Posts Tagged ‘Cures’

Psychiatrists Redefine “Recovery”

Monday, August 2nd, 2021

Because psychiatry doesn’t work, psychiatrists have had to redefine the idea of “recovery” to ensure their own survival.

The lexicon of psychiatry engenders a false view of the human condition. When such words are used, one should be warned that psychiatry borrows from the language of medicine to look legitimate, but this is only to disguise its utter lack of claim to any authority. An example is the term “mental illness,” a fraudulent usage that implies a medical condition, when psychiatrists know that there is no valid medical, clinical test for any psychiatric diagnosis.

Would you go to a practitioner to treat an illness if you knew that practitioner couldn’t cure that illness? Likely not.

Such is the case with psychiatry – their treatments are not cures. Psychiatric drugs are more akin to over-the-counter cold remedies. They seek to minimize the symptoms of the so called “illness” without ever addressing its cause.

For psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies, long term treatment of symptoms is far more profitable than a cure. After all, a person with an infection can be cured in very short order with a small regimen of relatively inexpensive antibiotic medications. A person taking expensive new generation antidepressants is a long term customer and far more profitable.

According to the President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (Final Report July 22, 2003), “The discovery of effective treatments using medications currently on the market is also encouraging. However, since these medications are treatments and not cures, some individuals with chronic illnesses, including children, are expected to use these medications over an extended period of time.”

So, psychiatry has had a problem. How do you attract patients if you can’t cure them? The solution to this problem is Public Relations (PR), a careful selection of words and the redefinition of the concept of “recovery”.

Psychiatric front groups openly promote that mental trauma is “treatable” but will never say that it is curable.

Psychiatric proponents believe that people don’t seek psychiatric care because of their negative attitudes about mental trauma and treatments. One of the main negative attitudes is that psychiatric disorders are not curable. To counter public fear and negative attitudes the psychiatric PR machines heavily promote the idea of “recovery”.

We think it is important that you know exactly what psychiatrists mean when they say, “recovery”.

Traditional (allopathic) medical science says, “You’re ill. There is a pathogen or source of your illness. By identifying the cause of the illness we will give you treatment (e.g. medicine or surgery) to eliminate the illness at its source and you will no longer be ill.”

Psychiatry says “You’re ill. We don’t know what causes “mental illness”. We can randomly give you some medications which are known to minimize your symptoms in some people, some of the time. Although we cannot cure your condition there is some hope that over time with adherence to your medication that you may feel not as bad. When you have learned to come to terms with your condition, accept it and function in life despite it, we will consider that you have recovered.”

According to A. Kathryn Power, former Director for the Center for Mental Health Services in the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, “Recovery does not necessarily mean a cure. Recovery is a process, sometimes lifelong, through which a person achieves independence, self-esteem, and a meaningful life in the community.”

Certainly no one will disagree that people should have hope, independence, self-esteem, and a meaningful life in the community. We would wish these things for anyone. But by changing the very nature of the word “recovery” from “cured” to “has hope and is able to live despite a mental condition” we have moved psychiatry even farther away from a science and into the realm of a philosophy or even a religion. One could get the idea of a mental health consumer struggling his whole life to achieve this mythical state called, “recovery”.

You may see a number of public service announcements in the media showing mental health consumers who have “recovered.” Recognize them for what they are. They have not been cured. It’s debatable if they were even ill in the first place. They are however, life-long customers of the psychiatric industry and followers of the new religion of “recovery”.

Recognize that the real problem is that psychiatrists fraudulently diagnose life’s problems as an “illness”, and stigmatize unwanted behavior or study problems as “diseases”.

Psychiatry’s stigmatizing labels, programs and treatments are harmful junk science; their diagnoses of “mental disorders” are a hoax — unscientific, fraudulent and harmful. All psychiatric treatments, not just psychiatric drugs, are dangerous.

Contact your local, state and national officials and tell them what you think about this.

What Exactly is Mental Health?

