Sunday, January 24, 2021

Comments by Willoweed

Showing 100 of 143 comments. Show all.

  • The major point I took away is that giving the person the same amount of money (or even less) than it costs to provide therapy instead of therapy has larger benefits than just therapy.

    Everyone’s health insurance/care costs would decrease if we just gave people money instead of paying $6,000 a year per person for mental health services. The economy would also improve as less people become disabled and unemployed because of mental health.

    People high in selfishness won’t care about fixing the system since it won’t help them. However, when doing so lowers their health care costs suddenly they have a self interest.

  • We can see why psychiatrists oppose this by giving an example of what telling patients the research would look like.

    “The evidence this SSRI helps short term is done by those selling it. These studies have half a dozen pro-drug flaws and yet they find the drug improvement is clinically meaningless. Long term studies find the drugs worsen outcomes but if we take people addicted to the drugs and withdrawal them they suffer. The drug takes 5 years off your life by causing physical illness.”

    The biggest problem with psychiatry is they not only refuse to give informed consent but lie about the benefits and harms to get people on the drugs. I’m not even sure this shared decision making idea can work because psychiatrists will just keep being dishonest. It’s not a decision if the party with power lies and manipulates the vulnerable person.

  • There isn’t much of an ability to “not preach to the choir” because mental health forums and other media censor people who post anything that does not agree with psychiatry. One psych forum has a separate but equal section. Even posting links to studies showing bad results for the drugs must be done in the anti-psych section. That is one of the least censored forums.

  • “There are so many people who say these drugs have helped” -Psychiatry

    “What about those saying the drugs caused massive harm?”

    “Defective mentally ill people are too stupid to understand what is good for them. Stop stigmatizing them by attacking psychiatry. ” -Psychiatry

    “That completely contradicts your earlier bandwagon argument.”

    Also,
    Those who recognize what psychiatry is who don’t have a psychiatric label can’t understand because they don’t have personal experience.

    In the same discussion I’ve been told “you’re mentally ill, your opinion isn’t valid” followed later by “you are too smart to be mentally ill and therefore can’t understand how good psych drugs are.”

    Doublespeak, is alive and well.

  • Make people feel powerless by falsely claiming they are biologically defective, check.

    Make them afraid they will suffer forever unless they do what you say, check.

    Make people dependent, not only on drugs but on psychiatry to solve their problems, check.

    Reeducate and reform their behavior and beliefs (the definition of CBT), check.

    Isolate people, check.

    Convince people they can only listen to the mental health system, check.

    Gaslight people and claim withdrawal means addicting drugs are good, check.

    Force and drug people so they stay in your group, check.

    If the mental health industry was a small religion we’d call it a cult. The government would have burned it to the ground and jailed its leaders for kidnapping, forced drugging, and assault (giving someone brain damage with drugs, or electrocution) and giving addicting deadly drugs to kids.

  • This paper tells me that some opposition to transgender rights and opposition to not enforcing social gender norms is caused because for various reasons some people want to force their idea of gender onto others.

    I’ve heard people say, “Sex is determined be the private parts someone is born with” yet later they’d say something such as, “boys wearing pink will confuse them. Not calling a boy a boy will make it so they don’t know what sex they are.”

    If it is true that the private part you have determines sex, wearing pink and being called by gender neutral pro-nouns can’t make someone a different gender. A irony is that those statements show the people making them accept that gender is at least partly a social construct.

  • Psychiatrists and doctors- You were helped by one; millions had their lives ruined by them. What can I say? Besides that I at least haven proof they have ruined millions of lives.

    How about we determination what is okay based on using logic? Appeals to authority are a logical fallacy.

    The Chiropractor was about more than money. It was about taking charge of their life and working hard. He earned the right to use logical fallacies. To pretend this is about working hard is to lie. This is about a systemic use of poor logic that causes oppression and death.

    What is happening is that you want different standards for different people. Stop pretending wanting certain people to have more rights and status isn’t about a desire for power.

  • Science now means whatever those with authority say it is. At least that is how psychiatry and the public view it.

    If psychiatry says drugs that increase serotonin and dopamine cure depression because of a chemical imbalance it is science. When the person is still depressed and psychiatrists say they need to add a drug that blocks dopamine and serotonin to cure a chemical imbalance it is science. It may seem to contradict itself but that is because everyone who is not a loyal psychiatrist lacks insight.

  • Maybe one reason the mental health industry tends to avoids abuse is because they don’t want to look in a mirror. This could simply be an emergent process.

    Regardless of what you think of psychiatry their tactics resemble those used by emotions manipulators.

    They partake in pretty much every sign of emotional manipulation mentioned in the bellow link.

    https://www.healthline.com/health/mental-health/emotional-manipulation#home-court-advantage

    When you are emotionally manipulating someone it is probably uncomfortable to tell them how someone else is doing the same thing.

  • Jiddu Krishnamurti spoke a lot about how the way we look at something changes what we see. How the rush to label, judge, and proceed to an action prevents us from understanding what is actually there.

    It’s not that the therapists observation changes the observed; it’s that the therapists actions stemming from it do. Observing paranoia, with “weird thoughts” and label someone being abused as a schizoprenic becomes self-fullfilling. They get cognitive impairing drugs and become incoherent. Now any claim that they are being abused can be rejected because they are certifiably so crazy they need less rights than a criminal. That itself might make someone lose it.

  • Sexism and racism is not the problem but are caused by the problem. The Dr. usage is the advancement of a logical fallacy. Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. Evidence, data and logic should be the basis of an opinion not the perceived “authority of the speaker”

    When I show people that the evidence and scientific studies show psych drugs cause only harm a common response is “listen to your doctor” This response means “reject the evidence it is our final and most essential command.”

