“Make Psychiatry Healthy”: Analysis of a Leaflet From the Danish Psychiatric Association

37
2309

The Danish Psychiatric Association has a 21-page leaflet from 2020 on its website entitled “Make Psychiatry Healthy.” Since I also think psychiatry is sick, I studied the leaflet closely. I found that the Association’s suggestions would make psychiatry sicker than it already is.

Close up of a stethoscope held to a computer, with a red diagnostic glowing out from it

“During the last 10 years, a special focus on non-psychotic mental disorders such as stress, anxiety and depression has resulted in a marked increase in the number of psychiatric patients. It can represent serious illness, but unfortunately the economy has not kept pace with the developments … From 2009 to 2017, the number of patients in psychiatric treatment has increased from 110,000 to 151,000.”

There is no information about overdiagnosis, although it plays a major role for the growing number of people receiving a psychiatric diagnosis. The criteria for making a diagnosis are so broad that many healthy people, probably the vast majority, could get a diagnosis if they were examined for some of the many diagnoses, psychiatry operates with. This is also my experience when ask course participants to try just three different diagnostic tests on themselves.

“Literally speaking, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and psychoses related to substance abuse tear the mind apart and deprive people of the ability to be with others and to manage on their own. Yet, too many seriously mentally ill people are left to fend for themselves in a starving psychiatric system with too few resources for the too many patients. They live significantly shorter lives than average … Some present a danger to others. Several are at risk for themselves. This is reflected in the high number of suicides and in the number of forensic psychiatric patients, i.e. mentally ill sentenced to treatment, which tripled in the period 2001 to 2014.”

The leaflet does not say that one of the main reasons why seriously ill patients live substantially shorter lives than others is the treatment the psychiatrists provide to them, often against their will. In addition, psychiatrists often deprive patients of their hope of getting well, for example when they say that medical treatment must be lifelong. The high number of suicides is partly because depression pills increase the risk of suicide, both in children and adults.

In a register study of 2,429 suicides, Danish psychiatrists showed that admission to a psychiatric ward increases the risk of suicide for psychiatric patients 44 times. Of course, one would expect patients admitted to hospital to be at greater risk of suicide than others, but the results were robust, and most potential biases in the study actually supported the hypothesis that hospital contact is harmful. An accompanying editorial noted that there is little doubt that suicide is related to both stigma and trauma, and that it is entirely plausible that the stigma and trauma inherent in psychiatric treatment—particularly if involuntary—might cause suicide. The authors believed that some of the people who commit suicide during or after an admission to hospital do so because of the conditions inherent in that hospitalisation.

The tripling of forensic psychiatric patients could be because far too many receive a treatment sentence. This has been heavily criticized in the public debate, but the psychiatrists do not write anything about that either.

The psychiatrists claim that “74 percent of the forensic psychiatric patients have received inadequate psychiatric treatment in the period before they committed the crime. Some of the crime, which affects completely innocent people, could thus have been avoided with better treatment.”

These conclusions are based on false premises, and they are not valid. In contemporary psychiatry, inadequate treatment means inadequate medical treatment. But there are no psychotropic drugs that can prevent crime unless you render the patients totally passive with excessive doses of psychosis pills, which they call becoming a zombie. It is well-documented that psychotropic drugs increase the risk of violence. That which in the eyes of psychiatrists is “better treatment” will therefore likely increase crime.

“[We] doctors are forced to discharge seriously ill patients who have not been adequately treated more than 25,000 times a year because new patients arrive at the clinics. Among other things, this is expressed in the towering readmission rates when the ‘revolving door patients’ come again and again in the hope of adequate treatment.”

There are two main reasons why patients come back, but the psychiatrists do not mention them. One is that depression pills and psychosis pills have such a small effect that it is less than the minimal clinically relevant effect, which the psychiatrists themselves have demonstrated. The other is that patients often do not like the drugs due to their harms, and if they stop abruptly or taper too quickly, they may get abstinence symptoms, also called withdrawal symptoms, which make them even worse. These symptoms often resemble psychiatric disorders, and then it is not at all strange that the patients come again. It would lead to far better long-term results and fewer revolving door patients if one opted for psychotherapy and other psychosocial interventions instead of medication.

“The diagnosis is clear: Psychiatry is sick. Very sick. Unfortunately, a deficient symptom treatment is the only treatment that psychiatry has received in the last many years. This cannot continue. Psychiatry needs a long-term political treatment plan. A treatment plan that strengthens psychiatry and the efforts for the people and families affected by mental illness. A treatment plan that ensures proper and dignified treatment for all who need it. A treatment plan that makes psychiatry healthy.”

Sure, psychiatry is very ill, but it’s the psychiatrists’ own fault, and the solution is not more of the same, which would only make matters worse. In all countries where this relationship has been studied, there is a clear correlation between how much the population is treated with psychotropic drugs and the allocation of disability pensions because of psychiatric disorders. Medicine makes it hard for people to function. How difficult can it be? The deficient symptom treatment that the psychiatrists are talking about does not apply to psychiatry, but it is precisely the kind of treatment that the psychiatrists give the patients!

“The number of psychiatric beds must be markedly increased. Seriously mentally ill people must be able to be admitted and remain hospitalized when their illness requires it, and the readmission rate in the most strained sections must be reduced. As several pilot projects have shown, more beds and more staff may reduce the use of coercion and may reduce the use of psychotropic drugs for the individual. It will cause fewer side effects and thus a more effective treatment in the long run.”

More beds may well reduce the use of coercion and medication, but it is especially important that there are enough beds that the patients can administer themselves. They may need a little rest and relief during an acute period of stress, which may prevent the condition from developing into a psychosis. A Swedish psychiatrist wrote about this: “Being treated humanely is difficult in today’s psychiatry. If you panic and seek out a psychiatric emergency room, you will probably be told that you need medication, and if you reject it and say you just need rest to gather yourself, you may be told that the department is not a hotel.”

“The capacity for outpatient treatment must be significantly increased.”

The result of this depends entirely on whether it just becomes more of the same, or a completely different psychiatry where the emphasis is on psychotherapy and other psychosocial interventions. That will hardly be the case because the outpatient clinics are run by psychiatrists.

“The waiting time for housing offers must be significantly reduced, and the quality must be increased. The waiting time can exceed 12 months for a housing offer where the seriously mentally ill in need of daily support and help are left to fend for themselves. No one with a serious mental illness should be discharged into the streets.”

You can only agree with that. But the efforts at the housing facilities must change radically. Many residents are unable to function because they are on too much medication.

“Treatment courses for the mentally ill must be based on the individual patient’s difficulties and resources. Significant individual differences in disease courses and needs make treatment packages and treatment guarantees ineffective. ”

Yes, to a great extent. Treatment guarantees can be useful if you have broken a leg or had a blood clot and need to be treated and rehabilitated without undue delay. But mental disorders are so individual that they are not at all suitable for treatment packages.

