greymouser

Jun

2020

Vaxx vs Anti-Vaxx

Vaxxers vs Anti-Vaxxers vs Big Pharma

Vaccination is a sensitive subject right now. Always has been, but now with the whole Covid-19 thing going on it is even more inflammatory.

I’ve done a huge amount of research on the subject in the last 2-3 months, more than I have done on a lot of subjects and generally I’m pretty good at research.

I like to get as close to source data as I can. If I can find a white paper on a subject I’m researching, you know, real lab testing, double-blind and all that, then I’m all in. Some of those can be tough to wade through; these scientists are writing for their peers, not peons like me.

I’ve watched videos and read books. When I’m doing these last, I like to go the websites or papers referenced as much as I can. I even read novels that cover various issues and follow up with research there. For example, I was reading a thriller that had some bad hat lobbyist involved with the vaping industry. The character in the book was supporting and investing in the vaping industry and backing the tobacco industry in this cause until the CDC did some serious testing on its safety. (Then, of course, the bad hat bailed.)

I’m far from the CDC’s biggest fan but there are some there that do good work. There are a number of articles on the actualities of vaping here: New England Journal of Medicine

I would rather read a book than someone’s opinion about the book.

I have found that, with regard to vaccinations, even those called ‘anti-vaxxers’ are not so much against vaccines as their abuse.

The line goes something like this:

Extreme ‘Vaxxers’ Middle Extreme ‘Anti-Vaxxers’

++++ ————————————— ++++

Most people, if you take the time to actually listen, as with anything, fall somewhere in the middle. It may be one or the other end of the middle but within that area if put aside your emotions, you could have an actual conversation with the person at the opposite end of the middle. Don’t bother with the extremes. You would be wasting your time.

This all brings me to the real reason for this article, Big Pharma. The pharmaceutical industry.

Two points, actually. One, there has never been any control or placebo test group done with any testing on vaccines. Ever. The arguments for this are largely that one would be depriving people, mostly children of the safety of the vaccine. This could be said about any drug or product that the pharmaceutical industry manufactures. For all other products, they are impelled to do so.

The other, more insidious reason, I believe is that the whole industry is protected by the government for any harm done by vaccines.

So, combined, those two facts, I find worrisome. Big Pharma and the CDC do not have to test the efficacy of the product they are injecting and cannot be censured if something goes wrong!

Please understand that I had my children vaccinated and would do so again, but likely not under the current regimen. I would ensure that their immune systems were boosted to the max and would look for a way to have the gentlest impact on their immune systems.

I even watched the movie ‘Vaxxed’. There are people having not watched it, would quote detractors of this movie, not bothering to watch it themselves. I don’t think there was anything in the movie that couldn’t be verified, if one was willing to take a moment. And I didn’t see anyone in the movie that I would have considered an ‘anti-vaxxer’. Most were upset with the way the pharmaceutical industry behaved with regard to vaccines. I will try and refrain from giving too much opinion about the movie and ask you to just watch. If you can’t find it, let me know.

When this whole Covid-19/Coronavirus thing blew up, I asked a number of medical people a question about vaccines. I wanted to know, if one had a vaccine, could one still carry the disease and be infectious. Or could one still contract the disease that they were vaccinated against to a smaller extent. I went to medical websites and doctors involved in the industry and asked these very direct questions. The answers that I got were weird because, well, they weren’t answers. No one gave me a definitive answer. It was all kind of gobbly goop. Kind of like politician speak. So, I had to do my own research.

(A point on research. When you do a search on Google, you will often find the first 20 items often are all quoting the same reference. Go deeper. Just because there are twenty different articles all quoting the same document, does not mean that document is correct. Take a look around. Get some understanding so that you can have some judgement.)

Here are some of the results:

“If you've gotten the vaccine, though, you could have symptoms that are mild and still be infectious.” webmd.com

One article I read regarding whooping cough, pointed out that even after the vaccine, one could contract the disease and spread it. It was pointed out in the article that because of the vaccine, the symptoms would be less dramatic and one would not necessarily feel ill enough to stay home. This would result in an increased chance of spreading the disease.

There is an article (link below) that talks about people with vaccines spreading the disease they have been vaccinated for. You don’t have to read the article if you think it will upset you, but at the end are 19 links that go to websites like

cdc.gov,

cid.oxforjournals.org

ncbi.nem.hih.gov

mercola.com

… all quite reputable websites. Many of the links go to white papers which can be a bit tiring to wade through. But they make their point. Very thorough testing. Read them at your peril:

https://www.westonaprice.org/studies-show-that-vaccinated-individuals-spread-disease/

May

2020

Do We Lack Compassion?