  • Schizotypal personality disorder is an euphemism for “this persons personality isn’t normal enough and as a result they get stigmatized and abused therefore the problem is them” This study design doesn’t tell us marijuana increase this type of personality or if this type of personality uses more marijuana. Even if marijuana increases this type of personality (which this study does not scientifically show) it’s not a bad thing minus societies habit of hurting people who are different.

    I don’t have access to the exact “cognitive” tests and results of the study so it is impossible to tell if the subjectively stated cognitive difference is actually a real negative. A test can claim someone is mentally defective simply because they fail to agree with the majority. The psychiatric PANSS test says someone is psychotic if they simply disagree with psychiatry.

    Marijuana is a drug that has negative effects. Smoking is not healthy period. The problem I have is claiming things are bad because they don’t advance a bigoted view of how people should be. This study does this and therefore nothing it says can be taken as honest or accurate. Ironically this study hurts the cause of reducing marijuana use. Stating the negative effects from marijuana is that non users are bigoted against it and the drug causes a form of rebellion results in more marijuana users than if other negative effects are portrayed.

  • Arguments are made not for the person they are being done with but for the people watching/reading.

    Another analogy that is similar to your slave trade one is the court room. Psychiatry is the defendant and the average psychiatrist who prescribes these drugs is charged with lying and making money by killing more people than any serial killer.

  • If you are labeled with a mental illness and against psychiatry you are too stupid and lack insight and can be ignored.

    If you don’t have a mental illness label and are against psychiatry you don’t understand it and can be ignored.

    If you are a former psychiatrist who is against psychiatry you are a money whore because selling science non-fiction books is easier money than selling patented addicting drugs that are forced on people. Therefore you can be ignored as well.

    All those things look like examples of cognitive dissonance and inconsistent thinking but they aren’t. The psychiatric premise is that only loyal members of the cult can be listened to. The other excuses for why no one else should be listened to is marketing.

  • Looking at the details of the Cipriani study that claims serotonin drugs are effective is revealing.

    This study relied almost exclusively on published short term (IE cherry picked) corporate trials. More cherry picking was done by excluding people with physical health problems and people who were more likely to have adverse events. The study methods also included putting the placebo group through withdrawal.

    These studies are claimed to be randomized double blind trials but a Polish study found in practice they are unblinded. This occurs because of noticeable drug effects. Over 80% of people know who is in the drug group. This is important because the scale used to measure depression is highly subjective. It relies on self reporting. Playing with your hair too much means you’re more depressed. If the psychiatrist feels the person is apprehensive they are marked as more depressed.

    These studies are the most biased pro-drug studies out there. They are specifically designed to get the drugs approved. Yet according to them the drugs provide a 1.5 point “improvement” on a 54 point scale for 1 in 7 people taking them.

    For reference someone saying they are ill and defective is a 2 point improvement. Someone who stops losing weight (the drugs cause obesity) is a 2 point improvement. Going from a subjective “frequently complains” to “self absorption” is also a 2 point improvement. That is the best the drugs do in the most short term biased pro-drug studies done by people with massive conflicts of interests who we know because of court cases regularly lied and hid information about these very drugs.

  • The most common response psychiatrists have if someone complains about an effect of a drug is to add another addicting deadly drug or increase the first ones dose. Their definitions literally view complaints about drug effects as a sign of mental illness.

    It’s why people get put on neuroleptics (which block dopamine and serotonin) and drugs that increase serotonin and dopamine at the same time. Other combos are sleeping pills, and other sedatives while on stimulants. Anti-chilinergics (which cause dementia) for the neuroleptic induced brain damage which causes movement disorders.

    They don’t want not admit they broke the doctor ethics of “first do no harm” and “informed consent” so they lie and cover up by breaking those ethics all over again.

  • The use the drugs for 6 week to experience all the benefits was not only fabricated but it opposes the results of the corporate studies used to approve the drugs.
    Corporate psych drug studies find the entire theoretically drug benefit occurs at the start and decreases over time. By 6 weeks the placebo group has the same relapse rate but since they did worse at the start the drug still has a claimed net benefit. We know the reason these studies show a benefit at first is because the placebo group is actually in abrupt withdraw from the drugs.
    The 6 week lie is simply designed to addict people to the drugs.

  • Abilify gives you energy in the sense that it causes movement disorders where you are in pain or discomfort if you are not moving. All neuroleptics cause this in an estimated 25-75% of users. Serotonin and Benzo drugs also cause the movement diseases though at smaller rates.

    Neuroleptics may temporary knock out psychosis (though there isn’t any evidence this is true because all the studies have the placebo group in drug withdrawal). The problem is that the drugs disable the mind, kill, and increase long term psychotic symptoms. They are a trap with zero long term benefits.

  • Psychiatry tells everyone those with “mental illness” are defective and have biologic abnormalities. That they will be “ill” and suffer forever. In a sense since almost all people with a “mental illness” take chemical imbalance causing psych drugs this is true. A fear filled self-fullfilling prophecy in more ways than one.

    An often reply when I’m telling people how psych drugs cause only harm is “you are fear mongering.” Pscyh defenders utilize projection as much as a movie theater. When they are attacking anti-psych it’s more likely than not that they are projecting.

    Societies view and opinion on what people with these psych labels are like is not based on what these people are actually like. It’s based on what they are like when they are addicted to psych drugs, or in withdrawal. Many of the stereotypes, traits, and outcomes for people with these labels are effects from the drugs.

    Stereotypes such as having movement disorders, tobacco use, drooling, unemployment, cognitive impairment, early death, brain damage, apathy, suicide, an inability to feel pleasure, and a lack of motivation are all caused by neuroleptics. Even the symptoms these drugs are said to reduce are increased by the drugs.

