It's Time To End Psychiatry

[ArjanD]

Psychiatry has no future. Yes, it is clear: they don't have evidence for a biological cause for problems with the human mind. And they have been promising results for almost an age now...

 

But come on people: think about it a bit more clearly. How can the physical be the source for itself? The human mind is more then a product of the biochemical processes in the brain.

 

If you have a problem with your brain, you see a neurologist. If you have problems with your mind, you need an expert on that field: a psychotherapist.

 

Psychiatrists are scammers, this can't be denied if you know the facts.

 

The maximum psychiatry can offer us as humanity is supressing problems and that will only lead to more and more supressed problems.

 

Psychiatry has no future to offer us. In many ways psychiatry behaves like a parasite, always wanting to grow bigger without caring for the effects.

 

We need to understand what life is all about and what is required to stay alive in the future.

 

Scientific studies show again and again that psychiatry is doing more harm then good and that alternatives (such as for example Soteria psychotherapy) can make up to 90% of all people with complex psychological problems (labeled with schizophrenia/psychosis) recover well while psychiatric treatment reduces the chance to recover. This is hard fact.

 

There is more then what we can see and measure. Did you know there is no athlete trainer education in The Netherlands? It is because to be able to guide athletes you need 'experience' (which includes beyond what you can measure). Every athlete is unique and requires his own unique way to get results. Science can offer limited help in this area.

 

It is exactly so with the human mind. The human mind has endless possibilities because possibilities give rise to more possibilities.

 

Psychiatry is fraud and needs to be put to an end.

 

See also: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427381.300-psychiatrys-civil-war.html

Edited December 25, 2009 by ArjanD

[toastywombel]

This is completely over the top and seems like spam.

[ArjanD]

Well, it is not meant as spam and I would like you to explain to me why you disagree.

[Pantaz]

Psychiatrists are scammers, this can't be denied if you know the facts.

What facts are those?

 

We need to understand what life is all about and what is required to stay alive in the future.

What has this to do with psychiatry?

 

Scientific studies show again and again that psychiatry is doing more harm then good and that alternatives (such as for example Soteria psychotherapy) can make up to 90% of all people with complex psychologica problems (labeled with schizophrenia/psychosis) recover well while psychiatric treatment reduces the chance to recover. This is hard fact.

Citations required.

 

Did you know there is no athlete trainer education in The Netherlands? It is because to be able to guide athletes you need 'experience' (which includes beyond what you can measure). Every athlete is unique and requires his own unique way to get results. Science can offer limited help in this area.

If you want to talk about athletic training, start a different thread.

[insane_alien]

why are there so many anti-psychiatry threads of late?

 

and its not fraud. psychiatry does help many many people. and it is dealing with an incredibly complex system with many subtle effects as well as larger ones. its essentially like tasking a toddler to repair the space shuttle. the fact that we have a non-zero success rate on this is quite frankly astounding. its much better than just leaving the crazies to it.

 

now, this lack of knowledge we have is not for lack of trying. many people are working on it and as we learn more about the mind it will improve the success rate and inevitably lead to a few revolutions of the field where old ideas are discovered to be wrong and need changing. we'll probably even go down the wrong road many times and not notice until later. but as any science and application of science will do, it will eventually realise the mistakes and change.

 

and psychiatrists will not make a patient supress a problem, they will find way to help the patient deal with the problem.

 

psychotherapy is also not the great miracle worker you seem to think about, the success rate is far from 90%.

[ArjanD]

What facts are those?

 

I have been investigating psychiatry for almost 4 years now and reported about it on my website (I don't know if it is allowed to post a link to your own website on this forum, I could send it by pm, it is in Dutch).

 

The amount of 'facts' that prove psychiatry is a false science, are overwhelming.

 

Just to name a fact:

 

- antidepressants are addictive and cause a rise in suicidal behaviour (and also cause murder). It will also make people anti-social.

 

A few sources for this claim. Dr. Helen Fisher at TED talks:

 

 

She sais that antidepressasnts block the ability to love people.

 

And for example this recent study, that shows TCA antidepressants cause a tenfold increase in suicidal thoughts and behaviour (SSRI double the risk)

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091014193213.htm

 

I am not part of scientology or CCHR, I am neutral. I also do not have a professional link with psychiatry.

 

What has this to do with psychiatry?