Or, The Chemical Imbalance Lie!

In 2006 and 2007 there were some surveys done showing that 80% or more of the people surveyed considered the theory of chemical imbalance in the brain as fact.

If you want to read a lengthy article on how this fallacious idea came to be, read this article Psychiatry Under the Influence

By survey in 2006, 80% of Americans believed that a chemical imbalance in the brain is what causes depression. Ronald Pies calls this concept, an urban legend.

“…in a 2007 survey of 262 undergraduates, psychologist Christopher M. France of Cleveland State University and his colleagues found that 84.7 percent of participants found it “likely” that chemical imbalances cause depression.” - Scientific American

In my years of research, I have found no evidence, no white paper proving this theory. Numerous psychiatrists, doctors and professors, etc., that actually work in the industry, have found no evidence to support this.

“I don’t think there’s any convincing body of data that anybody has ever found that depression is associated, to a significant extent, with loss of serotonin.” -Alan Frazer, University of Texas Health Science Center, 2012

“In truth, the chemical imbalance notion was always a kind of urban legend, never a theory seriously propounded by well-informed psychiatrists.” - Ronald Pies, July 11, 2011 in Psychiatric Times

“We have hunted for big simple neurochemical explanations for psychiatric disorders and have not found them.” Kenneth Kendler, Psychological Medicine, 2005

In an article in Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime, Dr Peter Groeche talks about the myth of the chemical imbalance:

The Harmful Myth About the Chemical Imbalance Causing Psychiatric Disorders

“It has never been possible to show that common mental disorders start with a chemical imbalance in the brain. The studies that have claimed this are all unreliable.” Prof. Peter C. Gøtzsche, June 28, 2019

In this article Professor Gøtzche points out that at least one psychiatrist claimed, when being interviewed that the profession no longer stood by the theory of the ‘chemical imbalance of the brain’ causing depression or other issues. And some weeks later this same doctor lectured about ‘chemical imbalances’. Hmmm!?

“It is a lie that you have a biochemical imbalance and that psychiatric drugs will rebalance your brain. It was a marketing ploy not based upon science. It was designed to sell drugs and it has worked all too well.” Dr Kim West

For example, Pfizer’s television advertisement, years ago for Zoloft states that “depression is a serious medical condition that may be due to a chemical imbalance”, and that “Zoloft works to correct this imbalance.” (This video is easily found on Youtube if you would like to check it out.)

The ‘original’ Zoloft ad, I think seen at a Super Bowl, promoted the drug for depression claiming that it corrected an imbalance of chemicals between nerve endings. There is absolutely no science behind this claim. Another statement that is made in the ad is that Zoloft is not habit forming. If this last statement were even close to the truth, there would not be any number of websites telling how to come off this and other types of drugs. And how difficult it is to do!

I’m not sure if Pfizer was ever held accountable for the lies told in that Television ad. Sad. So, can a pharmaceutical company like Pfizer get away with blatant lies in their advertising? I guess so!

If you or one you love or know is on a drug like Zoloft and wants to stop, then please read through the material at this link first. VERY IMPORTANT

The article references Dr Peter Breggin’s method for coming of these drugs. He suggests coming off at increments of 10%. Some doctors will suggest 1% increments for certain drugs. So much for the statement that drugs like Zoloft aren’t addictive.

Here is a great, short video by UCLA Professor David Cohen, PhD. Titled ‘Sadness Is Not a Brain Disorder’

You can do your own homework but here is a list of Doctors, professors, psychiatrists and scientists and their opinion of the Myth of Chemical Imbalance in the Brain:

“The spurious chemical imbalance theory of depression is arguably the most destructive thing that psychiatry has ever done.” By Philip Hickey, PhD

Where is it Going? https://www.madinamerica.com/2020/02/chemical-imbalance-theory-going/

“To this day, there exists not a single biological test for any mental disorder, despite claims to the contrary.” -Mark L. Ruffalo

"However, there is one (rather large) problem with this theory: there is absolutely no evidence to support it.[Chemical imbalance in the brain] Recent reviews of the research have demonstrated no link between depression, or any other mental disorder, and an imbalance of chemicals in the brain." (Lacasse & Leo, 2005; (Valenstein, 1998).

“There’s no biological imbalance. When people come to me and they say, ‘I have a biological imbalance,’ I say, ‘Show me your lab tests.’ There are no lab tests. So what’s the biochemical imbalance?” —Dr. Ron Leifer, New York psychiatrist.

