Needing emotional support shouldn’t mean “run to your nearest MD or therapist” as this often leaves people trapped on a medicalized merry-go-round that never stops.

Our cultural mindset needs to change.

Report comment

CLARIFICATION: Just because so-called “antidepressants” affect people’s bio-chemical makeup (serotonin levels, blah, blah, blah) doesn’t mean someone has an illness or a “disorder”. All it means is that they’ve swallowed a a powerful emotional anesthetic (aka sedative).

Report comment

Psychoactive Drugs

Be honest? Seems fair. A simple change in a culture which at present is operating on lies and fraud, to one where truth is expected. Oh wait, i’m becoming delusional again. Vulpes pilum mutat non mores.

This is serious Mum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-mLIdLZZeI

Activism to Change Societal Policies

I read something earlier which went like;
‘Only when the last tree is cut down, the last fish caught and the water totally poisoned, will the white man realise that he can’t eat his money.’

Why bother with activism? If covid has taught us anything, it is that the powers that be will go to ANY length to ensure their ‘societal policies’ are implemented, by force if necessary. One positive from that was that I got to watch as the whole community was subjected to what most ‘mental patients’ live with each and every day (restrictions to liberties, forced or ‘coerced’ injections).

I bet they were sweating when they were discussing how far they could go with their human rights abuses though. People seem to accept a lot when the target has been slandered with the label of mental patient (which is what a lot of people who refused the ‘vaccines’ were accused of being. Conspiracy nut jobs etc)
Well, this is how far they will go to get someone the ‘help’ they need……

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ9UQKBUrsg

Luckily the Police have not been co opted by ‘mental health services’ in the same manner they were in National Socialist Germany. The Fuhrerprinzip rather than the rule of law Australians value so much….. well, obviously not these particular police, and not a lot of those who work in mental health who know what is good for you. And it was referred to “Ethical Standards” (if only they knew what that little euphemism means lol)

Selecting and Training More Talented Therapists

Why on earth would anyone who was talented want to become a therapist? It’s like the problem we have here in Australia. Our education system (or to be precise, the students. We don’t actually have an ‘education system’ it’s more an ‘indoctrination system’ but putting that aside) provides billions to the Govt in fees (HECS), and with that money they subsidize the Oil Companies (ie they pay no tax).

We have a lack of talented people because no one wants to go to University and end up with a debt which will take them many years to pay off. Instead they go and work on the mines and make big bucks. This means we don’t train any local people (because we don’t have any teachers) and have to import all of our ‘skilled workers’.

Why not make education free and tax the Oil and Mining Companies? Awww I forgot (Just noticed ma sign ….Jeff Foxworthy style) our Politicians are being paid to ensure the outcomes are favoring the Companies we aren’t allowed to know they have shares in? Which seems to feed back into point 2.

Report comment

CLARIFICATION: The harsh reality is that fields as scientifically porous as psychiatry and as theoretically porous as psychology are entrenched in DOGMA — a kind that requires an inordinate amount GULLIBILITY in its students.

Report comment

If depression is not acceptable and “emotionally very troubled” or “unacceptably low mood” are not acceptable, What would be acceptable to describe this phenomenon?

Report comment

I you are unfamiliar with Hubbard’s teachings, how do you know they are fanciful? In my experience, they get results.

Report comment

John B, I would call chronic depression a “chronic grief neurosis” or in deeper cases a “chronic apathy neurosis.” But these labels are secondary to the task of getting to know the patient and discovering what is really going on with them.

If their problem is not chronic, the cause of it could be very temporary, and rest and a healthy diet would be the wisest intervention. But then, what do I know? I’m not a psychologist.

Report comment

In other words, critical thinking (and that magical something called “empathy”) in the psy disciplines more often than not are nowhere to be found and are usually quickly shut down if they dare make an appearance at all.

Report comment

Report comment

Since you speak approvingly of Ron Hubbard, I assume that you subscribe to the tenets of Scientology. You’re entitled to believe whatever you want, but I see no compelling reason why I should accept your notion of “mental health” (a term that I regard as a metaphor) rather than the hypotheses put forward by Freud, Jung, Reich, Janov, Beck, Ellis, Adler, Horney, or the many other founders of competing brands of psychotherapy.
I further assume that scientologists reject the DSM psychiatric bible in favor of Hubbard’s own fanciful teachings, with which, I frankly admit, I am completely unfamiliar. Can you therefore explain to me and the other MIA readers, as simply and concisely as possible, exactly how the “Tone Scale” and “meter” you refer to gauge someone’s mental and emotional state? And what kind of training is needed to master this technique? Who certifies the would-be therapist’s skills and knowledge?

