08-14-2010, 12:41 AM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Finally, the Truth about Psychiatry & Psychiatric Drugs

Finally, someone is telling the public the truth about psychiatry and their unholy alliance with pharmaceutical companies.

Recently I stumbled upon an amazing documentary on television about psychiatry and psychiatric drugs produced by an organization called Citizens Committee for Human Rights (CCHR). It blows the lid off everything the public is told about psychiatrists, antidepressants, and other conscious altering drugs in the news and in commercials.

I was stunned to find (manifest) this documentary right AFTER I posted an article on Guru Habits.com entitled, "Why Psychotherapy Doesn't Work," that closely parallels many of its points. 

The kind of information that CCHR is distributing has the potential to radically change and even save millions of lives.

I suppose some psychiatrist, psychologist, or pharmaceutical executive will soon invent a label called “Anti-disorder Disorder (ADD  ). If so, you can stick it on me immediately! 

Here are links to the articles, videos, and documentaries on the CCHR site.

Quick Facts About Psychiatry

Videos and Documentaries

Enjoy!

 08-14-2010, 07:56 AM

xfa****

Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 530

I've always suspected that, ever since I read on "Prozac"'s fine print "believed to balance blah blah blah". As if it's effect is a matter of faith and not scientifically proven fact!

Those guys are earning millions pushing us drugs we don't always need...I wonder if they have conscience at all.

 08-14-2010, 09:21 AM

Dou*****

Junior Member

Join Date: Apr 2009

Posts: 13

Haven't watched the video yet, but i will when I've got time.
All i want to say: antidepressants have done a great job in treating my psychic problems. And they are doing now - I am in psychiatric therapy.

 08-14-2010, 09:36 AM

Dou*****

Junior Member

Join Date: Apr 2009

Posts: 13

I've watched the video now. I don't find it convincing.
It is suggesting that pills don't work, cause it's not scientifically proven.
Well, i am my own proof, as i see my symptoms gone when on medication.
Also:
CCHR was co-founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and Professor of Psychiatry Emeritus Dr. Thomas Szasz at a time when patients were being warehoused in institutions and stripped of all constitutional, civil and human rights.
Ouch!

 08-14-2010, 10:59 AM

Ill********

Banned

Join Date: May 2010

Location: England, UK

Posts: 665

Quote:

Can you tell us a quick summary of the findings in the video please? I can't be bothered to visit it if it's just going to say pills don't have any effect.

I've used many mind-altering drugs over the years, both legal and illegal. Right now I have an entire draw full of SSRIs, SNRIs, NDRIs, etc. which I bought from India. To say they have no effect would be incorrect. You can use these drugs for massive performance enhancement in almost all fields. Whether people can use them to treat depression relies on that person's own ability to control their own mind. In other words, some ****face who hasn't even tried controlling their own thoughts is only going to get a temporary fix from SSRIs, since once a tolerance is built, the brain will revert.

However, someone like me who has years of meditation and brain-change experience can literally rewire their entire thought processes, permanently, by utilizing the new neural connections these drugs introduce to the brain. I call them "nootropics" for these abilities - smart drugs. I'm going to write a series of posts on them once I've finished my book.

 08-14-2010, 11:00 AM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

To me, the issue with psychiatry and medication was never about whether or not the meds actually work. They do in most cases. Sometimes one drug won’t work on a person, and in that case, the doctor will just prescribe you another and keep doing it until you find something that does work. In rarer occasions, people never respond to a drug and they go for something ‘extreme’ like electric shock therapy.

The problem with whether or not there is ‘such a thing’ as a psychiatric disorder known as ‘clinical depression’ comes down to whether or not there is a biological entity that can be conceptualized as ‘depression’ or whether or not the cluster of symptoms that we have come to recognize as ‘depression’ exist outside in the environment. Those are two different statements. Psychiatry makes a living selling the idea that ‘depression’ (and other psychiatric disorders) are a biological entity when that is not an obvious statement. Anti-depressants, for example, are targeted at working, middle class mothers because environment stress is most likely to manifest it self as ‘depression’ (this is not a biological entity - its an environmental issue). ADHD medications are increasingly being prescribed to young boys as they enter school at earlier ages and mom and dad do not have as much time to instill proper interrelational skills onto them (this is not a biological entity - yada yada). 

The issue is whether or not we ought to be prescribing people drugs basically in order to medicalize everyday life as a form of coping mechanism. Some people I meet say yes; they just see the drugs as a form of self-enhancement. Other people say no for various reasons, such as the side effects of drugs and the loss of ‘identity’.

I haven't watched the film BTW. All of my material is coming from academic literature. I'm not feeling up to watching anything from the COS 

 08-14-2010, 02:25 PM

xfa****

Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 530

Quote:

Personally I don't say that the pills don't work, it's just that I believe that in most cases depression can be treated without them, using psychotherapy alone. But - modern doctors just love to prescribe you with antidepressants even if there's no need for that.

 08-14-2010, 06:08 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

Their greed has overtaken their conscience. I’m sure they don’t sleep peacefully. 

 08-14-2010, 06:15 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

I have only watched one of their documentaries on TV. So I don’t have a summary to offer you. Even if I did, it would only be from my perspective. I just posted them here for those who may wish to view them. 

