Psychiatry & Psychology Have Embraced the Entrepreneurial Spirit

Entrepreneur: One who organizes, manages, and assumes the risks of a business or enterprise, often with an additional connotation of far-sightedness and innovation with boldness and energy. [French, from Old French, from entreprendre to undertake; entre- between  (from Latin: inter-) + prendre to take (from Latin: prehendere to grasp)]

The U.S. government funded training for substance abuse researchers in entrepreneurship at Yale, so they could learn how to get more funding for their health care startups about substance abuse.

Scholarly articles have been published about “The Psychology of Entrepreneurship“. One such study we noticed focused on industrial and organizational psychology (it has its own abbreviation, I/O); many of its key conclusions were to plead for more research in that area. We think that one of the primary goals of this kind of psychobabble is to set the stage for getting more research funds, rather than coming up with anything truly useful.

Another news article in the Washington Postnoticed that entrepreneurs seem inclined to have mental health issues.” There are any number of news reports about “the problems entrepreneurs with mental illness often face,” and “managing your mental health as an entrepreneur,” and yet again “the psychological price of entrepreneurship.”

So it seems that psychiatry and psychology have latched onto entrepreneurs as a new category of those needing “help,” a new pool of potential customers. Entrepreneurs have been targeted by the mental health industry both as a new customer pool and a new way to do business. The competition for government funding and grants to address the problems of entrepreneurship is heating up, and the psychobabble is deafening.

And, like any entrepreneur, psychiatrists are looking to the future. Since they have never been required to cure anyone, they continually come up with new disorders, new drugs, and new treatments which they can apply to new communities of potential patients.

The news is full of these “miracle” treatments — marijuana, cannabidiol, electric shock (yes, they still do this, and it is a big money-maker), MDMA (Ecstasy), trauma-informed therapy, Ketamine, cognitive-behavioral therapy, transcranial magnetic stimulation, assisted suicide (yes, this is considered a “treatment”), deep brain stimulation, involuntary commitment, vagus nerve stimulation, addiction therapy (ignoring the fact that psychiatric drugs are addictive), and one drug after another — each new one designed to combat the adverse side effects of the one before.

Not to mention the profusion of new mental health related applications for your mobile device and the startups that create these. Not to mention this recent headline: “Entrepreneur Teams Up with Leading Psychiatrist to Address Depression, Anxiety, and Suicide“. Not to mention that the producers of “Shark Tank” mandated that “all entrepreneurs meet with a psychiatrist after giving their pitch, regardless of the outcome.

The news is devoid, however, of one thing — actual cures for mental trauma.

Click here for more information about fraud and abuse in the mental health industry. Read about how Full Informed Consent can help.

Immigrant Children Forcibly Injected with Psychiatric Drugs

A lawsuit filed April 18, 2018 claims that children detained by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) are unlawfully, routinely and forcibly given multiple psychotropic drugs without theirs or their parents’ consent in order to control their behavior rather than for any medically necessary reason (particularly those housed at the Shiloh Residential Treatment Center in Manvel, Texas), told little or nothing about these drugs, and often suffer negative side effects without recourse.

The lawsuit alleges that children were told they would not be released or see their parents unless they took drugs and that they only were receiving vitamins.

Taxpayers have paid more than $1.5 billion in the past four years to private companies operating immigrant youth shelters accused of serious lapses in care, including forced psychiatric drugging, neglect and sexual and physical abuse. In nearly all cases reviewed, the federal government continued contracts with these companies after serious allegations were raised.

This smacks of the forced over-drugging of foster children; we think both cases — the over-drugging of foster children and the over-drugging of immigrant children — are examples of coercive psychiatry at its worst. Harming children in the name of health is despicable, and the psychiatrists responsible should be in jail.

Claiming that even normal childhood behavior is a mental disorder and that drugs are the solution, psychiatrists and psychologists have insinuated themselves into positions of authority over children.

The entirety of psychological and psychiatric programs for children are founded on the tacit assumptions that mental health “experts” know all about the mind and mental phenomena, know a better way of life, a better value system and how to improve the lives of children beyond the understanding and capability of not only parents, but everyone else in society.

