Showing 100 of 6954 comments.
That’s for sure!
It can never be caused by the “treatment” – it’s always the patient’s or the “disorder’s” fault, as if the “disorder” is some kind of animated being that is trying to thwart their “treatments.” It seems it is never, ever the doctor’s fault or failure, no matter the actual data.
Why would we want to “infuse” the view of despair with “biological perspectives?” Sounds like what they already do, and with horrible results. How about they let the actual sufferers “infuse” psychiatrists’ views with human and compassionate perspectives?
Conflicts of interest are an enormous problem in the government right now, at least in the USA. There’s a revolving door with Big Pharma. I believe more than 50% of the FDA membership should be people who have no relationship to the pharmaceutical or medical industries at all. Indeed, why would we believe the fox when he says he’ll guard the chicken coop for us?
Quite so! The HVN should probably be analyzing the “mental health” system!
They have not researched “deaths of despair” because they don’t recognize despair as a legitimate complaint. There should BE no despair, as far as their model is concerned. Despair is indicative of “illness,” even if it’s caused by being hung upside down in a dungeon and tortured by people who have promised you will never escape. The tortured person should apparently have a better attitude, or else the reason they’re so upset is because their brain chemistry is messed up. If they were “normal,” it would not bother them much to be tortured. They’d just accept it as another one of those crazy things that happen in life!
That’s how REAL scientists act! Maybe we can get them to take a similar approach to psychiatry! I’m sure they’d be appalled.
Well, they can’t TOTALLY go away, or they’ll have to find new customers. They mostly want them to be inert, except to have just enough energy to pick up their next prescription.
We should give credit where credit is due!
It is the only medical “treatment” where the odds of survival are DECRASED by receiving “treatment!”
I see absolutely no proof of the mind being something separate from the body, either. There is no proof either way. It’s a mystery.
Or to be afraid that if they DON’T go along with the abuser, they will be the next target!
I am sure they don’t cure infections, but they have been noted to have strong effects on pain, nausea, emotional conditions, fatigue, etc. These effects are apparently measurable and observable in the brain.
More convincingly, how the brain is used has been shown to alter the function of the brain itself. Taxi drivers develop an increase in areas of the brain associated with geography; meditating monks have an increase in areas of the brain associated with calmness and relaxation, as well as alterations in brain wave activity.
One can say, “Well, they’re using that part of the brain more, so it’s more developed.” But WHO or WHAT is using that part of the brain more? And HOW is that decided? These are things we simply do not understand.
The mind is and remains a mystery. It appears to have effects on the body, but how these effects are created is not remotely understood by any in the world of science. What “the mind” even IS is not understood by scientists. I don’t claim to have any understanding of it myself, I’m just pointing out that claims that understanding the brain means understanding the mind are similar to claims that understanding electrical circuitry is the same as understanding computer programming. They are very different things.
I would say that the brain is an organ, while the mind appears to be an agent of controlling the body. It is certainly within the realm of possibility that the mind does somehow arise from the brain, but that is certainly not proven, nor is there even evidence to say it is so, other than materialists saying, “It must be, because what else could it be?” But regardless of that, there is tons of evidence that the mind, whatever that is, is able to control the body, including the brain, in many, many different ways. The placebo effect is a great example. How can believing that something will work help the body to heal or change? Obviously, there is some form of agency that uses beliefs and goals to move the body to do things. Perhaps the concept of a “programmer” is the best analogy. Lots of people refer to the “hardware” (the brain) and the “software” (whatever programs the brain is running), yet no one seems to remember that someone has to WRITE the programs for a computer to run! So who is the “programmer” of the human brain? That’s what I’d call the mind. And again, it is a mystery – no one really has a clue what it is or how it works, but it is clear that it DOES exist and it DOES work, and pretending that we’re just a brain is as dumb as pretending a computer is just a bunch of electronic components and wires. Try to run a computer without software and see what happens! Try to program a computer without a programmer and see how far you get.
Quite so. Science is about establishing what is TRUE, not what is RIGHT.
