Dear Psychiatrist,
As an educator of 20 years, I often reflect on the good and bad semesters Iāve had. I sometimes cringe at some of the silly or stupid comments I said and also think about things I included in lessons that didnāt have much to do with the unit we were studying at the time. I ask myself, What was I thinking?
But what you do is far more important and far-reaching, literally involving the lives of your patients. It requires much more self-scrutiny and reflection than, letās say, the layout and instructional delivery of an expository essay.
Please reflect on the questions below if you plan to stay in practice. But first, itās important you know that just before I ended my long-term patient-doctor relationship with you, I had to leave my neighborhood of 23 years locked in the back of a sheriff’s car (an ambulance was not available). I had written a suicide note to my husband and boys telling them I couldnāt take it anymore. I even threatened to take a bottle of pills because I was in so much pain. I had been through six long months of various medication trials, heavily drugged on Xanax and BuSpar, as prescribed, and you never laid eyes on me. Thankfully, my sister came to my rescue and the ER staff and hospital psychiatrist saved my life by getting me off the medications you carelessly put me on.
What were you thinking when you prescribed me nearly 800 pills of Xanax in under seven months? Did you not see the signs that I was developing a dependency, especially given your background in addiction? I learned from the emergency room that I had “developed a significant tolerance to Xanax” and that my BuSpar dosing had been “increased far too quickly.” I will never forget these words as long as I live. I finally had an answer to so much of my pain. Did you forget that Xanax is one of the most addictive drugs in the world? Iāve since learned that many local professionals limit prescriptions to no more than 10 pills per patient per year. Please consider this if you continue to prescribe Xanax.
What were you thinking, not looking at the current medical literature on the dangers of Xanax? I know you have 30+ years of experience, but the literature overwhelmingly points to the dangers of long-term Xanax use. Yes, benzos may have an important place in psychiatry, but only when used short term. The literature also points to the fact that these drugs actually make anxiety worse ā much worse. Once again, benzo rebounding is that bad. You and all psychiatrists should look at the horrifying accounts of patients on long-term benzo use. Please visit the BenzoBuddies and BIC (Benzodiazepine Information Coalition) websites. These sites alone will forever change how, and if, you prescribe benzos.
What were you thinking, not listening to my physician husband who requested a medication change? We had to learn from the hospital psychiatrist, with his 20 years of practice, that Xanax was making everything worse. He stated how he never used Xanax and never would because, to him, the drug was far too dangerous. Within days of getting off the drug, with the temporary use of Klonopin (something we had even asked you for), I got markedly better. My brain was no longer on the torturous Xanax roller coaster. In the weeks that followed, I felt more like myself than I had in months. Family and friends were stunned ā and thrilled ā to see my improvement. But alongside the relief, I was also overwhelmed with deep sorrow for what I had endured, and profound regret for not heeding the warning signs sooner, particularly those from the staff at the well-respected facility that I went to. They urged me to get off Xanax but I didnāt listen. Essentially,Ā the darker things got, the deeper my trust grew, trusting your opinion only.
What were you thinking? When I kept saying that I needed more Xanax, didnāt you see this as a sign of dependency/tolerance? I now know that when you doubled my nighttime dose of Xanax, it was knocking me out only to leave me with the worst next-day anxiety Iāve ever felt. I kept calling you, saying that my anxiety was getting worse in weird and unusual ways such as shaking, shortness of breath, and OCD-like behaviors. Morning and daytime Xanax use was something I had never done in my life. Didnāt you think this was odd? You should have been concerned.
What were you thinking, not seeing me in person for more than seven months when I was really struggling (because of the Xanax, I now know)? We could have used masks. You never even thought to use screens for our teletherapy. If you continue to stay in practice, please look at the current literature on telepsychiatry. It has its upsides, as well as downsides. Therapists have been amazed at what they miss not seeing a patient in person. Therapist Sean Grover describes how the emotional experience with in-person sessions is very different because the benefits include access to nonverbal communication, building a more intimate personal relationship. And, while I briefly saw a therapist at your office, all I kept asking her was when will my need for Xanax stop? She said she couldnāt answer my questions because she was not an MD. Did you ever touch base with her about this? Why couldnāt I see you at your office?
What were you thinking when you recommended an out-of-state facility that would cost $90K out of pocket when I had already been to one, locally? Do you understand how demoralizing it was to hear that? It was this suggestion that drove me to write the suicide note to my family. I couldnāt face another treatment center, another round of medications, or another round of false hope. You just kept pushing me off.
What were you thinking when you shared with me that you wanted to “kill” your already deceased mother? Building rapport is one thing, but that was disturbing. A big red flag that I should have given more attention to early on.
What were you thinking when you repeatedly mentioned how good my insurance was, offering phone-call therapy? My husband urged me to bring this up to you because of how much it bothered us. Was I an easy and lucrative case to you?
What were you thinking, telling me for a long time not to worry about taking Xanax for sleep because I was on a āpediatric doseā? Hopefully, young children are never prescribed Xanax in the first place, and once again, it should never be prescribed long term. Yes, it worked for me for years, but it was your job to ādo no harmā and ultimately, advise me to take a different course of action. I have a girlfriend who, in a tough time, was prescribed a benzo but her psychiatrist said it was her job to help her taper and try something different because long-term benzo use is dangerous. Itās ironic that a hospital psychiatrist saved my life, turning things around in a few days, whereas my six torturous months with you didnāt help at all.
I understand that psychiatry is complex and nuanced. But your decision to increase my Xanax dosage and never see me in person during my most challenging moments turned my life into a nightmare. The bottom line is that your approach to patient care was convenient for you but dangerously harmful to me. Please reflect on the questions above if you plan to stay in practice. I will always regret trusting you, my specialist, for so long.
Sincerely,
Your former patient, now medicine-free and feeling better than ever.
What I understand from this life story is… In fact, it is a situation that everyone has experienced. The common point;
1) Mental (psychological) problems experienced due to environmental conditions.. (Natural psychological (spiritual) problems..)
2) People turn to the psychiatry and pharmaceutical industry out of desperation.. (i.e. falling into a trap)
3) The psychiatry and pharmaceutical industry turning this into an opportunity and ‘money’.. So… These natural mental problems are made worse by psychiatric drugs, forcing people to fall into the ‘psychiatric drug trap’. (Continuous use of medication is ensured..)
“When there are no other alternatives, desperation makes (people) do anything.”
The psychiatry and pharmaceutical industries are also turning people’s desperation into money.. They are luring people into the trap of (psychiatric) drugs. When states (health systems) remain silent (approve) of this, everything becomes okay. Of course.. The ones who suffer the most in this are the ‘people and their families’ who are also helpless.
Psychiatry (psychiatric drugs) has a feature that also disrupts (tears) family life. When families break up (disintegrate), naturally the ‘family structure of society’ also breaks down. Society is deteriorating.. When society is deteriorating.. In society, violence, murder and suicide are increasing.. Crime rates are increasing..
So.. The psychiatric industry (especially with psychiatric drugs) appears to be increasing crime rates in society. (Probably..) BThrough a chain of events.. Like this.. If there is a family member using psychiatric medication, this can affect other family members as well. Affected family members can also affect other family members in the environment. In this way, through chain of events, the family structure of society is being destroyed. Although not all, it seems to be the case in general. (Probably..)
People can’t help but think… How many millions of families have the psychiatry industry (and psychiatric drugs) caused to break up around the world? The psychiatric sector (and psychiatric drugs), from this perspective, can also be seen as a ‘biological weapon’.
Probably.. The psychiatry sector is seen as being brought into the medical community not to improve people’s mental health but to disrupt the family structure of societies. Isn’t that so? What a sad and tragicomic situation.. š
With my best wishes.. š Y.E. (Researcher blog writer (Blogger))
Report comment
Amen Yildirim. Your three points above are exactly right. I can’t believe they even treat pet dogs and cats with psychiatric medication – dogs being on chronic medication for anxiety and depression, even though there is no safe and effective psychopharmacological treatment for anxiety and depression – that’s the stark truth. There is no safe and effective psychopharmacological treatment at all. What a total grift it is. It’s snake oil and almost everyone in this society believes in this stuff. See the irony of regarding such people as sane. I find the insights in the comments often the more salient and relevant views I ever hear on these issues so thank you Yildirim.
Report comment
Hi.. Giving psychiatric drugs to cats and dogs (animals)… A study was conducted on zebra fish.. Zebra fish were given psychiatric drugs. Zebrafish given psychiatric medication gave birth to baby fishs. Psychological syndromes have occurred in baby zebrafish;
“Parental exposure to antidepressants has lasting effects on offspring? A case study with zebrafish”
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653524007446
“…benzodiazepines can lead to neurocognitive changes, and in zebrafish, early exposure to antidepressants can be seen in three generations of offspring.”
https://www.madinamerica.com/2021/12/overuse-psychiatric-drugs-worsening-public-mental-health-doctor-argues/
————–
In other words, the toxic chemicals in psychiatric drugs are passed on to offspring ‘genetically (hereditary).. Possibly, probably.. An (unidentified) chemical brain injury occurred in zebrafish. And this brain damage appears to be an effect that is passed on from generation to generation to offspring…
So..Probably.. It could be the same for humans too. Psychiatric drugs have become a ‘biological weapon’ that can transmit mental illnesses from generation to generation. (Is it possible? Maybe…) Probably… Psychiatry (and pharmaceutical) industries.. They make money by damaging people’s healthy brains (chemically induced brain damage). And they make money by destroying the family structure of societies. Could this be the real reason for the increasing ‘mental illnesses’ in societies? (Maybe.. Probably..)
——-
Are dogs (and cats) secretly given psychiatric medications? We don’t know… But when I read in the media that it was given legally… We are almost in shock… Apparently, probably.. The psychiatric (and pharmaceutical) industry is working to make ‘mental illnesses’ permanent, not only in humans but also in animals. So.. It seems that they are trying to turn natural psychological problems into permanent ones and pass them on from generation to generation. They do all of this under the name of ‘mind (mental) health treatment’. So, it’s all LEGAL..
We LEGALLY have ‘mental illnesses’ because of psychiatric medications! š
We LEGALLY have ‘brain damage’ due to psychiatric medications! š
We are being LEGALLY maimed (injured) and killed because of psychiatric drugs! š
What a tragicomic and sad situation. Like a bad donkey prank.. š
—-
Probably.. What psychiatry doesn’t understand;
1) They believe that the mind and mental illnesses are in the brain. (They don’t believe that they are in the soul.) When the medical world, society and governments remain silent about this situation… That’s why they continue to prescribe toxic psychiatric medications with ease.
2) They believe that psychiatric medications ‘work and do no harm’.. So… (They do not believe that psychiatric medications ‘do not work and cause harm’.) However.. People are harmed (injured) and killed by psychiatric medications. When the medical world, society and governments remain silent about this situation… That’s why they continue to prescribe toxic psychiatric medications with ease. Unfortunately, unfortunately.. š
With my best wishes.. Y.E. š
Report comment
Amen Yildirim, but please don’t get frustrated when people don’t grasp the sanity of what you say – I think people can’t believe it is as bad as it is, but thank God there’s a few like you. Best wishes to you too.
Report comment
Prozac works well for dogs with anxiety which is very common in dogs compared to humans. Facts
Report comment
Is the dog a “bipolar” dog if it has a manic episode due to prozac?
Report comment
Great rejoinder.
Report comment
Corey,
Where exactly are you obtaining your āfactsā? Prozac, fluoxetine, is a neurotoxin. By āworks wellā, are you insinuating that causing brain and central nervous system damage (Breggin, P., 1991) in dogs is preferable to altering their environment to address the cause of their āanxiety?ā
Report comment
I’m not refuting what you have said. However, in my opinion, it is not just the psychiatrist, or the physician (MDs do this exact type of “medicine”). The pharmaceutical makers are the dealers. They have armies of attractive young professionals walking into the Dr’s offices with the sole intent of pushing their drugs. Now I’m not ignoring the kickbacks or the other incentives offered to prescribe this drug over that. I’m mad as hell because I noticed this over 20 years ago and have always been dismissed by others because “Dr knows best”. Dr’s are overworked humans that give advice, not orders.
There are actual lifesaving drugs, most of them do not fit into that category…
Report comment
Your making a lot of assumptions. Simply put this lady was given Xanax instead of SSRI trials which was a mistake. That’s the only conclusion you can make not what you are going on about
Report comment
It sounds like you are making a lot of assumptions yourself. Why do you feel such an urge to defend these drugs? Why not read and listen for a while and maybe learn that the situation is more complicated than you want to believe it to be?
Report comment
I’m not saying it’s not more complicated but everyone here making all or nothing blanket statements. Fact SSRIs lower suicidal thoughts reducing suicides. These needs have side effects but can be helpful and there will always be bad actors but most docs trying to help. The alternative is what to not give these meds? Doesn’t make sense
Report comment
“Everyone here” is an all-or-nothing blanket statement, Corey, so it seems you are displaying a bit of hypocrisy yourself here. Plenty of folks, including the Author, Robert Whitaker, (and me) take a much more nuanced approach. Read some of the articles by Johanna Moncrief, for instance.
“Fact SSRIs lower suicidal thoughts reducing suicides.” You believe this, but it is NOT a fact. Look at the work of Irving Kirsh and others. Prozac was initially not approved for sale in Germany due to increases in suicidal and violent thoughts/actions in some people. I am aware of no literature review that concludes “SSRIs lower suicidal thoughts reducing suicides.” (In fact, the best reviews I have seen suggest that only about 30% of users benefit significantly from taking antidepressants.) There is a black box warning about increased suicidal thinking in youth and young adults, hardly evidence of reduced suicides.
Do you have something to share along those lines to prove your claim? Or is that just what you believe to be the case? Have you ever read Whitaker’s work? Maybe you should have a good read before you draw unwarranted conclusions!
Report comment
Sometimes, SSRI medications have a rebound effect and CAUSE suicidality. Sometimes they do nothing because the patient does not have a serotonin deficit. Sometimes one medication in this class will work while another one won’t which requires a genetic study to see what would be most efficacious. Sometimes the patient is not depressed but personality disordered for which medication is mainly ineffective. The psychiatrist in this woman’s case was a charlatan and should lose their license and be sued for malpractice.
Report comment
Just to be clear, there is no evidence that anyone’s depression is caused by a “serotonin deficit.” Why SSRIs work as antidepressants for some people is not scientifically understood, but it’s not because of a “chemical deficit” in the brain, that much has become clear.
Report comment
Umm there is… https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165178124002026#:~:text=The%20findings%20suggest%20that%20SSRIs,was%20diminished%20by%20week%208.
Report comment
From your own study (emphasis added):
In contrast, studies on instances of suicidal behavior from weeks 1 to 10 found no significant difference in efficacy between SSRIs, non-SSRIs, and placebo. These results indicate that SSRIs MAY offer short-term protection against suicidal ideation. However, their long-term effectiveness in mitigating suicidal ideation and preventing suicidal behaviors is limited.
Report comment
https://sprc.org/news/antidepressants-and-suicidal-behavior/
Read
Report comment
So this is one meta-analysis claiming no INCREASE in suicidal effects on children or young adults. It certainly doesn’t suggest that SSRIs reduce suicide attempts or thinking. Of course, there are other meta-analyses that show that there IS an increase in suicidal thinking, or there never would have been a Black Box Warning in the first place. So your one meta-analysis is evidence, but not much, and certainly does not address your initial claim of decreased suicide attempts/thoughts resulting from SSRI use overall.
