It's not the reaction of a healthy person, because the purpose of harassment is to damage your psyche. Just like bleeding when shot is not the reaction of a healthy person -- the purpose of shooting someone is to reduce their health. If you find someone bleeding, there are two reasonable conclusions: one is that they started out unhealthy, and the other is that they were attacked.
If we're going the analogies here, this is more like someone with a gun pointed at them worrying that they may get shot. "Stop worrying!" you say. "You can trust the person holding the gun! They almost never shoot people who don't deserve it!"
I've had the FBI point guns at me and don't see why the situation should've been worrying. Why would I have acted in a manner that would've justified shooting me?
Being told "the FBI has decided to talk to you without a lawyer present" has a small but entirely real chance of resulting in personal or professional harm.
Also, I don't know where you got "in the head" from.
If we're going to veer into dumb analogies again, this would be more like driving to work after somebody leaves you a voicemail saying "I'm going to be suddenly braking in front of your car for your entire commute".
DSVM 4/5 proposal[1], where it lists "Panic Attacks"/"Panic Disorder".
A person is not healthy if they're responding to an event by having panic attacks.
Before we go any further, do you believe a person can have an unhealthy thought, and if so, do you believe part of having unhealthy thoughts is drawing conclusions based on little/no evidence?
From page 7: "Although PAs themselves are not considered a disorder or a condition that necessarily requires treatment, they often present in the context of various anxiety and nonanxiety disorders."
So, again, it doesn't seem to me like panic attacks are a sign of previous unhealthiness, any more than bleeding in response to being shot is a sign of previous unhealthiness. It is definitely true that having a bleeding gunshot wound is a medical emergency, which is more than can be said of panic attacks! But it's not a sign that you were previously unhealthy.
> Before we go any further, do you believe a person can have an unhealthy thought, and if so, do you believe part of having unhealthy thoughts is drawing conclusions based on little/no evidence?
I don't know what you mean by "an unhealthy thought".
The wording is slightly vague, but "...a condition that necessarily requires treatment" means they are considered a condition, just not necessarily one that needs treating.
Furthermore, your own quote goes on to indicate that PAs are indicative of unhealthiness, which is what I'm pointing out.
Below I've provided you with some reading so you can understand what an "unhealthy thought" is. Let me know when you've established a working understanding so we can continue (or don't, up to you).
I agree that panic attacks are often indicative of present unhealthiness, just as I agree that having a bleeding bullet-sized wound is indicative of a medical emergency. What I have not agreed with, and what I think I have not seen any reason to believe, is that susceptibility to panic attacks in response to an attack indicate prior unhealthiness, any more than susceptibility to gunshot wounds in response to an attack is prior unhealthiness. In particular, I don't see anything in the paper that claims that.
OK, I've read those posts and I understand what you mean by "unhealthy thoughts". To make sure that I'm understanding your terminology, is this what you have been meaning by "unhealthy" / is a person with "unhealthy thoughts" themselves "unhealthy"? There are a few posts that say that everyone has some "unhealthy thoughts" from time to time, so if the sense of "unhealthy" that you're using is that everyone is unhealthy to some extent, I have been misunderstanding.