Monday, March 22nd, 2021

We speak and write often about mental trauma, and how and why psychiatry is not the answer to good mental health care. But we rarely address exactly what mental health is. There are continuous loads of social commentary about mental health without even clearly defining what is good mental health.

We’ll try to remedy that. There are a number of useful approaches to defining good mental health. As usual with most English terms, there are multiple definitions; but we can certainly isolate some common attributes and characteristics. One can delineate both positive and negative characteristics; one can list contributing factors toward good mental health, and alternatively one can list contributing factors toward bad mental health.

WHO Says What is Mental Health

The World Health Organization (WHO) describes mental health as: “a state of well-being in which the individual realizes his or her abilities, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to his or her community.”

For a practical approach, this is a good start.

Additional Approaches to What is Mental Health

We might also call good mental health an absence of psychoses, neuroses, compulsions, repressions, and psychosomatic ills; leading to a state of mental well-being.

The Wales Mental Health in Primary Care Network has an interesting viewpoint of good mental health:
“The central role of relationships in health and wellbeing suggests that relationships set the initial conditions and the simple values that lead to the emergence of health and wellbeing outcomes. Relationships that are positive between people and within organisations are the simple small inputs that lead to the much bigger output of improved outcomes and health gain. … The gold standard for mental health and wellbeing is the gold standard for caring relationships.”

Green Mental Health Care

Green Mental Health Care is based on the preservation and treatment of the mind and body (for they are not separate functions) using non-toxic, non-addictive, and non-invasive strategies that produces good mental health. Green Mental Health Care has not only proven to be superior in patient outcomes than any other treatment method, including the use of psychiatric drugs, but it achieves the patient’s health goals at a fraction of the cost while saving them from the life-threatening health risks associated with psychiatric drugs.”

What is a Cure?

We generally take cure to mean the elimination of some unwanted condition with some effective treatment. The primary purpose of any mental health treatment must be the therapeutic care and treatment of individuals who are suffering emotional disturbance, leading to a cure. The only effective measure of this treatment must be “patients recovering and being sent, sane, back into society as productive individuals.” This, we would call a cure. Psychiatry produces no cures, which they readily admit.

“We do not know the causes [of any mental illness]. We don’t have the methods of ‘curing’ these illnesses yet.” [Dr. Rex Cowdry, psychiatrist and director of National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) in 1995]
“The time when psychiatrists considered that they could cure the mentally ill is gone. In the future the mentally ill have to learn to live with their illness.” [Norman Satorius, president of the World Psychiatric Association in 1994]

The Effects of Stress

According to top experts, the majority of people having mental problems are actually suffering from non-psychiatric disorders, which can cause emotional stress. We might characterize mental stress as inorganic or organic. Organic conditions are characterized by physical and biochemical indicators, while inorganic conditions manifest only as distressing experiences or undesirable behavior. In either case, an underlying cause would be some form of stress.

An individual’s health level, sanity level, activity level and ambition level are all monitored by their own concept of the dangerousness of their environment. You are as successful as you adjust your environment to yourself, rather than the environment enforcing itself on you which produces stress.

Human Rights and Mental Health

Mental health refers to psychological, social, behavioral, and emotional aspects of health.

The Right to Mental Health is an important human rights issue.

“The right to health contains both freedoms and entitlements. Freedoms include the right to control one’s health, including the right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment and experimentation. Entitlements include the right to a system of health protection (i.e. health care and the underlying social determinants of health) that provides equality of opportunity for people to enjoy the highest attainable standard of health.”

The highest attainable standard of mental health care “includes the provision of equal and timely access to basic preventive, curative, rehabilitative health services and health education; regular screening programmes; appropriate treatment of prevalent diseases, illnesses, injuries and disabilities, preferably at community level; the provision of essential drugs; and appropriate mental health treatment and care.”

What is a Good Patient Outcome?

When we think about the outcomes of mental health care, we can think in terms that are important to the patient, or alternatively in terms that are important to others such as family, teachers, insurance companies, or the attending medical professionals.

A good patient outcome is one that leads toward optimum survival for the patient and all their associations.

