Psychiatry: The Brain is a Malignant Tumor!

Peter Breggin, MD
38
2837

My introduction to organized psychiatry came when, as a college freshman, I joined a Harvard volunteer program at the local state mental hospital. I spent hundreds of hours on the wards and eventually directed the volunteer program.

Among the astonishing educational experiences I had, one of the most stunning was my conversation with the psychiatrist running the insulin shock room in which the staff injected the hapless inmates with overdoses of insulin until their brain began to die, sending them into convulsions, unconsciousness and then a deep coma. Sometimes they writhed, sometimes they lay still like the dead that they were becoming, until saved by doses of sugar.

I asked the psychiatrist, “How does insulin coma help?”

He replied with certainty, “It kills bad brain cells.”

While still a skeptical college freshman and sophomore, I began reading on my own about what the institution of psychiatry routinely inflicted on its patients. There was insulin shock—which undeniably killed brain cells. Tissue samples showed the dead and dying cell. And electroshock that wrecks the brain and kills the neurons of hundreds of thousands in America today, as well as the less common final resort, sending them off for lobotomies to have portions of their normal brain tissue cut or burned out. I struggled in my own mind as a young college student to understand what could motivate anyone to inflict such damaging assaults on the brains of other people.

Much more recently, in fact within the last year, I have returned to studying the origins of the first blockbuster miracle drug—Thorazine (chlorpromazine). I have already put up some of the original research papers from the early 1950s written by the pioneers Delay and Deniker on my free Antipsychotic Resource Center (www.123antipsychotics.com). After experimenting with the new drugs for about two years, and watching Thorazine go viral around the world, the Frenchmen realized that the drug was behaving like an epidemic encephalitis agent. They realized they had discovered a neurotoxin!

Delay and Deniker’s promotional work had already led to millions of patients being overwhelmed by the new neurotoxins, inevitable suffering from all kinds of dreadful neurological and physical reactions. By 1957, they knew in detail how their drugs mimicked a well-known neurotoxic epidemic called lethargic encephalitis.

So what did the two doctors do? Did they write and phone their colleagues to say, “Wait! We’ve made a dreadful mistake. We are spreading neurotoxins across the face of the earth.”

No, they didn’t. Instead, they contacted the drug company and asked, “In your monkey lab studies, what’s the most neurotoxic drug of all—the one that causes the most severe damage to the nervous system?” They quickly received a series of deadly agents and began giving it to their patients. Out of their approach came drugs like Haldol (haloperidol), arguably among the most toxic agents in medicine, possibly only outdone by the most radical cancer treatments.

Now, perhaps my conclusion begins to make more sense—that psychiatry has always viewed the brain as a cancer. Consciously or unconsciously, psychiatry views the brain as a malignant, incurable cancer that can only be controlled by drugs that kill brain cells and shorten lives. And if the drugs do not work, there is the shock machine to blast the brain to near death in which the brain waves often flat-line. And of course, as with any cancer, there is always the scalpel or the hot probe, in this case lobotomy and newer forms of psychosurgery, including radiation. Yes, radiation, just like a cancer treatment.

Before I took five years out of my life to stop the resurgence of psychosurgery around the world in the early 1970s, one of the most esteemed British neurosurgeons, Geoffrey Knight, performed his lobotomies by implanting radiation seeds in the frontal lobes of his patients! It makes me think I must be right: psychiatrists and some aberrant neurosurgeons believe that the brain is a malignant tumor.

I am nearly there, finally explaining what makes psychiatrists and some neurosurgeons seem so irrational and even mad. They do think the brain is a malignant tumor—one that, for practical reasons, can never be fully eradicated but instead must be managed and controlled for the patient’s lifetime, however shortened it may be by the treatment.