On 15 November 2016, I was invited to a meeting in Parliament, “Hearing about children without pills,” which was introduced as follows: “More and more children end up in psychiatry. That is right for some children, but many could have been helped much better earlier and with other efforts. We will jointly develop recommendations for this.” The child and adolescent psychiatrists agreed that treatment packages are completely unsuitable. It is incredibly important to prevent an incipient mental illness from developing into something much worse, and some children need a far greater effort than others. It could save a lot of money, also for early retirement later, if resources were provided to give these children the support they need, which is not drugs, but psychosocial interventions.

“The national guidelines for the treatment of severe psychotic diseases and depression need to be updated … National guidelines will strengthen both patient rights, patient safety and the quality of treatment in psychiatry.”

The most important issues in relation to patient rights, patient safety and the quality of treatment are not mentioned. Denmark has ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which stipulates that mentally ill patients must not be discriminated against: “States parties must abolish policies and legislative provisions that allow or perpetrate forced treatment, as it is an ongoing violation found in mental health laws across the globe, despite empirical evidence indicating its lack of effectiveness and the views of people using mental health systems who have experienced deep pain and trauma as a result of forced treatment.”

It is also not mentioned that benzodiazepines (sleeping pills or sedatives) in randomized trials have shown better effect than psychosis pills in acute psychosis. In 14 trials that had compared them, the desired sedation occurred significantly more often on benzodiazepines, and almost all patients report that they prefer to get a benzodiazepine if they should become acutely psychotic again. However, the psychiatrists do not respect the patients’ wishes. Via the Freedom of Access Act, we got access to documents in 30 consecutive cases where patients had complained about the forced medication to the National Board of Appeal. We showed that the law had been violated in every single case.

“Specifically, the Danish Psychiatric Association recommends that psychiatry should be evaluated based on:

      • Life expectancy for patients corresponding to the rest of the population.
      • Retention in education or in the labour market.
      • Decrease in number of suicides.
      • Decrease in use of coercion.
      • Decrease in number of forensic psychiatric patients.
      • Decrease in number of mentally ill homeless people.
      • Decrease in use of police resources for psychiatric patients.
      • Strengthening the clinical databases.”

These are really good effect measures. If used on contemporary psychiatry, you will have to conclude that it does not work but makes matters worse for the patients due to the excessive use of medication and coercion.

“Psychiatry must become a more prominent part of basic medical education. The number of teaching weeks in psychiatry must be increased substantially … A better understanding among doctors in general of psychiatric diseases will also contribute to increasing the life expectancy of psychiatric patients.”

Under the current psychiatric paradigm, this is not correct. It will lead to even more psychiatric diagnoses for people who have difficulty sleeping, family problems, sweetheart troubles, stress, are irritating (also called ADHD), or who just have a temporary low in life; and it will lead to even more use of medication that will lead to even more lost life years and lost good life years for psychiatric patients. I have estimated, based on the most reliable research I could find, which were randomized trials and good cohort studies with a control group that did not receive psychiatric drugs, that psychiatric drugs are the third most common cause of death, after heart disease and cancer. It may not be quite as bad, but there is no doubt that psychiatric drugs are a very common cause of death.

The basic medical education must therefore be changed radically, with far greater emphasis on psychosocial interventions in psychiatry. Psychiatric drugs should only be used in acute situations, only with the patient’s acceptance, and only with a plan for subsequent slow phasing out.

“More public research in psychiatry.”

That is a good idea. It is well-documented that we cannot trust at all the industry-sponsored trials of psychiatric drugs. They are deliberately flawed by design, which gives a false idea of ​​what the drugs can accomplish and what the harmful effects are. Moreover, more than half of the deaths and half of the suicides in psychiatric drug trials have been omitted from the published articles. The psychiatrists therefore do not know how dangerous and ineffective psychiatric drugs actually are. But the population knows this. A survey of 2,031 Australians showed that people thought that depression pills, psychosis pills, electroshock and admission to a psychiatric ward were more often harmful than beneficial. The social psychiatrists who had done the survey were dissatisfied with the answers and argued that people should be trained to arrive at the “right opinion.”

Since the perceptions of the population agree with what the most reliable part of the research literature shows, it is time for psychiatrists to be educated by teachers who know what they are talking about so that they can be cured for their many misconceptions, which are so harmful to their patients. The leaflet from the Danish Psychiatric Association can be summarized with these words: “Send more money.” But it is not a good idea to get more of the same.

Psychiatry must be changed radically. And psychiatrists need to listen to the patients and the rest of the population and take what they say seriously. This would not only benefit the patients but also provide greater job satisfaction for the psychiatrists.

***

Mad in America hosts blogs by a diverse group of writers. These posts are designed to serve as a public forum for a discussion—broadly speaking—of psychiatry and its treatments. The opinions expressed are the writers’ own.

37 COMMENTS

  1. Peter, Your Concerns are Realistic.

    Psychiatric Disability
    The Psychiatric Disability figures in the UK demonstrate an increase in Disability with an increase in Antidepressant usage.

    Psychosis
    Psychosis has increased with the increase in Antidepressants, as people graduate from being Depressed to being BiPolar.

    Forced Treatment/Death
    https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/better-without-antipsychotic-drugs
    1982
    “….For example, a study published in 1982 reported that when a group of patients with schizophrenia were each given 20 mg of fluphenazine, the difference between the highest and lowest blood level of the drug was 40-fold.
    ….”

    1983
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6886035/
    Suicide associated with akathisia and depot fluphenazine treatment
    M K Shear Allen Frances P Weiden J Clin Psychopharmacol. 1983 Aug.

    AKATHISIA
    https://rxisk.org/akathisia-depression-suicide-the-list/
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akathisia
    https://rxisk.org/akathisia/

    2013
    Fluphenazine Discontinued
    https://www.madinamerica.com/2013/07/haloperidol-in-neurotoxic/
    “…The only generic LAI on the market is haloperidol (mysteriously, fluphenazine decanoate recently went out of production). ..”

    The Control Drug Fluphenazine killed more ‘Psychiatric Patients’ than Hitler.

    • The Nazis murdered between 100 000–137 500 of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia between 1934 and 1945, as estimated in this article http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2800142/. Many of these people were murdered in gas chambers. The number of the victims must be much higher than the authors believe if we take into account all the countries and territories under the Nazi occupation.

      The article “Suicide associated with akathisia and depot fluphenazine treatment” does not say how many suicides may be associated to fluphenazine treatment. And even if we had such statistics, I certainly don’t think that we should compare deaths by suicide associated with fluphenazine to the deaths of psychiatric patients exterminated by the Nazis. The latter had absolutely no way of escaping their horrible death.

      • Dear Joanna

        I am aware that what I have said is shocking.

        I attempted suicide twice on Fluphenazine, and if I was exposed to this Drug again I could easily attempt suicide again. I had never attempted suicide before or since.

        When I moved to the UK in 1986 I wrote to doctors at Ireland asking them to send warning to doctors at the UK concerning my Adverse Drug Reactions.

        Doctors that had cared for me in Ireland deliberately WITHELD the Requested Adverse Drug Reaction Warning and negatively distorted the Account of me, sent to the UK.

        I have copies of both my 1986 ADR Warning Request Letter and the 1986 Record Summary Sent to the UK in Response. I also have a friendly letter from one particular doctor guaranteeing me that my request had been dealt with.