The Highest Attainable Standard of Mental Health

It should be obvious by now that the term “mental health” has multiple effective meanings. It should also be obvious that psychiatry is not engaged in good mental health care, so the highest attainable standard of mental health would certainly eliminate psychiatric involvement.

The Bottom Line? Pick one or more of the above standards for good mental health and apply it to your own situations and interests; use them to guide your activities toward a higher standard. After all, good mental health is not a fixed state; one can always aspire and work toward a better state.

The Complete Removal of Psychosis
The Complete Removal of Psychosis

Psychiatry is Not a Sustainable Industry

Monday, March 8th, 2021

Reference:
United Nations Promoting Sustainable Development

Resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 25 September 2015
Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

Sustainable: Of, relating to, or being a method or lifestyle for using resources so that the resources can be maintained and continued, and are not depleted or permanently damaged.

[from Old French sustenir (French: soutenir), from Latin sustineo, sustinere, from sub– (under) + teneo (hold, uphold, possess, guard, maintain)]

The U.N. Sustainable Development Goals

The 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and their 169 associated targets adopted in 2015 and accepted by all Member States seek to realize the human rights of all and balance economic, social and environmental factors towards peace and prosperity for all.

To this end we examine some of the existing factors which block or inhibit the realization of these goals, and which must be eliminated so that the goals can be achieved in practice.

SDG 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global
Partnership for Sustainable Development.

Target 17.16: Enhance the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources, to support the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals in all countries, in particular developing countries.

How Psychiatry Obstructs Target 17.16

It should be obvious by now that psychiatry is not a sustainable industry, neither by definition nor by example.

The main resource in consideration here is people, the most critical building blocks of society. Yet psychiatry has no cures, and depends on damaging their patients to continue in business.

We see the globalization of biomedical psychiatry as undemocratic, unsustainable and without a clear ethical focus.

Green Mental Health Care

Green Mental Health Care is based on the preservation and treatment of the mind and body (for they are not separate functions) using non-toxic, non-addictive, and non-invasive strategies that produces good mental health. Green Mental Health Care has not only proven to be superior in patient outcomes than any other treatment method, including the use of psychiatric drugs, but it achieves the patient’s health goals at a fraction of the cost while saving them from the life-threatening health risks associated with psychiatric drugs.

Unsustainable Psychiatric Practices

Unsustainable prescription drug costs will ultimately create pressures on health systems and insurers to reduce spending in other areas or to decrease benefits.

ElectroConvulsive Therapy (ECT), or shock therapy, is a highly lucrative but damaging psychiatric practice. The purpose of shock treatment is to create brain damage. This brain damage is what brings about the memory loss and learning disability, as well as the spatial and temporal disorientation which always follows shock treatments. All physical damage done to the brain by ECT is permanent and irreversible. There is evidence that the damage, once begun by ECT, is progressive and feeds on itself, leading to further brain deterioration, including physical shrinkage of the brain and a shortening of the life of the victim. This barbaric “treatment” is currently being pushed on an unsuspecting and vulnerable patient population for major depression, but in reality it creates a patient for life due to this brain damage. Sign the petition to Ban ECT.

With mental health treatment costing up to 300% more than general medical treatment, spiraling costs are unavoidable when mental health care is mandated.

Psychiatrists and psychologists proclaim a worldwide epidemic of mental health problems and urge massive funding increases as the only solution. Yet Community Mental Health programs have been an expensive and colossal failure, creating homelessness, drug addiction, crime and unemployment all over the world.

Whenever a “mental patient” commits an act of senseless violence, psychiatrists invariably blame the tragedy on the person’s failure to continue their medication. Such incidents are used to justify mandated community treatment and involuntary commitment laws. However, statistics and facts show it is psychiatric drugs themselves that can create the very violence or mental incompetence they are prescribed to treat.

The end result of psychiatric treatment is not a cured patient, returned to society as a well-adjusted, functioning contributor, but rather a person with the same or worse mental symptoms, told they must remain on debilitating psychiatric drugs for life, because psychiatrists know of no other cure.