    It becomes a feedback loop where people take the drugs because they are lied to about the effects and about having a chemical imbalance. The shitty outcomes afterwards then become proof people with psych labels are defective and ill. If those people quit the drugs withdrawal becomes more proof.

  • Before the use of drugs “mental illness” was episodic and a person would recover and be good for the rest of their lives. Now it is chronic because the drugs cause a chemical imbalance and result in an illness.

    It is harder to get people to take addicting deadly drugs when those drugs cause a chemical imbalance. It’s a lot easier if the people believe they are defective and genetic deadbeats who need drugs to be normal. It is similar to how abusive husbands convince the wife she is worthless and would be nothing if she left.

  • I wonder what the mental effects of being told you’re mentally defective, need “professional” help and need drugs are when you talk with friends and family about your suffering. The medicalization of suffering causes suffering because it has turned the response to suffering into veiled insults and self fullfilling prophecies of doom. Though it can’t be worse then the “professional treatments” of deadly addicting drugs that worsen all long term outcomes measured.

  • There is zero scientific evidence anxiety or any psychiatric label is genetic.
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2768030

    Benzos are deadlier and more addicting than “antidepressants”. Note the study found Benzos are 9% deadlier than antidepressants, which increase all cause mortality by around 70%.
    https://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j2941

    The majority of people who suffer from anxiety and other psychiatric labels who don’t take drugs recover and it goes away. There is zero evidence Benzos provide a single long term benefit, in fact all long term data shows the drugs worsen all outcomes. Your insistence that you suffer so much and are angry because you struggle maintaining a drug addiction contradicts your insistence that the deadly, dementia causing drugs with zero evidence of any benefit are helping you.

    You’re probably suffering because of the drugs. After a days to a few weeks of use Benzos cause a large increase in anxiety, cognitive impairment, death, 4x increase in depression and other negative effects

    https://erenow.net/common/anatomy-of-an-epidemic/7.php
    (Chapter 7 the Benzo trap)

  • Society will spend tens of thousands of dollars jailing and drugging someone to try to prevent them from committing suicide yet when it comes to spending even less providing someone with food, healthcare and shelter it is called evil communism destroying the nation. Someone getting $800 a month for disability gets insulted as a drain on society but anyone saying spending $1,000 a month on addicting deadly psych drugs with zero benefits is bad is called a crazy cultist. Society is painted in cognitive dissonance.

  • Right, in the PANSS scale (which is used to measure psychotic symptoms in drug studies) someone is labeled psychotic if they are hostile and suspicious in disagreeing with psychiatry.

    In studies testing drugs for depression someone saying they are mentally defective is considered a 2 point improvement on a 54 point scale. The average drug has a 1.5 point improvement in the short term biases flawed corporate studies.

  • Someone is forcibly jailed in an institution. They are forcibly drugged and told the drugs will fix them. They continue to get worse because the drugs actually worsen all outcomes and the additional stigma and discrimination caused by being medically labeled “crazy, dangerous and mentally defective”. The mental health industry gets their family to spy on them and make sure they are taking the drugs.

    Paranoia in this case isn’t a delusion. It is manufactured by the mental health industry constantly lying, using force and hurting people. A common phrase is, “It’s not paranoia if they are really out to get you.” Everyone who has been through the the mental healthy system can one up that with, “It’s not paranoia when they already got me and a hundred million other people.”

  • 1) Almost everyone with a depression label gets drugged. Meaning even if they did find impaired neuron communications the more likely reason for that is the deadly brain changing drugs. Psychiatry likes to be dishonest and claim people who were addicted to the drugs for months and going through withdrawal from them are “drug naive” or “undrugged”.

    2) Were these impaired neuron communication findings replicated? MRI studies of mental illness show the point I’m trying to make. One MRI study will find those labeled with depression have a larger brain region and it will be declared a biological cause. Another study will find the same region is smaller and again be declared it is a cause. While a third will find no difference and be ignored.

    3) MAOI’s cause an increase in dopamine, serotonin, norephinprine, and other chemicals. Another drug that has some similar chemical effects is Cocaine and meth. Given all Antidepressants and MAOI’s more than double Dementia, and cause cognitive impairment claiming they improve cognitive function is an anti-science claim.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5347943/

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26295747/

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22377782/

    3) I’m sure a drug that increases dopamine and/or other chemicals can get you high or provide an active placebo effect. I’m sure addicting drugs cause withdrawal and make the addict feel like shit when they try to quit. This does not mean the drug is good and helping you. It means the drug is addicting and/or you had an active placebo effective or got high before tolerance kicked in. There are zero studies actually finding any psych drug has any long term benefit. Psych regularly touts studies finding the drugs are addicting and cause withdrawal and falsely claim this means the drugs are good but that is all they have. All long term studies that don’t utilize withdrawal data or account for it find all psych drugs worsen all outcomes by hundreds of percent.

    MAOI’s increase all cause mortality by 75%. All “antidepressants” cause large increases in death rates. MAOI’s on average will reduce your life expectancy by 7 years.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28903117/

  • Isn’t addiction a biological illness caused by the drug use changing the persons physical brain/body? Exactly like how mental illness is a biological illness caused by psych drugs. If someone has mercury or lead poisoning don’t they have an illness caused by those substances?

    I think a conflict arises because addiction is multiple different things clumped into one definition. One kind of addiction is a drug induced biological change that causes withdrawal when the drug is stopped. A second is a desire to get rid of pain/feel better and the only available way to do that is to use drugs. The second kind causes the first.

    Pretty much the focus on “helping” people with an addiction consists of stigmatization, discrimination, jail, and using other drugs or rehab to address withdrawal. Going to rehab or taking an addiction drug are red marks that can cause social isolation and discrimination. They reduce self-esteem but they do help reduce and get past the initial withdrawal.