The reality is that all child mental health programs are designed to control the lives of children towards specific ideological objectives at the expense of not only the children’s sanity and well-being, but also that of their parents and of society itself.

Psychiatrists have been largely responsible for creating the problems they have ostensibly tried to solve. They are the last people to whom we should turn to solve the problems of our children.

If your child has been subjected to psychological/psychiatric screening without your consent, or coercively drugged and harmed, consult a lawyer to determine your right to prosecute criminally and civilly.

Support legislative measures that will protect children from psychiatric and psychological interference and which will remove their destructive influence from schools and other social institutions. Ultimately, psychiatry and psychology must be eliminated from society and their coercive and unworkable methods should never be funded by the State.

For more information click here to download and read the CCHR report “Harming Youth — Psychiatry Destroys Young Minds“.

Crime and Mental Distress

A recent news report suggests that “Having a mental illness makes people more vulnerable to becoming the victims of a crime.”

We wondered about this, because it sounds just like the incessant and inane psychobabble coming out of the “psychology today” brain mill.

These results are suspicious because the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) lists “Victim of crime” as a mental disorder. So it’s hard to imagine that both “mental illness causes being a victim of crime” and “being a victim of crime causes mental illness.” It’s a no-win situation, and the fact that the DSM is a fraudulent machine used to sell psychiatric drugs does not make it more palatable.

The DSM-5 also has fourteen other diagnoses about being a victim in various abusive situations, and thirteen diagnoses about being the perpetrator of abuse or violence. It would seem that both victims and perpetrators are the focus of a lot of attention; so many ways to prescribe psychiatric drugs known to cause violence.

The study authors are using these questionable results to assert that people with mental illness are more likely to be victims rather than perpetrators of crime, giving the benefit of doubt to those who commit violence and further contributing to the perception of the “dangerous environment” so necessary to the existence of coercive psychiatry.

They are trying to prove that school shooters are not mentally ill, because this taint goes against the massive psychiatric public relations campaign to “stop the stigma of mental illness,” which is really a campaign underwritten by pharmaceutical companies to sell drugs.

The fact is, the real criminals here are psychiatrists and psychologists.

The soaring crime rate began to rise when psychiatrists and psychologists infiltrated the fields of education and law. When you put criminals in charge of crime, the crime rate rises.

If psychiatrists and psychologists actually knew what they were doing, the crime rate would drop. Instead, they conduct sham research about the relationship between crime and mental illness, instead of actually curing people and cementing the safety and security of society.

Real criminals would want to obfuscate the issues and point the finger away from themselves. Guess what? When the criminal mind accuses others, he is likely disclosing his own type of crime. And the fact is, psychiatric drugs cause violence, proven again and again as psych-drug-addled school shooters rage on.

Criminals think everyone else is a criminal, since they cannot envision people being decent. Psychiatrists and psychologists, focusing their attention on crime and illness, fail to observe human decency, and think there is nothing else but crime, deceit, and violence — all to be suppressed with harmful and addictive drugs, electroshock, psycho-surgery, involuntary incarceration, and restraints.

Recommendations

1. Legislative hearings should be held to fully investigate the correlation between psychiatric treatment and violence and suicide.

2. Toxicology testing for psychiatric and even illicit drugs should be mandatory in cases where someone has committed a mass shooting or other serious violent crime.

3. Train law enforcement officers, school security and teachers in the adverse effects of psychotropic drugs in order to recognize that irrational, violent and suicidal behavior in persons they may face could be influenced by these drugs.

4. No student shall be forced to take any psychotropic drug as a requisite of their education, in alignment with Title 20 of United States Code: Chapter 33, “Education of Individuals with Disabilities,” Subchapter II, (25) “Prohibition on mandatory medication.”

Psychiatric Drugs, School Violence, and Big Pharma Cover-Up

A study published June 12, 2018 from the University of Illinois at Chicago suggests that more than one-third (37.2%) of U.S. adults may be using prescription drugs that have the potential to cause depression or increase the risk of suicide.
[JAMA. 2018;319(22);2289-2298. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.6741]

Information about more than 26,000 adults from 2005 to 2014 was analyzed, along with more than 200 commonly prescribed drugs. However, many of these drugs are also available over the counter, so these results may underestimate the true prevalence of drugs having side effects of depression.

