For over thirty years now I have been a journalist, traveler, and writer. I have written over a hundred books, most of them self-help books about reprogramming the subconscious mind, a healthy lifestyle, travel adventure books, cookbooks, and courses in foreign languages based on the instinctive method I invented when I was 18 and was struggling with learning English. That was my biggest bestseller, which sold over a million copies in Poland. I have always tried to speak the truth, and sometimes there is a lot of pushback against that. People don’t always like to hear the truth when it challenges them or contradicts their assumptions and biases. But I have always considered it my duty as a journalist to say it anyway.

I’m used to extreme reactions to my work. One of my recent bestsellers was about my struggles as a lonely teenager and how I healed myself by changing the way I think about myself and my life. For many years I fought with addictions. I had anorexia and bulimia, drank too much, smoked, suffered from depression. I tried to kill myself at 16. I was raped at 25. I felt I was the loneliest person in the world. But I kept remembering one thing. When I was 16—a lonely outsider rejected by everyone—I vowed one day I would find a way to be happy. It just seemed to make no sense to live as an unhappy human being. It took many years, but I finally found my happiness. I cured myself of addictions, I changed the way I think, and I adopted a healthy lifestyle. I felt that other people should know this is possible—to change your life, to become healthy and happy, no matter what happened to you in the past.

It surprised me when that book was publicly ridiculed and attacked by the press, by doctors, and by others. It seems that the very idea that you can change the way you think and behave, improve your life, and become healthy and happy, was quite offensive! Still, that message must have resonated with plenty of people, since the book was a bestseller. (All that extra publicity might have helped too!)

Beata Pawlikowska

But nothing prepared me for the reaction to my latest video. Now I’m under attack, with threats of violence flung at me alongside threats of lawsuits. And all because I shared the large body of peer-reviewed research that contradicts the mainstream assumptions of psychiatry.

The question is this: What is the purpose of being a journalist in Poland today? Is it to regurgitate talking points? Is it to reinforce mainstream assumptions, even when they are not supported by the evidence? Is it to support the powerful at all costs, and never question their words? Or do we have a duty to seek out the truth—as presented in the peer-reviewed scientific literature—and present it to the people?

The Serotonin Theory Falls

A few years ago, I became interested in science. I wanted to understand how the brain works. I started reading and studying on my own. I never graduated from any university, but I love learning, studying, searching for more information. I am fluent in English so I could read the latest books and research articles before they reached Poland. In some ways, Polish psychiatry is very slow to recognize the discoveries that are coming out of America and Western Europe.

Last year the article “The Serotonin Theory of Depression: A Systematic Umbrella Review of the Evidence,” by Joanna Moncrieff and her colleagues, was published in the peer-reviewed journal Molecular Psychiatry. The researchers found that, after reviewing all the studies on the topic, there was no evidence for a serotonin imbalance in depression. In interviews, the researchers eviscerated the notion that antidepressants balance or correct brain chemistry. Instead, they said, the drugs perturb normal brain functioning, which may sometimes have a helpful effect (such as by blunting emotions).

In the US and the UK, this finding was presented by the media as something that shattered the very basis of the psychopharmacological model. The chemical imbalance myth had been debunked over and over in previous articles, too, so this was—in a sense—the final nail in the coffin of the serotonin theory.

Of course, psychiatry’s defenders rushed out in the US and the UK too. Some wrote that no one ever believed the serotonin hypothesis, comparing it to the medieval concept of the four humors. Others wrote that the serotonin hypothesis could still be true, despite these decades of consistent negative findings. The commonality was a defense of antidepressants: pundits opined that the drugs were still effective, even if no one knows how or why they work.

Nonetheless, in the US and UK, there is a substantial body of research showing that while antidepressants may be statistically better than placebo in some studies (especially industry-funded, older, biased studies), this difference is tiny and likely not clinically relevant.

This was presented in Poland in quite a different way. A journalist from a popular news website asked the Polish Psychiatric Association for comment and this is what they said: “It would be difficult to assume that researchers on several continents gave their patients drugs for so many indications and did not realize until now that they were giving a placebo.”

The Polish Psychiatric Association in its official statement said that the new research focuses on explaining the mechanisms of action of antidepressants: “This does not mean that antidepressants do not work, as millions of people around the world experience every day. It means that they work in more complex mechanisms, which we have already partially learned and are still learning.”

The Reaction to My Video

I spent months listening to all the lectures on the subject I could find on YouTube. I devoured videos from Joanna Moncrieff, Robert Whitaker, Bertram Karon, David Healy, Peter Breggin, and others, reading books and scientific articles, and I realized that nobody talks about it in Poland. So I decided to write a book about it and make a video. I am halfway through writing the book, and on Monday night I published the video called “The Latest Research on Depression.”

As I said, I’m used to getting criticized for telling the truth. But nothing could have prepared me for the vehement attacks that followed my video. It made me the No. 1 public enemy in Poland. Everybody attacked me. Fellow journalists, doctors, and the general public. I felt lynched. I was afraid to go outside in fear I would be beaten. People publicly wished me death and blamed me for possible deaths of people who might stop their medication. They called me all kinds of names: stupid, old, and ugly being the mildest, all the way to messages like You moron, you are a mental bottom! Use the clothespins for hanging laundry. Put them on the back of your head to draw wrinkles, because you look terrible … Get cancer! Get lost, you nit!

My video was carefully crafted and documented. It was all based on scientific articles which were quoted on the screen as I talked and the full list of the articles was put in the description below the video. In the beginning I said that I am not a doctor or a scientist, but as a journalist with fluent English I have access to the latest research and I would like to present some facts so that you can decide for yourselves what you want to do with these facts. In the video I said that the antidepressants may be very useful in the short-term; at the end of the video I showed a still saying IMPORTANT. Abrupt discontinuation of antidepressants is dangerous and can be detrimental to your health. If you are taking medications, follow your doctor’s instructions and, if necessary, work with your doctor to gradually stop taking them.

And then at the very end: This video is not a medical recommendation. The information contained in the video is educational in nature and is not intended to replace individual medical advice provided by a doctor.

The day after the video was published, a psychiatrist and president of the Polish Medical Media Association organized a fundraiser to sue me for publicly publishing “untrue information that poses a threat to the health and life of hundreds of thousands of people suffering from depression.”