Report comment
It shows ssris reduce suicidal thoughts and attempts in adults. When they that’s the black box warning scripts for Prozac went down in children and suicides went up. Look it up.
Report comment
Sadly, you again are quoting propaganda. The Black Box warnings did NOT increase the suicide rate. Read the following:
https://www.madinamerica.com/2018/08/adolescent-suicide-and-the-black-box-warning-stat-gets-it-all-wrong/
Report comment
Corey, please explain the biological mechanism of action, or pathway, by which SSRI’s reduce suicidal ideation…. You can’t, can you?….
Should I rest my case?….
“Ye shall know the TRUTH, and the TRUTH shall set you free.” – the Bible
Report comment
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22309973/
Here’s a meta analysis showing reduction with ssris
Report comment
To begin with, this blog post, this article, isn’t about antidepressants, it’s about what Xanax did to someone, something that went away after she STOPPED such “treatment.” Seems like someone then decided she was supposed to be on antidepressants instead, because she had suicidal thoughts, although they only emerged after being on Xanax. If someone is in an abusive relationship which depresses them and makes them suicidal, but gets out of it, should they also be told that they should have been in an antidepressant trial!? How is such a correlation made, that by a professional who can prescribe such, when really the statement regarding suicidality was made concerning another psychiatric drug, and went away after treatment with that drugs was stopped?
Those two graphs regarding antidepressant efficacy are only for 84 days. Not only does that not say anything about what happens or happened afterwards, which statistically correlates with more relapsing, but we would have to see more data regarding what actually went on in the trial those 84 days, before just believing these graphs, that in themselves don’t show much efficacy, if those are the true results.
There are quite a few standard methods that the odds have been skewed, or made more favorable to the non control group:
1) Someone in the control group (and I’m sorry, in past posts I got control and non control confused, it was confusing to me because it’s the control group that doesn’t get the treatment, although to me it seems that getting a treatment is being controlled, so I’m sorry for that, in prior posts. REALLY sorry. I had control and non control group mixed up), however with antidepressants trials it was standard that would anyone in the control group get better within the first week or so, they would be taken out of the trial. Not counted. The guise being that then they weren’t really depressed although someone in the non control getting better is left there. In other words, to actually validate that those in the non control were actually being treated in a fashion that helped them, and not having the placebo effect or simply having their depression go away the first week, you’d have to have duplicates of them, exact duplicates, and have the other in the control group. That seems a bit impossible, which to me says you need to leave those in the control group that that got better the first week there. They of course didn’t take those in the non control group that got better the first week out of the trial, let alone see if they had disruptive withdrawal symptoms would they have to or want to get off of the medications. I think this “washout” method rigs the odds in favor of the non control group. Then often enough, many people in the non control group had to leave the trials, because of side effects, that also wasn’t counted as a failure of the antidepressants, this to me AGAIN rigs the odds. Added to this often the non control group was given not just antidepressants, but an antidepressants and a sedative because of restlessness, meaning it wasn’t really a trail for antidepressants, it was for more than one drug. And then they had to start adding people that already were on psychiatric drugs to get the odds they wanted, which means people that already were used to, liked, or in order to get approval from those prescribing already found psychiatric drugs favorable. Psychiatric drugs being then medications that disable natural functions of the brain, which they all do. Regarding people already in such a habit. Then one can add that there were many many trials made, and only the ones that added up to any efficacy were reported, the rest dismissed, this seems a bit dishonest, as well.
And then we have what happened to those in the non control group that had to get off of the antidepressants after the trial was over, and their sometimes severe side effects not being reported, or at first not included in the trial data.
After ALL OF THAT it would indeed be beyond bleak would there not be any efficacy turning up, but what turns up still remains quite marginal.
To determine what those graphs really show, we would have to be given the information regarding what I listed above. All of it. That isn’t given…..
Report comment
Cory, from one HCP to another, letās be honest. Research overwhelmingly shows at best 25-35% reduction of depressive or anxiety symptom per MADRS. Paired with psychotherapy, SSRIs still do not perform better than 35-40% in symptom reduction. Weāve long known that the monoamine theory of depression and treatment model is insufficient, which is why weāve turned to NMDA receptor activity with ketamine, Auvelity, and yes, psychedelics. Just plain talk therapy also doesnāt perform well, but goal oriented, root cause focused modalities do offer significant improvement/ symptom reduction. RTC studies show efficacy with supplements like NAC for anxiety/ compulsive symptoms, inositol for mood stabilization and ADHD, etc. Acting like SSRIs are a panacea is a disservice to our patients, there are far more effective treatment interventions with fewer side effects. Lastly, the point of the article was the danger of Benzos and indiscriminate prescribing practices. These ARE real problems in our field.
Report comment
Great reply, Steve! Thank you!
Report comment
Thank you all for the interesting commentary above.
Other medications were trialed (see para 3: “various medication trials”), but the Xanax nightmare had begun and continued. One local professional told me, after looking at a list of my prescriptions, that no medicine was going to work bc of so much Xanax being on board…
Anyone questioning the dangers of Xanax and dosage adjustments, I urge you to read similar stories on Benzobuddies.org, as well as those presented by the Benzodiazepine Information Coalition (BIC). Dosings matter, and should be monitoredā¦ again, I was on various medicines for months, and my doctor never laid eyes on me.
——————–
And, let’s all agree that we go to a psychiatrist for a reason. I was under considerable stress, which I could have addressed sooner, but I didnāt. However, deep down, I know things should never have gotten so ugly. I will forever find it incomprehensible that an addiction specialist allowed me to go up and up on Xanax, which he prescribed, without ever questioning it.
I think some bigger questions are at hand:
Why do some doctors know the dangers of Xanax/benzos, yet my doctor didnāt?
Did he not pursue CME credits?
Was my doctorās proximity to retirement part of the problem? I know this reeks of ageism, but when should doctors step down?
That said, my internist, who has been in practice for at least 30 years, is amazing. Sheās an extremely good listener and does research right in front of me when I have questions that she might not know the answer to.
Back to benzos…
Esteemed addiction researchers (see Frances, MD & Lembke, MD) state that we are in the midst of a hidden epidemic with benzos, yet these drugs are still prescribed like candy. Boy, do things need to be fixed. Letās continue to be thankful for forums like this one, as well as those I mentioned above, to get our stories out there.
Report comment
āstate that we are in the midst of a hidden epidemic with benzos, yet these drugs are still prescribed like candy. Boy, do things need to be fixed.ā
This critical point, got lost in the chatter of comments.
I also was negatively affected by benzodiazepines. They made me suicidal. I would present at the emergency room and get locked up and drugged with antipsychotics. Obviously, they didnāt know. I saved my own life, by quitting benzoās. No further issues.
Asking AI:
What percentage of people prescribed benzodiazepines experience negative side effects? What are those negative side effects?
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/what-percentage-of-people-pres-Wy02ImxkQIG2t8IIfE0ppA
Report comment
Your rejection of psychiatric medicine is as extremist and dangerous as the psychiatrist who failed this patient. You sound like JFK, Jr, who is also ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Remind me…who was it that saved the writer’s life and helped her detox from Benzos? A PSYCHIATRIST with the correct medication!
Report comment
People are well within their rights to reject “psychiatric medicine” after years of hell with it. A much much bigger problem than the medicine is the people who dole them out, the ideology they have and the way they think and behave. Drugs are drugs. They don’t prescribe or take themselves.
I hope AI comes in and kicks out 95% of mental health industry graduates from their jobs. Diagnosis, prescription, it’s all removed from their hands and control is as much as possible with the person with the problems himself. Less enrollment in psychiatry courses in med school. Eventually phase the damn thing out as much as possible. Study dentistry or ENT instead. Heck, become a video game streamer.
Report comment
“I hope AI comes in and kicks out 95% of the mental health industry graduates from their jobs.”
Here’s hoping for 99%.
Report comment
Unfortunately, the hospital psychiatrist in this situation does not represent the majority of psychiatrists.
Report comment
You make an excellent point. I am forever grateful to the hosp. psychiatrist for voicing his strong opinions against benzos. And, also for telling me that I had been increased much too fast on the BuSpar.
After the ER, I found another excellent provider who got me off everything…
I had to be tapered safely – – I can’t emphasize enough how much better I feel…
So, there are excellent psych people out there.
Regarding medication, if people find meds that work for them, who am I to judge? Everyone has to do what is right for them.
Report comment
āEveryone has to do what is right for them.ā
How can people know what is right for them when so many doctors fail to provide adequate INFORMED CONSENT???
If doctors routinely provided the proper INFORMED CONSENT, thereād be no need for MIA.
Report comment
The only thing “complexed and nuanced” about psychiatry is the way it fools people into believing its “diagnoses” represent discrete biological “disorders” that its “medications” can “treat”.
Report comment
You are saying no psych meds work? That’s laughable
Report comment
Psych meds only “work” by numbing people’s emotions. I don’t find that laughable.
Report comment
Absolutely not true. There are plenty of psych meds that help in all sorts of ways, without a numbing side effect.
Report comment
What are those “plenty of psych meds that help in all sorts of ways, without a numbing side effect?”
Report comment
Please explain exactly what you mean by “help” and then explain exactly how, why and when this “help” happens.
Report comment
Yes, Katayun, SOMETIMES, SOME people do SEEM to do “better”, for SOME length of time, on SOME DRUGS….Psychiatry’s “success rate” runs from single digits, to maybe 20 – 30%. AT BEST…. The studies are unequivocal. Long term use of psych drugs almost ALWAYS results in negative outcomes, including as much as a 25 year shorter life-span…. In my book, psychiatry continues to FAIL….and psych drugs are better described as NEURO-TOXINS….
Hey, sometimes, some people seem to do better on fentanyl, meth, crack, heroin, etc.,…
Report comment
Few psych meds work. I’ve been on 46, including clozapine, but you can just put me in the “treatment resistant” category instead of believing psychotropics are 75% placebo effect.
The STAR-D trial’s methodology has been dissected; when numbers aren’t fiddled with, efficacy was ~30%.
From personal experience, a hefty chunk of the participants for whom the SSRI did “work” made that claim based on the fact that feeling emotionally numb was an improvement to the blackest depression.
Psychiatrists are so truly awful when it comes to the consideration of side effects or discontinuing. It’s just academic information in their heads–lived experience doesn’t matter.
The psychiatric drugs that have helped me?
Prazocin (not a psych drug)
Propranolol (not a psych drug).
As I mentioned, the other 43 medications did not.
In 50 years, stewing patients in cocktails of drugs no one understands will be viewed with the same horror that we hold for lobotomies today.
Report comment
Few psych meds with according to a study of 1 person
Report comment
“In 50 years, stewing patients in cocktails of drugs no one understands will be viewed with the same horror that we hold for lobotomies today.”
THAT’S inevitable, I believe, especially now with the internet. But sadly, it’s going to take a lot more iatrogenic suffering to get us there.
Report comment
Corey,
The “psych meds work” … if the goal of the “psych meds” is to create iatrogenic illnesses with the “psych meds,” for the profit of the “psych” and mainstream medical industries.
Please take Steve’s advice, and read critical psychiatry advocates’ work, specifically Whitaker’s, Moncrief’s, Kirsch’s, Breggin’s, et al.
And, if you also still believe the “antipsychotics” are beneficial, you may even do me the common curtesy of reading my medical research findings. Since the antipsychotics / neuroleptics can create the positive symptoms of “schizophrenia,” via anticholinergic toxidrome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxidrome
Plus the neuroleptics can also create the negative symptoms of “schizophrenia,” via neuroleptic induced deficit syndrome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroleptic-induced_deficit_syndrome
I didn’t personally make up the names of those medically known toxidrome and syndrome.
Report comment
I’m aware but they still work. Those are side effects of which the antipsychotics have a lot of them, granted but what’s the alternative? If you hear voices, don’t try anything? Second generation are much lower anyway
Report comment
They still SOMETIMES work for SOME PEOPLE. And it kind of depends what you mean by “work.” Read up on long-term studies, the folks who manage to avoid antipsychotics or use them sparingly do significantly better in the long run. This is shown in more than one long-term study. Again, your tendency to generalize make a lot of what you say of lesser value than it would be. It’s not so black and white as you want to believe.
Report comment
Harrow is the best example of how long-term antipsychotic use leads to worse long-term outcomes. Take some time and look it up!
Report comment
What’s the alternative? Joining a “Hearing Voices” network.
FYI: second-generation antipsychotics are not lower in side effects than first-generation.
Report comment
Any psychiatrist who does NOT refer a patient who “hears voices” to the “HVN”, – “Hearing Voices Network”, -(I think that’s the correct name….), is at best culpable of medical negligence, IMHO…. As for psych drugs, I was put on them in 10th grade, at age 15. The next 20 – 25 years were a LIVING HELL, BECAUSE of the psych drugs, and attendant medical neglect from the fraudulent pseudoscience drug racket known as “psychiatry”. The last 30 years OFF psych drugs & psychiatry have been better. Sort of. There is NOTHING I can do, to get back the decades of LIFE psychiatry stole from me…. So, please understand that I have little tolerance for the IGNORANCE and CRUELTY of psych apologists….
Yes, SOMETIMES, SOME drugs do SEEM to work better for SOME people, SOMETIMES…. But, since psychiatry has as yet made NO attempt to determine who doesn’t need the poison pills, well….case closed. Psychiatry is a fraudulent drug racket. That’s MY TRUTH.
Report comment
Corey, I think it’s time you did some real homework.
Report comment
I asked A.I. (perplexity.ai) what was wrong with your statement āantipsychotics have a lot of negative side effects, but what is the alternativeā?
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/what-is-wrong-with-this-statem-cznVUO1aR6ucB6yx9wNIUQ
I further asked what are the alternatives to antipsychotics for treating schizophrenia?
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/what-are-the-alternatives-to-a-MSSM.VSISrGXUCYOF5i6ng
I am just learning to use A.I. so I am uncertain how long these links are good. They work, as of now, while I am writing this. In case they donāt work, by the time you are reading this – replicate these questions in a AI of your choosing.
I realize that your training has you spouting āthe party line (of psychiatry)ā, but do yourself a favor and come fully into the year that it is – 2025. The subject is far more nuanced than you were taught (and likely are reimbursed for) and you are getting blow back from people who are all too familiar with the harms, exceeding the good.
In 5 years time, we will all have an A.I. doctor on our phones.
Update your knowledge, or become unemployed!
Report comment
“I realize that your training has you spouting “the party line (of psychiatry)”, but do yourself a favor and come fully into the year that it is – 2025. The subject is far more nuanced than you were taught (and likely are reimbursed for) and you are getting blown back from people who are all too familiar with the harms, exceeding the good.”
Brilliant comeback, Hope.
P.S. Thanks also for the fantastic links!
Report comment
Harrow looked at people not on them who had milder disease so not being on antipsychotics occurred bc of selection bias. That’s why cohort studies aren’t great. First episode psychosis studies say try med for 2 years then taper off slowly the study that showed benefit not being on long term included one episode psychosis pts not long term schizophrenic pts so it’s not accurate to tell everyone that don’t be on antipsychotics long term you’ll do better that’s irresponsible to give that type of advice to a schizophrenia pt. Period. And it happens all the time in forums where people don’t know the details and make assumptions. That’s what we recommend. There is no long term study saying if your are hearing voices don’t take antipsychotics and you’ll do better it’s a selection bias or milder population than what we see. We’re both talking the same of course there are people that don’t do that in the field but to disparage the field c of your bad experience is painting top broad a brush. We see people everyday that hear voices we have to give them something. Giving them nothing is not an option they would just continue to hear voices.