        Their Behaviour was as Psychopathic as Hitlers Doctors. I believe the Fluphenazine killings would also have been well in excess of 137,500 Deaths.

        • Dear Joanna

          (I am aware that what I have said might be frightening. My UK GP was distressed).

          Copies of the Original Documentary Evidence I mentioned from 1986 (from my Records), can be found in the Email (Copy) Below:-
          “…
          From: ME

          To: Medical Newton (NHS CENTRAL LONDON (WESTMINSTER) CCG)

          Sent: Friday, 16 November 2018, 00:42:07 GMT
          Subject: Att. All Partners and Dr Baluch

          Dear Sirs/(Madams)

          In your Letter dated October 17 2018 – you seriously misrepresent me.

          TRUST
          My trust in Newton Medical was broken in October of 2012 when (to my horror) I discovered my name had been on a Severe Mental Illness Register since 2002. At this time (2002) I had been working as a Building Subcontractor in the House of Parliament Buildings (and can substantiate this).

          OCTOBER 8 2018 VISIT TO NEWTON MEDICAL. REGARDING HEALTH AND SAFETY ON BUILDING SITES
          On October 8 2018 I explained (and showed ) to the Reception Manager and to Dr Baluch at Newton Medical, that at my last appointment on July 20 2016 Dr Simons had given me in writing a sheet of paper from the Appointment Notes stating that – “he could see no reason that I could NOT work on a Building Site” . While at the same time Dr Simons had provided me with another sheet of paper from a “Legal Adviser” (July 20 2016)

          https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s-mEHH5pLC5EzWpxjnOLKcylQOTJ-Kvw/view?usp=drivesdk

          (which made reference to the historical 1986 Irish Record Summary) but also at the the bottom of the page stated – that I had a “Diagnosis of Schizophrenia…” and “had NOT DISPUTED this diagnosis..”.

          I explained on October 8 2018 that I had shown and discussed both of these contradictory statements received in July 20 2016 with a Building Health and Safety Officer who advised me to get this contradictory situation resolved – as the medical suggestions could undermine my credibility, and could affect me in the event of an accident on a Building Site.

          I have not suffered any disability in my 30 years in the UK; but Medical Claims of Present day Severe Mental Illness are invalidating. I presumed Newton Medical (promoting the disability) to be the first place to approach – this is why I called to the Surgery on October 8 2018.

          DISTRESS
          When I clearly demonstrated the Malpractice properties of the 1986 Irish Record Summary to Dr Simons in two interviews in October/November 2012 – at the end of both of these interviews Dr Simons shirt was completely saturated and sticking to his body (he was genuinely traumatised).
          But, there is no mention anywhere on my records of this Malpractice.

          MY BACKGROUND
          I made Full Recovery in 1984 as a Result of carefully tapering from the Modecate Depot Injection with the help of Practical Psychotherapy – and returned to normal life and independence.

          Recovered 1
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PW-wn9GOkiyWAbdzgXuC8cDS-7UPEj0-/view?usp=drivesdk

          Recovered 2
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/19xYpA4O4h9h45b_H2PtSBTNFx3ErE-MK/view?usp=drivesdk

          Adverse Drug Reaction Warning Request Letter sent to Galway Nov. 8 1986

          ADR Request ltr Pg 1
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAZlVTbHdBRDFFSHc/view?usp=drivesdk

          ADR Request ltr Pg 2
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAZ0otNjFyN0NJajA/view?usp=drivesdk

          ADR Request Ltr Pg 3
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAcExwMzhEMVRzdm8/view?usp=drivesdk

          MALPRACTICE:
          The Irish Record Summary dated November 24 1986 was Sent To UK In Response:- but WITHOUT Requested ADR WARNING

          Irish Record Summary Pg 1
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBATlNoNTlpYy11X28/view?usp=drivesdk

          Irish Record Summary Pg 2
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAMmlqS18xQVZlcms/view?usp=drivesdk

          Wellness Presentation at Galway in November 1980, according to Dr Fadel https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBANjBTZEtkbjBhMkU/view?usp=drivesdk

          Dr Donlon Kenny False Reasurrance Letter November 1986
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAeUFLam5rYmtXd3c/view?usp=drivesdk

          AKATHISIA.
          Near Fatal Modecate Experience 1. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EY4XDLt04KgmCjg_5wXU-kbVezo_DxL4/view?usp=drivesdk

          Near Fatal Modecate Experience Pg 2
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YTWxPJTtNeTDM9eewkHoSUJr0WpBpu4b/view?usp=drivesdk

          Dr Allen Frances (DSM IV) 1983 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/16313058_Suicide_Associated_with_Akathisia_and_Depot_Fluphenazine_Treatment

          https://rxisk.org/akathisia/

          “…Significant symptoms of akathisia occur in:

          around 20% of people on an antidepressant.

          at least 50% of people on an antipsychotic. On higher doses, this rises to 80% or more..”

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

          “..Around half of people on antipsychotics develop the condition…”

          “…..Neuro-psychologist Dennis Staker had drug-induced akathisia for two days. His description of his experience was this:

          “..It was the worst feeling I have ever had in my entire life. I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy…” ”

          Drug induced Akathisia is medically acknowledged to cause suicide.

          “Depot Antipsychotic Revisited Research Paper 1998” From Galway Psychiatrist Dr PA Carney.

          https://ps.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/ps.49.10.1361-b.

          About 4 out of 10 of the people on these drugs will attempt Suicide.

          I notice that both Dr Simon Gordon and Dr Balucha are on the GP Commissioning Governing Board.

          Yours Sincerely
          ME
          …..”

          From: Xxxxxxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxxxxx

          To: Medical Newton (NHS CENTRAL LONDON (WESTMINSTER) CCG)

          Sent: Friday, 16 November 2018, 00:42:07 GMT
          Subject: Att. All Partners and Dr Baluch

          Dear Sirs/(Madams)

          In your Letter dated October 17 2018 – you seriously misrepresent me.

          TRUST
          My trust in Newton Medical was broken in October of 2012 when (to my horror) I discovered my name had been on a Severe Mental Illness Register since 2002. At this time (2002) I had been working as a Building Subcontractor in the House of Parliament Buildings (and can substantiate this).

          OCTOBER 8 2018 VISIT TO NEWTON MEDICAL. REGARDING HEALTH AND SAFETY ON BUILDING SITES
          On October 8 2018 I explained (and showed ) to the Reception Manager and to Dr Baluch at Newton Medical, that at my last appointment on July 20 2016 Dr Simons had given me in writing a sheet of paper from the Appointment Notes stating that – “he could see no reason that I could NOT work on a Building Site” . While at the same time Dr Simons had provided me with another sheet of paper from a “Legal Adviser” (July 20 2016)

          https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s-mEHH5pLC5EzWpxjnOLKcylQOTJ-Kvw/view?usp=drivesdk

          (which made reference to the historical 1986 Irish Record Summary) but also at the the bottom of the page stated – that I had a “Diagnosis of Schizophrenia…” and “had NOT DISPUTED this diagnosis..”.