In other words, the use of prescription drugs, not just psychiatric drugs, that have depression or suicide as a potential adverse reaction is fairly common, and the more drugs one takes (called polypharmacy), the greater the likelihood of depression occurring as a side effect. “The likelihood of concurrent depression was most pronounced among adults concurrently using 3 or more medications with depression as a potential adverse effect, including among adults treated with antidepressants.”

Approximately 15% of adults who used three or more of these drugs concurrently experienced symptoms of depression or suicidal thoughts, compared with just 5% for those not using any of these drugs. Roughly 7.6% of adults using just one of these drugs reported a side effect of depression or suicidal thoughts during the study period, and 9% for those using two of these drugs. These results were the same whether the drugs were psychotropic or not. Depression was determined by asking nine questions related to the symptoms defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5).

“Commonly used depression screening instruments, however, do not incorporate evaluations of prescribed medications that have depression as a potential adverse effect.” In other words, so-called depression screening tests can register false positives when the person is taking one or more of roughly 200 prescription drugs.

We thought we should dig a little deeper into this phenomenon.

First, understand that there is no depression “disease”. A person can certainly have symptoms of feeling depressed, but this is not a medical condition in itself. An example of a medical condition with a symptom of depression would be a vitamin B1 (thiamine) deficiency. You don’t fix it with an antidepressant; you fix it with vitamin B1. There are hundreds of medical conditions that may have mental symptoms, just as there are hundreds of drugs that can cause or worsen these symptoms. Finding the actual causes with appropriate clinical tests and then fixing what is found is the correct way to proceed.

This leads to a topic known as CYP450, which stands for Cytochrome P450 enzymes. Cytochrome means “cellular pigment” and is a protein found in blood cells. Scientists understand these enzymes to be responsible for metabolizing almost half of all drugs currently on the market, including psychiatric drugs.

These are the major enzymes involved in drug metabolism, which is the breakdown of drugs in the liver or other organs so that they can be eliminated from the body once they have performed their function.

If these drugs are not metabolized and eliminated once they have done their work, they build up and become concentrated in the body, and then act as toxins. The possibility of harmful side effects, or adverse reactions, increases as the toxic concentration increases. The ballpark estimate is that each year 2.2 million Americans are hospitalized for adverse reactions and over 100,000 die from them.

Some people are deficient in CYP450 or have diminished capacity to metabolize these drugs, which may be a genetic or other issue. Individuals with no or poorly performing CYP450 enzymes are much more likely to suffer the side effects of prescription drugs, particularly psychiatric drugs known to have side effects of depression, violence and suicide.

These metabolic processes are immature at birth and up to three years old, and this may result in an increased risk for drug toxicity in infants and young children. Furthermore, certain drugs or certain excipients in vaccines may inhibit activation of CYP450 enzymes, again resulting in an increased risk for the accumulation of non-metabolized drugs and the resultant increase in adverse side effects such as depression, violence and suicide.

The side effects caused by a CYP450 deficiency and its subsequent failure to metabolize any one of hundreds of drugs can then be misdiagnosed as a mental illness, the patient then being prescribed more psychiatric drugs in a mistaken attempt to treat those side effects, further complicating the problems.

It is estimated that 10% of Caucasians and 7% of African Americans are Cytochrome P450 deficient.

The psychiatric and pharmaceutical industries have been aware of this phenomenon for some time, yet they have continued to push psychiatric drugs at an ever increasing rate, and the dramatic increase in symptoms of depression, suicide, and school violence is a direct result.

No one should be prescribed these types of drugs without adequate testing for a CYP450 deficiency, in order to determine their risk potential for adverse reactions. The test is not “standard of care” so one has to ask for it; but beware, they will still recommend an alternative drug if the original one cannot be easily metabolized. Better yet, stop prescribing all psychiatric drugs and find out with proper medical, clinical tests what the real problems are and treat those. Full informed consent is always indicated.