You should read “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.” It speaks to this very issue! One of the best books I’ve ever read!
I would say that psychiatry mistakes the BRAIN for the MIND. The mind runs the body, including the brain. Whatever the mind is. Which to me remains a mystery. But psychiatry doesn’t allow mysteries. It makes them, dare I say it – CRAZY!
Oh, I think they know very well who Karl Rove is. I just don’t think they consider him a person they’d like to be compared to. More somebody they’d wish to NOT be like at all.
I agree 100% on THAT point! I think I’m emphasizing more what people’s attitudes have become, and you are emphasizing more how that attitude has been used to mislead the public. There is nothing “rational” about believing some subset of humanity, with sufficient intelligence and training, can somehow determine what is “true” for the rest of us. It’s just as superstitious as believing in evil spirits. Maybe a little more so!
Right you are! The very essence of science is skepticism, the willingness to invalidate any and all conclusions in the face of new data, and in fact, the drive to do all we can to try and invalidate a particular theory that SEEMS to be true, and only accepting it as truth when all other explanations are proven to fail. And even then to be prepared for new data to force modification. The concept of “scientific truth” is badly misused, as “scientific truth” by definition is always subject to change. Even Newton’s Laws of Motion, long held up as the ultimate in “proven fact,” ended up being approximations. Who knows what we’ll discover in the future, if we stop pretending that some “smart people” already know everything and that we can stop looking and just let them tell us what is true!
True, but a slightly different issue from what I’m talking about. The idea of science being “value neutral” is extremely problematic, as Robert Pirsig so eloquently elucidates in “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.” But what I’m talking about is a form of almost religious worship of Scientists as the All Knowing, so smart and informed that us mere parishioners are too ignorant and easily misled to be able to understand their deep knowledge. Doing what the Scientists say makes us Smart and Clever free from the curses of Superstition and Blind Faith! The fact that this is another form of Blind Faith does not occur to the faithful. Science is Truth, and to question this is Sacrilege! Oops, I mean Unscientific! Psychiatry is able to use this kind of blind faith to maintain its hegemony despite the fact that their own scientific researchers (not to mention basic logic) have proven that their diagnoses are nonsense and that their “treatments” tend to make people worse rather than better, and in fact to shorten their lives. To question Psychiatry is to question Science, and who are we to question the wisdom of the Great Scientific Gurus!
It has always both fascinated and repelled me that those oppressed by abuse and social discrimination are the ones identified for “treatment,” while those who do the abusing and oppressing are not “diagnosed” with anything at all. What’s wrong with this picture?
Your points are all very well taken.
“Mindfulness meditation” as promoted by DBT or others is at best distantly related to actual Buddhism. If you study Buddhist teachings, you will find that the idea of “mental disorders” and “treatment” would be considered absurd, and forced treatment would be considered a horrible affront to humanity.
It is also interesting that they admit to “neurological changes” due to antipsychotics, which is a nice euphemism for “brain damage” or “abnormal brain functioning.” They slipped that one in without admitting what it really means.
Not really news to anyone paying attention.
A lot of people are “pro-scientist” rather than “pro-science.” They thing science is something that other smart people in lab coats do, and they then report their findings honestly and all we need to do is follow their recommendations. The idea that scientists could be dishonest or corrupt or just plain incompetent and narrow-minded is too much for them to process. It’s more like a religion than a logical conclusion. Real science is scary to those people, because it requires them to personally sift and evaluate the evidence, instead of deferring to “the authorities.” So they get very upset at people who question their “pro-scientist” dogma!
Speaking Chinese tends to run in families. Must be genetic, eh?
“No result” is apparently no reason not to continue with “treatment” in the world of psychiatry. Continuing “treatment” is all that matters. If it doesn’t work, we double the dose. If that doesn’t work, we add another drug. We continue until the person either lapses into apathy or dies. That’s psychiatry in a nutshell.
You really know how to ruin a figure of speech! So what are you “seizing” right now? How many “seizers” does it take to “seize it?” And if everyone agrees, why is there any need to “seize?”
