Comments by Cat

Showing 32 of 33 comments. Show all.

  • Dear Pamela,

    I appreciate you sharing your experience with prolonged and unnecessary psychiatric drugging. Incredibly, you had supportive individuals who respected your decision and assisted you in accessing tapering strips to manage withdrawal symptoms.

    I disagree with your ‘diagnosis’ of ‘Obsessive Compulsive Disorder’ and your belief that “mental disorders and distress are more common in (y)our family than the norm”. As discussed by Marcia Angell in 2011, there are no objective signs, tests or MRI findings to prove that ‘mental illness’ exists, and the line between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ is unclear.

    When it comes to Mark Horowitz, I do not think he can be called a “trailblazer” considering the facts. Peter Breggin’s works, “Toxic Psychiatry: Why Therapy, Empathy and Love Must Replace the Drugs, Electroshock, and Biochemical Theories of the New Psychiatry” and “Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal: A Guide for Prescribers, Therapists, Patients and Their Families,” were published 33 and 22 years before Horowitz and Taylor’s “Deprescribing Guidelines.” While Horowitz does challenge psychiatric drug practices, he doesn’t advocate for their abolition or promote the dissolution of psychiatry’s continued appalling negligence and torture, unlike true trailblazers like Peter Breggin, Bonnie Burstow, Robert Whitaker, and Peter Gotzsche.

    Kind regards,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Dear Kevin,

    The accumulation of fifteen psychiatric diagnoses is a series of errors that could be considered comical. However, it seems that psychiatry lacks remorse for the pain and disability it inflicts. I believe that your characterization could serve as their defining label: Psychiatry – “professionally irresponsible.”

    Love,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Dear Cas,

    I’m so sorry to hear about the difficult situation you’re facing with psychiatric abuse. It’s heartbreaking to know that you’re going through this, especially when you have every right to be treated with dignity and respect. The fact that psychiatry, pharmaceutical companies, and governments don’t recognize your human rights is truly disturbing. Have you thought about reaching out to organizations like Mind Freedom International or others in your country that advocate for people in involuntary psychiatric situations? I truly hope you find a way to break free from this complex position.

    With love,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Dear Silvia,

    I was truly heartbroken to learn about your son’s passing. I can’t begin to imagine the pain and sorrow you must be experiencing. It’s clear that your son was dealing with an immense amount of stress, which is a completely understandable reaction to such overwhelming circumstances. Please always remember that you are not at fault for what occurred. The responsibility lies with Pfizer and your son’s prescriber.

    Wishing you love and strength,

    Cat

    Report comment

  • Thank you, Someone Else.

    “In a new study, a psychiatric diagnosis was found to be incorrect for more than” one hundred per cent of people. Their symptoms were “misdiagnosed as DSM-5 psychiatric disorders like panic disorder and major depressive disorder” by ignorant individuals who continue to foolishly believe that the DSM is a scientifically valid diagnostic instrument, despite negligible evidence.

    Report comment

  • Dear Tom,

    I often ponder about how my medical appointment might have transpired twenty-four years ago. Here is the utopian version:

    Date: Mid-February, 2000
    Location: Sterile, boring, powder blue medical centre, Katherine, Northern Territory, Australia
    Weather: hot, humid and dramatically stormy