Any psychiatrist or pharmaceutical company that has knowingly withheld evidence about the relationship between CYP450 enzymes and drug side effects should be subject to both prosecution and litigation.

Medical students should be educated about these relationships.

For more information click on any of the links in this newsletter.

So Help Me I’ll Whip You

So Help Me I’ll Whip You

So Whip Me I’ll Help You

[Conversation between the sadist psychiatrist and her masochist patient.]

A psychiatrist in Tennessee had her license suspended for whipping patients and comparing them to mules.

The Tennessee Department of Health suspended Valerie Louise Augustus’ medical license in June 2018 because of her treatment towards multiple patients in 2015. Augustus owns and operates Christian Psychiatrist Services in Germantown, which is a suburb of Memphis.

She whipped mental health patients with a riding crop, whips, and other objects when they failed to adhere to her recommendations; can’t say this was a very Christian treatment, can we? It’s a shame it took Tennessee three years to reach this conclusion.

But patient abuse is typical of the psychiatric industry, and in spite of all psychiatric protestations to the contrary, coercive psychiatry has not changed much in the last hundred years. In spite of their sophisticated pseudoscientific trappings, psychiatry has not advanced beyond the cruelty and barbarism of its earliest treatments.

Such psychiatric procedures qualify as “assault and battery” in every respect except one; they are lawful. Psychiatry has placed itself above the law, from where it can assault and batter its unfortunate victims, all in the name of “treatment.” Note that this psychiatrist was not criminally charged with any crime; she got a 60-day suspension of her license and can be reinstated after taking a two-day medical ethics course. She should be in jail.

There are humane alternatives to psychiatric abuse. People in desperate circumstances must be provided proper and effective medical care. Psychiatric physical assault should be outlawed and the psychiatrist who authorizes it or performs it should be criminally culpable.

Psychiatric colleges, their institutions and psychiatrists themselves must be held accountable for the abuses of basic statutory and human rights committed daily in the name of “help.”

If you know someone who has been assaulted by a mental health practitioner, seek attorney advice about filing a civil suit against any offending psychiatrist and their hospital, associations and teaching institutions for compensatory and punitive damages.

More About The Dangerous Environment

Injustice, War, Pollution, Debt, Drugs, Illiteracy, Terrorism, Ignorance, Enslavement, Epidemics, School Shootings, Elderly Abuse, Foster Care Abuse, Sexual Abuse, Racism, Religious Intolerance, Political Abuse, Fake News, Psychiatry

It has been a couple of years since we last discussed The Dangerous Environment, but we notice now that we need to discuss it again.

Many people are not only convinced that the environment is dangerous, but that it is steadily growing more so. For many, it’s more of a challenge than they feel up to. An “environmental challenge” exists in an area which is filled with irrationality. While we thrive on a challenge, we can also be overwhelmed by a challenge to which we cannot respond.

What is dangerousness? Something one is afraid to communicate with. So if you say, “Don’t communicate with this,” then people will think it is dangerous. There are real areas of danger in the environment, but there are also areas being made to seem more dangerous than they really are. For example, recent political machinations stress the “dangerousness” of the environment — “Make America Safe Again!” This leads to all sorts of wrong targets, designed as red herrings to distract one from the real threats.

The fact of the matter is that the environment is made to appear much more dangerous than it actually is. A great number of people are professional dangerous environment makers. This includes professions which require a dangerous environment for their continued existence, such as the politician, the policeman, the newspaperman, the undertaker, the terrorist, the psychiatrist, and others.

These people sell a dangerous environment. That is their mainstay. They feel that if they did not sell people on the idea that the environment is dangerous, they would promptly go broke. So it is in their interest to make the environment seem far more dangerous than it actually is. This kind of misinformation is itself a clear and present danger to our personal safety.

Wherever psychiatry intervenes, the environment becomes more dangerous, more unsettled, more disturbed. PTSD, ADHD, Depression, Bipolar, Schizophrenia, on and on — psychiatry thrives on making people think they are sick; otherwise there would be no psychiatric patients, there would be no need for psychiatry.