 

Well, the human mind and life = one.

 

The mind is a direct exponent of what has brought us humans into existence. This can be understood by basic logic. For as the measureable can't be the source of itself.

 

"You can't see the seeing while you see". With this thinking trick you can understand why the human mind is more than what we can possibily measure.

 

But of course, none of this really matters. The facts show that psychiatry is doing more harm then good, and that humane and respectful alternatives such as psychotherapy or CBT are far more effective, especially in the long run:

 

http://psychminded.co.uk/news/news2009/nov09/Eight-out-of-10-people-recover-after-CBT003.htm

 

 

If you want to talk about athletic training, start a different thread.

 

Don't you understand the relation between getting results as an athlete, or getting results in life?

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Here is one more source to show antidepressants effectiveness is a big lie:

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505564

 

This is the reality. It isn't scientology or something like that. These are honest scientists raising the alarm.

 

It needs to be taken seriously.

 

And in my position I have an overview on the exact same situation in practically every facet of psychiatry.

Edited December 25, 2009 by ArjanD
Consecutive posts merged.

[D H]

Psychiatry has no future. Yes, it is clear: they don't have evidence for a biological cause for problems with the human mind.

Nonsense.

 

 

Scientific studies show again and again that psychiatry is doing more harm then good and that alternatives (such as for example Soteria psychotherapy) can make up to 90% of all people with complex psychological problems (labeled with schizophrenia/psychosis) recover well while psychiatric treatment reduces the chance to recover. This is hard fact.

 

 

Did you know there is no athlete trainer education in The Netherlands?

Did you know that (a) this is a non sequitur, and (b) totally false?

The US national soccer team has made marked improvements over the last two decades, and this is in part because the US has adapted a lot from the Netherlands (the Ajax model) and Brazil (total futbol).

 

It didn't take too long to find sports science researchers in colleges in the Netherlands. Here are a couple:

http://www.emgo.nl/personal_pages/profile/index.asp?id=214&page=1

http://www.m3-research.nl/people/vanloon.html

[ArjanD]

why are there so many anti-psychiatry threads of late?

 

and its not fraud. psychiatry does help many many people.

 

Could you name something? (and btw: anti-psychiatry is a flow within psychiatry with anti-psychiatrists, this topic is just critical on psychiatry).

 

now, this lack of knowledge we have is not for lack of trying. many people are working on it and as we learn more about the mind it will improve the success rate and inevitably lead to a few revolutions of the field where old ideas are discovered to be wrong and need changing.

 

Please tell me then, what is psychiatry trying to achieve? Cure an immeasurable and hypothetical brain disorder? Is that what you are talking about?

 

Because as far as I know psychiatrists are prescribing drugs solely based on wet finger work and not a single medical test exists to prove any brain disorder that would supposedly be treated with the drugs.

 

How can you explain that?

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Did you know that (a) this is a non sequitur, and (b) totally false?

The US national soccer team has made marked improvements over the last two decades, and this is in part because the US has adapted a lot from the Netherlands (the Ajax model) and Brazil (total futbol).

 

It didn't take too long to find sports science researchers in colleges in the Netherlands. Here are a couple:

http://www.emgo.nl/personal_pages/profile/index.asp?id=214&page=1

http://www.m3-research.nl/people/vanloon.html

 

Sure, but tactics isn't the same as individually training people to become a winner.

 

There may be 1 million ways to get arround a problem. Athletes are facing new problems every day. Those problems can't be predicted. Science is a valuable tool. But it is not more then that. For guiding people to become a winner it takes experience for the larger part.

 

 

It is the exact same thing with the human mind.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Scientific studies show again and again that psychiatry is doing more harm then good and that alternatives (such as for example Soteria psychotherapy) can make up to 90% of all people with complex psychological problems (labeled with schizophrenia/psychosis) recover well while psychiatric treatment reduces the chance to recover. This is hard fact.

 

Here are my sources for the claim that:

 

a) psychiatry does more harm then good

b) there are humane alternatives that can get 90%+ people to recover well (at far lower costs)

 

First there is a study published in 2007:

 

 

Lange termijn resultaten schizofrenie, bron: Martin Harrow and Thomas Jobe. “Factors involved in Outcome and Recovery in Schizophrenia Patients Not on Antipsychotic Medications: A 15-year Multifollow-up Study. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 195 (2007):406-414.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17502806

 

This study showed that people who have complex psychological problems that are labeled with psychosis (schizophrenia) are far better off with no treatment at all, compared to the standard psychiatric treatment combination of antipsychotics and psychiatric therapy.