Report comment
You clearly didn’t really read Harrow. Whitaker has a fantastic analysis which sinks your argument fully, though clearly the psychiatric establishment grasped at that straw, and I’m guessing that’s what you are responding with rather than your own analysis.
Harrow identified 4 groups: bad prognosis on aps, bad prognosis off aps, better prognosis on aps, and better prognosis off aps. The outcomes sorted this way: better prognosis off aps, bad prognosis OFF aps, better prognosis ON aps, worse prognosis on aps.
If the worse prognosis clients off aps do BETTER than the better prognosis ON aps, that’s the opposite of selection bias.
But I doubt you will bother to revise your statement. So far, you only take positions that support your narrative. If we can’t have a rational exchange about this, I’m done with this conversation. Your position has been thoroughly undermined for anyone who actually cares about science.
Seriously, Corey. Read the book!!!
Report comment
There are hundreds of studies that show reduction in auditory hallucinations and paranoia with antipsychotics. I would like to see you work in a psychiatry clinic and take every schizophrenic off of their antipsychotic if that’s what you’re proposing?
Report comment
See how you attack anyone and anything that you don’t agree with, and use emotional arguments? Did I say to take everyone off their antipsychotics? Why raise these pointless straw man arguments if your case is so strong? Why not just present your evidence?
Of course it’s longitudinal, how else do you look at long term outcomes?????
The facts are there. You don’t care to learn. That’s your choice, but don’t claim I said things I did not.
Done wasting time on you.
Report comment
It’s a longitudal study by the way. Not very useful type of study. The author concluded this is from antipsychotic resistance not that antipsychotics are bad which is what you’re seeming to imply. Are you suggesting people go off their antipsychotics? Because that’s dangerous especially if you don’t know them
Report comment
That’s hardly a personal attack honestly it seems like you’re being dramatic. But what’s the point of a study if it doesn’t change your management. Like saying antidepressants and antipsychotics have no benefit long-term what’s the purpose of stating that and the unintended consequences you can get people off their medication or increase the stigma of taking medication so there’s actually a downside to it. A cost. Yeah it’s a longitudinal study it’s not a good study type we need double blind plaxebo ontrolled long-term studies.
Report comment
It is an attack to pretend someone is proposing something they are not and criticize them for it. Strawman argument. Study logic sometime. And read the damned book!
It is childish at best to respond to the question, “Why did people with worse prognoses do better on less APs than those with worse prognoses on more APs” with “Longitudinal studies aren’t worth much.” That is an emotional argument not a logical one, which is why I’ve decided there’s no point in trying to have a rational conversation on this subject with you. As a wise man once said, “The first barrier to learning is thinking you know all about the subject.”
Steve out.
Report comment
Corey, maybe it’s time you ask yourself why you (seem) so intent on suppressing other people’s auditory hallucinations.
Did you happen to know that a diagnosis of “schizophrenia” is very subjective?
And that “schizophrenia” also happens to be the diagnosis most used to improperly justify medicating people with highly toxic neuroleptics?
It’s better to have a handle on your own anxieties before you start trying to suppress someone else’s.
Report comment
Yo Steve! Hats off to you.
Report comment
Meaning of “improperly justify”:
1. Using faulty logic: Employing logical fallacies, such as ad hominem attacks, false dilemmas, or slippery slopes to support an argument.
2. Misrepresenting facts: Twisting or selectively presenting information to fit a narrative, rather than providing an accurate and balanced account.
3. Appealing to emotions: Manipulating people’s emotions to persuade them, rather than relying on rational arguments and evidence.
4. Ignoring context: Failing to consider relevant factors, nuances, or context that are crucial to understanding the issue at hand.
And numbers 5’s the Grandaddy of them all:
EXPLOITING AUTHORITY: Relying on one’s position, status, or expertise to assert an argument without providing adequate evidence or reasoning.
Corey, by any chance do any of these happen resonate with you?
Report comment
From Corey: “Are you suggesting people go off their antipsychotics? Because thatās dangerous especially if you donāt know them”
Corey, are you suggesting that when, after implimenting antipsychotics for schizophrenia, or for bipolar (when such medications didn’t exist beforehand), that even though since the advent of such medications, there are at least 10 times (I think maybe 20 times or more, but I’d have to look) more occurrences of such diseases, that anyone questioning whether they are effective is promoting something dangerous? That’s simple statistics. And then there’s the science of how such medications work in that they cause a chemical imbalance in order to disable normal brain functions, and thus the short term reductions of symptoms. But they cause chemical imbalance, which first the drug companies tried to make out came from the disease, but then had to retract. THAT, I find I have to add is simple science, so people KNOW, and can make their own decisions. When someone can’t supply scientific or statistical facts without being accused of saying something is bad, when they haven’t, this regarding how objective science points out something that should be known given informed consent, what is that?
Then you make a statement about whether someone knows another, regarding telling them to get off of their meds. Which also wasn’t suggested, only by you that that’s what was said. Steve simply supplied statistical truths. But yeah, someone presents scientific evidence which would give people perspective regarding whether antipsychotics are the right choice, if that evidence isn’t favorable, then that’s dangerous, regardless of what the evidence says? Added to this. This whole blog is regarding a lady who did better getting off of Xanax. You don’t know her. She hasn’t been to you for treatment. You don’t even know what she initially went to the psychiatrist for, and yet, devoid of all of that knowing, you have made numerous attempts acting as if you have objective knowledge how she should have been treated.
Also, what Steve pointed out regarding the Harrow study. It’s the most severe cases of “schizophrenia” that did the best when going off of the antipsychotics given long term results. And so that’s the OPPOSITE or selection bias. Which then are WHAT they are, long term results. It also happens that people live more than say two years, regarding whether long term, or rather longitudinal studies are useful studies to look at.
You disparage cohort studies, longitudinal studies, although this isn’t really founded. You mention whether there are long term studies that say taking no antipsychotics hasn’t been shown to help hearing voices. When there’s lack of ANY kind of long term study regarding ANYTHING determining that it isn’t effective, this DOES NOT MEAN it’s effective. EXCUSE ME, but that way you could implement anything regarding whether it’s effective or not, as long as one lacks a long term study that says it’s not effective….
You also went on regarding forums and details. When Harrow’s study showed how “schizophrenics” with the most severe ” cases,” and that wasn’t him making those diagnosis, when he shows they do better in the long run getting off of antipsychotics, this DOES NOT MEAN that you can determine the opposite, that then they weren’t severe cases, which IS what you are doing, DESPITE what the data shows. THAT regarding details. Or stating there’s no long term study saying to not apply said treatment to said condition, so that excuses the mainstream treatment. NO! It doesn’t. Would anyone actually look at what you stated there, they would see you are promoting the premise that as long as it hasn’t been proven that not applying said directive is better than the directive, then that excuses or condones the directive….. Those are details? We’ve done something, and no one proved whether doing nothing is better, so that’s being helpful. And then regarding statistics that show that “something” isn’t always such a good idea, that’s dangerous. This is OK as long as they haven’t proven that not implementing it is more helpful…..
Report comment
I got curious āwho is Harrow?ā so what are you people debating?
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/is-there-a-medical-research-pa-gJuSm1aRSNK9rkDXPwnhWw
Report comment
I had a roommate in a psych hospital who ran her car into a ditch because the voices in her head told her to kill herself. She told me that the voices subsided when she was put on a new antipsychotic medication. I was so happy for her. I wish I kept in touch with her after I left. I hope she’s alive and well.
Some people do find some psych meds to be helpful for them. The problem is that most medications for any of our health problems (heart, liver, etc.) have side effects and our bodies develop a resistance to them as well after a while.
Report comment
Well, I had a neighbor, across the hall, and he had rescued a puppy from, what he told me, having all of his siblings murdered, drowned. He told me that those people had been arrested, and the one puppy, that I knew of, had been rescued. He then told me that the dog was put on antidepressants. What we, and who was left in the apartment building experienced, was that as soon as this man left each day, or each morning, the puppy would howl so loud the whole block would hear it, and it scratched so much at the door that it scratched part of the wood, and the carpet loose. Another friend of mine had rescued a dog from the shelter that was already on antidepressants, and couldn’t handle the dog at all, and had to return it. She was so loving of animals, a cat she had adopted she put an extra door for it in her door, would build special housing etc. This lady was loving to any stray, but that one dog…… I did a google search for: “My dog on antidepressants was a nightmare” and you get hits like “antidepressant poisoning in dogs” or “antidepressant toxicity in dogs” or another hit explaining it should only be for short term.
Report comment
Thank you. This helps explain why stopping Wellbutrin changed me from feeling chronically uneasy to feeling quite composed.
But get this: the prescribing psychiatrist, who was very “well-respected”, NEVER MADE THE CONNECTION. He looked at me in amazement while saying, “You are a different person”, which I was. He said he’d never seen it happen to anyone before.
Stopping the crap was my idea.
You’d think the ability to speak would enable you to be clearly understood. Experience has taught me otherwise.
The moral of my story? Never underestimate a psychiatrist’s ability to misinterpret what you are trying to say.
P.S. I hope the poor dog found a new home.
Report comment
Birdsong, regarding your “improperly justify” comment above, that’s probably your most SCIENTIFIC, and least POETIC comment ever!
4 bullet points, even!
We all here at MiA just love the shorty-short, poetic, “zinger” comments you usually write!….
KEEP UP the GOOD WORK!
Report comment
Thank you, Bill. š I just try to write in a way that feels authentic to me.
Report comment
Birdsong, I’m glad you got off Welbutrin. I still am “recovering
from someone making out he’s an authority being a psychiatrist, comes in here, a blog where a lady very honestly details how she wanted to take her own life because of the side effects of Xanax, and got out of it despite a doctor that wouldn’t listen; and this other “authority” says we got it all wrong (SIC added by me):”Your [SIC] making a lot of assumptions. Simply put this lady was given Xanax instead of SSRI trials which was a mistake. Thatās the only conclusion you can make not what you are going on about”. THAT is a professional? He doesn’t see this is about Xanax toxicity that shouldn’t have happened, and the rest of it I already stated and would have to repeat, such as he doesn’t KNOW why she went to see a psychiatrist to begin with, who he WASN’T; so he determining whether or what type of drug she should have had is impossible. Unprofessional. Not what this blog is about. She has come back and pointed out there’s a whole community dealing with this problem YET, after years of knowing how dangerous this drug is, and it’s STILL handed out like candy: Benzo Buddies and BIC she mentioned as Internet sites. She also said that people go to a psychiatrist for a reason, and that being that she was under considerable stress, the psychiatrist posting here had already decided she was being treated for anxiety (no sir, the Xanax caused the extreme anxiety), doles out āinformationā regarding what supposedly would have helped for what he doesn’t know was going on and was wrong regarding. The only conclusions we could make (he says) was that she was supposed to be on treatment for something, that since he mentioned the treatment has had several severe warnings itself regarding, people have had to rebute or question data he shares, and why he shared them wasn’t why she [who wrote the blog and wasn’t asking for another diagnosis or prescription] went to a psychiatrist to begin with.
It’s quite predatory when people start talking about severely disturbing things to have someone pop up with answers, in this case inappropriately, have that not phase them, and then start sharing data that’s questionable or inaccurate regarding diagnosis they were never asked to make and even would one believe such doesn’t apply in this case, add catch phrases, deny science, dismiss certain brands of trials if they don’t show the data wanted, display personal attacks in the form of straw man arguments, saying both you and Steve (and probably more, who can keep track of it) said things you never did……..
Some of us are actually trying to keep track of the truth!
Just an example of how OVERLOADING such behavior is, when you wrote: “Stopping the crap was my idea.” in reading that at first, and the second time as well, I thought of course she’s (or heās) referring to what she thought that the psychiatrist would have EVER prescribed that, “Stopping the crap” having taken on a dual meaning and I went down a layer regarding what it could mean, that such disruptive stuff shouldn’t have been prescribed: that when he said, as you detail here :”But get this: the prescribing psychiatrist, who was very āwell-respectedā, NEVER MADE THE CONNECTION. He looked at me in amazement while saying, āYou are a different personā, which I was. He said heād never seen it happen to anyone before.” I thought, of course, she thought in general stop the crap, stop handing stuff out like that, but you meant it was YOUR idea to stop with the medications, and he had never seen that with anyone else. Added to that you had to take yourself off before telling him, and only then could he see. I mean, it would have been something to FIRST ask him, hear the negative response, then take yourself off, and then what? Which might not even have been safe given the situation, because you can see again how defensive such people can get, From this blog also.
And the poor dog that was put on antidepressants….the one a friend of mine couldn’t handle and brought back to the pound. I think she stated that he tried to bite her, or had (she was giving him a bath, which one can only wonder why she would even try that with a dog), but it was a really nice lady. Always took in underdogs, although this really was a dog, but on antidepressants she couldn’t deal with it. I have to say I felt it around me, from the other dimension, where everything can happen, and so much of it has, I just have to learn one can’t talk about such with too many people. Let alone too many psychiatrists. It’s the science of thought, and I mean science. And so I had a whole so many page of impossible stuff that has happened that I felt was too much (Elsa the lioness that appeared out of the fourth dimension when I was doing the yoga pose the tree at a bus stop, that no longer is there and informing a lady waiting where they moved it that they put up a fence and took the shelter away because maybe homeless people would hang out there and thus they moved the stop I realized later she was an angel among us, and then before they took the bus stop away from that area a whole flock of seagulls murmured perfectly each of them catching a bread pellet the whole flock staying in flight to catch each pellet one by one, whatās called Indian file, pellets I had made from bread that had been discarded and I kept for no reason until there was a reason or it happened, and where I had picked it up miles across the city ended up being a place I teleported away from having to cross there at a stoplight, when I stepped so carefully to avoid slipping on the ice that there was no fear to do something good or be chastised (I do use yaktrax and such now and did then mostly) ending up with one gentle step on the other side of the building, around the area where every time I needed to escape rationality of limitations Iād play with a Mozart aria and the singer who had reincarnated and died since again appeared out of nowhere like Elsa, and so many I lose track, the earth does have a history that speaks and the wave patterns shown in the double list experiment to become particles emerge in dreamtime to show life always had meaning, and then most recently along with the lady at the portal area where they moved the bus stop another being regarding what touches in with the fourth dimension when you let go of fear appearedā¦. And thus were pages I donāt know where they went, apparently I didnāt even save them, although I could keep adding to that supposed word salad foreverā¦…) thought the science of thoughtā¦.. THAT is something different than turning off the physical mechanism of thought called the brain, akin to turning off a warning signal, such as a smoke alarm or when the car says something etc. etc. when the warning is too much for whoever would have to deal with waking up instead, to thought.
(Elsa the lioness that appeared out of the fourth dimension
when I was doing the yoga pose
the tree
at a bus stop, that
no longer is there
and informing
a lady waiting where they moved it
that they put up a fence
and took the shelter away
because maybe homeless people would hang out there
and thus they moved the stop
I realized later she was an angel among us,
and then
before they took the bus stop away from that area
a whole flock of seagulls murmured
perfectly
each of them catching a bread pellet
the whole flock staying in flight
to catch each pellet
one by one,
whatās called Indian file,
pellets I had made
from bread that had been discarded
and I kept for
no reason
until there was a reason
or it happened, and
where I had picked it up
miles across the city
ended up being a place I teleported away
from having to cross there at a stoplight,
when I stepped
so carefully
to avoid
slipping on the ice
that there was no fear
to do something good
or be chastized
ending up
with one gentle step
on the other side of the building,
around the area where
every time I needed to escape rationality of limitations
I would play with a Mozart aria
and the singer
who had reincarnated and died since
again appeared
out of nowhere
like Elsa,
and so many
I lose track,
the earth
does have a history that speaks
and the wave patterns
shown in the double list experiment
to become particles
emerge in dreamtime
to show life always had meaning,
and then most recently
along with the lady
at the portal area
where they moved the bus stop
another being
regarding
what touches in with the fourth dimension
when you let go of fear appearedā¦.