          I explained on October 8 2018 that I had shown and discussed both of these contradictory statements received in July 20 2016 with a Building Health and Safety Officer who advised me to get this contradictory situation resolved – as the medical suggestions could undermine my credibility, and could affect me in the event of an accident on a Building Site.

          I have not suffered any disability in my 30 years in the UK; but Medical Claims of Present day Severe Mental Illness are invalidating. I presumed Newton Medical (promoting the disability) to be the first place to approach – this is why I called to the Surgery on October 8 2018.

          DISTRESS
          When I clearly demonstrated the Malpractice properties of the 1986 Irish Record Summary to Dr Simons in two interviews in October/November 2012 – at the end of both of these interviews Dr Simons shirt was completely saturated and sticking to his body (he was genuinely traumatised).
          But, there is no mention anywhere on my records of this Malpractice.

          MY BACKGROUND
          I made Full Recovery in 1984 as a Result of carefully tapering from the Modecate Depot Injection with the help of Practical Psychotherapy – and returned to normal life and independence.

          Recovered 1
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PW-wn9GOkiyWAbdzgXuC8cDS-7UPEj0-/view?usp=drivesdk

          Recovered 2
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/19xYpA4O4h9h45b_H2PtSBTNFx3ErE-MK/view?usp=drivesdk

          Adverse Drug Reaction Warning Request Letter sent to Galway Nov. 8 1986

          ADR Request ltr Pg 1
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAZlVTbHdBRDFFSHc/view?usp=drivesdk

          ADR Request ltr Pg 2
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAZ0otNjFyN0NJajA/view?usp=drivesdk

          ADR Request Ltr Pg 3
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAcExwMzhEMVRzdm8/view?usp=drivesdk

          MALPRACTICE:
          The Irish Record Summary dated November 24 1986 was Sent To UK In Response:- but WITHOUT Requested ADR WARNING

          Irish Record Summary Pg 1
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBATlNoNTlpYy11X28/view?usp=drivesdk

          Irish Record Summary Pg 2
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAMmlqS18xQVZlcms/view?usp=drivesdk

          Wellness Presentation at Galway in November 1980, according to Dr Fadel https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBANjBTZEtkbjBhMkU/view?usp=drivesdk

          Dr Donlon Kenny False Reasurrance Letter November 1986
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zhbh8V4MBAeUFLam5rYmtXd3c/view?usp=drivesdk

          AKATHISIA.
          Near Fatal Modecate Experience 1. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EY4XDLt04KgmCjg_5wXU-kbVezo_DxL4/view?usp=drivesdk

          Near Fatal Modecate Experience Pg 2
          https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YTWxPJTtNeTDM9eewkHoSUJr0WpBpu4b/view?usp=drivesdk

          Dr Allen Frances (DSM IV) 1983 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/16313058_Suicide_Associated_with_Akathisia_and_Depot_Fluphenazine_Treatment

          https://rxisk.org/akathisia/

          “…Significant symptoms of akathisia occur in:

          around 20% of people on an antidepressant.

          at least 50% of people on an antipsychotic. On higher doses, this rises to 80% or more..”

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

          “..Around half of people on antipsychotics develop the condition…”

          “…..Neuro-psychologist Dennis Staker had drug-induced akathisia for two days. His description of his experience was this:

          “..It was the worst feeling I have ever had in my entire life. I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy…” ”

          Drug induced Akathisia is medically acknowledged to cause suicide.

          “Depot Antipsychotic Revisited Research Paper 1998” From Galway Psychiatrist Dr PA Carney.

          https://ps.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/ps.49.10.1361-b.

          About 4 out of 10 of the people on these drugs will attempt Suicide.

          I notice that both Dr Simon Gordon and Dr Balucha are on the GP Commissioning Governing Board.

          Yours Sincerely

          Xxxxxxxxxxxxx

          • Dear Fiachra, thank you for your reply. I want to make it clear that I know very well what akathisia is – I suffered from horrible akathisia myself when I was on neuroleptics.

            I was not frightened or distressed by your comment. I simply think that we can’t compare planned extermination to being prescribed a drug associated with suicidal thoughts and attempts in some people.

            I don’t think that psychiatrists who prescribe akathisia-inducing drugs want their patients to take their own lives. In fact, plenty of patients are prescribed akathisia-inducing drugs, but only some of them attempt suicide or die by suicide.

            To me, akathisia was horrible, but it was definitely not the worst thing in my case. The worst thing was the feeling of hopelessness caused by my “schizophrenia” diagnosis. If I had attempted suicide while on neuroleptics, a researcher might have wrongly concluded that the drug-induced akathisia was the cause of my suicide attempt.

            You say that “about 4 out of 10 of the people on these drugs will attempt suicide.” I don’t know where this number comes from (it does not come from the “Depot Antipsychotic Drugs Revisited” paper).

            This number seems much too high. Anyway, the fact that a person attempts suicide while using an akathisia-inducing drug does not prove that the akathisia is the *only* cause of such a suicide attempt, or that akathisia is *always* or *usually* linked with suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts.

          • Someone Else, only some people experience psychosis on psychiatric drugs. Importantly, there are also other drugs which may trigger psychotic symptoms in some people. My psychotic episode actually began when I was using an anti-malaria drug.

            Psychiatric drugs definitely have many harmful effects – I am not defending these drugs. But doctors don’t prescribe them in order to kill their patients. In Nazi Germany psychiatrists were literally sending patients to gas chambers.

            Let’s not forget that only some psychiatric patients are forcibly treated with psychiatric drugs. Countless other patients take them willingly. Some people even get angry if someone says something critical about the psychiatric drugs they are using!

            Psychiatrists are often much too dismissive about the negative effects of psychiatric drugs, but it is not the same as exterminating people. Today’s psychiatrists don’t intend to kill their patients – in fact, a patient who is alive for many decades and dutifully taking his/her medication(s) is much more useful to psychiatrists and to Big Pharma than a patient who is dead!

            Prescribing drugs with harmful effects is not the same as intentionally killing people. There is a crucial difference between a psychiatrist who is convinced that his/her patient needs a psychiatric drug and a psychiatrist who thinks that his/her patient should be killed in order to reduce public expenditure.

            Psychiatric patients diagnosed with schizophrenia tend to have shorter lives than the rest of the population, but neuroleptics are not the only cause. As an example, some of these patients die from lung cancer caused by smoking (unfortunately, for some reason patients diagnosed with severe mental illness are very often heavy smokers).

          • I understand that since cigarettes increase dopamine, and the antipsychotics massively decrease dopamine, many antipsychotic users (forced or voluntary) smoke in order to reduce the side effects of the antipsychotics. Many probably don’t even know that’s why they do it, they just feel better when they smoke. So ironically, the psychiatric industry wants to blame shortened lifespans in the “severely mentally ill” on “lifestyle issues” like smoking, while the drugs used to “treat” these “disorders” in fact dramatically INCREASE the rate of smoking among the “treated!”