 

This is also backed by a study by scientific journalist Robert Whitaker who wrote the best seller on psychiatry Mad in America.

 

http://www.madinamerica.com/Mad%20In%20America/Documents_files/50-yearrecord.pdf

 

Antipsychotics block dopamine D2 receptors in the brain and in response the brain makes the receptors more sensitive which will cause people to become chronically ill. Antipsychotics also cause damage in the brain that is also associated with a worsening of the symptoms in the long term.

 

So it is proven that solely looking at the problems that psychiatry is making the problems worse and people are better off with nothing at all, and 40% grows over it naturally in 2-4 years.

 

This is also backed by a study by the World Health Organisation in 1992:

 

Living in a developed country is a “strong predictor” that a person newly diagnosed with schizophrenia will never fully recover.

~ World Health Organization, 1992

 

When the World Health Organization compared outcomes for schizophrenia patients in rich countries to those in poor countries, it determined that outcomes were much, much better in the poor countries. In the poor countries, the WHO reported, only 16% of patients were regularly maintained on antipsychotic drugs.

 

However, next to this, antipsychotics cause people to die prematurely and lose on average 30+ years from their life. It will cause an horrible death in which your hairs fall out and you can't stand on your legs anymore when you are 30-40 years old.

 

Ignored: the mentally ill killed by drugs that are meant to help them

 

Daniel Galvin died of a heart attack in August. He was six stone overweight and had high blood pressure; his hair was falling out and he was incapacitated by trembling legs. He was 29.

 

Daniel's family believe his symptoms, and his untimely death, were caused by side effects from the powerful psychiatric drugs he had been taking for 14 years.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/ignored-the-mentally-ill-killed-by-drugs-that-are-meant-to-help-them-951821.html

 

But the reality is even worse. A recent study that was published in The Lancet showed that the newest antipsychotics are the most deadly, and even more shocking: the top 3 best selling antipsychotics (Seroquel, Risperdal and Zyprexa) are matching the top 3 deadliest antipsychotics.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE56C15Z20090713

 

I know that it is the psychiatrist who wants this effect. Because a company always serves a demand. A company will learn soon enaufh what kind of drugs it should make to make the most sales. And they think: "if you don't do it (take this billion dollar extra) someone else will"

 

So here are my sources to proof that psychiatry is 100% sertain doing a lot more harm then good in the psychosis/schizoprenia facet of psychiatry.

 

But there are alternatives. I already mentioned Soteria psychotherapy. Maybe you could read into that, I think it is the best example of an alternative that is backed by scientific evidence:

 

Soteria, designed as a drugfree treatment environment, was as successful as anti-psychotic drug treatment in reducing psychotic symptoms in 6 weeks.

 

Taken as a body of scientific evidence, it is clear that alternatives to acute psychiatric hospitalization are as, or more, effective than traditional hospital care in short-term reduction of psychopathology and longer- social adjustment. Data from the original drug-free, home-like, nonprofessionally staffed Soteria Project and its Bern, Switzerland, replication indicate that persons without extensive hospitalizations (<30 days) are especially responsive to the positive therapeutic effects of the well-defined, replicable Soteria-type special social environments. Reviews of other studies of diversion of persons deemed in need of hospitalization to "alternati-ve" programs have consistently shown equivalent or better program clinical results, at lower cost, from alternatives. Despite these clinical and cost data, alternatives to psychiatric hospitalization have not been widely implemented, indicative of a remarkable gap between available evidence and clinical practice. J Nerv Ment Dis 187:142-149, 1999

 

http://www.moshersoteria.com/soteri.htm

 

One other source: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5idJtabQYbwdz0gv1koOaXPr3qGRQ

Edited December 25, 2009 by ArjanD
Consecutive posts merged.

[bascule]

Could you name something?

 

Uhh, how about anti-psychotic medications that allows people with bipolar disorder or other mental illnesses to lead otherwise ordinary lives?

 

Clearly you've never met one of these people when they're off their meds.

 

Please tell me then, what is psychiatry trying to achieve? Cure an immeasurable and hypothetical brain disorder?