And thus were pages
I donāt know where they went, apparently
I didnāt even save them, although
I could keep adding to this
supposed word salad
foreverā¦…)
Report comment
Thank you, Nijinski. I’m glad I got off Wellbutrin, too š
Perhaps I should have been clearer, but yes, when I used the word “crap” I was referring to Wellbutrin. And getting off it was my idea. The psychiatrist didn’t object, which was kind of odd, now that I think about it. But hearing him say he’d never seen someone change for the better after going off it made me realize something was wrong and it wasn’t with me.
In any event, I, too am recovering from the person you referred to. This kind of verbal back-and-forth is both infuriating and exhausting. However, reading your detailed analysis of the situation is helping me process it. Thank you for this.
It is indeed predatory when people think they know more than they do and then try to discredit people who disagree with them.
What bothers me most is how people like this invariably come off as so sure of themselves. Clearly this man is both out of bounds AND out of his depth in matters of critical psychiatry.
I enjoyed reading your poetic entry. Perhaps your being musically gifted gives you more access to the fourth dimension than most people, which isn’t a bad thing, as long as you know where you are.
Report comment
Interesting you mentioned Elsa…. I remember seeing “Born Free” when I was little. The scene where Joy Adamson says to her husband, “Elsa is free because she was born free, and we should be too” is something I’ve never forgotten.
Report comment
Oh birdsong you didn’t need to be clearer. If I had gone one step further it would have been thinking you meant that the drug companies should stop with their games, how to get things approved: what their intentions are. The point being one gets lost in such a swamp of convoluted….. When the lobbyist becomes the supposed authority, and what’s the difference? Is it ideology or a paycheck? Or is it called for me? And who is pulling the strings? Just like trying to talk with somebody who has been all indoctrinated with a whole repertoire of responses to insist that the planet is flat or that the sun revolves around the Earth. Why? Because then whatever outfit promotes such ideology can sell their stuff. Chemical imbalances that the treatment causes which is said to alleviate what it causes. And then you have more of the problem. And so when there’s statistics that shows that there’s rising problems and it’s become critical there’s an epidemic then we need more of what causes it: not only the chemical imbalance (that the drugs cause: the treatment not the supposed disease) also the paranoia in society. Make the whole populous alarmist about something and there you go: they’re paranoid fixated…. There’s a whole war going on against natural functions of the brain. Intelligence….. This society is so full of believing it needs to control people with fear whether it’s the penal system militaries the school system handing out grades religions talking about how money who knows what else. And it trains people to do such, you end up with a select group of people so sociopath that the only winning they see left is dowsing the population to be controlled by them whether it’s psychiatric drugs or other forms of mind control. Who is the guy that was actually on Charlie Rose going on about how you would stop homelessness if you put that population on psychiatric drugs or other such nonsense? There’s no reason they’re homeless you just dope them up and make them more docile and able to be mind controlled. They’re going to go in the factories feed consumerism and help destroy the rest of the planet with pollution etc. And the people pulling his strings are worse except that he thinks he needs them. That winning is ditching their own humanity by trying to destroy it in others. While this comment has the option to edit it I had to go look and that I guess was E Torrey Fuller promoting this idea that you could drug up all the homeless people and they’d be all functional. You know let’s just ignore the whole history of what such controlled substances have done and make up a new fantasy and people think oh yeah. I guess he wasn’t in Charlie Rose’s brain series but that’s also just a bunch of lobbyists actually. You get that all over the place in corporate media of course not just the mental health system what you hear about any topic regarding any of what people are supposed to be controlled with regarding fear. After a certain point you are just completely lied to basically and all they have to do is find some angle to make a mental construct to mislead you with……. Maybe I should listen to Charlie Rose and his brain series which came out before he was basically fired because of the me too movement but yeah so that’s still out there like it’s something. Maybe I should listen to it but I never watch the news either….so much stuff I just don’t even believe it. I guess if I watched Charlie Rose brain series I’d have to take out a notepad to start writing down all the convolute everything….. Because otherwise I probably would get totally lost trying to remember it all, it’s totally overwhelming. I mean you have to act like you’re taking a college class where you have to keep track of how much they’re lying to you and take the same kind of notes you would take to see what somebody is saying when it’s actually scientific but here you have to keep track of….. And it’s all hidden under we know we’re causing a chemical imbalance but if you don’t say it’s treating one then the people won’t take the medications, which only work in the short term that’s all you have long-term everything gets worse but you’re also ignoring along with every cause of chemical imbalance not treated it, and yeah there’s way more mental illness because we’re causing this chemical imbalance which we can’t tell people but that’s just that it is emerging in society it wasn’t being treated before although there is more disability…. Incredibly incoherent other than how it deceives people while everything is getting worse in the long run for them to believe that what caused the problem is going to fix it….. Then there’s more of the problem so you can cherry pick the minority that it is working for as if that’s going to fix it when it has caused the spike instead. Well people get more fearful and more moralistic…… I have to stop now in a minute I can’t edit anymore
Report comment
“This society is so full of believing it needs to control people with fear…”
It’s sad that lobbyists have come to be seen as the authority. It’s gotten to where there’s almost no point in keeping up with their lies, especially now that corporate media and corporate medicine work synergistically.
Be that as it may, I still have a feeling the tide may turn sooner than we expect.
Report comment
After reading the last comment of mine, it being posted I think I need to clean that up.
My point was that itās like a lobbyistās dream when the treatment they are promoting is hidden to be statistically in correlation with the spike of the problem. When you donāt tell people that the medications cause chemical imbalance, but tell them that they treat a chemical imbalance to make them keep taking the medication, then youāve hidden whatās really going on. And then they add on the untruth that itās like diabetes medications. Or any other medications that actually does treat scientifically a chemical imbalance rather than causing one to suppress āsymptoms,ā of whatās labeled as a psychiatric condition. If short term, the brain disabling affect of causing a chemical imbalance suppresses symptoms, this trumps the fact that in the long run, the chemical imbalance brought on by the medications makes everything worse. And then people become more and more paranoid of any symptoms of mental illness, because of the spike. In themselves and in others. The media chimes in and highlights bad cases, often people that already were treated in a way in correlation with the problem to say that that means more treatment rather than what science and statistics show. They fail to see the difference between what the medications cause and what life itself causes. And then people who at first had what life causes end up having what the medications cause, and so people think itās all part of the same ball game, when in reality without the medications added thereās more recovery of what life was causing. Statistics show that, but not if you say that people are discovering they have chemical imbalances to excuse giving them one with treatment, and lie to them otherwise they wonāt continue treatment.
And people are totally brainwashed, their first knee jerk reaction, if not enlightened, is to believe what correlates with the spike of the problem, what correlates with causing the paranoia they have, that this is how to get it to stop. And they think they have to implement that, police it, convince others, politically get the system to be able to force treat others.
And these violent acts of supposedly āuntreatedā mental health patients werenāt occurring BEFORE they were ātreatedā to any degree comparable to whatās also become a whole spike. Cat has nicely shared studies that prove correlation, simply with the medications. I donāt think that was there before the implementation, and YET itās mainly made out to be what would stop it, when thatās AGAIN the same series of 1) create short term suppression of symptoms 2) say itās treating a chemical imbalance while knowing itās doing the opposite 3) profit off of the phobia when things get worse, which correlates with the āmedicationsā not the ādisease.ā 4) fill corporate media with scare tactics, while suppressing those that are part of the statistics that recover without āmedicationsā while without the āmedsā thereās more recoveryā¦. 5) when putting a person on medications make sure it falls under medical confidentiality, so that one canāt really determine causality.
Can you imagine the same going on with say heart medications, or any other where thereās compelling evidence there could be a causal link, but the information is withheld. I actually a bit cringe using the word ācompellingā because how often this was used all the years the drug companies made out they would find proof thereās the chemical imbalance going on that their drugs fix, but they havenāt been able to. THAT they will look into and find nothing, but the other side they donāt even considerā¦…
We always have to hear stories of how this drug helped so and so, while at the same time, someone who got off of their drug often has to do it without telling the psychiatrist, or their family, and thus falls off of the radar. Also the whole spectrum of treatments that arenāt drug related, or arenāt given WITH drugs, or could be INSTEAD, this isnāt even really offered, so no one really knows what would have happened to the cherry picked minority where the drugs have helped, one doesnāt know if something else would have helped them, and then beyond that the drugs are still available. Which is another thing, we canāt speak the scientific truth or we are keeping people from their drugs, we are saying all drugs are bad, we are saying psychiatric drugs donāt work. No, we are honoring science. Logic would say there would be less, it also says there would be more recovery if different methods were available, certainly methods that correlate more with recovery in the long term, and then the drugs are still there. But one canāt say all of that without it being put forth that then we arenāt doing anything. A person is considered non compliant, or just not valued for their input when they havenāt gone the drug route. How many people, given how the system works, stopped taking the mediation without their psychiatrist knowing it, and THEN he found them showing signs of recovery? And then they got out of the system. Or they just stopped going to see the psychiatrist. Robert Whitaker just did an interview where Courteny Harding revealed that EXACTLY what I said was going on with many of those who had recovered and gone off of their meds, because they at first didnāt want to say they had, then showed them drawers full of medications they had never taken, but had picked up at the pharmacy because the ācommunityā would otherwise have problems. If she hadnāt been able to hire people who knew how to relate to those that had recovered, who made them feel comfortable enough to confide, without such sensitivity this information wouldnāt have turned up. How often is that going on where the information remains hidden?
Thatās one of the first things police ask you, because Iāve had them ask me, whether Iām taking āmedications.ā I lose track of how many times people just say: āheās crazy.ā People I donāt even know. Iām also not ever supposed to have recovered, you know, from things that happened decades ago. I was just riding my bike around, once, someplace I used to go, and I hear: āheās crazy!ā and then āHe saw usā¦ā¦.ā as if Iām some target for the same āentertainmentā people go to a spook house for. For the most part, they are quite totally out of their minds. I had a bad tooth infection, it actually became abscessed, and had been that way for a couple of years, I was stubborn about it being healed with alternative methods or a miracle. Found that colloidal silver kept it at bay, although it was holding me back. Then I found a healer lady Carol Everett Healing Sanctuary and following her instructions within 3 months it wasnāt holding me back anymore, although it showed up in x-rays for a couple of years still, but since is gone, which is supposedly impossible. But in the interim, I was going to a church, and was talking in store with the store keeper about Jesus. And I was of course rather animated about it. Iām not all that gun ho about Jesus, by the way, because there ARE others, and THEY have helped me more, but Jesus is part of it. But there are others who didnāt play media games becoming āthe saviorā and making alliances with powers in the Universe to resurrect them, as if escaping the situation and sharing miracles someplace else would be a failure, which it wouldnāt have been, and would express forgiveness in a higher way, because they heād still have the body nature gave him, and deal with the challenge of how it responds, and how it heals. Anyhow, I was going on about Jesus. A lady from church says to a child with her: āheās crazy.ā I just ignored it. You hear this so often itās not worth responding to. Then, during a church service, when I was going through stuff, but just myself an non violent, she gets up before the service is over and says, as if SHE knows and other should heed her: āHEāS CRAZY.ā I donāt know who this lady is at all, and then looking through the psychology department where my father taught and I got my bachelorās degree in music, sheās a psychology teacher there. In the meantime, Iāve found out stuff regarding psychology she wouldnāt learn academically, certainly didnāt who insight, the tooth has healedā¦ā¦
The wheat from the Chaffā¦ā¦ā¦.. And thereās A LOT of chaff, itās not really fair to compare that to wheatā¦ā¦. I donāt think wheat has such a problem, Butā¦. Why I would want to be part of such a āsocietyā¦ā¦.ā Or think that thereās nothing beyond it, that Iāve failed otherwiseā¦..
Birdsong, don’t worry about me getting lost in the fourth dimension, that’s impossible. That doesn’t happen there, no loss, no guilt, no loss in giving etc….. It would be more thinking I can get lost there that causes problems…..
Report comment
“It would be more thinking I can get lost there that causes problems….”
Yes, and they’re just the kind of problems psychiatry wants you to have.
Report comment
Sir, try not to fool people into making out what was said was something else. What was said was “it fools people into believing its ādiagnosesā represent discrete biological ādisordersā that its āmedicationsā can ātreatā. There is TO DATE no real proof that ANY psychiatric medications treat a proven chemical imbalance. That would be a biological disorder. Now, I’m sure you can cherry pick this or that article, but in reality even the drug companies quite awhile gave up on coming forth with what for years they said was “making headway” in regards that their was “compelling evidence,” that they would find proof of this chemical imbalance they said they were treating, but in reality haven’t substantiated what they said they would find. Yes, psychiatric drugs work by disabling natural functions of the brain, and one can scientifically detail how this works, but that does not mean they are treating a verifiable or as was said “discrete” biological disorder.
Mr. Corey Yilmaz, MD. Someone makes a statement backed up by science, regarding psychiatric drugs. Uses accurate terminology. Refers to what would be a biological disorder. You make out she said something she didn’t and then say it’s “laughable.” Is such how you treat your patients who make statement that science can back up, but contradict what you would promote?
I would suggest you try not to insult people who challenge you to respond in a professional way, which so far you haven’t.
And then there’s informed consent.
If then psychiatric drugs statistically, while causing chemical imbalance (let’s just skip informed consent for this argument, not that it should be skipped, but let’s just skip it to make a point), that by disabling natural function of the brain statistically correlate with a lessening of mental illnesses, that would be something, but in reality there’s a spike not only in mental illnesses but in disability. Any reasonable person, with perspective, when ANYONE asks for such a drug, or before recommending such, would explain that it doesn’t treat a known chemical imbalance, that it doesn’t treat a known biological disease, that it causes a chemical imbalance, but disabling natural functions of the brain seems to help for some people. THAT at least should be said. That would be professional and involve informed consent. Anyone who would care to look at science and statistics further, and be responsible might add that since the advent of these medications there’s a spike in mental illness and disability. That also is long term and in general, NOT cherry picking short term results, and a certain populace for whom these drugs seems to work, while the rest no longer take part in such “treatment.” And that it might be better to try first alternative methods, or therapy, or exercise, or meditation, or walks in nature, or art or taking a look at one’s life to see what might be causing the emotion or responses one is trying to get rid of. Or simply waiting and not fighting with the emotion, not trying to push it away, but finding what helps it to go away. All of that has better long term results.
That you are so sure that what statistics show is in correlation with a spike, is treating an actual biological disease, that when someone simply states one can’t really back this up, there isn’t real grounded science to support this, and so states: “it fools people into believing its ādiagnosesā represent discrete biological ādisordersā that its āmedicationsā can ātreatā. You call this laughable, what does this say about your willingness to look at science and statistics?
That’s in general how people behave when someone dares to say something against the programming of what’s made out to be an authority. That’s also what often is most hurtful to people struggling with a mental illness, that they haven’t been able to, or allowed to, or even get in touch with what they really feel, think, or have experienced. And then they hear such responses, as their behavior is “laughable” or they are just “wrong” or “sick.”
Please try to be professional as in: “first, do no harm…..”
Report comment
You are mis-understanding what she’s saying….
