greymouser

Aug

2019

The War On Terror

When there is a terrorist attack, why would you, or anyone, talk about or forward their message?

With domestic terrorism or global terrorism, who are the real casualties?

I believe that one of the best ways of combating terrorism is to not talk about it. Lately, it seems, though, social media and terrorism go hand in hand. If terrorists had no way of creating fear in the hearts of many, I’m quite certain they would not be so active.

This from Encyclopedia Britannica:

“The goal of terrorism generally is to destroy the public’s sense of security in the places most familiar to them. … and that terrorist acts are intended to create an overwhelming sense of fear.”

Every time you talk about an incident that occurred, every time you forward some news article, you let the terrorists win.

The Media and Terrorism ... or Suicides ‘R Us

There are a couple of places where suicides are known to occur in volume. One is on subway lines around the world and another is a place like Niagara Falls. People jump in front of trains and people jump into the Falls. These suicides used to be sensationalized in the press. This was stopped in most places as this type of media coverage normally resulted in an increase of suicide attempts. Usually a spike after any media attention. With less media attention, they still occur but to a much lesser extent.

If you knew that as a result of your promoting that someone jumped over Niagara Falls and committed suicide resulting in three other people doing the same thing, hopefully, you would feel somewhat guilty and not promote this thing any more. The media did stop, or at least put this type of news on page 23 and the number of suicides went down.

The same could be predicted for the war on terror. A terrorist attack that no one hears about is just some idiot killing people. If they are not creating a climate of fear and worry, if they are not alarming populations as a whole, then the terrorists are not winning.

Domestic Terrorism in the US of A

There are many examples of domestic terrorism in the US, but by far the most prevalent and obvious is the recent school shootings. And not so recent. There have been a lot over the years.

You may realize where I’m going with this…

If you insist on telling everyone on Facebook, Twitter or other social media how sorry and concerned you are about the shooting in whatever school then you are feeding the frenzy. You are doing exactly what they want. You are forwarding the fear and feeding the terror.

If you say on Facebook that your heart goes out to all those in Texas for some tragedy, I honestly believe that is a useless bit of sympathy. No one in Texas is going to read your post.

For every Tweet and Facebook post about some terrorist attack, whether it be a bombing in Paris or the Columbine Massacre one is just forwarding the terrorists message and creating fear and upset.

The media’s mantra ‘the people need to know’ is simply put just bullshit. That is just an excuse to spread and create a feeling that the world is a horrible place. Years ago someone coined the phrase ‘merchants of chaos’ as a moniker for the media. I think this is quite appropriate.

Big Pharma - The Real Terrorists

The media is pretty much controlled by the advertising companies. If you disagree, just try and get an article attacking Big Pharma in a woman’s magazine. Any pharmaceutical company is going to love these terrorist attacks in schools. The upset that occurs I’m sure drives their drug sales out the roof. They are going to milk this for all it’s worth.

If you really want to calm things down and fight terrorism, then don’t give in to it. Don’t forward the fear. 90% of the people in the USA would not even consider not talking about this. They will believe the media. They will feel that it needs to be talked about. They will feel that posting on Facebook, Twitter and other social media is going to help.

I ask you how? How is this going to help. You are upset about it and now you are going to upset all your friends? How does that make a safer environment? Please tell me how that is good and beneficial.

So, I would propose that the real cause of the increase in school shootings is social media. Twitter, Facebook and the like. The media in general has been feeding terrorism for years and years. Guns are a factor. Psychiatric mood altering drugs and street drugs are also undoubtedly a factor. But for the surge over the last few years of these domestic terrorists (school shootings), I can only thank (or blame) social media. Or the people using social media to stir up fear and alarm in others.

So, just stop! If you are fearful and alarmed and need to talk to someone, then talk to one person, don’t create fear and alarm in 10 or 20. As far as I’m concerned as soon as you do that you are partnered with the school shooter or the Paris bomber.

So, just stop!

Jul

2019

Marijana – Is It a Gateway Drug?

Pro pot arguments:

1. Marijuana is not a gateway drug.

2. No one has ever died from marijuana.

3. It is impossible to overdose on marijuana.

4. What about alcohol? It is a legal drug and causes thousands of deaths.

5.There are no studies that prove marijuana is bad for you.

6. It is safe for pregnant women.

7. Marijuana is just a herb.

8. Marijuana: it is just a plant.

9. Marijuana is not a drug.

10. Big Pharma is afraid of marijuana legalization.

11. The traffic fatalities attributed to pot can’t be, they must be because of some other drug.

12. Big Pharma is afraid of marijuana legalization.

13. Marijuana is OK to drive

14. Safe for children and teens.

15. Marijuana cures cancer

16. Marijuana slows or stops black market sales/Lessens crime related to drugs.

17. Marijuana is not addictive.

18. Marijana is not a hallucinogen.

19. Medical Marijuana

One of the issues that concerns me most about the marketing of marijuana is that it makes other drugs so much more acceptable. My youngest son lives in Colorado and tells me that it is very hard to find someone like him that doesn’t like or do drugs.

