There's a small monumental gaping hole in this plan, one described by clinical psychologist Bruce E. Levine:
"Chemists consider psychiatric prescription drugs and illegal mood-altering drugs all to be psychotropic or psychoactive drugs. Cocaine and ADHD drugs such as Adderall and other amphetamines affect the neurotransmitters dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine; and antidepressants used in combination also affect the same neurotransmitters. Not only are prescription psychotropics and illegal psychotropics chemically similar, they are used by people for similar reasons, including taking the edge off their discomfort so they can function.This statement cannot be refuted. Facts:
- If psychiatry's methodology-free and medically-baseless methods worked, psychiatry would quickly run itself out of business.
- Therefore, curing a patient violates every psychiatrist's profit motive and would amount to blasphemy against the corporate state faith, from which none are immune. In some cases, this fact appears unknown consciously; in other cases, malpractice in which the psychiatrist is almost guaranteed to successfully defend himself again, is the norm.
- The difference between a drug dealer and psychiatrist? (1) Drug dealers don't charge $100 or more per fifteen minute appointment on top of the drugs they sell. (2) The drugs they sell have known effects that perform as promised. Dangerous? Yes, but less dangerous than psychiatry's ever-shifting drug cocktails, which fail and fail.
- Nearly every psychiatric drug is psychologically and/or physically addictive. The tranquilizers prescribed, benzodiazepines, without question have proven themselves the most addictive substances on earth, with the longest and most vicious withdrawal imaginable. Almost no patient is informed of this fact, as psychiatrists either ruthlessly prescribe them anyway or never bother learning the facts. And where would they learn them? In their "medical school," psychiatrists receive roughly eight hours of addiction training. How can this be? Look to the funders of those "medical schools." You'll find drug manufacturers everywhere.
- Drug dealers don't claim to "heal" anyone. They don't claim to be "doctors." They don't claim to have attended "medical school." They don't claim anyone has a "cocaine imbalance."
- Back to Bruce E. Levine, who correctly labels psychiatry a "diversion from societal, cultural and political sources of misery." Further, he states that the "mental health profession not only has financial value for drug companies but it has political value for those at the top of societal hierarchies who want to retain the status quo."
Such a conclusion seems to justify the existence of the ADD diagnosis. In a hyperized society, no one avoids a diminished attention span: We live in the Land of Diversions. I don't question the existence of ADD or the effectiveness of the drugs used to treat it; however, let's deal spades only. ADD treatment almost always amounts to highly "cut" (i.e., diluted by baking powder or similar substances as a way of increasing supply) sister or brother of cocaine. From any perspective, prescriptions for ADD amount to a legal means of selling otherwise illegal drugs.
And while drug dealers don't claim a cocaine imbalance exists, psychiatrists outrageously continue telling patients the completely-refuted fairy tale that their depression is the result of a chemical imbalance, i.e., insufficient serotonin. This lie has been crucified again and again, but it keeps coming back out of its cave. Once considered messianic, antidepressants -- or rather, those who prescribe them in concert with a belly full of lies -- belong back on the cross.
Why antidepressants work for anyone remains a guessing game. Does guesswork support the rampant administration of a drug class proven to have nothing more than a placebo effect, except in the case of major depression?
Consider the National Institute of Mental Health stats, according to which 16.5 percent of the U.S. adult population battles lifelong Major Depressive Disorder, while 8.7 face the black dog for one year, plus 2.3 percent experiencing lifelong Dysthymia (i.e., Depression Lite) and 2.5 facing the greyhound for one year.
Strangely, roughly 57 percent of the black-dogged population receive "minimally adequate treatment," compared to approximately 67 percent of those forced to live with a greyhound. Logic and the simplest understanding of human nature, would predict the mirror image of those numbers, with the deeply depressed seeming far more likely to seek treatment than their less-depressed counterparts. Hmm...
According to the NIMH, 30 percent of the population experienced depression as of 2005. Applying the greater percentage of those receiving treatment (67 percent) to the benefit of the NIMH's credibility and the U.S.-Census-reported adult population of 234,646,609, the NIMH determined that 70,393,983 Americans experienced depression. Of those, at best (or worst) 67 percent sought treatment, with the NIMH's calculation of the grand total number of adult Americans seeking treatment per year optimistically (or pessimistically) rounding out to 47,163,969.
The fantastic but never reported results? According to my calculations, soon to be proven an underestimate, 20 percent of American adults received "adequate treatment" for depression per year.