Report comment
Corey Yilmaz,
Unlike some of the responses you have gotten, I do agree some psych meds work sometimes for some people. But it’s much more nuanced than just “work”. I have met people who have said that clozapine is the only thing that worked for their panic attacks. There are people with insomnia who really need low dose mirtazapine to sleep. SSRIs, though they made my hands and legs shake, cause sexual dysfunction, cause mania etc., did alleviate very bad obsessive-compulsive symptoms I had when I was a teenager (though if the psychiatry graduates in my life actually did the right thing and eliminated the maltreatment I endured in my life at the hands of whatever people, I may or may not have ended up in Psychiatry in the first place; Psychiatry just created 3 problems for every one problem it solved).
So, yes. They do work for people in certain situations. People’s responses here might be simplistic with a blanket “they suck and don’t work” attitude, but that might also be because they were forced onto them inappropriately or many other reasons with regards to psychiatry graduates and the psychiatric system.
While I understand why the word “side-effects” is used, to me they’re just effects of the drug. SSRIs probably causes sexual dysfunction more reliably than they have an antidepressant effect. Might as well say the antidepressant effect is a side effect.
Report comment
FOR THE RECORD: I was never subjected to forced psychiatric treatment or psychotherapy of any kind. My insistent attitude comes from justifiable anger AT BEING LIED TO FOR YEARS by psychiatrists believed to be among the best in the business.
Truth is, they WERE the best, but only at deceiving themselves and people like me.
Report comment
CLARIFICATION: I am not, nor have I ever been forcibly subjected to psychiatric DRUGGING or psychotherapy of any kind.
Report comment
The same goes for ECT.
Report comment
Thank you for sharing your story, Jackie. I’m glad you are “now medicine-free and feeling better than ever.” Especially since I’ve seen just horrendous videos of people suffering from benzo withdrawal.
But I could write a blog entitled the same to my former psychiatrists, since they both prescribed egregious anticholinergic toxidrome inducing drug cocktails, despite having been taught in med school, about anticholinergic toxidrome.
“Oh, we’re ‘professionals,” who all now claim to be ignorant of the common adverse and withdrawal effects of the drugs we force and coerce onto innocent others. Pardon my disappointment … and, honestly, my disgust at the scientific fraud based “mental health professions.”
Report comment
Thank you. Similar to the videos you mention, I was reading personal stories (on Benzobuddies.org) of those suffering from protracted withdrawal. I had to stop reading bc it was so bad/painful… Yes, I am so thankful to be off benzos/drug free.
Report comment
Hi. Thank you for writing and sharing your horror story with everyone. Some aspects of your experience overlap with my own experiences.
Psychiatrists are a fairly sinister group. I was prescribed benzodiazepines and z hypnotic drugs and stimulants in my late teens. Some things Iāve learned since thenā¦
1) they know the drugs are addictive and they use it to their advantage. Giving a nervous person benzodiazepines calms them. These drugs are fast acting and pleasant. The patient will trust the doctor and like the doctor more. They may make more frequent office visits or at least trust the doctor more. And thenā¦
2) one doctor would do rapid potentially dangerous cuts on the benzodiazepine. I didnāt get it then but itās punishment for xyzā¦theyāre fairly sinister so they donāt need valid reasons. Somewhere in my records a doctor writes that my eyes are too bright. Welcome to psychiatry.
3) occasionally rewards happen. Not for meā¦Iām a survivor largely because I was subjected to cruelty and punishment not given goodiesā¦but it happens. Pay out of pocket for instance.
4) excessive doses are destructive and often punitive: I know this from personal experience. My best guess is that your psychiatrist is more misogynistic and classist than is generally accepted in the field at this time. Orā¦maybe not. Female psychiatrists are generally less dangerous than male psychiatrists. Theyāre all rather dangerous and crazy making. Avoid!
Thanks again.
Report comment
“Psychiatrists are a fairly sinister group.”
No kidding.
I think you have to be at least somewhat sadistic to want to be a psychiatrist. After all, psychiatry is extremely murky — making it perfect the place to be if you enjoy inflicting pain while avoiding accountability.
Psychiatry isn’t science, it’s a sophisticated way of manipulating people.
IMHO.
Report comment
This is outrageous! I’m so sorry for what you went through, almost costing you your life. If you haven’t already, I would write an official letter of complaint to the state medical board where you live. If it were me, I would also sue for medical malpractice. I’m so glad you made it out of this nightmare with your life intact.
Report comment
Yes, I did file a formal complaint with OPMC (Office of Professional Misconduct), and my case, ‘keeps moving forward’…
But, regarding legal implications, we learned that psychiatrists are largely get off the hook with benzo/controlled substances issues/complaints, because of the ‘black box warning’ label/paperwork that comes with the prescriptions.
What’s interesting though is I have two girlfriends who were put on benzos, briefly, and then their doctors told them ‘times up’ – – both doctors said I’m not doing my job if I let you stay on these too long. So, again, I do think there are good psychs out there.
Report comment
Look up the words poly pharmacy, poly substance abuse, prescribing cascade . And yes I agree with this article . Anyone up for a debate ? Horrible what these shrinks do to people and their families they know what theyāre doing . I think they should be 100 percent liable for their actions . There not .. beautiful world
Report comment
Thank you for speaking God’s honest truth.
Report comment
Jackie, thank you for your articulate, and lively vivacious article. I’m so glad that not only you somehow got out of this insult to a circus pushing you on all sides, stimulating you into what you thought you couldn’t deal with anymore, poking at you, not listening to your own input, response, or experience, then poking you more, then…..
God bless it that you got out of such a dizzy dizzy situation.
I had a psychiatrist, friend of my mother, way back before she diagnosed me, she prescribed pain medications when I had contusions from a car accident on my right side. All that the problem was, was I would have needed to wait for a month or so, and I could then sit again and play the Chopin etudes at the piano. The pain medications taught me to sit wrong, although I could practice a Beethoven concerto, Chopin etudes required more of the body, and years passed, I didn’t know I had learned to do this, all sorts of problems I wasn’t aware of, or didn’t turn up till later. I have to say, maybe you’ve experience that as well, that it is rather interesting to find solutions, which I’ve done on my own, teaching the muscles to go back into alignment, although I would have wanted to avoid all of such, and often wish it just would go away, albeit this being more than half a lifetime later, and Chopin also has been waiting, who I already knew through a medium, and just have to laugh when I had a sitting at a piano with him, and he didn’t even mention I added a few extra spices to what’s called the Winter Wind Etude, or was I just doing that now, without knowing it at first I had wanted to start playing where these spices would end up, when sitting with him at a piano, he coming through a medium, and when I hesitated, only thinking that chord, he asked me why I’d stopped, and the medium’s hand came to the other side of the piano, the eyes closed wouldn’t have seen any of the notes, and played the one correct chord, which he had done earlier regarding another passage, pointing out if I played a supposedly slight variation in a phrase the wrong way, being that I would play it as it is written the other time, I’d hear why it’s that way, rather than this stupid question of mine, whether it was like Polish grammar which is quite complex, has seven cases someone told me. Chopin also did the same regarding part of a Mozart sonata. There supposedly was a compositional error, if you misinterpreted the voicing, since the hands couldn’t play all the notes,what’s called parallel fifths, he again didn’t correct me, but said: “maybe you were thinking this,” and then played how you could fix what wasn’t wrong, only if you misinterpreted it. REALLY COOL GUY!…… But I was diagnosed also, more than half a lifetime ago, shortly within a year or so after that, because stuff was going on that I didn’t have an outlet to talk about, and the balance between the left brain (it was seriously stuff that one can’t talk about, that people find crazy, I knew that so and so would be in my life, although there was no way I could know that rationally, then he showed up, and I couldn’t deal with it, something jarred, whether it was I just needed space for myself or…..)….. the balance between the lobes of the brain regarding stuff that doesn’t come really from physical perception, and the whole ability the brain has for imagination and dreams, and everything transcending such…… while people were making me out to be crazy, and this psychiatrist believed stuff my parents told her, as if something wasn’t going on when all they would have had to do is ask the neighbor lady to find it it was……. and then the world’s way or interpreting stuff that it doesn’t solve, but the spiritual energies can, although that’s ALSO made out to be “crazy.” Even the people saying the represented the spiritual energies, even while AGAIN “professional” got in the way, terribly. I remember having to talk to this psychiatrist, actually a very nice lady and was open to me dealing with the problem without “medications,” even what art might have to do with it, but yet simply thinking she would be someone that would listen, and the anxiety that brought, and then trying even harder to communicate and becoming more and more fragmented disassociating from their inabilities. THEIR disabilities…. I didn’t go for psychiatric drugs, instead coffee and cigarettes, which will put you in quite a state, and I over did it, but it was such a crutch……. although i was free to stop, and no one was prescribing all of that. And then on disability I could allow art, dreams, imagination to be what perhaps they are meant to be, without having to meet deadlines……..
I’m right at the age where I have to rebalance the muscles, to prevent becoming decrepit in my old age. And no, it’s not a good idea to take pain medications while the muscles are still healing, so that you can do things that the pain would tell you not to do. I finally know enough to understand the emotional language, the tendencies or push to escape when I could just practice non attachment or meditate, the whole IMMENSE perspective beyond just being normal, the adventure you incur when you’ve experience so much beyond the norm that……..somehow I can balance that out now…. I have to meditate every day for at least an hour. Something brought up by a healer (Carol Everett Healing Sanctuary), that to get the energy for a healing that also wasn’t supposed to happen given physical limitations, she said to do this, and then also gave me a jump start for such………. But one does learn what’s there……
The brain is an amazing vehicle, so is the body, so is the soul, and so is what transcends that into forever and remains……
Thank you for your effervescent blog, article, story, piece of art you shared here…… I’m glad you made it. Be happy!
Report comment
I feel like some facts are missing here. The writer has a PhD and a doctor for a husband. Did she read the warnings that came with the drug? It sounds like she had in-patient treatment — for what? Substance abuse? Some people benefit from Xanax taken short term. Some are able to use benzodiazepines from time to time over a long term e.g. to fly. The doctor may have been wrong, but the patient also has responsibilities.
Report comment
I think actually the psychiatrist must also have a PHD. That involves a medical degree. How does this excuse him from not heeding the warnings, that I think would go beyond the warning labels on the drugs the patient gets because the patient was supposed to have read certain warning labels? And regarding what information is missing, we don’t know what that warning label was, at that time. Nor given what was shared, and what others that kept their eyes open for what these drugs do to others, does it seem the warnings would be adequate. For whatever reason you would start pondering whether someone had in-patient-treatment, or for what, what does this have to do with her blog post, other than you’re trying to color her as someone into substance abuse, despite all the warning signs the doctor should have seen? You also seem to be insinuating that she’s hiding something, when in reality you don’t know that, nor do we. Why do you introduce this? Many of us are quite aware of this comparison with psychiatry and street drugs, peer pressure, addiction etc. the difference here is that psychiatry legally prescribes these drugs. Regarding whether she, or ANYONE else, would be hiding something. I don’t really see that her having in-patient-treatment would lead towards substance abuse problems, she states clearly why she was on Xanax, and that it helped her, at first for a couple of years. Then the problems started, and thus the in-patient-treatment. But I don’t know, and I hadn’t tacked on: “she had in-patient-treatment” so was she into substance abuse? And is she or anyone else was, this doesn’t further point to unprofessional behavior from the psychiatrist? It’s also characteristic that psychiatry can hide how they made someone addicted using patient confidentiality as an excuse, and then hide side effects, and then you say information is missing, would someone not have shared they had substance abuse problems. I don’t see that such a suspicion would apply or is insightful given what the blogger has shared. Are there any other suspicions she had about her personal life, and why she would have asked or been advised to take Xanax? Should she not have allowed her boss to overwork her, or was she letting her children (which we don’t know whether she had, but yeah, information could be missing) stress her out too much, or is it the neighbor, or the neighbor’s children? Do you also think she’s getting money from some hidden outside source for simply sharing what this psychiatrist and the drug companies did to her? Again, that’s more the case with the drug companies where when the APA has a meeting normal rules of conflicts of interest have to be suspended. The blogger also HERSELF states she should have heeded earlier warnings: “But alongside the relief, I was also overwhelmed with deep sorrow for what I had endured, and profound regret for not heeding the warning signs sooner, particularly those from the staff at the well-respected facility that I went to. They urged me to get off Xanax but I didnāt listen. Essentially, the darker things got, the deeper my trust grew, trusting your opinion only.”
Report comment
I take full responsibility for several things.
Regrettably, I turned a blind eye to the dangers of Xanax because, for years, my psychiatrist assured me he āwould not let me get in trouble with the drugā and that I āshouldnāt worry because I was on such a low dose.ā As a result, both my psychiatrist and I didnāt think it mattered to increase my nighttime Xanax dose. But, having lived through the experience, I can say that dosing adjustments matter. (I stated this above in another comment – See similar painful stories on Benzo Buddies and BIC). And, to repeat again, I also believe that dosings, not just for Xanax but for all medications, should be closely monitored (read Sean Grover on the dangers of telemedicine). I took more than 1,000 different pills (yes, other drugs were trialed in addition to Xanax), and my psychiatrist never once laid eyes on me.
The most important lesson I can share from my story is that Xanax is an extremely dangerous drug. I learned from other local experts that they prescribe Xanax for only three situations: flying, a funeral or tragedy, or a surgery. Yet, I was on increasing doses for seven monthsāthe worst months of my life.
No, I was not in a facility for substance abuse. I barely drink alcohol. I was there for severe anxiety, which I now know was rebound anxiety from the Xanax. In fact, the staff there told me how much they disliked benzos, especially Xanax, but the on-site doctor didnāt want to step on my psychiatristās toes, and vice versa. Yes, my psychiatrist told me this! (Itās almost an entirely separate essayās worth of materialā¦)
So, yes, I will forever regret not listening to the staff, but I felt the information should come from āa doctor.ā How wrong I was.
Lastly, my physician-husband was on the phone with my doctor a few times, questioning things, including medication. For some reason, we will never understand, my psychiatrist never questioned Xanax as the problem. My husband, a cardiology specialist, believed the specialist, and in ways hard to articulate, he made us think there was something seriously wrong with me. To me, this was the biggest crime of all.
And, I’m not saying all medicines are bad, I can’t speak to others who say these medicines work for them, that is not my place, but it was mind-boggling how much better I felt when the medications were out of my system.
The one line in my essay sums it up:
āEssentially, the darker things got, the deeper our trust grew.ā My husband fell into this darkness.
Report comment
See my comment above where I talk about personal responsibility as well as my husband falling into the darkness. But, no, I was not there for substance abuse (I barely drink alcohol), and my husband was on the phone with my psychiatrist a few times questioning meds, but my psychiatrist led us to believe there was really something wrong with me.
Report comment
āā¦but my psychiatrist led us to believe there was really something wrong with me.ā
Thatās standard practice ā whether they believe or not.
Itās their way of protecting themselves from malpractice suits.
Why else do you think most doctors love using psychiatryās DSM???
Report comment
I want to thank again Jackie Munro for her beautiful article. I notice that up above already there’s seems to be a parallel going on, which I’m hesitant to incite to more, Steve did such a good job responding, already.