Only fair if I ruin your figure of speech in return…
So you’re saying it would have alienated his loyal followers to say, “Hey, these psychiatrists had no clue what they were doing!” or “I realized that I was failing to follow my own advice about fogging my feelings?”
Getting a Masters Degree in Education disabused me of any delusion that having an advanced degree means you’ve met some much higher standard of knowledge. My grad courses were WAY easier than most of my undergrad education, and a student could easily get through the entire curriculum while having not the slightest skill or motivation toward caring about kids’ learning. I’m absolutely certain the same would apply to a psychology degree. The only truly useful part was my internship, and that was because I was lucky enough to land a good mentor teacher to work with.
An advanced degree means pretty much nothing about someone’s skill level or integrity.
And despite all that, the ending isn’t all that “happy.” Another psychiatric success story!
He is ABSOLUTELY a victim of psychiatry. I hope no one is disputing that fact. Again, my disappointment is only that a person with such a large platform has missed an opportunity to get the word out about his victimization, especially since his own philosophy as stated is so consistent with a critical attitude toward the kind of “solutions” psychiatry has offered.
Sounds like he was a practicing psychologist in the past, but no longer sees clients.
Some of those “helpers” are posing as helpers and are not anyone you should follow!
I don’t wonder, I am certain of it!
Oh, no, it wasn’t CAUSED by the drugs! The drugs UNCOVERED a LATENT PSYCHOTIC DISORDER! That’s what they tell people. It’s sick!
I hope so!
The “Treatment” for akathesia is to stop administering the drugs!!! But apparently, that’s not an acceptable plan. The answer always seems to be more drugs, not less.
Yes, the magic of “cognitive dissonance.” Nobody likes to be wrong, even when it’s not exactly their fault. But most of what we learn comes from being “wrong” and trying to do better!
As for me, I feel no hostility toward him at all, just a certain sadness and disappointment that such a fantastic opportunity to direct his energies toward that profession which is most strenuously opposed to his philosophy, even when he was victimized by that profession. But it is very hard to admit when you’ve been victimized, especially for those who revere doctors as being automatically more trustworthy than the general population.
I wish him well, and hope he sees soon what seems clear to us who are further down the road.
“Indifference” and “equanimity” seem like very different things to me. The latter is being “above the fray.” The former is giving up, being “beneath the fray,” as it were.
Surprised they don’t have “antipsychiatry disorder” in there yet. Maybe in the DSM6?
It does seem ironic that he is telling people to face their emotions and not try to “fog” them, while taking antidepressants for years and then getting dependent on Benzos by following his doctors’ advice. Wouldn’t you think he’d see the irony here and come out and acknowledge that he’d been led down the garden path? I feel compassion for him, but he’s missing a great opportunity to promote his ideas by challenging the cultural assumption that “feelings” can be a “disorder” that needs to be “treated” rather than understood and faced as Peterson insists is necessary to get away from our overly “orderly” society.
I needed to read that last part. I think I need to stop fighting so much and let people be where they are in their journey. Yelling at them or being disgusted with them does nothing to help, and damages my own peace of mind. Not that I’m not ready to take to the streets when the time is right, but I don’t see that happening any time too soon.
I think the clinical approach is called either “corruption” or “stupidity.” We could give it a fancier name if you’d like.
Adderall can certainly counteract the effects of “antipsychotics,” especially the traditional ones like Haldol that act solely on dopamine. It appears that is why smoking is so very common for users of neruoleptics. (What, it’s not because they are all lazy, irresponsible addicts? But, but…) But what sense is there to raising dopamine levels with one drug while lowering them with another? Meth would absolutely work similarly. Stimulants are pretty much all the same, except perhaps for cocaine.