He was out with one girl who was frustrated when she arrived and said that because of the stress, she had to take a couple of Adderall just to get through the day. Like it was nothing. Adderall is a very addictive drug.

In the 1960s when drugs like marijuana were coming into mainstream society, we did them. We knew they were drugs. We knew they were bad for you. We didn’t argue that. We did them anyway. Then most of moved on and got on with our lives.

I saw this comment from someone that had used marijuana for years. He pointed out that when you are doing a drug like marijuana, you are going to be around other drugs. You are often going to be around people that will offer you other drugs.

Let’s look at these one at a time:

“No-one has ever died from marijuana!”

"A ten year old pointed out (I’m paraphrasing here): “Is that your criteria for whether a drug is good or bad: it doesn’t kill you?”

First Death in Colorado from Marijuana Edible

Also, granted it is very difficult to overdose from smoking pot, but numerous people have died in many ways from being under the influence.

Automobile fatalities have increased in areas that pot has been legalized. Often used with alcohol, pot exacerbates the danger. Individuals having psychotic episodes have been killed or committed suicide.

“It is impossible to overdose on marijuana.”

(The logic here being because of that, as above, you can’t die from it.)
How about the teen that had asthma and was too stoned to grab his inhaler and died. And, as said earlier, is that really the criteria that you are going to use to measure if something is bad for you or not.

“What about alcohol? It is a legal drug and causes thousands of deaths.”

This is true and is horribly tragic. But is also a deflection of the argument. Do you want another legal drug that takes lives?
“Marijuana-related traffic deaths increased by 154 percent between 2006 and 2014;” - factcheck.org

There are numerous other places that link marijuana and traffic deaths. Often marijuana is used in conjunction with alcohol, increasing the damaging effects of both with respect to driving. Driving stoned is still DUI.

“There are no studies that prove marijuana is bad for you.”

There are dozens of studies. Many that show the dangers of pot for young people with developing brains. Here is one article that tell of the reduction of IQ with pot smokers, particularly with teens.

Study Shows Heavy Adolescent Pot Use Permanently Lowers IQ

“There is less crime if pot is legalized.”

One can find numerous opinions where people think that the logical result of marijuana legalization will lower crime. One does need to factor in the data that possession crimes are not now going to be added in.

The Colorado Government stats show:

“Felony marijuana court case filings (conspiracy, manufacturing, distribution, and possession with intent to sell) declined from 2008 to 2014, but increased from 2015 through 2017.

The most recent increase in filings might be in part because legislation changed the legal indoor plant count, providing law enforcement agencies with greater clarity and tools to increase their enforcement of black market activity.

Felony filings in 2017 (907) were still below 2008 filings (1,431).

Filings in organized-crime cases followed a similar pattern, with a dip in 2012 and 2013 followed by a significant increase since 2014.

There were 31 organized crime case filings in 2012 and 119 in 2017.”

“It is safe for pregnant women.”

https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/factsheets/pregnancy.htm

“Given the potential of marijuana to negatively impact the developing brain, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends that obstetrician-gynecologists counsel women against using marijuana while trying to get pregnant, during pregnancy, and while they are breastfeeding.”

(Ref: Marijuana Use During Pregnancy and Lactation - ACOG. ACOG. http://www.acog.org/Resources-And-Publications/Committee-Opinions/Committee-on-Obstetric-Practice/Marijuana-Use-During-Pregnancy-and-Lactation. Published July 2015. Accessed October 12, 2016.)

And from livescience.com

“Researchers studied marijuana's effects on mice and brain tissue from human fetuses, and found that the active ingredient in marijuana, THC, interferes with the formation of connections between nerve cells in the cerebral cortex, the part of the brain responsible for higher thinking skills and forming memories.”

“Marijuana is just a herb.”

Yeah, so is hemlock. Hemlock is also a poison.

“Marijuana: it is just a plant.”

Yeah, so is the poppy - where heroin comes from. Cocaine comes from a plant.

“It (marijuana) is not a drug.”

If you want to redefine the word ‘drug’ to your liking then no one can argue with you, of course. But if we take the common legal term and use that definition, then, yes, it is a drug.

Marijuana is not a hallucinogen!

Per Villanova.edu :
“Examples[of a Hallucinogen] include: LSD, PCP, MDMA (Ecstasy), marijuana, mescaline, and psilocybin."

“The traffic fatalities attributed to pot can’t be, they must be because of some other drug.”

Do your homework. Because of the acceptance of marijuana and that it has been promoted as harmless, young people are drinking alcohol and also smoking pot and driving.
From the Denver Post 2017:

“The number of drivers involved in fatal crashes in Colorado who tested positive for marijuana has risen sharply each year since 2013, more than doubling in that time, federal and state data show.”

“Big Pharma is afraid of marijuana legalization.”