A psychiatrist comes along, he says that you should have been put on an antidepressant trial, not Xanax, then goes on about it supposedly helping suicidal thoughts, which Steve then articulately supplies contradiction to, also pointed out the sources backing the psychiatrist’s statements don’t add up. Now, am I wrong, but it seems to me that this article is not about going to a psychiatrist regarding suicidal thoughts, it’s about Xanax, and anxiety, and the result of Xanax causing such thoughts, which otherwise weren’t there. That it’s about the sheer hopelessness of the insensitive, irresponsible and unprofessional behavior of a psychiatrist, who didn’t care to see what the result was, or even responsibly take in the warnings or advice regarding treatment warnings. Where does an article about how Xanax causing what it did, turns into what Xanax caused that wasn’t there before should have been what was prescribed. WHAT!? When someone finds a situation or drug causes them to become suicidal, they should have been on antidepressants, this then excuses the antidepressants, the situation and the other drug? Let’s forgo mentioning get out of the situation when another psychiatric drug becomes involved because you know the drugs are necessary. To not prescribe them makes no sense. No, you should have been given a prescription for what the other psychiatric drug caused, even though the symptom wasn’t there without it. If there are any possible side effects with psychiatric drugs, should we first start taking drugs for the side effects, just to make sure!? How would we know? What does this have to do with ADHD medications, and who needs them: the psychiatrist or the patient, or both for proper treatment? Will that help them to follow orders, to avoid non compliance for either patient or psychiatrist, because such well thought out preventative measures are a bit difficult to follow to make sense out of? Is there any other drug that should be involved? Is there anyone who can predetermine yet to emerge side effects that need to be prevented before they emerge, and is there a problem getting funding for research are new medications determined to be necessary, or is that a bit too much regarding preventative or diagnostic measures?
And antidepressants help dogs with depression. That’s stated as fact. Someone with the same name stated, only then just a first one. Is this depression just a problem around humans? Are just the humans seeing this as depression or have the dogs supplied objective evaluations regarding their own depression, and how did they do this themselves? Or are dogs only able to express themselves objectively when humans do it for them? Should the humans also be taking some sort of psychiatric help given a situation which could be quite distressing should side effects show up? Should these side effects be thwarted with another prescription before turning up? What about dogs in the wild? Are they also suffering because of loss of territory and global warming? Currently only 4% of mammals are wild, the rest being domesticated, this might also be quite bleak for the wild ones. Would antidepressants help them as well? The wild ones? Or should this be administered already because the depression might emerge from further loss of territory or global warming, or that there are even less wild dogs compared to domesticated ones (same as with suicidal thoughts emerging with Xanax should have been instead given antidepressants would they emerge although they didn’t without them)?
Report comment
The treatment for anxiety is not Xanax maybe as a prn but it’s CBT plus SSRI per science. That’s how it came up
Report comment
To begin with, you donāt KNOW what she went into treatment for, you donāt know this lady, she hasnāt been to you asking for ANY treatment or medications, this is HER blog post, not a diagnostic request. References in a blog post regarding suicidal thoughts because of Xanax, and then the mention that Xanax makes anxiety worse does not mean YOU have had ANY conversation with her and know why she was asking for treatment. Neither does her stating that anxiety is worsened with Xanax mean that why she was asking for treatment was because of anxiety. And then the add on, which you have posted numerous times stating āscienceā or āfacts.ā Because something is mainstream does not make it science. When āmedicationsā cause chemical imbalance in a brain disabling it from normal functions, and in a marginal way short term symptoms are suppressed although in the long term statistically things get worse, this isnāt science to say they are treating a chemical imbalance which was there in the first place, and that such medications are needed for life to treat this chemical imbalance. SCIENCE would be stating the medications cause chemical imbalance, NOT the disease, and that long term outcomes become worse. THAT also would be informed consent.
Many of us here are quite familiar with the way psychiatrists will change diagnosis, and then medications, often without even caring to take into consideration withdrawal periods, mostly without informed consent when medications are changed or initiated. YOU demonstrate this dangerous disabling habit by diagnosing multiple times someone you NEVER have even seen in a professional manner. Neither is there any proven consistency with diagnosis among psychiatrists enough that such diagnosis are objective (see They Say Youāre Crazy by Paula Caplan). Weāve seen that you read references to suicidal thoughts or anxiety caused by a drug and when itās clearly expressed that getting off of the drug healed those problems, you instead act as if she went into treatment because of what the drugs caused. You behave as if this lady has come to you for treatment diagnosis, know how she should be diagnosed or treated differently dismissing that it was the drug that caused the anxiety and the suicidal thoughts, even though when the drug was stopped those symptoms went away. What if your ādiagnosisā wouldnāt have worked, would you have changed the diagnosis and/or drugs again? Instead, this blog shows that getting off of a psychiatric drug, getting off of Xanax, healed her.
Would anyone actually READ the article, rather than with a clearly biased onset extracting a reference to thoughts, or a phrase there, taking it out of context, and making themselves out to be an authority regarding someone they havenāt had ANY professional interactions with, they would see that this lady is doing well after getting off of the drug hampering her. You display quite clearly and accurately exactly what Birdsong stated in a post days ago:
The only thing ācomplexed and nuancedā about psychiatry is the way it fools people into believing its ādiagnosesā represent discrete biological ādisordersā that its āmedicationsā can ātreatā.
And your reply being:
You are saying no psych meds work? Thatās laughable
You continue as if you have the ability to make diagnosis of someone you have never seen in a profession setting, who hasnāt gone to you for help, who got better getting away from any such intrusion into her life, and then present yet another diagnosis involving āmedicationā for someone who got better without any such, and again medications that above have been highly contradicted as being effective. You donāt know what she was initially being treated for, because sheās not, isnāt, wasnāt your patient. Neither can you decide what she should have, should be or would be treated for, as sheās not, isnāt wasnāt nor do I think ever will be your patient. She also got better getting away from the fashion of treatment you are promoting.
Report comment
“Because something is mainstream does not make it science. When ‘medications’ cause chemical imbalance in a brain disabling it from normal functions, and in a marginal way short term symptoms are suppressed although in the long term statistically things get worse, this isn’t science to say they are treating a chemical imbalance. SCIENCE would be stating the medications cause chemical imbalance, NOT the disease, and that long term outcomes become worse.
THAT also would be informed consent. Neither is there any proven consistency with diagnosis among psychiatrists enough that such diagnosis are objective (see They Say You’re Crazy by Paula Caplan).”
THANK YOU NIJINSKY
Report comment
āPsychiatrists are nothing but legal drug dealers, and they’re dealing drugs that don’t work and actually kill people.” -Dr. Bart Billings.
Report comment
Practically every doctor “visit”/consultation could now be classified as a drug deal.
Report comment
IMHO.
Report comment
Thank you, Nijinsky, and many of you, for your kind words. I had this story in my head two weeks after the drugs were out of my system, but was scared to put it out there.
Then, I realized that if we don’t tell our stories, it takes away our power.
Again, I’m thankful this forum exists.
Report comment
And thank YOU for writing this blog. Don’t stop. It’s good. And I’m sure, or know beyond needing to, that many of us are thankful you gave us a place where we could feel safe, and be safe to know our own stories……
Report comment
This well written piece helps to understand the terrible consequences of relinquishing oneās personal moral agency to a third party, the psychiatrist in this case.
Report comment
Thank you for also speaking Godās honest truth.
Report comment
Allowing yourself to be emotionally objectified – the very essence of āpsychotherapyā – is rarely a good idea.
Report comment
Allowing yourself to be emotionally objectified – the very essence of psychiatry – is NEVER a good idea.
Report comment
ā¦.IMHO.
Report comment
Thank you for the nice comment. I know it may sound hard for many to believe, but the psychiatrist even led my physician-husband down a path that there was really something wrong with me. I think this is the worst, criminal thing of all. My husband was questioning him about the medicines, but my doc just took the weirdest stance that it was me w/ the problem. Here, it was one doctor questioning another doctor (two scientists who are supposed to question everything), and my psychiatrist didn’t budge. Then, as I said, in other comments, ‘the darker things got, the deeper our trust grew’. And, unfortunately, my husband fell into this darkness. You almost have to live it to believe it (what we went through) but of course I wouldn’t wish this on anyone.
Report comment
Having worked and been trained in a County Psych Hospital, a training hospital for med students, I am more aware of the lack of a psychological education that psychiatrists are taught. They are taught that solutions to psychological issues are medications.
Before anyone takes medication as a last alternative, they should at least try to do self-help EMDR. There are a number of programs available to the public. Take a quick look at the website, Se-REM.com. It is now helping people in 33 countries and has the potential to up-end the standard of mental health delivery.
Report comment
Please write and tell us more about EMDR…. from what little I know of it, it looks to be potentially HUGE, which means it is seen as a threat to $PhRMA$….
Report comment
EMDR has been around for a while (late 1980s). Lots of great resources at EMDRIA.org. Similarly, Internal Family Systems, Somatic Experiencing/ somatic attachment theory, ART – are fantastic psychotherapeutic modalities.
Of course, nothing works for everyone, but each of these has a common foundational understanding of the role of the autonomic nervous system in responding to decreased safety cues/ perceived threat.
Pharma industry wants us to believe in brain chemistry imbalance, but in truth we have to look at environment, lifestyle, nervous system response. We focus so much on diagnostic labels when really we need to focus on root cause from the perspective that as humans, the physical, cognitive, emotional, and spiritual aspects of self are not separate. Itās our environment (internal and external), our lived experience, and how we respond to that threat can / does result in symptoms. Integrative psychiatry looks at all of this, focuses on partnership & collaboration with patients, and most often involves medication only as a last option. I rarely prescribe SSRIs / SNRIs, still there are some situations where a person prefers that approach or the situation truly warrants temporary use. Same for benzos. I might have prescribed them to 3 individuals in the last 10 years. Rebound anxiety, rebound depression, SI, dependency are all known risks and should have been discussed with the author in informed consent. Itās unconscionable those were not clearly stated and monitored for, or that the medication was used long term. That it was without actually seeing the client – frankly thatās malpractice. Reading these pieces makes my blood boil. I feel both sad and angry she had this totally preventable experience that has affected her entire life and family.
Report comment
K A Nelson, I hope you know that stories like Jackie’s are not that uncommon, meaning that what she went through shouldn’t surprise you.
Report comment
Hi Bill, The short answer is that a brain when stimulated into an REM state is much more effective at processing and resolving traumatic emotions. EMDR is a therapeutic technique that uses back and forth eye movement to create an REM brain state. Of course the brain experiences this during sleep, but the conscious brain has no control over the memories or images. So for the first time in history, a person can use this brain state to do a tremendous amount of brain healing. One brain researcher called REM a “dishwasher for the brain”. I published an article in madinamerica titled, “A Self-Help Version of EMDR Could Make Healing From Trauma Easier”, also published in madinireland on 10-22-22. I believe this self-therapy could change mental health care delivery all over the world.
Report comment
David Buschās website SE-REM.com is endorsed by the American Psychiatric Association. The APA is a criminal organisation of āprofessionalsā who invent psychiatric ādiagnosesā, promote and prescribe neurotoxic drugs (Breggin, P., Whittaker, R., Szasz, T. et al), endorse and utilise incarceration, restraint and electrification (Burstow, B., Breggin, P. & CCHR), accept finances from drug companies, skew and conceal scientific ādataā (Goetsche, P.) and lie to the entire world about their barbaric and faulty practices (Breggin, P., Szasz, T, et al ).
David Buschās website provides no scientific confirmation of the efficacy of his EMDR SE-REM method. Yet he claims, without verification, that he has āused this therapy session with thousands of clients and (has) had miraculous results.ā Without evidence, Busch asserts that he has āhelped clients who previously would have had little chance of change or reducing their pain or their problem behaviorā and that his program is so effective that it āhas helped individuals and even marital couples make changes that at other times would have been impossible.ā Yet, he also mentions on his testimonial page that āindividual results will vary.ā
Promoting snake oil practices that could make healing from trauma easier, offers nothing more than false hope and disinformation to people who have already been robbed of their autonomy through trauma. āIn my opinion, the SE-REM program wishes to impose their definition of reality upon others. They say that because of their greater knowledge, wisdom, training, and experience, they know what is best. People who believe that they know what is best for other people are denying other peopleās truths. This is an act of aggression (Masson, J. 2021).
I have used the SE-REM program. It does not work. As a childhood incest survivor, I can assure you that people do not āresolveā or āhealā from trauma, nor should they be forced to confront it by individuals who use ātherapiesā endorsed by the quasi-scientific and drug company-financed American Psychiatric Association. People with trauma continue to live with their experiences for the rest of their lives. As the Buddha stated, āLife is suffering.ā Ergo, the end to suffering is death. The APA knows this, but the only ālegalā method is to slowly kill people with their neurotoxic Kool-Aid.
Report comment
Emdr great. Treatment for PTSD recommended by scientific community is CBT plus SSRI.
Report comment
Hey Corey Yilmaz,
You seem to be relatively young. So, there’s still maybe like 500-1000 people you will label as “schizophrenics”, “bipolars”, “borderlines” etc. in your career (whatever their issues may be).
Please do a lot of us a favour. Please don’t label people “bipolar” when the SSRIs, SNRIs and stimulants you hand out for whatever reason cause manic episodes and psychosis in some people. This is a standard practice in your field. Instead of simply calling it a drug induced effect, your guys go onto labelling them bipolar, stigmatising not only them, but creating problems for any biologically related to them too (because they go onto becoming “family histories”).
Also, a little change in language. Instead of “I would like to see you work in a psychiatry clinic and take every schizophrenic off of their antipsychotic if thatās what youāre proposing?” you could say “I’d like to see you take every delusional or hallucinating person off of their meds”. There are people here for whom the labels you label them with have become an even bigger headache than the original problems they sought (or were forcibly made to seek) help for.
Report comment
BRILLIANT REBUTTAL
Report comment
Forget about brilliance in any rebuttal. It’s alarming to me that people in Psychiatry departments have attitudes of this nature and they write so callously that way. Literally, they have no idea what sort of issues people face from what they’re doing. It’s like training little children to not hit each other.
Such little understanding of what people have gone through and why they’ve ended up here.
Joanna Badura (amongst others) here has written for years here about how being categorised as a “schizophrenic” crippled her life and I doubt many of these guys would ever think of things like that when they write “you want me to take every schizophrenic off his meds?”. At least the guy didn’t blatantly write like a nurse I saw on Quora who wrote “the problem with mental patients is, rather than work to get a new diagnosis, they keep blamingā¦.”. The problem with mental registered nurses like her is that they think we’re their slaves to crawl through shit to make their employment easier. The literal harassment and gaslighting that comes into so many of our livesā¦they have to endure none of it. Jeffrey Lieberman on his Reddit AMA wrote that the sorts of people on Mad in America are the types that can’t accept their infirmity and hence they write against his chosen medical field. Astonishing individuals. These kinds of views become entrenched when all their interaction is with other mental health industry graduates.
This is why, the happiest I feel, is when I see other medical doctors take up the fight against mental health industry graduates. Like Susan Haney. Oregon doctor Susan Haney is suing psychiatrist Howard Sampley, alleging that he mistook effects of medication, and pregnancy, for a mental disorder. Haneyās trip to the emergency room for asthma and pain from a burn had resulted in a diagnosis of psychosis, bipolar disorder, mania, potential harm to self and others, and a suspension of her medical practice. The state medical board later reinstated Haney without restrictions; she is suing for for $2.25 million.
God bless Dr. Susan Haney. I hope she has a long life and a successful medical career. We need a LOT more Susan Haneys.
The other thing I want to say to this psychiatry graduate is: there is a difference between a person’s problems and the labels you put on them. The fact that someone refuses to be labelled is not a denial of the issues they’re facing. Some people might be in denial of their issues. However, not accepting psychiatric labelling is not the same as being in denial. A lot of guys in your profession can’t understand that. They gaslight people with verbiage like: “you can’t accept the problems you have”. Please don’t do that for the remainder of your career either.