    Dr. King (the nice one): “Hello, Catherine, how are you today?”
    Cat: “I’m good, thank you (I always lie in response to this question because I do not want to offend or upset anyone). However, I’m concerned that I’ve been crying regularly. I’m scared that something is wrong with me.”
    Dr. King (the nice one): “I’m sorry that you’ve been feeling upset. It’s typical to feel sad. Life can be very challenging. There’s nothing wrong with you for crying. Would you feel comfortable talking to me about what might be causing you to cry? You don’t have to answer right now if it’s awkward for you.”
    Cat: *bursts into tears (maybe literally)*
    Dr. King (the nice one): *passes a box of Blinky Bill tissues to Cat* “I’m going to order a full blood test for you. I’ll also provide you with the contact details of a counsellor and a psychologist. You don’t have to contact them if you don’t want to. I also have the number for emergency accommodation and financial support if you feel unsafe in your relationships or where you are currently staying.”
    Cat: *desecrates Blinky Bill tissues with tears and mucus, and continues to sob* “Thank you, Dr. King.”
    Dr. King (the nice one): “You can contact reception anytime if you want to see me again. I’ll also give you the details of a female doctor because you may feel more comfortable speaking with her. I can see that you are hurting, and I would like to help you. I’m going to cover the cost of this appointment, and we can schedule another meeting in a week. You don’t have to attend. Be kind to yourself, Catherine. Remember that crying is an ordinary human emotion. Please take care.” *passes Cat a pathology form, contact details for a variety of social support services and a female doctor, along with an anthropomorphic and overwhelmingly cute platypus scratch and sniff sticker because he realises that small gestures matter*
    Cat: *still crying* “Thank you, Dr. King. Please call me Cat. Goodbye.”
    Dr King (the nice one): “I am so sorry, Cat. Please forgive me. Goodbye.”

    *Twenty-two years of psychiatric abuse, and iatrogenesis are prevented through empathy.*
    Fin.

    Thank you for reading my story, and for your suggestion.

    Love,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Dear GPM,

    The most isolating aspect of my experience is the continued iatrogenic harm which I continue to suffer from. If I were to disclose it to a ‘medical professional’, I fear that I may be psychiatrically incarcerated and lobotomized like the unfortunate Frances Farmer.

    Thank you for reading my story, and for your flattering comment.

    Love,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Dear Bernadette,

    I agree that ‘mental health professionals’ would rather utilise a book of lies (The DSM) and neurotoxic drugs than provide people with time, relevant support and compassionate understanding. It is imperative that others can empathise and bear witness to our suffering.

    I appreciate your kindness and warm wishes.

    Love,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Dear Joel,

    The ‘mental health’ industry is akin to an untreatable venereal disease- it has no geographical or political boundaries, and its victims will suffer the consequences for the term of their natural lives.

    Thank you for reading my story.

    Love,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Dear Silvia,

    No, my doctor never checked my vitamin D levels prior to, during or after prescribing me an ‘antidepressant’ drug. When I was first prescribed neurotoxins, they failed to undertake a full blood count, determine nutritional deficiencies, or bother to examine my basic health.

    I have known ‘illegal’ drug dealers who have demonstrated more consideration for my well-being than legal drug dealers/medical ‘professionals’.

    Kind regards,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Dear Someone Else,

    Unfortunately, Australia and the rest of the world are paedophile empires, too. The Australian police did not even bother to interview my abusers. Psychiatry and psychology continue to conceal sexual abuse crimes through quasi-diagnosis and victim-blaming. The only solution is the abolition of the psy-disciplines, and sexual abuse and consent education for all children and adults.

    Thank you for reading my story.
    Love,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Alfonso Troisi incorrectly assumes that an “evolutionary approach to psychiatry—one that prioritises behaviour and functional capacities over symptom-based diagnoses—could revolutionise the field”. It is essential to recognise that enacting substantial change necessitates the complete dismantling of the psychiatric system, which encompasses the removal of the role of psychiatrists like Troisi.