“If a psychiatrist says you have a shortage of a chemical, ask for a blood test and watch the psychiatrist’s reaction. The number of people who believe that scientists have proven that depressed people have low serotonin is a glorious testament to the power of marketing.”
- Jonathan Leo, Western University of Health Sciences

“First, no biological etiology [cause] has been proven for any psychiatric disorder...in spite of decades of research....So don’t accept the myth that we can make an ‘accurate diagnosis’....Neither should you believe that your problems are due solely to a ‘chemical imbalance.’”
- Edward Drummond, M.D

“Remember that no biochemical, neurological, or genetic markers have been found for attention deficit disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, compulsive alcohol and drug abuse, overeating, gambling, or any other so‐called mental illness, disease, or disorder.” - Bruce Levine, Ph.D/Psychologist

“Biopsychiatrists have created the myth that psychiatric ‘wonder’ drugs correct chemical imbalances. Yet there is no basis for this model because no chemical imbalance has ever been proven to be the basis of a mental illness,” - Ty C. Colbert, Psychologist.

May

2020

Judy Mikovits: A Plague of Corruption

Book: A Plague of Corruption by Kent Heckenlively and Judy Mikovits

“Where does an 800 pound gorilla sit? Wherever the heck it wants!”

The pharmaceutical industry has looked, to me, for a long time, as a 800 pound gorilla with brass knuckles. I’ve watched Big Pharma abuse people with mood altering drugs like Prozac, Ritalin, Lithium, Zoloft and a host of others. Destroying people’s minds and numbing their moods and lives.

I had no idea that they were doing the same thing with vaccines. I’m reading the book, ‘Plague of Corruption’ by Judy Mikovitz which chronicles the organsition as it has paid out in excess of 4 billion dollars to people that have been damaged by their vaccines. This with rules in place that make it all but impossible to bring these corrupt companies to task.

Supported by the Department of Justice (for some reason) running interference by screening their own witnesses when they won’t toe the party line.

There are a few things that I would have left out of the book, some hypotheses as to what happened to some friends and acquaintances at the hands of some over zealous investigators.

Other than that her story, the history and the facts and events that Mikovits speaks of, can all be verified outside the pages of the book.

I know some that throw the phrase ‘conspiracy theorist’ at her as a way to discredit. I hate that phrase. It is akin to name calling. It was coined to discredit those who would try and investigate various government ‘indiscretions’ and crimes. If someone is labelled this way, the viewer is likely to not look any closer at their theories.

I’m of a mind to believe someone that is attacked by any government agency as fiercely as Mikovits has been attacked.

Instead of reading opinions or watching videos about Judy Mikovits, read the book and verify these things yourself.

As a note, this book did not convince me to stay away from vaccines. It did, however, educate me to a point that I'm able to ask questions intelligently, so that I'm not trusting doctors out of hand and endangering my self and others. Particularly my children.

Check out the link below for the book:

Purchase here

Apr

2020

The Goal of Psychiatry

The Aims and Goals of Psychiatry

The stated Aims of Psychiatry are not in alignment with the general medical profession. The medical profession has the Hippocratic Oath; you can read the entire oath here: Doctor's Oath

And then there are the intentions of the Industry of Psychiatry. Here is a quote from Brock Chisolm, first head of the World Federation of Mental Health

"The re-interpretation and eventually eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith in the certainties of the old people, these are the belated objectives of practically all effective psychotherapy."

- Brock Chisholm (1946) The Psychiatry of Enduring Peace and Social Progress. p. (1896-1971) Canadian World War I veteran, medical practitioner, first Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO), first head of the World Federation of Mental Health.
Your Dictionary

Eradicating the concept of right and wrong? That allows for any immoral or illegal act to become justified. If that is the actual goal of the psychiatric industry, then I believe any sane person knowing this would justifiably throw the whole industry into the scrap heap.

At the end of one article elucidating the above he closes with this:

“There is something to be said for taking charge of our own destiny, for gently putting aside the mistaken old ways of our elders if that is possible. If it cannot be done gently, it may have to be done roughly or even violently--that has happened before.“
(Brock Chisolm Quote)

Brock Chisolm is justifying force to make you or me, or more specifically our children, think and behave the way that he sees fit. Maybe that is what justifies such barbaric practises as electro-convulsive therapy, lobotomies, or drugs like lithium.

And then there are some less violent definitions.

What is the goal of psychiatry?

“Psychiatry is a medical specialty dealing with the prevention, assessment, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of mental illness. Its primary goal is the relief of mental suffering associated with disorder and improvement of mental well-being.”

from sciencedaily.com

Voltaire said, “If you wish to converse with me, define your terms.”