“Biomedical psychiatry” has yet to validate a single psychiatric diagnosis as a disease, or as anything neurological, biological, chemically imbalanced or genetic. Decades of psychiatric monopoly over mental health has only lead to upwardly spiraling mental illness statistics and continuously escalating funding demands — the very definition of unsustainable.

The claim that only increased funding will cure the problems of psychiatry has lost its ring of truth. Psychiatry and psychology should be held accountable for the funds already given them, and irrefutably and scientifically prove the physical existence of mental disorders they claim should be treated and covered by insurance in the same way as physical diseases are.

The many critical challenges facing societies today reflect the vital need to strengthen individuals through workable, viable and humanitarian alternatives to harmful psychiatric options.

Psychiatric fraud and abuse must be eradicated so that SDG 17 can occur.

Psychiatric Intention — Failure is Not an Accident

Monday, November 16th, 2020

Even a dog distinguishes between being stumbled over and being kicked.

It’s called INTENT.

One definition of intention is positive postulation. It’s a self-determined causation, action, resolve, outcome or consideration. Whatever it is, it is done on purpose.

[Ultimately from Latin intendere “intend, extend, direct”, from in- “towards” + tendere “stretch, tend” — for example “to stretch out for, or aim at”].

Failure can be defined as a reversal of an intention. For example, one intends to hit the wall and does not hit the wall, or one intends not to hit the wall and does hit the wall. These are failures. The intention was reversed in action.

Psychiatric Intention — Failure is Not an Accident

Let’s examine the Intent of the psychiatric industry. It’s something you need to know.

It is not well-known that psychiatry, as taught in schools and funded by governments, is not intended to cure anything. Historically the idea that a science could be developed to control populations sprang up after the French Revolution of the late 1700’s, to counter the popular demand of liberty. At Leipzig University in the late 1800’s Wundt advanced the idea that nerve conditioning could be done to control people. In Russia between 1890 and 1930 Pavlov conceived the idea that men’s social responses could be altered with conditioning. Using the same principles in the 1930’s and 40’s German psychiatrists extended “conditioning” to mean outright murder of dissenters.

The pattern has been invariable. Totalitarian principles are now called “psychology,” “sociology” and “psychiatry.” This half-witted dream to control society has slaughtered more than a hundred million people.

The purported “intention” of psychiatry to treat mental illness is a failure. As psychiatrist Rex Cowdry, the acting director of the National Institute of Mental Health, said of “mental illness” in 1995, “We do not know the causes. We don’t have methods of ‘curing’ these illnesses yet.”

The goal of psychiatry was reached at least in 1955. With the advent of LSD as a “treatment” it could now make anyone insane. And now we see the actual goal of psychiatry, which has not been a failure, is to control populations for their own ends.

Psychiatrists and their front groups operate straight out of the terrorist text books. The 1920’s Russian Revolutionary Communistic plan for world domination as originally conceived used psychiatry as a weapon designed to undermine the social fabric of the target country. One can see it in constant use in present time.

Psychiatry’s brutal and barbaric treatments succeed not only in controlling their patients, but actually result in harming their patients — Involuntary Commitment, Electro-Convulsive Therapy, Psychosurgery, Deadly Restraints, psychiatric Rape, harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs, etc.

Protect yourself and your families by executing a Living Will. A Living Will lets you specify decisions about your health care treatment in advance. Should you be in a position where you are to be subject to unwanted psychiatric hospitalization and/or mental or medical treatment, this Letter of Protection from Psychiatric Incarceration and/or Treatment directs that such incarceration, hospitalization, treatment or procedures not be imposed, committed or used on you.

Wishing you all a Happy Thanksgiving!

The psychiatric Rush to Market

Monday, February 17th, 2020
Psychiatry has always given the impression that cures were the rule, rather than the exception. However, the psychiatric industry itself admits it has no capacity to cure.

Psychotropic drugging is big business — a high-income partnership between psychiatry and drug companies that has created an $80 billion industry in psychotropic drugs.