    Report comment

  • Dear Mark,
    In light of the animal studies you mentioned, it appears that a 42-year-old human who has been exposed to ‘antidepressant’ drugs for 22 years may face the risk of enduring permanent biological injury. The study you referenced indicated that animals subjected to a few weeks of drug exposure displayed noticeable biological changes for up to a year afterwards. Extrapolating this to humans, it suggests that someone drugged for 1144 weeks (equivalent to 190.6 6-week exposures, resulting in 190.6 years of biological changes) could potentially experience biological alterations for up to 190 years, exceeding the human lifespan. This raises the possibility that ‘antidepressant’ withdrawal symptoms may not be mere withdrawal, but rather permanent and irreversible biological damage caused directly by the drugs. I would value your input and opinion on this matter.
    Kind regards,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • It is important to note that there is an absence of scientific evidence supporting the biological existence of the 297 ‘disorders’ listed in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Illness (Whitaker, R, 2010, Burstow, B,2015, and Szasz, T, 1987). The foundational approach to psychiatric ‘treatment’ involves brain-disabling interventions such as neuroleptics, antidepressants, lithium, electroshock, and psychosurgery (Breggin, P, 1991). Mark Horowitz raised concerns about the challenges of stopping these drugs once started, as well as the limited research into the causes of protracted withdrawal, including the absence of brain imaging or hormone studies. Despite these apprehensions, psychiatrists, like Taylor and Horowitz, and general practitioners continue to promote and prescribe these drugs, fully aware of their potential for addiction and serious side effects, and acknowledging the lack of research into withdrawal and long-term effects. Furthermore, labelling a drug withdrawal guide as “Deprescribing” is a misnomer, as Peter Breggin has already discussed in his 2012 work “Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal: A Guide for Prescribers, Therapists, Patients and Their Families”.

    Report comment

  • The ‘new study’ is not actually new. Sigmund Freud published “The Aetiology of Hysteria” in 1896, where he argued that childhood sexual abuse was the cause of ‘hysteria’. His research sparked outrage in academic and public spheres, and led to him being personally ostracized. He renounced this theory a year later. Both before and after this time, the field of psychiatry has continued to re-victimise, diagnose, medicate, torture, and incarcerate survivors of adversity, both children and adults. When will psychiatrists acknowledge that, for over a century, they have understood that suffering causes emotional, psychological, physical, social, and financial consequences, and that their fabricated ‘disorders’ only serve to silence victims, absolve perpetrators, neglect adversity, and sell drugs?

    Report comment

  • Dear Inquisitive89,
    I believe you misinterpreted my comment. I was not suggesting that governments should have “any right or responsibility to influence someone’s mortality”. However, most governments already have the legal power “to influence someone’s mortality” through incarcerating, diagnosing, drugging and torturing individuals in psychiatric facilities for physically attempting to and/or verbally insinuating that they might/will end their lives. Additionally, the right to die is not necessarily “influenced by wealthy interests who would rather us plebs kill ourselves”. Indeed, I am a disability pension-receiving plebeian who believes in the right to self-inflicted death. If ‘healthy’ or ‘unhealthy’ people wish to end their lives, it is their individual choice. I am proposing that physically attempting to end one’s life and/or verbalising the intention of self-inflicted death be considered a legal human right and removed from ‘mental health’ law to prevent psychiatry, medicine, government, law enforcement, and insurance companies from abusing individuals. As Isabel Eckes stated in her article, “The official methods of “Suicide Prevention” are not science-based and more importantly, they go against the preservation of dignity and self-determination.”
    Kind regards,
    Cat

    Report comment

  • Thank you, Peter, for your continued efforts to expose the capitalist-driven dishonesty and negligence of psychiatry and pharmaceutical companies.

    Carole, Bill and nonBeliever, I am so sorry for your suffering. We are the forgotten victims of psychiatry, governments, and society.

    Whilst prescribed fluoxetine, I once attempted suicide with a firearm (the weapon did not fire), experienced passive suicidal ideation numerous times, committed aggravated assault, and self-harmed regularly (see https://www.littlecattrauma.com.au/miserable). Two years since withdrawing, and despite protracted withdrawal syndrome, I no longer exhibit violent or active suicidal behaviour. Coincidence? I think not. Eli Lilly has blood on their hands (https://www.drugwatch.com/ssri/prozac/lawsuits/#:~:text=Lilly%20Settles%2030%20Suits%20for, violent%2C%20aggressive%20and%20suicidal%20behavior)!

    Report comment

  • Thank you for your honest account of “preventative suicide”, psychiatric abuse, and independent recovery. I, too, have toyed with my mortality since adolescence, and believe that everybody should have the legal right to die. As humans do not choose their own birth (Benatar, D, 2017, The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life’s Biggest Questions, Oxford University Press), a free society owes individuals the right to live and to end their lives on their own terms (Appel, J, 2019, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-m-appel/assisted-suicide-for-heal_b_236664.html).

