Neurologist acuses psychiatry of fraud; Stevie Nicks concurs.

... psychiatry’s claims that their diagnoses are chemical imbalances is nothing but a lie and a deception. And yet, because of their financial might on the world scene, no one will challenge them. They have friends bought and paid for in government and in all of the governmental health-care agencies.

www.cchrint.org...

The biggest mistake I ever made was giving in to my friends and going to see a psychiatrist. - Stevie Nicks

www.newsweek.com...

Just a reminder to stay alert. We are being hit from several different directions, and a key player is the "mental health" industry.

Remember: They can keep you locked up in a "hospital" on the socially-acceptable basis that you are "sick" and need treatment. This ploy has been used many times down through history as a form of state-sponsored terrorism.

reply to post by l_e_cox


Scientology site, there is to much to be said on Scientology, their claims on science and etc. Just bare that in mind.

reply to post by l_e_cox



Someone has been rather selective of their sources and giving partial quotes to support their argument.

I'm sorry, that Neurologist is specifically addressing ADHD and has nothing to do with the times article you addressed. Nor does address mental illness in general..

Why are you posting this material in a misleading fashion?

My question then is this; if ADHD is not a real disease, and amphetamine-like drugs are prescribed after diagnosis, why then do the amphetamines tend to calm the children down? I always accepted that there was in fact a chemical imbalance that was corrected with these types of drugs. I could be wrong I suppose.

I was diagnosed with ADD just last year, however I chose not to take any drugs. Instead I chose meditation and exercises that calm the mind. It isn't that I can't sit still or anything, it is just that I get bored with almost everything in about 10 minutes. It's hard to explain, but it is really annoying.

Oh no...this leaves too much open. The mind and brain are not the same...that is to say the psyche and the biological organ (the brain) are connected, but two totally different spectrums of the science. Pharmacology may see something beneficial that psychology may see as adverse in every way. Leaves the ambiguous question wide open...Treat behavior (a behaviorist's view) or treat the thought process before the behavior occurs (typical neo-fruedian approach)?

Way too many questions, theories, approaches, treatments, etc...to know where to begin on this subject.

One thing is clear, and that is you have to have unbiased information to even get started. This information provided is way too biased and that is why science has procedures in place (like a double blind study) to avoid the mess of having bad data.

Who can come to anything but a bad decision when all they have to go on is bad information?

I'd say that some people do have a chemical imbalance, but the majority of people do not need psychotropic drugs. This majority is living out of touch with themselves, making them think they have an imbalance. They do, but it's in their lifestyle, not neurotransmitters.

Originally posted by satron
I'd say that some people do have a chemical imbalance, but the majority of people do not need psychotropic drugs. This majority is living out of touch with themselves, making them think they have an imbalance. They do, but it's in their lifestyle, not neurotransmitters.

This is a good theory but I have to ask this then:

How do you really know who suffering from what, and how do you treat it? Drug therapy, clinical psychology, surgical procedure (I always like reading about split brain procedures), what is for who?

edit: By the way, are we seriously considering Stevie Nicks opinion on this as a good source? I love Stevie Nick's music, but really is she authorative on ADHD?

Originally posted by jerryznv

Originally posted by satron
I'd say that some people do have a chemical imbalance, but the majority of people do not need psychotropic drugs. This majority is living out of touch with themselves, making them think they have an imbalance. They do, but it's in their lifestyle, not neurotransmitters.

This is a good theory but I have to ask this then:

How do you really know who suffering from what, and how do you treat it? Drug therapy, clinical psychology, surgical procedure (I always like reading about split brain procedures), what is for who?

I would tell the people to slow down the pace of their lifestyle, and see if that helps. I'm not an expert, but I'd say 9/10 times it's going to work. You always start out with the simpler solutions, because they generally work first. If it fails then you go down the line. Some people might not be happy being told to slow down or to quit being so ambitious when they can't handle it, but that's not a chemical imbalance, it's a fault in one's expectations.

Originally posted by satron

Originally posted by jerryznv

Originally posted by satron
I'd say that some people do have a chemical imbalance, but the majority of people do not need psychotropic drugs. This majority is living out of touch with themselves, making them think they have an imbalance. They do, but it's in their lifestyle, not neurotransmitters.

This is a good theory but I have to ask this then:

How do you really know who suffering from what, and how do you treat it? Drug therapy, clinical psychology, surgical procedure (I always like reading about split brain procedures), what is for who?

I would tell the people to slow down the pace of their lifestyle, and see if that helps. I'm not an expert, but I'd say 9/10 times it's going to work. You always start out with the simpler solutions, because they generally work first. If it fails then you go down the line. Some people might not be happy being told to slow down or to quit being so ambitious when they can't handle it, but that's not a chemical imbalance, it's a fault in one's expectations.

I want to make sure I understand what you are saying...

If a child is diagnosed with ADHD then slowing down the pace of his/her lifestyle should work (well 9 out of 10 times anyway) and they should also lower their expectations because they are just too ambitious?

They really don't have a chemical imbalance and drug therapy would be useless...do I have that right?

Rubbish we all know the human body and brain
runs on chemical balances.
and you get a lot of chemical imbalances.
if you dont get all the vitamins you need you get sick.
so if the brain does not have the chemical it needs.
it will go funny, chemical imbalances!