 

There's nothing hypothetical about bipolar disorder, or its treatment.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I think it's perfectly safe to say, however, that psychiatry can stand to improve a great deal. There is still much to learn.

 

ArjanD, would you happen to know where I can find a source for that WHO quote about the best predictor of non-recovery? I'd like to see the context in which it was published.

[D H]

Please tell me then, what is psychiatry trying to achieve? Cure an immeasurable and hypothetical brain disorder?

You are using fallacies, something not appreciated here.

 

Because as far as I know psychiatrists are prescribing drugs solely based on wet finger work and not a single medical test exists to prove any brain disorder that would supposedly be treated with the drugs.

Oh, please. Do you know the incredible amount of testing psychoactive drug must undergo before they can prescribed?

 

 

Here are my sources for the claim that:

 

Lange termijn resultaten schizofrenie, bron: Martin Harrow and Thomas Jobe. “Factors involved in Outcome and Recovery in Schizophrenia Patients Not on Antipsychotic Medications: A 15-year Multifollow-up Study. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 195 (2007):406-414.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17502806

Did you read the article? I just did. It does not say what you are claiming it says. What it is saying is that for a select subclass of people diagnosed with schizophrenia, those people can and probably should be taken off their medications at some point in time after those medications have helped those people get past the acute stage of the disease. For most people diagnosed with that disease, however, the disease remains incurable.

[toastywombel]

How about the invention of the drug L-dopa? Lack of dopamine in the brain is the cause of Parkinsons disease. L-dopa is a drug that can slow the progression of Parkinsons disease significantly. If it was not for understanding the biology of the brain, specifically what biologically causes Parkinsons disease , we would have not been able to design the dopamine supplement, L-dopa.

[bascule]

I think it's perfectly safe to say, however, that psychiatry can stand to improve a great deal. There is still much to learn.

 

Same goes for those silly physicists who can't even tell us which interpretation of waveform collapse is correct. Let's just go back to good ol' earth, air, fire, and water.

[DJBruce]

Please tell me then, what is psychiatry trying to achieve? Cure an immeasurable and hypothetical brain disorder? Is that what you are talking about?

 

Psychiatry is attempting to take a wide range of people, suffering from a wide range of disease, within a wide range of severity, and help them overcome their disease and return to the most normal life that they can. Considering the complexity, the interconnectedness, and the lack of uniformity in the patients their goal is virtually an impossible task; to simply make any progress towards helping people is a real amazement.

 

Are you insinuating that things such as severe depression and schizophrenia are not caused by brain disorders, and that they are simply imaginary made up ailments? For if you are I would really like to see the evidence backing up your position.

 

Here are my sources for the claim that:

 

a) psychiatry does more harm then good

b) there are humane alternatives that can get 90%+ people to recover well (at far lower costs)

 

First off can you please post reliable peer reviewed data that shows that treatment by a psychiatrist is harmful to a majority of the people who seek treatment. I highly doubt that you can produce any such data. For if such shocking data existed I have a feeling the field of psychiatry would be abandoned by both patients as well as main stream medicine.

 

Secondly you have not shown any proof that 90% of the general population that seeks psychiatric help can be treated successfully by other means. You have shown that certain subsets of a population can be treated somewhat successfully, and this claim is dubious at best. The article you cited that stated 80% of depressed persons treated with CBT recovered seems to have some serious flaws. Mainly being as the article states,

"Most people, some of whom were also on anti-depressants, received “low-intensity” CBT."

If the study allowed people already seeking psychiatric help into their study the effectiveness of your alternative methods is unprovable.

 

Lange termijn resultaten schizofrenie, bron: Martin Harrow and Thomas Jobe. “Factors involved in Outcome and Recovery in Schizophrenia Patients Not on Antipsychotic Medications: A 15-year Multifollow-up Study. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 195 (2007):406-414.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17502806

 

This study showed that people who have complex psychological problems that are labeled with psychosis (schizophrenia) are far better off with no treatment at all, compared to the standard psychiatric treatment combination of antipsychotics and psychiatric therapy.

