Comments on: A whole branch of science turns out to be fake

By: jancarol11

jancarol11 — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 05:44:47 +0000

where is that “like” button!

By: jancarol11

jancarol11 — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 05:27:16 +0000

Actually, it would be nice if scientific method had anything to do with these drugs. Ref: “Blame it on the Brain,” Valenstein (shows it’s been going on since the 70’s), and the newer by Whitaker et al., “Psychiatry Under the Influence”

By: justanthropology

justanthropology — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 00:50:28 +0000

Spitzer may be gone, but his legacy and the unremitting consequences of his work live on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/27/us/robert-spitzer-psychiatrist-who-set-rigorous-standards-for-diagnosis-dies-at-83.html

By: Deborah

Deborah — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 18:21:18 +0000

Thank you for this post. As I have done research over the years myself to try to escape my own diagnoses, I find these articles so disturbing. So sad this can be allowed to go on in this culture and my horrific fear of how I can escape this system and who will help me get off these drugs and stay off these drugs and I wonder if I will survive.

There should be a law.

A filmmaker should expose this, Micheal Moore perhaps.

Thank you for posting. I pray people will survive this dark time in medicine.

By: Deborah

Deborah — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 18:18:05 +0000

Reblogged this on Science Goes On – A Blind Date With God and commented:
So many victims, so few ways to escape that psychiatrists have done to us…and I wonder how many will survive these drugs we can’t get off of now.

You always thought you could trust your Doctor, one would never think it turns out they are the ones that make you believe you are sick, make you believe you need these pills and it’s too late to go back to when your brain did not take them and you wonder why you are poor and disabled now and traumatized and why no one will help you stop taking the pills….and the horror continues and you wonder…if it can even be stopped.

By: Jennifer L Thorpe

Jennifer L Thorpe — Tue, 05 May 2015 19:30:42 +0000

I agree and its sad. Big Pharm has its way.

By: Cherrieri

Cherrieri — Tue, 05 May 2015 03:22:28 +0000

it’s worse than “making money”, it’s about control.

By: Cherrieri

Cherrieri — Tue, 05 May 2015 03:20:56 +0000

There are many physical ailments/diseases that cause emotional symptoms, the problem is that doctors have been trained to refer to psychiatrists.

By: Kate

Kate — Tue, 10 Feb 2015 01:49:22 +0000

I think you misunderstand something. In science, there is no such thing as “proof.” We can never “know.” As far as the scientific method goes, if a scientist makes a hypothesis, follows proper method to experiment upon said hypothesis, and comes to a conclusion that supports the hypothesis–that isn’t proof. Your hypothesis is supported, at best. Theories are made when research (i.e. experiments) have been done, repeated, peer reviewed, altered, done again, peer reviewed again. As in… it’s a really long process to form a theory. If even ONE experiment doesn’t support your theory, it’s out. It’s gone. Science is all about knowing the truth, yeah? People trying to figure stuff out. Same with spirituality, same with psychiatry. The thing is, since we can’t know everything, we do the best we can.
First, a bit of background: The way all mutations work in the human body, whether it be cancer, macular degeneration, or ADHD, is that very small RNAs, called microRNAs, act as instructions for protein formation. These RNAs can instruct cells to make proteins out of viral tissue instead of healthy tissue, such as in the case of Hep B, or these microRNAs can attach to a messenger RNA and destroy it, effectively silencing the formation of dangerous cells (disease, cancer, etc). Ideally, scientists would be able to synthetically produce microRNA’s (synthetic ones are called siRNAs) and program them to silence the genes that cause psychiatric “diseases.” However, this is not the case. Often, we don’t know what causes such things as these, but we can do all we are able in order to relieve those who are suffering.
Back to “doing the best we can.” Take, for example, birth control. Scientists don’t actually know why taking a combination of estrogen/progesterone every month keeps us from getting pregnant, but it happens anyway to the point of 99% effectiveness. Lots of times, scientists DON’T know how something works, they just know that it does. Many experiments have a different result than is intended, and lots of times, this is how progress is made and innovation is had, even if the intent was different. Similarly, psychiatric medication helps the symptoms of very harmful illnesses, like psychosis, schizophrenia, and multiple personality disorder.
Personally, I am not opposed to medicating (with their consent) those who suffer from conditions like this, as long as they understand that every individual is different and one medication will not work for all victims of the same illness. For some, therapy and medication is the best route for them. For some, homeopathic remedies soothe them better. But the important things are that A) they are not a danger to society and B) that they feel relieved from their symptoms, if they find those symptoms to be problematic (as in routinely interfering with their ability to live life). However, “medicating” often goes too far. Far too many children are diagnosed with ADHD than is realistically probable. Though milder conditions like ADHD can be problematic, many patients AND physicians seek to fix an underlying behavioral problem with a quick prescription instead of trying to fix the root of the problem.
Really, it is not about denouncing science, or denouncing homeopathic remedies and spirituality. It is about balance. We’re all trekking toward a common goal.

Another thought: You probably should have a beef with the FDA and Insurance companies as well. Here’s why:
A) After all the clinical trials have been done and a medication is shown to help with certain conditions (let’s call these conditions A,B, and C), the FDA (non scientists and non doctors, I might add) insists on RE testing the medicine (which is very expensive) and that takes a really long time. Enter insurance companies. Let’s say the clinical trials say that medicine A helps with conditions A,B, and C. However, the FDA “tests” have only supported the medicine’s use for A, but not B and C. EVEN IF medication A is the best option for person with condition C, the insurance company will refuse to pay for the medication because the FDA hasn’t “tested” it yet.
B) If medication A will work better for a patient than medication B, if medication A is more expensive than medication B, the insurance company will insist that the patient try medication B first, since it is cheaper. If the medication does not work (which, in this case, it wouldn’t in the first place), the doctor has to fill out an appeal form in order for the insurance company to even remotely consider paying for medication B for the ailing patient.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on what I have to say, Thanks for reading. 🙂

By: medusajoe

medusajoe — Fri, 06 Feb 2015 03:00:34 +0000

I guess such New age definitions of psychiatric frauds such as schizophrenia are a suitable bedfellow.