          • Steve, yes, I have also read that smoking lowers the level of neuroleptics in the blood. I am sure that this could partially explain why so many patients in mental hospitals and so many people labelled with “schizophrenia” are heavy smokers.

            I agree with you that the psychiatric industry does not take it into account – as you said, it is generally trying to blame the shortened lifespans on people’s “lifestyle”.

            At the same time, I don’t think that we can safely conclude that many people diagnosed with severe mental illness smoke because of neuroleptics. Poor people are more likely to smoke. Smoking is one of the few pleasures available to the poor, and it is also more difficult to get help in quitting smoking when one is poor.

            In one of my comments I mentioned a man who was diagnosed with “schizophrenia” and a heavy smoker and who died from lung cancer. One of the sisters of this man – who did not have any psychiatric diagnosis – was a heavy smoker, too, and also died from lung cancer.

            The thing they both had in common was poverty and maybe also childhood trauma (they lost their parents at quite a young age).

            If we say that neuroleptics cause people labelled with severe mental illness to smoke, this will be too simplistic. Neuroleptics definitely play a role here, but there also other factors, including poverty and stress. There are people on neuroleptics who never start smoking.

            Of course various lifestyle factors shortening the lives of people labelled with severe mental illness are closely linked to their situation. People who are poor and stigmatized are much more likely to do things which harm their health, including drinking, being physically inactive, eating junk food etc.

          • I am saying it is a contributing factor, and that at least SOME of the high rates of smoking among those diagnosed “schizophrenic” are due to the “treatment.” I’m also pointing out the irony of the psychiatric industry using “treatments” that are known to reduce lifespan, and yet trying to blame it on habits that their own drugs actually encourage/reinforce.

            But you’re right, poverty, discrimination, and trauma are related to “poor lifestyle choices” AND to being swept up by the psychiatric industry as a “patient.” It is a very complex system. But a part of that system is a “treatment program” that doesn’t actually work in the long run in many if not most cases, and which can create or exacerbate the exact “symptoms” they claim to “treat.” And meanwhile reducing people’s quality of life and life expectancy, while trying to deny this is true.

        • Dear Fiachra, I know that you feel that Fluphenazine caused your suicide attempts. I also understand why you describe your psychiatrists as psychopathic.

          However, Nazi psychiatrists aimed to literally exterminate psychiatric patients. Nazi psychiatrists saw the lives of these patients as worthless, “unworthy of life”.

          These people were murdered in cold blood, on a mass scale, just like Jews. This was a planned and well-organized extermination programme. Psychiatrists and psychiatric nurses were actually personally participating in this much too little known programme.

          Psychiatrists who prescribe Fluphenazine are not doing it in order to exterminate their patients. Only some people take their own life while using Fluphenazine. And it is impossible to say that Fluphenazine is the cause of such suicides. There are no data which would allow us to make this claim.

          Even if it were possible to prove that Fluphenazine (or another psychiatric drug) is the only cause of some suicides, it would be impossible to compare it to the planned extermination of psychiatric patients by the Nazis.

          You say that you believe that “the Fluphenazine killings would also have been well in excess of 137,500 Deaths.”

          First of all, suicides associated with Fluphenazine use can’t be called killings. There is a proven link between alcohol use and suicide, but somehow no one calls suicides associated with alcohol use “alcohol killings”.

          Secondly, we simply can’t compare planned extermination with suicides associated with the use of a psychiatric drug. Suicide is always a person’s decision. It is not the same as being murdered in cold blood.

          If we put on the same level the suicides of people who were taking psychiatric drugs and the deaths of people murdered by the Nazis, we will disrespect the memory of the victims of the Nazi extermination programme.

          • “we simply can’t compare planned extermination with suicides associated with the use of a psychiatric drug.”

            But, Joanna, we can say all medical students – including the psychiatrists – are all taught in med school that both the antidepressants and antipsychotics are anticholinergic drugs. And they’re also taught that the anticholinergic drugs can can create “psychosis,” via anticholinergic toxidrome.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxidrome

            And it’s now widely known that the antidepressants can create both “mania” and suicidal ideation.

            And I would imagine all the doctors are also taught about neuroleptic induced deficit syndrome in med school? Or at least, since I can research and find information about it, so can they.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroleptic-induced_deficit_syndrome

            So how can you say today’s “psychiatric holocaust” – of apparently millions annually, worldwide. And the medical confessions – by the former head of the NIMH, and the head of the DSM3 and DSM4 – confessions of which are being deleted from the internet, are not part of a “planned extermination?”

            Many thanks, Peter, for your continued truth telling. And I agree, “Psychiatry must be changed radically. And psychiatrists need to listen to the patients and the rest of the population and take what they say seriously. This would not only benefit the patients but also provide greater job satisfaction for the psychiatrists.”

            – A message from an innocent mom, who dealt with the insanity of the psychological and psychiatric industries because – according to medical records eventually handed over by decent nurses – I had an insanely paranoid and dangerous PCP, who wanted me murdered to cover up her husband’s “bad fix” on a broken bone of mine, and criminal “mental health workers,” who wanted to cover up the medical evidence of the abuse of my child, for my former religion – and these are systemic problems.

            https://books.google.com/books?id=xI01AlxH1uAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_
            r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
            https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2019/01/23/18820633.php?fbclid=IwAR2-cgZPcEvbz7yFqMuUwneIuaqGleGiOzackY4N2sPeVXolwmEga5iKxdo
            https://www.madinamerica.com/2016/04/heal-for-life/

            Which were not so obvious problems, initially – to one who previously knew nothing about these systemic crimes of “the two original educated professions.”

            But we can probably “compare planned extermination” motives, with the motives of doctors who wanted to proactively prevent legitimate malpractice suits, and the pastors who wanted to cover up child abuse. Since those might actually be legitimate reasons for the mainstream doctors and pastors to buy into the scientific fraud based DSM deluded “mental health” belief system, so they may help to “exterminate” innocent people, for such nefarious reasons.

          • Someone Else, you mention a doctor who – as you believe – wanted to murder you. But you also say that this doctor wanted to cover up her husband’s malpractice. We can’t compare it with planned extermination of hundreds of thousands of people.

    • In this thread the comment “The Control Drug Fluphenazine killed (kills) more ‘Psychiatric Patients’ than Hitler” is disputed by Joanna Badura.
      The increased mortality rate/shorter life of the mentally ill is known and yet is ignored, does back this claim up.

      The math of millions of people on the drugs (all psychiatric drugs) does prove that the slow euthanasia has a higher death toll(total) than the five years of Hitlers rule. There was a YouTube video of professionals discussing the math of millions killed, but I can’t find it at the moment. (and this comment might not be printed if I put the link in.)

      “Formerly, when religion was strong and science weak, men mistook magic for medicine; now, when science is strong and religion weak, men mistake medicine for magic.” Szasz.

      Billion dollars a year are being made by Pharma company and the deaths are written off as natural causes, because both doctors prescribe the drugs and doctors analyze the cause of deaths.

      Planned VS unplanned doesn’t matter does it?

      The planet warming too fast for species to cope and world ecosystem failing will shortly bring an end to the matter.