 

This statement is completely false the abstract to which you linked in no way stated this. The article says,

"A larger percent of schizophrenia patients not on anti psychotics showed periods of recovery and better global functioning (p < .001). The longitudinal data identify a subgroup of schizophrenia patients who do not immediately relapse while off antipsychotics and experience intervals of recovery...The current longitudinal data suggest not all schizophrenia patients need to use antipsychotic medications continuously throughout their lives."

The article says that a small group of the test subjects had times during a 15 year period when their schizophrenia was better. This does not mean nobody needs medication. Nor does it show that people suffering schizophrenia are better off with out medication.

 

 

And for example this recent study, that shows TCA antidepressants cause a tenfold increase in suicidal thoughts and behaviour (SSRI double the risk)

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091014193213.htm

 

Yet again the study you cited no where near states this. The study says,

"men who took nortriptyline were found to have a 9.8-fold increase in emerging suicidal thoughts and a 2.4-fold increase in worsening suicidal thoughts compared to those who took escitalopram."

The study say one particular drug has a higher rate of side effects then another. This study does not show that anti-deppressants cuase an increased risk sucide from the normal population.

 

I have to say that I feel that psychiatry is a completly legitimate and safe medical feild. While thier are procedures and complications there are those in any medical feild whether it be psychaiatry or family practice. Also the claims which you have made have been grandious and extensive. So far you have failed to back them up with enough reliable evidence to convince me that your point has any validity.

[ArjanD]

Uhh, how about anti-psychotic medications that allows people with bipolar disorder or other mental illnesses to lead otherwise ordinary lives?

 

Clearly you've never met one of these people when they're off their meds.

 

Right, and how about my references that show antipsychotics are causing just that dependency? They supress problems in the short term and make it worse in the same time, so you can't withdraw anymore?

 

Here is a quote of my post:

 

Antipsychotics block dopamine D2 receptors in the brain and in response the brain makes the receptors more sensitive which will cause people to become chronically ill. Antipsychotics also cause damage in the brain that is also associated with a worsening of the symptoms in the long term.

 

So it is proven that solely looking at the problems that psychiatry is making the problems worse and people are better off with nothing at all. 40% grows over it naturally in 2-4 years.

 

And with honest help (psychotherapy/CBT etc.), those people would be able to fully recover without having to use destructive drugs that will shorten their life with 30+ years and cause them to have less chance to reproduce and such.

 

What do you have to say on this?

 

There's nothing hypothetical about bipolar disorder, or its treatment.

 

How is it diagnosed then? With a wet finger, right?

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

I think it's perfectly safe to say, however, that psychiatry can stand to improve a great deal. There is still much to learn.

 

ArjanD, would you happen to know where I can find a source for that WHO quote about the best predictor of non-recovery? I'd like to see the context in which it was published.

 

Why improve something that's bad from within the core? Psychiatry has no right to exist at all.

 

1) they don't have proof there is a biological cause for their made up "illnesses" (for which they vote at the APA...)

2) their treatments of the brain for hypothetical disorders are doing more harm then good, if you have a critical look at the facts

 

So what exactly could they improve then? What could they learn? Could they learn more about the immeasurable brain disorders they are currently diagnosing in millions of people?

 

Sure, why not study the existence of peter pan and elfs and then tell people: there is still much to learn, we already have a glimps on their existence but we're just not there yet.

 

Because this is what psychiatry is doing. They don't have a shred of proof.

 

And then there is logic: can't you understand that the human mind is more then a product of biochemical processes? Why exactly do you believe in psychiatry?

 

The WHO quote comes from http://www.madinamerica.com (scientific journalist)

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Are you insinuating that things such as severe depression and schizophrenia are not caused by brain disorders, and that they are simply imaginary made up ailments? For if you are I would really like to see the evidence backing up your position.

 

How about you showing that those brain disorders do exist, and start with the patients you diagnose? Aren't you turning the things here?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

 

You are claiming that there is a brain disorder that for some reason can't be measured yet.

 

I believe it is your call to prove that the brain disorder DOES exist, and that the brain medication you are prescribing to people (as a psychiatrist) is not based on scientific fraud.

 

We both know: there is no such evidence, because why wouldn't you otherwise put people under a scanner and send them to a neurologist, who is there to help with measurable brain disorders?

 

This is why psychiatry is a undeniable scam. You claim that psychiatry is helping people while in fact it is just supressing symptoms for the rest of their lives and charging people for it.