It also explains why all of our scientific and carefully reasoned efforts to criticize psychiatric drugs, shock treatment and lobotomy have fallen on such deaf ears. These people, these psychiatrists and neurosurgeons, do not think they are treating a normal brain with a mind and a spirit, and a living person—they think they are treating a subtle and sometimes flagrant form of cancer.

Now of course they speak of biochemical imbalances and how their drugs are correcting them. But they know it’s not true. The evidence is clear that the only biochemical imbalances present in the brains of their patients are the ones that they themselves put into them with their neurotoxins and electric shocks.

So why don’t psychiatrists pay attention to those of us writing so many scientific articles and books about what Peter Gøtzsche calls Deadly Psychiatry and what I have described as Toxic Psychiatry and Brain-Disabling Treatments? Why do they dismiss the havoc wreaked by their drugs, treating it as mere collateral damage in a war that justifies and requires the use of deadly chemical weapons?

Malignancy that it is, this sick brain must be brought to death’s door if necessary; and even if many millions of brains a year are killed or maimed, along with their owners, it’s the same kind of risk that must be taken with the treatment of any deadly tumor. After all, these brains kill the people they inhabit and sometimes they kill other people. Worse yet, these brains emanate life’s most unimaginable horrors: strong and sometimes overwhelming emotions that cannot be controlled without resort to neurotoxins and electric shocks to the head.

Before my insight makes you feel overcome with resentment or any other nasty emotions lurking in your malignant brain, think of this: What must these psychiatric exterminators of the brain think about the organ inside their own heads? Think how darkly and wretchedly they must feel about their own brains and hence about themselves.

I conclude with the most important insight of all. We have persistently failed in trying to influence psychiatry with scientific argument because we view the brain as normal and they think it is a cancer. Imagine how weird it must seem to them: We are talking about an organ inside our heads that we treasure, and they are peering at it the way a surgeon studies a neuroblastoma—or a killer views the object of his hatred. We love the brain and they are stalking it.

So there it is; but what new strategy grows from these insights? We must convince psychiatrists that their own brains are not cancerous. We must help them understand that all the emotions they struggle against within themselves are part of the human experience—that it is normal, indeed that it is exalted, that we human beings are so full of emotions and passions, painful and thrilling, depressing and elevating, and ultimately loving.

38 COMMENTS

  1. Thank you, Dr Breggin for the excellent post.

    When I visited the Maudsley Hospital in 1980 I thought I might meet an expert that might enlighten me. But I didn’t.

    EMAIL: From Me.
    To: Office of Information Commissioner Ireland
    Sent: Today November 24, 2017 at 3:41 PM

    Heading: Ref 130177 Amsterdam 1980 etc.

    Dear Mr XXXXX

    I was advised to direct my query to you.

    I’m having an awful lot of difficulty sorting out a very dated medical history (and this history is causing real present day problems for me).

    I presumed XXXXX to still be at the OIC
    and this is what I wrote:-

    You looked after a Case belonging to me a few years ago. I wasn’t happy with the outcome, but you did tell me to get in touch with you, if anything cropped up at a later date.

    I would like to be as brief as possible.

    NO MENTION OF AMSTERDAM ON THE UK NOTES
    I don’t see any mention of Amsterdam on my 1980 UK Records though I was with the Maudsley Hospital for two months (and had spent several months in Amsterdam shortly before arriving there).

    THE UK TAKES NO RESPONSIBILITY
    All accounts of me from the UK are nondescript and vague, almost to the extent of never having met me (- but were given professional standing in 1980 at Galway).

    KEVIN MCGRADY IN AMSTERDAM
    I recognise nearly too easily from the the Wikipedia description of Kevin McGrady below (with some further inquiry).

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_McGrady

    that Kevin McGrady was someone I was socially acquainted with in Amsterdam in 1980.

    Kevin McGrady gave me the impression of being a genuine reborn again Christian, but nobody could have been as naive as the Wikipedia article suggests. It’s quite possible that he was being “groomed” at the time and that his Diplock evidence would then be totally “incredulous”.