This is what was posted with the fundraiser:

I’m a doctor, psychiatrist, CEO, and I’m honestly sick of celebrities talking about health. Especially about mental health. On January 16, 2023, on the YT channel, Ms. Beata P., a journalist fluent in English, published a video in which she gives false information that poses a threat to the health and life of hundreds of thousands of people suffering from depression. I’ve had enough. I need your help to raise funds and show all her possible successors that this type of content is over. It is time to start punishing.

Here’s link to the post:

Link to the fundraiser:

Within a day or so she collected over 30,000 zł needed to proceed to court (roughly 5,500 pounds) with comments like: “Thank you for promoting science and fighting falsehood in public space.”

I felt threatened. All alone, attacked by everyone, including journalists, doctors, scientists, and the general public all writing about me with headlines like: Beata Pawlikowska Babbles about Depression. Enough Is Enough. Internet Users Are Preparing a Lawsuit.

I decided to take down the video from my social media and published an apology:

If I had known that my video would cause such a violent reaction, I would never have published it. I’m sorry I did. I thought that information about new scientific research might be interesting or helpful. I understand that many people do not want me to talk about this. I respect this. I’m not going to take up this topic any more. I apologize to those who felt offended.

That didn’t help much. The lawsuit is still moving forward: “All we want to do is get this lady banned from talking about mental health,” said the psychiatrist/fundraiser in one of the interviews.

I didn’t know what to do. Nobody in the public space offered any support, nobody said I had the right to speak the truth and quote veritable scientific research.

I am being publicly humiliated, insulted, and called offensive names. For days, not a single journalist, not a single scientist, not a single lawyer, NOBODY had spoken for me.

I was afraid to go out into the street in fear I might be attacked. I hadn’t slept in days and spent the days covered with sweat. But I won’t give up!

I have written to all major newspapers and weeklies in Poland, describing my video, including the link to the video and all scientific papers, and asking a few simple questions, such as:

I would like to know, as a journalist in Poland:

  • Do I have the right to publish a journalistic investigation video with the latest scientific research on depression (or other diseases)?
  • Do I have the right to publicly quote the American psychiatrist Dr. Bertram Karon, who wrote that ‘The worst thing you can do is tell someone that they have a genetic, incurable disease caused by a malfunctioning brain. It takes away hope, and without hope there is no recovery’?
  • Do I have the right to write a book that is a journalistic investigation into the latest scientific research on depression?
  • Do I have the right to publicly say/write that schizophrenia has been treated without medication for thirty years in northern Finland, using the Open Dialogue method which has the best schizophrenia treatment results in the world?
  • Do I have the right to conduct and make public an interview with Dr. Joanna Moncrieff, an English psychiatrist, the author of many scientific studies and the above-mentioned groundbreaking study about the supposed biological basis of depression?
  • Do I have the right to quote pieces of scientific research from peer-reviewed scientific journals on issues such as: the impact of playing sports on recovery from depression, vitamin D levels and treatment of depression, or cognitive behavioral therapy for depression/schizophrenia?

Nobody answered me!

I sent it also to the Ombudsman of the Polish parliament and to every foundation I could find that deals with the freedom of speech, as well as to all three existing journalists’ professional associations existing in Poland.

Responses Begin

I got one reply from the Oro Iuris foundation inviting me to a meeting, and an email from the Press Freedom Monitoring Center of the Polish Journalists Association saying that they were willing to help. One lawyer offered to help pro bono if the lawsuit happens.

An assistant professor at the Institute of Psychology at the Pedagogical University of Krakow, the author of the doctoral dissertation entitled “The Biomedical Model in Psychopathology and the Opposition to It: A Psychological Perspective,” referred to my film. And he did confirm that what I was saying was true and based on scientific evidence. He was THE ONLY SCIENTIST in Poland who had the courage to say publicly that I did say the truth! He was ignored by the media and journalists.

I now have a lawyer who offered to defend me in court, and the Association of Journalists in Poland has issued an official statement confirming my right to speak about it. However, there are three associations of journalists in Poland and only one had the courage to speak for me, and, what is more important, the statement was ignored by the media and nobody has mentioned it publicly.

So far nothing has changed. I am being portrayed as a liar and insulted in all possible ways. So far not a single journalist or any other public figure or body has spoken for my right to the freedom of speech or admitted I had the right to say the truth.

Privately I have received a lot of support from my viewers. Some people say they were forced to delete their positive comments under my video because they, too, were being threatened and insulted.

I will not be silenced, though. I am planning to open a foundation for people with depression and schizophrenia, speak publicly for them and present the latest research, and also planning to start my own podcast where I will invite scientists and researchers to talk about their latest work.


  1. “To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?” Kevin Alfred Strom

    “I will not be silenced, though. I am planning to open a foundation for people with depression and schizophrenia”

    Great, i’m sure their metaphors will benefit from the foundations work.

    I don’t know that you won’t be silenced, mainly because you possibly have very little idea of what powers are available to these people you have clearly upset. Even the U.N. is using mental health services to silence critics/whistleblowers these days….. abusing human rights whilst claiming to be defenders of human rights.

    See The Whistleblowers Inside the U.N.

    Report comment

  2. Thank you for sharing your story, Beata. And absolutely you are right, if you speak out contrary to the beliefs of the DSM “bible” thumpers … well, if your a patient, you are subjected to many attempted murders. In my case, all via egregious anticholinergic toxidrome poisonings. And, if you are not a patient, then the “mental health” system will attempt to steal everything from you. And I do have legal proof of such attempted thievery, in the form of a conservatorship contract, disingenuously dressed up as an “art manager” contract.

    Since you plan to try to help those labeled as “schizophrenic,” you should know that the “antipsychotics” / neuroleptics can create the positive symptoms of “schizophrenia,” via anticholinergic toxidrome. And they can create the negative symptoms of “schizophrenia,” via neuroleptic induced deficit syndrome.

    Thank you for sharing the truth. Especially since the truth about psychiatry is being censored, it appears by the US NIMH itself. For example, NIMH took Insel’s confession about the “invalidity” of all the DSM disorders off the internet, so you have to get it from now.

    Report comment

  3. Beata

    You are a courageous woman who is, not only fighting against the enormous power of psychiatry (and Big Pharma) and their oppressive medical model, but also against the power of a state government apparatus that derives benefits from people believing in “genetic theories of original sin” and (in great numbers) numbing themselves against society’s daily traumas.