A wide variety of environmental stresses can contribute to the onset of mental trauma. People can have mental trauma in their lives; but the treatment is not psychiatry or psychiatric drugs. The treatment is finding out what is really wrong, and then finding out that something can be done about it, and then doing something about it. Actually, if you knew what the problem really was, you would already have fixed it; so the “finding out” steps are essential. Psychiatry entirely skips the “finding out” steps; it just prescribes a drug to deaden the pain.

It used to be that the term “mentally ill” was limited to mean crazy people like those talking to themselves in the streets and those acting irrationally, oblivious to the world around them. However, the symptoms of mental illness, today, have been re-defined and broadened by psychiatry to fit under the umbrella of any non-optimum behavior, including what is considered normal for that age. Basically, “mentally ill” now is just an opinion about something that a psychiatrist doesn’t like.

This, in turn, allows for wholesale diagnoses of everything from “teenage moodiness” to “bad at mathematics”, followed by treatment with dangerous and addictive mind-altering drugs with harmful side effects. It would make more sense to look and see where the symptoms are coming from and check out things such as diet, allergies, infections, toxic things in the environment, illiteracy, etc.

The psychiatricizing of normal everyday behavior by including personality quirks and traits is a lucrative business for the psychiatrist, because by expanding the number of “mental illnesses” even ordinary people can become patients and added to the psychiatric marketing pool.

Safe and effective medical treatments for mental difficulties are often kept buried. The fact is, there are many medical conditions that when undetected and untreated can appear as psychiatric “symptoms.” The psychiatric pharmaceutical industry is making a killing — $84 billion per year — based on people being labeled with mental disorders that are not founded on science or medicine, but on marketing campaigns designed to sell drugs.

An individual’s health level, sanity level, activity level and ambition level are all monitored by their own concept of the dangerousness of the environment. You are as successful as you adjust your environment to yourself, rather than the environment enforcing itself on you. Find something in your environment that isn’t being a threat. It will calm you down.

Find Out About The Psychiatric Assault on America! Fight Back!

Cannabidiol (CBD) – Can We Be Sure It’s Safe?

Every time we say “CBD” out loud we think Bidi Bidi and picture Buck Rogers’ Twiki the Robot.

But really, what is CBD, and is it harmful or helpful?

Derived from Cannabis (marijuana), CBD is one of many cannabinoids which are chemical compounds capable of binding to specific biological receptors in the brain or other sites in the body.

The theory is that when CBD binds to these brain receptors it seems to suppress or limit the immune system’s inflammatory signals.

Another cannabinoid, THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, also called “The High Causer”), is the principal psychoactive component of marijuana, and when it binds to receptors in the brain it gets you high. We also know that THC damages the immune system, yet proponents of cannabis call it a “medicinal herb.” Click here for more information about the harmful effects of this “herb.”

CBD and THC are structural isomers, which means they share the same chemical composition but their atomic arrangements differ.

The claim is that CBD, unlike THC, is not hallucinogenic. Much of the research information so far available about CBD comes from animal studies.

Although it is a cannabinoid, CBD apparently does not directly interact with the principal receptors in the brain to which THC binds, and binds to many other non-cannabinoid receptors in the brain.

Basically, the research to date is unclear on exactly how CBD works, except that we know it affects the brain. We’d call these observations mostly anecdotal — that is, people have reported on their observations and feelings, but the double-blind human clinical trials are sparse.

Animal studies have demonstrated that CBD directly activates multiple serotonin receptors in the brain, and we know that in humans at least, psychiatric drugs which mess with serotonin levels in the brain are addictive and have some disastrous side effects. The manufacturers of every psychiatric drug so far which messes with serotonin in the brain say they don’t really know how it works.

CBD, LSD, mescaline, and other hallucinogenic drugs bind to the same serotonin receptors in the brain, so calling CBD totally non-intoxicating is a bit of a stretch. We think the insistence on calling CBD “non-intoxicating” or “non-hallucinogenic” is Public Relations for “Bidi bidi, gee, we can make a bundle with this.” While the anecdotal evidence claims no hallucinogenic effect for CBD, the fact that it affects serotonin in the brain makes it less attractive as a healthy alternative. Its long-term effects are simply unknown.