 08-14-2010, 07:23 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

Prior to viewing one of their documentaries a few days ago, I knew nothing about the CCHR organization. I did not know that the Church of Scientology was a co-founder. I have since taken a closer look at their “About” page.   

Like any pioneering organization, there are good and bad things that can come along with that.  Although I took one Scientology course decades ago and got a lot out of it, I don’t have an opinion of the organization now except to say this. 

As with many psychiatrists and pharmaceutical scientists, I am sure that many of the people who work in organizations like Scientology do so with the best of intentions.

Ron L. Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, died in 1986. I would hope that the CCHR organization, and perhaps even the Church of Scientology, has evolved, modernized, and developed over the 24 years since then. I do not know whether Scientology is in control of this organization today.

CCHR may or may not be the best flag carrier for this cause, but I agree with what I saw in their documentary. And feel that this material will do more good than harm. At the very least, it offers people another perspective to consider. After all, the documentary isn’t promoting anything bad that I could detect.

You mentioned that the drugs make you feel better. Of course they do! That’s an absolute requirement of their product development. Once they’ve got the feel-good part done, all they have to do is persuade the public through advertising to use it. 

10 lines of cocaine or a 12 pack of beer would make a person feel great too. At least until it leaves their system and they begin to withdrawal. 

Smoking a cigarette makes a person feel great when they haven’t had one for eight hours! Tobacco companies have been marketing one the most addictive drugs on the planet by convincing consumers how good it makes them feel. Tobacco companies once had the perfect product. Unfortunately, it took decades to override their brainwashing and get people to see that tobacco maims and kills them. Yet billions of people (dead and alive) have succumbed to their tactics. 

Pharmaceutical companies are using some of same marketing tactics today. The public and the psychiatric community is being brainwashed through their marketing into believing that the best and only solution to their depression, anxiety, or any one of the other so-called problems on their GROWING list of psychological DISORDERS is to take their drugs! 

I go in more detail about this issue in the article I referred to at the beginning of this thread, “Why Psychotherapy Doesn't Work.” 

Here’s the bottom line to my position. Being fully conscious and learning how to control your own emotional states is best. I agree that in rare cases psychiatric drugs medications may be beneficial. Unfortunately, they are GROSSLY over prescribed to millions of children and adults who do NOT need them! 

If a person "honestly" feels that the medications they are taking are absolutely needed in order for them to function, then who am I to question it. I am no doctor, scientist, or genius, just a person with an opinion and a few ideas. 

I wish you the best.

Last edited by Brad Paul; 08-14-2010 at 08:25 PM.

 08-14-2010, 07:34 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

Who do you suppose is providing the funding for the creation, publication, and distribution of academic literature on psychiatric drugs drugs?

 08-15-2010, 01:05 AM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

The COS?   I think funding would come from multiple sources (including tax payers) and it would depend upon the faculty. Different faculties are going to take a different perspective on psychiatric drugs as my original post indicated. And I don't think that is a bad thing since the issue is complex and can be approached from a biological, sociological and individual basis. I don't think psychiatric drugs are necessarily a bad thing; my biggest complaint with psychiatrists is that they insist that mental disorders are only a biological entity and over look environmental issues. If you do not remove the sociological and individual environmental issues, the depression will return once you go off of the drug, and in some cases, the drug just puts the person into a 'neutral' state (though that is not always the case). This is what I meant by the medicalization of life; too many people are taking drugs on a long term basis when ideally they should only be taken on a short term basis due to the change in environmental issues. 

I take it you are against psychiatric drugs? If that is the case, what alternative solution would you propose for the very real life problems and environmental stress that people face in their everyday lives? I think that is also an issue; people take psychiatric drugs because they see it as a quick fix for a problem they otherwise do not have the resources to deal with.

 08-15-2010, 03:41 AM

elu******

Banned

Join Date: Mar 2010

Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posts: 12,751

Quote:

If they are psychopaths then they don't have a conscience...so, if this true, which I'm sure there would have to be at least one on the board of directors...then I'm quite sure he/she sleeps perfectly well at night.

 08-15-2010, 04:41 AM

xfa****

Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 530

Quote:

Unfortunately, I'm sure they do. These people are usually extremely cynical and they don't really care about their patients. I've seen a few, they could barely be called "doctors".

 08-15-2010, 05:50 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

I have no association with or opinion about The Church of Scientology. Therefore, it is not a factor for me in this discussion. 

Quote:

It is my understanding that the majority of funding for academic research and publication comes from pharmaceutical companies. 

Quote:

I am not in favor of their use. They are GROSSLY over prescribed. They should only be used in extreme situations. Drug companies are brainwashing the public about these products with their commercials. 

I’ve observed family members, friends, and acquaintances who have taken these drugs for decades. I have not seen a single success story among them. 

Quote:

I do not mean to be disrespectful in anyway, but the last part of the above sentence sounds like it may have come from a drug company commercial. It this were true, it would not be your fault. They do a good job of conditioning the public.

Here’s what I propose:

For environmental stress, MOVE! Simple I know. Extremely difficult in certain situations, I am sure. But moving is a better solution than taking psychiatric drugs to “cope.” Taking drugs says that you are surrendering to the unhappy environment or situation. 