Report comment
The type of attitude/insult Jeffery Lieberman exhibited on his Reddit AMA no longer alarms me as I’ve come to understand that using logical fallacies (make that logical fantasies) is par for the course among (most) psychiatrists, which imo makes it fair to assume that the skillful use of such twisted reasoning is likely (intentionally) woven throughout a psychiatrist’s training, as this serves to develop the prospective psychiatrist’s defense mechanisms – both legal and emotional.
In any case, if I were you, I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss the use of rebuttal as right now it’s just about the only tool/weapon we’ve got.
Report comment
“These kinds of views become entrenched when all their interactions are with other mental health industry graduates.”
That’s what happens in all cults.
Report comment
Corey Yilmaz,
Also, another thing : If you’re ever going to tell your clients “MRIs show this and that” like a lot of psychiatry graduates and their supporters who use it as a convincing tactic (for a varied number of conditions from “bipolar disorder” to “autism”), please take out an MRI of the person and show what issues are there in it in his/her own scan.
Please don’t cite journal papers and textbooks. People who have COVID see the results of their PCR test. Not the tests of other people in textbooks and journals.
Report comment
“…: there is a difference between a person’s problems and the labels you put on them. The fact that someone refuses to be labelled is not a denial of the issues they’re facing. Some people might be in denial of their issues. However, not accepting psychiatric labelling is not the same as being in denial. A lot of guys in your profession can’t understand that. They gaslight people with verbiage like: “you can’t accept the problems you have.”
Take my word for it: it’s not worth losing sleep over people who prefer living in cognitive rigidity, especially ones trained to work as psychiatrists, as cognitive rigidity clearly is one of its main job requirements.
It helps to get used to the fact that the world is full of people unable to see past their own stubbornness, something that usually comes from an unconscious fear of failure/fear of being found out.
Or simply from fear of being unable to cope with life’s inevitable uncertainties and complexities, which is EXACTLY what makes the cult of psychiatry so attractive to those with closed minds.
Report comment
…IMHO.
Report comment
registeredforthissite I really am amazed, in a good sense, that you can read such blogs, as Lieberman and the nurse, I avoid such places as I would avoid paralyses, actually. To read such stuff, and see how completely clueless and brainwashed some people can be….. it makes you [me, one] wonder whether one can do or say anything except pray for a miracle, not that that’s impossible but there I end up feeling helpless reading such…… Lieberman, who can’t even process scientific data, corrupts, true statistics and scientific results, then when what he advocates, enforces and prescribes, often AGAINST the will of the vulnerable people forced to adhere or be arrested and forced “treated,” when this correlates with the lack of recovery, the disability, the spike in the problem, the epidemic the TRUE results are; then he talks about them being infirm. WHO exactly is non reality based? Who is impossibly showing signs of having infirmity? Who is it no one can convince he’s unaware of what’s going on?
WELL! Looking at the twitter site regarding him, it seems, after getting numerous awards, all sorts of highly esteemed academic positions, he was outed as being quite racist, and then colleagues of him reported he had shown such signs the whole time. How much money was poured into this racist man, the whole time? Someone purporting that schizophrenia also is genetic? And then these “trials” showing that the newer drugs are so effective, where they took “schizophrenics” already addicted to antipsychotics, took half of them off, put them in the control group where they of course got withdrawal symptoms listed as showing signs of the disease instead, the non control group then getting another drug close enough to what they were addicted to that they didn’t get withdrawal symptoms listed as more not showing signs of the disease, and THAT was supposed to “prove” the drugs were effective. Beyond this, they didn’t note how many of those who were said to be helped by the newer drugs before the two year or so trial was over had gotten off of them, nor did they look at long term results for those who at first were said to have symptoms of the disease but later recovered without going back on said medications…..
That someone, racist the whole time, can put forth schizophrenia is genetic, get THAT much money with his cohorts to corrupt science, be able to advocate force treating people, have the legal profession and the police back this up…..
Years and years ago, there was an article from Satz in the BMJ saying that a psychiatric patient should be able to get a restraining order against their psychiatrist, given the proven damage such “treatments” cause. I starting responding to that article, and met a really nice person who had been treated such, and she was amazed at me that I could even read and respond to what such people, psychiatrists etc. were saying. She had gone into an asylum, regarding childhood sexual abuse, upon being advised to. The result was that she was so drugged up she became catatonic, and it would take her like a day to be able to decipher what such a statement by a psychiatrist or so was really saying. Then she tried to become a nurse, she AGAIN couldn’t express her experiences regarding antidepressants in class to become a nurse, or she was harassed and suppressed at every turn, she told me one person was so belligerent she was sure she would have physically assaulted her, was she allowed to…. This lady was the friend I made: https://www.amazon.com/Ranting-Out-Devil-Traumatization-Transformation/dp/1904697445 And then all over the place just being alive and relating to human beings rather than being indoctrinated by said media blip, simply talking about reality what I encounter. A lady who was promised a job here in my city from Ukraine, and then had two children, was a very good mother, but the paperwork for her status as well as the job didn’t fall through, she had to deal with that, take care of her children, and some social workers came along and noticed her house keeping didn’t compare with something you see on TV, or who knows what would have found approval, and of course this lady was affected by what happened to her, but still a very good mother, then the social workers proposed antidepressants, and the poor lady, whose mother was a nurse, said what she knew regarding such, given her mother knew the truth….. the social workers made a report exaggerating everything, and one can only question if this poor lady hadn’t said the truth regarding antidepressants whether there would have been a less discriminative response (I’ve encountered the same nonsense in this city from such maniacs, although they couldn’t really get to me, couldn’t have me committed etc. but EVERYTHING can be misinterpreted EVERYTHING, as soon as they think someone isn’t being compliant to their idea of a indoctrinated discriminatory evaluation) and the poor lady’s CHILDREN were taken away, put in foster care. The local media, the local newspaper also had a whole story about her, AGAIN exaggerating EVERYTHING. I never read it, but talked to someone who went on about it as if it was the truth. He also thinks anyone not inducted into his Jesus cult won’t get entrance to “Heaven” and that “God” gave “Israel” to the Jews, as part of “Christianity.” But there you go….. Another girl worker at a coffee house could tell me how she had to get out of her parent’s house because antidepressants they wouldn’t allow her to stop taking were making her violent, and they wouldn’t listen. And a guy, who I overheard making a sarcastic remark on the bus regarding his doctor recommending antidepressants, who knew the two kids in the Columbine shootings, the two boys came to play pool at his foster care facility that he had then in Colorado, shared how they were bullied at school by jocks, the principle said to go the sheriff, the sheriff said to go the principle, nothing was done, the ring leader of the two had had his medications changed to Luvox just before the shootings, had told his doctor that Luvox was making him have angry thoughts at everyone, his friends, parents, girlfriend, teachers, etc. and the doctor told him to just keep taking the drugs. And the drug companies bought out that case, so this was never reported properly. I have to stop now, being already overloaded, just being awake and alive and talking to people with my brain, senses and curiosity open, rather than brainwashed. How many friends I’ve seen totally disabled by these neuroleptic drugs. People whose subconscious, or whose nature, just couldn’t adapt to said programming by “society,” and thus like all of everything nature does, that’s part of evolution rather than conforming to society and not be labeled as disruptive, they had behaviors they didn’t understand and were met with such alarmist, discriminatory, phobic, paranoid responses by authorities, and then having had their natural responses repressed, natural responses they were made to be terrified of consequently, they were broken, lost the ability to challenge, defy or get away from what was imprisoning them. And YET, in ways they remained more functional than the society at large deciding they weren’t, there STILL remained something human that couldn’t be destroyed…..
Report comment
I consider the use of MRIs in psychiatry a form of Kabuki theater.
Or like looking at bruises on someone’s skin that could have been caused by any number of things.
Report comment
Thanks for the Lieberman update, Nijinski.
Report comment
Also, another great treatment for “PTSD” when it is caused because of abusive assholes. Get them to friggin’ justice! You might not even need CBT or SSRIs in some cases after that.
Report comment
Corey,
āPTSDā does not exist. There are no known biological causes for any of the psychiatric ādisordersā. Nor are there any tests to provide independent objective data in support of any psychiatric diagnosis (Council for Evidence Based Psychiatry, http://www.cepuk.org).
Psychiatric drugs are neurotoxins. They lead to progressive shrinkage and loss of brain tissue, resulting in brain atrophy that is consistent with dementia. This process can both induce and exacerbate various emotional, cognitive and physical symptoms and accelerate cognitive and neurobehavioral decline (Jackson, G., 2008, Psychrights.org).
Additionally, numerous studies have demonstrated that āProzac (fluoxetine) was most commonly linked to aggression, increasing violent behavior 10.9 times. Paxil (paroxetine), Luvox (fluvoxamine), Effexor (venlafaxine) and Pristiq (desvenlafaxine) were 10.3, 8.4, 8.3 and 7.9 times, respectively, more likely to be linked with violenceā (https://www.livescience.com/32934-do-antidepressants-increase-violent-behavior-111102html.html#). In 2004, the FDA issued a warning regarding the increase in depression, hostility and suicide in people using āantidepressantsā (https://industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/drug/docs/#id=znbn0225).
Please cease promoting disability and death for your fellow humans.
Report comment
I’m so traumatized by what 2 GP’s did to me I can’t even comment. Lies, gaslighting and HIPPA violations. And I’m a healthcare worker š Thank goodness I realized about 3.5 years later what they were doing. Never taken a pill since and feel great! ALL about control and $$$$$.
Report comment
You are fortunate to have gotten off the pills and away from the offending psychiatrist. My son was not so fortunate. His note would have read, “Dear Psychiatrist: I Died Under Your Care.” The psychiatrist he was seeing never took his bp or weighed him, which I thought was odd. By the time he died two weeks before his 29th birthday, my once skinny son was considered obese. The psychiatrist kept prescribing benzoids even though Alan had a couple of accidental, non-fatal overdoses. The doc’s solution was to add gabapentin, which both doc and pharmacist insisted would have no harmful side effects. (Odd that in the UK gabapentin is a controlled substance.) The combination of drugs leads to brain fog and impaired cognition, which no doubt contributed to Alan’s fatal overdose.
Report comment
Thank you for sharing your story along with mine. I am so very sorry about your son. Yes, more and more pills are often added, increasing the complexities, then no one knows whatās doing what, side effects, etc. Allen Frances, MD, talks about this – overdiagnosis and overprescribed – arguing that the field of psychiatry needs a lot changes, especially with the DSM-V. Check out his compelling work. As we are reporting here in this forum, some docs, not all, end up doing more harm than good.
Report comment
I don’t know about Frances, there’s a whole expose regarding him here: https://www.madinamerica.com/2020/04/allen-frances-still-spinning-the-story/ Yes he does attend certain issues that should have been brought out before they started, but he does also seem to still be defending his idea of treatment against others, and then buffing up his brand against there’s rather than perspective in general that might have more to say regarding the whole matrix. I would say read Whitaker who blessed us with this site, or Joanna Moncrieff…..
Report comment
I’m also terribly sorry for your loss, and it breaks my heart every time I hear about such knowing the real stories are often buried, never make it into mainstream media. And we lose very human, very dear, very vulnerable people whose stories might change society were they listened to rather than suppressed……. Not only, as J Munro so aptly said, are there a whole cocktail of drugs, to such an extent that one doesn’t know what is doing what… then there’s more leading to such confusion: the diagnosis (there isn’t really a consistency regarding diagnosis among psychiatrist to warrant true science of objectivity, see Paula Caplan’s books: They Say You’re Crazy and her other works), change of drugs ( each one disables natural brain functions in a different way), the way they are advertised or promoted, and the kind of sly ways the drug companies make something seem viable using language that sounds scientific while hiding the truths ( for example what “someone” has tried here with the logic that if science or truth actually exposes what might make the drugs unfavorable that is stigma against the drugs, or dangerous that it might make people want to not take their drugs etc. and then long term consequences are ignored) thus truth is suppressed that would give informed consent, information that would give a person the ability to make decisions based on knowledge rather than advise, ideology and propaganda…… After listening to what such “sources” say, a person may not know what to think anymore, having been filled with all sorts of alarmist ideas regarding short term results, short term results that when seen as being advantageous statistically bring on more problems in the long run, or people simply have been spoon fed constructed ideas of cause and effect that aren’t really true but actually designed to get a person to believe they need the drugs, again for short term results while long term statistically things gets worse….(causing chemical imbalance by disabling normal functions in the brain which marginally suppresses symptoms is said to be treating a chemical imbalance.
While in reality this isn’t treating a chemical imbalance its causing one, and the long term problems statistically correlate with the chemical imbalances the drugs cause, not the disease, but that’s again made out to be the disease….) etc. etc. etc…..There’s a whole spike in the problem, that’s why there’s a book called Anatomy of an Epidemic by Whitaker, and his other books “Psychiatry under the Influence,” and “Mad in America.” People actually have been made to believe that what statistically correlates with the epidemic, with the spike, is necessary to stop it. And when there’s more of the problem, they think that what’s correlates with causing it is the solution. Whether that’s over drugging, or the implementation of drugs to begin with rather than other modalities of therapy…….
How are people influenced such?
People in general are so bombarded with sound bytes, with consumer oriented stimuli, with themselves being turned into commodities by others seeing how they can get them to be consumers that……can they really think anything through themselves anymore. Do they even feel safe trying, or will they look towards some fabricated source instead? Just go back a couple of hundred years ago to writing of say Dickens, or Edith Wharton, or before them Shakespeare, or later Emily Dickinson’s poems, and people had an ability to follow their own thoughts, or relate to someone creating a whole world from their experience, their mind, their brain, their memory, to relate to scenarios their own minds were creating at a level that now a days seems to be quite infiltrated with the vulnerabilities instilled in them with these “soundbytes.” Go to a Hollywood blockbuster, Watch the News, Who’s the latest pop star, What’s that new flavor or item at said big food chain… etc!
Report comment
“Essentially, the darker things got, the deeper my trust grew, trusting your opinions only.”
My experience exactly.
Report comment
Thank you Jackie Munro for this poignant personal story. FWIW, I found the “what were you thinking” a very effective use of anaphora!
But I beg to differ with your ending statement that “psychiatry is complex and nuanced! I suspect you had several good reasons for writing this-and may even believe it so? But nothing could be further from reality. As Thrasymachus said in Plato’s Republic, “They muddy the waters so as to make them appear deep”. And given that psychiatry is little more than pseudo science and an institution of power, real substantive complexity is the first casualty of psychiatric interventions, of which must be “rigorously muddied” so as to sufficiently and justifiably continue operating…Its no more complicated than that, sadly.
Report comment
Thank you for your nice words. Regarding your point about deep, muddy waters, I just replied above, how my doctor led me and my husband to believe there was something very wrong with me. Unbelievable. Yes, I did seek his help bc of problems and stress (isn’t that why everyone sees their psychiatrist) but my situation never should’ve gotten as ugly as it did. More than 1000 pills and never seeing me in person? Seriously.
I know there are very helpful/good psychiatrists out there (two helped me get out of my mess), but my doctor was very cavalier and dangerous.
Report comment
Dear J Munro, all the years I’ve been going through what I’ve been going through, I have frequented drop in centers for marginalized, or people with a mental health label. I have to a bit stop myself from going florid would I starts to say what I’ve seen regarding what you’ve mentioned regarding “deep muddy waters,” and then also how both you and your husband had started giving in to the system, because things got so bad, and you didn’t know it was the “medications.” Somehow you got out, and the truth of what was going on dawned through. What I’ve seen in drop in centers though, over years and years of encountering very very human people is heart breaking. I’m just glad you got away from such “treatment.”