    Our current treatment for addiction is such a failure because it harms a persons social and emotional health in order to attempt to address the biological effects of addiction/withdrawal. No one started using a drug because they had an addiction because biological addiction is a drug effect that comes after continued use. People who were once addicted, went through withdrawal and start using drugs again years later do not do so because they are addicted.

    Our societies treatment plan is to address an effect (biological addiction) by worsening some of the causes (social isolation, poorer self-esteem discrimination, etc).

    A biological addiction isn’t the cause. It is a drug effect that can be overcome by addressing what causes the drug use. Fixing the effect doesn’t work well because the causes are still there and the act of fixing the effect worsens the causes.

  • Yes. The drugs for TD like neuroleptics cause cognitive impairment making it harder for the person to recognize what is going on and complain. They also cause sedation; if you’re passed out in bed it’s harder to see/have movement. The new TD drugs being discussed here reduce dopamine, and other neurotransmitter levels. Neuroleptics block those receptors so both drugs have similar chemical effect. The adverse even data from the corporations show these drugs for TD cause other movement diseases. Other drugs for TD also cause cognitive impairment and sedation by causing chemical imbalances.

  • Imagine that scenario happening with any other trauma. A victim of rape being told to go see her rapist in order to get over her rape. A former disabled prisoner of war being told they need to go to the people who imprisoned them to get help for their blown off legs. If the person doesn’t do so they are called crazy, and blamed for not helping themselves. That is what happens to anyone who has escaped the prison of psychiatric drugs.

    It is difficult to become okay with trauma. It’s harder when the trauma was society giving you brain damage. It’s even harder when that society insults and blames you for the harm they caused and tell you to go get more brain damage to fix it.

  • Withdrawal can make TD appear worse. All neuroleptic studies take people addicted to the drugs and withdrawal half claiming that is a placebo group. This is one way the psychiatric studies hide how prevalent TD is with these drugs. They compare people who’ve been given brain damage from the drugs and are going through withdrawal to just people taking the drugs.

    The same thing happens with the new TD drugs. Since many people who enter a TD trial have either been on an old TD drug or reduced their neuroleptic dosage they are going through withdrawal. Adding the new TD drug means the drug group is no longer in withdrawal.

    You can see this in the TD drug studies where the entire drug benefit over “placebo” occurs in the first 4 weeks. After that period the placebo group has a larger improvement over the drug group but enough time doesn’t pass to overcome the outcomes in the first 4 weeks.

    Adverse even data from the corporations show the TD drugs over 12 weeks cause 5.2% of the people taking the drug to develop Akathsia (another painful movement disorder caused by brain damage) verse 0 for the “placebo”.

    Taking a new deadly addicting brain damage causing drug to sedate and temporary cover the symptoms of brain damage from the first drug is making the same mistake over and over again.

    Some studies have found that taking vitamins B6, magnesium, Iron, Omega 3 and B12 can have some benefits for TD and other movement disorders. Though make sure if you take these not to take huge amounts as very high dosages of vitamins can cause harm.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5440239/

  • Are we sure placebos can’t do long damage? Of course in the short term they help but I think we are all aware that short term “benefits” can reverse and become negative in the long term. I can imagine long term harm if someone attributes their success, ability, and happiness to a placebo instead of their own effort and strength.

    All else equal which person is happier: the one who thinks they are happy because of a placebo or the one who thinks they are happy because of their own effort?

    All else equal which person will be more functional, the one who think they can function if they take a placebo or the one who thinks they can accomplish their goals themselves?

  • Upton Sinclair could tell us why therapists don’t discuss how their power to essentially jail their consumers harms their consumers. How being a shoulder to cry on only because they are overpaid to do so is not a therapeutic environment (by overpaid I mean that their services have zero to very little long term benefits ). How the average person would be better off with the cash but have to use poorer quality services because that is how society operates. How most of their job consists of distracting blame from our dystopian society.

  • When you look at the tactics and signs of abusive manipulative behavior you’ll notice the mental health industry partakes in almost every single one of them. There is a natural tendency to rationalize why ones own actions are good. One reason they coddle abusers is because they are trying to defend their own manipulative abusive behavior.

    If someone is “mentally ill” because they are being abused the solution isn’t therapy or psych drugs. It’s removing them from the abuser. There is a financial conflict of interest to believe the abused person is “ill” among all mental health employees.

    The major problem with “life isn’t fair” is it is used to justify shit that is unfair. It is used as an argument to manipulate people into doing what you want them to do.

    Going with the flow is alright if the flow you’re going with isn’t objectionable. An aunt/uncle going with the flow to play imaginary games with children can be good and produce happiness. Going with the flow when it pertains to something that can cause harm is like lemmings jumping off a cliff.

    Our society has a tendency to attack the messenger. The person pointing out an injustice is assumed as equal in moral status as what causes the injustice.

    As the philosopher Jiddu Krishnamurti points out we are all simultaneously the observer and the observed. You don’t gain quality observation of something by distancing from it. You do that by sensing it for what it is, without preconceived notions, labels or desires to change it.

  • Almost all Neuroleptics used today also block serotonin. It’s common for people to be on a serotonin reuptake inhibitors and a Neuroleptic.
    It’s also to be on other sedating drugs (such as a Benzo or anticonvulsant) and being on a stimulating drug as well.
    The drugs cause an actual biological mental illness so they give people a second or third drug to address the symptoms of the first drug.

  • Yes that is a myth. This very article sources how the corporate studies claiming this myth compared low dose second generation to high dose first generations neuroleptics in order to claim the second generation was less likely to cause movement diseases. Studies that account for the bias and flaws find the newer drugs cause the same amount of movement diseases.

    The second generation was claimed to differ because the drugs caused serotonin and other chemical imbalances besides just dopamine. Yet when you look at the pharmacological data a lot of first generation drugs also caused more chemical imbalances besides just dopamine. I think it’s also a myth that the second generation is a new drug class. It was just labeled so in marketing because that sold better.