For depression, anxiety, panic attacks, you name the “disorder” I suggest:

• Get a comprehensive medical check up.
• Purge any painful “secrets” by sharing them with a close friend ONCE!
• Talk through any serious problems (if needed) with a close friend ONCE!
• Begin a program of self-improvement. 
• Get some inspiring self-improvement books, CD’s, and DVD’s.
• Get some inspiring music that focuses on personal triumphs.
• Learn to control your thoughts and emotions.
• Learn how to meditate.
• Redesign your life and set some new and exciting goals.
• Take a soul-searching vacation alone.
• Create an inspiration board (as I like to call it).
• Begin a daily exercise program.
• Begin eating a 100% healthy diet.
• Begin taking vitamin supplements.
• Stop taking recreational drugs.
• Reduce or eliminate alcohol intake.
• Quit smoking.
• Quit drinking coffee.

These actions can…

• Make you feel great! 
• Lead to abundance!
• Eliminate depression.
• Eliminate panic attacks.
• Stabilize your emotions.
• Reduce stress.
• Reduce anxiety.
• Improve your self-esteem.
• Improve your self-confidence.
• Cause positive changes in your brain chemistry.
• Rebalance your brain chemistry to its natural state.
• Help you live a higher quality life. 

These actions can do many of the same things that the psychiatric drug commercials claim and BETTER! And without the long list of “possible” side effects!

I realize that there are severe cases that require the use of psychiatric drugs and/or psychotherapy. But the majority of us do not need or benefit from these things. 

Quote:

I agree. 

Last edited by Brad Paul; 08-15-2010 at 08:27 PM.

 08-15-2010, 06:28 PM

Jam****

Banned

Join Date: Apr 2009

Posts: 12,690

I wouldn't advocate throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

For instance, prescribing pills for mental issues probably isn't the most effective way to create healing in a patient.

But saying "psychotherapy doesn't work" seems a bit drastic to me. For anybody who takes a look into the study of psychology, you'll see that it's more than just laying on a couch talking to someone or taking a bunch of pills to fix an issue.

 08-15-2010, 06:39 PM

re***

Family Member

Join Date: Sep 2009

Location: earth, everywhere and nowhere

Posts: 9,713

Hey, BP, environmental stress often involves finances. Or the environmental stress often involves a person's relationship with them.

If you'd like to donate the financial resources to help someone move.... PM me and I'll give you my PayPal info, cuz I'd certainly prefer relocating to taking drugs to help me with my environmental stress 

I agree drugs are overprescribed. I also think it would help if psychiatric and psychological support was more readily available. Psychiatrists rarely do psychotherapy, and it can get quite expensive to see both. And in the society at large most people don't want to be around any negativity even if it's a valid working-through process. So social support is there for general interaction benefits, but most friends will only be able to handle so much processing of your stress. Someone can be dealing with so much environmental stress that it impacts their ability to do for themselves, seek support effectively, or negotiate the systems for resource-delivery. (I have an academic background in this stuff.)

While I agree meds are overprescribed, I also think the system needs a massive overhaul to allow for the alternative. People need access to quality support, and the support networks need quality support so they don't get burned out. (Many in that support network started out with ideals about supporting others and got very burned out, but they continue doing what they can. It's not enough sometimes, but that is a systemic issue.)

 08-15-2010, 08:12 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

Will a bus ticket get you there?

Quote:

I agree that friends and family can only handle so much. But since they know your life story so well and have an emotional investment in your wellbeing, they are the best source. But I’d try to limit the discussion to one session for these reasons. So you don’t burn them out and you don’t re-manifest the problem by focusing your energies on it.

Quote:

I agree. The entire system needs to be reinvented, not overhauled.

 08-15-2010, 08:30 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

I am sure that some benefit can sometimes be derived from psychotherapy. I have no personal knowledge or experience that indicates that psychotherapy transforms people’s lives in a positive way. I’ve seen it do more harm than good.

The focus of psychotherapists seems to be more on diagnostics than solutions. Their job, if you consider the growing list of so-called “disorders,” appears to be on identifying psychological problems in their patients and all the people in the patient’s life. It’s the only approach they know because that is the antiquated way in which they are taught in universities.

How much good can come out of rehashing all the unpleasant memories and problems in a person’s life? Focusing on problems in the past, or the present, only magnifies, expands, and entrenches them.

I believe that most psychotherapists have the best of intentions. And many of them probably do some good for their patients from time to time. I just do not see much value coming from the amount of money that is spent for their services. There has to better ways to get happy. 

I went to a couple of sessions with psychologist. I got absolutely nothing out of it. Interestingly, I’ve gotten more from personal development experts, innovative psychologists like Dr. Wayne Dyer, and books like “The Secret” than I ever did from a session with a psychologist.

It’s unfortunate that psychotherapists don’t take advantage of a broader range of tools. Their licensing and academic indoctrinations probably prevent this. It’s like they are stuck with the notion that talk-therapy, diagnosis, and psychiatric drugs are the only way. 

I have a couple of friends who work in the psychology field and they are completely opposed to any of the concepts of self-improvement or the New Thought movement. They see the ideas on websites like mine as psychological poison. Why? Because is their methods take the opposite approach.