 

That those people 'believe' that they are helped does not change a thing. Many people believe that they are helped by the magic hands from a paragnost also.

 

First off can you please post reliable peer reviewed data that shows that treatment by a psychiatrist is harmful to a majority of the people who seek treatment. I highly doubt that you can produce any such data. For if such shocking data existed I have a feeling the field of psychiatry would be abandoned by both patients as well as main stream medicine.

 

Well, this is exactly what is going on right now. First off: studies are very costly, and the pockets of farmaceutical companies are very deep. They have 1000+ studies to prove something, while you as honest scientist have maybe 200k on your own for 1 study.

 

But have a look at this:

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505564

 

It is pure fraud going on. Antidepressants do not work better then a so called 'active' placebo. This is a fake pill with a side effect so that people can feel something is happening in their body. Antidepressants are 0% more effective than such pills.

 

But...

 

Antidepressants cause a rise in suicidal behaviour. I gave that one study on ScienceDaily but there are hundreds more. In the big (trusted) media in The Netherlands and Belgium it is already clear SSRI are doubling the risk.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1205890/Depression-pills-double-suicide-risk-young-adults.html

 

It is about young adults, but other studies show that it is the same with adults.

 

But...

 

Antidepressants make men infertile, they reduce the chance to reproduce.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/oct/24/medicalresearch.drugs1

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3073502/Anti-depressants-may-cause-infertility-in-men.html

 

This is highly suspicious. Also it causes to block love for other people, so they can lead to murder. Prominent professors in The Netherlands are claiming this in the media:

 

Google Translate: Pill for depression can lead to murder

 

So:

 

1) an active placebo is 100% as effective as antidepressants. This proves it is purely the believe in a immeasurable brain disorder and a pill that make people feel better but also make them addicted.

2) antidepressants have severe side effects that actually cause a rise in suicidal behaviour, make them infertile, cause genetic damage in the fetus in pregnant woman (see this law suite a few months ago), cause weakening of bones and other damage...

 

So you can't deny: depression treatment is doing more harm then good.

 

This statement is completely false the abstract to which you linked in no way stated this. The article says, The article says that a small group of the test subjects had times during a 15 year period when their schizophrenia was better. This does not mean nobody needs medication. Nor does it show that people suffering schizophrenia are better off with out medication.

 

You don't get it: it proves 40% is better off without treatment. This remaining 60% is not better off with antipsychotics. They are just not helped with 'nothing'.

 

When you give them Soteria psychotherapy, 90% will recover well without the use of the destructive psychiatric drugs. This is proven in the following study by prof. dr. Loren Mosher:

 

http://www.moshersoteria.com/soteri.htm

 

For over a decade Loren R Mosher, MD, held a central position in American psychiatric research.

 

He was the first Chief of the Center for Studies of Schizophrenia at the National Institute of Mental Health, 1969-1980. He founded the Schizophrenia Bulletin and for ten years he was its Editor-in-Chief. He led the Soteria Project.

 

The Soteria research demonstrated that there is a better way: A better way to treat schizophrenia and other psychoses that destroy the lives of so many young people. The Soteria research showed that the prevalent excessive destructive psychiatric drugging of all these young people is a huge and tragic mistake. The psychiatric establishment was offended. Prestige and Money won. Truth and Love lost.

 

The success of Soteria was the reason that Dr Mosher was forced to leave his key position in American psychiatry.

 

So here you have it again: psychosis/schizophrenia treatment is doing more harm then good

Edited December 26, 2009 by ArjanD
Consecutive posts merged.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Why improve something that's bad from within the core? Psychiatry has no right to exist at all.

 

1) they don't have proof there is a biological cause for their made up "illnesses" (for which they vote at the APA...)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipolar_disorder#Melatonin_activity

 

There are biological and brain differences in many people with psychiatric problems. The trouble is that the brain and neurological systems are so incredibly complicated that you can't just point and say "That's it!"

 

And then there is logic: can't you understand that the human mind is more then a product of biochemical processes?

Says who?

 

The WHO quote comes from http://www.madinamerica.com (scientific journalist)

Yes, but in what report or document did the WHO say it?

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

But have a look at this:

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505564

 

It is pure fraud going on. Antidepressants do not work better then a so called 'active' placebo. This is a fake pill with a side effect so that people can feel something is happening in their body. Antidepressants are 0% more effective than such pills.