Some proponents promote taking THC and CBD together. We think this is a short path to becoming a bidi bidi robot.

At higher dosages, CBD will deactivate cytochrome P450 enzymes, making it harder to metabolize certain drugs and toxins, particularly psychiatric drugs.

What about CBD oil or cream (hemp extract) applied to the skin? Is there a difference between CBD derived from hemp and CBD derived from marijuana?

CBD is legally available in the United States, but it must be derived from imported high-CBD, low-THC hemp. CBD itself is not listed under the Controlled Substances Act, so it’s legal in all 50 states provided it’s not extracted from marijuana.

A huge amount of fiber hemp is required to extract a small amount of CBD, so researchers are focused on breeding plants with more CBD and less THC just for this purpose. It is important to note that all cannabidiol products are not approved by the FDA for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of any disease.

CBD and THC both interact with the body through a vital nerve signaling system which regulates a wide array of functions, some of which include: pain, appetite, mood, memory, immune response, and sleep. There are still very little long-term safety data available. The proponents of CBD, whether for internal or external use, ignore the fact that it messes with serotonin when making claims for its safety and usefulness, so caution is advised. There is a lot of money riding on making these substances legal and ubiquitous; any bad effects are not going to be advertised or promoted.

At present, we’d prefer not to experiment with substances that tweak the brain in ways that are not fully understood, lest we become like bidi bidi Twiki. As always, your fully informed consent for any treatment is of paramount importance.

Nuedexta, PCP in Disguise

Nuedexta (dextromethorphan hydrobromide and quinidine sulfate) marketed by Avanir Pharmaceuticals is FDA approved for the treatment of PseudoBulbar Affect (PBA), a so-called neurological condition thought to cause involuntary, sudden, and frequent episodes of crying and/or laughing, observed with patients having amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), multiple sclerosis (MS), strokes, or traumatic brain injury. It was originally approved in 2010 by the FDA for such emotional instability.

Dextromethorphan may cause serotonin syndrome, a buildup of an excessive amount of serotonin in the body, and this risk is increased by overdose, particularly if taken with other serotonergic agents, SSRIs or tricyclic antidepressants.

Side effects of serotonin syndrome can be altered mental status, muscle twitching, confusion, high blood pressure, fever, restlessness, sweating, tremors, or shivering. Use of Nuedexta with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or tricyclic antidepressants increases the risk of these side effects.

These are not all the possible side effects.

The quinidine in the formula is used to suppress metabolism of the dextromethorphan in order to increase the bioavailability of the dextromethorphan, and is not part of the treatment for PBA. Dextromethorphan acts on the central nervous system, but the mechanism by which dextromethorphan exerts any therapeutic effects in patients with PBA is totally unknown — it’s just a guess from clinical observations that it might have such a symptomatic effect.

Dextromethorphan, derived from an opioid analgesic, is sometimes referred to as DXM or the poor man’s PCP (phencyclidine, or Angel Dust), and is also used recreationally — acting as a dissociative anesthetic producing hallucinogenic states, delusions, or paranoia. At high concentrations, DXM can result in a false-positive for PCP on a drug screen. It is a nonselective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Its previous primary use since 1958 is as a cough suppressant. Regular use over a long period of time can cause withdrawal symptoms. DXM is often used as a substitute for marijuana, amphetamine, and heroin by drug abusers, and its use as an antitussive (cough suppressant) is now known to be less beneficial than originally thought.

We think that part of the danger of this drug is that it can be prescribed for various symptoms in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) just because of its claims of symptomatic relief — in spite of the fact that its mechanism of operation is unknown, its use can be severely abused, and its side effects can be fatal; and the symptoms of its side effects as well as the original medical issues can lead to the prescription of other dangerous and addictive psychiatric drugs.

Examples of DSM diagnoses that may be involved are “Histrionic personality disorder”, “High expressed emotion level within family”, “Adjustment disorder, With mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct”, and “Unspecified mental disorder due to another medical condition”.