This couldn’t be further from the truth. The sales of mood altering drugs via Big Pharma have not faltered anywhere that pot has been legalized. These organizations have more than enough money to fight it if deemed necessary. As I mentioned earlier in this article, the acceptance of marijuana helps to make other drugs more acceptable and prevalent.

Meth Deaths Surge In Oregon

Well, I use 'Medical Marijuana'

There is no difference between regular marijuana and medical marijuana. Some will say that because medical marijuana is regulated it is safer. It supposedly has a higher CBD and lower THC content. Both of these facts can be shown to be inconsistent.

From wikileaf.com

“Would it surprise you to know that there is no fundamental difference in the plants used for medicinal purposes and those used for recreational purposes? Granted, medical marijuana is often grown organically and tested for consistency and potency, but the plant itself is still simply marijuana.”

Summary

When I read comments on Marijuana articles I think that most of the pro-pot people must be trolls. The reason for this thought is that in the majority they resort to name calling and inflammatory remarks as opposed to citing studies with links, that support their view. Or they will use some generality like, ‘it’s common knowledge’, which is a bit silly because that again doesn’t really back up their view with anything concrete. I’m pretty sure these trolls are trying to stir up emotion so that people react instead of having a civilized conversation. If they can’t argue the point they criticize the writer.

Jun

2019

Should you take SSRIs?

Depression and SSRIs

There are millions of dollars spent on ads on TV and thousands of doctors and psychiatrists that will promote and tell you how wonderful Prozac and Ritalin and similar drugs are for you. Zoloft is also an SSRI. SSRI definition: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.

Read the articles below if you want to do proper research to find out how these drugs can affect you. Are they really effective is solving what they are prescribed for?

Five Reasons

If you are taking any of these 'depression' or mood altering SSRIs, for heaven's sake DO NOT go cold turkey. Don't quit without proper medical supervision. Almost always, the effects/reactions one has when trying to withdraw or quit can be be much worse than whatever you were experiencing beforehand. There is some data in this article from

Crossfit.com

There is also a great book by renowned psychiatrist Peter Breggin on coming off drugs and how to go about withdrawal.

<br />

Please know what you are getting into before you start doing something like this. Don't do these drugs casually or even with a doctor's prescription without doing your own proper research.

Dec

2018

The Scientific Method and Psychiatry

Psychiatry: Claims to be a science.

In talking to people in general, the feeling is that for the most part psychiatry is benign. The understood purpose is to help people that are dealing with anything from ADHD to Depression to Psychosis.

Automobile Seat Belts - An Analogy

Normally, when one sets out to fix something, they would measure adequately to know if the results warranted continuing.

The Problem:

For example, let’s take car fatalities. Years ago, in the 1950s and 1960s, seatbelts were not mandatory. A lot of people were severely injured or died as a result.

The Results:

In 1968 seat belts were made mandatory for all cars in the USA. From there, mandatory use followed in all states and Canada. Took a few years but….

Resulting Statistics:

Here is a reference from the Journal of The Royal Society of Medicine showing the before and after statistics of injuries and deaths with respect to seatbelts:

“The number of those who escaped injury increased by 40% and those with mild and moderate injuries decreased by 35% after seatbelt legislation. There was a significant reduction in soft tissue injuries to the head.”
February 1990"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1292501/

A 40% reduction in deaths is a significant reason to continue to enforce the use of seat belts.

What about Big Pharma and Psychiatry

Big Pharma and the psychiatric industry market depression drugs like Zoloft, Lexapro, Prozac and Cymbalta which if you think about it, should result in far few people being depressed. The result of that would be fewer suicides. One would think.

The problem with the psychiatric industry is that the ‘solutions’ they use mask or bury the problem. An active child that the parents don’t have time for: put him on a drug that quiets him. Turns him or her (usually him) into a zombie and mom and dad who don’t really have time to deal with the noise of their child, are happy because said child is quiet and not in their hair. Thus, Mom and Dad are convinced of the success of the drug.

Here is how it should work. There is such as thing as the Scientific Method. It is the logical, agreed upon procedure for figuring ‘stuff’ out.

Some definitions:

Science:(Definition) A fact in science is when some happens the same every time in the same set of circumstances. (definition.org)

Science: (Definition): a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws.

Science(Definition): The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. Oxford Dictionary

So, we want facts and truths. Simple, right?

The Scientific Method:

The steps of the scientific method go something like this:

1. Make an observation or observations.
2. Ask questions about the observations and gather information.
3. Form a hypothesis — a tentative description of what's been observed, and make predictions based on that hypothesis.
4. Test the hypothesis and predictions in an experiment that can be reproduced.
5. Analyze the data and draw conclusions; accept or reject the hypothesis or modify the hypothesis if necessary.
6. Reproduce the experiment until there are no discrepancies between observations and theory. "Replication of methods and results is my favorite step in the scientific method," Moshe Pritsker, a former post-doctoral researcher at Harvard Medical School and CEO of JoVE, told Live Science. "The reproducibility of published experiments is the foundation of science. No reproducibility – no science.”