    On a world scale, the fight against against the medical model is INSEPARABLE from the fight against the inherent inequities in a profit based capitalist system that puts the profits and power of the bourgeois elites above the interests of the masses.

    Poland is just a more extreme example of authoritarianism in the world running amuck. In America the ruling classes are currently able to bury the truth about the medical model within a vast “market place of ideas,” and a competing media that is quite capable of passing on a narrative of multiple conspiracy theories that are believed by millions.

    Science, and the truth about how the world actually works in our daily lives, is under attack on many fronts. To all those people who want to compartmentalize the fight against psychiatry and the medical model, and separate it from all the other social justice battles in the world, PLEASE WAKE UP!

    The battle over the science of climate change, Covid 19 (masks and vaccines etc.), women’s right to control their own bodies, and racial theories of inferiority etc. can not (and should not) be separated from our need to expose the myth of the “chemical imbalance theory” and psychiatry’s promulgation of so-called psychiatric diseases and all their toxic drugs that allegedly “treat’ them.

    Beata Pawlikowska is “fighting the Good Fight” and needs all of our support.

    “Dare to Struggle, Dare to Win”


    Report comment

    • Dear Richard,
      Thank you very much for your comment. I know we live in the world of imperfection. I see it as our chance to stand by our values and seek the truth. This is probably the only thing worth living after all because it creates a measure for our true humanity.
      All the best,

      Report comment

  4. This reminds me of a comment left about Robert Whitaker by a user “job job” on this article:

    “You are an integral part of a movement that uses a wide brush to condemn and to incite hatred for all of psychiatry wholesale, and all psychiatrists, maliciously, unfairly, with repeated venomous attacks, destroying the reputations of millions of good, conscientious, dedicated and caring professionals, who work very hard to bring healing to the suffering. Disparaging comments about groups of people are banned on your website, you say.”

    Take a good look in the mirror job job and the other psychiatry folk who feel “unfairly attacked”.

    You know, the weird thing is, people in clinical psychiatry/psychology do just enough good to ameliorate some degree of suffering for some people, some of the time to turn them into psychiatry-warriors who have to denigrate those who have been screwed over by the same profession (even with their “best practices”). They don’t even see that they themselves are being screwed over sometimes nor do they stop to think about the horrible aspects of the profession. I both pity and fear them.

    Report comment

    • You all did a job well done responding to that Westmount Wanker, a term coined by actor James Woods. Mr. Gurdjieff insisted that precise knowledge requires a precise language, and he coined many himself. When he began teaching in Germany he was asked for the source of his knowledge. He answered that he had taken “The Sly Man’s Pill” His student, and ambitious potential rival, P.D. Ouspensky, immediately seized upon this, calling Gurdjieff The Devil, broke with him and The Fourth Way and started his own dead end cult, In Search of the Miraculos.

      Gurdjieff never made that mistake again, for what he was referring to was his near-death experience when he was seriously wounded by a sniper in Afgahnistan and lay for hours on a cold mountain trail recapitualting his life and meditating on his fate until somehow he gathered the strength to get up and walk out. In German, the word Kugle can mean either bullet or pill. There was no magic pill either. Gurdjieff had great knowledge about drugs. He said anything can be a drug, and the open-minded know he was correct.

      The latest deception of the Westmount Wankers is to attempt to equate anti-psychiatry with anti-semitism. The retort to this is to reeducate the uninformed who might believe this lie to the work of Abram Hoffer, Peter Breggin, Thomas Stephen Szasz, and so many others down to and including our own Bruce Levine.

      The US Submarine Force, which faced and overcame superstions years ago reveres the Man In The Grey Flannel Suit, Hyman G. Rickover, born in Poland in 1900. In his autobiography, he states that Nuke power and weapons should only be considered expedient in the face of greater evil and that if mankind could learn to live in peace, the radio-active elements should never be removed from their place in the planet’s phyisology.

      Report comment

      • @Subvet416:

        Can your comment be accurately summarised as follows? :

        You did well retorting to that jobjob guy.

        A drug can be anything. Even a near-death experience.

        The latest deception of psychiatry’s supporters is to attempt to equate anti-psychiatry with anti-semitism. The retort to this is to reeducate the uninformed who might believe this lie to the work of Abram Hoffer, Peter Breggin, Thomas Stephen Szasz, and so many others down to and including our own Bruce Levine.

        Report comment

        • It’s not that simple. What exactly is being implied by the term anti-semitism? Who or what entity coined the term? As Gurdjieff suggested, for precise knowledge, a precise language is required.

          Let’s take the history of Judaism back to Solomon. How many tribes were formed from there and how many spoke Semitic languages? Who has King Solomon’s ring now?

          Report comment

          • IMHO, so-called “anti-semitism”, just like so-called “racism”, has become empty of any real meaning. So many different people have accused so many other different people, in very different contexts, of both-either, that they are fast becoming meaningless insults….
            BUT, the fact that so-called “anti-psychiatry” folks are now smeared with the “anti-semite” label, only PROVES to me, the complete intellectual bancruptcy of the pseudoscience drug racket known as “psychiatry”….
            After all, psychiatry is nothing more than 21st Century Phrenology, with potent neuro-toxins….

            Report comment

    • Yes indeed, thank you for your comment! I think each and every one of us is similarly tested every day in our fields of profession. Being a kind, honest human being has always been – and still is – a challenge. This is also – I believe – the only way to change the world. All the best,

      Report comment

  5. That was like reading a horror story. You have gone through a lot. That is a great video and I hope your ideas of continuing your work are successful. People that have courage to go against public opinion are few. Amount of persecution seems not to be small.

    Those being the first at something somewhere always have it hardest. It is very similar to the case of new political parties that become popular. At first they are mocked and ridiculed and even sued at courts. Not being able to silence those that speak against something commonly considered as “good” is frustrating. Good old arguments that worked before become useless and a talk against them becomes common.

    When years go by you can be extremely proud of yourself knowing that you have helped many. That podcast is a great idea. That would get people accustomed to the idea that one cannot just trust someone educated professional and that it is arguments and research and freedom to say those that matter. One cannot simply force something to be true by calling someone with ugly names and mocking her. That learning phase can be stormy, but finally it will calm down.