Psychiatrists tell us that the way to fix unwanted behavior is by altering brain chemistry with a pill. But unlike a mainstream medical drug like insulin, psychotropic medications have no measurable target illness to correct, and can upset the very delicate balance of chemical processes the body needs to run smoothly. Nevertheless, psychiatrists and drug companies have used these drugs to create a huge and lucrative market niche. And they’ve done this by naming more and more unwanted behaviors as “medical disorders” requiring psychiatric medication.

Thus there is a continuing need to find or create new patients to which to market new drugs, and a continuing rush to market for the latest drugs regardless of their harmful side effects.

The Risk of Side Effects

In a study of 68,730 individuals it was found that psychotropic drugs (SSRIs, mood stabilizers, antipsychotics, and benzodiazepines) are independently associated with a significantly increased risk of hip fractures and other major osteoporotic fractures.

Lead author Dr. James Bolton at the University of Manitoba says, “So physicians need to think about fracture risk as they are prescribing these medications, especially in patients who are vulnerable to fracture.”

Psychiatric Marketing Campaigns

Almost a third of drugs cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration pose safety risks that are identified only after their approval. Thus we say “rush to market”; you can find hidden drug marketing campaigns practically everywhere.

Many of these marketing campaigns come from industry?funded front groups operated by psychiatrists but posing as compassionate patient support groups. Of all these programs, one of the most successful is the benevolent?sounding mental health screening campaign; it uses broad?based psychiatric screening questionnaires to diagnose common life situations such as sadness, nervousness and occasional loneliness.

Currently running is the “suicide prevention” campaign. But statistics show that there is no teenage suicide epidemic; and participants in these programs are more likely to consider suicide a solution to a problem after the screening program than before the program.

With a long and well-documented history of failure, psychiatrists and their drugs are under attack by government safety warnings, legislation, and tens of thousands of lawsuits.

Interestingly, underlying most psychiatric problems is an undiscovered and untreated physical illness. And when that is cured, so is the “mental problem.” But because of the powerful hold psychiatrists and drug companies exert over the rest of the medical field, this is rarely told to patients. To protect yourself and those you love, insist on a full and accurate consent: an accounting of all risks and benefits of the treatment recommended, of other treatments and of not doing anything at all.
Modern World

Power to the Patients

Monday, January 27th, 2020
Listening to a radio program about considerations of political power in the Middle East made us wonder more generally about the concept of power. Their main consideration was the accumulation of power in order to control various elements of society. We noticed how this might apply to abuses in the mental health industry.

Power is one of those English words with multiple definitions. Generally it means “the ability to act or produce an effect”. In other contexts, for example in physics, it has the definition “the time rate of doing work.” In the referenced radio program it meant “relating to political, social, or economic control.” There are other specific definitions in mathematics, religion, business, law, etc.

In a very practical personal sense power means “being able to do what one is doing when one is doing it.” In another practical sense it means “the ability to hold a position in space.” Power represents total abundance where nothing can strike you down. A Zone of Power could be considered the area over which one has responsibility and control.

We ask how all this might relate to patient abuse in the mental health industry.

Coercive Psychiatry

When we speak of “coercive psychiatry” we mean that psychiatry is used as a means of social control against which one has no recourse and cannot fight back. Prime examples are involuntary commitment and enforced treatment.

As the late Professor Thomas Szasz said, “coercive psychiatrists function as judges and jailers not physicians and healers” with the power of life and death over the most vulnerable people.

“Disguising social control as medical treatment is a deceit which conceals an abuse.” This is a de facto abuse of power, as it seeks to limit and control the individual instead of helping the individual to get better and improve their conditions in life.

Coercive psychiatry is not intended to cure anything. On the contrary, psychiatry is the science of control and entrapment, and having power over distressed and vulnerable individuals. 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. It is actually a mis-use of power, since its intentions are to make less of a person’s self-determinism and give more power to others and the state.

All too often people may mistakenly disparage their own strength or power; do not allow psychiatry to crush you even further.

Click here to read more about psychopolitics — the art of asserting power over the thoughts and loyalties of individuals and the conquest of enemy nations through “mental healing”.