Taking the car/seat belt example from above, the Scientific Method applied properly saved countless lives.

Insulated Winter Boots - Another Analogy

If one were running a business; let’s say making high quality insulated winter boots. If they kept people feet warm, they would be successful. If 80% of the time, they did not keep people’s feet warm, it is very likely that people would stop buying them.

So, using this analogy, let’s say the marketing was good but as time went on more and more people were using these ‘wonder boots’. But more and more people were walking about with freezing feet and getting frostbite and worse but the boot people marketing would just tell them they need more of these boots. A second pair or change to another pair of boots that are also not properly insulated but, what the hell, we are making a bundle of money, so who cares. Then the boot manufacturers lobby the government representatives and get laws passed that enforce people to wear these boots. They get papers written on how effective these boots are.

People still have cold feet. So, now they convince the people with cold feet that it is their problem and not a problem with the boots. Tell them how they are mentally blocking their feet from getting warm.

Not very good Scientific Method. The solution would be to make a boot that worked. Use that method to actually make a boot that kept your feet warm.

So, what of the Pharmaceutical Industry and psychiatry. One would assume they have done adequate testing on their drugs and various techniques and procedures. Maybe, maybe not.

Let us take depression stats as example. Psychiatry and Big Pharma have been pushing this one hard for a number of years and pumping various anti-depression drugs into their US the rest of the world for years now.

The Results:

Per the CDC https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/suicide/index.html

“… The incidence of suicide increased 30% from 1999 to 2016.”

And concurrent with the increase in suicides:

In the UK: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/29/nhs-prescribed-record-number-of-antidepressants-last-year

“The total number of prescriptions dispensed has risen 46.8% in the last 10 years, from 752m items in 2006 to 1.1bn last year. The average number of items prescribed for each person has gone up …”

In the USA:

“The rate of antidepressant use in the United States increased nearly 400 percent over the last two decades, according to a report released Oct. 19.”
https://psychcentral.com/news/2011/10/25/antidepressant-use-up-400-percent-in-us/30677.html

These drugs are supposed to make things better. But, if I’m to line up these two preceding facts, I should get a bit worried. The rate of suicides follows the rate of increased use of anti-depressants.

A comment on psychiatry’s use of The Scientific Method:

“…it ignores much of the genuine science there is and goes on supporting and perpetuating concepts and treatments that have little scientific support.”
By Sami Timimi, MD from madinamerica.com
https://www.madinamerica.com/2018/01/the-scientism-of-psychiatry/

And from same article, Dr Timimi shows more of the total lack of Scientific Method. Giving the example of ADHD he clearly points out that diagnosing this so called disease has absolutely nothing to do with science:

  “Consider the following example: If I were to ask the question “what is ADHD?” it is not possible for me to answer that question by reference to a particular known pathological abnormality. Instead I will have to provide a description, such as ADHD is the presence of the behaviours of hyperactivity, impulsivity, and poor attention (plus a few extra qualifiers such as age of onset). Contrast this with asking the question “what is diabetes?” If I were to answer this question in the same manner by just describing symptoms such as needing to urinate excessively, thirst and fatigue, I could be in deep trouble as a medical practitioner as there are plenty of other conditions that may initially present with these symptoms and diabetes itself may not present with these symptoms in a recognizable way. In order to answer the question “what is diabetes?” I have to refer to its pathology involving abnormalities of sugar metabolism. I would get independent (to my subjective opinion) empirical data to support my hypothesis about what may be causing the patient’s described experiences (such as testing the urine and/or blood for levels of glucose). In the rest of medicine, therefore, my diagnosis explains and has some causal connection with the behaviours/symptoms that are described. Diagnosis in that context sits in a ‘technical’ explanatory framework. In psychiatry, what we are calling diagnosis (such as ADHD) will only describe but is unable to explain”.

This is only one example, where, in psychiatry there is no standard response or technique. There is no Scientific Method applied to issues like depression or ADHD. If it was applied then it would follow that there would be fewer and fewer people depressed and fewer and fewer suicides. But the opposite is happening. Make it as complicated as you want. All of the obfuscation in the world doesn’t change the fact that these drugs are making things worse.

When confronted with information like above, a Big Pharma representative will likely tell you “…it is more complicated than that…”. They will try and ‘baffle you with bullshit’. Answers are generally simple. Even for big issues. It is not really complicated.

If you are applying a solution to a problem and that problem gets worse, then stop for god’s sake! Big Pharma and the psychiatric industry are driving the suicide rate out the roof.

A real test would be to stop feeding people drugs like Prozac, Ritalin and Zoloft and watch depression and suicides plummet.

So why, then, to people consider psychiatry a science?

Jun

2018

Kate Spade and Anthony Bourdain Suicides

In doing some research on the recent suicides of Kate and our beloved Anthony, I came across this article. It was pretty much what I wanted to write so I’m posting it here(with permission) in its entirety. There is a link to Scott Lazarowitz’s Blog at the end of the article. (Thanks Scott!)

