Saturday, November 17, 2018

Comments by Ragnarok

Showing 100 of 105 comments. Show all.

  • So the NIMH broke the law? Guess that means fines and/or jail time for the higher ups eh? Because if nothing happens it means the law means nothing. If the law applies it should apply to everyone equally. Not one set of laws for governments, corporations, and rich and wealthy elite where they can get away with mass murder while another set of laws for everyone else where they can’t get away with growing or smoking a plant or saying words because it might offend someone.

    Nothing will change until people accept that THIS IS INTENTIONAL. Manipulating study results, downplaying negative effects while talking up any minor positive even if they have to manipulate a negative into a positive, posting positive results but not negative results, promoting the psychiatric agenda of chemical imbalances and broken brains and drug interventions as the best and first line interventions, pushing psychiatric drugs as ‘safe and effective’ when many have been proven to be little more effective than placebo yet include the risk of many adverse effects including homicidal and/or suicidal thoughts and/or actions, ignoring evidence that ‘chemical imbalances’ never existed (except the ones caused by psychiatric drugs) and ‘mental illnesses’ are not real illnesses but clusters of personality traits, behaviours, and emotions that are clustered together and given a label and voted into existence.

    What these nutbars in power are doing is ON PURPOSE. They didn’t accidently forget to file their paperwork. They didn’t misspeak saying psychiatric and pharmaceutical drugs are “safe and effective”. It’s not a woopsie that they hire “Key Opinion Leaders” to influence others in their profession. They didn’t make a mistake hiring thousands of drug reps and lobbyists to influence policy makers and script writers. This is all intentional. Nothing will change while you people look at psychiatry and look at what they are doing like it’s a ‘mistake’ or an ‘accident’ or ‘misguided’ or ‘doing it wrong’. What they are doing is by design, they are doing exactly what they intend to do. And what they intend to do is maintain and expand the status quo of power, profit, and control by continually making up mental illnesses and pointing the blame at broken brains and individuals (while ignoring the environment, society, and government policy) and pushing for everyone on the planet to be monitored 24/7 and drugged up to their eyeballs from cradle till grave and those who question or step out of line will get a more ‘dangerous’ or ‘crazy’ label (or given a low social credit score and banned from most services) and given more powerful drugs or electroshocked into a dribbling shell of a human who can no longer think for themselves or question the increasingly insanity of those in power.

  • You honestly don’t think the government serves the people do you? The same can be said for psychiatry.

    Politicians have sold to the public that this ‘cures act’ is to help people, but nothing could be further from the truth. This so called ‘cures act’ was never about helping people, it was always about maintaining and expanding the status quo of power, profit, and control. More power and control to the government and psychiatry to lock people up against their will because of a label, and more profit for the pharmaceutical industry for the mass drugging of the human population.

    With this law in place psychiatrists and/or the government can point the finger at any activist, protestor, or dissident, anyone who questions the authority or abuses of power by psychiatry or the government, slap an arbitrary label on them, then throw them in jail (sorry, I meant a ‘mental hospital’) against their will and forcibly medicate them with toxic drugs to keep them zombified and away from the public so they can’t be a nuisance and inform the people of what’s really going on.

    “See that activist over there that pointed out governmental abuses of power? Well, don’t listen to them cause they’re mentally ill and we all know the mentally ill are violent and a danger to society cause the television says so! And to make sure you don’t listen to their crazy conspiracy theories about human rights abuses by psychiatry and the government we’ll disappear them, sorry I mean hospitalize them, and torture, woops I mean treat them, cause we’re here to help! We’re the government and we’ll step on your face with our jack booted thugs cause we own your sorry ass you stupid slave, wait, I meant to say help you and give you lots of hugs cause we love you.”

    The 9 scariest words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

  • I’m not sure if you fully understand the situation you’re talking about, regarding ‘mental illness’ and violence.

    Like Noel said, many/most school or other mass shooters in the U.S. were on or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs at the time of their killing spree. Meaning, it was not their fictitious ‘mental illness’ that caused them to be violent, it was the psychiatric drugs that caused them to be violent.

    It is well known (though maybe not to the layman) that certain types of psychiatric drugs can cause violent, homicidal, and/or suicidal ideation/action. It’s even on some black box warnings for the drugs that they can cause violence or homicide/suicide.

    So to sum up, those given a psychiatric diagnoses are typically more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators of it, unless they are given psychiatric drugs in which case they may become violent as a direct result of the psychiatric drugs, not their ‘mental illness’.

  • The fact that psychiatric drugs can cause psychiatric symptoms and chemical imbalances is becoming more acknowledged and accepted, though not exactly wide spread or known by the general public.

    Peter Breggin talks a lot about the harms of psychiatric drugs in his books Toxic Psychiatry and Medication Madness, not to mention all the other authors that have delved into the issue.

    My own personal experience fully agrees with the assertion that psychiatric drugs can cause psychiatric symptoms. In my late teens I was having a difficult time so got my hands on some antipsychotics (not my prescription) to try and forget what was troubling me. Well, they sent me loopy and made me hallucinate, for which I was thrown involuntarily into a mad house where they gave me, you guessed it, psychiatric drugs to treat my psychiatric drug induced psychosis (specifically antipsychotics for antipsychotic induced hallucinations). Cause that makes total sense.

    I’ve said it many times before.
    Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane.

  • I agree with Vanessa and oldhead. Take notes. Though mental notes would likely be preferable, as they’d raid and destroy any physical notes and maybe even use such material to claim you are paranoid.

    Like oldhead said, such an experience you are having will offer far greater insight into how the system works than any degree could offer. Write a book about your experience to help others and expose the system.

    You’re already not confronting them, which is good, cause that’s a druggin’. Keep asking questions, but not too many, or that’s a druggin’. Stand up too fast? Yep, that’s a druggin’. Forget to return a plastic spoon and you’ll get a druggin’.

    To try and defend yourself, there are a few things you can do. They threaten you with forced drugs like antipsychotics which you rightly want to avoid. Look up some Robert Whitaker articles here on MiA (like this one https://www.madinamerica.com/2016/07/the-case-against-antipsychotics/ or go straight to https://www.madinamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/The-Case-Against-Antipsychotics.pdf for the 46 page article). Get these printed, read them, and show them to the staff. You’re not delusional if you’ve got evidence. You have every right to refuse brain disabling ‘treatments’, and if they want to force such treatments, then ask them to justify forcing a ‘treatment’ that is not ‘safe and effective’ and has potential for great harms, as is provable in Whitaker’s research. Also, if they tell you again that you have a ‘chemical imbalance’, ask them the two word question every psychiatrist hates: Prove it – or – Show me. Ask them to provide evidence or the results of a test or scan or whatever that shows you have a chemical imbalance. They will either try to ignore/dismiss your question, or they’ll get flustered and not know what to say. Also, you could try turning things around a little. If any staff member raises their voice, or closes a door too fast, or makes threats of violence, point it out, and even do it with a smile on your face. You raised your voice staff member, is that a sign of your chemical imbalance? You closed the door too fast and I found it threatening. You’re threatening me with violence and forced medication against my will? Are you a psychopath Mr Psychiatrist? Maybe a sociopath? Arrogant personality disorder?

    Psychiatry is a pseudoscience. It claims to be a medical specialty yet has no medical tests. It cannot prove the existence of any so called ‘mental illness’. There is no evidence to support the claims of brain diseases, biological illnesses, chemical imbalances, or genetic defects. Their treatments are not ‘safe and effective’ as claimed, yet evidence shows they are potentially harmful and even fatal.

    Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane.

  • boans, you said “It’s sometimes best to remain silent about some people.” This is a tricky one. Sometimes it may be best not to get involved, but according to the State, silence is consent. So if the government says “We are going to lock up every single mentally ill person and experiment on them to find out why their brain is broken” and you (or everyone) don’t say anything, that’s the same as consenting and saying “Yep, go for it.”

  • Richard, you mentioned The Black population has been hit especially hard by Biological Psychiatry.

    I don’t remember the name of the article off the top of my head, though I could probably find it if required after a little digging, but there was an article (psychological published article) that reported links between Big Pharma (and by extension psychiatry) and eugenics.

    Most people think eugenics was discarded years ago, but it just stayed behind the curtain and behind the scenes. Such a suggestion may have been shrugged off as a ‘conspiracy’ years ago but the severe damage that psychiatry and Big Pharma do on a daily/yearly basis should be impossible to argue against a eugenics agenda.

  • Richard, you said All these “genetic theories of original sin” are a diversion away from focusing on all the oppressive forms of social organization and institutional control that form the present backdrop for the current “mental health system.”

    I’m not sure if you realize that these biological/genetic theories are diversions away from oppressive social organizations and institutions as a whole by design. Not only those higher up in psychiatry, but those in power who run the entire system (not just the mental health system) seek to maintain and expand the status quo of power, profit, and control. The whole system that includes government, corporations, education, media, banks, etc, are all systems of control designed to give those in power absolute power and control. Psychiatry, by pointing the finger at the individuals biology/brain/genetics, seeks to redirect the ‘blame’ onto the individual and away from society and social institutions (controlled by governments and corporations). Those in power don’t want you to look at, let alone disable/remove, the many wider systems of oppression and control.

    In this way, psychiatry has been an incredibly useful form of social control that those in power will be unwilling to part with easily (unless forced). Psychiatry can be used by the State against anyone that either gets damaged by the system (depression, PTSD etc), or those that wake up and see the corruption and evil that pervades the higher echelons of power throughout the world (by labeling them as oppositional defiant, delusional, or anti-social etc). Psychiatry is used as the systems guard dog. Anyone that challenges the system (controlled by governments and corporations) can be labeled with any of 374 (or more in the DSM-5) mental illnesses and then forcibly kidnapped, detained, restrained, and forcibly medicated or electroshocked against their will because psychiatry says they are mentally ill and the media constantly pushes that mentally ill people are unstable and dangerous/violent and must be forcibly treated against their will because they are a danger to society.

    The oppression of psychiatry is by design, used by the wider system of oppression to quell dissent and to incapacitate as many people as possible so there are fewer people who aren’t brain damaged that can figure out how psychotic the entire system and people who run it really are.

  • Hi Lois. I hope you read it. The theory works. You just need an open mind. Although it will take a great deal more input from others and experts in their given field/area to add their knowledge to it, the theory is built enough to be used as a foundation.

    You want to expose and remove the flawed biological, medical, and disease models? Then use the psyche model to replace them.

    My theory doesn’t replace other psychological theories, it incorporates them. Use it as a foundation and put the other theories onto it. Build on it. Psych-ology is a study of the psych-e, so by definition, all psych-ological theories must be psyche-logical in that they all explain some aspect of the psyche (if they didn’t explain some aspect of the psyche such theories would not, by definition, be psychological).

    When you get to the relevant sections(s), the words neutral/passive are incorrect, but were the only words I had available at the time. The more accurate term is receptive.

    Some terms may be changeable based on later professional preference (do we call people clients or patients for example), but most of the terminology should be accurate.

  • And I still don’t know what you’re trying to figure out that isn’t already known

    The point I’m trying to make, which you seem unable to grasp, is that currently it is NOT known how the mind works, so I’m trying to figure out something that is not already known. And that argument of yours could be applied to anything, so should we stop all psychological studies (of which there are many on MiA) because its ‘already known’? Should we stop learning new things in medicine because its ‘already known’? How would we ever learn anything new? That’s a really idiotic argument. We, as humans, are constantly learning. You on the other hand sound like the old saying of “you can’t teach an oldhead new tricks”.

    A car has a useful function, so it makes sense to know how to maintain it.

    Are you saying the mind doesn’t have a useful function?

    Not so for psychiatry; it’s primary function is repression. Do we need an “sound alternative” to fascism before we undertake to eliminate it?

    My theory is based on psychology, not psychiatry. There’s a difference. You’re arguing against a theory you have not read and know nothing about. That’s just showing your arrogance and ignorance. My theory can be used to expose and help bring down psychiatry and you’re arguing against it? Psychiatry says mental illness is a real illness, my theory says its not an illness and proves it. How is that a bad thing? Trying to tear down a flawed system is a noble venture, but almost impossible when it is so deeply entrenched in so many areas (psychiatry itself, Big-Pharma, laws and legislation, government groups such as CPS etc). Good luck trying to remove such a system without something to replace it. And what do you propose for all the people caught up in the current system? You don’t want to give all those people needing help an alternative to the current toxic system? Tear down psychiatry and just leave them hanging huh?

    oldhead, with your callous disregard for other humans, your blockheadedness, your arrogance and ignorance, and opposing any theory that might help bring down psychiatry, you’d make a fantastic psychiatrist yourself.

  • why do you want to “know how the psyche functions”? Seriously oldhead? That’s like asking a mechanic “why do you want to know how an engine functions?” or asking a neuroscientist “why do you want to know how the brain functions?”. Ummm cause it’s kind of their job? That’s what they do! The professions of psych-ology and psych-iatry even have the word psyche (minus the e) in their names.

    oldhead, your argument that we need only expose the current system but do not need anything to replace it is like saying we need to discard the flat earth theory because that’s a lie but refusing to accept a replacement model. You’re basically saying we know what it’s not, but we don’t want to know what it is. That’s crazy.

    Also, I dunno if you noticed, but you’re posting regularly on a website almost completely dedicated to the mind. The site is called Mad in America, and madness affects the mind. The majority of posters (not commenters) are licensed psychologists or psychiatrists. That’s psych-ologists and psych-iatrists. We are talking about things such as legislation (Murphy Bill) that dictates what rights or freedoms a person may have based on the subjective labels regarding a persons mental state (state of mind), or what is called ‘mental illness’. We are talking about trying to expose and remove a profession that has immense power over others which is derived from them being able to subjectively label people as ‘mentally ill’ while claiming it is a real illness/disease that is biologically based (which there is no evidence to support) and needs a medical treatment (which the drugs cause far more harm than good).

    oldhead, you go back to your “we know what it’s not, but we don’t want to know what it is” mentality, and I’ll stick with my curious nature of wanting to know how things work.

  • Hi Nancy. If the Buddha mapped the mind 2600 years ago why are we not using such a mind map when it comes to psychology and psychiatry? Why is it not taught at a university level with all other psychological theories based on it? Why do we currently live in a world were the mental health system is based on medical/disease models of mental illness, where the brain or biology is blamed? Why isn’t the mental health system based on Buddha’s mind map?

    I understand your fear of potential viruses, but there is no reason why I would. It’s a pdf of a book with my name on the cover, so it wouldn’t be very smart to include a virus. Tinyurl is a standard upload site and the page itself has a link to download the pdf and a link to download the file after virus scanning it.

    I’d try to explain it but it’s far to complex with many interlocking parts. About the best I can explain it is it’s a map of the mind, and being a map of the mind it can explain what mental illness is, which isn’t an illness, but it is mental. It incorporates numerous psychological concepts such as emotions, personality traits, morals, ego, Self, persona, consciousness, and unconscious (personal and collective). The primary language used is Jungian. It references such people as Whitaker, Breggin, Ekman, Healy, Moncrieff, Rosenhan, Szasz, and lots more. I don’t remember exactly how many but I think it’s over a hundred references.

  • None of these screening programs are designed to help people. They are designed to label more people as ‘mentally ill’ so more people can be drugged to make even more profit for the pharmaceutical industry. That’s why, even though there is little evidence to support such screening programs, they are still pushed anyways. Because the psychopaths in power do not care about the people. They care about maintaining and expanding the status quo of power, profit, and control.

  • What are you trying to figure out about the “psyche” that hasn’t yet been recognized?

    Ummm the whole thing? I tried to figure out how the psyche itself functions because there is no current model of how the psyche/mind functions. So what part of the psyche has not yet been recognized? The whole part? Sure they have a number of different theories to explain how certain aspects of the psyche functions (emotions, personality, etc), but currently there is no single model that unifies all the other theories. So currently psychology is just a bunch of separate theories to explain separate psychological concepts, but there is no theory/model to combine them all into a single design. If you think there already is a theory/model to explain how the psyche/mind functions as a whole, please post it.

    So to answer your question again, I’ve figured out how the psyche as a whole functions because currently the psyche as a singular theory/model has not yet been recognized.

    For what purpose or in pursuit of what ends?

    Do you really need to ask that oldhead? After all your comments on MiA surely you would be one of the people open to such a theory. Why and for what purpose? Look at the current mental health system, based on biological psychiatry, the medical/disease models, the DSM, forced drugging, chemical imbalance theories and other nonsense. Surely you know how harmful the current system is and how flawed the current models are. To get rid of the current system we need another one to replace it. To discard the medical/disease models we need another model to replace it. Psychology and psychiatry, by definition of their own professional names, both (supposedly) study the psyche, but since there is no model (other than my own) to explain how the psyche functions other theories have been used, mostly biological/brain based theories, which as we know, are flawed and in many cases flat out wrong. So the purpose of my theory is to replace the current harmful system with a model that is more accurate, easier to use and understand, and respects individual difference.

    But you know oldhead, continue to dismiss something that you’ve not read and know nothing about.