Nuedexta is not thought of or advertised as a psychotropic drug, but exposing its camouflage one can now see that essentially it is psychoactive and should be avoided — another example of a psychiatric drug disguised as a legitimate medical drug.

Click here for more information about dangerous psychiatric drugs.

The Solution to Entrapment

Coercive psychiatry is not intended to cure anything. On the contrary, psychiatry is the science of control and entrapment.

Wherever men have advocated and advanced totalitarianism, they have used psychiatric principles to control society, to put limits on individual freedom, to suppress and punish dissent, and to trap people into worsening conditions.

Communism, fascism, Nazi national socialism, psychiatry, psychology — alike are all violently opposed to a free society.

They advocate that man is a soulless stimulus-response animal who can be manipulated to keep society barely running, and to keep themselves in power.

You bet this is a conspiracy.

If these groups had any handle at all on how to improve the conditions of life, there would be improvements. But when you put criminals in charge of crime, the crime rate rises. When you put criminals in charge of education, literacy drops. When you put criminals in charge of health care, harmful and addictive drugs become the norm.

Society is held together by the heroic efforts of a few, hampered in all directions by institutions dedicated to slowing and stopping freedom and progress — expert witnesses corrupting the judicial system; educational psychologists ruining literacy; atheists attacking religions; racists aborting babies; police deluded into involuntarily committing the most vulnerable citizens; dumping hallucinogenic drugs on children. You’ve seen it; but if you speak out against it you’re called a crazy conspiracy theorist.

The basic idea of weakening or corrupting a population has been used for thousands of years. The development of the atomic bomb made direct confrontation by war too dangerous, so the techniques of cultural destruction were welcomed by those wanting to be in control. The standard cultural institutions that used to uphold civilization (such as education, religion, the arts, health care, civil rights, police and justice, the military, and politics) have been infiltrated and discredited by psychiatrists, psychologists and their front organizations and special interest groups, to the end of perverting freedom and keeping people trapped in a downward spiral of worsening conditions.

There are two ways of trapping someone — one is with physical universe barriers; the other is with fixed ideas. Fixation occurs only in the presence of one-way communication. If one is not allowed to communicate, one becomes trapped. The incessant pounding of psychobabble from all of these psychiatrically-compromised social institutions wears one down. The antidote is to talk back. If you see an injustice, make a complaint. If we ask you to write your legislators, please do so. Talk to your government and political representatives, your church groups, your parent-teacher organizations, your networking groups, your hairdresser, your business associates, your peers, your family and friends. Show them the CCHR documentary DVDs (let us know and we’ll send you one.) Forward this newsletter and suggest they subscribe. Find Out! Fight Back!

Let us know what you have done.

Autism

We wish we could give you all the true data about autism, but we don’t know it all. Instead, we can give you many related facts and a few opinions; perhaps these can help you evaluate the subject. The reason we discuss it at all is because the psychiatric industry has claimed this disorder for its own purposes, and continues to wrestle with the line between unusual and abnormal behavior. For obvious reasons, we mis-trust anything that psychiatry has to say about the condition, especially about treating it with psychotropic drugs.

The word “autism” was coined in 1912 by Swiss psychiatrist Paul Bleuler (1857-1939) from the Greek autos- “self” + –ismos a suffix of action or of state. The notion was originally of “morbid self-absorption.”

The number of people diagnosed with autism has increased dramatically since the 1980s, partly due to changes in diagnostic criteria and practice; the question of whether actual prevalence has increased is unresolved, since diagnosis is based on behavior, not cause or mechanism.

Autism, sometimes called “autism spectrum disorder,” “pervasive developmental disorder,” or “Asperger syndrome,” apparently does not have a single definitive definition that can be used across the board to provide a basis for correcting the condition; it generally refers to a range of symptoms characterized by impairment of the ability to form normal social relationships, by impairment of the ability to communicate with others, and by stereotyped behavior patterns.

A study was once done to figure out how common Asperger’s was, and the results were clear — it was vanishingly rare. Then Allen Frances put it in the DSM, and the number of kids diagnosed with the disorder exploded.