“Were the Suicidal Kate Spade and Anthony Bourdain on Psychiatric Drugs? Published by scott lazarowitz on June 9, 2018

Why did Anthony Bourdain and Kate Spade both commit suicide and within a week of one another? Well, I think the timing is unrelated, but from the little information I’ve seen about both of them, I am wondering if they were taking the SSRI antidepressants.

I know, I know, I go on about the SSRIs, and the anti-anxiety meds, and so forth, but with good reason.

We do know that Bourdain had a history of depression, as he acknowledged in 2016. According to TMZ,

Bourdain addressed the issue while visiting Argentina — a country that fascinated him because it embraced psychoanalysis and mental health treatment.

The episode featured several scenes of Bourdain speaking with his therapist and addressing real issues in his life. And, even though it seems like a joke at first, it becomes clear he’s not kidding around.

When asked what brought him into the office, Bourdain says … “I will find myself in an airport, for instance, and I’ll order an airport hamburger. It’s an insignificant thing, it’s a small thing, it’s a hamburger, but it’s not a good one. Suddenly I look at the hamburger and I find myself in a spiral of depression that can last for days.”

Regarding Kate Spade, according to the Guardian,

“Kate suffered from depression and anxiety for many years,” the statement said. “She was actively seeking help and working closely with her doctors to treat her disease, one that takes far too many lives

Now, I’m not saying that either of those two had been taking those pharmaceutical antidepressant drugs, or, if they were, that the drugs caused them to decide to commit suicide. However, among other things, Dr. Peter Breggin writes, “With or without mania, antidepressants often cause a worsening of the individual’s condition, with “crashing” into depression and suicide.” Read the linked article for more information. You see, those SSRI antidepressants have very serious side effects, including causing depression and suicidal thoughts.

Dr. Breggin has written several books on the subject, and has testified before Congress on this issue as well.

As I have noted many times before now (and with documentation), many of the mass killers in recent years had been taking either those antidepressant drugs, or anti-anxiety drugs or anti-psychotics. In recent years, the young people have been exhibiting a rise in depression and anxiety. And I believe this is because of the schools and the mental health industry feeding them those damn psychiatric drugs, such as Ritalin, adderall, xanax, prozac, zoloft, luvox, and the list goes on.

As Dr. Breggin notes,

Antidepressants are neurotoxic, that is, they harm the brain and disrupt its functions. As a result, they cause innumerable kinds of abnormal thinking and behaviors, including mania, suicide and violence. In the process, they cause detectable damage to the brain of the child or adult, and also to the fetus of pregnant mothers who take the drug (See Scientific Section 9).

The antidepressant drugs have no specific impact on depression and instead are used off label to treat everything imaginable from physical pain to anxiety and ADHD. People often experience euphoria after starting an antidepressant, but it is short-lived, leaving the individual to try one and then another antidepressant in the hope of re-experiencing this artificial, chemically induced “happiness.” This initial “feeling great” is in reality a danger sign, often signaling the start of an antidepressant-induced manic episode that can ruin lives. Antidepressant-induced mania is largely indistinguishable from spontaneous mania, and varies in intensity from mild to psychotic. It can include bizarre destructive behaviors, impulsivity, sexual acting out, callousness, grandiosity, and very bad judgment. Antisocial behavior is common. Extreme irritability can lead otherwise loving people to become hateful and violent. Loss of judgment can cause ethical people to act like criminals (See Scientific Sections 1-7).

Again, I don’t know if Anthony Boudain or Kate Spade had been on any of those psychiatric drugs, but it would be informative to know if they had been taking them. In my view, it would be those damn drugs in which the emotional effects of personal incidents, which can affect someone deeply in the first place, are exaggerated greatly by the drugs.

As Wenzel observed, one possible incident in Bourdain’s life is that two days before his suicide he may have found out that his girlfriend was seen with another man, according to Daily Mail. But we don’t know if Bourdain had been on those psychiatric drugs. If he had been taking one of those psychiatric drugs, would he have otherwise gone on to commit suicide if he had not been on them?

And as I have included in my past posts on this subject, if someone wanted to stop taking antidepressants, to prevent dangerous withdrawal symptoms see Dr. Breggin’s book on psychiatric drug withdrawal, Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal: A Guide for Prescribers, Therapists, Patients and Their Families.”

Scott’s Blog can be found at http://scottlazarowitz.org/blog/

May

2018

Chemical Imbalance: Truth or Lie

The Illogic of the Chemical Imbalance Theory

I have this friend at the gym, his name is Sonny(real name). I’d see him fairly regularly and we got to chatting a few times and somehow or other we got onto the topic of kids and ADHD and that sort of thing. He told me that when he was in Grade School he was diagnosed with ADHD. His grandfather found out about this and thought it was a ridiculous. He took Sonny and enrolled him in a martial arts class. This allowed Sonny, according to him to burn off the natural access energy that was driving him to fidget for those horrible six-seven hour days in school.