    It really bothers me that the whole belief that science can prove the necessity of something and that educated professionals can make good decisions for others has been going on for so long. When that happens some personal or political goals are pushed in the scientific evidence base and expressed as objective fact. But those that are interested in these kinds of philosophical problems seem few.

    Report comment

    • Janne says, “It really bothers me that the whole belief that science can prove the necessity of something and that educated professionals can make good decisions for others has been going on for so long. When that happens some personal or political goals are pushed in the scientific evidence base and expressed as objective fact. But those that are interested in these kinds of philosophical problems seem few.”

      Agreed. It used to be people automatically saying things like, “the Bible says so”, to where they’re now automatically saying, “it’s the science” about darn near everything, from psychiatric drugs to dog food.

      Sadly, today our societies’ collectively uncritical infatuation with science has led to not teaching people how to think critically and question prevailing theories. The mass indoctrination that began with Freud has morphed into the public’s unquestioning acceptance of “bio-psychiatry”.

      Report comment

    • Thank you, Janne! As I am now looking back at what happened, I realize it was the last days of the Year of the Tiger in the Chinese Lunar calendar 🙂 So the tiger roared. A few days later we entered the year of the Rabbit, the most positive, kind, truthful and honest sign 🙂 It is going to be all right 🙂
      All the best,

      Report comment

  6. Janne says, “It really bothers me that the whole belief that science can prove the necessity of something and that educated professionals can make good decisions for others has been going on for so long. When that happens some personal and political goals are pushed in the scientific evidence base and expressed as objective fact. But those that are interested in these kinds of philosophical problems seem few.”

    Agreed. Where people used to automatically point to their bible, they’re now saying, “it’s the science” about darn near everything, from dog food to psychiatric drugs. It’s become a meaningless trope.

    And it’s society’s collectively uncritical embrace of anything that looks or sounds remotely “scientific” that has led to the neglect of teaching people how to think philosophically and critically question the prevailing narratives about “mental health”. What started as misguided Freudian interpretations gradually merged with “science” and steadily morphed into the public’s unquestioning acceptance of psychiatry’s medical model. It’s become the world’s latest and greatest example of mass indoctrination.

    Report comment

    • “Among my people are the wicked who lie in wait like men who snare birds and like those who set traps to catch people.” That’s a good description of at least some ELCA Lutheran psychologists, I painted one as a wolf in sheep’s clothing, after he tried to steal from me.

      “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.” And why did that psychologist set a trap to catch me? Because my earlier work was “too truthful” for “the wicked … who set traps to catch people” … the psychologists “set traps to catch people” for the psychiatrists.

      Report comment

  7. Dear dear Beata, I’m listening to your talk, but it’s not true that they found out that people who died from suicide had less serotonin, that’s just some or a few of them, others had more serotonin, others had normal amounts, as was with those that didn’t die from suicide. Antidepressants in themselves don’t increase serotonin, they do for the first couple weeks or so, and then the brain stops making as much so then they actually have less serotonin. I notice that you mentioned this regarding there’s a decrease in receptors for serotonin, but it never was found originally the there was a lack of it.
    And I’m sorry, but I don’t understand, if you are going to do a video regarding anti-depressants, state numerous times how they interfere with normal brain functions, explain this regarding how the serotonin remains in the synapse with serotonin re-uptake inhibition, I don’t see how this can be reconciled with that unblocking normal brain function. You state clearly that after the receiving cell has taken as much as it wants, some of it is returned to the cell it came from, but with re-uptake inhibition that’s blocked and the serotonin stays in the synapse and so remains at large. So normal brain function is blocked. That causes the brain to decreases the amount of receptors (and I think what you didn’t mention is that it also decreases the amount of serotonin in the end because consequently the brain stops making as much, as well as the amount of receptors is decreased). But you say that when people can’t understand their emotions having normal brain functions blocked, and then say anti-depressant can be a life saver by unblocking them. I don’t know whether that’s a mistake in translation, but it’s is highly contradictory.
    Some people can’t deal with an articulate mind. If they are so brainwashed that the mind expressing dissent causes them discomfort, they are happy disabling it. It’s against nature to constantly say sadness is a disease. As if there’s no cause for sadness, the emotion, to exist, as if there’s no intuitive intelligence being expressed there. As if giving room to feel the sadness is dangerous. What does this say about a society that doesn’t give people the space to express such a natural emotion? What does this say about a society when a natural normal emotion gets so blocked up, so repressed that a person feels there’s no place to go with it anymore? Instead of finding an environment that’s empathic giving them an outlet, they feel abandoned. It could just be that trying to push sadness away is the real discomfort. When I was at a junior college people used to drive me crazy. I would be sitting with a group of people, and I would be thinking about something that made me sad, and I instinctively know that when you just feel that that it would go away. I actually would THINK about the emotion that yes it feels that way, but if you just feel it it goes away. But suddenly I would be accosted with people asking me what was wrong, as if there was some terrible tragedy going on, and I was supposed to get hysterical. My father did that a few times also, and it was quite disruptive. In how often would such people with their amplified need to help you by encouraging you to make a drama out of it, only be making things much worse? There are so many other ways to deal with any emotion as well. If you feel a certain way, your mind can have answers, but those voices or thoughts giving that answer are often so quiet people don’t listen. As if the tension of thinking you’re doing something makes it substantive, when that could be highly deceiving.

    I think it’s a really good talk, it’s just I found that one point contradictory, and it remains difficult to put into words why someone would feel helped by anti-depressants, it is maybe better just to say it helps some people, although there’s no clear explanation how that works. that it blocks normal brain functions one can clearly explain, you see. But that’s contradictory to how it’s sold.

    Report comment

  8. Sadly a lot of people are psychologically dependend on psychopharmaka. That includes people who don’t even take them.

    One would expect people to be happy about them being (worse than) useless, as they could do even better without them. This doesn’t happen.

    Report comment


      It covers almost the same as what you’re saying – the lack of efficay of antidepressants, refutation of the serotonin theory, and withdrawal effects. It also shows a clinic in Germany that no longer recommends antidepressants.

      You can put the transcript through a translation software to get the details – just in case it helps to have support from across the border (this documentary was created by a public broadcaster) for your court case or whatever else you’re up against. Good luck!

      Report comment

  9. This is reminiscent of Martin Luther standing up to the corrupt Catholic church. It also shows what a well crafted lie Freud foisted upon the world and how there is now an entire industry dedicated to perpetuating that lie and punishing ‘blasphemous nonbelievers’. It’s basically another man-made religion and the DSM is one of its religious texts. Best wishes in your work and if you start your own GoFundMe I will donate.