  2. I as diagnozed with bipolar disorder and with a “career” of 22 years with Carbamazepine I would like to ask: What if
    What if I leave my secured path?
    What if I hope for a better life after careful withdrawal of my med but it happens something that crashes my stability? Stress at work for example.
    What if I believe in all these critical good sounding articles but my withdrawal shows how instable I am?

    In short: I was diagnozed when I was 22, that for surehad to do with substance use.
    At first I did not accept Lithium therapy. But later in life at the age of 34 when I started a family I went back to my psychiatrist and started Carbamazepine – 400mg most of the time since.

    • Anna, I am going to use the word “you” but I am throwing it out there for it to mean “you” as in “you anyone”, or “you folks who might be considering withdrawing”.
      I am not a professional medical advisor. I am just a layperson.

      People withdrawing ask “what if”. So begin there. You maybe need a “what if” therapist to hold your hand over the worst of withdrawal. Though if you are not wanting that then may I suggest you get a recording device such as an old tape deck or just use your computer to record your “diary” of quitting meds. All you do is talk to the “therapist of the device”. You speak to it each morning and afternoon and evening. For ten minutes. You tell it how worried you are. You cry and vent your frustration. You give a list to it of all your days “what ifs”……

      “what if I dont cope?”
      “what if I go crazy on a lower dose?
      “what if I shout at my family?”
      “what if I suddenly go back on pills?”
      “what if the feeling in my stomach gets worse?”
      “what if I hallucinate?”
      “what if I think I am okay but I am not?”
      “what if Ive been on pills too long?”
      “what if the panic about what ifs doesnt stop?”
      “what if asking what if is a sign its not working?”
      “what if constant what ifs are dangerous?”
      “what if nobody but me thinks of a million terrifying what ifs all day?”
      “what if the sky is falling in and my withdrawals are stopping me from seeing that?”

      Withdrawals bring on a plague of inner “what ifs”. They do so because the lack of sedation opens you to experiencing you natural flight or fight hormones, adrenalin, cortisol and so on. These hormones are your friends because they protect you from forest creatures like our ancestors needed protective warnings from. So fear is your friend. Its just sedation for many years has made you a stranger to the natural awakening bursts of anxiety from such hormones. The hormones are prime “what if” hormones. Their job is to make your mind worry about the ancestral forest or cave man dangers humans used to endure. The friendly fear hormones are like body guards accompanying you to keep you safe. But since they have only just awoken via your quitting pills, they are out of shape and may over react and this may cause your stomach to over react with butterflies of anxiety or rage. Fear or fight. Your thinking mind may then try to ascribe a rational reason for why you feel a burst of fear. So you mind goes on a search of all you have in your environment
      and so your mind says….
      “oh, the fear must be because the shop owner upset me over the price of a tin of chickpeas”.
      But then your mind, still experiencing vague fear adds a bit of worry by saying…
      “what if the shop owner deliberately argued with me?”
      “what if he is not the only one?”
      “what if everyone is arguing with me?”
      “what if it is because I like hip hop music?”
      “what if I am alone in my love of hip hop music?”
      “what if its out of fashion?”
      “what if I will never feel a sense of belonging?”
      “what if…what if…what if?”

      And those mind based “what ifs” then wake up the bodyguards that are your friendly fear hormones, who give you a burst of anxiety just incase what your mind says turns out to be a problem like a sabre tooth tiger you have to run from.
      So the mind’s “what ifs” bump up against the sleeping hormones that set of the alarm system in your nervous system.

      So during withdrawl it is useful to know this much. So that you can vent and release a tirade of “what ifs” into a tape recorder, if a therapist is not available. Venting “what ifs” often leaves you confident and laughing, since most “what ifs” are terrifying fantasies not based in dull practical reality. For some reason speaking a long list of “what ifs” out loud is the best way to sooth them. Even if it is just your own voice in an empty room. You do it like you leave a message on an answerphone. If you have ever spoken to a machine that way then you should find it simple.

      When I withdrew I realised that all my “what ifs” were a problem made worse by the normal return of naturally regulated hormones like adrenalin and cortisol in the morning. My mornings and afternoons were worse. Evenings felt calmer. So I used to just know that I had to pay for my calm evening by a enduring a few panics in the morning, every day for a few months. Its not easy but it is possible. However. I think anyone withdrawing should do their own research and only withdraw under medical agreement from their own doctor. I am not a doctor. All my above words are just meant to be accepted as hypothetical notions of what I might say to someone like you. I am not advising “you”. I am using the term “you” generally. As in the word “one” or “anyone” or “people on the whole”.

      Anna, just continue to only listen to your own professional care team.

      I will say that the “what ifs” that are a problem can be turned around and put to good use as “what ifs” ABOUT “what ifs”.

      So if your mind says….
      “what if I am going to break down?”
      Your ability to ask “what ifs” can reply….
      “what if you are getting lost in what ifs from the adrenalin burst again, lets see about going for a nice walk?”

      (This was a long reply to Anna but I wont add anymore comments as I am done talking and am going to put my own house in order now)

      • Hi Daiphanous, thank you a lot for your answer. I know it’s me who was about “What if”s. But your writing about anxious feelings hits not really my problem. Sorry if I sound strange here and there, I am not native English. Anyway your answer gave me an idea of how to “activate” an inner “always on” therapist. Good idea. I got a similar hinge in an other talk to someone. Unfortunately I am a people person. I usually need someone listening in order to get my thoughts into words. But I will try to do it the way you are describing.
        I read your other comment beneath that blog article from Christine Burnett. That your said something about this get yourself listen to your own voice. I suppose this is the answer I was looking for since I found these psychiatry critical sites and authors. Who shall help me when I try do do it on my own. When you are so used to be labeled a life long and your life seemed to get better from the time on when you started mood stabilizer then it’s pretty strange to go out of that cage.

        • Anna, you writing is very good and clear.
          Thank you for your reply. I would rather not do any more long comments this week because I have to do a lot of work. But I just want to say that there is an idea called a “double bind”. It is like a tight knot in a string.
          You try to pull the knot one way but it just gets more tight. You try to pull it another way but that way also tightens the knot. A knot can also mean the word “bind” in the english language. A double knot or double bind is just an impossible knot to undo easily. What ever you try brings difficulty. Psychotherapist use the symbol of the “double bind” to show a psychological problem where the client tries to undo the problem one way but that choice has hard consequences. Then the client tries another way but that has hard consequences also. This immobilizes “the ability to make either choice”. The client dreads one choice, but also dreads the opposite choice. You can dread quitting meds because of the hard consequences. But equally you may feel a dread of spending your whole life on meds, since that also may have hard consequences. If you cannot make any choice you end up frustrated by being stuck. You feel stuck in a problem where you feel unsatisfied. The unsatisfaction is because you are unhappy with both choices. The choice to stay on meds feels like an unhappy choice. The choice to withdraw feels like an unhappy choice. No one likes to feel indecisive and stuck and unsatisfied. So a fed up frustration builds and builds.
          In this time maybe go with the flow of accepting your frustration is an honest response to a situation where you feel you cannot win, whatever choice you make. Hard obstacles are on the path of either choice you might make. And it is right that you feel upset about life dealing you this challenge.