  • There is a withdrawal effect which can appear to worsen TD and similar symptoms in the short term. This is one way they were able to lie about the prevalence of these diseases in neuroleptic studies. They made the adverse effects of the drugs appear less likely by making the “placebo” group a group that was addicted to the drugs and went through withdrawal during the study.

    Imagine alcohol companies trying to claim their drug is safe because people addicted had similar adverse events compared to addicts put through withdrawal. “Alcohol addiction saves lives because the placebo group had more deaths during withdrawal.” It would be laughable how illogical it is, if not for society and people religiously agreeing without question.

  • The few studies for the new drugs for TD have the same problems as all psych drugs. They have the same chemical effect as older drugs. Older drugs that had no long term research but were widely used. Some or all people with TD entering these clinical trials had taken the older drugs and therefore a withdrawal effect would occur in the clinical trials. The studies would also be unblinded, cherry picked, short term and have all the other flaws.

    Let’s look at the results of the 6 week clinical trial for these drugs. At 6 weeks the drug caused a 3.2 point reduction on the AIMS scaled compared to a .1 reduction on placebo. They cherry picked 7 out of 12 of the 4 point measures on the scale. The drug at 6 weeks reduced these cherry picked symptoms by 11%. Slightly over 2/3rds of the benefit occurred in the first 2 weeks. On the CGI-TD scale there was no significant difference between the groups.

    Adverse events showed that compared to placebo 1.3% more of those using the drug died, 2% developed akathsia, 3.8% developed a new dyskinesia, and 2.5% developed a painful joint disease. Another effect was sedation which in the short term can mask signs of TD.

    VMAT2 inhibitors like these drugs have an indirect chemical effect of reducing dopamine, serotonin and Norep levels. That is basically what neuroleptics do and we know that in the short term reducing those chemicals masks TD and similar symptoms. Once drug dependence kicks in and the sedation reduced these drugs will make symptoms worse just like increasing neuroleptic dosages masks the symptoms in the short term and worsens long term symptoms.

    I’d bet good money that in 5 years when or if we get long term data we will find these drugs have no benefits and cause massive harm.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28320223/

  • I wonder if there are any studies or data on the topics therapy focuses on. How much of therapy consists of, “you need to be addicted to these drugs because you are biologically defective.” How much of therapy consist of trying to cope with drug effects such as amotivation, and obesity? How much is about coping with stigma and discrimination which occurs largely because psychiatry lied about how the people they label have broken brains and are so dangerous they need less rights than a criminal?

    Maybe that is why studies find therapy has little benefit while studies like this find some benefit when the focus isn’t on addicting people to drugs and addressing harms causes by psychiatry.

  • Sadly in our society someone’s actions don’t determine their ethical status. Authority and social status determine if someone is considered ethical in our society. That’s why a psychiatrist is a hero for addicting kids to amphetamines while lying about how meth is a health product.

    A meth dealer on the street selling meth to adults lacks authority and social status and therefore should be jailed. This is despite the meth dealer adhering more to the medical ethic of informed consent compared to the psychiatrist.

  • Another problem is the concept of “garbage in, garbage out” When all the studies consist of withdrawing people addicted to the drugs (garbage in) the results can claim the drugs help (garbage out).

    There are even meta-analyses that claim the long term Wunderink withdrawal study finds neuroleptic drugs are good. They say this by cherry picking the data from the withdrawal period and leaving out the post withdrawal data. The post withdrawal data shows 3 times higher recovery rates for those taken off the drugs, yet the psychiatric researchers claim the study claims the drugs help. I’ve seen this occur in multiple meta-analyses.

  • The hypotheses for the use of psychedelic drugs to help states of sadness, anxiety, addiction and so on have some significant differences from past drugs marketed for these things.

    Having a psychedelic experience by itself is thought to be one reason why using magic mushrooms can help with these things. For this mechanism of action people don’t need to do the drugs daily. One or a few trips on the drugs is suggested. A problem I see is this turning into people taking mushrooms constantly all the time.

    Psychedelics have less addiction potential and cause less harm to some ones health compared to any psych drug. Meaning even if they don’t help at all, using them over psych drugs will produce a net benefit by removing the harm from psych drugs.

    You’re experience is common. I know people who were put on drugs after a family member attempted suicide or they lost a job. People with negative life events are put on drugs and told they are ill. I wonder how many people don’t even bother mentioning negative life events because they believe they must be “ill” and drugs will help while talking about painful things just causes more pain.

  • One thing I’ve noticed is that psych “meta-analysis” often outright lie about the results of the studies they are looking at.

    One meta-analysis claimed Harrow had mixed results(3). Yet Harrow found worse results with the drugs for all outcomes measured.

    Another claimed Wunderink found the drugs helped(1). Wunderink found that long term withdraw from the drugs improved full recovery by 2.25-3 times.

    Meta-analyses of lithium claim the Amsterdam study says lithium helps but the study actually shows lithium uses had worse outcomes(2).

    I just listed 3 instances where prominent meta-analysis lied about the data even as the data was there proving the lie wrong. I wonder how prevalent this is.

    (1) https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychological-medicine/article/effect-of-discontinuation-v-maintenance-of-antipsychotic-medication-on-relapse-rates-in-patients-with-remittedstable-firstepisode-psychosis-a-metaanalysis/DC0C0DA6A891CAAE2F7F901EBAE46222

    (2) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7221175/

    (3) https://www.madinamerica.com/2015/12/timberrr-psychiatrys-evidence-base-for-antipsychotics-comes-crashing-to-the-ground/

  • The “almost 200 meta analysis have been published alone” is laughable. A meta analysis is a study that looks at other studies and reports their average results. All these meta analysis are of the same industry funded studies. They aren’t new; they are the same bad science junk that has been debunked. They have the same pro-drug flaws such as multiple instances of cherry picking, withdrawal, unblinding, outright fraud, short term length, and conflicts of interest etc.