    Report comment

    • I’m not sure what you mean by the ‘well-crafted lie Freud foisted upon the world’. Freud fundamentally believed that mental symptoms are meaningful and have meaningful psychological causes. (He considered even the tiniest details of the content of, say, a paranoid delusion meaningful rather than random delirium.)

      Things like the chemical imbalance theory or the biological causation of mental illness are about as un-Freudian as you can get.

      Also, if you actually found a psychiatrist who openly sees themselves as a Freudian or as perpetuating Freud’s legacy I would be extremely surprised.

      What lie are you referring to?

      Report comment

      • Beatrice g asks, “What lie are you referring to?

        I can think of two, right off the bat: little girls have “penis envy”, and little boys want to sleep with their mother.

        Worth a glance: “Was Freud right about anything? Spoiler: not really., By Benjamin Plackett, from LIVESCIENCE

        Report comment

          • Yes, he was wrong about penis envy. But that can’t be the lie Chris Johnson was referring to because claiming that psychiatry and the DSM are “an entire industry dedicated to perpetuating” the theory of penis envy would be absurd.

            I’m aware that Freud wasn’t the first to recognize the importance of dreams, and so was he. In fact, he actually quotes a passage from Aristotle to that effect (in which Aristotle mentions, wait for it, dreams of sleeping with one’s mother!).

            Having worked at an anonymous support service for a while I can assure you that the desire to sleep with the mother is certainly alive and well in many grown men, and is sometimes carried out. Whether Freud’s theories on this are true is highly questionable, but he didn’t assert these things out of nowhere. Neither did he attribute the feelings of adult males to little boys.

            Btw, Freud wasn’t the first to posit infantile sexuality. Others had done it before him.

            I’ve looked at the article you quoted and, with all due respect, I’m not convinced. A bunch of sweeping claims, asserted without any evidence or arguments to support them and without referencing any of Freud’s works. Someone somewhere claiming that ‘this is bonkers’ isn’t much of a refutation, is it?

            So much tedious Freud-bashing by people who don’t know what they’re talking about. Sadly these kinds of things probably deter people from investigating whether psychoanalysis might be able to help them, either as a theory to help them understand their experience, or as a therapy. Spoiler: psychoanalysis has moved on in the 100 years since Freud!

            Report comment

          • Somehow, in contrast to whoever that was, I don’t think that simply calling it for what it is when someone resorts to such ridiculous nonsense as penis envy. That wasting your time sorting through why he made up this bologna and then having filled yourself with references that go nowhere but you’re supposed to know because this is what goes on in such discussions, somehow I don’t think that not doing that that is tedious or who knows what else. What’s obviously tedious is that somebody has to actually be articulate and see that to dismiss all that nonsense is totally valid. Well then you have to actually sort through all of that and see that it leads nowhereFreud’s penis envy is an assault on women. It’s a denial of the sexual abuse that was rampant in that society, and how such trauma affects people. It is as ridiculous as saying that people with brown skin when they suffer the kind of abuse and oppression that has been meeting upon them by a society full of white men. It is as ridiculous as saying that when they show signs of trauma because of it they have sparkle envy. That they actually would want to have white skin that sparkles in the sunlight or something that ridiculous. And any beating around the bush being truly tedious and excusing that nonsense this is abuse in itself and playing game theory with oh yes no I’m a therapist look I can cross this baloney and make it seem like something because I fill up with so much distract of scientism that people are going to believe it and go around nodding their head filled with such.

            Report comment

          • (sorry, I was posting from a cell phone, using speak recognition, wanted to add something, but it seems everything is so geared towards making people trigger happy, that I have no idea why it posted, when I simply was trying to add something, so here is the addition) Somehow, in contrast to whoever that was (beatrice), I don’t think that simply calling it for what it is when someone resorts to such ridiculous nonsense as penis envy. That wasting your time sorting through why he made up this bologna and then having filled yourself with references that go nowhere but you’re supposed to know because this is what goes on in such discussions, somehow I don’t think that not doing that, not taking part in such tediousness is tedious. Since the word was used. What’s obviously tedious is having to re-articulate indoctrinated snippets, hauled out from that place of no return that they were trying to escape from. Like Dickens when he referred to the circumlocution office, and how anyone actually wanting to do something ends up being buried in minutes, assaults with bushels of addendums, references, footnotes, and if they still somehow break through to the light of day have their insights deemed to be unwarranted for such high honors as actually being listened to. Well then you have to actually sort through all of that and deny that it leads nowhere. Freud’s penis envy is an assault on women. It’s a denial of the sexual abuse that was rampant in that society, and how such trauma affects people. It DENIES trauma. It is as ridiculous as saying that people with brown skin when they suffer the kind of abuse and oppression that has been meted upon them by a society full of white men… It is as ridiculous as saying that when they show signs of trauma because of it they have sparkle envy. That they actually would want to have white skin that sparkles in the sunlight or something that ridiculous. Same as abused women want a penis, or that because men are the oppressors, you can deny that saying women want their special part. And any beating around the bush being truly tedious and excusing that nonsense this is abuse in itself and playing game theory with oh yes no I’m a therapist look I can dress up this baloney and make it seem like something because I fill up with so much a distraciont of scientism that people are going to believe it and go around nodding their head filled with such. That the whole world went walking around thinking they knew something about mental illness because there’s these ridiculous mental constructions such as penis envy or an Oedipus complex. Might as well add sparkle envy or Penguin desires (wanting the right to wear black suites like the rest of “them”). What’s worse is when trauma is acknowledged, that this turns into a whole variety of therapies that in exposing this trauma, get a person stuck in being a victim. Worst maybe being, us holy therapist can teach you how to understand your trauma, it goes this way, to be followed by more indoctrination. People have a innate ability to deal with trauma, and that comes out when you just listen to them, not think you know how to teach them how to deal with it. That ISN’T listening.

            No, I don’t think Jung and Freud pioneered modern therapy, when it’s helpful. That was more people like Miles Horton or R.D. Laing. Or any good person who studied psychology or social work and ditched all of these mental constructs to just listen to another person. I think that the arts, yoga, such wonderful techniques as pandiculation to get the body to release held on tension, nature that all of that and more is healing, and therapeutic. To tick off a bunch of books and say this one says how you have to teach the body to let go of this, and this one says it’s because you can’t verbalize what’s going on, when the healing might be completely beyond verbalizing anything, and the body won’t let go of it unless you stop trying to make it let go.