Of course, while Dr. Hans Asperger is credited with shaping our ideas of autism and Asperger syndrome, one may not want to give him that much credit, since he is now linked with the Nazi’s child euthanasia program, recommending dozens of children to be sent for euthanasia.

There are many competing theories about autism’s etiology [its causes or origins]. We have seen articles relating autism to toxins (mercury, pesticides, etc.), nutrition, incomplete breakdown of casein or gluten, vaccination, genetic predisposition, neurological brain disorders, an alteration in how nerve cells and their synapses connect and organize, birth defects, the stress of circumcision, antidepressants, ad nauseum.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), psychiatry’s billing bible, may perpetuate the perception, whether true or false, that autism is related to mental retardation where it discusses atypical autism arising most often in profoundly retarded individuals.

Where to go from here?

Well, we’re not going to spend any more time discussing etiology and treatment, since you can Google those thousands of articles as well as we can. The real point we want to make is that psychiatry currently owns autism, listing “Autism spectrum disorder” in the DSM-5.

In future revisions of the DSM psychiatrists may make it easier to diagnose, increasing the number of children into the mental health system; or they may make it harder to diagnose, excluding children whose families are currently receiving, or hope to receive, some kind of monetary disability support. In any case, the hue and cry is already demanding more psychiatric funding for whatever they are currently calling autism.

At least a million children and adults have an autism diagnosis or a related disorder, such as “Unspecified neurodevelopmental disorder” (and there are ten categories of “developmental disorder” in the DSM-5.)

There are as many recommended therapies for autism as there are theories about the condition; these therapies may include diet, nutrition, behavioral modification, and many other non-invasive alternative health treatments. Of course, the treatment of choice for psychiatrists is the usual list of harmful and addictive antidepressants, antipsychotics, and anti-anxiety drugs, whose devastating side effects are well-documented.

Autism is big business — meaning big profits. One check on the Missouri government web site (www.mo.gov) revealed the word “autism” appearing 1,880 times, and “autistic” appearing 607 times.

The Missouri Department of Mental Health budget in 2012 included over $10 million for various autism services. In 2018 the autism budget is still roughly $10 million, but the budget for the Division of Developmental Disabilities is going to be over one billion dollars.

Granted, there is social justification for providing help to children and families coping with traumatic health situations. Given, however, psychiatry’s history of fraud, abuse, and use of damaging drugs, due diligence suggests examining this field very closely for exaggeration and mis-use.

The Drug Controversy

It is estimated that more than half of autistic school age children are on one or more psychotropic drugs. In at least one study, it was shown that prenatal use of antidepressants increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder in newborn children.

Children with autism are more likely to be prescribed addictive and harmful antipsychotic drugs than their typical peers, according to a large study. They are also prescribed antipsychotics such as risperidone at younger ages, and for longer periods of time. Doctors often prescribe antipsychotics to manage behavioral problems in children with autism rather than as any kind of actual treatment for the condition, since the drugs act to suppress the central nervous system. Other studies also indicate that many children with autism who take antipsychotic medications are not first offered safer and more effective options. A 2017 study suggested that about 20 percent of children with autism in the U.S. are prescribed antipsychotics.

An article in the Los Angeles Times on April 23, 2012 headlined, “Report says studies overstate drugs’ ability to treat autism symptoms.” It went on to say that “Antidepressants are not specifically approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treating autism, but they have become the go-to drugs for trying to control some of its key symptoms. By some estimates, the drugs have been prescribed for as many as one-third of children with the diagnosis. … A series of standard statistical tests designed to check the consistency and reliability of the published data [about the effectiveness of psychiatric drugs prescribed for autism] strongly suggested publication bias. The effect appeared to be so great that the researchers could no longer deem the anti-depressants effective.” [Publication bias occurs when studies that show a drug or treatment is effective are more likely to be published than studies with negative findings.]

Find out more about what you can do to expose psychiatric fraud and abuse, and support CCHR St. Louis so that it can continue to expose psychiatric fraud and abuse. Go to http://www.cchrstl.org/takeaction.shtml.