  • This is incorrect. If these kids were not drugged society would save thousands of dollars a year per kid just in drug costs. Society would earn hundreds of thousands of dollars for every kid who is not disabled by these drugs.

    We would all benefit if millions of kids were not given deadly meth and meth like substances that cause only harm.

  • “Meth is horrible and will destroy your brain, ruin your life, and cause a psychotic rage where you commit murder suicide.” -Society.

    “Kids who don’t sit down and shut up need to get addicted to meth or else they will become drug addict depressed criminals in constant suffering .” -Same exact society.

  • Withdrawal is also a factor in almost all studies. The study design is to take people with depression and withdrawal them from their current drugs. During this withdrawal period they test the new drug vrs no drugs. Since most drugs used for depression increase serotonin, even before SRI’s all these studies have a placebo where some of the people are going through withdrawal. You can see this in the data with the drug benefit occurring mostly at the start of the short term study.

    2 points on the HDRS scale is equivalent to someone no longer losing weight. Meaning the drug is claimed to work because one of its effects is obesity. A person also receives a 2 point improvement if they no longer “deny” that they are mentally defective and ill.

    Does anyone really think obesity means depression is better? Does anyone really thing someone saying they are mentally defective means their depression is better?

  • “You can choose how you feel.”

    If this is true there’s no need for psych drugs because we choose how we feel.
    In a sense a placebo effect would be “choosing” how you feel subconsciously. Though using deadly, addicting drugs as a placebo instead of sugar is violating the medical ethic of “first do no harm”

    If you choose how you feel depression and emotions cannot be a physical brain disease. No one I know can use their mind to change their physical body.

    “Fake it until you make it.”

    Is mental illness a chemical imbalance or a frame of mind that can be created by pretending? How would one fake the correct chemical balance?

    “No one is responsible for your life but you.”

    If that were true society wouldn’t be forcibly locking people up or putting them on drugs because of how they feel. If someone really believes that saying they cannot also claim people shouldn’t commit suicide because it will hurt other people’s lives.

    It’s interesting how a lot of the advice from therapy contradicts what psychiatry says and does.

  • It is harder to make false claims about how those in withdrawal having bad outcomes prove the drugs are safe and effective if you also admit the drugs cause bad withdrawal. That’s why they hid and lied about withdrawal. They didn’t want to give informed consent because less people would buy their drugs and services if they did.

  • They watch the deterioration, death and drug effects and say it’s proof the people addicted to the drugs are genetically and mentally inferior and therefore need the drugs.

    When people go through withdrawal they claim withdrawal is proof the peoole need the drugs as well.

    It would be like if cocaine and meth addicts said their high death rates meant the cocaine was good for them. That withdrawal meant the drug healed them. Hell psychiatry flat out says this about the children they addict to meth.

  • You rejecting the data because Harrow made a speculative assumption (one he later said was wrong) in order to support your first fact free assumption sounds like denial.

    The Wunderink study had a sample size as large as the typical antipsychotics study. It also was 7 years long compared to the typical 1-3 months for other psychiatric antipsychotics studies. If anything it is a larger study compared to the average.

    You can read all about the VA study in the bellow link. To sum the VA data up psychiatric treatment itself doubles suicide. People who have worse mental health who didn’t take the drugs had less suicides compared to people with better mental health who took the drugs.

    https://www.madinamerica.com/2019/11/screening-drug-treatment-increase-veteran-suicides/

  • A study found “antidepressants” increase mortality risk by 33%. The most used drug classes have higher mortality rates.
    If pre-medicated depression was adjusted for the increased mortality from the drugs would be larger.

    Adding a second antidepressant increases mortality risk by 33% while adding an “antipsychotic” increased the mortality risk by 45% on top of that. Both those options are on top of the 33% increased mortality risk from the first antidepressant.

    That is a lot of dead people who were never informed of how deadly the drugs are. If a “medical profession” doesn’t follow the medical principles of “first do no harm” and “informed consent” are they really a medical profession?

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28903117/

  • Is that why Harrow found those with severe illness who didn’t take the drugs had 40% better better outcomes compared to those with mild illness who took the drugs?

    Is that why the Wunderink withdrawal study found the people quitting the drugs had more negative risk factors?

    Is that why the VA found veterans without a “mental illness” who took drugs had 50% higher suicide rates compared to Veterans with a “mental illness” who didn’t use the drugs?

    This new study notes that the people who quit the drugs went through withdrawal and were non-compliant. Both of which cause and are associated with worse outcomes.

    The problem with your argument is that it’s a fabricated one. One that is rejected by the evidence and research.

  • It’s odd because if you present people with dozens of studies find the drugs worsen the very symptoms they are said to help also cause a bunch of new physical and mental illness the response is “what else are we to do?”

    The idea doesn’t cross people’s minds that maybe not taking drugs that worsen the “illness” and cause other illnesses is a better course of action than spending $5,000+ dollars a year poisoning people.

  • Back before society recognized that lobotomies were torture, maiming and killing people psychiatry called “antipsychotics” chemical lobotomies.

    Now a-days if you state what psychiatry once said as fact you are anti-psychatry.
    This happens in several other instances, where if you say what psychiatry says pro-psychiatry druggers insult you and get upset. Psychiatry can say without any evidence or science that the people they label are mentally defective, stupid/lack insight, more dangerous than criminals and lost causes. But if you point this out suddenly you’re stigmatizing people.

  • Another myth: You need to take the drugs for 4-6 weeks to see the benefits.