    About two weeks before I left Amsterdam Kevin McGrady expressed concern regarding a conversation we were supposed to have had a few days earlier. I honestly didn’t remember this conversation (but I had also been out late a night before and had no memory of coming in. Kevin McGrady had worked on the night desk).

    ARRIVAL AT GALWAY 1980
    I was considered to be quite well on Arrival at Galway in 1980 (by two doctors – not one).

    Nurse XXXX was also present at the time.

    On Arrival me and the accompanying English doctor were split up and interviewed separately. The English doctors account was fairly unreliable (with no reference to Amsterdam). The English doctor also had a quantity of alcohol on board.

    A young Irish doctor took my account with reference to Amsterdam included. This young doctor never appeared on my Records. His version of events was updated to several days later and entered in by Psychiatrist Dr PA Carney in his own hand.

    IRISH POLICE
    I believe that at this time, once it became clear that something was “wrong” The Irish Police should have been called in.

    NEAR FATAL 1984 DEPIXOL INJECTION (AKATHISIA)

    I believe the Records were interfered with at this time because:-

    The Depixol injection appears on the notes without explanation.

    Staff at the time were instructed not to Admit me, though I should have been kept under observation for at least 24 hours after being newly introduced to this type of medication.

    This injection was given at twice the introductory level though the Modecate had been re introduced at the introductory 12.5 mg level (in December 1983 by Dr XXX ).

    This injection was given as an alternative with supposedly less involuntary movement effect.

    Dr PA Carney was trying to keep my Modecate disability problem off the records, because he had been holding me responsible for my inability to Function, and had continually expressed this as my main problem.

    April 1984 was my last hospitalization. I made
    Longterm Recovery as a result of carefully tapering off strong Psychiatric medications with the help of Psychotherapy.

    Please acknowledge this email.

    Yours Sincerely

    Me

    • The Office of Information Commissioner, Ireland answered my EMAIL
      Friday 24 November 2017 at 4:07 PM

      Re: Request under the Freedom of Information Act 2014 (FOI Act)

      Dear Mr XXX

      I refer to your correspondence to this Office today, 24/11/2017.

      Once a formal decision has been made following a review, neither the Commissioner nor his delegate have jurisdiction to reconsider or amend a decision unless directed to do so following an appeal to the Courts on a point of law.

      Section 24 of the FOI Act sets out detailed provisions for an appeal to the High Court by a party to a review, or any other person affected by the decision. In summary, such an appeal, normally on a point of law, must be initiated not later than four weeks after notice of the decision was given to the person bringing the appeal. Unfortunately that deadline has expired in this case.

      Accordingly, this Office cannot re-open the review, or enter into detailed correspondence with you or any of the parties involved, once a binding decision has been made.

      Therefore, there is nothing further that this Office can do for you in relation to this case.

      Please note that this Office does not propose to engage in further correspondence with you in this regard.

      Regards

      XXXXX
      Office of the Information Commissioner

      Attention:
      This e-mail is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the message and notify the sender. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author.

      Tabhair aire:
      Tá an r-phost seo faoi phribhléid agus faoi rún. Mura tusa an duine a bhí beartaithe leis an teachtaireacht seo a fháil, scrios é le do thoil agus cuir an seoltóir ar an eolas. Is leis an údar amháin aon dearcaí nó tuairimí a
      léirítear.

  2. Peter, thank you for your amazing work and this insightful blog post. I agree with the proposed strategy articulated in your final paragraph and am working on it in my professional of psychology. It occurs to me that if psychiatry were to abandon the assumption that psychological struggles are brain diseases, its identity and reason for existence would dramatically change. This leads me to a question for you: if we somehow succeeded in convincing psychiatry that psychological struggles are part of the human condition and not brain disease, what would that mean for psychiatry? It’s not clear to me that psychiatry would have a role to play or reason to exist. And I imagine many psychiatrists would recognize this possibility and as a result remain closed to even the most compelling arguments and data we might offer. As you know as well as anybody, this seems to have been the case for the past 4 decades. Do you truly believe your proposed strategy – to persuade psychiatry to abandon its biomedical model by arguing that psychological struggles are part of the human condition and not the product of brain disease – can work?