  • So lots of people are actually opposed to the medical/disease/diagnosis models? You want an alternative to the current diagnostic system (the DSM) in psychiatry and psychology? Then we need a new model. Simple as that. And there already exists the exact model that should be used. It’s called the psyche model.

    Psychology and psychiatry both (supposedly) study the psyche, the Greek word for mind, soul, and spirit. That’s where the names of the professions come from. However neither profession currently knows how the psyche (the mind) itself functions. This has resulted in completely wrong theories being promoted and accepted, namely the biological/medical/disease models promoted by psychiatry. As most people on MiA are aware, the biological, medical, and disease models used by psychiatry to explain ‘mental illness’ are wrong, because ‘mental illness’ is not a real biological illness or brain disease.

    We need to drop the flawed biological, medical, and disease models currently used by the psychiatric/pharmaceutical/mental health industry. Start using the psyche model. A copy of The Map of the Psyche: The Truth of Mental Illness, which explains how the psyche model functions and what ‘mental illness’ really is as it relates to the psyche, is available here (http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=15608219692732934858)

    In the interest of disclosure and transparency, I’m the author of The Map of the Psyche and creator of the psyche model. I give permission to freely download a copy of my book/theory. The psyche model, the alternative to biological psychiatry and the medical/disease model, is available. Use it.

  • And this is why psychiatry should be completely abolished and we just stick to psychology. Psychiatrists primarily favour a biological perspective even though there is no evidence to support the notions of biological illnesses, brain diseases, chemical imbalances, or genetic defects, and much evidence to actively disprove such claims. Psychiatrists are flat earthers or believe the moon is made out of cheese. Their entire profession is based around assumptions that have been proven wrong yet they continue to believe them anyway — and force that belief onto others — often with disastrous consequences which they then blame on a mythical disease that never existed.

    Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane.

  • How to define who is evil vs who is caught up in a terrible system can be difficult, but look at the actions of people. People can commit an evil act (even without knowing it is evil and they intend to do good), but that doesn’t mean they are necessarily an evil person. We all have the capacity for good and evil. There’s a difference between those who do evil because that’s how the system was designed and what it tells people to do, and those who actively seek to commit evil or to modify the system to make it more evil.

    Look at American leaders for example. George Bush lied to the people after 9-11 to invade Iraq where reports suggest up to a million innocent Iraqi’s lost their lives. That was evil. Look at Obama’s secret kill list, and drone strikes that kill hundreds of innocents. And what about Hillary Clinton? She absolutely fits the definition of evil/psychopath (narcissist, pathological liar, manipulative, no empathy, guilt, or remorse). Look at the actions of people (not their words) and their own actions will give it away if they are mostly good or evil. Do politicians write and pass laws that respect and protect innocent life? Or do they pass laws that hurt, oppress, or kill for fun or for profit? What about corporations? Do corporate practices respect and protect innocent life or hurt, oppress, or kill for fun or for profit? It’s different for a person that follows rules/laws/ideologies that are evil and those who actively write and enforce such rules or laws.

    There was a book, several I believe, that looked into how psychopathic personality traits may actually be beneficial in our current corporate system, because it allows someone to lay off hundreds or thousands of workers and not feel any empathy, guilt, or remorse, it allows them to lie to their workers, shareholders, or the media, it allows them to use or manipulate others to climb the corporate ladder to a higher status position and more money. So although this particular book stated that psychopathic traits may be beneficial, it’s the wrong question being asked. If psychopathic traits are beneficial in the current system then it means the current system was designed by and for psychopaths (evil).

  • The definition of good is “respecting and protecting innocent life.”
    The definition of evil is “hurting, oppressing, or killing for fun or for profit.”

    The system we live in is run by evil people, not good people. Look at government, psychiatry, corporations, the military-intelligence-industrial-complex. Look at the American governments drone strikes that kill hundreds of innocent people, look at the Patriot Act and NDAA that allows people to be kidnapped, detained, and tortured (sorry, ‘enhanced interrogated’) without charge, trial, or access to a lawyer, look at the government doing everything it can to destroy constitutional and human rights. The system itself, and the people who run it, are not the good guys.

    So when you have a system that is designed by evil people to benefit evil people (you could call them psychopaths instead of evil if you’d like), then people caught up in the system, even if they are initially good, end up shifting towards evil (though often without realizing it is evil and they think they are doing good) because that’s how the system works. Look at psychiatry for example. Psychiatry is a psychopaths wet dream. It gives those in power (the doctor/psychiatrist) all the power while the patient/client has none. Psychiatry is allowed to kidnap, detain, restrain, and force treatment on a person against their will. Psychiatry is based on lies and propaganda, not truth or science, because ‘mental illness’ is not a real biological illness, brain disease, chemical imbalance, or genetic defect, and psychiatric drugs are not ‘safe and effective’. DSM diagnoses are based on subjective ‘symptoms’ which any ‘doctor’ can slap on a person and that person has no recourse to challenge the diagnoses or treatment. If a child is given a diagnosis and prescribed drugs and the parent chooses not to drug their child, ‘child protective services’ (hah) may be called and the child taken away because of ‘medical neglect’. Psychiatric treatments over the years have been more akin to torture than treatment, such as electroshock, lobotomy, hydrotherapy, insulin coma therapy, etc. Psychiatry is a psychopaths wet dream because it gives the psychiatrist all the power over another person and it allows the psychiatrist to torture people and call it treatment. So even if a good person enters psychiatry because they want to help people they are quickly shifted from that moral ideal because the system itself is evil. They may then promote forced treatment of electroshock or psychiatric drugs and think they are doing good and helping people because that’s what the system says when in fact they are doing great harm, but they have been brainwashed into believing that psychiatry is good and helping people, when in fact psychiatry is evil and harming people.

    Onto police, going by the way of the D&D moral compass, police should primarily be lawful-good, lawful-neutral, or neutral-good. But they, like us, live in a system ruled by evil. Which is why we are seeing so many cops in America having a moral compass closer to lawful-evil, neutral-evil, or chaotic-evil. I include chaotic-evil because they hurt, oppress, or kill, and they don’t even follow the law – they act like they are above the law because of a badge and a gun.

    This is why we are seeing so much evil in the world. So much evil committed by police against unarmed civilians, so much evil committed by psychiatry against the ‘mentally ill’, so much evil from corporations with poor working conditions and wages, and especially so much evil from governments against their own citizens but also people in far away countries. This is all partly to do with the status quo of power, profit, and control, and the status quo is merely an extension of the fact that evil rules this planet, not good. This planet is an insane asylum, and the truly insane people are the ones running the joint. You wanna change things and put an end to all the police killings and psychiatric abuse? Then get the insane-evil-psychopaths out of power.

  • I agree with BPD. While talking about the drugs themselves, how ineffective and potentially harmful they are and how to safely withdraw from them is useful information, it still legitimizes psychiatry in that it criticizes the treatment but not the diagnosis.

    While talking about the harmful effects of psychiatric drugs is helpful, more effort needs to be put towards offering safer and more effective alternatives (attacking a treatment option without providing an alternative treatment may turn people away), but more importantly, more effort needs to go towards exposing and tearing down the psychiatric system as a whole which is based on diagnosis.

    Prove the fact that psychiatric diagnoses are not based on science, that there is no evidence to support such claims as chemical imbalances, brain diseases, or genetic defects. Expose that there are no legitimate medical means of diagnosing mental disorders, no brain scans, x-rays, blood or urine tests. Show people how throughout the decades since psychiatry came about that it has been used primarily as a form of social control to remove anyone that challenges the system, and show that psychiatric treatments over the years have been more akin to torture than treatment (hydrotherapy, electroshock, lobotomy, insulin coma therapy, etc). Psychiatry is a system built on abuse and is a system designed to maintain and expand the status quo of power, profit, and control.

    Rather than attacking the walls, go for the foundation. Expose that psychiatry is not science, just like eugenics is not science. Both psychiatry and eugenics are employed by insane people who seek more power and control over others while stripping those very things from the people they seek to dominate and abuse. Psychiatry is a house of cards. Don’t try to knock off a few cards from the top, go for the base, the foundation, and watch the whole thing collapse.

  • This is what I call reality manipulation (and what those in power call ‘perception management’).

    Even though the evidence and reality says one thing (in this case, that most people diagnosed with a ‘mental illness’ are more likely to be victims of violence and not the perpetrators of violence) the mainstream media says almost the complete opposite, and because most people get their news/information from the mainstream media the majority of people (having their realities manipulated) believe what the media tells them and believe that ‘mentally ill’ people are violent. This of course benefits those in power as it allows them to then shape policy (after shaping the narrative) to expand the status quo of power, profit, and control. By framing ‘mentally ill’ people as violent it allows those in power to push legislation that removes the rights and freedoms from the ‘mentally ill’ and to forcibly detain, restrain, and medicate or electroshock a person against their will if need be because they are (claimed to be) violent.

    Reality manipulation is also evident regarding other aspects of (biological) psychiatry, including the general public belief/understanding of what is/causes mental illness, such as the chemical imbalance theory. Even though there never is or was any evidence to support the chemical imbalance theory it is widely promoted by the pharmaceutical industry and through the mainstream media, so many/most laymen have the (false) belief that mental illness is caused by a chemical imbalance, even though the reality is that the chemical imbalance theory was never proven and has actually been actively disproven.

    This reality manipulation is evident in other claims made by psychiatry and the mainstream media, such as the suggestion that ‘mental illness’ is a real biological illness, brain disease, or genetic defect, even though studies have repeatedly failed to prove any such claims, yet the majority of people believe these things to be truthful because the media constantly makes and repeats such claims (tell a lie long enough and loud enough and people will eventually believe it). Then there is the reality manipulation regarding suggestions that psychiatric drugs are ‘safe and effective’ even though there is much evidence, and even black box warnings, that say most psychiatric drugs are little more effective than a placebo yet come with a wide array of adverse effects, including violence (caused by the drugs, not the ‘mental illness’) and homicidal and suicidal ideation.

    Reality manipulation is the norm, not the exception (think also propaganda and public relations). The television (and mainstream media) is a form of mass mind control. Most people in the Western world have atleast one television in their homes, and most people watch hours of television every single day. In American 90% of mainstream media sources are owned by just 6 corporations that control everything that people see, hear, and read. This corporate control of information shapes the views and beliefs of the people, which manipulates and controls the reality of the masses.

  • verticleman, you said “There is so much anger, so much lies,deceptions, and distractions that prevent the masses from knowing the truth.”

    What you don’t understand is that the media is doing its job perfectly. It is designed to spread lies and distract people and keep them from knowing the truth. The mainstream media is no longer there to inform, it’s there to entertain and keep the masses distracted and misinformed. Just look at the state of American politics. If the media was doing its job properly, the way it’s supposed to be, there is no way that the American (and other Western) government(s) could have gotten so corrupt and run by psychopaths. And that’s exactly how the ‘elite’ want things to remain. To keep the masses dumb and docile so they do not figure out how badly those in power are screwing over the people and the planet.

  • As always, more information is being revealed after the event. I read another article yesterday (http://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/omar-mateen-committed-mass-murder-fbi-tried-lure-him-terror-plot) that suggests the FBI had contact with Omar previously and tried to lure him into a terror plot. Could this have had anything to do with his violent terrorist act?

    Also, the FBI has a history of luring people in, often mentally disturbed, marginalized, or poor people, into terrorist plots that they themselves would never have even considered committing if it weren’t for the FBI. The FBI gives them the money, the weapons, the explosives (fake), and tells them where to go and what to do, then when the person is about to commit the (staged) terror attack the FBI swoops in and arrests them and proclaims they’ve foiled another terrorist attack. Reports suggest half or more of the several hundred terrorism cases have actually been FBI inspired and funded.

    There’s a book called Terror Factory: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War on Terrorism by Trevor Aaronson that goes into detail and explores the FBI’s involvement in many terrorism cases.

  • The definition of good is “respecting and protecting innocent life.”

    The definition of evil is “hurting, oppressing, or killing for fun or for profit.”

    So, does the Murphy Bill, psychiatry, the government, etc, respect and protect innocent life? Or does it hurt, oppress, or kill for fun or for profit?

    In our current society the concepts of good and evil are so twisted that people often believe that great evil is actually good. Here’s a perfect example. 9-11. Conspiracy theories aside of who was actually accountable and what went on, the official narrative says that terrorists were to blame. Reports indicate that approximately 3,500 Americans died on 9-11. The American government’s response of the War of Terror on Iraq (and other Middle Eastern countries) has reports of up to a million Iraqi citizens dead. So, to put it simply, those who are labeled terrorists and the bad guys killed 3,500 people, yet those who killed (the US govt) over a million people are called the good guys. Kill 3,500 and you’re evil, but kill a million and you’re good. The current concepts of good and evil are so incredibly twisted that people have no clue what is really good or evil anymore.

    That is why the understanding and definitions of good and evil need to be reevaluated.

    Good = Respecting and protecting innocent life.
    Evil = Hurting, oppressing, or killing for fun or for profit.

    Using these definitions psychiatry cannot proclaim themselves to be good. The US (and other Western) government(s) cannot proclaim themselves to be good. By their own actions, psychiatry and the government are evil, not good.

  • Lenora, you said “What I was disagreeing with you about, is your stance that we are responsible for their tactics, and was pointing out the violent culture we are dealing with here.”

    I never even mentioned their tactics. Please tell me where I said America is responsible for their tactics because I don’t remember saying anything of the sort. The tactics used are potentially hundreds of years old, so no, America is not responsible for their tactics. What I said was that America created, funded, and armed Al-Qaeda and ISIS. I never said anything about tactics.

    And you’re saying radical Islam is a violent culture? Sure, the radical side of it is. Muslims in general are not. Mohammed Ali was a Muslim (maybe not the best example to say they aren’t violent since he was a boxer). However, sure there is a violent culture we are dealing with, but what about the violent American culture? America’s biggest export is weapons of war. America spends more on defence (more like attack) spending than the 10 highest other countries defence spending combined. And look at Hollywood movies that are jam-packed full of guns and violence. And what about American militarized police that kill more Americans than terrorists do. And then there’s drone strikes that kill hundreds of innocent people every year. And enhanced interrogation (torture) on people who have not been committed of a crime. And the Presidents secret kill list that says its legal for him to assassinate anyone he likes. But you know, we should totally turn a blind eye to America’s violence and only focus on the violence of another country.

    I’m not dismissing or saying radical Islam should be given a free pass for their violence. They should absolutely be held accountable for the violence they commit against others. But so should America (more specifically the American government, not so much the American people).

  • This is why I don’t like debating with some people. I presented information where American politicians ADMIT they created/funded terrorist groups, yet here you are going “nope, no way, wasn’t them, America is totally innocent”.

    I’m not saying radical Islam isn’t a problem. It is. But any radical/extremist group is a problem. Radical Christians can also hate and promote violence against people for their race, religion, or sexuality. But when you are dropping bombs on Middle Eastern countries and killing hundreds of innocent people then it’s giving terrorist groups more fuel for the fire and gives them more material to say “Hey look, this is why America is bad, look how many innocent people they murder, so join us and lets get a little payback”.

    We aren’t going to see eye to eye. We’re going to disagree on things. So lets drop it.

  • Not to mention serotonin is both in the brain and the body, so a blood test may be able to see how much serotonin is in your system but it would be measuring body serotonin, not brain.

    And yeah, there is no known ‘normal’ level of serotonin, so there’s nothing to measure it against. Not only do they not know what a ‘normal’ level is but they also don’t even measure the current level.

    That’s why I find it so hard to understand exactly how the chemical imbalance theory, and especially the serotonin deficiency, became so widespread and accepted. Not only does science disprove the theory but it also doesn’t stand up to logic or scrutiny.

  • The thing I’ve found weird with the supposed ‘serotonin deficiency’ is that serotonin is not in itself a natural product of the human body. It is a byproduct, or aftercursor(?) of tryptophan. Tryptophan is a precursor to the neurotransmitter serotonin (and melatonin). And tryptophan can only be introduced in the diet.

    So, my problem with the ‘serotonin deficiency’ and the suggestion that a lack of serotonin produces depression (and other ‘mental disorders’) is that serotonin comes from tryptophan, which comes from a persons diet, yet psychiatry and the pseudoscientific chemical imbalance theory says if you have a serotonin deficiency then you need to take an SSRI (serotonin specific reuptake inhibitor) to increase your brains levels of serotonin, but they never ever mention tryptophan or diet. If you have a lack of serotonin it means your diet is lacking tryptophan, but psychiatry never mentions this fact and instead focuses on a pill for serotonin.

    The simple solution to having a serotonin deficiency (not that I believe the psychiatric chemical imbalance bollox in the first place), rather than popping a pill, is to increase the amounts of tryptophan in your diet, but psychiatry only focuses on a pill to increase (or reduce reduction of) serotonin. I find this a little, how do you say it, batshit insane?

    I hope this makes sense. I’ve had a few drinks so might be making less sense than usual and rambling a little.

    Anyways, my point is, psychiatry says a people need a serotonin pill to increase their supposed lack of serotonin, when the simple solution which psychiatry completely ignores is the fact that serotonin is a byproduct of tryptophan which comes from diet. Increase tryptophan in your diet will increase levels of serotonin in your blood/brain. It’s not rocket science. But hey, psychiatrists aren’t exactly the sharpest tools in the shed.