    According to the studies used to claim the drugs are effective the drugs benefit decreases over time.
    Now we know the reason the drug has benefits in these studies at the beginning is because the study design is to put the “placebo” group through withdrawal from the same drugs.

    The 4-6 weeks myth in practice gets people addicted to the drugs even if they don’t feel any benefit. Then if they try to quit they go through withdrawal and are told it’s proof the drugs are good.

  • Wouldn’t it be logical to assume taking drugs that cause cognitive impairment would make talk therapy less effective?
    A study did find that talk therapy was less effective for those taking the drugs.

    Basically what the mental health industry did-which is what they almost always do- was fabricate a fact free reason why the drugs help.

    Some therapists probably confuse them wasting time pushing drugs on people who do not want them as evidence taking the drugs improves therapy. When you take the drugs the therapist doesn’t have to push them on you and something else can be talked about.

    https://www.madinamerica.com/2019/11/psychotherapy-less-effective-people-poverty-antidepressants/

  • One way to convince society the people you’re locking up are dangerous is to drug them with drugs that increase violence, irritability, aggression and suicide.

    One way to convince society that the people you drug are too stupid to understand and lack insight is to give them brain damaging, cognitive impairing drugs.

    A this point with so many stereotypes of those labeled with “mental illness” having been found to be caused by the drugs it’s logical to say that “mental illness” is real. It is a chemical imbalance and brain/body disease. One caused by psychiatric drug addictuon.

  • Saying the drugs are “safe” is a tell. It is a purely subjective term. Real science would say the drug causes a percent change in all cause mortality. The “safest” antidepressants increase all cause mortality by 49%, antipsychotics by around 200%, and Benzos by hundreds of percent. The drugs take 5-25 years off people’s lifespan. This is covered up by claiming they are “safe” instead of giving the actual data.

  • The Harm reduction strategy is essentially, “we can’t stop drug use so let’s try to make it so the drugs used are less harmful ones.” Going from being addicted to an a drug that increases all cause mortality by 250% to one that increases it by 75% is a benefit.

    A problem is if informed consent isn’t directly given. It needs to be flat out said, “This drug is also deadly but not as deadly as your current addiction. It can but will not always help keep you off the deadlier stuff. You’d be better off on neither drug but if you can’t get off the deadlier one it is better to be on this one.”
    There also needs to be actually evidence that the drug is safer and effective at reducing use of the other drug.

  • The corporate clinical trials find about a 2 point change in the 54 point HAMD depression scale in the short term. This is before any adjustments to the half dozen or so design flaws that make the drugs appear better.

    Here are some examples of what a 2 point change in the HAMD scale is.
    -A person going from saying they are not ill to saying they are ill.
    -If the person stops losing weight.
    -The psychiatrist feels the person has stopped being preoccupied with health.
    -The person is no longer playing with their hands or hair according to the psychiatrists opinion.

    If informed consent occurred I wonder how many people would take a deadly addicting drug (Antidepressants increase death rates by similar amounts as an alcohol addiction) where the benefit was equivalent to, “I now say I am mentally defective and agree with the psychiatrist selling me drugs.”

  • Are there any other businesses or medical professionals whose practice is to insult their consumers? Who claim their consumers need to keep taking the addicting drugs they sell because the consumers are too stupid to know they are really good? Who then turn around and say anyone who they have not insulted who says something negative about the drugs lacks insight to know how good they are?

  • Half life of various drugs
    Cocaine 1 hour
    Heroin 30 minutes

    Half life means the time it typically takes for half the original substance to be metabolized and/or eliminated from someone’s system. It is not a reflection on the harms or benefits of the substance. It isn’t even an actual reflection on the duration of the substances actions. Many drug effects last last long after the original substance has been metabolized. These effects are sometimes called “withdrawal” “hangovers” “addiction”

  • In the scale they use for studies for neuroleptic drugs, psychotic symptoms include: suspicion, grandiose thoughts (so disagreeing with the psychiatrist), excitement, and hostility. Don’t even need hallucinations, delusions or disorganized thinking to score as psychotic. Though since it is all subjective disagreeing with psychiatry can be a delusion.

    In SSRI and drug studies used for depression/anxiety the person going from saying they are not ill to saying they are ill produces a larger “benefit” than the total short term drug benefit. No need to even address that these studies are cherry picked withdrawal studies because when you know what they define as “better than placebo” you realize the drug is worse than worthless.

  • A 450 page research book is “oversimplification” while a psychiatrists “you are ill therefore you are ill take these great drugs because we cherry picked a few corporate clinical trials.” Is what exactly? What do we call it when highly unequal standards are applied?

    If you admit the decision is painful why does psychiatry lie and withhold facts about it from people? Something being painful does not excuse them manipulating people to take as you say “painful” addicting drugs. Drugs that Anatomy showed cause only long term harm.

    Psychiatry are the ones who lied about a chemical imbalance to get people on the drugs. They are the ones who force people to take the drugs. People with these labels don’t get insulted for taking the drugs; they get insulted for being off them. Your “pill shamming” comments are you blaming others for the actions of psychiatry. Just like psychiatry blames the effects of their drugs on the people taking them.

    If you really believed the standard need to be high to release these kinds of ideas to the public you’d be attacking psychiatry. You know the people who lied to slander hundreds of millions Who lied to get hundreds of millions addicted to drugs. Who gave millions brain damage from their drugs. Those ideas were the dangerous ones. Correcting those ideas are only dangerous to those benefiting from the lies.

  • “Mentally ill” people who are against the drugs lack insight and can be ignored and forced on the drugs.
    People without those labels who are against the drugs can be ignored and slandered because they lack the insight from being “ill”
    Psychiatry holds these two contradictory beliefs simultaneously. I’d say if anyone lacks insight it is the psychiatry people who can’t do basic logic.