I tend to agree. I’ve seen more arguments occur for lack of this.

We should then define ‘mental illness’ and what we mean by terms like ‘disorders’.

From https://www.psychiatry.org

“Mental illnesses are health conditions involving changes in emotion, thinking or behavior (or a combination of these). Mental illnesses are associated with distress and/or problems functioning in social, work or family activities.”

And this from mayoclinic.org,

“Mental illness, also called mental health disorders, refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior. Examples of mental illness include depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, eating disorders and addictive behaviors.”

I have several issues with the above definition. ‘Health Conditions’ and ‘Disorders’. It is kind of broad. And it allows far too many things in life to be included as “disorders” or ‘health conditions’. Additionally, in the real world, mental illness has been redefined as a disease.

If we are going to define mental illness as an actual disease or some sort of physical illness, then there needs to be a test for it. Otherwise, the door opens to all sorts of misdiagnosis and the application of the incorrect solutions. If you read Dr Sydney Walker’s ‘A Dose of Sanity’, you will find that he was pretty much always able to find some physical problem behind a mental one. From that correct diagnosis, he was able to prescribe the correct procedure. Whether it be removing the brain tumour that Prozac had been prescribed for or something as simple as removing a child’s allergens from his or her environ. This particular child having been prescribed Ritalin due to being ADHD. With the allergens removed from the environment, the symptoms disappeared as well.

There are numerous psychiatrists and doctors that would also argue that often there is nothing wrong at all with the child in the first place. Peter Breggin MD in his book ‘Reclaiming Our Children’ gives numerous examples of helping parents and kids work things out with communication and understanding and various agreements. He doesn’t automatically assume there is a disorder or a disease. And again he consistently solves family issues. He is seen to be an extremely warm and caring individual as can be seen by reading any of his books.

Here we have two psychiatrists that have consistently solved ‘mental illness’ without prescribing drugs. These doctors among many many others, fulfill the above stated goal of psychiatry: “Its primary goal is the relief of mental suffering associated with disorder and improvement of mental well-being.”

Urban Legend?

“disorders that affect your mood”

And then what do you consider a disorder? Any emotion? Extreme emotions? What constitutes ‘clinical depression’? There is no physical test in existence for this ‘disorder’. The ‘chemical imbalance in the brain’ is right up there with the ‘Lemmings committing mass suicide’. In case you are wondering about the Lemmings thing, it never happened. It is an urban legend. So is the ‘chemical imbalance in your brain’ statement. If it were true, then a doctor or psychiatrist could do a test or series of tests and show exact results.

I think it is amazing that in spite of the fact that there has never been a valid physical test for things like depression and other mental illnesses, the idea that there is a chemical balance behind them all persists throughout society.

Ask your doctor. Or your shrink. Get him or her to tell you what the exact physical test is for these so called diseases. If there is something physically wrong, what is the test to show this?

If you really feel there is something physically wrong, persist in asking your doctor to help find out what the problem is. Do not just let him or her ask you a few questions and write a prescription for some drug or other.

Both doctors and psychiatrists are bound by The Hippocratic Oath. And thus they are supposed to do you no harm. If they are giving you a drug it may have no effect on the problem or may do more damage and could very likely be addictive. In this case, then, these medical professionals aren’t being so professional! They are doing you more harm than good.

You have a responsibility to your own health and well-being to ask questions.

And something about your health and marijuana

Mar

2020

Drugs Are For Losers

I Want To Be A Winner

There is no mystery to the fact that drugs and alcohol have ruined countless lives. Alcohol deaths just in the US of A are over 75,000 per year. Deaths from opioids in 2017 were over 70,000. That is almost double the death toll for opioids from 2010.

Psychiatric drugs are the worst. Not enough can be said against these horrible drugs. Many are much, much more addictive and destructive than ‘street’ drugs. This is quote from a white paper from US National Library of Medicine (Feb 2018):

“…prescribing of antipsychotics in the elderly was occurring in the UK and such patients had an 85% increased risk of adverse events and greater mortality.”

The study was designed to investigate the deaths relating to the elderly and dementia but here is one of the conclusions from the study:

“This is further supported by comparing the risks of mortality for dementia patients using antipsychotic drugs to that of the non-dementia patients in the population who are using antipsychotic drugs, with both showing similar HR around twice the risk levels for mortality compared to the non-user groups.”

So, you can see that these psychotropic drugs are equally as bad for the general population as they are for the elderly.

Here are some more numbers, and these are just for the elderly:

“Psychiatric drugs are responsible for the deaths of more than half a million people aged 65 and older each year in the Western world…” Peter Gøtzche, British Medical Journal.