  • Sara, agreed.

    Someone who shoots up a place and kills dozens of people is mentally unstable. But it is not because of a mythical ‘mental illness’ that made them do it. It is more to do with the environment, social or environmental, and their upbringing. Abuse, neglect, bullying, loss, trauma, religion, etc.

    Mental disturbance has a part to play in mass shootings. So does access to guns. So does religion in some cases. And so does psychiatric drugs in many cases. It’s not just one cause. So yeah, a terrorist attack on the West has to do with some or all of the above. But that’s only part of the issue.

    America’s never ending War of Terror is greatly responsible. They funded and armed terrorist groups decades ago, and still do. America’s foreign policy of bomb any country with brown skinned people also has a lot to do with it. I mean, look at America’s response to terrorist attacks. The response is kill them, bomb them, ban them, torture them, kill their families. Yet American’s frequently fail to see how it is from their side. America bombs their countries, kills their families, and you don’t think atleast some of those people would want to do to the West what the West is doing to them? How many Muslims have been locked up in Guantanamo Bay for years without trial, without charge, without access to a lawyer? How many Middle Eastern countries has America bombed the hell out of? There’s Iraq, Afganistan, Libya, Yemen, Iran, and a few others I can’t remember. What do you think would happen if just one Middle Eastern country dropped a single bomb on one American city? Yet how many American bombs have been dropped on how many Middle Eastern cities?

    America’s War of Terror and subsequent terrorist attacks they provoke (that they are greatly responsible for) suits the establishment perfectly because it gives them an excuse to expand the status quo of power, profit, and control. It gives those in power an excuse to expand their powers, with agencies such as the TSA, CIA, NSA, etc, and programs such as search and seizure, prolonged detention, secret assassinations, enhanced interrogation (torture), and many others. It gives them an excuse to greatly expand the police and surveillance state, because you know, they gotta protect us from the terrorists (which they helped create). It gives them an excuse to remove more of our freedoms, because they gotta protect us from the terrorists (which they helped create).

    The Wests never ending War of Terror is the perfect justification to further the status quo of power, profit, and control, and to implement a totalitarian All Powerful, All Watching, All Abusing Superstate that is no longer held accountable for its actions and does not represent the people. Instead it represents a small group of psychopathic elites who want total power and total control of everything and everyone.

  • Lenora22, we can agree to disagree. You are completely ignoring the cause and only focusing on the effect. You mentioned confirmation bias but cannot see your own. My pointing the finger at American foreign militaristic foreign policy being the problem is not confirmation bias, it’s based on truth and fact. You sound like a typical brainwashed American who thinks that America is all good and the best place in the world and that America could never do anything bad. Blame anyone and anything else but don’t accept responsibility for your own (government) actions.

    You are saying terrorism is the problem? There’s always been bad people in the world. That will likely never change. But this ramping up of terrorist attacks, especially in Western countries, has been increasing within the past 15 or so years. And guess what, America’s War of Terror has been going on for, oh wait, about 15 years (since Sept 11 2001). But surely there’s no connection there right?

    You’re quick to blame Muslims and terrorism, but you clearly have no idea that it is America and the West that actually created (whether directly or indirectly) Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

    Al-Qaeda was formed a few decades ago during the Cold War, and it was created, funded, armed, and trained by America to fight against Russia. Then decades later Al-Qaeda turns against their masters and America then fights an American created terrorist entity. This isn’t speculation. This is history. Here’s a link showing Hillary Clinton admitting they created Al-Qaeda (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqn0bm4E9yw). And here’s another one called Reality Check by Ben Swann that says the “creation of al-Qaeda wasn’t Islamic fundamentalism, it was the CIA” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcZKso_Z6M8). And another one, where a former CIA agent says Al-Qaeda was created by the US and Israel and that America is being attacked because of its foreign policy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U868d5oJrFc).

    And what about ISIS? Another American/Western creation. Here’s one report titled “Declassified Pentagon Report Proves US Helped Create ISIS” that says “A newly declassified US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report confirms that the US and other western governments allied themselves with al-Qaeda and other Islamic extremist groups to oust Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad. They suspected the consequences of this tactic would lead to the rise of an “Islamic State.”” (http://theantimedia.org/declassified-pentagon-report-proves-us-helped-create-isis/). And what about this one, where Obama admits (while ignoring heaps of other evidence) that the rise of ISIS was due to the US government (http://theantimedia.org/obama-actually-admits-the-rise-of-isis-was-due-to-the-us-government/). And another titled “ISIS: The ‘Enemy’ the US Created, Armed, and Funded” (http://theantimedia.org/isis-the-enemy-the-us-created-armed-and-funded/). And another one, titled “General Wesley Clark explains ISIS was created by U.S. Allies” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojcoKnTGf4s).

    But no, you keep blaming Muslims and terrorists and pointing the blame at everyone else while completely ignoring the fact that ISIS and Al-Qaeda were (directly or indirectly) created, funded, trained, and/or armed by the US government.

    If you want to try and shift the blame away from US foreign policy then do so in another conversation. Stop hijacking my conversation and the information I’m trying to share. You can focus on the effect, I’ll focus on the cause.

  • It’s not just the ‘left’ or the ‘right’ in politics that’s being manipulative, it’s both sides. They are both manipulating the conversation, even if for different things. One may blame it all on Islam, another may blame guns, but regardless of which political side they are both trying to shift the blame away from American militaristic interventionist foreign policy towards something else. The main problem is America being the worlds bully and bombing the hell out of the Middle East and killing innocent people, which by the way, seeing your own family blown up by American weapons would make anyone mad and want revenge, because there sure as hell ain’t no justice.

    There’s another article (http://theantimedia.org/former-cia-really-causing-terrorism/) based on a video posted by a former CIA agent. She says, regarding all these stories that blame Muslims, blame guns, blame mental illness, “Those are stories manufactured by a really small number of people on both sides who amass a great deal of power and wealth by convincing the rest of us to keep killing each other.”
    She also said “An Al-Qaeda fighter made a point once during debriefing,” she recounted. “He said all these movies that America makes — like Independence Day, and the Hunger Games, and Star Wars — they’re all about a small scrappy band of rebels who will do anything in their power with the limited resources available to them to expel an outside, technological advanced invader. ‘And what you don’t realize,’ he said, ‘is that to us, to the rest of the world, you [America] are the empire, and we are Luke and Han. You are the aliens and we are Will Smith.’”

    America claims to be the worlds protector. They aren’t. They are the worlds bully. Its like the Mafia threatening people and collecting protection pay when it’s the Mafia the people need protection from. The American ‘war on terror’ is actually a war OF terror. When you have children in (Middle Eastern) countries afraid of blue skies and liking dark skies because drones don’t fly in bad weather, that’s a sign that something is very very wrong.

    There’s an old American Indian saying where the left wing and the right wing belong to the same bird. So even though there’s this republican and democrat arguments (or labor and liberal), it makes little difference because they both represent the same entity. No matter who you vote for, the government still gets in. And the American government, BOTH sides, are not the good guys so many brainwashed Americans believe it to be.

  • It seems everybody jumps to conclusions before all the facts are presented. Was this tragedy because of guns, or terrorism, or mental illness? Yes and no, to each of them.

    A news piece was recently posted on the anti-media website, and a survivor gave her side of events, and considering she claims she (and other survivors) were in a bathroom with the gunman when he made a call to the police, her claims should carry a lot of weight.
    You can view the article here: http://theantimedia.org/orlando-shooting-hostage-motive/

    Here is a short piece of what she said:

    “Throughout that period of hours, the gunman was in there [the bathroom] with us, and he actually made a call to 911 from in there,” she said.
    “Everybody could hear it — who was in the bathroom who survived — could hear him talking to 911 saying that the reason why he’s doing this is because he wants America to stop bombing his country. And from that conversation from 911, he pledged his allegiance to ISIS.”
    “But through that conversation with 911, he said that the reason why he was doing this is because he wanted America to stop bombing his country,” she said.

    Its interesting to note that the mass media reported that in Omar’s phone call to the police he pledged his allegiance to ISIS, however they failed to mention the reason he was doing what he was doing was because he wanted America to stop bombing his country.

    So guns, ISIS, and mental illness are all scapegoats and misdirection. This attack wasn’t about any of those, even if they were involved. This was a ‘protest’ (albeit a violent one) against American foreign policy that bombs and mass murders people in other countries. So if you want something to blame, blame the American government for its never ending War Of Terror and its continued mass murder of innocents overseas, which, if anyone had half a brain, would realize that bombing and killing innocent people, who have families, is a very good way to actually create the terrorists that America claims they are trying to prevent.

  • rofl GetItRight, are you seriously going to try and argue that ‘mental illness’ is a real illness on this website? Good luck with that.

    Mental illness is NOT a biological illness, brain disease, chemical imbalance, or genetic defect. There is ZERO evidence to support such claims, yet much evidence to prove such claims are wrong. If you think there is evidence to support such claims, please provide references. And not just “that one at the top of the list” following a single google search.

    But, you know, try and argue that ‘mental illness’ is like diabetes, and people need their psychiatric drugs like diabetics need their insulin. We’ll just laugh you out the door.

  • The definition of good is respecting and protecting innocent life.

    The definition of evil is hurting, oppressing, or killing for fun or for profit.

    Will the Murphy bill respect and protect innocent life or will it hurt, oppress, or kill for fun or for profit?

    Does psychiatry respect and protect innocent life or does it hurt, oppress, or kill for fun or for profit?

    What about the government and government agencies, such as the FDA, NSA, CIA, TSA, and all manner of alphabet agencies, do they respect and protect innocent life or do they hurt, oppress, or kill for fun or for profit?

    The people in power are not the good guys.

  • Fiachra, that ‘pill induced’ violence you mention is what Peter Breggin calls ‘medication spellbinding’. Basically, when on certain types of medications, especially psychiatric drugs, these can have profound effects on the individuals psyche and can drastically change their personality, including psychosis, mania, and/or violence. However, the individual has little understanding that it is the drugs that are causing the effects and instead thinks it is simply them and what they are feeling is natural. Which is why such effects are so dangerous because the person has absolutely no clue that it’s the drugs that are causing them to act so out of character.

    I have a personal experience with such medication spellbinding. In my teenage years I took some anti-psychotic drugs (not my prescription, some people I knew took them because it made them hallucinate), yet when my own hallucinations kicked in I didn’t/couldn’t cognitively put two and two together (took drugs to hallucinate, then started to hallucinate), so I thought what I was seeing was real and freaked the hell out. This of course got me sent to a mental hospital where, if you can believe it, they gave me anti-psychotic drugs to treat my hallucinations that were caused by anti-psychotic drugs.

  • Shouldn’t it be obvious by now that the government and our public ‘representatives’ do not serve the best interests of the people? More and more laws are being passed that are increasingly totalitarian and draconian. This is not by accident, it is by design.

    The people in power are not the good guys. They are the bad guys. And that is why legislation like this is being constantly pushed, because those in power do not serve the people.

  • There are several reasons why a lot of people don’t know how corrupt the current mental health industry is.

    Psychiatry and Big-Harma both seek to maintain the status quo of power, profit, and control. They control the narrative. And they have the money to buy time in the media (adverts, news stories, etc). Since a lot of people just switch on the TV and don’t look at alternative information sources, all they get is what the TV (and by extension, Big-Harma and psychiatry) tells them. So part of the problem is so many people are so braindead or brainwashed that they don’t think for themselves or question what the tel-lie-vision tells them. And the mainstream media isn’t going to tell people how corrupt the (mental) health industry is because the industry pays the media so much in advertising money, and the media won’t bite the hand that feeds them. So, people need to start thinking for themselves and stop believing everything the TV/establishment tells them.

    But hey, it’s not just psychiatry and Big-Harma that are corrupt, it’s the entire system, including government, media, biotech, law, health, defence, etc. Good people don’t rule the world. Evil people do. And it’s amazing that so many people are to blind/stupid to see it.

  • Frank, you’ve got a point about profits being a big motivator for the current psychiatric ideology, but it’s not just profits. It’s the status quo in general, which is power, profit, and control. Sure profits are a big thing, but it’s primarily about the control and power. Psychiatry and Big-Harma may make billions of dollars in profits, but they also have the political and legal power to detain and drug anyone against their will and also the control over peoples lives based on arbitrary labels. Profits are a big part of it, but don’t forget the other aspects of the status quo, which is power and control. The profits are the bonus, however the power gained from the control are the main points. It’s all about control. And psychiatrists and governments are absolute power tripping control freaks.

  • I didn’t read all the text in these comments (yeah I know, me who writes essays as a response didn’t read others responses, but meh, I’ve had a few drinks), I’d like to leave my own two cents.

    While I personally have not been officially diagnosed with TD I’m fairly sure I have atleast a mild to moderate form of it (twitches/spasms in face, neck, back, legs, and right hand). And yes, I took anti-psychotics, aswell as anti-depressants and several others in my teenage years. That drug cocktail also resulted in long term seizures (sooooo not fun for anyone that’s never had one).

    Anyways, I’m by no means an expert on TD, but to my understanding TD is something that affects the physical brain. Depression, PTSD, DID, etc, are mental, meaning they affect the mind. Sure these experiences can alter the brain after a long time, but they are initially and primarily mental. TD however seems physical.

    To put this in metaphorical terms, say you wanted to do the high jump (track and field stuffs). Depression for example may make you feel like you aren’t good enough or anxiety may make you anxious of performing in front of people, but with enough belief in yourself you could do it (with a bit of practice of course). TD however is like being in a wheelchair and wanting to do the high jump. No matter how much belief you have you still have physical inadequacies. So while mental issues you may be able to overcome with belief and practice and help and whatnot, certain physical issues are not so easily (if at all) overcome.

    Someone that is far more knowledgeable about TD correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems to me like TD is something like the myelin sheath in our brain nerves being frayed so the nerves kind of ‘short-circuit’ sometimes. Consider a power cable that has the wiring inside and the plastic/rubber coating on the outside. If you remove that outer coating then the inner wiring is exposed and can get disrupted or short circuit or something similar. How do you fix that? I’m not an electrician, but apart from replacing the cable maybe you could pour plastic/rubber over the exposed wiring to try to ‘fix’ the damage. Maybe this would work, maybe it wouldn’t. But how would you be able to fix an exposed ‘power cable’ inside your brain? You can’t. You might be able to improve your diet, or exercise more, or believe anything is possible like the Little Engine That Could, but surely there’s a limit to how much you can improve considering the physical nature of the damage.

    Although I hate saying it because I personally experience and am stuck with this, I’m not saying that TD is something that can never be improved in any way, but I am saying that due to the physical nature of the damage that there surely is a limit to how much the condition can be improved.

  • Non-drug pain and distress relief? Meditation and mindfulness has shown promising results.

    As for drug but non-pharmaceutical options, try weed. Weed is a wonder drug. Well, more of a medicine really (not medication). It’s not the devil drug that governments have demonized over the years. Honestly, governments making weed illegal and locking people up for smoking it is a crime against humanity.

  • This is mainly a comment for Bob, so please read it Mr Whitaker, however it also involves others. Beware, essay ahead!

    So, a little backstory first. Over the past 2-3 days I heard about a Youtube channel (H3H3) being sued by another youtuber for using videos and being critical of him which he claims were not fair use. Another youtuber (Philip De Franco) made a video about it saying how stupid and possibly precedent setting it would be for one youtuber to be able to take down another youtuber’s video/channel because they didn’t like something that was posted and claimed under fair use. Long story short(ish), Philly D created a gofundme page which in like 24 hours got over $100,000 for H3H3 to fight these bogus fair use claims.

    Getting closer to the main point, MiA is a brilliant website with many contributors talking about how flawed and corrupt psychiatry is and that psychiatry is pseudoscience not real science and it is harmful not helpful. However, the information presented here on MiA doesn’t get much further than the MiA community so really only those who are already aware of the ‘anti-psychiatry movement’ will be exposed to this information.

    So here’s the point I’m getting at. Couldn’t we, as a community, do something similar to what H3H3 and Philly D did? We could, for example, create a 5-15 minute video, with a number of the many well known contributors to MiA and anti-psychiatry (Whitaker, Breggin, Hickey, Moncrieff, Kirch, Goldacre, Angell, etc etc, not to mention the psychiatric survivors) talking about the many flaws of biological psychiatry: ghostwritten or manipulated studies, DSM lacking validity, psych drugs lacking safety and efficacy but having potential for harm, Pharma bribes of doctors and ‘thought leaders’, etc. Kind of like a mini documentary. This could be posted on and shared on sites such as Youtube (and spread the link through other social media sites like Twitter or Facebook). We could also get popular youtubers, who post specifically about psych related stuff or are just popular open-minded peoples, to also talk about it and spread the word. This mini-documentary could then be tied to a gofundme or similar site to raise money to afford a) a journalist to post stories on mainstream media like Bob mentioned above in a comment, or b) a lawyer to essentially take biological psychiatry to court and prove it fraudulent and harmful. With option b, it may cost a lot of money, but surely there would be a lot of people worldwide willing to contribute a little money (and a little from a lot adds up quickly) to combat organized psychiatry because so many people have been harmed by it. And since this community has the truth on our side, with all the evidence we could easily argue in court that biological psychiatry is not a real science and is harmful not helpful. Psychiatry would not be able to argue that they are right because psychiatry is based on lies and marketing not truth and science. So, since we’d have all the information proving our side it should be an easy (though maybe costly/lengthy) win because psychiatry has absolutely no evidence to support its claims (brain diseases, chemical imbalances, valid diagnoses, safe and effective drugs, etc).