          Sometimes a double bind is best sorted by realising that since there is nothing you can do to avoid the hard consequences of either choice, you can make a choice by flipping a coin in the air, and if it lands with one face up make that choice, or if its the other side of the coin make that choice, since you may have to settle for consequences anyway it almost does not matter which choice you make.
          MIA articles can offer good information as to the better choice, but they cannot stop any choice you might make from potentially having hard consequences, such as having to go through the pain of withdrawal.
          But knowing all this can make things easier. It becomes easy because as you venture onto perhaps taking the quitting meds path choice, you are clearer in your mind that the other choice, had you gone that way instead, would have made you just as exhausted, overwhelmed, afraid. And so knowing that can help you stick with your choice rather than wistfully thinking you made a mistake.

          Ultimately withdrawal is only :your choice” to make. No one can choose it for you. And you should not feel pressurized to do what might not work for you.

          Talking into a tape is good for exploring the consequences of each choice.

          I was lucky. I was told by an emergency team in a hospital to immediately cease all medication or die. The choice was made for me. The “double bind” knot was cut with a pair of nursing scissors.

          • Thank you again, Daiphanous!
            In the comments I sometimes read that someone is wise. I think your answer is wise. And it was a long one again. You said your time is short. But your answer is very helpful for me. I know I made my decision some months ago and now I can stay on my way and accept my feelings about its difficulty. Thank you again.

          • Double bind theory was first described by Gregory Bateson and his colleagues in the 1950s,[1] in a theory on the origins of schizophrenia and post-traumatic stress disorder.
            ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bind

            Nope, Gregory Bateson. Dr. Laing may have mentioned double bind a lot but you can’t lay the origin of double bind theory on him.

    • Hi Anna_N,

      I withdrew myself, from the above drug I complained about. It took me a good few years to completely stop taking drugs, but I had comfortably reduced the most troublesome effects fairly quickly.

      I think the best bet is to take it steady and overcome any difficulties as the come up – until moving further.

  3. Abolishing psychiatry will make it healthy. I would say flushing down all the psychiatric drugs down the toilet but that would be more dangerous. In fact, that is how we used to get rid of unused pills until the rates of psychiatric drug prescriptions went up and up and up…. We could take all the psychiatric drugs and put them on a space ship and propel them into space somewhere, but probably someone would find them a century or more later and they would still be useable and they would still be able to harm, damage, maim and kill. So the question remains, what do we do with all these psych drugs? How can we safely dispose of them so that can not harm, damage, maim or kill again? This may be the riddle of the near and far future that both “scientists” and the “general public, etc” will have to “wrestle with…” Thank you.

  4. One thing is overlooked here and that is that these conditions do exist. Psychosis and delusions are experienced by some people without ever coming into contact with psychiatric drugs. Mania does exist for some people. I do not consider these conditions to be illneses in need of treatment by medical means. I do however recognise that these conditons are devastating on a persons life but can be recovered from and you can lead a normal life given the chance.

    Medicalising people turns them into long term patients whereas if we had sanctuary without force then that would be an immense improvement on real care.

    Soteria was one such place.

    Thank you Dr Peter for yet another amazing article and i will be pasting it to my psychiatrist.

    • Bippyone, I definitely agree with you. I experienced psychosis, though I was not using any psychiatric drugs before the psychotic episode. I have recovered, and I am sure I was able to recover because I refused to be a long-term patient. I also agree with you that what we need are sanctuaries without force!

  5. Thankyou Anna for your compliment. I am glad.

    I would add briefly that the double bind comes with a handy catchphrase.

    “Damed if I do, damned if I dont'”.

    Its easy to memorize. It just means a person in a double bind is going to have obstacles in either choice. But frustration is an unbearable consequence on its own. The frustration of doing nothing is insufferable also. But often it is when we quieten down a bit and rest and do nothing for a while that the solution becomes clearer as to the best choice. Im not saying do nothing about being in danger. Some regard drugs as just that danger, so the quicker a person tapers and comes off drugs the better. But the frustration is important. The reason people often hurriedly consume drugs is because they have no tolerance for that state of frustration, which a normal healthy state in life, much as it us uncomfortable. There is NO community support to hold the hands of the burningly frustrated and calm them into “doing nothing”. Instead people are left ashamed and alone in their frustration and their double bind choices, which dont feel like easy choices at all, and all three…
    1. frustration.
    2. choice one.
    3. choice two.
    all add up to a sense of crisis. This crisis propels people to turn to prescription drugs. They want the drugs to soften the awful frustration. They want the drugs to make them skillful at making difficult choices that come with hard consequences either way.

    A double bind makes people vulnerable to wanting prescription drugs. And a double bind delays them choosing to withdraw from drugs they maybe feel no benefit from. And a double bind may stop the quitter from enduring the inevitable explosion of riotous adrenalin and cortisol that come back upon withdrawal, since these are natural hormones that have been sedated for years. But these hormones are very uncomfortable, a bit like frustration is uncomfortable. But the good thing about withdrawal is it gives a person a time to learn how to cope with these normal stormy feelings without needing pills. But that requires work and a good therapist or community, to help the quitter build back such resilience.
    The problem with modern society, in my view, is we are not supporting frustrated. And we are not positive enough about helping them regain natural resilience.

    The recent intiative to flag up trauma as being a huge problem in society is perhaps causing some to be too reticent of withdrawal because it feels too traumatic. But the path back to resilience cannot not involve traumatic withdrawal states.
    If trauma is a wound, like a flesh wound, often what can heal it is not simply lifelong avoidance of trauma but resilience.

    To be resilient involves an element of cultivating inside a level of tough love. To not yeild to cravings for the pap of endess sedation. But it is not easy at all to quit meds. Strength and fortitude alone may not be enough to support the quitter through month three or four. So OTHER support is needed. Not mollycoddling support that will just tell the quitter to go sedate themselves to avoid the trauma of withdrawal, but CONSTRUCTIVE hands on, round the clock REAL support. Support of a resilience vision sort.

    I have some friends who are stuck stuck stuck in pill-land. They are timid to try to come off. I think they are right to be timid since the structural support is non existant. They are right to stick with the devil of a drug they know best. But as for their timidity about wanting to avoid trauma.
    …..I bite my tongue because I want to say.to some extent…

    “life is trauma”.

    If they wimp out of ever risking trauma they wimp out of risking life itself. Resilience is never regained, like regaining muscle power.f And that, it seems to me, is yet another recipe for disaster.

    I shall add no more because I have a fever and just woke up after dreaming my room was full of living minature horses at my ankles.