Report comment

Wow, “sales catalog” describes the DSM perfectly! And for what it’s worth, as a woman I can’t relate to ‘feminised therapeutic culture’ either.

Report comment

Joel
It appears that you are opposed to characterizing depression as an illness or disease. Fair enough. Can we agree that people having this problem can be described as follows (taken from (www.mayoclinic.org))?
“Although depression may occur only once during your life, people typically have multiple episodes. During these episodes, symptoms occur most of the day, nearly every day and may include:
• Feelings of sadness, tearfulness, emptiness or hopelessness
• Angry outbursts, irritability or frustration, even over small matters
• Loss of interest or pleasure in most or all normal activities, such as sex, hobbies or sports
• Sleep disturbances, including insomnia or sleeping too much
• Tiredness and lack of energy, so even small tasks take extra effort
• Reduced appetite and weight loss or increased cravings for food and weight gain
• Anxiety, agitation or restlessness
• Slowed thinking, speaking or body movements
• Feelings of worthlessness or guilt, fixating on past failures or self-blame
• Trouble thinking, concentrating, making decisions and remembering things
• Frequent or recurrent thoughts of death, suicidal thoughts, suicide attempts or suicide
• Unexplained physical problems, such as back pain or headaches
For many people with depression, symptoms usually are severe enough to cause noticeable problems in day-to-day activities, such as work, school, social activities or relationships with others. Some people may feel generally miserable or unhappy without really knowing why.”

Instead of depression, would it be acceptable to use the terms “emotionally very troubled” or “unacceptably low mood”?

Regarding the individuals you mentioned, I believe they are all proponents of critical psychiatry and have unwavering views concerning the use of psychoactive drugs and I am skeptical of much that they write. As a case in point, please refer to my initial comments concerning the chemical imbalance theory and the fact that Moncrieff et al. (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-022-01661-0) simply discovered what had already been known, depression is not caused by a simple imbalance of serotonin.
My skepticism is further fueled by Dr. Levine’s article. In his discussion claiming placebo was more effective than Zoloft, Dr. Levine elected not to include other information and references that showed just the opposite, one result appearing in the same paper he mentioned. Similarly, Dr. Levine was quick to accept the arguments of H. E. Pigott (https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/7/e063095.abstract) without mentioning the rebuttal published by Rush et al. (https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp.20230869). You made the statement that “Far more lives have been irreparably harmed than saved by the mental health industry.” This argument would be strengthened by a reference or two for this that appears in a peer-reviewed mainstream medical journal by an author who is not a proponent of critical psychiatry or antipsychiatry.
All the best
JB

Report comment

This would not be the first time you have complained about “ideology” within articles and/or comments, which is ironic given that it seems pretty clear that your own thoughts on any given topic on MIA are chiefly driven by ideology.

And while you try to portray your statements as being supportive of the mentally ill, reading between the lines it seems you do not have a lot of empathy for anyone who continues to suffer because they do not subscribe to your “ideology”.

Report comment

Report comment

I have been trained by Hubbard (through his writings and lectures and working on staff).

The “patient” has a strong voice in the quality of his therapy. We don’t actually call them “patients” but that is the closest non-technical word. He is also tested visually and on a meter, and those results noted. The testing must be done by a trained individual. In our system, all therapy (“spiritual counseling”) is also monitored by a trained third party called the Case Supervisor. This person looks for technical errors based on session notes and patient indicators. The Case Supervisor may correct the therapist if errors are found. This system stays in place for the entire career of the therapist, unless the therapist gets trained to be a Case Supervisor and moves over to that role.

We have something called a Tone Scale which is used as a major indicator of whether or not the patient is getting better. One must be trained to use it, though it is rather intuitive. I wish it were more broadly known. One of the problems with the field of mental health is that different “schools” each have their own theory and terminology.

Report comment

I remember listening to one of Ralph Nader’s podcasts on which he cited a study by the Harvard School of Medicine. According to this study, approx. 100,000 patients a year (if memory serves) die from iatrogenic illness, not to mention the countless others who are severely harmed or traumatized in some way. Of these unfortunate victims of medical incompetence, how many were subjected to chemical lobotomies or electroshock therapy? Does the number of those people harmed by psychiatric treatments far exceed the number of those who claim to have been helped? If that indeed is the case, I cannot but agree with Dr. Peter Gotzsche’s conclusion: the worst thing a person in emotional distress can do is to consult a psychiatrist, whose first impulse will be to assign him/her a DSM label and prescribe a potent drug or neurotoxic cocktail promoted by a pharmaceutical company (often on the basis of manipulated or incomplete research findings).