    Biological psychiatrists (Pies, Francis, Lieberman) will not publicly debate those who are opposed to biological psychiatry (such as those awsome MiA peoples mentioned above) because they know they could not win the debate. So, take ’em to court. Prove it in court. Set a precedent. Right now there are laws saying it is legal for psychiatry to kidnap/detain people and forcibly drug/electroshock them against their will if they are deemed a ‘hazard to themselves or others’ based on bogus psychiatric labels. Well, prove it in court, with all the evidence to back it up, that psychiatry is fake science, that ‘mental illness’ is not a real illness or disease, that psych drugs are potentially harmful or even lethal, that electroshock is brain damage not a cure, etc. Once that is proven in court then it will come back on government policy that supports biological psychiatry and psychiatry itself. Lets say, as a completely made up example, that psychiatry says cyanide is a cure for mental illness and governments approve the forced use of cyanide, then you prove in court that cyanide kills not heals, the government and psychiatry will be forced to change their stance on forced cyanide or be exposed for the harmful and corrupt organizations they are because if they don’t make changes it will be proven that they support something with zero scientific backing that can potentially harm or even kill people. If people still want to take cyanide then it is up to them as an informed choice, but it would no longer be forced or used as a front line treatment. I hope I’m getting my point across in my usual roundabout way.

    To do this would of course take a bit of time and organization. It would need to have some proper planning and not be rushed. Psychiatry still flourishes because they have the money backing them, because information like what is presented on MiA and other such sites only reaches a small audience that is already aware of the information, and because we as a community are divided (compared to organized psychiatry) and we only chip away slowly at the lies promoted by psychiatry and Big Pharma. We need to put down our differences and work together. And we need to put down the chisel and grab the sledgehammer. There are hundreds of articles on MiA and elsewhere talking about the many flaws of psychiatry but it hasn’t really done anything. Psychiatry is still here. In a year, two years, or ten years, nothing will have changed. Sure psychiatry is starting to tremble a little but our information frequently fails to make it into the mainstream and the public psyche. They currently control the public narrative. So we need to come together as a community. Get a video to present the information to the public, create a gofundme (or similar) page to gather funds, gather all the information that challenges psychiatry, and find a lawyer willing to fight psychiatry in court.

    Biological psychiatry does not have the evidence to support their claims of brain diseases and chemical imbalances. It’s false advertising and fraudulent and a few other words I probably shouldn’t say on a public forum. Psychiatry needs to be exposed and torn down. We have all the information and evidence, now we need to up our game. If the mainstream media will not present this information (as Bob above has mentioned where media fails to report on his and others books and refuses to print any articles critical of psychiatry) then we should use social media to share the information ourselves. And do it on a massive scale. The few dozen authors on MiA will surely have a following based on their articles or books or videos and will likely have atleast one social media account (youtube, facebook, twitter, etc). If everyone made some noise and pointed to a mini-documentary and fundme site the word would get out and spread fairly rapidly (obviously after said documentary and funding site were set up). We’ve chipped away at the edges of psychiatry for long enough. Time to pick up the sledgehammer. Or maybe we should should … *breaks into song* come in like a wreaaaking baaalllll!!

  • Not sure exactly what was passed/changed, but I know a few years ago they were talking about changing the mental health treatment options to allow for 12 (I think it was 12 with the option of another 6) psychological appointments or up to 50 psychiatric appointments to be handled by medicare. But just like America and other Western countries the emphasis has increasingly moved away from social/psychological/environmental towards biological/medical. Heck, in 2012 the Mental Health Bill proposed for Western Australia even promoted sterilization for children (aged 12 and older I think it was), though I’m fairly sure the eugenical sterilization clause was removed after massive public outcry (I live in WA and went to 3 of the public meetings for the Mental Health Bill to oppose it).

    As for what type of non-medication options are available, it’s typically the same as other Western countries with regards to therapy (CBT, psychodynamic, counseling, etc).

  • I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane.

    Psychiatry is a medical profession that has no medical tests. Psychiatry diagnoses ‘mental illnesses’ base on checklists of ‘symptoms’ which are primarily emotions, behaviours, personality traits, or coping mechanisms, which are natural human characteristics not diseases. Psychiatry pushes the biological perspective of chemical imbalances, brain diseases, and genetic defects, even though there is a lack of evidence to support such claims and much evidence to actively disprove such claims. Psychiatric diagnosis is far from an exact science, where the same individual presenting with the same ‘symptoms’ could be diagnosed with different ‘disorders’ based on which country they are in or which ‘doctor’ they are seeing. Psychiatry claims psychopharmaceutical medications are ‘safe and effective’ even though studies frequently show they are little better than a sugar pill yet come with a wide range of potentially harmful adverse effects, including suicide and/or homicide. Big-Pharma also claims their drugs are ‘safe and effective’ yet time and time again it is revealed that positive drug studies have data manipulated or omitted or are ghost-written while negative studies are often failed to be published, so even though the published material gives a glowing positive review, the data produced by the corporations themselves frequently show lack of efficacy or harm, such as aggression or suicide, which they bury for blockbuster profits (Big-Harma buries the evidence and the bodies all in the name of profit).

    Albert Einstein said “The Earth is the insane asylum of the universe” and the truly insane people are the ones running the insane asylum. Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane. And their insanity is infecting everyone else (how many people fully believe they have a ‘chemical imbalance’ or ‘brain disease’ that never existed?)

  • You’re spot on when you suggest that ‘mental illness’ is not a real illness but a strategy used (usually unconsciously) to cope with a difficult situation, be that trauma, loss, abuse, neglect, etc.

    Mental illness is not an illness. It’s a natural response to a toxic environment.

    Also it’s not only the ‘mental illness’ that’s employed as a strategy to cope, but certain behaviours can be employed to deal with the distress of the ‘mental illness’. Depression for example may not be a real illness, but it is real and sucks big time, so sometimes a person might need something to cope with the coping mechanism. If you are in a dead end job or relationship, your psyche may unconsciously throw feelings of major depression or anxiety at you to kick your butt into gear to either fix the situation or get out of it, but if the environmental/social causes do not change then the depression/anxiety may stick around for longer, and those feelings can be extremely unpleasant so you may look for something to deal with the feelings of the depression/anxiety, such as self-harm, heavy drinking, or drug use. So self-harm, drinking, or taking drugs, although destructive, can sometimes be used as a relief/release from the feelings of whatever it is you’re feeling. So rather than self-harm/drinking/drugging being a ‘symptom of a disease’ it can actually be a conscious coping mechanism (destructive as it may be) to deal with the feelings of depression/anxiety/whatever which was an unconscious coping mechanism produced in response to environmental factors (that dead-end job or relationship) that were not corrected.

  • To the authors, Bonnie and Julia, if you want to learn more about why governments are passing legislation to effectively ban vitamins and minerals, you should look up something called “Codex Alimentarius”. Dunno if I can post links but search for “Nutricide – Criminalizing Natural Health, Vitamins, and Herbs” on youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_z6lZ8q3Z_o). This is just one informative video clip, though I’d suggest looking into a great deal more information regarding Codex.

  • You seem to think that we need to take little baby steps, while I prefer to jettison the whole medical perspective asap as something inherently fraudulent and corrupt, hence un-reformable.

    I do not propose we take little baby steps, I’m suggesting we take two steps in order, and I want both those steps to be as ground-breaking and earth-shaking as possible. We need to expose psychiatry first, then we can replace it with a new language/system, but we need to expose it first to reduce psychiatry’s perceived power and authority.

    I also agree we should “jettison the whole medical perspective asap as something inherently fraudulent and corrupt, hence un-reformable.” In other posts I’ve repeatedly stated that psychiatry is not something that can be fixed or repaired, it needs to be abolished. And since ‘mental illness’ is not a real biological illness or disease, the medical and disease models used by psychiatry are completely wrong and should be discarded.

    Two steps, not baby steps: expose psychiatry, replace psychiatry. Psych-ology and psych-iatry (supposedly) study the psyche, the mind, though biological psychiatry studies the brain. Since ‘mental illness’ is not a real illness or brain disease we should be studying the psyche/mind, not the body/brain (well, not so much in this profession). And that’s where my book comes in, The Map of the Psyche: The Truth of Mental Illness. It’s a map of the psyche, a map of the mind, that explains how the mind functions, and in so doing, explains what ‘mental illness’ really is (a natural response to a toxic environment that can influence/alter a number of human characteristics, including emotions, thoughts, memories, personality trains, behaviours, etc, but is not an illness/disease).

    Discard the medical/disease model, replace it with the psyche model. Simple.

  • Is there any chance that someone, MiA author(s) or contributor(s), could gather together a collection of articles such as this one, that point out psychiatric treatment, especially forced, is more harmful than helpful, or that psychiatric diagnosis is not valid or based on science, you know, just a bunch of information in an easy to read format that exposes psychiatry as a fraud, then give out copies to groups and especially lawyers that represent people who have been diagnosed and forced psychiatric treatment. Surely if we could use the legal system against them we could set a legal precedent that proves (with supporting evidence) that psychiatry is a psuedoscience and not real science, that psychiatric diagnosis is flawed and the various ‘treatments’ are of little benefit with many potentially fatal risks associated with them.

    Use the system against them like they’ve used it against us.

    Either the (legal) system will be changed in our favour or it will expose a legal/governmental system that defends a field not backed by science and an industry of death that makes yearly profits of billions of dollars while ignoring the plight of the people.

  • No. You throw out all terms that connote, allude to and, in this case, even make analogies to disease. The you change to words which actually correspond to and describe the phenomena at hand.

    200+ years of psychiatric obfuscation and double-talk has left the language permeated with terms such as those you defend using; we need to pick through it all and discard the debris.

    You may find this strange oldhead, but I agree with you. Sorta.

    Yes, psychiatric language is absolutely flawed and we need a new language. But this needs to happen in steps. If you and me and dozens of people on MiA came up with a new language what do you think would happen? We’d try to communicate with other people not privy to our new language and they’d wonder what the heck we were talking about because they wouldn’t understand what we were saying, plus there’s the psychiatric language to combat and overrule any new language, and even though psychiatric language is extremely flawed it’s socially accepted as being accurate. First we need to expose and abolish psychiatry (or atleast greatly diminish their appearance of power and authority). Then second we can come up with a new language/system to replace psychiatry. But until that first step is taken we need to still be able to communicate, and sadly the primary language we have available is strongly influenced by psychiatry. If we discard all such terms before we have a new language we won’t be able to communicate. Discard depression? Then how do we describe it? That thing that makes you sad lots after you lose something important? What about anxiety? The thing where your heart beats faster and you freak the hell out? It’s got a nice ring to it but it’s a bit of a mouthful. Yes we need a new language and to discard anything that alludes to ‘mental illness’ being a real disease, but we need to be able to communicate in a common language until psychiatry is exposed and abolished.

    You throw out all terms that connote, allude to and, in this case, even make analogies to disease. The you change to words which actually correspond to and describe the phenomena at hand. Agreed. What psychiatry calls ‘mental illness’ is not a real illness or disease, so anything suggesting this should be discarded. But just because psychiatry has hijacked a term and claimed it is a disease does not make it so. For example, extroversion is a term that describes a certain cluster of characteristics, such as sociability and activeness. If psychiatry claimed that extroversion was a disease, would you suggest throwing out the term extroversion completely because psychiatry says it’s a disease but it isn’t? Or would you continue to use extroversion as a term and not a disease term? Do you understand what I’m saying? I’m saying continue to use some words as terms, not disease terms. Use (some) terms such as depression like extroversion, as a term, not a disease term. You’re saying throw the lot out because psychiatry claims it’s a disease but it isn’t.

    200+ years of psychiatric obfuscation and double-talk has left the language permeated with terms such as those you defend using; we need to pick through it all and discard the debris. Agreed. Sorta. I don’t and never did defend all psychiatric terminology. I’m saying that some of it is useful, atleast for the time being, and I assume you also believe that some of it is useful when you said “we need to pick through it all and discard the debris.” Yes psychiatric language is full of double-talk and all-round total bollox and we need to pick through it and discard the debris. We both agree psychiatric language needs to go, but there are some terms we can keep while other terms (the debris) can be discarded. I’m sure we’d both agree on schizophrenia being one such debris term to be discarded. But what about the rest? Have you alone picked through the entire psychiatric language and decided what’s debris and what’s not? Or should this be more of a collective undertaking? I say depression is a useful term (not a disease term, much like extroversion is a useful term but is not a disease term), though maybe we could change it later with a new language/system, or we could go back to calling it meloncholy if you’d like. What about anxiety? I say that’s useful. People can feel anxious/anxiety. Anxiety does describe the phenomena at hand. People don’t have a disease called anxiety (or an anxiety disorder), but they certainly can feel anxious/anxiety.

    Can we stop arguing with each other and work together to bring down psychiatry? We want the same things more or less. We want to expose and abolish psychiatry. We want a new language not based on the medical/disease models. We want to help people, not harm people. But until psychiatry is exposed/abolished we need to be able to communicate and the only way we can do that is to continue using some of the current language (and use certain words as a term and not as a disease term).

  • oldhead, you’re being overly pedantic regarding the use of language. How the heck exactly are we supposed to communicate anything??

    We can’t talk about mental illness because it is not an illness or disease, therefor ‘mental illness’ does not exist (technically, as an illness/disease, it doesn’t exist). We can’t talk about depression or anxiety or schizophrenia because ‘they’ are classified as mental illnesses by psychiatry and ‘they’ are not real diseases therefor do not exist. Depression is not a real disease so any sadness you think you feel is just an illusion because it’s not real. So how do we communicate regarding mental distress? We can’t according to you. ‘Mental illness’ may not be real (it’s not a real illness or disease), but mental distress is very real.

    You’re saying depression is not a real disease so it’s not real. You’re saying that 10 years of hell I went through experiencing depression (and whatever others go through) wasn’t real, that I did not experience what I experienced because it is not a real disease therefor it’s not real and doesn’t exist. This line of reasoning is just as insane as psychiatry’s line of reasoning where every human expression is a disease. You’re basically saying the opposite, that because it’s not a disease it doesn’t exist at all. This is lunacy.

    I keep saying that ‘mental illness’ is not a real biological illness, brain disease, genetic defect, or chemical imbalance, but such experiences are very real (though again, not a disease). Extroversion is real even though it’s an illusory construct that describes a cluster of characteristics that people who identify with that term will have most (but not all) characteristics in common. Same with depression. People can feel sadness, helplessness, hopelessness, etc etc, and that is very real, though again, not a disease. It doesn’t cease to exist because it is not a real disease. Yes we need to get away from labeling such human experience as a disease when it is not a disease, but we cannot throw out every single word to describe human experience or expression because it’s not a disease so it doesn’t exist.

  • oldhead, you’re right, in a sense. By your word logic, psych meaning psyche meaning mind, and path meaning pathology meaning disease, psychopath meaning diseased mind is an impossibility because the mind, being non physical, cannot be afflicted with a physical disease. So yes, by that logic, psychopath as a term is somewhat of an oxymoron.

    However, you keep getting caught up on disease labels. As disease labels the labels used to describe assorted so called ‘mental illnesses’ is wrong because they simply are not diseases. I however am using such terms purely as a label and not as a disease label (don’t get me started on how labeling people is bad, I know, however descriptive terms, aka labels, can be useful at times for understanding different types of people and how they interact with and interpret the world). Maybe the term ‘psychopath’ should be abolished because it is not a disease label and the word is an oxymoron. That doesn’t change the fact that there are some people with a personality type that includes narcissism, pathological lying, lack of empathy guilt or remorse. That cluster of characteristics does exist. So, if ‘psychopath’ is the wrong term to use then we need another to replace it. Unless you’re proposing removing the word with no replacement, which would mean losing the ability to identify psychopaths because we’d no longer have a word to describe it.

  • oldhead, you seem to have a particular view about the type of person I am or what you think I believe, and you seem to be twisting what I’m saying to suit your narrative. This is confirmation bias. And it’s getting somewhat annoying.

    I agree with a lot of what you say oldhead, aswell as BPDTransformation, aswell as a lot of other people on MiA. Why? Because we’re all on the same forum discussing the same thing. That psychiatry is flawed and should either be completely overhauled or shouldn’t exist (that includes psychiatric diagnosis and treatments such as drugging or electroshock). So yeah, I agree with a lot of people on this website. I also disagree with a lot of stuff people say.