My understanding is that the shrinkage is primarily in the basal ganglia, where a lot of dopamine is processed on its way to the frontal lobes. (If I recall correctly, this was the part of the brain that lobotomies attacked, leading some to call neuroleptic “treatment” a “chemical lobotomy.”) This makes sense, because dopamine is the target of the “antipsychotics” aka neuroleptic drugs. I also seem to recall something about reduction in white matter, the stuff that surrounds the neurons. Tardive dyskinesia is clearly and unarguably caused by damage to the dopamine system, only seen in people taking dopamine inhibitor drugs like the neuroleptics, and it would stand to reason that damage to the dopamine system would associate with TD, though I have not researched that question.
Indeed it does! But apparently, they don’t even respect their own “experts” when they come up with the “wrong answer!” These are not people who are going to suddenly say, “Gosh, we seem to have gotten it wrong – maybe we should listen to our clients in the future.” They are dogmatically committed to their worldview and to taking down anyone who dares to challenge that view. I want to extend my love to such people and hope for their transformation, but we can’t allow such people to decide what is “helpful” for the people they truly don’t give a crap about!
New drug names have to have a Z or a Q or some other rare letter in it, or some weird spelling. So maybe we can go with “Taperz” or “Nottooqik” or “EventuelyOff.” Or “Qutdownz?” “UKANQiT?”
Of course, alcohol feels good, too, and I used to enjoy marijuana before it started making me a little paranoid. I have no objection to people using whatever drugs work for them, but it’s sure not a sign of psychiatric drugs “working” to “treat mental disorders!”
Not to mention denying the evidence from their own researchers: that “ADHD” is 30% more likely to be “diagnosed” if a child is a year younger, that there are no long-term outcomes that are improved by stimulants for “ADHD”, that “antidepressants” increase the likelihood of aggression and/or suicide rather than decreasing them, that taking “antipsychotics” for more than a brief time dramatically DECREASES the likelihood of recovery, that countries with less “antipsychotic” use have better outcomes, that the likelihood of “psychosis” is strongly affected by social conditions, in particular, migration, urban living, and childhood sexual abuse, that genetics contributes little to nothing to the probability of any psych “diagnosis,” that “antipsychotics kill people decades earlier than the general population… I could go on.
I agree, the most fundamental evidentiary problem is ignoring the actual experiences and feedback from those they are supposed to be helping. You’d think that would be the MOST important data, and it is considered the least. But even without that vital consideration, the profession’s ability to ignore cartloads of inconvenient evidence disqualifies them for even the vaguest consideration of being “scientific!”
I agree completely. School in its entirety was a total violation of any sense of safety or self-determination I had. I was in internal revolt for 13 years, but externally acted like things were OK, except for one or two incidents of acting out over the years. It is very damaging, and is only one of many ways in which we have to deny our intuitive sense of what is right in order to survive.
Most have given up on the idea of “bad parents.” Any suffering is caused by a faulty brain. Because if your brain worked properly, apparently, we’d all be happy with our circumstances, no matter how grim!
Thanks for pointing out the subtleties of your comment! Your writing borders on the poetic!
I don’t think it is inevitable that we are required to disrespect our own instincts and rhythms. It seems to relate largely to having too many people for the space we have, and having too few people with too much power to direct others’ behavior for their convenience. And we all accept it at this point, or most of us. I think a lot of ‘mental illness’ comes from internalizing these expectations.
Very well said, John!
It can hardly be considered coffee’s fault that our circadian rhythms are not respected. I’d view coffee as mostly an effect – an attempt by individuals whose circadian rhythms are PERFORCE disrupted by a society that does not respect them to do something to maintain their alertness in spite of the constant assault on their natural rhythms of sleep and lots of other things. This disrespect begins in the cradle (remember forced feeding schedules and intentional waking of babies who “slept too long” for their arbitrary schedules?) and continues through school (how many days were we all forced to “go to sleep on time” and get up at a ridiculous hour to spend a day of largely wasted time in a building we hated with people we were forced to associate with doing things that someone else decided were important?) and of course is brutally enforced in the workplace for most of us who have had to do a “job” to maintain survival for ourselves and our families.
Let’s not blame coffee for doing a job that our society has created for it! Remember the Rat Park experiment – rats DON’T prefer cocaine to food when their social and emotional needs are met!