Supporting and Treating Officers In Crisis Act of 2019

Sunday, August 18th, 2019

Introduced by Republican Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, the “Supporting and Treating Officers In Crisis Act of 2019” (S. 998) was signed into law by President Trump on July 25, 2019.

This bill reauthorizes and expands certain Department of Justice grant programs to provide mental health, stress reduction, psychological services, suicide prevention services, and training for identifying, reporting, and responding to officer mental health crises and suicide, for law enforcement officers and their families. The bill authorizes up to $7,500,000 in appropriations each year for fiscal years 2020 to 2024, a maximum total of $37.5 million.

This sounds eminently socially acceptable, and indeed the bill was widely supported by Congress and various national advocacy groups.

The Real Crisis in Mental Health

While society certainly owes significant consideration and support to law enforcement officers (LEOs) and their families, we can’t help noting that in today’s environment, “mental health and suicide prevention services” really means psychiatric drugs and other harmful psychiatric treatments.

The real crisis in mental health care today is not officer stress, but psychiatric fraud and abuse.

While the bill specifically calls for evidence-based programs, the evidence actually shows that psychiatrists don’t know what causes mental trauma, are unable to predict violence or suicide, and cannot cure any mental disorder they claim to treat.

Psychiatric Fraud

By their own admission psychiatrists cannot predict violence or suicide, and often release violent patients from facilities, claiming that they are not a threat. In 1979, an American Psychiatric Association’s task force admitted in its Brief Amicus Curiae to the U.S. Supreme Court that psychiatrists could not predict dangerousness. It informed the court that “‘dangerousness’ is neither a psychiatric nor a medical diagnosis, but involves issues of legal judgment and definition, as well as issues of social policy.” In addition to not being able to predict violent behavior, psychiatrists certainly have no cures for it, a fact that even they admit.

Psychiatric diagnoses are not based on science, but opinion. Psychiatrists do not have any scientific or medical test to diagnose a person’s mental condition and rely upon faulty observation and opinion of behavior. They admit to not knowing the cause of a single mental disorder or how to cure them. The error in their opinions is enormous — they condemn the innocent, release the dangerous, induce violence in others through drugs and commit people who are not in need of help or turn those away who may genuinely be in need of it.

Recommendations

Rather than training psychiatrists and psychologists about LEO mental health, the grants should be used to train LEOs, security personnel, teachers, coroners, and other professionals to recognize that irrational, violent and suicidal behavior could be caused by psychiatric drugs.

Click here to download and read the CCHR report “Psychiatric Drugs Create Violence & Suicide — School Shootings & Other Acts of Senseless Violence.”

Click here to download and readPsychiatrists Cannot Predict or Cure Violence.

Now They Are Arguing About Exercise

Thursday, September 13th, 2018

Psychiatric researchers from Yale University and other brain research institutions have analyzed 1.2 million people to see how exercise affects a person’s mental health.

The results and subsequent discussions have been blasted across all news media, and are proliferating rapidly.

Anyone with an exercise bike has been chiming in; some say their depression didn’t go away with exercise, some say it did. With glee, many reporters emphasize one particular result of the study, that “there is such a thing as too much exercise.”

The researchers measured “self-reported mental health.” Naturally, they also reported that more study was needed; needing more study (i.e. needing more research funds) is a standard result of many self-perpetuating studies. One could say they are exercising their right to continue working.

For this study, the only mental health disorder that the researchers took into account was “depression,” using something called the “Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System,” with questions such as “Now thinking about your mental health, which includes stress, depression, and problems with emotions, for how many days during the past 30 days was your mental health not good?”

We’re incredulous that this ridiculous research is given so many column inches of press, and that it took 1.2 million people to decide that sometimes exercise helps one feel better and sometimes it doesn’t.

If exercising sarcasm were a disease, we’d probably be dead by now.