That is a really scary number! And from https://www.rehabs.com

“Psychiatric Medications Kill More Americans than Heroin”

Many people over the years have suffered from drugs and alcohol but many have successfully changed their lives, leaving these things behind and creating more productive lives. There are numerous celebrities, that, over the years, have shown how careers have flourished after quitting drugs or alcohol.

I read a post recently of someone promoting drug use and saying that lots of celebrities did drugs and their careers were fine. The celebrities that were listed all were individuals that had tried marijuana at one time or another but not regular users. Big difference.

A recent notable, someone that has spoken out against pot use and how it affected him, is Ed Sheeran:

"I've stopped smoking weed. I found myself just sitting at home watching films. I only ever create (when I'm) sober. I like to be alert. I find most ideas happen when you have a cup of tea. For me, anyway.”

Another well known actor, Robert Downey Jr., for years had serious battles with drug and alcohol addiction. For years he couldn’t get a role because no-one would cover the insurance costs.

“Downey’s wife Susan Downey (née Levin) told Harper’s Bazaar that he quit drugs for good in 2003 after she gave him an ultimatum. Apparently, it stuck."

Mr Downey has been doing OK since. More here if you are interested: Robert Downey Jr and drugs

Drugs Are For Losers

I Want To Be A Winner

Then there is Steven Tyler and Aerosmith. They flourished and for some time drugs held them back but getting away from them, they flourished again.

“So, I got sober, and you know it took me many years to get over the anger of them sending me to rehab while they went on vacation. But today because of that moment ... I am grateful and owe a thanks to them for my sobriety.” “…there is no drug stronger than music.”

Jamie Lee Curtis has now been 20 years sober and straight.

Gene Simmons of KISS fame: He has never done drugs or used alcohol.

This from Addiction Helper.com

“Simmons told the Naperville Sun that using drugs and alcohol is one way to become one of life’s losers. He made it clear that you cannot be a winner if you are constantly drunk or high.”

There is a lot more in the article as to the whys and wherefores. Simmons is not just a member of the “most successful American rock bands in history, he is also an author, actor, record producer, songwriter and TV personality.”

And here is a study from University of California/Davis done to establish whether cannabis is safer than alcohol. This study went on for almost 40 years. It studied people over that period of time that smoked pot at least 4 times a week. You can find a report on it here: UCDavis/Health

“Cerdá is lead author of a research study with colleagues at Duke University that has been following a group of children born in 1972-1973 in Dunedin, New Zealand, from birth to age 38 to assess changes in health over a lifetime.”

“With regard to downward social class mobility, antisocial behaviors in the workplace and relationship conflict, the researchers found that cannabis dependence was worse than alcohol dependence in the case of financial difficulties, such as troubles with debt and cash flow, and food insecurity.”

And we all know how bad alcohol dependence is. We’ve admitted to that for years. People that drink, know it is bad for them. They will justify to some degree but beneath it all, will admit the damage that it causes. Whereas, evidence to the contrary, marijuana has been marketed as a panacea, so some are convinced that it does no harm. And will not look at the evidence that shows this to be a lie.

So again, consistent and persistent use of marijuana over a period of many years is statistically proven to lessen initiative, income and general security in life.

Drugs Are For Losers

I Want To Be A Winner

Here is a little bit of experience on the subject of drugs being for losers from The Observant Black Male

And from Paul Anderson Youth Home website:

“…approximately 1900 teens for 10 years and found that regular marijuana users were three times more likely to be unemployed or drop out of school than non users.”

And Sana Kahn, a millennial writes an article with 9 reasons drugs are for losers: The Witty Scoop

“Since Drug buildups can stay in the body for a long time after they were taken, the impact on the brain can keep going quite a while. Don’t lose your brain! Stay away from Drugs.”

I could easily list another 100 people here that have turned their lives around by quitting drugs. I’m pretty sure that nobody sets out in life to be a drug addict. I’m sure that at some point you had goals, things that you wanted to achieve. Winning in life and drugs do not go together.

Drugs Are For Losers

I Want To Be A Winner

Here are some great reference sites: Reference Websites/Links Pay particular attention the 'follow the money' article.

Vaxxers vs Anti-Vaxxers vs Big Pharma

Have We No Compassion?

Or, The Chemical Imbalance Lie!

Book: A Plague of Corruption by Kent Heckenlively and Judy Mikovits

The Aims and Goals of Psychiatry

What is the goal of psychiatry?

Urban Legend?

I Want To Be A Winner

Drugs Are For Losers

I Want To Be A Winner