He told me that pretty much from that day on he had no problems and it was much easier to concentrate in class. Someone who adamantly believes in the theory of ‘Chemical Imbalance’ in the brain, might say that Sonny didn’t really have ADHD.

If that were the case, then the person who diagnosed him should be seriously reprimanded, fined and likely have their licence revoked.

From a website ScienceNordic.com:

‘“In Brazil the dominant approach is psychoanalytical and Brazilians tend to disregard biological mechanisms,” says Aase.
Until recently medication of ADHD has been held in disfavour because of the country’s history of military dictatorship and links between political oppression and medication of people with behavioural problems.’

Again, if ADHD was a biologically based ‘disease’ this would not be possible; you would not be able to treat a biological mechanism by using psychological means. Add to this that there are no real standard methods of diagnosis, which is continuously admitted throughout literature on the subject, and you have a real confusion as to causes and cures.
I’m sure some psychiatrist could ‘fake news’ his or her way through this to make it all seem confusing and invalid. In my research, I’ve seen ‘researchers’(I use that term very loosely), doctors and such, comment on the factualness of the biochemical nature of issues like ADHD and Depression. I have, in all of my research, and believe me I’ve done lots, found no factual studies that confirm any biochemical causes for the above so called ‘diseases’.

So many people are diagnosed with Depression and Clinical Depression. I see every year or two some article about some researcher is on the cusp of the discovery of exactly what chemical imbalance in the brain causes depression. Trying to give more credibility to the concept but at the same time admitting that there is no scientific evidence validating any kind of biochemical cause.

Again, there are so many people diagnosed with ‘depression’ that are able to overcome it without resorting to drugs. So, they are either misdiagnosed or it is NOT biochemical.

Where is the science?!

So far, I have not been able to locate any exact science on this. There are numerous psychiatrists that will back be up on this: Dr. Peter Breggin; Dr. Sydney Walker Jr; Dr. Thomas Szasz to name but a few. (I’m tempted to offer money to anyone that can find something definitive on this - I do feel quite safe that I would never have to give up a penny!)

I read a quote recently that pointed out that people that have more challenges in life are happier. My observation is that when people are doing something or producing something, they are always happier. And the person who is doing something and at the same time helping others is the happiest of all.

I’ve observed that those having the most difficulty with depression and such are constantly worried about things instead of getting on with it and actually challenging themselves in life. A slightly ‘dangerous’ environment keeps you awake and doesn’t give you time to worry about being depressed. I’m not saying you should put yourself in ‘bad’ situations but make a bigger game and start solving the problems of that game. Stop thinking so much. If you have time to sit around that think, then you, for sure are not going to be happy.

The thing that really gets me on this is that so many people have accepted the idea of things like depression and ADHD being physical diseases as FACT, when there is no proof at all. But I guess this is just more evidence of blindly accepting ‘fake news’ as is now done daily on social media. I guess if you say an untruth enough times it becomes true. Or at least believed to be.

May

2018

Gun, Baby, Gun by Iain Overton

I recently read a book by Iain Overton called ‘Gun Baby Gun’. I honestly think that the book would be a good read for anyone that likes guns or dislikes guns.

The author investigates gun culture all over the world, not just the USA. There are places much worse for gun violence than the US.

I’ve owned guns in the past(I don’t currently) and like to shoot them. I took safety courses, learned care and safety of my guns and made sure my kids had the same knowledge and respect for what a gun can do.

Over the years, between reading magazines and various posts on the internet and FaceBook, both sides of the ‘gun’ situation in the world kinda pissed me off. Always, always, particularly on FaceBook many posts that I’ve read leave important information out.

A similar example: Years ago when Obama was running for his second term as President, within a few days I saw two different memes on Facebook. One was posted by a Facebook friend that was very much a Democrat. It listed 5 or 6 statistics that Obama had been responsible for that were very stellar and good. Another Facebook friend is very right wing and posted a similar meme that listed 5 or 6 statistics that put Obama in a terribly bad light. Showed how poorly he was doing.

I took each point in both memes and researched them fully. Pros and Cons. In the meme that told how wonderful Obama was, five out of the six ‘facts’ were quite false or very misleading. In the meme that was showing Obama in a very bad light, five out of the six ‘facts’ were false or misleading. I wish I had them here to show, but anyone that has been on FaceBook for any length of time is quite aware that there is very little truth in any of the memes that are posted and they are largely posted just to inflame.

Both sides of the gun lobby do the same thing. Facts get omitted to forward a particular line. The reader will often assume that because it is coming from a somewhat respectable source, that the facts are accurate. There is usually enough truth that cursory investigation makes it look valid.