This article does not say what you think it says. Let's look at a quote:

 

Drug-placebo differences increased with increasing baseline severity and the difference became large enough to be clinically important only in the very small minority of patient populations with severe major depression. In severe major depression, antidepressants did not become more effective, simply placebo lost effectiveness. These data suggest that antidepressants may be less effective than their wide marketing suggests.

 

What does this tell us? If antidepressants still have a (small) effect when placebos don't, they're doing something. They are not just placebos themselves.

 

However, I will concede that antidepressant pills are likely prescribed far more often than they should be. Doctors seem to prescribe them at the drop of a hat.

 

 

Now, a broader point to be made, which is important: you bring up many studies which suggest that current psychiatric treatments are not the best. This is true. We have no magic pill that can cure depression or schizophrenia instantly. But: psychiatry is not standing still. Scientists do not sit on their hands going "well, the evidence says it doesn't work. Better cover it up!"

 

No, scientists say, "the evidence says the treatments don't work. Awesome. This means we can get a heap of [acr=National Institutes of Health]NIH[/acr] grant money to research new treatments! Let's start filling out an application."

[ArjanD]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipolar_disorder#Melatonin_activity

 

There are biological and brain differences in many people with psychiatric problems. The trouble is that the brain and neurological systems are so incredibly complicated that you can't just point and say "That's it!"

 

This is a lame excuse, "there is proof however we can't proof it yet" is what you say...

 

Well, if there is proof then why don't you diagnose the disease with a brain scanner?

 

You see? It is fraud that is going on. There is no proof for a brain disease, also not with Bipolar disorder. It are hypothesis you are talking about, not more then that.

 

And biochemical imbalances? Please... Why would anyone believe in such a thing, while it can't be measured?

 

Look at the power of the human mind:

 

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12301-man-with-tiny-brain-shocks-doctors.html

 

And then a unmeasurable biochemical imbalance is causing complex problems in the human mind you believe?

 

It is so stupid actuallly. It seems you can't do more then read from a book. (the psychiatric bible in this case)

 

Says who?

 

Well, try to think for yourself for once. It may help

 

Yes, but in what report or document did the WHO say it?

 

Sorry, I don't know. I could give you the e-mail address of Robert Whitaker (the author of the book) however. He will be able to provide it to you.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

You can look at it like this: the human mind is in relation to the brain a bit like a trumpet in relation to the air that flows through it to produce a sound.

 

With complex problems with the human mind there is often nothing wrong with the brain, but then you are playing if it were a false note.

 

It is then of course barbarian to ditch dents in the trumpet with drugs or other brain treatments to change the sound. It would be case to learn to produce a pure sound.

 

The human mind is more then a product of the building blocks because the measurable can't be the source of itself. Please try to think about this. You can't find this in books. It is something you can understand at most, because the source of life and the human mind can't be measured.

Edited December 26, 2009 by ArjanD
Consecutive posts merged.

[insane_alien]

This is a lame excuse, "there is proof however we can't proof it yet" is what you say...

 

he supplied you with proof. he also said in addition to it that there are many contributing factors and no single cause to the end result. this is not the same as 'no proof' this is just indicative that the brain is a very complex system.

 

heck, if you look at relatively simple systems like a chemical plant where there has been an accident there are always contributing factors that caused it, not just one single event.

 

Well, if there is proof then why don't you diagnose the disease with a brain scanner?

 

you can, but to do so would be hideously expensive and unnecessary as you can make the diagnosis without such specialised equipment.

 

i mean, if every time you went to the doctor you were submitted to a barrage of uneccesary tests and probing you'd complain right?

 

as to your remark about immeasurable brain chemistry alterations, well, if they were immeasurable then we wouldn't know about them. they are indeed measurable and there are tests that work only because they do measure brain chemistry. they tpically involve sampling the spinal fluid though as remotely testing for the chemical levels is hard and inaccurate.

 

i think you should start behaving a bit more maturely, all the evidence you have posted you seem to have misinterpreted. you are showing all signs of starting from a conclusion and then scurrying to find evidence to fit it. this is not how you should be operating.

[iNow]

Just as I said in what was post #13 which got deleted last night.

[ArjanD]

What does this tell us? If antidepressants still have a (small) effect when placebos don't, they're doing something. They are not just placebos themselves.