    Please correct me if I’m wrong, but what I interpret you saying is that such terms as depression, schizophrenia, etc are considered ‘disease terms’ by psychiatry, but they are not a disease, so they should be discarded. I agree that psychiatric terminology is flawed and that such terms do not describe a disease. Schizophrenia is a tricky term because it is considered a catch-all diagnosis where two people given the same label do not have to have any similar ‘symptoms’ (which are not ‘symptoms’ of a disease but various characteristics such as emotions, personality, etc). Sure, maybe schizophrenia as a term should be discarded, but something like depression is actually useful. Let me be clear here. Depression is not a disease that people have, it’s a label used to describe a cluster of characteristics (emotions, personality, behaviour) that people can exhibit. It’s an experience, not an illness. If we discard the term because it’s a disease term that describes something that is not a disease then how do we describe it? Should we say depression is not real because it’s not a disease? That is actually somewhat true. Depression as a disease is not real, but it does exist. I experienced depression myself for over ten years. Will you say I never experienced what I experienced because depression is not a disease therefor it doesn’t exist? Because I’d consider punching you in the face if you said that.

    You likely think it is useful because you know what the term means to you and assume that it means the same thing to others, but this is rarely the case (even within the “professional” world). This is true. People are different. We grew up in different cultures in different environments so people have different perspectives. Heck, just the word ‘house’ can mean different things. I may say a house is a small 3 bed, 2 bath, quarter acre, picket fence, with a pet cat. You might say a house is a large mansion with 10 bed, 4 bath, 5 acres, a maid, a cook, and 2 guard dogs. Or the ‘table’ I might think of a dining table that can seat 10 people while you may think of a card table designed for 4 people. Even the same word can have different meanings/interpretations, and that’s true outside of psychiatry, not just within it. So yes, DSM labels lack reliability and validity but some of them can be useful, though there should be a complete overhaul of such terms when we finally abolish psychiatry. Regardless, we do need a similar and accepted language to convey concepts and ideas to other people, especially within the same profession.

    “It”? What “it”? Again, quotes or not, if “mental illness” doesn’t exist there is no “it,” so there’s no need to find a better label. There’s nothing to label. Again I’ll use depression as my example. You’re saying that because ‘mental illness’ isn’t an illness, which means depression isn’t an illness, there’s no need to use that label or a different/better label, because it doesn’t exist, therefor there’s nothing to label. Really? You wanna tell that to the millions of people that experience depression that depression isn’t an illness therefor it isn’t real and what they’re experiencing isn’t real? That might not go down so well. I experienced depression for over ten years. Regardless of if you call it depression or boner-fart (a reference to Borderlands 2 there heh) the experience was the same even though it is not an illness. A rose by any other name.

    There are other terms that are useful in describing human qualities, such as extrovert/introvert, Scorpio/Virgo, male/female. Not every extrovert will exhibit all the exact same characteristics at the same magnitude, but does that mean we should get rid of the term because not everyone given the ‘label’ is exactly like everyone else given the label? Should we discard terms such as Virgo or Scorpio, what about male or female? Not everyone given those labels will have all of the exact same characteristics but it doesn’t mean we should discard them. Schizophrenia as a term, like I said above, should probably be trashed because, like you said “people so-labeled don’t necessarily have anything truly in common but the label.” That’s true. But something like depression is useful. Let’s look at something else, say a fear of heights. A fear of heights is not a disease, however there are certain characteristics (what may be called ‘symptoms’) that will manifest when that fear is revealed, such as vertigo, sweaty palms, heart palpitations, etc. These are a cluster of characteristics that may manifest regarding a fear of heights. Whatever the phobia name for heights is is a label used to describe a fear of heights that may include a number of characteristics. This is not a disease but it’s the same type of thing as depression, anxiety, etc. A name/term/label given to explain a cluster of characteristics that some or all may manifest in certain/all situations. Depression is not a disease, but it is still a useful term, just like introvert or extrovert.

    By focusing on behavior and not the source of behavior, outward similarities of expression are considered more significant than what’s actually going on with each individual. This is not at all what I said. This may be psychiatrys claim, but is certainly not my own and I have never said anything like this. I have repeatedly said things such as the following: “Mental illness is not a real illness. It is a natural response to a toxic environment. Trauma, abuse, neglect, society, these are the causes of psychological distress, not a mythical chemical imbalance or brain disease.” Tell me, how exactly am I focusing on the behaviour? This is totally focusing on the source of the behaviour. Heck, even in my book I say that psychiatry/psychology needs to stop looking at what behaviour is exhibited and start focusing on why that behaviour manifested. That’s focusing on the source, not the behaviour.

    You are taking psychiatrys views and putting them on to me. Please stop doing that. And you keep completely misinterpreting what I’m saying even though I’m trying to spell it out as clearly as possible, so maybe that’s my fault in not being clear enough, but I’m fairly sure I’m explaining myself as best I can.

    Also, this right here is why the world is in the state it’s in and why psychiatry is still abusing its power to kidnap and forcibly medicate millions against their will. Instead of us banding together to fight the real threat we are bickering with each other. Divide and conquer. We need to focus on taking down psychiatry, not taking each other down because of a mere difference in language or opinion.

  • I’m aware that personality traits etc are not symptoms of an illness, which is why I phrased it the way I did. Sorry if that was not apparent. Also, I never phrased behaviour in terms of symptomology, psychiatry does that. I said “a label used to describe a cluster of ‘symptoms’ (personality traits, behaviours, emotions, beliefs).” So let me be clear. A (mental illness) label is used to describe a cluster of what psychiatry calls ‘symptoms’ which are in fact not ‘symptoms’ of any disease but are natural human characteristics such as personality traits, emotions, behaviours, beliefs, etc, which are not a disease or symptoms of a disease. Sorry if I didn’t spell that out. My mistake.

    “Your elaboration on what you mean by ‘psychopath” reveals it, in this case, to be a moral term, not medical or even sociological.” If it wasn’t apparent, I’m against the medical model regarding ‘mental illness’ and psychological understanding. And I wasn’t trying to micromanage what category the label would fit under (moral or sociological). It’s a term, regardless of if it’s medical, moral, or sociological, it is a term that is useful in understanding a certain type of human’s psychological state regarding their interpretation and interaction with the world (like extrovert or introvert).

    “Useful in creating a false sense of understanding.” Let me be clear. I do NOT support psychiatry, psychiatric labels, or psychiatric drugs. I’m not suggesting mental illness (which is NOT an illness) labels be used in general conversation in public without a true understanding of what such experiences are, because the current psychiatric perception is WAY off (i.e. NOT an illness or brain disease or genetic defect or chemical imbalance). Such terms are however useful within a professional capacity to convey a certain concept. If I say the word ‘table’ you know what I mean because we have a similar representation. Same thing goes for depression, anxiety, introversion, etc. It is NOT a disease, even though psychiatry says it is. But such terms can describe a cluster of characteristics including personality traits, emotions, behaviours, etc, and are useful in describing certain human characteristics (or clusters of) within a professional capacity.

    Your logic (and error in my estimation) is similar to BPDT’s in that you hold that saying “people labeled as schizophrenic” (instead of just “schizophrenics”) makes it a valid category, when people so-labeled don’t necessarily have anything truly in common but the label.” You are seriously misinterpreting what I’m saying. I’ll use the depression term rather than schizophrenia term for my example. I do NOT say nor believe that people ‘have’ a ‘disease’ called ‘depression’. It is NOT a valid disease category because it is not a disease. You may experience depression, but you don’t ‘have’ it. It’s a perception. A perspective. A different point of view. Let me frame that another way. When you are exposed to a toxic environment (trauma, abuse, neglect, etc) such experiences can have an impact and potentially leave a mark or wound on the psyche of the individual. This psychological damage can, as a result of exposure to a toxic environment, influence the psychological development/expression of the individual, potentially changing personality traits, behaviours, emotions, beliefs. Such psychological impacts can result in certain clusters of characteristics being experienced/exhibited, which has been given labels by psychiatry to categorize and medicalize every human experience and expression, but is NOT a disease.

    Again, I am NOT saying that ‘mental illness’ is a ‘real disease’. It is called that by psychiatry but I do not agree with psychiatric practices, if that were not already obviously apparent to you. I’m saying such terms can be useful to convey a concept for those within the same profession to communicate. I’m not a fan of labels and I despise psychiatry’s disease categories and do not like to be put into a box, but certain terms (or labels) can be useful. Let’s take myself for example, if I met you or anyone else in a random meeting, I might come across as rude, blunt, mentally challenged, or a number of other things. But if I were to say I identify myself as an introvert rather than an extrovert, you’d understand me a little better. If I were to say my mind functioned more like the ‘aspergers’ mind than the ‘neurotypical’ mind, you might understand me a little more. Lack of social skills, isolated, but extremely well learned on a certain topic/subject. I am not a label. I do not have a disease. But ‘introversion’ for example is a very useful term to describe a cluster of characteristics (personality, emotion, behaviour) that I express. If you were versed in astrological signs (I’m not, except a little bit about my own) then giving my star sign could, as that star sign is a label that can encompass certain characteristics, be used a single word to convey an idea or concept that incorporates or clusters around certain (though not all within every individual) characteristics. Although I do not personally identify with the term ‘psychopath’ I have met atleast one person that does, and it is a useful term to describe a cluster of characteristics, but is NOT a disease.

    Please let me know if you misinterpreted anything else I said so I can spell it out in essay format.

  • Psychopath is a disease term? Like depression or anxiety or schizophrenia are disease terms? Psychopath, like depression etc etc, is a label used to describe a cluster of ‘symptoms’ (personality traits, behaviours, emotions, beliefs).

    Have you ever met a psychopath/sociopath? I have. Thankfully only 1 so far (atleast that I figured out). And I can tell you from first hand experience it is one of, if not the most damaging and destructive personality type there is. They use and abuse, spread lies, manipulate to the extreme, and have an almost (if not total) lack of empathy. The only psychopath/sociopath I have ever met claimed to be my ‘best mate’ for about 2 years. He is to this day the worst person I have ever met.

    I agree with a lot of stuff you say oldhead, we are both on the same wave-length, but this I have to disagree with you on. Psychopath is only a disease term so far as psychiatry is concerned, though even on that I’d have to disagree because psychiatry doesn’t use the terms psychopath or sociopath, they use ‘antisocial personality disorder’. But the fact remains, even though these are ‘disease terms’ they do not actually specify a disease, but they do refer to a cluster of characteristics that tend to be similar within people given the same label. For example, a person experiencing depression does not have a ‘disease’ called depression, but they will experience a similar cluster of characteristics (what psychiatry calls ‘symptoms’) such as prolonged periods of sadness or despair, anxiety, disturbed sleeping or eating patterns, lack of social support, lack of physical activity, etc.

    Saying that psychopath is a ‘disease term’ is like saying that introversion or Scorpio is a disease term. It is not a disease. They are labels used to describe similar clusters of characteristics. Perhaps the labels are flawed, because it is a label and puts people into a box, but the fact remains such terms can be useful (though not as psychiatry currently uses them). Should we discard terms such as psychopath or depression or schizophrenia? Yes and no. Such terms do not define a disease, but they are useful in conveying to others a certain type of person(ality). Should we discard terms such as extrovert and introvert, or the various star signs? We could, but those terms are useful in understanding people, even though they are not a disease.

    I think a better way of going about things is to see ‘psychopath’ or ‘depression’ like we see ‘extroversion’ or ‘introversion’. Not a disease or illness or imbalance or defect, but a useful way of describing or understanding how a person interprets and/or interacts with the world.

  • Great article. Being anti-psychiatry isn’t a bad thing. Biological psychiatry isn’t a science. It’s marketing and propaganda/public relations. And some eugenics and torture thrown into the mix.

    Warning, essay ahead! Start reading at your own peril. And maybe get a tea or coffee. Or beer.

    Most contributors/commenters on MiA are aware that if corporations were a real person they’d best be described as a psychopath. And most would be aware of studies suggesting that psychopathy occurs considerably higher in positions of power/authority, such as police, politician, or CEO. Biological psychiatry, and those who follow it’s ideology, can best be described as delusional eugenicist psychopaths employing cognitive dissonance as a defense mechanism. I’ll explain each in turn.

    Delusional – According to wikipedia (I never use wikipedia as a reference, but the description is pretty good) says there are “three main criteria for a belief to be considered delusional [which are] certainty (held with absolute conviction), incorrigibility (not changeable by compelling counterargument or proof to the contrary), impossibility or falsity of content (implausible, bizarre or patently untrue). Furthermore, when a false belief involves a value judgment, it is only considered a delusion if it is so extreme that it cannot be, or never can be proven true.” Biological psychiatrists absolutely believe that mental illness is real and caused by a brain disease, genetic defect, or chemical imbalance, even though the research has repeatedly shown such claims to be entirely untrue. Psychiatry’s claim that mental illness is real and caused by a brain disease, genetic defect, or chemical imbalance are not and never can be proven true because ‘mental illness’ is not an illness, it is a natural response to a toxic environment (trauma, abuse, neglect, poverty, most/all ‘isms’, and society in general). ‘Mental illness’ is not an illness, it is a cluster of certain personality traits, behaviour, emotion, and/or beliefs (none of which are an illness) given a label and prescription for social control.

    Eugenicist – There are probably more than just the one, but a recent article on MiA by Jay Joseph called Comments on Jeffrey Lieberman and Ogi Ogas’ Wall Street Journal Article on the Genetics of Psychiatric Disorders critiqued an article written by a former President of the American Psychiatric Association and an associate who support the biological basis of psychiatry, which just so happens to mirror eugenicist practices and procedures. A (non-MiA) journal article called Screening for Mental Illness: The Merger of Eugenics and the Drug Industry by Vera Sharav (2005) looked into a modern eugenicist agenda by Big Pharma and psychiatry with the use of mental health screening. “Eugenics equated morality to intellect and attributed behavioural problems and social maladjustment to low intelligence, whereas psychiatry links the same problems to mental illness. Both use the mantle of science without the substance of science to further an agenda. Psychiatry’s claims and interventions resemble those of eugenics: Both are couched in pseudoscientific terminology but lack scientific validity. Neither developed objective criteria for diagnosing or defining normal and abnormal traits; neither could withstand independent critical analysis; but both have been immensely successful at promoting their objectives by popularizing unsubstantiated claims.”

    Psychopath – Some of the qualities of a psychopath include:
    Pathological lying: Like psychiatry’s constant claim that ‘mental illness’ is a real biological illness caused by a brain disease, genetic defect, or chemical imbalance, even though the evidence overwhelmingly shows such claims as being untrue, not to mention the constant claim that psychiatric drugs are ‘safe and effective’ when the evidence shows they are barely more effective than placebo yet have a great potential for harm from assorted adverse effects.
    Narcissism: This one, not as much, however psychiatrists have for decades pretended to be real doctors and sought out the prestige and profit of becoming a legalized drug dealer with the sole claim to authority over the mind and mental distress.
    Lack of empathy, guilt, and remorse: You’d have to lack empathy, guilt, and remorse to be able to forcibly restrain a fellow human against their will and administer electroshock torture and say it is to help them. Or to pressure someone into ingesting or injecting psychiatric drugs which may turn the person into a drooling zombie (like anti-psychotics do) and say they are ‘improved’.
    Deception and manipulation: How many journal articles or books put out by psychiatry or Big Pharma have been ghostwritten or had data altered or omitted to support the claims made by psychiatry or Big Pharma (though this is certainly not the only industry that employs such fraudulent practices). It’s fairly common practice to manipulate the data to give the impression that a psychiatric drug/treatment is more safe and effective than the studies data actually indicates. How often do psychiatrists tell people they have a chemical imbalance or brain disease (with zero evidence) and taking a pill for a long time or even the rest of their lives is the only effective treatment option available.

    Cognitive dissonance – Wikipedia says “Dissonance is felt when people are confronted with information that is inconsistent with their beliefs. If the dissonance is not reduced by changing one’s belief, the dissonance can result in restoring consonance through misperception, rejection or refutation of the information, seeking support from others who share the beliefs, and attempting to persuade others.” Sounds like the parts in your article where you wrote “Similarly, all six responses to the survey, in the same edition of the journal, written by 13 psychiatrists (including current and past Presidents of the European Psychiatric Association and the current President of the World Psychiatric Association) dismissed all the concerns raised by the 1057 medical experts and blamed everyone but their own profession, including their supposedly ignorant, prejudiced medical colleagues and the biased media” and “instead of proposing efforts to address the problems identified by the medical community, such as having little scientific basis, they recommend only ‘enhancing the perception of psychiatrists’ so as to ‘improve the perception of psychiatry as a career”.

    Psychiatry is not something that can be fixed. It is far to psychopathic, corrupt, greedy, and insane. The foundations of biological psychiatry are built on lies, not truths. It’s flimsier than a house made of cards. Psychiatry needs to be exposed then abolished. While I’m typically anti-psych drugs, I do understand there is a very small need for the potential of psychiatric drugs to be used as a treatment, but this would be in a much much smaller population than is currently drugged and for as short a period of time as possible. Other professions can prescribe drugs if necessary. Psychiatry itself needs to be abolished.