  • You once falsely believed the medication was the reason for everything you had. Now you recognize the truth, that you were stronger, more resilient, and more dedicated then you ever imagined. Strong enough to survive being put on however many horrible drugs for so long. I hope you can recognize the beauty, exceptionalism, and accomplishment of your survival like I now do.

  • It’s hard for anyone to say if what they experience and feel is an effect of the drugs because psychiatrists lie and withhold what the effects are. They tell people the effects of their drugs are because of their “illness”. Patients who complain are called crazy. Most the time they are given an additional addicting deadly drug to address the effects of the other drugs.

  • Pretty much everyone with these labels gets drugged. If they do well off the drugs psychiatry claims they must not really have the “illness”. This means that the perception of what these labels are is based on looking at drugged people. Particularly drugged people put through withdrawal.

    The irony is that “mentally ill” people do have an “illness” that illness is a psychiatric drug addiction to drugs that cause brain damage even in the short term. These people’s brains do have abnormalities that cause horrible effects. Those abnormalities are effects from the drugs.

  • Well if they didn’t deny the effects of the addicting deadly drugs they push and even force on people and they had any conscious they would have trouble sleeping at night.

    Why bother becoming informed about your actions if doing so shows you’re maiming people? Much easier and better for ones happiness to ignore the consequences of your actions. To call anyone pointing them out a dangerous crazy person.

    There is a quote that goes “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” I can one up that with, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his moral status depends on his not understanding it.”

  • Isn’t it shocking how psychatry admits that they purposefully violate the medical principle of informed consent? They also violate the medical oath of “First do no harm.”
    They admit to withholding facts and lying to people in order to manipulate them into buying their addicting deadly drugs. If a group violates the doctors oath and standard medical principles doesn’t that mean they aren’t medical professionals?

  • I think it is revealing what Psychiatrists mean exactly when they say our treatment is “effective, and better than placebo.”

    The corporate clinical trials do find that antidepressants are statistically significantly better than placebo. (For now let’s not address biases and flaws of these studies. Let’s just look at the exact results). These studies find that the drugs in the short term reduce the HAMD 54 point scale by about 2 points. A 2 point change in this scale can mean the person goes from saying they are not ill to saying they are ill. The psychiatrist thinking the persons facial expressions have gone from apprehensive to irritable is also a 2 point change. If someone stops losing weight it is also a 2 point change.
    That is why they think people need to take these drugs for life. Because a 6 week corporate clinical trial says that their addicting deadly drug causes a persons HAMD scale to change by the equivalent of them no longer disagreeing with psychiatry .

  • Almost all studies psychiatry uses for “safety and effectiveness” for its drugs consist of putting the non drug group through withdrawal. Since withdrawal causes these neurological disorders these studies will vastly underestimate how many people get this drug induced disease.

    I wonder what the people who started the medical principle of informed consent would think of not telling people, “There is around a 50% chance using antipsychotics will cause a permeant painful movement disease that can’t be treated.”

  • Imagine if the prescribers did that and performed honest informed consent. “The corporate clinical trials found antidepressants causes a 1.5 point increase in a 54 point scale in the short term. In this scale you changing your mind and agreeing you are mentally ill is registered as a larger benefit than the benefit the drug provides. 87 people out of 100 taking the drug will not see any improvement from the drug. The drug is addicting and it increases all cause death rates by 25-75%.”

    How many people would take that drug?

  • Money isn’t the most important factor. It is deeper than that.
    It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his moral and social status depend on his not understanding it.
    The mental health profession forces drugs on people and drugs kids. For them to admit their whole profession is a pseudoscience that kills and tortures people’s; they have to accept the horrors they’ve done.

  • Do chemical imbalances that are as deadly as an alcohol addiction count as an an incurable disease? If so technically people do have that because psychiatric drugs cause deadly chemical imbalances. Pretty sly to lie and say your patients will never recover and put them on drugs that cause chronic illness. They will assume the effects of the drugs is their mental illness and keep taking the drugs. Even more crafty to lie and claim the drugs take 4-6 weeks to work because by that time a person is addicted. The withdrawal is then used as evidence the drug works. Their studies that claim these drugs work use the same idea. They put the placebo group through withdrawal. Because of this these biased studies actually find the effectiveness of the drug declines after several weeks.

  • You mean maybe mental diagnosis are just a bunch of random traits people disliked and they don’t describe any cause or disorder at all? That would explain why many people’s diagnosis switches and why a lot of people could be labeled with multiple diagnosis. Assuming something that causes mental suffering and problems will result in similar presentations in everyone is bad science.

  • If society grants you the authority to diagnosis people as ill and drug them then you can. Society not only granted psychiatrists the authority to lock people up and force drugs on them, but also the authority to determine if their drugs are safe and effective. Like almost all defendants at a trial they said they were good. The best! Evidence based. Saving lives and making you safe. No chance people whose drugs were killing and torturing would admit it right? No chance people paid by a drug company could make a biased study on the companies drug.
    A major problem with this debate is society acts like the defendant is the best expert witness.

  • https://www.madinamerica.com/2019/11/screening-drug-treatment-increase-veteran-suicides/

    I’ll give you a warning Pro-psychiatry people are in a constant state of denial. I’ve had multiple people respond with a variation of “mentally ill people commit more suicide”. They don’t ever actually read any research they just make up lies about how the research is wrong and they are right. This wouldn’t work very well but corporations and psychiatrists making money off the drugs easily produce fraudulent research.

  • Antidepressants increase suicide by 250%. Veterans without a mental illness who get psychiatric “care” have 50% higher suicide rates compared to Veterens with a mental illness who don’t get psychiatric care. Antipsychotics increase psychosis by 300% and triple disability. Let that sink in.
    The mental health industry does more harm than all mental illnesses combined. They cause more suicides, deaths, and suffering.