Iain Overton’s Book ‘Gun Baby Gun’ is very enlightening on many points. For example he brings up the point of gun suicides. The NRA argues that if the person doesn’t have a gun that he or she will find another way to commit suicide. Overton gives an example of the Israeli army. For some years soldiers would take their guns home on the weekends. There was a pretty serious suicide rate so the rules were changed so that they would not take their guns on leave. Suicide rate dropped dramatically.

There are facts that Overton does not delve into with the book. He does, to some extent, try and forward information and let one make his or her own evaluation. To an extent.

There is one area that Overton glosses over that I thought needed more attention. He mentions at one point that he looked into the fact of psychiatric drugs and their involvement in violence in the US in particular. This was surprising to me in the light of the fact of the detailed accounts in other areas of his book. For example, check out the sections on the proliferation of SWAT teams in America.

If one reads almost any book by Peter Breggin, MD, or watches some of his videos you will read or hear much about the relation of mood altering prescription drugs and violence, including gun violence.

Maybe it was because some of the people in the mass shootings in the USA were not actually on the drugs when committing their atrocious acts. Neglecting the fact that some of the worst mental anguish is when someone tries to ‘come off’ these drugs without a proper medical or health practitioner monitoring and helping.

If you can read through the gobbledygook on the following website, you will see in the article some of the legal, prescription drugs that can be responsible for violence:

Guns and Prescription Drugs

Here is an article that talks about one of the biggest issues being that people stop the medication abruptly and without proper supervision: School Shootings

If you look, you can find articles that negate this relationship. But if you go to the source… Go to the websites that list out the side effects of drugs like Prozac and Ritalin and the like; research some of the drugs that these kids that do the mass shootings are on. Have a look at the side effects, that are often depression and violence.

To me, this was a huge omission from Iain Overton’s book ‘Gun, Baby, Gun. Marvelous book. Well worth the read. Extremely enlightening.

Get a copy of the book here:

Mar

2018

Medicine or Magic

Thomas Szasz Quote:

“Formerly, when religion was strong and science weak, men mistook magic for medicine; now when science is strong and religion weak, men mistake medicine for magic.”

Thomas Szasz, Author

Mar

2018

Who Profits from ECT Machines?

Article by Charlotte Roberts:

And under the heading of, “Did You Know?” there are two manufacturers of ECT machines in the U.S. One of them is owned by two psychiatrists who loudly beat the drum for ECT.

Of course they do.

I daresay Edgar Bronfman told people that a bottle of Seagram’s Seven Crown would cure whatever ailed them.

Somatics LLC, the manufacturer of the Thymatron ECT machine, is owned by psychiatrists Conrad M. Swartz and Richard Abrams.

They each have published books heavily promoting their junk science masquerading as medicine. Swartz wrote “Electroconvulsive and Neuromodulation Therapies” which can be yours for the low, low price of $162.95. Abrams merrily penned “Electroconvulsive Therapy”, the fourth edition of which sells for $137.35.

Abrams, at least, forgot to mention this tiny detail to his publisher. He also forgot to mention that ownership in this disgusting company accounts for half of his income. He declined to detail just what those sales or profits are, but supplying about 500 hospitals at $10,000 a pop adds up, I’m sure.

The Somatics LLC website contains outright lies such as a denial that ECT causes permanent memory loss, something that has been clearly affirmed by medical journals and by the poor souls who have fallen victim to ECT. Anypit.com reports that “even noted ECT advocate Harold A. Sackeim has admitted that lasting memory damage is much more common than previously believed”.

Somatics LLC puts a disclaimer at the end of this BS denial that says: “Please note that nothing in this website constitutes, or should be construed as, a claim by Somatics LLC that confusion, cognitive impairment, or memory loss (short-term, long-term, recent, remote, transient, or persistent) cannot occur as the result of ECT” which is tantamount to saying, “Hey, we were just kidding when we said it wouldn’t hurt you.”

Under the “How Does ECT Work?” section, they say that “Although it is necessary for the brain cells to interact with each other chemically and electrically for ECT to work, exactly how this interaction is therapeutic needs further investigation … A number of rigorously-designed research projects are underway to study this question”. This is lawyer-speak for, “Hell, we don’t know but we’re making lots of money from it so it must be really great!”

They have a catalog on the Somatics LLC web site in which they even offer “a one-page course in advanced ECT”. Geez, imagine that – you, too, can become an expert torturer after reading just one page. Wow!

And speaking of torture, Swartz is also a guitarist in a band called – are you ready for this? – “Insanitizers”. One of their songs is “Dance Like a Robot”. He probably plays it for the poor sods whose brains he’s about to fry.

Mar

2018

The History of Electroconvulsive (HA!) Therapy (ECT)

Article by Charlotte Roberts:

The History of Shock Therapy in Psychiatry

ECT was first developed by Ugo Cerletti born in 1877, the son of an agricultural engineer. After attending medical schools at Rome and Turin (he must have been out sick the day they covered the “first do no harm” bit), he went on to tour European “sanctuaries” including those run by the infamous Emil Kraepelin and Franz Nissl.