    “There is even an international organization, ‘Global Mental Health’, designed to bring the supposed superiority of the Western approach to the rest of the world”. This is bad. Very bad. A profession that is wholly unscientific seeks to infect the entire world with lies, labels, drugs, and torture they call ‘helpful, safe, and effective treatment’. Psychiatry is not a science. It is marketing. Psychiatry and Big Pharma are part of the system that seeks to maintain and expand the status quo of power, profit, and control. It doesn’t matter how much harm psychiatric practices and treatments inflict because it maintains psychiatric and political power, mass profits, and social control. It also fulfills the elites eugenicist agenda by neutralizing the ‘inferior’.

    Mental illness is not a real illness. It is a natural response to a toxic environment. Trauma, abuse, neglect, society, these are the causes of psychological distress, not a mythical chemical imbalance or brain disease. Psychology and psychiatry, by definition, are supposed to study the psyche (the mind), but biological psychiatry focuses on the physical brain and biology and ignores the mind. To bring down the two-headed giant of psychiatry and Big Pharma, the biological ideology needs to be exposed (which it frequently is, especially on MiA). But there also needs to be an alternative system to replace psychiatry and the medical model (and no, not the biologically based RDoC proposed by the NIMH). The truth is, people do experience psychological distress. Depression is not a brain disease or genetic defect, but people do experience depression. Same with anxiety, or mania, or schizophrenia. These are not diseases, chemical imbalances, or genetic defects, but people can and do experience them. So we need a new system that can explain what these things are that is not based on the flawed foundation of biology.

    To truly understand what ‘mental illness’ really is and how best to treat it, we need to understand how the mind works. Thankfully, the mind has already been mapped (though certainly not in minute detail). It’s described in a book I wrote called The Map of the Psyche: The Truth of Mental Illness that unifies countless psychological theories to produce a map of the mind that can be used to explain what ‘mental illness’ is as it relates to the psyche, and once you understand what it is it becomes much easier to understand how to heal it. The map of the psyche can also be used to bring down psychiatry. By showing how the mind actually works and what ‘mental illness’ really is it also exposes what mental illness is not (not a biological illness, brain disease, genetic defect, or chemical imbalance).

    Mental illness is not an illness, but it is mental. Mental meaning mind, not brain. If you want to understand mental illness, study the mind, not the brain. Use the Map of the Psyche.

  • Hey Bradford, thanks for taking the time to read (some) of my past comments. I tend to write a lot. Thought I’d gotten past the essay writing, but apparently not.

    I’d offer to send you a copy of my Map of the Psyche, but I don’t know how contact between MIA members works. Otherwise you can get a copy on Amazon.

    You’re right when you said “The map is NOT the Territory”. My map is like the outline, a colouring in page. The outline is there so you can see what it is, but the minute details are missing. You’re also correct that biopsychiatry’s map is poorly drawn and worse than no map. Like you said, it’s like using a “Treasure Map you got off a box of Cap’n Crunch cereal!” Spot on analogy.

    Exposure to a toxic environment, be it abuse, neglect, poverty, or whatever, can lead to changes in emotional expression, behaviour, or personality. In some cases this can lead to creativity, as the individual must change something to make things work again. Other times this can lead to something disruptive, a ‘mental illness’, that is just the psyche’s way of trying to deal with a problem. The solution will typically help, but it may be helpful or disruptive. For example, if you got broken into, you might freak out and develop OCD and lock and relock every door in your house a dozen times, or you might develop an app (there’s a bloody app for everything) that could tell you what doors/windows in your home are secure. Two solutions, two different ways of dealing with the problem, but one is beneficial and the other less so.

    As for autism, that’s a tricky one. I’m not a fan of the concept of ‘mental illness’ (because it’s simply not an illness) and I’m not a fan of all the discrete labels (depression, schizophrenia, autism, etc). However, it is atleast a little useful being in the field to help identify certain clusters of characteristics, and will suffice until something better is accepted. So, I haven’t personally studied autism enough, but my understanding is that autism is something that has affected the brain (heavy metals, like mercury, have been implicated), while aspergers (supposedly on the autism spectrum) seems to be mind based. But without getting into too much of a debate, the environment (including social) is the primary contributing factor to mental disturbances.

  • This. Exactly this. Psychiatry and Big Pharma rake in billions of dollars every year from their labeling and drugging, so they aren’t going to stop any time soon. They certainly won’t stop themselves.

    But here’s the issue I have with this. Psychiatry (specifically biological psychiatry) is psuedoscience, not real science. There is no evidence to support various claims made by psychiatry, such as the claim that ‘mental illness’ is a real biological illness, brain disease, chemical imbalance, or genetic defect. The only things that support psychiatry is marketing and propaganda (public relations). The same can be said for psychiatric/pharmaceutical drugs. There is no evidence to support the claim that psychiatric drugs are ‘safe and effective’ (and much evidence that says the opposite) other than the marketing and propaganda pushed by Big Pharma and psychiatry.

    So how has an industry (the psychiatry-pharma complex) that has zero scientific basis and is based on lies, omissions, fraud, intimidation, character assassinations, etc, managed to infect the majority of the worlds population with a belief, not a truth, that is worth multi-billions of dollars every year (well, the corporate mainstream media helps). They promote a belief system that is wholly unscientific, apply arbitrary labels that have no basis in truth or reality, and push ‘treatments’ that are harmful and potentially fatal and charge obscene amounts of money for. And it’s all based on lies.

    Joseph Goebbels, the Nazis chief propagandist, reportedly said “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

    The government supports biological psychiatry and Big Pharma (and fears the truth). How often has the FDA (a government agency) favored Big Pharma and ignored the people who claim they have been abused, poisoned, and even murdered by psychiatric practices. Heck, Obama recently nominated a bought and paid for Pharma puppet to head the FDA. How often has the government pushed policy that promotes biological psychiatric viewpoints with a medication first treatment policy. How often has the government attempted to silence any critics of psychiatry or Big Pharma?

    The people in power are not the good guys. They push an unscientific belief system based on lies. They push drugs and other ‘treatments’ that are harmful and potentially fatal and are closer to tortures than treatments. They push a eugenics agenda designed to wipe out all the ‘inferior’ people. The people in positions of authority are not the good guys. They are evil, egomaniacal, pathological, psychopathic, eugenicist asshats. And I dare anyone to prove me wrong. Well, apart from the asshat thing, cause clearly such people do not actually wear hats on their posteriors.

    Who wants the slaves free? Certainly not psychiatry, Big Pharma, and the government who seek to maintain and expand the status quo of power, profit, and control.

  • BPD, I don’t agree with you, no matter what any article posted on MIA says. You said “People labeled psychotic are on average no smarter than, and usually much less functional than the general population.” I wasn’t referring to just people labeled psychotic, but to anyone labeled with any ‘mental illness’ (depression, bi-polar, etc). There are many well known writers, inventors, scientists etc who struggled with a ‘mental illness’. I myself, though not currently well known, know for a fact that if I had not experienced a wide assortment of ‘mental illnesses’ myself then I never would have discovered and created my own theory of how the psyche functions.

    Also, I did say there was a link between genius and insanity, but also between creativity and madness. Creativity does not equal intelligence. You don’t have to have an IQ that rivals Einsten’s to be able to paint or sculpt a piece of art, or combine two or more things into something new, or discover a new island or species. You could be as dumb as a bucket of shrimp, but all you need to do is drop a piece of chocolate in some peanut butter and whammo there’s a million dollar creation right there.

    There’s an amazing woman called Temple Grandin who was diagnosed as autistic. She has said that if the autism gene (if there is such a thing) were removed from the gene pool that nothing would ever get done and nothing new would ever be created, because the social people are too busy being social, so you need people who think and see things differently (like autism, depression, bi-polar, etc) to invent and create.

    People who are put into a toxic environment (neglect, bullying, abuse, poverty) either adapt or die. When you adapt you are forced to see and/or do things differently. Say you were earning $50,000 a year then something happened and you only earn $10,000 a year. You may discover new ways to make your stuff last longer, or create new meals that are cheaper. This is creativity, not intelligence, and without those hardships (including the mental problems that come with it), such things may never be created.

  • It seems the eugenics agenda is becoming more evident. I’m glad someone brought it up. Eugenics never died out, it just went underground. Eugenics is very much alive.

    There’s an article called Screening for Mental Illness: The Merger of Eugenics and the Drug Industry by Vera Sharav (2005) that discusses the eugenics agenda of Big Pharma and psychiatry through the use of mental health screening. “Eugenics equated morality to intellect and attributed behavioural problems and social maladjustment to low intelligence, whereas psychiatry links the same problems to mental illness. Both use the mantle of science without the substance of science to further an agenda. Psychiatry’s claims and interventions resemble those of eugenics: Both are couched in pseudoscientific terminology but lack scientific validity. Neither developed objective criteria for diagnosing or defining normal and abnormal traits; neither could withstand independent critical analysis; but both have been immensely successful at promoting their objectives by popularizing unsubstantiated claims.”

    I’d like to make a few comments of my own to some of the points you made.

    I don’t remember if it was a specific quote, but I remember reading somewhere that supposedly many creative/famous people, including writers, physicists, mathematicians, inventors, and more had a so called mental illness. It’s suggested there a link between genius and insanity, between creativity and madness. How many inventions, discoveries, theories, works of art, and other creations would this world be without if eugenicists like Lieberman and Ogas got their way after they discussed “whether it is desirable or possible to remove allegedly pathological genes in the interest of creating a future “mentally perfect society.”” Isn’t that a pathological mindset? It certainly seems like a mentally disturbed condition to suggest deleting anyone that reacts to a toxic environment rather than fix the environment. You reacted to bullying? Off with your head! Got upset when your parent/child/partner/pet died? Lethal injection for you! You see things that aren’t physically there? To the gas chamber! No thanks, I’ll keep my madness. You can have your authoritarian psychopathic evil bureaucratic elitist “perfect society.”

    “The C4 gene’s two functions are “shaping the brain’s neural circuits during maturation” (the alleged schizophrenia-relevant function), and “contributing to immune-system protection against infections and toxins.”” So if this gene is removed, wouldn’t that just leave a brain dead vegetable that’s extremely vulnerable to illness? Am I reading that wrong? They want to remove a gene responsible for brain development and immune-system function. What a bunch of evil eugenicist snotrags. Why don’t they just suggest a bullet to the brain is a cure-all for any arbitrary label that an authority figure throws at you. Got depression? Feeling anxious? Seeing things that aren’t there? You need a bullet. Only $299 each. But that would never happen of course. A corpse is a one off customer while a brain damaged zombie is a lifetime pay packet.

    “What determines if you are mentally healthy is not necessarily what types of genes are in your DNA but how many or few copies of the genes you have.” Although genes do a lot, it’s the environment (social, physical, financial, nutritional) that has the biggest influence. Epigenetics shows that the environment turns on or off genes, they aren’t hardwired and determined at conception. I can’t understand biological/genetic psychiatrists. Even though the evidence overwhelmingly points to mental illness not being a real biological illness, brain disease or genetic defect, they continue to bark up the wrong tree expecting to find acorns in a banana tree. They aren’t there you idiots. Stop looking. But hey, if you wanna keep chasing parked cars for fun, go for it, just shut up and stop barking at everyone and infecting them with your idiocy.

    a new genetic technique called “ROMA,” which they claimed has shown that “healthy and mentally ill individuals” vary in the “number of copies of various brain related genes” they possess. Say what now? I thought they still couldn’t even define what ‘mentally ill’ and ‘mentally healthy’ means. If they can’t define those things how the heck can they determine how the brain/DNA looks? There still are no x-rays or brain scans or genetic tests that can be used to diagnose any so called ‘mental illness’ yet they have a device that can suddenly separate between all 374+ labels (from the DSM-IV, not sure how many in DSM-5) for the so called ‘mentally ill’ people compared to normal ‘mentally healthy’ people. What a magical time we live in.

    Lieberman and Ogas believe that genes are the main cause of mental disorders, which implies that there is little need to change political policies and social conditions to improve people’s psychological well-being. Eugenics is a very elitist psychopathic mindset. It’s a mindset that can intentionally make social changes (political, economic, technological, war) that will benefit the few at the expense of the many. It’s a mindset that allows those in positions of power/authority to abuse their power over other people, who in the eugenicists mind, are inferior. Biological/eugenics (bio-eugenics?) psychiatry calls for the arbitrary labeling of people and ‘treating’ them with physical restraint, chemical lobotomies, forced medication, and/or brain electrocution that comes with a hefty price-tag, even though there are no medical or genetic tests to prove the existence of any so called ‘mental illness’. Gather round, step right up, we’ll tie you down, we’ll lobotomize you, we’ll inject you with all sorts of stuff that will seriously f**k you up, and we’ll send hundreds of volts of electricity through your brain to induce seizures, and the best part about all that is that you’ll be paying for the privilege, you inferior peasant scum. Nice doing business with you sucker.

    How is biological psychiatry still a thing?

  • “arguing that the First Amendment gives the company the right to market its drug for this broader group of people despite the lack of regulatory approval and the lack of evidence of an outcomes benefit for patients.”

    The FDA has approved Xyrem for very limited uses including narcolepsy, but Caronia suggested that it was “a very safe drug” that could be utilized for Parkinson’s, fibromyalgia, chronic pain, chronic fatigue, insomnia and weight loss in patients as young as eight and over sixty-five. Remarkably, the court ruled that these statements were not “false or misleading.”

    Soooo snake oil salesmanship is now legal? I should totally start my own company. I’ve got some grass clippings that can relieve sunburn, shrink brain tumors, and cure cancer. Only $500 per blade. Get in fast because at these prices they’ll be flying off the shelf.

  • There are some issues with what you have said.

    We as a culture have been manipulated into believing mental problems are a medical illness. The people didn’t magically come up with this idea, it was pushed on them by biological psychiatry and Big Pharma so they could assert power and control (and rake in obscene profits).

    And therein lies the issue. Mental problems are not a medical illness. It is not a brain disease, chemical imbalance, genetic defect, or biological illness, therefor medicine actually has no jurisdiction over mental issues.

    A branch of medicine (psychiatry) and an industry that makes and sells medical treatments (Big Pharma making psychiatric drugs) have asserted dominance over something they have absolutely no right to and something that is outside of their field. It would be like a dentist claiming authority over feet, or a vet claiming they were the experts on art. Medicine, and any branch thereof, has no right to claim authority over mental issues at all.

  • BPD, you are correct, my research is based on a lot of other psychological theories, especially any that are social/relationship/environmental based.

    My theory, based on the amazing research of other well known psychologists/psychiatrists, says that mental illness is not an illness but a natural response to a toxic environment, such as abuse, trauma, neglect, etc. So your view that this sort of approach should replace the biological psychiatric notion of brain diseases, my theory does exactly that.

    The notion of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ is somewhat simplistic, and my theory is more complicated than that, yet still almost as simplistic. It’s based on the concept of duality and unity, much like the Yin-Yang. Within the psyche there are such dualities as good and evil, law and chaos, extroversion/external and introversion/internal, masculine and feminine, light and dark, etc. We all have these dualities within us, just look at your left and right hands/feet, or the left and right hemispheres of your brain. But those dualities also combine into a unity, such as the brain as a whole being composed of left and right hemispheres.

    Honestly, what you want to replace the current system of psychiatry is exactly what my theory offers. Although it will replace biological psychiatry, it doesn’t replace the many well known and accepted psychological theories, it incorporates and unifies them. Imagine being taught two separate mathematical equations, such as 2 x 3 = 6 and 1 + 1 = 2. My theory just puts them together and says 1 + 1 x 3 = 6. Using psychological concepts, we are taught many separate theories for various psychological functions, such as emotion, personality, behaviour, etc. My theory just puts them all together into a single unifying theory. It’s a true map of the mind. And the only way to replace the biological view of ‘mental illness’ (mental refers to the mind not the brain) is with a map of the mind that explains what ‘mental illness’ really is.

  • Hello Richard,

    My theory is not based on charts or statistics. I personally don’t like numbers. It’s a visual model. Initially based on a pyramid then a star shape within a sphere. It’s kind of like a 3-dimensional map. On a map you have a state here, a state over there, a state up there and another down there. Each state looks and feels different. That’s basically what my map shows. Depending on where you are, your ‘location’ within the map, tells what you may feel or perceive based on your ‘state of mind’ as it were.

    Ragnarok

  • Well, here’s another essay response from me. As has been mentioned, the system is not simply broken, it was intentionally designed that way. It is not there to help people, it is there to make obscene profits from controlling people.

    The promotion of the medical model and ignoring of people who ask questions or raise concerns regarding the practices of psychiatry and mass drugging goes much further than biological psychiatry, the pharmaceutical industry, and the health/mental health system. This corruption has spread into almost every bureaucratic/governmental (the definition of bureaucrat by the way is “an official who works by fixed routine without exercising intelligent judgment.” – fixed routine without intelligent judgement), and corporate entity, not only including psychiatry, Big Pharma, and the health system, but extending further into government agencies (e.g. the FDA and NIMH), mental health advocacy groups (e.g. NAMI), the mainstream/corporate media (that receives billions of dollars in pharmaceutical advertising revenue), and even education (where many universities/health departments receive funding from drug companies).