            Report comment

          • In response to a discussion about Freud:

            I’m rereading Jeffrey Moussaieff Mason’s book, the chapter Freud and Dora, and I have to break in, just to recall all the nonsense Freud comes up with, and I hadn’t read the book for years, apparently disassociated from it, it’s THAT bad:
            When Dora has been propositioned by a man whose wife is having an affair with her father, and the man who propositioned her also propositioned a servant, Freud decides that Dora actually is in love with the man who propositioned her, that she’s actually jealous of the servant he propositioned, that she (Dora) is also in love with the man’s wife (they read some material regarding sexuality together, and Freud jump to this, and a hoard of other nonsense). Poor Dora was then forced to have “therapy” with this man who basically felt free to come up with a load of nonsense he thinks is insightful, but has no bearing on what’s happening other than this is called psychotherapy, and Freud made it up, contrary to reality. You can read all of this in his writings. I’m sure I skipped some of the perversions of his “analyses,” because it’s overwhelming, but you can read that chapter yourself, in the book. All with excellent footnotes and references. There’s reference to a governess who is said to have been nice to Dora to get to her father, all put forth again by Freud, again thinking he has some insight, as long as there’s some repressed who knows what going on.
            Dora’s father then didn’t believe she had been propositioned. One at this point can only start to realize the kind of environment poor Dora was in, and Freud ads to it by deciding or supposing who knows what comes from having masturbated as a child, and then says that putting cocaine on a special spot on the nose, will relieve the gastric illness that comes from such (masturbating), all inspired by his friend Fliess. This Fliess would operate on women, because of their “organic damage” from masturbating, and Freud had handed over an earlier patient to Fliess, an Emma Eckstein, and she almost bled to death from it. Freud’s reply was that she was just a hysterical bleeder. Freud decides that Dora’s problems come from not admitting she’s in love with the man who propositioned her, whose wife was having an affair with her father, the man who wouldn’t believe she was propositioned, so sent her to Freud for “therapy.” Freud then comes to the ridiculous conclusion that Dora couldn’t love the man that propositioned her as a 14-year-old, because she never admitted her love for her father, and this is because of the always-ready-for-whatever-the-result-supposed-was act of masturbating. ALL OF THAT is what this poor Dora has to deal with, child of an industrialist, and having to deal with this “society,” she’s forced to have to endure.
            When she cuts off this “therapy” (which is good considering that she could have ended up like Emma Eckstein), she is tossed around in different publications by various people in Freud’s cult. Made out to be some sort of hostile jealous person bent on revenge (see above, that when she didn’t like being assaulted as a 14 years old, which her father wouldn’t believe, and she wouldn’t entertain such nonsense as that he actually loved the man but couldn’t feel it because her masturbating as a child has repressed her love for her father: if you’re lost by now, masturbating as a child according to the founder of psychotherapy Freud prevented her from loving her father, which is why she couldn’t know she loved the man that her father wouldn’t believe propositioned her)… When all of THAT doesn’t help Dora, Freud thinks he failed because he didn’t see that she was “transferring” her vengeance towards the man who propositioned her to him. So it wasn’t that he was trying to load her with fabricated mental constructs having nothing to do with what was going on, her “inability” to believe such nonsense was because she was “transferring” her anger towards the man who propositioned her towards him.

            Report comment

    • Birdsong, I’m sorry you have to deal with such insensitivity. That’ somebody who is supposed to be helping others, knew they were being sexually molested or had been. But that being not something one was allowed to talk about made up this ridiculous mental construction called penis envy. You know just that he could keep on maintaining this image that he knew what was going on and was helping, no he wasn’t. And then when somebody simply calls it for what it is and doesn’t hold back being politically correct then suddenly they are making sweeping gestures. I thought Freud had already cornered that market, wow. There are some very excellent books written by Jeffrey Moussaieff Mason which detail very clearly the stuff again the psychological and psychiatric institute don’t want people to know. In his books you’ll find all of the information about what you’re not told in how abusive both Freud or Jung could be. Jung who was the someone who believed women belonged in the kitchen and there was something wrong with the primitive races genetically. Of course someone who is apologetic about such behavior because for example they think that instead of just listening to somebody who has suffered trauma, instead of seeing that this is a society that doesn’t allow that such expression, instead of just listening and giving the natural knowledge that already is inside that person’s space to do what it naturally does. Instead that they started making epitaphs on how they are going to teach somebody to deal with trauma. Well, there you have the whole….Because you know animals don’t hold on to that stuff. Well isn’t this jumping right from the frying pan into the fire. The society doesn’t allow you to express it so let us teach you how not to listen to yourself because since animals can just do it and we don’t seem to it’s because we haven’t been taught to. Wow.

      Report comment

  10. Sorry, last night I was tired. I neglected mentioning your simple courage in sticking with the truth. I have had similar experiences when out of absolute good will I have wanted to promote what clearly given research, given scientific truths, given statistics and given free will and informed consent should be exactly what would pave a way towards healing and insight, but then you encounter these indoctrinated road blocks and in your case intimidation, harassment and malicious threats. Can you imagine someone being force treated in an asylum being accosted in such a way would they simply express the simple truth, and that regarding how with violent force they are being treated, or rather being mistreated? What is the difference between this and a fascist system?
    There are still people around in your country who remember what it was like for East block countries under the Communist regime. And yet when psychiatry acts in the same fashion it seems as if hardly anyone dares to speak out. What does this say about Western culture? Maybe if you point out parallels people might raise their heads, but who knows how one can say anything about this beyond trusting the Universe so one can enjoy life beyond all of the traps set.
    What is clear is that you have had a harrowing time simply stating stuff that to anyone with a clear mind would be the simple truth. And there are so many things like that. Clearly too many people think that sanity is disabling their mind from being articulate enough to fathom the truth beyond indoctrination and the game theory of social adaptation and its brainwashing, that a normal functioning brain is some sort of dire loss. And thus the use of psychiatric drugs or the dismissal of the whole arena of understanding, insight, perspective and true healing that happens when other approaches are allowed.