  6. Another aspect of wihdrawal is that people on longterm failing drugs are not embarking on a quitting drugs path from a level of pristine wellness. They may be an exhausted foetal ball of utter wretchedness if their pills have been giving them the chaos of intra withdrawal crashes of equilebrium. This is the difference between say a person in an emergency ward with a broken toe being asked to brave a painful series of procedures to get them better…and a car crash victim in total pieces being asked to go from that pit of anguish to the anguish in withdrawal. So it is not like going from 0 to 9 (if 0 is normal health and 9 is pain), it is like going from minus 8 to plus 9 (the minus 8 being months of distress). When a person is chonically distressed from intra withdrawal they may develop a faulty assessment of how weak and feeble they are. The fact they have endured intolerable intra withdrawal without throwing in the towel actually speaks of huge inner strength. But they may be too wrung out from that battle to even consider finding any residual capacity within to begin the long long battle of withdrawal.
    Withdrawal is like child birth but for a few months. Its enormously exhausting. Doctors glibly think that the people they tell to withdraw are just like them, coming from a 0 of normal health. It would be like a midwife telling a malnourished homeless ill mother to keep pushing. The resilience required to withdraw does not just fall out of the sky and beknight the quitter.

    (And Bippyone, I havent a clue who came up with the double bind concept. Could have been Laing? Ive not read anything by Laing. I will have picked it up from someone somewhere who also maybe did not know where it came from. Like the concept of love. )

  7. There is tragically something intuitively wrong about this discussion that compares what happen in Nazi Germany when they killed the “psychiatric patients and the disabled” in their horrific gas chambers versus what is happening today as far as prescribing psychiatric drugs to “patients” whether they need them or not and they rarely ever need them. First, as far as the smoking argument lowering the lifespan of the “alleged mentally ill” I would call that the “Torrey Argument” and thus both a non-starter and a deception that covers up the dangers of these psychiatric drugs and other treatments forced upon “psychiatric patients.” In this day and time, it would be unlikely that what happened in the Nazi Death Camps would be literally copied. We now have so many subtle techological and chemical/biochemical ways to utilize to attempt to rid the world of a population of people deemed unsuitable. The Nazi Death Camps would horrorifically crude and unsophisticated. Who needs these “gas chamber showers” when drugs and other means can be used in such a way it is probably not even noticed in the general population? The question is could be is this happening or not? I can not prove it for sure. Each person has his or her unique testimony and understanding of their own situation. It is not ours to forget or deny what happened in the Nazi Concentration/Death Camps in the 1930s and 1940s until the Allies liberated Europe. And yes it always behooves us that if they come for one “group”, they may come for the “group” in which we claim allegience. We must be vigilant and always keep our eyes and ears open. We must be willing to confront and defeat evil wherever it appears and in whatever form it appearrs. We must alwasy be on the side of what is good and noble and right. We must never sink down to the world of seedy, greedy, immoral, ill-gotten gains. Unfortunately, getting involved in “psych world” —the diagnoses, the drugs, the therapies, the treatments, the etc. places us in a vulnerable position where can become both the hunter and the hunted. It is in our best interest to get and remain drug-free so we can keep a clear mind and a clean hands and heart. Thank you.

    • Rebel, I also think that there is something wrong about this discussion, though for different reasons. The idea that psychiatric patients now have it worse than in Nazi times – or at least just as bad as in Nazi times – is based on emotions, not on facts, and disrespectful to the victims of the Nazi extermination of psychiatric patients.

      As I have said many times here, the Nazi extermination of psychiatric patients was planned. There are facts and documents which prove that these patients were murdered. We are not talking here about conjectures, or about lives which were shortened because of the long-term effects of toxic drugs, or about people who took their own life while using a psychiatric drug. We are talking about people who were literally murdered.

      Most people know very little about the Nazi extermination of psychiatric patients. They were not murdered in death camps or in concentration camps. Most of them were actually murdered in asylums. Psychiatrists and psychiatric nurses were actively participating in these crimes.

      There is absolutely no evidence that today’s psychiatrists want to kill their patients. Psychiatric drugs have many harmful effects, but they are not prescribed in order to kill or to harm the patient. They are prescribed because of the dogmas of biopsychiatry, because of the power of Big Pharma, because it is much easier to give a person psychiatric drugs than to provide free psychotherapy and to improve the person’s life, and finally because society is simply scared of the “mentally ill” because of the prevailing stereotypes.

      As I have said in this thread, many patients want to take psychiatric drugs. This is very important – in very many cases these drugs, especially antidepressants, are NOT forced on unwilling people. We can say that most people don’t know enough about the long-term effects of psychiatric drugs, but we can’t say that people who are willingly taking psychiatric drugs are passive victims tortured by evil psychiatrists.

      As I said earlier, some of the people who are using psychiatric drugs actually get angry if someone is criticizing these drugs. Of course we can say that they are brainwashed, but we can’t deny the fact that many people want to be prescribed their favourite psychiatric drugs and believe that the drugs are helping them.

    • Rebel, as to the “Torrey Argument”, I feel that you have misunderstood me. I did not say that the lives of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia are shortened only or mainly because of smoking.

      I am not defending psychiatric drugs. I was forced to take neuroleptics in the past (in a hospital). I refuse to take any psychiatric drugs, I know that they are harmful.

      However, it is not true that the lives of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia are shortened only because of neuroleptics. There are many other negative factors in the lives of most of these patients, including poverty and social isolation. Many of them are smokers and some of them die because of lung cancer which is usually caused by tobacco smoke.

      A relative of my mother’s husband was diagnosed with schizophrenia, but he was also a heavy smoker. He died from lung cancer. He kept smoking even when he had terminal lung cancer. We can’t say that his illness and death was caused by neuroleptics.

      Let us not forget either that many patients diagnosed with schizophrenia don’t take neuroleptics or take them only occasionally. Many psychiatrists are complaining about it in their books and articles!

      The shortened life expectancy of psychiatric patients does not have a single cause. We can’t blame everything on psychiatric drugs and say that all the other negative factors are of no importance.

      • To mention all those possible causes of premature death amongst those allegedly diagnosed with schizophrenia or any other alleged “mental illness” is to obscure the absolute truth that above all else, the psych drugs (neuroleptics, SSRIS, etc.) are the greatest cause to premature death. The psych drugs far eclipse all else in the determinants of premature death. Stating all those other alleged causes only weakens the truth and actually speaks of a prejudice against those who may be “poor” or otherwise. How sad! I read both of your posts and tragically they seem to be obscuring the truth and the fact that the psych drugs, in particular, and possibly other drugs are killing the human population, prematurely, regardless of economic status or any other factor. It is not climate change or global warming or whatever that threatens humans to extinction, but DRUGS—-ESPECIALLY PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS, but, others may contribute also. And what we do say about the extermination of psychiatric patients, the disabled or the Jews under the terror of Hitler does not diminish its horror or seek to dishonor their memory. That is further from the truth. What are we trying to o? To awaken people that such evil has not died out and is still possible today. And since you say that you have at one time taken psych drugs, you must know the evil is there and persists in too, too many forms. And there is one way out of this evil and His Name is Jesus! Thank you.

  8. Thank you Peter.
    There have been power systems in all of history, Psychiatry is just another harmful system.
    Of course it is “unhealthy”, in the way systems are unhealthy when they promote harm to people. And psych did a fine job to infiltrate every public system.

    It’s such a crude and backwards practice that shrinks should be embarrased that in todays age they still participate in stomping on people who they think are lesser or sicker than themselves.

LEAVE A REPLY