Originally posted by buddha
Rubbish we all know the human body and brain
runs on chemical balances.
and you get a lot of chemical imbalances.
if you dont get all the vitamins you need you get sick.
so if the brain does not have the chemical it needs.
it will go funny, chemical imbalances!

Most of the time, it's a part of their personality. Just because someone is diagnosed with ADHD, it doesn't mean that they always have a debilitating condition that needs medication

Originally posted by satron

Originally posted by buddha
Rubbish we all know the human body and brain
runs on chemical balances.
and you get a lot of chemical imbalances.
if you dont get all the vitamins you need you get sick.
so if the brain does not have the chemical it needs.
it will go funny, chemical imbalances!

Most of the time, it's a part of their personality. Just because someone is diagnosed with ADHD, it doesn't mean that they always have a debilitating condition that needs medication

I agree it does not mean they need medication, but then my question still stands...

Who needs what for what...who is to know?

Who makes that call? Hopefully someone who has researched the benefits of medication and can make an informed decision. What degree is the ADHD and how debilitating is it really?

I don't know that I would let Stevie Nicks be the deciding factor in my treatment.

reply to post by satron


The neurotransmitters are just the "wires" transporting the communication between your body (through your subconscius) and your consiousness, and not the source itself. So the idea of messing with the wires is just as brilliant as if you shut down the instruments in front of a pilot whenever it's making noise due to engine problems.

Less noise, yes, but.......

reply to post by alice2b


Ever hear of the synaptic gap? How about dendrites and axons?

Just curious because then you would know that neurotransmitters are chemical messangers that cross the synaptic gaps between nuerons.

reply to post by jerryznv


Exactly, notice the word you use; "messengers"

We don't want to "kill the messenger", do we?

I understand that I come out pretty strong, not being a scientist and all, but I understand how my body works, and also my subconscious. Thanks to what I've been able to figure out about the programming of our genetic mind, I've been able to cure my panic attacks in less than a minute, and I've been able to get rid of all my 30 years of suicidal thoughts in an instant, and for good. How? Because I suddenly understood where it all came from, and it lost it's power over me. Didn't need a singe pill, didn't cost me a dime......

reply to post by alice2b


Please make no mistake as to what I am trying to point out...I do agree that a "magic pill" is not the awnser to everything. As you pointed to so clearly in your own experience.

I do however think that pharmacology has a place in modern nueroscience and for millions that have not found relief in anything else, a "magic pill" seems to work wonders.

The subconcious mind (as neo-fruedians love to explore) is at best, barely understood if understood at all, and it is my opinion that libraries of books could be written about it when we do finally grasp it.

I am glad to hear you have overcome the troubles in your experience, I could only hope that more people can find what you have discovered, but until then the "magic pill" has it's place today.

Stevie Nicks describes her experience with psychiatry as a mistake, and because it is so new in the world of science, alot of people think it is a joke, and without benefits. I disagree.

reply to post by jerryznv


Yup, we agree all the way down to one single thing.....psychdrugs are, in my opinion, just at legal substitute for cannabis, amphetamin etc. Actually, I would find pot as more healthy than prescribed psychdrugs. At least it's natural, not chemical. But it's up to each and one of us to decide what's best for ourselves, even though I find this kind of drugging of children to be abusive.

I do understand your opinion on this matter, though, since so many people find some kind of relief using this kind of quick-fix medication.

reply to post by l_e_cox


That is such an awesome title for the thread, in so much as it implies Stevie Nicks and a neurologist are on par intellectually speaking. Regardless, I do truly think it is important to get most of my news based on the opinions of entertainers as I find they are the most important and trustworth sources to follow. Thanks for the info! Have you read any Kirk Cameron lately? That guy tells it like it is!

CJ

reply to post by alice2b


I know this is not my thread...and my opinion is pretty well smeared all over it, so I just want to add one last thing and then I am leaving this alone (mostly because it is too ambiguous).

I don't know if medication is a quick fix necessarily...for example: A diabetic needs insulin for their disease, I do not consider this a quick fix, but an essential for life, or quality of life, depending on how serious their illness is.

People that suffer from mental illness are (at least according to the medical model) suffering from a disease, and much like the diabetic, it is not in their control to change their chemical make-up.

A person that has clinically been diagnosed with a psychotic disorder, such as schizophernia, may very well not be in control of the way they are statistically deviating with their behavior.

Anti-psychotic drugs are very helpful, to the schizopheranic, and to everyone else, so why not use them...it's really not a quick fix in a situation like this, in my opinion, and is no different then insulin for a diabetic.

That's all I have on this subject...for now...Stevie Nicks can sing, psychiatrists can prescribe medication to improve things for peoples lives (sometimes).

When I was young,
my dad did a lot of research,
and found us a family doctor that specialized in sports medicine.

He said that he was curious why the popular view of medicine was about treating illness.
That a doctor should be able to detect a healthy person, and maybe even improve their performance. Just like the expensive doctors that the NFL used. Isn't is strange that some doctors will keep looking until they find something wrong.

I'm still waiting for evidence from the Psychiatric profession that their treatments have produces a single genius. Hell, even a slightly smarter more well adjusted person would be a start. I, for one, endorse the obvious slant of the opening post as a healthy dose of self preservation and suspicion.


David Grouchy