    Report comment

  11. Beata Pawlikowska, thank you for speaking up about psychiatry and I hope a lawyer a big law firm will help you pro bono.
    There are some people who can’t handle the truth, some are like snakes in suits who will attack you with everything they’ve got.
    I’m not sure what your court system is like in Poland, but I myself will never trust our Canadian government ever, this includes the courts and I live in Canada!
    In 2001 I was denied my legal right to lawyer after police had taken me for a mental health evaluation against my will. I was detained and drugged and denied Due Process for 11 days!
    My crime, promoting my upcoming book called ‘Canadas Dishonest Tax Police’ a Self Help book for Canadians who were having troubles with our tax department in Canada.
    I included my own personal story regarding what the tax man did to me and my family over a ten year period over money I did not owe.
    I was threatened by a Dr in 2001 who stated to me that should I complain about the Drs involved, or attempt to correct the misinformation in the medical records that I could be institutionalized for a very long long time.
    I fought the establishments from May 2001 to April 2020 when the final decision from the British Columbia Health Review Board decided that citizens detained under the BC mental health act have no Right to contact a lawyer.
    Criminals have more rights than citizens being treated as mentally ill.

    My advice is to tell as many people about any threats and court action, then they may back down.

    Report comment

    • Hi Gordon W Stewart

      “In 2001 I was denied my legal right to lawyer after police had taken me for a mental health evaluation against my will. I was detained and drugged and denied Due Process for 11 days!”

      On what “reasonable grounds” were you referred for an ‘evaluation’?

      “I was threatened by a Dr in 2001 who stated to me that should I complain about the Drs involved, or attempt to correct the misinformation in the medical records that I could be institutionalized for a very long long time.”

      Interesting how times have changed. Certainly in my State they wouldn’t bother wasting resources on you, and would simply ‘drop’ you (in the military sense of the term). The John the Baptist days of holding someone due to Gods law no longer an issue.

      “…citizens detained under the BC mental health act have no Right to contact a lawyer. Criminals have more rights than citizens being treated as mentally ill.”

      They most certainly do, in fact the criminals operating in our hospitals are fully aware of this fact…… though if you think about it, situations where a ‘first strike’ policy exists tends to make for a lot of tension. Honor among thieves? I think not.

      I know that the criminals who tried to “unintentionally negatively outcome” me for speaking the truth had two good years of operating within our system….. and then had to flee the State because they knew they couldn’t trust their ‘colleagues’ who had to create the appearance that they had done at least something about their demonstrable offending. Not believing they would continue to obstruct and pervert the course of justice for them.

      It’s all good when your riding the wave, not so good when the Juggernaut of Justice bears down on them…. and in some very subtle ways I might add. It’s amazing to watch the paranoid delusions caused by the need to conceal their offending destroy them, though I note they also tend to refuse ‘treatments’. I think of this as being ‘the crushing’.

      “My advice is to tell as many people about any threats and court action, then they may back down.”

      Good advice from someone who has fought for 20 years. My attitude has always been that the more people know about the scam, the less likely they are to fall for it. The consequences will be the need for more force, as people hardly trust our ‘doctors’ these days anyway. Having about as much credibility as Encyclopedia salesmen, and about as much relevance.

      But I must say I have also considered sociopathy. It would be a great disguise to infiltrate their organisations. And the pats on the back for ‘fuking destroying’ people and their families may open up arenas not otherwise available? Because these are people who have no respect for the law, and are being supported by those following the Fuhrerprinzip…. black man beaten to death by police is not a crime because ….. well, we don’t even need to answer that question because we’ll fuking beat you and your family too. Not that such things would happen in the U.S. but they are certainly happening in Australia while our ‘advocates’ look the other way…. nay in fact they assist with concealing such human rights abuses.

      Report comment

      • There were no “reasonable grounds”! There was nothing in writing by police to medical staff, police fabricated a story to silence me; via a verbal report to medical staff.
        The Dr in hospital stated “police brought Mr. Stewart in from Revenue Canada”; “I can only assume he was somewhat threatening at Revenue Canada.”, “I think it best to get a psych consult and go from there.” I was at the Court House in the zorocess of filing an 810-peace-bond at the suggestion of the Justice of the Peace.
        The intake Dr after I filed my complaint left town to work in Saskatchewan (I believe), the Director of Mental Health resigned his position on Dec 24th 2001.
        When police become friends with the tax agency and use psychiatry to silence people like myself from promoting a book, we all need to be very careful exposing the bad in our society. Don’t go it alone.
        When I filed an appeal to the decision of the College of Physicians & Surgeons of British Columbia regarding my complaint against the four doctors who had any involvement with me, the lawyer for the College was actually a Board member of the CLAS the organization who gets paid by the BC government to represent citizens detained under BC’s infamous Mental Health Act. I’m mean what the hell!
        I have never been to this hospital ever in my life, yet the records person stated after my release (on my answering machine) that she couldn’t find my file as there were more than a couple Gordon Stewart’s with files at this hospital. I have become an advocate and have already changed many laws and policies in BC regarding mental health detentions.
        I truly believe they arrested the wrong person; mistaken identity. My 3 daughters were all under the age of 6 at the time, I had my own business, life was good for us before the fabricated pathology!
        In 1998, a female tax agent yanked my documents out of my hand (information proved tax agents knew I didn’t owe, but garnished and seized my bank accounts anyways.
        Then to top it off, the first day of promoting my book, a tax employee (in a meeting) stated they retrieved my documents from my lawyers office.
        That was unlawful, no Court Order allowing them to do so. I have had my eyes open up wide. The BC Law Society ruled against my lawyer.
        As I was promoting my book many people were advising me to be very careful, one of the things people said was “they will institutionalize you to discredit you.” I laughed it off believing nothing like that would ever happen in Canada, boy was I wrong!

        Report comment

  12. Good Luck and Good Hunting, Beta! Find ’em, chase ’em, sink ’em!

    If you don’t get off the wheel this time around, consider the US Submarine Force next time. The opportunities for courageous women on the boats are now unlimited. No one knows the properties, potentials and danger of elemental lithium better than us, and we are going to expose its abuse as a means of mind control for all the world to see. We don’t leave our women on the pier now. Welcome aboard!

    Report comment

  13. I am from Poland and I believe that what you did was a great act of bravery. It takes a lot of courage to do what you did..