    Report comment

  • The DSM is a book of deceits. According to Daniel Regier, psychiatrist and co-author of the DSM-5, diagnostic criteria “are intended to be scientific hypotheses, rather than inerrant Biblical Scripture” (Greenberg, G. 2013, The Book of Woe: The DSM and the Unmaking of Psychiatry, Scribe, New York, p. 125). Additionally, “there are no biological tests or brain scans that can be used to provide independent objective data in support of any psychiatric diagnosis” (Council For Evidence Based Psychiatry, 2024, http://www.cepuk.org). It is an abomination that psychiatry, an institute based on fiction, eugenics, torture, deprivation of liberty, and drug dealing, continues to exist when its methods are less valid than astrology, and it is responsible for the murder of half a million people every year (Gotzsche, P).

    Report comment

  • Psychotherapy is inherently authoritarian and victim-blaming. “Many people who wish to impose their definition of reality would deny that they are involved in gaining power. They would say that because of their greater knowledge, wisdom, training and experience they know what is best. The most dangerous people in the world are those who believe that they know what is best for others” (Maisson, J, 2012, Against Therapy, Untreed Reads, p.23).

    Report comment

  • Article 15 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” (United Nations, 1984, CRPD). It is incredulous that the majority of countries have ratified the United Nations CRPD agreement yet continue to allow barbaric psychiatrists and ‘health care’ staff to torture and drug their citizens in a “ceremony of degradation” (Mosher, L.). Involuntary detainment, restraint, drugging and seclusion increase the risk of suicide (https://www.madinamerica.com/2017/06/risk-suicide-hospitalization-even-higher-previously-estimated/) and must be abolished to honour the human rights of everyone.

    Report comment

  • I agree that psychiatry and psychology are both quasi-sciences. However, the endorsement of the ‘mental health/mental illness’ paradigm and the assertion of knowledge regarding what constitutes ‘healthy’ human emotions is concerning. ‘Mental illness’ is merely another example of how society labels and controls those who don’t ‘behave’ (Goffman, 1961, & Scheff, 1966). Furthermore, classifying an individual’s perspective as “downright wrong” is objectionable. Reality is subjective. “What is normal for the spider is chaos for the fly” (Addams, C).

    Report comment

  • “The one thing that derails us into ‘mental health’ issues”, Chana Studley, is psychiatric dogma, not “an innocent misunderstanding of the role of thought”. The most dangerous political movement in the world is the ‘mental health’ movement (Dr Keith Hoeller). You have transitioned from prey to predator.

    Report comment

  • Liam alleges in his personal statement that he is “especially interested in using feminist and queer theory to unpack current systemic issues that affect otherized, marginalized groups”, but then proceeds to employ Steven Hollon’s research to advocate the use of cognitive psychotherapy for ‘depression’. Why would a person require paternalistic ‘therapy’ if, as Liam quotes Hollon, the ‘condition’ is “an integral part of human survival mechanisms”? How is this article protecting the interests, autonomy, and human rights of marginalised groups using Feminist and Queer theories? ‘You are depressed, therefore you need thought-police therapy’, is a reductionistic victim-blaming theory that fails to address the gross inequalities and trauma produced by our patriarchal capitalist society. “Psychological distress occurs for reasons which make it incurable by therapy” (Smail, D, 1987, Taking Care: An Alternative To Therapy, Routledge). Please stop promoting psy-discipline Kool-Aid cocktails under the guise of advocacy and science.

    Report comment

  • There are no known biological causes for any of the psychiatric disorders, 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). How is it possible that individuals with a history of trauma are diagnosed with ‘psychosis’ and ‘schizophrenia’? How can people be treated if their alleged diagnoses are not biological, and the typical ‘treatment’ for ‘psychosis’ and ‘schizophrenia’ is with neuroleptic medication (wrongly named antipsychotics) which causes severe physical, emotional, and cognitive side effects, chronic illness, irreversible brain damage, homicide, suicide, and early death (Whitaker, R, Gotzsche, P, Jackson, G)? How is this considered treatment?

    Report comment