Report comment

John, thank you for your thoughtful and measured reply. Thomas Szasz addressed this particular issue long ago. If a state of mind or pattern of behavior classified hypothetically as a psychiatric disorder is eventually found to stem from a verifiable physical cause (genetic, hormonal, neurological, etc.), said disorder will then become the remit of a medical professional specializing in treating that specific condition. However, depression is such a vague catch-all term that it cannot be fit neatly into the category of a single discrete “illness.” Yes, conceivably it could turn out to be the result of some underlying pathology, but it may also be an understandable, totally appropriate reaction to distressing circumstances (as in the case of a non-binary teenager who is humiliated or assaulted by his/her/their peers, or the victim of sexual abuse, or someone traumatized by the horrors of war). To characterize those suffering from verbal or physical violence as “sick,” “dysfunctional,” or “disturbed” is a gross misappropriation of medical terminology.
As for the comparative benefits and harms of antidepressants and other psychoactive medications (whose proven neurotoxicity has been revealed by a number of eminent contributors to this website, including Robert Whitaker, Peter Breggin, Joanna Moncrieff, and Phil Hickey, among others), I think the evidence is clear by now that for the great majority of patents to whom potent drugs are administered over the long term for treatment of the hundreds of hypothetical disorders listed in the DSM, the deleterious effects on their brains and other organs outweigh whatever short-term benefits that chemical lobotomies may bring. Far more lives have been irreparably harmed than saved by the mental health industry. If you don’t believe me, I refer you to the valuable, well documented studies that Dr. Peter Gotzsche has contributed to MIA in regard to this subject.

Report comment

…but it is beautiful example of confirmation bias.

Report comment

Joel
Thank you for your comments. Being so far near the bottom, I was wondering if anyone would read my comments. I have to disagree with you that one must know the biochemical causation in order for it to be “regarded as a medical illness in the literal sense of the word.” There are many medical illnesses for which the biochemical causation is unknown. Examples include Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, Fibromyalgia, and Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Actually, the list of such illnesses is quite long.
Part of the problem with the study of depression is that depression might be a disease in and of itself or it might be a symptom of an underlying illness. Pellagra is a good example in which depression is one of several symptoms of an underlying illness. As you may know, Pellagra is a vitamin deficiency disease caused by a deficiency of niacin (Vitamin B3). In addition to depression, symptoms include inflamed dark and crusty skin, bleeding, diarrhea, dementia, and sores in the mouth. In 1926, Dr. Joseph Goldberger was the first to determine that Pellagra was due to a dietary deficiency. It wasn’t until about 1939 that Drs. Conrad Elvehjem, Tom Spies, Marion Blankenhorn and Clark Cooper demonstrated that niacin deficiency was the cause of Pellagra. Fortunately, if treated early enough, all symptoms (including depression) of Pellagra are resolved by addition of niacin to the diet. I would note that clearly Pellagra was recognized as a medical illness long before its biochemical causation was elucidated.
It would be a wonderful thing if the precise biochemical mechanism(s) of depression were known. Then scientists would have better direction to develop medications that target the precise biochemical problem(s). When treating medical illnesses for which the biochemical mechanisms are unknown, physicians are left with using medications (or other non-pharmaceutical approaches) that provide symptom relief, but not a cure. This is a reasonable approach. Consider that aspirin was used for pain relief for about 70 years before the mechanism by which it functions as a pain reliever was discovered.
I do not dismiss the true-life accounts of contributors to this website who have had negative experiences, nor do I dismiss the true-life accounts of people who have had positive, sometimes lifesaving, experiences with antidepressants and other psychoactive medications.
All the best,
JB

Report comment

There is so much talk here about supposedly talented therapists. Please explain to me, a layman, the precise, verifiable criteria by which you can distinguish such talented therapists from the ones who are hopelessly incompetent or simply mediocre albeit well-meaning. Furthermore, I would really like to know what type of therapies you consider effective and scientifically respectable, in contrast to those which are useless if not downright harmful. Who should have the ultimate authority to make such determinations–the APA guild, the pharmaceutical industry, the NIH? And on what body of knowledge should that authority be based? If not the DSM, then what? The hypotheses of Freud, Jung, Skinner, Janov, Beck, or Ron Hubbard?

Report comment