It wasn’t too long ago that lobotomy and shock treatment were seen as cures for mental “disorders!” Just like Jack Nichol’s character in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.” (I can see from your avatar that you’re a JN fan.) Had I been around back then, I probably would have been rushed to a mental hospital in a straightjacket and forced to have a lobotomy for the things I’ve written in this thread. 

 08-15-2010, 08:32 PM

sec*********

Retired

Join Date: Mar 2010

Location: A Greyhound Station where I set my thoughts to far off destinations...

Posts: 4,380

The first thing that popped into my head when I read the title of this thread was, "Scientology". They like to paint psychiatry in an us vs. Big Evil Baddie Psychiatrists, sort of way. I've even heard them suggest they were secretly Nazis, so I'd be wary of that documentary--which looks like it's funded by the church.

That said, my personal opinion is that these drugs are next to useless, physically harmful, and cover up issue that can be dealt with differently. I've had anti-depressants prescribed to me in the past, and after one dose I decided not to take them again. They made me feel kind of paranoid, and physically awful--my liver actually hurt. (I'm no longer depressed, btw, and med-free)

I have a friend with Asberger's. He's a sweet guy off his meds, but he runs around, talks about power rangers more than you'd ever think anyone would, and stares at others body parts. But he's him and he's nice. Unfortunately however that's not good enough for his parents. When he's drugged up, he doesn't act socially clueless, he gets good grades. But he's snappy and obviously miserable.

I also have a friend who's manic-depressive. This situation's a little harder because when she's off her meds she'll do rash things like steal her parents car. But when she's on them, she has this blank look on her face, like she's not really even in her body. They also take away her appetite, and she's gotten dangerously underweight.

 08-15-2010, 08:44 PM

re***

Family Member

Join Date: Sep 2009

Location: earth, everywhere and nowhere

Posts: 9,713

Wow, Brad, that was a fun response (the bus ticket question). I'm trying to minimize upheaval while my system is under stress, so technically yes that would work, but practically I'm still trying to prove to myself it won't come to that. Your question also led to some important insights for me, and I appreciate that very much.

Quote:

I see the validity to this. Depending on where someone is at with their growth, and what programs they are still working with, they may not be in a place to act effectively enough to keep this limited to a single session. 

It's funny, we're a social species, and so most of us grow up conditioned to reach out, but ultimately it's still more effective to handle our business. Even so, some folks have programs that can interfere with that, and self-help does work, but then if someone needs to address 'problems in living' or if they have programs that get in the way of acting for themselves, I'm not sure it's helpful to limit access to services and support. In the average person that can be fuel to act in their best interest. In some people, that can be fuel for a mental breakdown.

It all depends on the severity of their experience, the programs they run, and some other factors. Self-reliance and self-sufficiency is certainly the ideal. In theory traditional therapy is about holding the space for a person to work on themselves (depending on the model being used), and the real work doesn't begin until there is rapport (which can get costly), but I do think there is a place for such things in the culture. Granted, many people's concerns can be solved in other ways, but some people really do benefit the most from therapy with a good fitting professional. 

But traditional mental health approaches are certainly not perfect, they can be a bit too rigid at times, and there's cultural bias as well. It would be nice if there was an open dialogue between the traditional "establishment" helpers and the PD/complementary-and-alternative helpers.

 08-15-2010, 08:59 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

Well done! Good points to consider. 

 08-15-2010, 09:03 PM

bra*****

Member

Join Date: Dec 2009

Location: The Dark Side of The Moon

Posts: 34

Thanks to this book:

Amazon.com: The Depression Cure: The 6-Step Program to Beat Depression without Drugs by Stephen S. Ilardi PhD

I learned several things about prescription drugs in addition to curing my depression:

Certain forms of cognitive-behavioral therapy have been statistically proven to be far more effective than anti-depressant drugs. Unfortunately, most psychiatrists appear to be unaware of this fact.

In addition, studies show that many native hunter-gatherer societies have a literally 0 % occurrence rate of depression. Obviously, this means that there is something wrong with our lifestyles. Instead of counseling their patients on ways to change their lifestyles, they prescribe expensive, ineffective drugs.

It's really getting to the point where the whole concept of a "mental health professional" is becoming outdated. Honestly, good research skills, Google, and Amazon are enough to expose the flaws in the most common forms of treatment.

 08-15-2010, 10:04 PM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

Why would pharmaceutical companies provide sociology departments funding so that professors can question the validity of their concepts? If you are suggesting that all academic research supports pharmaceutical companies, you need to start reading that academic research in all of its diversity. 

Quote:

As Rei pointed out, a lot of your ideas involve finances and you are assuming that everyone has enough finances to solve their problems. Not everyone can afford to be a stay-at-home mother/father. Not everyone can afford to go to a trained psychologist. Not everyone can afford to have regular checkups from a doctor (assuming medical care is privatized). Not everyone can afford a vacation. Not everyone can afford to just get up from an abusive relationship and start a new life elsewhere especially if they have children (and yes the perception of poverty plays a factor in sustaining abusive relationships; claiming they can just get up and live in a car or something if it is that bad blatantly overlooks how people behave in real life). 

The populations that are most likely to be diagnosed with depression are the people who face the move environmental stress and cannot simply walk away from it. Offer us some feasible solutions for a lower-middle class women who has to work full time to meet expenses, deal with any issues from work, struggle to make day care expenses, pick up the kids from day care, come home clean up and cook dinner, take care of her kids (and husband), deal with any social obligations etc. I’m sure there are some solutions and I’m not advocating meds. My point is that people turn to meds because they do not perceive to have any other resources available to them to deal with environmental stress. 