Cerletti applied the skills he learned in medical school to design a white winter camouflage suit (you think I’m kidding, but, I swear to God, not), after which he was naturally made Head of the Neurobiological Institute in Milan. What better place for a fashionista?

Cerletti turned his attention to the matter of epilepsy because, according to him: “I have always given prime importance to the study of epilepsy, since it is linked to many areas of neurology and psychiatry”. In the course of his study of this disease, he tried to replicate an epileptic state in dogs by passing a 125-volt current through their bodies. He killed a lot of the dogs, of course.

After he’d finished stacking up the dog corpses, he decided to move on to humans. In his words: “The daily confrontation with the dogs who had been made epileptic by electroshock treatment naturally gave me the idea of a possible similar application on man”. Naturally.

Then, “One day I heard that at the Rome slaughterhouse they were killing pigs with the electric current used for lighting” so he went to the slaughterhouse to check it out. Sure enough, “I saw some butchers moving about among the pigs, holding in both hands a large pair of pincers, which had at both ends two discs, spiked with small, blunted, metallic tips. When they got near to the animals, they opened the jaws of the pincers and quickly grasped the front part of the pig’s head between the tips of the discs. 70-80 volts were then sent through the electric cable. As soon as the animals had been got hold of, they fell rigid to the ground without even uttering a sound and shortly after, began to present general clonic shocks.” (Clonic shocks are seizures). Well, you could see how that would appeal to a psychiatrist. Cerletti walked off from the slaughterhouse with a set of those electric pincers in hand, a happy man, off to kill more dogs.

Cerletti’s first human victim was a man that the police had apprehended who was “behaving in a very odd way, answering questions put to him in a very strange language which was completely incomprehensible”. The poor guy was probably speaking a different European language that nobody at the psychiatric institute could speak. And, from that, they diagnosed him as schizophrenic. (Note – schizophrenia is defined as “a mental disorder of a type involving a breakdown in the relation between thought, emotion, and behavior, leading to faulty perception, inappropriate actions and feelings, withdrawal from reality and personal relationships into fantasy and delusion, and a sense of mental fragmentation”. Hmmm … sounds a lot like most psychiatrists, doesn’t it?)

This poor sod was Cerletti’s “first experiment” [Cerletti’s words] in electroshock. He secured two electrodes soaked in a saline solution to this man’s head with an elastic band and send 80 volts through his head. After this “treatment”, the patient begged “Not another one! You will kill me.”

Cerletti’s response to this? He immediately administered another shock to the patient, at a higher voltage, and damned near killed him. Cerletti noted that after the second shock “treatment”, “there was an interruption in breathing and a deathlike cyanosis of the face which, if upsetting in a spontaneous epileptic fit, seemed to us in this case distressingly unending”.

Cerletti then went on to administer 19 more shocks to this poor soul until he was in “complete remission” which, in psych-speak, means that he was quiet and compliant.

And that was the start of electroshock (HA!) therapy. Contemporary proponents of it will tell you that it is “safe” and “effective”. Don’t you believe it. Psychiatrists now use heavy sedation and anesthetic before shocking their victims, but that does not make the procedure one bit less harmful. Sedation and anesthetic before ECT is like slipping Rohynol to a rape victim first to leave her helpless and forgetful of the violation, and then saying that rape is “safe” and “effective”.

Sedation and anesthetic dull the agony the victim feels, but they don’t do a damned thing to lessen the damage.

ECT is not treatment. It’s terrorism. It’s time to put a stop to it.

The War On Terror

This from Encyclopedia Britannica:

The Media and Terrorism ... or Suicides ‘R Us

Domestic Terrorism in the US of A

Big Pharma - The Real Terrorists

Marijuana – The Gateway Drug?

Pro pot arguments:

“No-one has ever died from marijuana!”

“It is impossible to overdose on marijuana.”

“What about alcohol? It is a legal drug and causes thousands of deaths.”

“There are no studies that prove marijuana is bad for you.”

“There is less crime if pot is legalized.”

“It is safe for pregnant women.”

“Marijuana is just a herb.”

“Marijuana: it is just a plant.”

“It (marijuana) is not a drug.”

Marijuana is not a hallucinogen!

“The traffic fatalities attributed to pot can’t be, they must be because of some other drug.”

“Big Pharma is afraid of marijuana legalization.”

Well, I use 'Medical Marijuana'

Depression and SSRIs

The Scientific Method and Psychiatry

Psychiatry: Claims to be a science.

Automobile Seat Belts - An Analogy

The Problem:

The Results:

Resulting Statistics:

What about Big Pharma and Psychiatry

Some definitions:

The Scientific Method:

Insulated Winter Boots - Another Analogy

The Results:

And concurrent with the increase in suicides:

A comment on psychiatry’s use of The Scientific Method:

The Illogic of the Chemical Imbalance Theory

Thomas Szasz Quote:

The History of Shock Therapy in Psychiatry

Search This Site

Recent Posts