    • if psychiatry were to abandon the assumption that psychological struggles are brain diseases, its identity and reason for existence would dramatically change

      If psychiatry were to do that it would have to go back to promoting diseases of abstractions such as “the mind.” Eventually people would catch on. Plus there would be no further rationale for drugging dissatisfied people to the point where they are unable to cause trouble. Nonetheless psychiatry’s essential reason for existence, i.e. repression in the name of medical treatment, would remain.

  3. Math joke.

    A mathematician is taking his written exam to become a firefighter.

    The second to last question is: you come to a burning building, what do you do?

    Put the fire out, he answers.

    The last question is,”You come to a building you’ve been called to, but it’s not on fire, what do you do?”

    Set it on fire, he answers.

    Later, the examiner calls him in to ask about that last answer. Why would you set it on fire?

    Because, says the mathematician, then it’s reduced to a problem I know how to solve.

    I think you are smart enough to carry the analogy over to psychiatry and a patient they have to treat.
    Setting the building/patient on fire/ forcing drugs on them ( a physically healthy person), because then the situation is reduced to a problem they have been trained to solve.
    ____
    otherwise
    Tyrants never give up their power voluntarily.

  4. Great article Dr. Breggin. Szasz understood that psychiatry is all about deception, coercion and force. It always has been, and it will ever be so, until it is abolished. Freedom of the mind is paramount. Psychiatry has always endeavored to conquer and control the human mind, most often by attacking that precious organ of which you speak, the human brain.

    It is true that many psychiatrists view the human brain as some sort of a cancer, a tumor, or at least an object to be manipulated. Perhaps someone ought to conduct a study on psychiatrists to discover if, in fact, the very organ that they so despise can be found within their own skulls.

  5. Indeed, I think psychiatrists’ actions are crazy.

    One must be foolish to imagine implanting a microchip into the brains of traumatized people to control their emotions and behavior through artificial intelligence.

    http://www.nature.com/news/ai-controlled-brain-implants-for-mood-disorders-tested-in-people-1.23031

    “AI-controlled brain implants for mood disorders tested in people”

    “Brain implants that deliver electrical pulses tuned to a person’s feelings and behaviour are being tested in people for the first time. Two teams funded by the US military’s research arm, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), have begun preliminary trials of ‘closed-loop’ brain implants that use algorithms to detect patterns associated with mood disorders. These devices can shock the brain back to a healthy state without input from a physician.”

    It sounds like paranoid delirium, but that’s what DARPA psychiatrists really do.

    The results, as one might expect, are catastrophic, abominable: psychiatrists also refuse to publish them in peer-reviewed journals. And yet they are always asking for more volunteers to participate in their Frenkeistein experiences:

    “Chang and his team are ready to test their new single closed-loop system in a person as soon as they find an appropriate volunteer, Sani says. Chang adds that the group has already tested some closed-loop stimulation in people, but he declined to provide details because the work is preliminary.” (i.e.: catastrophic)

    These people’s actions are absolutely crazy, not like “schizophrenics” or “bipolar”, but like the criminal doctors practicing in the concentration camps or in the MK-ULTRA project.

    Controlling people’s minds with artificial intelligence is just crazy, it’s fascist madness funded by a state that dreams of a totalitarian society of science fiction.