I don’t think people are stupid. I also don’t think people are brainwashed by psychiatry (your implicit assumption is that everyone passively absorbs on T.V without challenging it, which quite frankly, is rather insulting). People rationally consider their environmental situations, the resources they have available to them and make decisions accordingly. If you are a ‘policy maker’ and you wanted to decrease the amount of meds used, you have to intervene into that equation and provide an alternative choice that rationally makes sense. There are solutions for poverty; the state could provide universal health care and education, parents can receive subsidies for day care, society could put more pressure on men to play an active role in the ‘double shift’, etc etc. 

Health Canada and the FDA could require more stringent testing on newly patented drugs and require drug companies to show that their drug is more effective than the leading drug on the market rather than a placebo. That way, doctors and patients rely upon older, better drugs that are better understood in terms of side effects and do not fall into the erroneous thinking of 'if its new, it must be better!'. 

Quote:

They still use lobotomies and shock treatments in rare occasions.

 08-15-2010, 10:12 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Had I known that the documentaries (and the CCHR) were associated with The Church of Scientology, I probably would not have posted them in this forum. Their reputation is too unstable.

Their documentaries, however, do an outstanding job in presenting the concerns that many of us have expressed. And the facts they highlight agree with what I’ve read and heard. The one that I watched did not include anything about the COS.

Their value is in their ability to explain several disturbing issues about psychiatry, the drugs they prescribe, and the role of pharmaceutical companies. I am glad someone had the courage to create documentaries like these. 

Reinvention is needed in this field. Renovation is not enough.

 08-15-2010, 11:12 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

 08-15-2010, 11:15 PM

sec*********

Retired

Join Date: Mar 2010

Location: A Greyhound Station where I set my thoughts to far off destinations...

Posts: 4,380

Quote:

Only in cases of chronic excess iron, in which case it *is* an effective treatment. I'm not sure if there are safer alternatives, but the way it is done in this context has a lot of precautions built in.

 08-15-2010, 11:26 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

Interesting. 

I am of course talking about performing bloodletting as a cure for a host of mental and physical illnesses.

 08-15-2010, 11:28 PM

sec*********

Retired

Join Date: Mar 2010

Location: A Greyhound Station where I set my thoughts to far off destinations...

Posts: 4,380

Quote:

Yep, just thought I'd mention it anyway. 

 08-15-2010, 11:30 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

Glad you did.

 08-16-2010, 12:30 AM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

What about the opportunity costs associated with foregoing work? What if young children are involved? Is it possible to bring the kids along for a relaxing vacation or would other arrangements have to be made? How much money would those arrangements cost? How much for gasoline? What if the person is a single parent working two part time jobs and cannot accommodate the time off between her two employers?

I don't have anything against your ideas; some of them sound very reasonable. But some of them sound decontextualized from real life. You don't just wake up and say, 'I think I'll take a vacation'. You don't just wake up and say, 'I think I'll redesign my life'. Reprogramming the way you think can do wonders, but you can't just ignore your lived reality. Etc. 

Quote:

Quote:

Most of the people I speak to about psychiatric medications already know the stuff we have brought up in this thread. They know the side effects and the potential for addiction. They know that meds do not change the environment. They know that GPS are not always qualified to prescribe medications. They know that there is controversy over the validity of psychiatric concepts (such as clinical depression). People are not stupid and they are not brainwashed as you suggest. They weigh their circumstances and the resources available to them and make decisions accordingly. Some people try psychiatric meds for awhile and toss them out because they didn't like the experience (this happened to me). But others use the meds because they do work and they provide a relief towards an environmental situation that they otherwise cannot deal with. 

So long as drugs are readily accessible, people will use them to deal with their circumstances. If you want to interrupt that equation, logic would state that you have to give them the resources to effectively deal with their environment without having to resort to medication. One could also change Health Canada and the FDA in order to protect the consumer and to empower him/her so that they can make informed decisions. I already suggested one way of doing this.

And just for clarification, I'm approaching this topic from a realist perspective not a moralist perspective. I'm interested in how people actually behave. Not in how the 'ought' to behave in the 'ideal' circumstances.

 08-16-2010, 01:39 AM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

My suggestions were offered as a menu of options not a prescription.

Quote:

A vacation is not a requirement. 

Quote:

Sure you can. You could start with just the design (plan).

Quote:

The brainwashing that I am talking about are the perceptions that psychiatric drugs are a superior choice for relieving a host of so-called “disorders.” The naming and promotion of “disorders” is also part of the brainwashing. What comes first and by whom? The naming of the disorder or the drug? It actually happens both ways.

Quote:

Who makes them so accessible, available, and known? The pharmaceutical companies. Comes down to choice.

Quote:

What are they waiting for?

Quote:

You offered some sound suggestions. 

***

I’ve enjoyed this exchange with you. You brought up some good points. I wish you all the best. 

Last edited by Brad Paul; 08-16-2010 at 01:41 AM.