    The reason why it is so difficult to be heard and to change this ‘broken’ (designed that way) corrupt system is because the corruption is so pervasive. It is also because the capitalist system puts profits before people, and the psychiatric/pharmaceutical complex is extremely profitable even though it is extremely harmful. Those people at the highest levels of power seek to maintain the status quo because the status quo is based on power, profit, and control, and these people do not want to lose their power, profits, or control. Also, how many people in the highest levels of power (government, corporate, media, education) would have egg on their face (as the saying goes) if they were forced to publicly admit that psychiatry, which they accept and promote, is fake science and a massive fraud. Many people already realize that psychiatry is an institute of social/political control, rakes in massive profits, and has way more power than a so called ‘branch of medicine’ should have (no other branch of medicine can legally kidnap, detain, restrain, and forcibly medicate or torture people against their will in the name of ‘treatment’).

    Although the higher levels of many institutions are corrupt, many people lower down may be good caring people that have been brainwashed into accepted the propaganda surrounding the validity of ‘mental illness’ or the effectiveness of psychiatric drugs. These people also have an invested interest in maintaining the status quo because to do otherwise would mean destroying their entire belief structure, that they know/practice good science, that they are offering safe and effective treatments, and that they are helping people. How many of these caring people could accept the extreme harm they are causing to other people when they think they are helping them? Widespread accepted beliefs are hard to challenge, no matter how wrong they are. People hold the view and belief that “that’s the accepted science, that’s just the way it is, everybody knows that.” It’s difficult for people to acknowledge or accept that the accepted science is wrong, that’s not the way it is, and that everybody that knew that is wrong. Just look at the world flat/world round thing. 500 odd years ago everybody knew the world was flat. Governments said it was flat, religions said it was flat, education institutes said it was flat, everybody knew it was flat. Then some guy comes along and says no, sorry, you’re wrong, the world isn’t flat, it’s round. Look what happened to him.

    I encountered something somewhat similar to what you did Richard, of being completely ignored when challenging the system, though I encountered it within an educational institution, not a medical institution such as yourself. After a decade of experiencing a wide assortment of so called ‘mental illnesses’ I entered university to study psychology. Shortly after I started uni I began piecing things together, which was in great part due to my personal experiences. As anyone who has studied psychology/psychiatry knows, there are many different theories, but no unifying theory. While there are many theories of how different aspects of the mind function (personality, memory, emotions, etc), there is no theory to explain how the mind itself works. Atleast there wasn’t previously. Well, 4 years after I entered university I mapped the mind, or more specifically, the psyche. This theory unifies all the other theories and can explain such things as personality, emotions, ego, consciousness, and even what ‘mental illness’ really is, all in one theory. It’s called The Map of the Psyche. How I thought my research would be viewed was very different to the reality. My university had the slogan “Discoverer’s Welcome.” My discovery was not welcomed. I approached practically every one of my lecturers and they all dismissed me, without even bothering to read my research. I thought psych-ologists would be interested in the psych-e. I was wrong. I thought those who taught me so many different psychological theories would be interested in a psychological theory that could unite all the others. I was wrong. I thought psychologists who wanted to understand more about what mental illness is and how best to treat it would be interested in a theory that explains what ‘mental illness’ really is and how best to ‘treat’ it. I was wrong. Although my lecturers claimed they want to learn and understand more about how the mind works, they are part of the system, an educational system that costs tens or thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars and takes a minimum of 4 years and a dozen or so classes taught by a dozen or so lecturers. I have a book that can be read in a under a day or taught in 2-3 hours (though it is certainly not as detailed as a full psych course would be, it’s like comparing a sketch to a painting – the sketch shows you the full image while the painting adds the detail). Although I learned psychology and not psychiatry my theory challenges the accepted structure/system, and for anyone in or running the system that could be considered a threat to their livelihood, like a lecturer teaching flat earth theory coming across a world round theory.

    There are many people challenging biological psychiatry, the DSM, and pharmaceutical drugging (especially here on MiA), and although we can say, with supporting evidence, that ‘mental illness’ is not a brain disease, chemical imbalance, genetic defect, or biological illness, and that pharmaceutical medications cause far more harm than good, there is no alternative to that system (apart from psychology/therapy). Depression, anxiety, schizophrenia and others may not be real medical illnesses/diseases, but people do experience such things. So if mental illness is not a real illness, what is it? There is no real alternative that can explain that. Well, actually, there is. The Map of the Psyche: The Truth of Mental Illness explains it. To replace the DSM and medical/psychiatric model, we need a different model, a more accurate and truthful model. The psyche model will replace the DSM and medical model of so called ‘mental illness’. It is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when. I, like so many others challenging biological psychiatry and the pharmaceutical industry, are still in the first part of Gandhi’s four-part scenario of “first they ignore you.” We cannot change this broken and corrupt system if even those who challenge it ignore others who challenge it and offer solutions.

    Psych-ology and psych-iatry, are, by definition, fields that study the psyche, the Greek word for mind, soul, and spirit. The Map of the Psyche is a single unifying psychological theory that unites all the other psychological theories. It can explain an assortment of psychological functions, such as emotion, personality, ego, Self, consciousness, unconscious, and even ‘mental illness’, all in one theory. It can explain depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, multiple personalities (dissociative identity) and other personality disorders, and more. It will replace the DSM. It will replace biological psychiatry. It shows what ‘mental illness’ really is, and by doing so, shows how best to ‘treat’ it, without drugs or electroshock. The current system is so broken and corrupt that it cannot be fixed, it must be replaced. The map of the psyche will replace the DSM and biological psychiatry. So, am I insane (maybe), or are the people running the current system insane? Well, as I’ve said before, psychiatrists don’t treat the insane, they are the insane. I offer a free electronic copy of my book to any MiA authors that would like to challenge, confirm, or deny my claims. Call me crazy or completely batshit insane if you’d like, but do so after reading my research. I’m sick of being ignored. It’s time to laugh at me, fight me, or let me win, and when I win, everyone else will too (well, except for the insane psychopaths running the current system).

  • I meant “you of all people” in that I’ve seen many of your posts and you seem pretty educated on psychology/psychiatry and psychiatric drugs. If you would rather I act like I don’t know you and assume you are a dumbass, I can do that.

    You are looking at gun deaths per year related to different countries. Yes, countries that have less guns will have less gun deaths. That’s one of those “Well duh” comments. But how many of those were suicides? How many accidents? Yes, a gun makes those things much more likely. It would also artificially inflate the numbers. A better statistic to use would be how many deaths/murders per year in each country (and not just by guns). Agreed, having easier access to guns would make it easier to kill people with guns, but it would also make it easier to defend yourself from someone else with a gun. And how many of those deaths were due to someone on or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs that made them homicidal when they otherwise would not have been?

    I’ve often seen the gun control in Australia being used as an example for how to control America. Firstly, Australia never had the gun culture that America has. Last reports I heard there were about 350 million guns in America, which is about one per person? Do 350 million people go on murderous killing sprees? Do 350 million people shoot up other people? If that were the case Americans would be extinct. There are bad (and good) people in every culture. You can’t blame the many good and law abiding people because of a few bad ones. Back to Australia, sure some people would have had guns for personal protection (shotguns or pistols), but the majority of weapons were single shot bolt action rifles owned by people living on farms/rural areas and used to hunt pests (kangaroos, foxes, rabbits, etc). We never really had the guns for fun, they were for practical purposes. What works in one country will not necessarily work in another.

    You say that the good guys are not physically or psychologically prepared to deal with an active shooter situation. I agree and disagree. I’m not talking about your average joe, the housewife and mother of two and a half kids, who gets a gun to carry around in her purse in case of a mugger. That person would not be prepared to deal with a shooter. I’m talking about the concealed carry owner, the one that goes to a shooting range and knows how to use their weapon. They would be far more prepared. But when you get right down to it, a trained cop or army officer who has been trained will generally freak the hell out the first time they are put into a real combat situation. That being said, how many of these bad guys with guns feel great shooting up a room full of unarmed civilians, and how many of these bad guys would freak the hell out themselves if someone shot back?

    You say “As for guns defending us against the government, get real! The government has Abrams tanks, Apache helicopters, F35 jets, aircraft carriers, nuclear subs, nuclear ballistic missiles. You have a little gun.” Isn’t that one of them strawman arguments? Or a red herring? Or I dunno which, the many types of those arguments confuse me. The government has nuclear bombs aswell! Good luck fighting off a nuclear bomb with an AR15, right? That’s a stupid argument. Bombs/missiles cost WAY more than bullets. Bombs also destroy the surrounding infrastructure. If you want to keep a city and buildings intact you aren’t going to bomb the place, unless it’s a last resort because you can’t round people up or take them out on the ground, you know, with regular guns. Bombs and missiles are great if you don’t care about the infrastructure in place, but if you want to keep it, those things are way to destructive.

    Most of the world has already been disarmed (except for governments of course). The psychopaths in power are pushing for a globalist agenda. Absolute power and total control of everything and everyone, everywhere, all the time. We are being marched towards a global surveillance/police state. Americans are some of the few who can actually fight back. Are you so quick to give up your defenses and let the psychopaths in power gain total control?

    Let’s forget about the government for a moment. We’ll just pretend the governments are run by the good guys who have our best interests at heart and want to help and protect us instead of serving globalist and corporate agendas while selling the people out. What would you do in the face of a zombie apocalypse? If the dead rose and started eating peoples faces off, would you really be okay with the police and governments being the only ones with weapons to defend the people? Do you really think they would/could?

  • bpd, you said “But this article actually supports the notion that the US is at least above most other advanced nations in terms of these kind of deaths.” America also has the highest rate of psychiatric drugging, and I’m sure you are aware, psychiatric drugs come with a heap of side effects, including suicidal and homicidal ideation and action. And most of the mass shooters were on or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs. Guns aren’t the problem, psychiatric drugs are the problem. Oh, and the lack of respect for human life, which is perpetrated by the American government (a secret assassination list, drone strikes that kill hundreds of civilians, militarized police of shoot first ask questions later), and especially Hollywood.

  • I agree with AgniYoga.

    BPD, you of all people should know the harmful side-effects of psychiatric drugs. Most of these mass shootings were done by people on or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs. Sure, guns were used to inflict harm, but it was the drugs that caused these kids to flip out. The problem is the drugs, not the guns.

    Many of these mass shootings were done in gun free zones. Gun control just means removing the guns from the hands of law abiding citizens and even turning them into criminals for having a gun. The bad guys don’t obey the law. Gun free zones are targets for the bad guys. It’s a shooting gallery. The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. But when the good guys don’t have any guys, the bad guys won’t be stopped. And what, you’re supposed to rely on the police? Some bad guy starts shooting up a shopping mall and you’re supposed to wait how long for the police? If a bad guy came to your home and threatened you and your family, would you really be fine with just sitting back and letting them terrorize your family while you wait for the police, if you could even call them? How long does it take for the police to arrive? 10 minutes? Half an hour? Do you really want to wait that long for help when you could shoot back at the bad guys and chase them off or end the threat within a minute or two?

    France has gun control. Did that stop the previous two mass shootings? Nope. But it did mean there were a lot of civilian casualties because the people had no way to defend themselves.

    I’ve said it before. Gun control is less to do with guns, and more to do with control. It’s about those in power wanting absolute power. It’s about those in control wanting total control. Gun control will just result in the bad guys and the government, which are frequently the same, having all the guns and all the power. Do you really want to give the government a total monopoly on violence? The biggest threat to human life in the past few hundred years has not been terrorists, or man made climate change (which doesn’t exist), or bacteria, or smoking. The entity that has killed the most people is government. And if you think the American government are the good guys, and not the corrupt psychopaths that they are, then you may aswell put yourself in chains and aim a gun at your own head, because it’s all over for you.

    The 9 scariest words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”

  • “no major differences in relapse rates or level of treatment response between those taking antidepressants and those undergoing CBT.” I find this hard to believe. Irving Kirsch has already shown that antidepressants are no more effective than a placebo. Plus there are the numerous side effects, including increased suicidal and homicidal ideation aswell as the long term neurological damage. It is also known that psychiatric drugs (especially antipsychotics, but I’m fairly sure antidepressants are included) increase the rate of relapse.

    Psychiatric drugs are not safe and effective as is commonly claimed by psychiatry and the drug industry. What little evidence there is of symptom improvement (these ‘symptoms’ are frequently emotions, behaviours, or personality traits, and not symptoms of any real disease) is just that, improving symptoms , not improving quality of life or fixing the problem. Numbing someone so they no longer feel sadness (or anything) is not a ‘cure’ and does not fix the problem, though on paper it looks good due to ‘symptom improvement’ which is more a manipulation than science. Psychiatric drugs cause far more harm than good.

    Although I’m fairly anti-drug (anti-psychiatric-drug), I do feel there is a place for psychiatric drugs, however that would be in maybe 5% of cases instead of the 50-75%+ of current cases, and they would only be used sparingly for a limited time and as a last resort. Though honestly I’d be just as happy to see psychiatric drugs exposed for the toxic and harmful substances they are and completely abolished, just like psychiatry.

  • This model seems way more complex than it should be. Sure, we shouldn’t have a simplistic model, but this looks way to complicated.

    Although this model seems to be a step in the right direction, going away from simplistic models of depression and suggesting it is a “new model for understanding how multiple psychological, biological, social and environmental factors contribute to the onset of depression”, the model still seems to be very heavily geared toward a biological/medical orientation. Just look at the main factors they suggest are involved: cytokine, cortisol, effective GR (glucocorticoid?), monoamines, hippocampal volume. These things may (and I stress may) be affected by depression but they are not the causes of it.

    Also, cytokine? Cortisol? Glucocorticoid? Since when did these become associated with depression? Where’s the good ol’ serotonin that psychiatry and big pharma have claimed for decades causes depression? Are they finally admitting that the serotonin theory of depression was wrong? Are they really going to simply change the type of brain chemical(s) involved yet still run with the whole chemical imbalance theory?

    This may be a step in the right direction (a baby step), but it is still way off.

  • Sooo meds prescribed for adhd are not safe and effective like psychiatry and big pharma claim? Just like the anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, and all the other psychiatric drugs? What a surprise.

    Psychiatric drugs have never been safe or effective. Big pharma just manipulated the results of every study or outright lied. It’s fraud on a massive scale.

  • NAMI is basically a front group for the pharmaceutical industry. They have received over 11 million dollars from drug companies. They push and promote the biological view of mental illness as well as drugs as being the best form of treatment.

    NAMI is bought and paid for by the drug industry. That’s why they support the Murphy bill because the Murphy bill will give more power and profit to psychiatry and the drug industry.

  • Warning, wall of text ahead. Read the whole thing, it is well worth it.

    Is psychiatry a science? Or an art? Or both? Psychiatry is neither science nor art. It’s a pseudoscience. It uses labels for social control. It sells poison for profits. Like bpd said above, “It’s rather perverse to even associate the word “art” with psychiatry, similar to associating the word “artistic” with lying, murdering, stealing, assaulting, destroying, and abusing.” Maybe a hundred plus years ago psychiatry could have been called an art. Now it’s associated with fraud, abuse, torture, drugging, and murder.

    I’d like to suggest that the various horrors being perpetrated by modern psychiatry have their roots in a desperate attempt to survive at all costs. You may be able to make that claim for modern psychiatry, but psychiatry since it’s inception decades ago has been associated with kidnapping, torture, abuse, and all manner of evils. Just look at their so called ‘treatments’ throughout history: hydrotherapy, shock therapy, insulin-shock therapy, lobotomy. Modern psychiatry is simply the modern version of ‘old’ psychiatry, and both modern and old psychiatry are rife with abuse, oppression, and evil. There is nothing good about psychiatry. Never has been.

    The wider cultural druggy doxa, rampant neo-liberalism and psychiatrists’ technical, pharmacological training enable, indeed encourage “research” like Study 329 and widespread academic corruption Right, so shouldn’t a system that encourages widespread corruption be abolished? The system itself is at fault. Trying to fix it will be a band-aid solution at best. You don’t try to fix a tumor. You remove it.

    [W]e must all interrogate every individual therapy, asking if it confronts the real infrastructural context which so often renders humans helpless and, ideally, SHOULD generate depression as a perfectly appropriate, non-dissociative response to, say, homelessness or other unbearable living conditions. The druggy doxa fuelling the biomedical model of psychiatry blatantly side-steps the socio-political infrastructure by locating the problem IN the isolated individual and proposing medical solutions to socio-economic or existential problems. What you’re saying is that our current social/economic/political system, which perpetrates and exacerbates homelessness, joblessness, poverty, hunger, etc, is the problem, with ‘mental illness’ being a natural response to such social ills, but which psychiatry labels a ‘mental illness’ within the individual, is the problem. Agreed. The current social/political system is the problem. Psychiatry focuses on the biological (even though no biological cause has ever been found for any ‘mental illness’) yet ignores the social/environmental and psychological. So called ‘mental illness’ (which is not an illness) is a natural response to a toxic environment, be that poverty, homelessness, joblessness, loss, abuse, neglect, or any number of other social/environmental interactions.