OK, let’s look at this from another point of view. First, what do people actually mean by “good mental health?” We often say that psychiatry produces no cures, and for good reason. But what would a mental health cure look like? We’d probably call that “good mental health.” Here’s what we think:

We generally take cure to mean the elimination of some unwanted condition with some effective treatment. The primary purpose of any mental health treatment must be the therapeutic care and treatment of individuals who are suffering emotional disturbance. The only effective measure of this treatment must be “patients recovering and being sent, sane, back into society as productive individuals.” This, we would call a cure.

So, good mental health must then be “operating sanely in society as productive individuals.”

Second, what do people actually mean by “depression?” We often say that there is no such disease as depression, since there are no clinical tests for it. There are two main possibilities — one is an undiagnosed and untreated medical condition; the other is the opposite of good mental health, which would be “operating insanely in society as non-productive individuals.”

So what is the cure? In the first case, using standard clinical tests (blood tests, urine tests, x-rays, DNA tests, MRI, ultrasound, etc.) find and treat the actual medical condition. In the second case, get busy being productive; and hence we get the occasional benefits of exercise as it relates to the productivity of one taking some responsibility for one’s own health.

We might say that depression could actually be low morale; and since morale is based on production, find something useful to do and hop to it!

Psychiatry & Psychology Have Embraced the Entrepreneurial Spirit

Friday, July 20th, 2018

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.

Research also confirms that minorities are more likely to be misdiagnosed as having serious psychiatric problems, leading to the psychiatric targeting of  entrepreneurial minorities.

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.

Patients For Life

Monday, April 2nd, 2018

A leading cause of death in patients diagnosed with a serious mental condition (such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression) has been preventable medical conditions such as cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes, metabolic disorders which are typical side effects of being treated with second generation (atypical) antipsychotics.

The majority of those who screen positive for these types of metabolic disorders do not receive treatment for these medical conditions. Even worse, the majority of patients being treated with these antipsychotics are not even screened, with simple blood tests, for these side effects.

A tremendous amount of effort, lasting over at least the last 15 years, has been expended in trying to change the U.S. medical system to implement simple blood test screening protocols for patients being prescribed antipsychotics. Many reasons have been given for this reluctance to change, but the most obvious reasons were not among them — the fact that no one knows how these drugs work, that they are addictive, harmful, and are causing side effects that produce continuing income from these patients for life, a life albeit shortened by the metabolic disorders caused by the drugs.

The general attitude of the mental health care industry is that mental disorders are comorbid with metabolic disorders. This means that there is a simultaneous presence of these two chronic conditions in a patient, with little thought given to the fact that metabolic disorders can be the side effect of the drugs being given for the mental disorder. Since the drugs are addictive, harmful, and have nasty side effects, the obvious solution is to stop prescribing the drugs and use one or more of the many non-drug alternatives. This, however, would deprive the industry of one of its top money-makers.

Patients already presenting with CVD or diabetes, or who have known risk factors for these, should not even be considered as candidates for antipsychotics, and should also be screened for any other undiagnosed and untreated medical conditions which may be causing mental symptoms.

A case could be made for malpractice if blood test screening for metabolic disorders is not being performed for patients vulnerable to these diseases, especially since the medications that psychiatrists prescribe increase vulnerability to metabolic syndrome. [Metabolic syndrome is a cluster of metabolic disorders, usually including increased blood pressure, high blood sugar, excess body fat around the waist, and abnormal cholesterol or triglyceride levels — that occur together, increasing the risk of heart disease, stroke and diabetes.]

Psychiatrists should be responsible for monitoring any potential side effects associated with the drugs that they prescribe; therefore, it is negligent if monitoring is not being done.

We are seeing a huge increase in the rate of antipsychotic prescriptions among younger pediatric patients, yet the younger one is, the lower one’s chances of being monitored.

Based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), statistics are touted about near “epidemic” rates of mental illness in order to demand more government funds and sell more harmful drugs, making people “patients for life” as the drug adverse events then require more drugs to handle these harmful side effects.

Contact your local, state and federal authorities and legislators and demand that funding for psychiatric promises be revoked until the mental health industry can prove its effectiveness with actual cures.