    I am also critical of psychiatry and psychiatry survivor, but since I work in the medical industry (not related to mental health), I am afraid to publicly criticize psychiatry, drugs, and forced treatments – I may even lose a job. I understand how difficult it is to do what you have done, so I have a great respect for you. Well done!

    For those who are not from Poland:
    Beata recently recorded a video about new research on antidepressants. The video was calm and did not attack psychiatry as a whole, but simply presented a different perspective. The amount of hate that followed from psychiatrists and so-called ‘science-oriented YouTubers and influencers’ was unbelievable and shocking!
    One psychiatrist even started a fundraiser to sue Beata.
    Popular online information portals have also portrayed the video as harmful.

    Beata, I am deeply sorry for all the hate speech directed at you. These psychiatrists are evil, and I hope that karma will catch up with them.
    If you need to hire a lawyer or require financial support, please start a fundraising campaign. I will definitely send some money (I am not wealthy but 100-200 zł is something I can afford). If you need any help, please let me know.

    Report comment

    • Dear David, Thank you for your kind words! I hope there will be a platform in Poland where we can freely talk about psychiatric drugs and depression. I hope to create it within the Knowledge and Hope Foundation which just has been registered. You are very welcome to bring your insights and comments, anonymously if needed. Let’s stay in touch, my email is [email protected] All the best!

      Report comment

  14. Beata, you are a brave girl! Anyone who values and promotes justice and freedom and who goes against consensus reality and conventional wisdom by revealing actual reality and true wisdom has frequently been shunned, ridiculed, persecuted, and sometimes imprisoned and put to death. Sometimes they have been disparaged and discredited for decades, even centuries, after their deaths. But none of that changes the fact that they spoke the truth.

    What you are experiencing brought to mind a book I am reading. I recently read a short article on this site ( by Bruce Levine. He compares contemporary psychiatry with religion and references Baruch Spinoza. (You, by the way, are following in his [Spinoza’s] footsteps.) Bruce references his recent book, “A Profession Without Reason: The Crisis of Contemporary Psychiatry Untangled and Solved by Spinoza, Freethinking, and Radical Enlightenment.” I immediately bought the book and am reading it. I think it might give you some hope and the courage to continue standing up for the right to voice your thoughts and to speak up about truths and the falsehoods that are being fed to us.

    I wish you well. I admire your courage and integrity. Few people are as brave as you. Thank you for adding your voice to the ongoing search for truth.


    Report comment

  15. Hi Beata,
    I watched your video. I am amazed at the hostile reaction you received from professional medical practitioners.
    The information in your video is readily available knowledge backed by credible research from a number of well known sources.
    These people who are criticising you are just fools determined to demonstrate their professional arrogance and ignorance.
    Unless the courts in your country are completely corrupt you should have no trouble winning your case and the eyes of the world will be watching.
    This whole rotten story of biomedical mental health has been based on years of deception, lies, corruption and greed. While some seem to have been helped by these psychiatric medications they have probably also damaged millions of others one way or another.
    At least the truth now appears to be coming out so that people will at last be properly informed and hopefully able to make up their own minds instead of being lied to and manipulated.
    Thank you for having the courage to speak out. I hope that many others will follow suite and do likewise.

    Report comment

  16. Psychiatry is BIG BUSINESS and in just the USA it represents a 60+ billion dollar industry! Why anyone is surprised by the response is confusing. Anyone who challenges their profits and industry is a threat!
    Actually should a lawsuit be filed it would actually expose Psychiatry as a fraud.

    Report comment

  17. Dear Beata,
    You’re not alone in your efforts in truth telling. These videos might be of interest to you, at least in spirit:

    “This Changes Everything|Graham Hancock Interview” with Russell Brand

    “Free Julian Assange: Noam Chomsky, Dan Ellsberg, & Jeremy Corbyn Lead Call at Belmarsh Tribunal” from Democracy Now!

    Take care,

    Report comment

  18. Hello Beata.

    It is so telling that they are threatening you, because they feel threatened. It has always been this way and many lost their heads due to having committed “treason”. You are the exposer, so it is of utmost importance to try and silence you.

    I am always of the mind that at least one or a few people benefit from reading exposing articles.

    A shrink does this. Sees “patient”, looks at their clothing, their weight, not because they give a shit, simply to blahblah down some notes.

    If I’m a shrink, I will pencil down “X seems to be on the thin side, suggesting patient purges, or is obsessed with food. Indicative of many disorders.

    X seems overweight, it suggests trying to deal with “depression” and “anxiety” with food.

    She seems to not be able to hold on to any relationship for very long.

    There is depression and addiuction in X’s family.

    Patient answers questions with an agitated tone.

    Patient seems distant.
    Patient is very visibly upset, generally seems unhappy with others.

    Noted that patient moves their feet. Noted that patient touches their face.

    And on and on, if gaslighting questions do not get them to slander you, they just make it up as they go. Super scientific.
    Of course, we can always get a “brain scan” and make up stories about the pink and green areas.
    But never without the scientific slander.

    I have met a doc who is very thin and a social worker who is chunky. I have no “scientific” knowledge or power to tell a fable about them, nor to make that fable stick.

    We know that shrinks more than qualify for the “scientific” slander they put onto others. And they qualify for one that suggests anti social behaviour. Anger, mistrust, delusions of grandeur, lack of insight.

    I suggest we all become shrinks or lawyers and then we will be safe from slander. It will then simply come down to who can outslander whom.

    They are a childish, immature selfish hateful bunch and you’re at the receiving end of them trying to somehow defend the damage, destruction and deaths they have left and continue to leave, on their very soiled disgusting paths.

    The first time you step into a shrinks office, or even answer private questions to any healthcare agent, you better tread careful. It is most important to never tell anyone anything that remotely describes you as a person.

    So kudos for hanging in there and to keep showing the truth regarding the “mental health” paradigm.

    Those are trick words. “mental health”

    Report comment

    • Sam Plover says:

      “I suggest we all become shrinks or lawyers and then we will be safe from slander. It will then come down to who can outslander whom.”

      THAT’S what psychiatry boils down to: SLANDER —

      “They are a childish, immature, selfish hateful bunch….you better tread careful.”

      Indeed. Only childish adults think the way most psychiatrists and psychotherapists do, i .e. having to believe they’re always right, and having temper tantrums when “patients” tell them they’re not.

      Report comment