Neurologist acuses psychiatry of fraud; Stevie Nicks concurs.

Originally posted by jonnywhite

I still think our problems [color=salmon]are inability to enforce workplace standards, environmental laws and labor laws on foreign companies that we do business with.

I feel that this sentiment is thoughtfull, and means well.
I just wonder who this benevolent enforcer is?
Has America ever been happy with
our leaders? Are drugs going
to make this possible?


David Grouchy

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/85b45034cab0.png[/atsimg]

reply to post by davidgrouchy


Try orthomolecular psychiatry

My IQ improved at least 10 points after taking the nutritional supplements and switching my diet around.

reply to post by davidgrouchy

It may seem like the two are unrelated, but a dad who lost his job and is trying to find another one or go back to school to get an income again is a dad that will cause a stressful home life for a child. That child then has to go to school and be a good student while deal with what's going on at home. My opinion is that if what's going on at home is taken care of then the child will have more support and more support means a foundation from which that child can better grow. Doing otherwise means you're making that childs life harder. OUr society likes to pick those special cases where things work out. In general, hardship can teach us lessons and make us better people, but if hardship is our goal because we feel it's a good teacher then why don't we move to Congo or Sudan? Surely we will learn even more if we all lived in poverty and disease.

Originally posted by unityemissions
Try orthomolecular psychiatry

My IQ improved at least 10 points after taking the nutritional supplements and switching my diet around.

This sounds awesome!

I can only embrace and celebrate
the fact that you did this.
Star for you!


David Grouchy

Originally posted by NightGypsy

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.

Okay, so what is the test that is done that determines this "chemical imbalance?" I'm not saying there isn't such a thing. All I'm saying is we have heard this term used by the psychiatric industry for so long, yet I am curious what tests have proven this? What "chemicals" are off balance? And what are the specific symptoms if one of these chemicals is "off balance?"

There isn't a test, other than observational. If there's anything else, it's new to me. How could you test for an imbalance in neural chemicals? Why do some people get better after they take some meds? Why do some people get better after taking a placebo? I'd like to answer your questions, but what you're asking has no answers thus far.

Neurologist acuses psychiatry of fraud; Stevie Nicks concurs.

best thread title in the history of... forever!

2nd

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

Originally posted by sepermeru
reply to post by davidgrouchy

 

Heck, it doesn't have to be yes or no. An answer at all would be good. Are you seriously arguing that it's better that he was not on medication, and are you sure enough of that to assert it to his victims?

I'll make it even simpler. Forget Jared. Meet a guy called Julio. He owns a gun, and he hears voices telling him to shoot people who wear the color orange. You meet up with Julio and he says 'Hey man, I have this pill I could take, I tried it before and it makes the voices and the urges to shoot people who wear orange go away. But I like the voices because I like the idea of shooting people who wear orange.'

You tell him 'Yeah, man, don't take the pill'? That is your argument, that he should not take that pill? What do you think he should do?

edit on 24-5-2011 by sepermeru because: edit button makes me happy

The problem with your posts is that you equate getting help with being on medication. Kids with adhd, depression or anxiety are a ballpark away from people hearing voices telling them to shoot people.

You invented that equivalency on my behalf. The conversational context of my posts was about psychiatric meds for psychotic and dangerous people-- and the reason I was focusing there was that some people, as you will see if you read the conversation, genuinely do believe that even those who hear voices telling them to shoot people should not take any medication. The question of whether ADHD meds are overprescribed is separate from the question of whether there are never any cases in which psychiatric meds are valid. There's no logical equivalence between my argument that there are some cases in which meds are valid, and an argument for meds being valid in all cases, which I've never claimed.