A lame excuse for “science!”
I think you’re right. It is driven by profits, so making it no longer profitable to drug people for ostensible “mental illnesses” is the answer. But drug companies can apparently afford the fines, so going after the prescribing doctors or those creating the “practice guidelines” seems the most likely to be effective.
It is a typical, dense, heavy-handed, insensitive, context-absent psychiatric intervention. If someone doesn’t eat enough, let’s give them a drug to make them hungry! If they eat too much, let’s give them a drug to make them LESS hungry! If they take stimulants (which increase dopamine) and become aggressive, forget DECREASING the stimulants, let’s give them antipsychotics to decrease the dopamine we’re increasing with the stimulants!
It’s like watching someone try to do sculpture with a pickaxe. They have no tool to do the job, but insist on doing it anyway, and regardless of the damage done, never seem to conclude that perhaps they ought to find a small chisel and hammer, but continue to hack away with the pickaxe and require everyone else to admire their “work.”
And comments like that have been made for decades. Yet, no one fills the holes, the prescribers are not better educated, non-pharmacological treatments are not given attention, and patient feedback is minimized or ignored. What could possibly occur that would change this?
But cigarettes can also uncover a latent coughing disorder. Which, of course, we can treat with an anti-coughing medication. And later on, you may develop lung cancer. We have found that lung cancer patients seem to have a penchant for cigarettes earlier in their lives. We believe a chemical imbalance in those pre-disposed to lung cancer also leads them to crave cigarettes. Of course, the cigarettes are just a meaningless correlation – the couldn’t POSSIBLY be a causal factor!
This seems to be so difficult for some people to understand. To say “there are no ‘mental illnesses’ is not the same as saying that this kind of suffering doesn’t happen. It means that the categories they define don’t mean anything at all! You can group together people with brittle fingernails or people who clean out their ears with their pinkies or people whose hair falls out early or people who have larger breasts on the average, and any one of these can be defined by a list of “criteria” and people can be diagnosed with “Excessive Ear Cleaning Disorder” or whatever you please. But if the grouping of people has nothing in common other than the ostensible “symptoms,” what is the point of it? And to then attribute these “disorders” to “neurodevelopment” without a shred of evidence adds insult to injury! Plus, if some subset of these people really DID have a neurological problem, the psych “diagnoses” immediately become a barrier to discovering this, because they’d be grouped together with a large cohort of people who did NOT have the same problem, and no one would look at these people with an interest in finding the cause.
There is no scientific validity to any “mental disorder.” They are based on arbitrary judgments and assumptions that have no coherent meaning. This is not to say people don’t suffer these described syndromes at times. It’s saying that calling these collections “mental disorders” is worse than pointless – it actually prevents any recognition of any ACTUAL physiological problems that DO exist, while invalidating the importance of life experience as the most important contributing factor to most mental/emotional distress.
Seems a very likely connection. I mean, athlete’s foot is embarrassing, causing anxiety and depression, which no doubt leads to violence, since we know all depressed people are violent. I hope you will control for the presence of clotrimazole, though. Could be a confounding factor!
You made me laugh!
But seriously, I’d love to see a study where antidepressants take on controlled doses of chocolate or French fries. I bet there would be little to no difference. In fact, chocolate would probably win!
Well, perhaps it’s time to recognize the antidepressant effects of fast-food French fries!
Ah, but was the elevated histamine actually CAUSED by the psych drugs themselves?
A lot of “witches” were midwives and herbalists. Women with power were always threatening to the patriarchal “leaders.”
So you mean handcuffing someone and forcing them into a patrol car, dropping them in a locked “ward” and strapping them to a bed and forcibly injecting them with a drug that makes them feel half dead, discourages them from seeking out similar experiences in the future?
An excellent argument! However, it doesn’t work so well for the drug companies!
Exactly! If it were low lead, we’d have to start THINKING, plus, our stimulant sales might go down, and if the client is actually healed, well, I’d have to look for new clients, wouldn’t I?