  6. Bravo! I don’t know a better way to put it. If these doctors would remove “bad thoughts” by removing “bad brain cells”, it must be malignancy they’re after. What if, wonder indeed, “bad brain cells” aren’t behind “bad thoughts”? Whoops. Too late to reassess, they’ve got a financial investment, and a business to think of. The investment, abusive treatment and incarceration, the business, damaging healthy brains. Tell them there’s a better way to do things, and keep your fingers crossed, they still don’t get it. Getting it could affect their finances, and hurt their business interests. Besides there’s this knuckle headed demand from people who don’t know any better, and from people who should know better, but don’t. Knowing better, after all, won’t keep bread and bacon on the table the way deception will, and deception that allows the law to look the other way. Deception that people take for, and as, information reception.

  7. Well, maybe it would be more inspirational if such pioneers would have electrodes inserted into their own brains. It’s a fundamental of leadership that you have to set the example for the flunkies, not getting them to do things because you’re afraid of them, yourself.

  8. Absolutely on point. I think it is evident that psychiatry is a malignant tumor that needs to be removed from the face of the earth.
    And there should be a special place in prison for the shrinks toxic poisoning and promoting ECT or electrocuting people with shock (as in Healy, Lisanby, Sackheim, Kellner..)
    The drugs are toxic and dangerous, but recovery is possible; recovery never happens for ppl brn damaged by shock. It is the greatest evil there is.

  9. destroying the brain to save the mind seems to be psychiatrists’ modus operandi. I am thankful for your work, Dr.Breggin. Psychiatry is a dangerous form of social control masquerading as a valid form of medicine. As much as I would like to see psychiatry abolished, one must wonder–especially in a punitive, unusually violent culture, as in the US–what would take its place.

    • Steve, I freely sought out a deliverance minister and he helped me. He treated me for free (2 four hour sessions.) He only treats people who are willing. He was much more respectful than any psychiatrist I’ve seen and didn’t damage my organs.

      Not saying this is for everyone. It must never be forced. More helpful than psychiatry in my experience though.

      To all you atheists/agnostics, you can say I benefited from a placebo effect. Still safer than drugs or electroshock.

      • I agree – having the Shaman shake a rattle over you and blow smoke into you

        Or having a Priest swing a censor over you with an Exorcism prayer –

        Or even having someone lay their hands on you and pray and shake the demons out of you –

        Will not have long lasting damaging side effects. It might be weird, it might even have a trauma element to it – but has the potential to be extremely cathartic. But no brain damage, no damage to nervous system or endocrine system.

        Ergo, Witch Doctory is more scientific than what the psychiatrists do. And potentially more helpful, too.

  10. Wow! With all of the insanity in psychiatry I did not think that any psychiatrist had the ability to elucidate just as Dr. Peter Breggin has done here in his article. I thought that they are were all a bunch of lunatics!

    Through research outside “popular” multi-media services it’s obvious that a big factor in psychiatry’s archaic state is controlling global corporate greed machinations to keep the populace at large docile. To see an individual in this profession who risks raising his head out of the foxhole and getting it shot off is amazing. Thank you so much for courageous people such as Dr. Peter Breggin.

  11. A wonderful article, Peter. Yes, indeed, they are treating the brains of “patients” like something cancerous. the problem is that psychiatrists have a vested interest in thinking how they do. Correspondingly, while there may be exceptions, and while for sure, they hate the brains of others, it is not all clear that they hate their own brains.

    • Although, it’s likely they do hate their own brains, or at least their own souls, which the “bio-bio-bio” psychiatrists deny the existence of. But, no one who loves and respects oneself and others, would ever do to others, what the psychiatrists do to their patients. So there must be a lot of well deserved self hatred.

  12. “……The evidence is clear that the only biochemical imbalances present in the brains of their patients are the ones that they themselves put into them with their neurotoxins and electric shocks….”
    In October 1980 in the UK Maudsley Hospital I was happy to refuse “medication” ; but by October 1983 when I attempted to stop taking “medication” I wasn’t able to survive.