 

You forgot about active-placebos that have a side-effect so you can feel something is happening. It is proven that antidepressants are a bit more effective in supressing depressive emotions then a placebo. But it is a total different story with an active-placebo.

 

Compared to an active-placebo the 'effectiveness' is gone.

 

And besides that. What the hell are you doing as psychiatry? Treating depressive emotions like a disease right? Do you have any clue how super destructive this is to humanity?

 

It isn't about getting better treatments, it is about getting psychiatry the hell out of our society.

 

Psychiatry is the sickness what it is all about. Many scientists argue that depressive emotions are there to serve you, and not a disease at all. It could be to protect against severe damage in stressful situations or when (unknowingly) suffering from a bodily disease. Or it could be an expression from the will to improve. Top performers often have a severe depression after which they find the power to move up again.

 

It is SUPER bad for these people to fall into the hands of a psychiatrist and to supress their emotions with psychiatric drugs.

 

Psychiatry does not care about the effects of their doings, they only want to grow further. Drugging more and more people.

 

Why is not really clear to me, but it is 100% sertain that it is not good intentioned.

 

Here is my reference that scientists are claiming that severe depressive emotions are not a disease at all:

 

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Depression-Should-Be-Embraced-Not-Medicated-102005.shtml

[toastywombel]

You forgot about active-placebos that have a side-effect so you can feel something is happening. It is proven that antidepressants are a bit more effective in supressing depressive emotions then a placebo. But it is a total different story with an active-placebo.

 

Compared to an active-placebo the 'effectiveness' is gone.

 

And besides that. What the hell are you doing as psychiatry? Treating depressive emotions like a disease right? Do you have any clue how super destructive this is to humanity?

 

It isn't about getting better treatments, it is about getting psychiatry the hell out of our society.

 

Psychiatry is the sickness what it is all about. Many scientists argue that depressive emotions are there to serve you, and not a disease at all. It could be to protect against severe damage in stressful situations or when (unknowingly) suffering from a bodily disease. Or it could be an expression from the will to improve. Top performers often have a severe depression after which they find the power to move up again.

 

It is SUPER bad for these people to fall into the hands of a psychiatrist and to supress their emotions with psychiatric drugs.

 

Psychiatry does not care about the effects of their doings, they only want to grow further. Drugging more and more people.

 

Why is not really clear to me, but it is 100% sertain that it is not good intentioned.

 

Here is my reference that scientists are claiming that severe depressive emotions are not a disease at all:

 

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Depression-Should-Be-Embraced-Not-Medicated-102005.shtml

 

What about the drug L-dopa? Do placebos work as well as L-dopa on providing relief for Parkinson's patients?

[ArjanD]

he supplied you with proof. he also said in addition to it that there are many contributing factors and no single cause to the end result. this is not the same as 'no proof' this is just indicative that the brain is a very complex system.

 

Proof?

 

Let's take a closer look at that source:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipolar_disorder#Melatonin_activity

 

It has been suggested that a hypersensitivity of the melatonin receptors in the eye could be a reliable indicator of bipolar disorder, in studies called a trait marker, as it is not dependent on state (mood, time, etc).

 

Oh right, it has been suggested. And that counts as solid evidence for you and as justification for brain medication?

[D H]

How is it diagnosed then? With a wet finger, right?

You are using appeal to ridicule, a logical fallacy. You agreed not to do so when you signed up to this site.

 

ArjanD, it is one thing to argue that psychiatry is not perfect and is in need of improvement. No surprise there; no science is perfect. It is quite another to argue that psychiatry is completely invalid. Your arguments to date have

• Been fallacious,
  
• Involved reading things into journal articles not supported by those articles,
  
• Relied on crackpot sites and very low impact journals.

 

Does psychiatry over-prescribe psychoactive drugs? That is a different question than claiming that psychiatry is illegitimate.

[ArjanD]

What about the drug L-dopa? Do placebos work as well as L-dopa on providing relief for Parkinson's patients?

 

Isn't parkinson a measurable brain disease that is treated by a neurologist?

[insane_alien]

thats only one part of the much larger set of indicators.

 

of course medication should not be prescribed based on the results of a single test but other indicators would need to be present in order for that to happen.

 

in all liklihood other symptoms would be required before that test was even performed.

 

you are grasping at straws here.