I don’t disagree at all. The point is not that acting out of anger is always OK, but that feeling anger is not a “disease” and behavioral choices are not ma “disorder.” They are choices. And choices have consequences. And if we want different consequences, we need to make different choices, and we can use our feelings in different ways rather than trying to snuff them out or feel guilty for having them.
I certainly would not expect you to. I was only mentioning that it is not a rare thing or an abnormal one that people who have had their trust frequently violated have a tendency to be sensitive to others’ questionable behavior. Anger can be a good way to protect ourselves from danger!
You are engaged in a noble pursuit, and the dangers are real. I hope you get some press and make them squirm!!!
Psych “diagnoses” most definitely discourage and undermine any effort to look for any cause, even an obviously physiological one like Wilson’s Disease. Once we “know” someone “has ADHD,” any further effort to determine a cause is immediately brought to a halt.
I don’t know if this applies to you, but I’ve known a LOT of people who have been traumatized in youth and adulthood, and it is very common that such people strike out when threatened or bossed around. I don’t think it’s “abnormal,” but it can be a problem sometimes.
Whew, sounds GREAT! Can you make sure to link us to the letter when it gets published? I want to see how this goes. You sound like a force to reckon with!
You are so right! It is a shame scientists don’t consult with you. They really ought to if they want to remain scientific and sane in their research!
Well, not NOBODY… there are plenty who make plenty of money over selling hopelessness and dependency.
Thanks for the ongoing education! Difficult reading, but it says so very much about why this “profession” has roots in very dark and destructive places, and why trying to “reform” the profession is destined to complete and utter failure.
And of course, the psychiatrists were foursquare behind the Nazis from day one. That can not be in dispute.
It is my impression that “scientific” eugenicists in the psychiatric world inspired the more direct and blunt efforts of the Nazis.
That is a very generous assessment of your therapist. Too bad she could not show the same generosity of spirit to you!
Just doin’ mah job, ma’am!
Clearly, that is central. The need to define “normal” and to attack or demonize anything that deflects from that “normal” seems to be critical to this effort. This way, everyone is focused on whether they are “happy enough” or “good enough” or “smart enough” or “pretty enough” and so on, instead of wondering where this anxiety and frustration is coming from!
I believe the “survivor” concept came from the world of domestic abuse/sexual assault intervention. Could be wrong there, but that is my impression. The intent as I understand it is to define someone by their strengths and accomplishments rather than by their victimization. But that’s my limited understanding.
“Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as “eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers” and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy.”
It is true that the US medical society is pretty obsessed with cutting out anything remotely related to cancer. However, at least there is an actual THING to be evaluated in that case. Psychiatry is the only profession I know that has done surgery for the sole purpose of destroying normal, healthy cells.
“A more recent analysis estimates 128,000 Americans die each year as a result of taking medications as prescribed – or nearly five times the number of people killed by overdosing on prescription painkillers and heroin. Sep 27, 2016”
Note that the now use the term “medical errors,” but over 120,000 deaths included in the original study (back in 2001 or so – more than half!) resulted from properly prescribed and properly administered drugs. So it doesn’t require an “error” for doctors to kill you. Standard medical practice does the job more than half the time.
Too true! For every death, there are dozens of injuries that mostly go unreported. As well we all know!
Talk about missing the point! Her suicidal thoughts appeared to be directly related to the stresses of having to deal with the racism and classism and anti-American sentiments in the British nobility, so essentially, with social ostracism and discrimination. There is no “treatment” for abuse!
I agree. Cancer treatment kills lots of people! But at least in that case the disease itself can kill you, so the risk of death is more understandable. Risking death because someone behaves in ways that society finds difficult to manage? Seriously?
Receiving medical care is the third leading cause of death in the USA. But I would bet that psychiatry is at the front of the line in terms of iatrogenic deaths.
Certainly. Evidence has to be examined objectively, or we’re no longer doing science. We’re doing marketing!
Holy crap! How could anyone “heal” in such an environment???!!
I think he was being facetious!
I agree with all you say above.
Oh, sorry, I forgot!