    You mentioned multiple dissatisfactions with mainstream psychiatry and its shameful lack of rigour, compassion, reflection and ethical practice. This isn’t just one or a minor slight. These are many major problems. A discipline that lacks compassion or ethical practice? Aren’t those qualities of a sociopath? How could you argue to keep such a discipline alive? That’s like arguing for torture. The answer is no. Just no. There is nothing good about it. Get rid of it. It promotes and supports evil while trampling on the good. Psychiatry is evil. Abolish it.

    As Frank mentioned above, “Psychiatry is abduction, torture, imprisonment, brainwashing, and killing.”. Biological psychiatry is a pseudoscience. Psychiatry is based on lies and marketing, not science. It should be abolished completely. Keep psychology, abolish psychiatry. Psychiatry is a medical profession that uses medical treatments (drugs and electroshock) to ‘treat’ something that is not medical/biological. You might as well say psychiatrists are experts in and have a PhD in unicorns. As cool as it might be if unicorns existed, they don’t exist. They are a myth. Just like the suggestion that ‘mental illness’ is a real biological illness, brain disease, or chemical imbalance. It’s a myth. It doesn’t exist. Psychiatrists have a PhD in unicorns. So why do these unicorn experts have the power to kidnap and forcibly medicate people against their will? It’s insane. The truly insane people have taken over the insane asylum.

    Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane. They diagnose people with a so called ‘mental illness’ (blaming biology/brain) without having any medical tests to prove the existence of said ‘illness’, then prescribe drugs that frequently have ‘side-effects’ that mimic the very ‘symptoms’ of the supposed ‘illness’ the person was diagnosed with. And if the drug-induced side/adverse effects mimic a different ‘mental illness’ or the individual tries to withdraw from such drugs, they are then given another ‘mental illness’ diagnoses and prescribed even more drugs. The crazy people have taken over the crazy house. Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane.

    Keep psychology. Abolish psychiatry. Many uninformed people confuse the two. Psychiatrists have a medical degree and are the drug dealers. But they have a medical degree and use medical ‘treatments’ for something that is not medical/biological. Get rid of the unicorn experts. They talk fancy, but when you get down to it, they talk complete and utter crap. They have no idea what they are talking about.

    The answer to biological psychiatry (to abolish it), is very simple. Psych-ology and psych-iatry both (supposedly) study the mind, or more specifically, the psyche. Psychiatry, and specifically biological psychiatry, focus on the brain, not the mind, which is why psychiatry claims mental illnesses are brain diseases or chemical imbalances. This is wrong. Although the brain and mind are connected, they are not the same thing. The brain is physical. The mind is non-physical. The answer to (replace) psychiatry and the DSM is the psyche. Use the map of the mind. Use the map of the psyche And yes, it has been mapped. Perhaps not in minute detail, but it has been mapped. Use it. Abolish biological psychiatry. Use The Map of the Psyche. Why accept a profession that claims ‘mental illness’ is a real biological illness/brain disease/chemical imbalance (which we know is false), when the mind has already been mapped? It shows what so called ‘mental illness’ really is, which is a different perspective or point of view, different personality traits, emotions, or behaviours, or a natural response to a toxic environment, and certainly not an illness or disease or chemical imbalance.

    Biological psychiatry is a pseudoscience. It’s a cancer on the human race. Abolish it. The mind/psyche has been mapped. Use it.

  • “A “not otherwise specified” (NOS) diagnosis is often used when an individual may have some symptoms related to a psychiatric diagnosis but does not meet enough criteria to warrant a full diagnosis.”

    So, is it possible for someone to be diagnosed with cancer NOS, or a brain tumor NOS, or death NOS? Either you have something or you don’t. Giving a ‘not otherwise specified’ diagnosis for someone that has some but enough symptoms for a diagnosis is insanity. Well, the whole diagnostic system that diagnoses based on symptoms (which are frequently personality traits, behaviours, or emotions) and not any actual biological pathology is insane.

    Biological psychiatry is a fraud. It’s a pseudoscience. It should be abolished. This insanity must stop.

  • The stupidity and insanity of biological psychiatry never ceases to amaze me. They have claimed for decades that ‘mental illness’ is a real biological illness, brain disease, or chemical imbalance, even though no such evidence exists to support such claims. After decades of research they still have not found anything wrong with the brain regarding ‘mental illness’. So what do they do in the face of this total lack of evidence? They seek to reclassify and redefine psychiatric disorders as brain diseases. Absolute insanity.

    I say it again. Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane.

  • When I was a teenager I was having a bad time and got hold of some anti-psychotics which some people I knew would take to hallucinate and have a great time (like tripping on acid). Well, hallucinate I did, but it was several hours after I’d taken them so I’d dismissed the drugs as having worked. It was also due to what Peter Breggin calls medication spellbinding where I didn’t realize it was the drugs causing the effects. So off to hospital I went, got talked down to by the psychiatrist there, then got taken to a mad house.

    I needed help. Instead I got locked up. Once inside no doctors or nurses talked to me or asked me what was going on in my life. They just gave me drugs as treatment. Including anti-psychotic drugs. They gave me as a ‘treatment’ the very same drugs that sent me loopy in the first place. It’s like prescribing heroin for a heroin overdose. Absolute insanity. But hey, that’s how psychiatry rolls. Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. They are the insane.

    So anyways, after I got discharged, they gave me some prescriptions for psychiatric drugs (including anti-psychotics and anti-depressants). Which I soon after took a handful of. Aaaaaand then got sent back to the mental hospital. They gave me the drugs that put me back inside the mad house. And again, once inside, nobody talked to me. They just gave me more pills. Insane much?

    I’m pretty sure as a result of that chemical cocktail I took I got what ‘Someone Else’ mentioned above as anticholinergic toxidrome. At the time I had memory loss, disorientation, incoherence, hallucinations, and delirium, and long lasting effects that still persist today of memory loss, twitching or jerking movements, and seizures. Atleast now I know where the seizures likely came from. Those things suck.

  • The biggest threat to our health is the corporate/capitalist system that puts profits before people. It’s the governments that seek to appease corporations (and their profit margins) instead of protecting the people.

    It’s not just “Big Risk” that’s the problem. It’s the entire system that’s the problem. It’s the status quo of power, profit, and control that’s the problem. It’s the psychopaths in power who are narcissistic and pathological liars who lack empathy, compassion, guilt, or remorse that’s the problem. The entire system (and the psychopaths who run it) are at fault, not any particular section of it. Fix the system, fix the problem. Attempting to fix one aspect of the broken system will be a band-aid solution at best.

  • In many regards physical abuse seems like the least damaging compared to sexual or emotional abuse. Though the long lasting damaging effects of physical abuse would be emotional/psychological, not necessarily physical, so it’s hard to tell.

    And emotional neglect can be just as harmful as emotional abuse. Feeling like nobody cares and having nobody to talk to, turn to, or help you, especially your own family/parents, is incredibly damaging.

  • I agree with your first two paragraphs, that so called ‘mental illness’ is not a real biological illness/disease like diabetes or influenza, but I disagree with your last paragraph.

    Alzheimer’s, dementia, and Parkinson’s etc are NOT ‘mental illnesses’, they are classified as organic brain disorders. These conditions are known to affect the brain and are physical/biological in nature. So called ‘mental illnesses’ (such as depression, anxiety, etc) affect the mind, and are nonphysical/nonbiological and therefor not an illness/disease.

    Although they are connected, there is a difference between the mind and brain. Psychiatry does not acknowledge that distinction, which is why they claim that ‘mental illness’ is a real biological illness/brain disease/chemical imbalance, which as I’m sure you are aware, is a complete load of hogwash.

  • Ever heard of Posse Comitatus? It is a law designed “to limit the powers of the federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States.” Meaning, the government cannot deploy the military on American soil. So, the arguments of the military having bombs and tanks and whatnot that guns wouldn’t be any match for is null and void. However, to get around the Posse Comitatus act the government has been increasingly militarizing the police. Sure they now have military gear and weapons, but they are still mostly guns with bullets. Do you see the police with tanks and jets and aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons and 2000 lb daisycutter bombs? Thankfully not. Atleast not yet.

  • Sure, the government has massive bombs, but that would also mean taking out the infrastructure. If they didn’t care about a place, sure, bomb it, but what if they want to keep what’s there? Bombs are not practical in that case. And they sure as hell wouldn’t detonate an A-Bomb willingly and have to deal with the fallout. Plus, bombs are way more expensive than a bullet. Also, how many people in the military would turn against the military if they started bombing their own people? But how many would go along with rounding people up ‘for their own safety’?

    You folks are focused on the hard kill method (bombs and bullets) but fail to consider the ongoing soft kill methods. How many people each year die because they can’t afford healthcare? How many die from toxins released by various industries? How many die from obesity or starvation (how do those two even co-exist?) How many die from pharmaceuticals or other medical interventions?

    One guy with a gun kills 10-20 people and it’s plastered on practically every newspaper and television station for atleast the next week. 100,000 people die every year from iatrogenic causes (according to the FDA), but this is rarely heard of. 10-20 people die because of a gun and everyone hears about it. Over ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND people die EVERY YEAR from the medical and pharmaceutical industry and people rarely if ever hear about it.

    It’s much cheaper to kill someone with a bullet than a bomb. And if you kill someone slowly with pharmaceuticals, or smoking, or nutritionless food, then not only are you still killing people, but the people are paying for the privilege and will even vocally or even violently defending their ‘right’ to it.

  • Yes, many more people die by prescription medications, diabetes, smoking, and other causes more than guns, but those things do not suit the agenda.

    Gun control is less to do with guns and more to do with control. And those in power are absolute control freaks.

    Protecting people and keeping people alive is not why the government is pushing gun control. If they were about protecting life, why has/is America engaged in so many wars around the planet? Why does America spend more on military (stuff designed to kill) than the next 20 countries combined? Why are toxic drugs allowed in the market place? Why are GMO’s in almost every type of food? The government does not care about the people. That should be obvious by now.

    Gun control is not about protecting people, it’s about getting guns out of the hands of the people. Before the Nazi’s could begin their mass extermination they first had to get the guns away people. Without their weapons the people had no way to fight back. Imagine what things would be like now with all the advances in technology. The government could easily round up people and put them in concentration camps or simply exterminate them. If you don’t think that could happen, just ask anyone of Japanese decent living in America during World War II, who were rounded up and put into concentration camps.

    American freedoms have been rapidly eroding, especially over the past decade or two. America has dropped to 46th on the World Press Freedom Index (https://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php). There is the increasingly invasive mass surveillance by the NSA and other government agencies. There is the invasive body scans or sexual molestation patdowns by the TSA. There is civil/asset forfeiture, which is simply legalized theft by the government and police forces. There is the militarization of police, which has a big impact on the police mentality where they no longer see people to protect and serve, but see the people as the enemy. The government has purchased over a billion rounds of hollow-point ammunition, enough for every man, woman, and child in America. Guantanamo Bay is still operating, with most of the people in there not being charged with any crime, with no access to a lawyer, and no trial. America also has legalized torture programs. And there are many more abuses committed by the American government.

    As others have said before, America is no longer the land of the free and home of the brave. It is the land of the fee and home of the slave.

    The American (and world) people better wake up fast. It will be too late to challenge the system when you are already in a concentration camp or on your knees with a rifle pointed at the back of your head.

  • The mass media and governments ignore the connection between psychiatric drugs and violence because that connection does not suit the agenda.

    Psychiatry is used as a form of social control. If it were exposed to the masses that psychiatry is a fraud and a pseudoscience, governments would lose one of their biggest forms of social control. Locking up a political dissident for being ‘mentally ill’ would no longer fly, and it would be exposed as an oppressive government incarcerating those that disagree with them. This would create far more social unrest than merely a ‘crazy’ person being locked up.

    Psychiatry and Big Pharma know their drugs can cause violent, homicidal, or suicidal tendencies, and they use that to their advantage. It supports the claim that mental illness is real. It suits the narrative that there are dangerous people out there who are mentally ill and need treatment. It supports the claim that we need more mental health services (based on biological psychiatry of course), with more mental health screening (labeling) and more treatment (drugging).

    If it was exposed to the public that psychiatric drugs are dangerous, Big Pharma would lose billions of dollars and lose credibility. Who would trust the pharmaceutical industry if they found out that Big Pharma knew of such dangerous adverse affects and buried the data to make massive profits? The FDA would lose credibility, since they are the ones that approved these drugs to be allowed on the market. The mainstream media would lose billions of dollars in advertising money. The ‘healthcare’ system would lose billions of dollars if people no longer trusted psychiatric/pharmaceutical drugs. Government officials would each potentially lose thousands/millions in pharmaceutical bribes. None of these players would want to see their lucrative cash cow exposed. They will do anything they can to either prevent the information from being widely exposed to the public, or by creating mis/dis-information to confuse the public.

    The American government also frequently exploits these tragic events to push gun control. The founding fathers knew the importance of the right to bear arms, hence it being the 2nd amendment after the right of free speech. The 2nd amendment isn’t there for hunting. It’s to allow the people to own weapons equal to that which the government/military owns. Why? Because if the government turns evil and turns against the people (which it is), then the people have the means to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. This is why gun control is being pushed so much. The government is no longer run by the good guys. They want guns out of the hands of the people so the people can’t fight back.

    There are several reasons why the mainstream media will not report on the connection between psychiatric drugs causing violent, homicidal, or suicidal thoughts and/or actions. It simply does not suit the narrative or the agenda. Mental illness is real, not made up. Psychiatry is a legitimate science and medical discipline, not pseudoscience and a fraud. Psychiatric drugs are safe and effective, not harmful and ineffective. Big Pharma is in the business of helping people, not making obscene profits from harming people. Governments are there to protect you from the many evils of the world, not remove your freedoms because they are the true evil ones. Everything is backwards in this world of ours. It’s amazing how easily people accept the lie yet refuse to even look at the truth. But then again, when the lie is all the people hear from the media and authority, that’s all they have to base their views of the world. A distorted world view of a distorted world run by psychopaths.

  • I have personal experience with psychiatric incarceration. About 15 odd years ago, in my mid to late teens, I had difficulty coping due to certain things that happened. Anyways, at the time I knew some people who had access to some drugs (anti-psychotics) that made them hallucinate and have a great time. So I got hold of some in the hopes that I would forget my troubles and enjoy the hallucinations. Well, hallucinate I did, and I got locked up in a mental institute for it. Once inside they didn’t talk to me, didn’t offer me therapy, didn’t ask what was going on in my life. The only thing they did was give me drugs. Oh, and take away my belt and shoe laces, even though I wasn’t suicidal (but I had self harmed). I had anti-psychotic induced hallucinations and they gave me anti-psychotics to treat my hallucinations. Hows that for insane?

    Now I will freely admit that at the time I needed help. And I needed some place to be to keep me safe. But what I received was not helpful. It made me feel helpless. It made me feel like a prisoner. I was locked up because of bad drugs in my system, but instead of looking after me while those drugs got out of my system, they locked me up and gave me the same chemical compounds that sent me loopy in the first place. It was like treating a heroin overdose with more heroin. Thankfully I wasn’t forcibly restrained or drugged, but I was out of it and at the time didn’t know any better so I took whatever drugs they told me to.

    I took a handful of psychiatric drugs on three occasions and got locked up twice (the first two times). I got hold of some anti-psychotics myself the first time. They prescribed me the anti-psychotics and anti-depressants I used for the second and third times. If they hadn’t prescribed me drugs (for my anti-psychotic/psychiatric drug induced hallucinations) I wouldn’t have had any to take and potentially overdose on for the second and third time. I needed help. Instead they gave me drugs. The same types of drugs that got me locked up in the first place.

    Psychiatrists don’t treat the insane. Psychiatrists are the insane.

  • Attempting to reform psychiatry would be a band-aid solution at best. Everything about psychiatry is based on flawed information and in some cases outright lies so it’s best to just be rid of the whole thing completely.

    The DSM is flawed, as has been pointed out many times, with over half of those who helped write the DSM IV and V being on Big Pharma’s payroll. The diagnoses are flawed, lacking validity. The suggestion that ‘mental illness’ is a real biological illness, brain disease, or chemical imbalance is flawed and has been proven wrong many times. Psychiatric drugs are flawed, lacking efficacy and safety but having the potential for great harm and even death. Many/most drug trials that suggest a drug is ‘safe and effective’ are written by the company or ghost writers and often omit negative information while hyping any tiny positive. The psychiatric practice of a 10-15 minute consult to check for symptoms, apply a label, and write a prescription is flawed, as it doesn’t get to the root cause of the problem. Psychiatrists being able to legally kidnap, detain, and forcibly drug people against their will is flawed and does far more harm than good. There is a revolving door between Big Pharma and the FDA. Many psychiatrists and even GP’s are bought and paid for by Big Pharma so they do what’s best for the drug companies and not what’s best for the person.

    There is nothing good about psychiatry. It’s based on fraud, bribes, lies, and marketing, not truth or sound science. Sure there are some good psychiatrists, like Peter Breggin, but since he rarely prescribes medications and offers therapy instead he’d be better classified as a psychologist than psychiatrist.

    The best thing to do is to expose psychiatry for the massive fraud it is and then abolish it completely.