As is the case to often all over the place, workers at drop in centers can be TERRIBLY misinformed regarding medications, especially when they are given to people already labeled as being disabled. All they see is withdrawal symptoms would someone want to get off of what’s disabling them, and then people that remain compliant are rewarded, just like you see in any environment where you get a pat on the head for being part of the gang. It was shocking for me, what happened when I simply mentioned people getting off of their medications. Someone on antidepressants had come to the head of one drop in center, trying to get off of them and all she could do was cry, which was the head’s reason to not even have any group to help people (as if everyone would have such a reaction, the person went back on the meds, I donāt know how a group helping people would disrupt THAT, but the head was on antidepressants I found out). Other than that it was a nice lady, but she herself was on antidepressants, her children also, her husband had committed suicide, and then there was no mention why HE would have done that, or the environment etc. A bit of stuff going on in the background here. As you see, I start going on about this and it gets florid. Other workers, you couldn’t get them to even acknowledge what withdrawal symptoms had to do with it, or that the medications caused the chemical imbalance which hadn’t existed before “treatment” by any discernible disease. etc. etc. Some workers of course were on “medications” and couldn’t get off of them but to me clearly depicted behavior that would explain their problems, and their addiction to a disabled brain. I couldnāt get them to be articulate beyond a certain point, regarding all sorts of stuff. I got one lady off who was a secretary, and she had done this quietly, I think first denying it, and then she left the place. She had gotten herself off of everything, and just said something about the “government,” and that she wasn’t going to take a bunch of stuff they paid for or something to that extent. At that drop in center there were people stuck in the system, even got rewards for playing the part of a poor helpless sort of pet of the system, until they really expressed what was going on. One guy who everyone thought the cutest, and would make little paintings with cute sayings on it was adored by everyone, but then one day he wasn’t so nice. He must have had irritable bowl syndrome from the 1000 dollars of meds he was on, which is easy to look up or know, and he actually had erupted, I think with the anger, frustration, oppression of what at one moment the feeling of that was, and actually taken a bowl movement out of his pants and thrown it at the wall or something. He of course was simply barred from the art room, no one ever looked into why he would do that, there was only extreme gossip regarding him. I could go on and on. And I’m not condoning throwing your sh@#$@#()t at the walls, there just was absolutely no perspective on it, and anyone a bit enlightened would start to see further. You disable someone’s brain from even knowing what’s going on, tell them lies about chemical imbalances not saying the only real proof beyond that con job is the drugs cause chemical imbalance by disabling natural functions of the brain, and then the abusers are suddenly heroes taking care of these poor victims while they are part of the system abusing them and keeping them down. It’s hair raising, just to see that, just to see how brainwashed people are. At another drop in center, where it was better in ways, but not too much, there were numerous people who would come there who some time in their life years and years ago had had an extreme emotional reaction, a normal reaction to something in their life. Whether this played out in a fantasy for a day, or just they themselves feeling there was something wrong with them, they ended up somehow being predatory to the mental health system, and went from point A to B to C to D until they for the rest of their life ended up in foster care facilities with nothing to do the rest of the day but go to a drop in center. Who knows how they’d been used as lab rats for some, as the drug companies always said, elusive chemical imbalance they were sure they would find, they had compelling evidence, they were making headway, the brain is a very complex organ etc. etc.. I would try to talk to these people, but there was no ability for them to even realize what really happened, how there was never any real understanding of what had happened to them years ago, or they maybe didn’t even really remember other than that they had been deemed mentally ill. And none of them had any real symptoms at all anywhere anymore, other than they thought they couldn’t take care of themselves, or were so doped up they wouldn’t be able to. Or theyād have their medications changed, who knows why, maybe they said the wrong thing to the psychiatrist about who knows what like āI get anxious when I hear the news,ā and so one lady suddenly was falling asleep all the time, because of the meds, somehow this had been resolved, I donā t know how. At that drop in center there had been a head of it that would understand the truth, but I have to stop going on about other things there that were ridiculous or add two more pages….. People that had simply given up on life, didn’t have any symptoms anymore, but acted like good little children, a bit comparable to obeying church rules or what have you I can’t think of to make comparisons with (going to school every day, watching the same movies and TV everyone else does?)….. and went around circles believing…….like actors playing a role, but not even one that had any real meaning……. One can only wonder what a percentage of the “success” stories the system puts out come from such people.
“muddy waters” and I’m only really taking this lightly what I’ve shared….
Then there are the stories of the people that didn’t make it. The mental health system would say they need more ability to force treat people, more research along the same lines where their ideology hasn’t worked out, but the “ideology” sounds good. “Chemical imbalance,” lets forget that the drugs cause that, and that’s science, but lets make out we’ll find it in the disease, which has never emerged yet. A friend of mine who I knew for years, saw her struggle trying to find equilibrium. She could be fine for years, even have a job, a house, a car, friends. Then something would erupt. She just wanted to be normal and it wasn’t working. She had come from a tumultuous family where the father was violent towards the mother, and I’ve detailed in another post how the mother then tried to coach her that the father had sexually molested her, and a “therapist” also, who could just put forth his suspicions. It turned out it was during a time when she was on a boat trip with the father and a sailor had sexually molested her, but for years, again the muddy waters. And of all things, the stuff with “the system” started when she went to college. From what she told me all that was going on was that she was kissing a boy in the halls, and a friend of her father’s, who was a professor, saw her, and called him up, and they had her committed. The father, mind you, was a notorious womanizer, actually. The poor girl ended up being carted around for a year in different institutions, which the rest of her life seemed to be exposing what that does to one. FOR A YEAR because she had been kissing a boy in the halls, and some teacher thought this shows some sign of who knows what, to have that turn into a whole faction of other “professionals” making up who-knows-whats for a whole year. There was then the anger against the system, the loss of understanding regarding how the “medications” kept her from finding equilibrium and the abject fear of what happens when she would lose it, and then the part of her that just wanted to be normal. I know what it’s like, you look at everyone else being able to be a cog in the wheel, part of the machinery, and then you see how you’ve failed, until you just finally start seeing what’s really going on despite that like 95 or 99% of the people “making it” are a bit too much akin to androids, and you could get them to believe anything just as long as they get rewards from the system, regardless of science, truth, real insight etc. Lilly would say she just wanted to be normal. A fantasy she couldn’t let go of. https://www.lifestorynet.com/obituaries/lisbeth-lilly-lipke.29513#memories And when you read her obituary, when it says: ā.We thank all of you, especially those who were so present with Lilly this past year and month. You know who you are and no words can adequately convey our gratitude for your kindness and love.ā those actually are the people that once again had her committed, force committed into an asylum, into a situation that had caused the problems, and I had warned them what might happen, that they would lose her, and had tried to state clearly regarding the science of what was going on. In fact, she had fled her house. They had invited me and her for tea and some cake, because they wanted to confront her, they got us into their house, then asked me to leave because they wanted toā¦.. I said that was funny (they had lied to me) said I wouldnāt do that, and left. I waited a few minutes, and she came BOUNDING across the street in terror, tried to get away on my bike which was locked, instead pushed down on the pedals so hard she broke her achilles tendon, and a sort of chase scene ensued. They invaded her house, acted like eager pundits to get rewards, called her case manager, and then I had enough of it, called to THAT house where one of those āfriendsā answered, and said that Lilly clearly didnāt want them in her house, and if they didnāt leave I would call the police. Then the lady who had answered the phone said in a sarcastic tone: āOh, would youā¦..?ā And I knew theyād lay a whole schpiel on the police. So I never called the police. But then I was passing her house, and the police were there, the whole dark cloud around it. Lilly of course by then quite disassociated emotionally from what was going on, talking to the police, saw me, and said to a police man who I was, and that I was a really nice person. The policeman then told me to āmove onā or Iād be arrested. I asked whether I could ask him why, and he said I would be disrupting an investigation. So, I went home, and there actually called non emergency police to tell them the facts, of how people had trespassed into her house, etc. the police at the non emergency desk then told me she had been doing things which she hadnāt. TOTALLY DIFFERENT POLICE also. They said she had been taking off her clothes in public. Turns out later that wasnāt true, but as soon as she FLED these āfriends,ā the FIRST THING one of them said is that she was taking off her clothes, running around naked. Apparently, they then feel free to tell the police this, which is a lie. And I have to say that I havenāt really heard ANY stories regarding someone being committed where there isnāt such going on, whether much more minimal or worse. This ācouldā happen so it is happeningā¦. And people have done, and do this to me. ADDED to that, when she was in the asylum, because her achilles tendon was ripped, her leg was swollen up to the knee, and in a āmedicalā setting they NEVER even looked at it. DESPITE it was swollen to the knee. In a medical setting! The result was that when she got out, she couldnāt walk properly anymore. But they did actually drug her up so that when she was feeling āniceā enough to convince them she was OK (she actually told me later she knew how to do this), I was told she wouldnāt even remember if she had taken her pills or not. I never asked why she was supposed toā¦ā¦ In the beginning her friends were all coming at me, like I was stupid or impossible, and I was told: āLillyās not taking her medications,ā and I replied: āThey donāt work scientifically or statistically.ā I should have said something regarding whether they could help her get OFF of them, say titrate etc. And later one of them actually AGREED with me that the pills only make things worse, YET they had her committed. Her mother ALSO, who said sheād looked into it and the only way, according to her, Lilly could be helped was in a very expensive place, like for Hollywood people, and they couldnāt afford that. Instead she AGAIN had her daughter committed. And it was a whole GROUP of people, if they had collectively actually cared to read the material regarding the āmedicationsā the ātreatment;ā how to help someone that the treatment hadnāt worked for, how to help them would they want to get off of said ātreatment,ā had allowed Lilly to just say whatever was going on instead of scaring her that ended up being what it wasā¦ā¦. It was a whole group of people, many of the agreeing regarding the āmedications,ā what might have happened where they not aggressively against and condoning violence AGAINST the truth when it wasnāt convenient to them? The last time I talked with her, before she committed suicide, she showed me how she couldnāt sit still, and her arm would start shaking, then told me how the psychiatrist at the institution had said: āYou either take this, and that and that, or youāre not getting out of here.ā and so she was on a whole cocktailā¦..Old story, whole history of what CAUSED the problems they were supposedly fixingā¦.. A different friend of hers I ran into a few times walking his dog a few years ago told me she had been to him, had gone to a doctor, and the doctor said they couldnāt fix her achilles tendon anymore. The friend had tried to tell her that she should try another doctor, but she had become so despondent by thenā¦ā¦
She told me that when they confronted her, having to deal with all of such, she had told them she was the second coming. What does A Course in Miracles say regarding the second coming? One of her āfriendsā being someone who said she liked A Course in Miracles, and when I had some minor critique of it wouldnāt hear it: āThe old view of the Second Coming saw evil as a real force with a terrible energy of its own, a will in opposition to God, a will which had to be combated and overcome. The Course, in seeing the Second Coming as the correction of mistakes, does not see evil as a real force. Darkness is not aĀ thing, a substance, it is merely the absence of light.ā āthe Second Coming is the return of our awareness of our true Self.Ā ā You can do a google search with āWhat does A Course in Miracles say about the second coming,ā and you get all sorts of replies akin. Some guy who was supposed to be so āChristianā teaching in a āChristianā college immediately said he would call the police, etc. Later, during the chase scene, when I told him that they were harassing her, he actually tried to threaten me with calling the police, and I asked him for what, telling the truth, than he got dramatic and told me to stopā¦ Stop with what? Telling the truth? That being BEFORE I found out they lied to the policeā¦ā¦
Well, and so whatās the second coming? One day, I wanted to go to the beach and thought I would ask Lilly to take us, since she had a car, then within a short time she called me talking about going to the beach, that we had a conversation about this. I didnāt disqualify that I had thought about it as a conversation, but she responded a bit tragic, as if that was too muchā¦..
I was involved with yet ANOTHER āspiritualā healing group, and beforehand thought Iād contact Lilly, again in my mind. Not even thinking about what I just shared. And THAT group was about near death experience stuff, so I thought Iād ask Lilly what Heaven was like. She told me that the good things remain, it grows. I imagine like the flowers each Spring. The grow, the remain, become part of foreverā¦ā¦. They donāt flush down the whateverā¦ā¦ā¦
āthe second coming,ā that was put in an asylum for saying soā¦ā¦ā¦.
Another friend of mine, who is stuck in the system had called me up: āLilly committed suicide,ā and I said and thought: āSheās not dead, sheās just not in the mental health system anymore,ā and then, after that brief call, I took a wand I had, waved it in the air, and there was a holographic image of Lilly, and she wanted to know how I did that. I didnāt reply but with a dimple, and I demuredā¦..
How that works it ways through the consciousness. Sometimes I thought that she had somehow reanimated the body, after it was pronounced dead, and there was this wonderful community that allowed her to survive, like a conduit showing thereās another way. Consequently, sometimes I saw her there, when probably it was her spirit body, and didnāt find it necessary to separate that from the physical, so thought thatā¦ā¦.. Obviously it wasnāt necessary for me to see herā¦. But that doesnāt mean resurrections donāt occur, even on THIS earthā¦…
Report comment
Dear Psychiatrists and Psychiatric Nurses,
What are you thinking, that i saw in a moment 25 years ago, so simple, that took 25 years to resolve?
The unwise acceptance of neuroleptics.
And, what were you thinking, the issue so simple, forcing them on me for 25 years, when it was as simple as stopping?
2025.
Report comment
FACT: psych “meds” must/do/have a hypnotic effect.
Why else would people keep going back for more?
Report comment
Addiction and the brain-disabling effects?
Report comment
Absofukinlutely.
Report comment
Dear Cat,
I am saddened to hear your anger and how disappointed you are that Se-REM did not give you the help and relief you wanted. Please send me your email address and home address and I will send you a check for $19. I have several Kats who have made purchases, and I am not sure where to send the check. I am guessing it may be too late to send it to you through Stripe.
There are a number of reasons that Se-REM might not have been helpful. The most common is people listening to it without headphones or earbuds. It must be listened to this way to stimulate the brain into an REM state.
Another common reason is that the stress and trauma is still current in the personās life. Se-REM is really only effective when the trauma is in the past.
Another reason is if a person is in the small minority of people who cannot make images with their eyes closed. I used to ask clients to close their eyes and picture their kitchen at home. If they could not do this, I knew the help would be much diminished.
Another reason for a less emotional experience is if the trauma had no visual component. The program is focused on visual memories. But if that is the case, I recommend people walk with Se-REM and just focus on the process of thinking about the events.
The last reason Se-REM might not work is if a person is gripped with the internal conflict between wanting these deep emotions to be felt and dreading the expression of these terrible feelings. So, anger is so much easier to give permission to express than pain and anguish.
Just a word about myself. My parents pushed me to become a lawyer. After I took one law class I realized law did not fit my moral center. I became a social work therapist. I value kindness and honesty to the highest degree. When I retired after 40 years of being a therapist, I could not let this program that increased my ability to help people, just disappear. The program cost many thousands to develop, get music rights, build a website, etc. It has broken even but never made enough money to have to pay taxes. That is perfectly OK with me. I am 75 and fully aware of my mortality. I want to leave this program behind to continue to help people. The many reviews are all authentic, and all written with honest vulnerability. Please write to me at: [email protected]
Report comment
Dear Jackie,
Thank you for having the courage and sharing your heart wrenching story. I hope you will keep writing!
Report comment