Pavlok

queenliz99

senecarr wrote: »

As much as I don't care for the book / movie, has no one seen A Clockwork Orange? The whole point of the story is that classical conditioning doesn't really work when dealing with humans. Sure, you can stick someone with an involuntary reaction to certain stimuli, but you don't really change who the person fundamentally is.
Using a device or pain stimulus to do the same with food will have the same effect. You might fool your body into reacting against certain foods, but you won't have fundamentally changed your relationship with food, you'll just have to deal with a higher hurdle to eating them.

seen it, loved the soundtrack

senecarr

queenliz99 wrote: »

senecarr wrote: »

As much as I don't care for the book / movie, has no one seen A Clockwork Orange? The whole point of the story is that classical conditioning doesn't really work when dealing with humans. Sure, you can stick someone with an involuntary reaction to certain stimuli, but you don't really change who the person fundamentally is.
Using a device or pain stimulus to do the same with food will have the same effect. You might fool your body into reacting against certain foods, but you won't have fundamentally changed your relationship with food, you'll just have to deal with a higher hurdle to eating them.

seen it, loved the soundtrack

Will you Tell me more about the soundtrack, or does that request sound like an overture?

queenliz99

senecarr wrote: »

queenliz99 wrote: »

senecarr wrote: »

As much as I don't care for the book / movie, has no one seen A Clockwork Orange? The whole point of the story is that classical conditioning doesn't really work when dealing with humans. Sure, you can stick someone with an involuntary reaction to certain stimuli, but you don't really change who the person fundamentally is.
Using a device or pain stimulus to do the same with food will have the same effect. You might fool your body into reacting against certain foods, but you won't have fundamentally changed your relationship with food, you'll just have to deal with a higher hurdle to eating them.

seen it, loved the soundtrack

Will you Tell me more about the soundtrack, or does that request sound like an overture?

do Tell

SLLRunner

Venus_Red wrote: »

SLLRunner wrote: »

Venus_Red wrote: »

Curious if anyone in this thread is getting the Pavlov connection (which had NOTHING to do with harm). This is a call/response mechanism approach to behavior therapy.

Curious as well: why would you think people don't get it? It's a pretty old concept.

The OP clearly said she caused bruising by snapping rubber bands on her wrists, which is harmful.

Because call/response has nothing to do with harm. Someone decided to add in that bit but it could be any response, really.

What? The OP said she used rubber bands on her wrists, which caused bruising. That is physical harm.

SLLRunner

jennifer_417 wrote: »

If you mean Pavlov, then yes, behavioral conditioning is very effective. However, pairing a unpleasant stimulus with food probably isn't a good idea, because food isn't bad, and that's likely to lead to some seriously disorded thinking.
Try pairing a pleasant stimulus with desirable behaviors. For instance, I used to buy myself an inexpensive pair of earrings for every 5 lbs I lost. I love earrings, so it made me want to do the desirable behavior, which was eat less.

ETA: I didn't realize that Pavlok was a thing, so I assumed it was a typo, esp with the rubber band thing. I'm finishing up a Bachelor's in Psychology right now, so perhaps it is a pardonable error. I stand by the rest of what I said, though.

And here we go, well said. This is exactly what makes that kind of behavior harmful.