 08-16-2010, 03:39 AM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

But do you have the financial and emotional resources to carry out that plan? Depending upon the circumstances, the financial and emotional investment required to eliminate environmental stress can be huge. Its not as simple as just coming up with a plan. 

Quote:

Irregardless of whether or not these conceptual frameworks or ‘disorders’ refer to something ‘real’, you cannot overlook the fact that they provide a solution to very real situations involving environment stress. This is the point of all of my posts. Psychiatry provides people with a solution for their environmental problems. If you want to subvert psychiatry, you have to provide better solutions. Do you remember the example I brought up about ADHD medication being prescribed to younger and younger boys in order to handle stressful school situations and poor interrelation skills? People know that the ‘validity’ of ADHD is in dispute; whether or not they decide to take the drugs depends upon the resources they have accessible to them. For example, this is just hunch, but I’m willing to bet that a family with a stay-at-home ‘mom’ or ‘dad’ is far less likely to accept drugs than a family where both parents work. Simply because the stay-at-home ‘mom’ or ‘dad’ has more time to foster better interrelational skills in their child. 

Quote:

Precisely and pharmaceutical companies have made an abundance off of these drugs because people want them. You can’t blame pharmaceutical companies for providing a solution to a problem. If you want to provide people better solutions than psychiatric drugs, you have to subvert the demand for them by providing realistic and accessible alternatives. The issue doesn’t boil down to ‘Oh people are just stupid and brainwashed. They want whatever Big Pharm tells them to want’. This is grossly reducing the complexity of the issue. 

Having said that, I’m all for imposing stricter regulation on pharmaceutical companies in Health Canada and the FDA. And I don’t know why Health Canada and the FDA does not implement tougher regulations. If anything, they have made it easier for drug companies to receive patents. Health Canada has recently stream lined their process of approving drugs and cut the processing time by over 50% if I remember correctly. Part of the problem is that the general public does not know how these institutions work and they fall outside of political discourse. I'm also in favor of alternatives to psychiatric drugs; I've listed some possibilities in previous posts.

There are ‘natural’ remedies for ‘mental disorders’ as well, but I don’t know much about them and have not read any academic reports on how well they work or what sort of side effects they may potentially have. I believe they are deregulated, however.

Quote:

Yes, thank you for the exchange 

 08-16-2010, 03:45 AM

sec*********

Retired

Join Date: Mar 2010

Location: A Greyhound Station where I set my thoughts to far off destinations...

Posts: 4,380

Quote:

I've been thinking lately on how this would apply to illegal drugs as well. I know several people (including my brother as well as my ex-boyfriend) who self medicate with weed or booze or what ever they can grab from their grandparents medicine cabinet for this very reason.

Last edited by secrets0stolen; 08-16-2010 at 03:50 AM.

 08-16-2010, 03:49 AM

sec*********

Retired

Join Date: Mar 2010

Location: A Greyhound Station where I set my thoughts to far off destinations...

Posts: 4,380

Quote:

I've also tried a few of these natural remedies--herbal extracts from the health food store-- when doctors wanted me on anti-depressants. In my experience they're just weaker versions of the same stuff.

Last edited by secrets0stolen; 08-16-2010 at 04:05 AM.

 08-16-2010, 03:53 AM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

Yes; that is definitely an issue. One that I am more familiar with in lower socioeconomic and homeless populations more so than ‘middle classes’ (though I’m sure middle class people also self-medicate). Crystal-meth is currently the ‘in drug’ on Edmonton streets and homeless youth will report taking it as a coping mechanism to deal with hunger pangs and cold temperatures. It is also a way to keep awake because they perceive the chances of bodily threat (physical assault or sexual assault) to be very high on the streets. And the chances of physical assault and sexual assault are higher than the national average. 

So I sort of get annoyed when other people ‘beat up on’ prostitutes and homeless people for spending their money on addictions. In a way they have a point. Feeding their addictions isn’t going to change anything and stopping the addiction is the first step off the streets. But it isn’t as if they cho0se to self-medicate on crystal meth for the sole fun of it. There is context to their lives that people routinely overlook.

 08-16-2010, 04:04 AM

sec*********

Retired

Join Date: Mar 2010

Location: A Greyhound Station where I set my thoughts to far off destinations...

Posts: 4,380

Quote:

Yeah, I get kind of peeved when people judge those in really rough circumstances. I heard that sort of bull crap at my old high school. Less extreme example, but many groups would judge the low-income kids (often from abusive situations that you wouldn't know about if you didn't know them, but I knew many kids in that spot) for being "pot heads". Often, the rich kids were the ones peddling the Vicodin and weed anyway, because they had a lot of money to get their hands on it in the first place. Adults didn't suspect them either, because they were wearing polo shirts and khakis.

For the record I don't think illegal drugs are inherently evil either, but often they end up making a bad situation unintentionally worse. But it's hard to judge those who turn to them for the reasons above.

Last edited by secrets0stolen; 08-16-2010 at 04:08 AM.

 08-16-2010, 04:46 AM

fel**********

Senior Member

Join Date: Jul 2010

Posts: 250

Quote:

It is interesting to note that in the livestock industry when animals develop behavior 'disorders', .. they are given specific vitamin/mineral supplements because the industry knows they work. .... Of course it's also significant to note that the supplements are a whole lot cheaper than pharmaceutical drugs. 
.... So one might ask, .. if the nutrients work with animals, ... why aren't they prescribed for people?
... Could it have anything to do with the fact that synthetic drugs return such a huge profit and they can be patented, .. so the market can be owned and controlled. 