    • Show me the psychiatrist who doesn’t drug people and I’ll accept ‘critical psychiatry”. Out of all the psychiatrists that I’ve met, and the ones I’ve dealt with personally, not one of them treated people without the toxic drugs. I know that there are a few wandering around but I’ve never met them. I suspect that you are one who doesn’t or didn’t drug. But as far as I’m concerned it’s anti-psychiatry all the way.

        • I know one psychiatrist who retired when the drugs pushed their way onto the scene. He stated that he would not be a shill for the drug companies nor a pill pusher. He was not really old and had a lot of good years left in him to walk with people in their distress. He used only talk therapy, I guess you would call it psychoanalysis. He lost a lot by retiring and having to find another profession. But he never lost his integrity, his honesty and truthfulness, nor his morals and ethics.

          I like your attitude; it’s very gentle and non-confrontational but at the same time you express what you believe with no apologies. I hope that you are victorious in your battle with celexa. Good luck and I’ll be cheering you on.

  13. I agree with most of what he says but he doesn’t have a balanced perspective he says the difference between him and others in psychiatry isbthat he views the brain as normal and others see it as a tumor that needs to be treated it is ignorant to say all brains are normal I agree that many people are labeled mentally I’ll when really they aren’t they are just going through maybe a fase but there are people out there who’s brains aren’t normal and the thoughts and emotions they have does point to an illness I can say firsthand that my brain wasn’t normal I dealt with extreme emotions as well as psycosis when I was young I knew there was something wrong you shouldn’t deny that a brain can be abnormal it’s a part of the body and any part of the body can be sick and yes that goes along with the brain as well not all are experiences are just the normal human experience some people are truly mentally ill but unfortunately alot of them are being treated with toxic drugs that in the long run can make things worse for them mentally emotionally and physically! that’s the problem with psychiatry they are not helping the problem with their pills and various so called treatments they are just making it worse and destroying people’s brains psychiatry is a sick profession I’ve always been a skeptic of psyciatrist and the ways in which they treat their patients by over medicating them with toxic drugs

  14. Thanks for speaking the truth about psychiatry for so many years, Peter. I wish I had run across your research long before I did. And, absolutely, I believe your comparisons between the German Nazi psychiatrists’ behavior and today’s American psychiatrists’ behavior are very important, since there is really no difference between those theologies – they are both based upon scientifically fraudulent, psychiatric, “genetic,” or eugenics, theologies. And both theologies were and are still wrong, both scientifically and morally. As was also true of the Russian Bolshevik psychiatrists’ theologies.

    Let’s pray the psychiatrists some day learn other’s brains are not “malignant tumors,” placed here on earth by God for the psychiatrists to destroy. Especially the millions and million of child abuse victims today’s American psychiatric industry is defaming and torturing with their drugs. Given that today, “the prevalence of childhood trauma exposure within borderline personality disorder patients has been evidenced to be as high as 92% (Yen et al., 2002). Within individuals diagnosed with psychotic or affective disorders, it reaches 82% (Larsson et al., 2012).”

    Covering up child abuse, by turning millions of child abuse victims into the “mentally ill” with the psychiatric drugs, is the actual primary function of today’s “mental health” industry. Let’s hope this destruction of the lives of the most vulnerable in our society ends soon. Especially since, “A society will be judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members”

    And I for one, am appalled by the way today’s globalist leaders, who have supported today’s psychiatric industry 100% until recently, believe the weakest in our society should be treated.

  15. I appreciate how you defend the defenseless when few else will, Dr. Breggin. Is it the Human Brain mainstream psychiatrists see as a cancer though or their patients–perceived by them to be subhuman? If your patient or consumer is a dangerous malignant tumor on society you do whatever is needed to shock them into inaction–like a malignant growth a surgeon cannot safely remove. If the growth goes into remission and dies on its own so much the better!

    They view their own brains as flawless, infallible instruments. As winners in the evolutionary race their DNA is perfect and they themselves are genetic supermen with godlike omniscience and super powers from unlocking all the mysteries of the universe.