been posted and go off half cocked raving about their pet neurosis. Whether its the “cops” threads, the “Duggers”, “Mormons”, or the entire set of open and closed “Religious Forums”, Black helicopters, Armageddon, the way in which feminism has ruined western civ, foreign brides superiority to rotten American women , the destruction of society by gays, feminism blah, blah, blah etc.

Freepers use to be activists and hold rallies and sponsor Dinners, and protests, and candidates and be activists, andsupport the troops at Walter Read Etc. Not Anymore!

In your post to me you said “Your logic is flawed at best.” I have studied advanced mathematics and If you would like we could discuss this using logic.

First learn the difference between :

“less well-accepted” and “not accepted”

Then study the following type of formal fallacies.

formal fallacies

Invalid arguments that may appear convincing at first glance because they closely resemble legitimate patterns of reasoning. Commonly occurring formal fallacies include:

four terms (quaeternio terminorum),
undistributed middle,
illicit major,
illicit minor,
exclusive premises,
affirmative conclusion from negative premises,
existential,
affirming the consequent,
denying the antecedent,
converting the conditional,
negating the antecedent and the consequent, and
affirming the alternative.

As a starting point. Then Call me when your done.

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.