Orthomolecular Medicine has been around for years (the treatment of specific diseases via specific micro nutrients), ... but the general public is for the most part completely ignorant about it. This IMO is largely because the culture has become indoctrinated to the pharmaceutical model. 

The bottom line is, ... the reason why medicine is dominated by the pharmaceutical model is the same reason why we've been unnecessarily driving cars with fossil fuel engines for the past hundred years. ... It's all about the money.

There's a small company in Canada that's been very successfully providing thousands who suffer from the likes of schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder and clinical depression etc, .. with an effective micro-nutrient solution that in many cases replaces the need for psych. meds. .... It works, .. and without all the negative side effects associated with drugs and with the peer review scientific research to back it up.

 08-16-2010, 05:40 AM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

Yah, I was thinking of your previous posts when I brought up natural medications. What you say is possible; there has certainly been cases in the past where certain ‘natural’ medications have been pushed out of the lime light in order to privilege ‘doctors’, such as ‘natural’ inducements for abortion vs. ‘the vacuum’ or the practices of midwives that were pushed aside by doctors. But like I said, I haven’t researched much about the issue and I think ‘natural’ remedies are deregulated, which means there is no one overseeing what goes on the market. I’ll check into this academic literature you brought up. Do you happen to have any reports on hand? That way I can read it and lift key words to do my own search for further material. I have access to prominent medical databases so that isn’t an issue.

 08-16-2010, 08:31 AM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

Never mind. I found the articles on the site you provided. Thanks 

 08-16-2010, 11:46 AM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

You have to take the first step in order to get to where you want to go. Not everything has to be done in the same day, week, month, or even year!

Quote:

Really? Who do you think creates the need? Who do you think makes the drugs known and desirable? Pharmaceutical companies! 

Pharmaceutical companies are not necessarily being dishonest, although they may be. Or at least they may have convinced themselves that everything they do is noble. They are driven by profits. In order to produce maximum profits on a continual basis they create both demand and need. 

I was once a corporate soldier for many years. I was responsible for marketing (pushing and pulling) over $400 million dollars annually in products that I didn’t see as always being needed by our wholesale customers or the public. Yet there were times when I was able to convince myself that I was being true to my principles. Usually, these deliberations were infiltrated by images of my paycheck, house, condo, expense account, and company cars. (That plural in cars is not a typo.) 

I meticulously maintained my principles in all other areas except sales. If I did not generate sales and achieve corporate objectives, I would be fired. I was like a lightworker in darkworker clothing. I actually spend a lot of my time during the endless number of meetings that I had to attend looking out the window and dreaming about doing other work. Eventually I got there.

It took me some time to mentally breakaway from the indoctrination I received through intense cultural pressures while I worked there. Today, I am thrilled that I am not a part of it. And I sleep like a baby at night whereas before when I worked as suit I did not. 

Quote:

You’ve associated brainwashing with people being stupid several times as though that is what I am implying. I am NOT. Nowhere have I used this word or any like it. The kind of brainwashing that I am talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with intelligence. 

There was a period, which lasted for decades, when the overwhelming majority of the world population believed that tobacco did NOT cause cancer and that it was NOT addictive. How do you suppose this happen? How do you suppose it continued even while there was scientific evidence available that proved otherwise? 

It happened with hundreds of millions of dollars in propaganda (brainwashing) in numerous forms to countless entities by the tobacco companies. In terms of marketing, it was one of the most successful campaigns in history. 

Have you seen the 1999 movie with Russell Crowe about the tobacco industry called, “The Insider?” It does an excellent job of explaining what happened. And the COS and the CCHR had no involvement. 

Imagine. You’ve got a product this is highly addictive, it maims and kills people, and you are able to convince the government and the public to allow you to continue to sell and promote it LEGALLY! 

I am not exactly sure about the full extent of what is going on with pharmaceutical companies or the psychiatric and psychological communities. But I do question the motives and ethics of the pharmaceutical companies. 

I understand that there are rare cases when psychiatric drugs are needed in order to fix a malfunctioning brain or in cases of extreme emotional trauma. But to use these drugs when times are hard, your situation is difficult, or you’re just unhappy is not a good choice. 

The same goes for psychotherapy. It has its place in the right situations. Unfortunately, neither has proven to create solid transformative results as far as I know. 

I read on the CNN Health website that antidepressants are the most prescribed drug in the US. That certainly tells a story.

Mass application of their drugs, in other words a drug for every problem and person, is not the answer. The human body does a pretty incredible job on its own if it is feed, exercised, and treated well. And living in a healthy environment, as you have pointed out.

***

It’s been real. 

Last edited by Brad Paul; 08-16-2010 at 06:41 PM.

 08-16-2010, 02:00 PM

fel*********

Senior Member

Join Date: Jul 2010

Posts: 250

Quote:

I just wanted to add that I have known certain individual cases where serious psychiatric illness was involved and a very skilled practitioner of traditional Chinese medicine, via a series of acupuncture treatments and in some cases in combination with Chinese herbology, ...was able to alleviate symptoms of mental illness. .... Years ago, I very successfully used traditional Chinese medicine to help me move through a very painful period of my life.

I also know of a school of body-therapy which some time back in the 80's brought a group of skilled practitioners into a psyche hospital in California. They were physically working individually on patients body's to clear aberrations (stored trauma's, etc), from the soma of the body. 
Their work over time was so successful that many patients were becoming free from the need for medication. ... What happened was that the hospital administration stopped the work from continuing. ... One could only assume that they were too threatened by the radical change in the status quo.
..... The body-therapy involved a combination of 'Rolphing', 'Trager', and energy work.

 08-16-2010, 02:27 PM

st3****

Family Member

Join Date: Oct 2008

Posts: 3,829

I used to take Concerta for my supposed ADD symptoms until about 6 months ago. I had a huge two week withdrawal phase (not something like "I NEED IT!!"  ) which I associated with forgetting to take my pills in the morning. Concerta is a psycho-stimulant, so without the pills, I was tired and I couldn't focus. So it's no wonder I thought I actually thought I had ADD because the withdrawal effects mimicked the symptoms. After the withdrawal, I was told I am more friendly and sociable instead of withdrawn and overly stressed! 

Why was I put under the pills? Because I was almost uncontrollable as a child. I'm sure there were other ways to raise me to make my behavior go away. The several medications I was under worked fine for the issue, so I can't say that medication does nothing. However, the side effects and costs of the medication make it an inefficient way of dealing with things sometimes. 

There are other things pills deal with other than mind altering, too.

 08-16-2010, 02:34 PM

JS***

Family Member

Join Date: Aug 2007

Posts: 1,133

Citizens Committee for Human Rights is a Scientology-founded organization.

There are some serious problems with psychiatry and psycho-pharmacology, but I personally consider the Church of Scientology to be the more sinister, manipulative and mercenary.

Quote:

 08-16-2010, 07:30 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

The CCHR was actually co-founded by The Church of Scientology and Professor of Psychiatry Emeritus Dr. Thomas Szasz in 1969.

I agree, in part, with what you and others have said about the COS. Their reputation is unstable. Had I known that the documentaries (and the CCHR) were associated with them, I would not have posted links to them in this forum. They are too controversial to use as reference material, which is a shame because I thought their documentary was outstanding!

The documentary that I watched did an excellent job of describing some important issues about psychiatric drugs and psychiatry that I’ve been thinking about for years. The facts they presented agree with what I’ve read, heard, and found in my own research. And there wasn’t anything in it about the COS.

 08-16-2010, 10:09 PM

old*********

Senior Member

Join Date: Jul 2010

Posts: 180

I was in the Church of Scientology from 1970 to 1972. One of my friends was thrown out onto the sidewalk when he was having a psychotic episode. Scientology can't handle psychotic episodes or major mental illness conditions.

 08-16-2010, 10:50 PM

Zep******

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 4,885

Quote:

So you are saying 'brain washing' leads people to think that psychiatric drugs are 'good' and 'noble'? But what convinces you that people actually think that way? I've suggested several times already that people generally know the potential consequences of psychiatric drugs. They make the decision to take the drug based on the available resources they have to deal with their environment. They see psychiatric drugs as one possible solution. It has nothing to do with being 'noble' and 'good'. People know that drugs companies are in it for the money. 

Ultimately, it comes down to the patient to use psychiatric drugs appropriately because the doctor can't change his/her environment on his/her behalf. Whether or not they remain on the drug for significant periods of time depends on how equipped they are (financially and emotionally) to deal with the environment. The fact that some people do remain on drugs for a very long doesn't attest to brainwashing (as you define it) IMO. It attests to a difficult environment. 

Comparing psychiatric drugs to the tobacco industry of the past is a bad comparison IMO. The difference is that people generally have access to psychiatric information that puts things into proper perspective if they so choose to find that information (which isn't really that hard).

 08-18-2010, 01:38 AM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

Quote:

We have made our points repeatedly. It looks like we are not going to find any common ground.

 08-18-2010, 05:37 AM

xfa****

Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 530

Quote:

I doubt they're unaware...it's just with prescribing drugs you can make so much more money!

 08-18-2010, 05:38 AM

xfa****

Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 530

Quote:

Doesn't mean they can't express valid concerns about modern psychiatry.

 08-18-2010, 04:12 PM

Brad Paul

Member

Join Date: Jan 2010

Posts: 30

The Bottom-line

This morning I ran across the same documentary on TV (but on a different station) that I referred to at the top of this thread. I found it to be just as interesting and informative as I did before. I agree with it completely.

The documentary did not persuade me to think a certain way. It only supported what I already believed.

Apparently, this is a new documentary as I noticed it had a 2010 copyright. I also noticed in the credits that the sources for the research information and interviews with psychiatrists, professors, politicians, and others came from television/cable networks and universities. I did not see any references to research or interviews by the COS or their representatives.

I am not an advocate of the COS. I am neither for nor against them. I wish some highly respected individual or organization had the courage to produce and broadcast a documentary like this at their own expense and ask for nothing at the end of it. Then maybe more people would be receptive to it. But since no one else has, as far as I know, the CCHR documentary serves the purpose for now and it does so very well.

Last edited by Brad Paul; 08-18-2010 at 08:57 PM.