However, by 2006, it was popularly reported that ((((((((((SHOCK)))))))))) 10 percent of Americans suffered depression. Far less coverage was given to the NIHM figures: "The National Institutes of Health provides a long list of mental health statistics for Americans, some of which are eye-popping. 'An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older -- about one in four adults -- suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year."
Interestingly, Dr. Richard O'Connor, Ph.D., claimed in 1999 that "Almost 20 percent of Americans have depression, most without knowing it."
So, is it the "startling" 10 percent or the barely-reported 20 percent of Americans who suffer depression per year? After reading the following, it seems but cannot be proven that 10 percent of Americans experience depression each year and either never seek treatment or "don't know" they're depressed, while 10 percent both know they're depressed and seek treatment: "10 percent of Americans over age six now take antidepressants" [Time Magazine, August 18, 2011]. This soon to be followed by a typical cover along the lines of, "Why depression is good for you." Such Orwellian statements aren't even worth the parsing; they've no parsley to chop. Everything is both good and bad for you; thus, how would you or anyone choose? Spin the roulette wheel. Spin it Russian style.
With at Least 10 Percent of Americans Taking Antidepressants, the
Following Antidepressants Have Justified the
Filing of Major Class Action Lawsuits
Prozac; Lexapro; Zoloft Effexor; Paxil; Celexa; Pristiq
As to the confusion regarding how many Americans experience depression per year, the 10 percent figure seems to arisen from a blatant misinterpretation of the NIMH's statistics. It's 10 percent figure relates to "people experiencing major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, and/or bipolar disorder." It's a bit difficult to "misinterpret" the figure considering the title of the NIMH web page reporting it: "Any Mood Disorder Among Adults." On the other hand, why do the NIMH's web pages specifying the specifics of depression indicate that 20 percent of adult Americans alone bear the melancholic burden?
More importantly, why are so many Americans depressed? For one, it's impossible to walk into a psychiatrist's office and not receive a diagnosis and one or more prescriptions. It's obviously presumed you require treatment because you sought treatment. That kind of "thinking" must be taught in Logic for Psychiatrists 101.
Second, it's likely many Americans become depressed because their lives cannot possibly measure up to the depressingly comical and nonexistent standards propagated as "real America" in every single form of media. Envy's just another word for on the way to the quacker.
Time for a War Against Psychiatric Drugs
or
End the Idiotic War Against Illegal Drugs Worse than Legal Drugs
Psychiatry cannot cure an individual's justifiable "neuroses" when those "symptoms" are merely accurate, if painful, recognitions of the actual problem: Living in absolute alienation within a diseased society." Unwilling to lose profits in the name of truth, psychiatry drugs patients into "adapting" to imposed societal sickness.
On that note, I make no excuses for myself; I walked into the psychiatric trap knowing it had failed me before, and yet I gleefully accepted benzodiazepines. I knew better than not to check them out via the Physician's Desk Reference (which may be on the desk or bookshelf of physicians but not psychiatrists). Sill, they proved hangover-free and apparently harmless. I was in for a surprise. But so is a much larger population of patients who've no reason to know better, no research at hand to warn them, and no experience to understand that psychiatrists are malpracticing psychopaths who thrive just as psychopathic corporate object-humans climb the ladder.
Thus, "self-medication" is utterly understandable even to the clueless drones who still believe they live (or ever did live) in a democracy.
Unlike psychiatry's drugs, particularly anti-psychotics, illegal drugs at the least provide relief and, if taken with care, rarely kill anyone. Unfortunately, addiction causes irrational cravings for more and more of any given substance. The exact same phenomenon occurs in those taking psychiatric drugs. Worse, no illegal substance causes the increased odds of committing suicide to the point that even the Big Pharma-owned FDA requires a warning to that effect for every antidepressant. may increase the likelihood of suicide. Oh, how brave. Suicide: That's one hell of a side effect for any "antidepressant."
CONCLUSION
Psychiatrists are Worse than Illegal Drug Dealers
and
Deserve the Death Penalty in 99 percent of cases
and
Drug Dealers Should at Most Be Sentenced to Misdemeanors
because
Drug Users Know the Dangers and Minimize Them
or
Pay the Price for Voluntary Poor Choices
and
Those Who Claim to Most Want Government "Off Our Backs"
actually
Wish the Government
(a subsidiary of the corporate state)
To Become a Nymphomanical Femme Fatale Sodomizer
and
Waiting for the Kill
a/k/a
The Ever-More Transparent and Ruthless Social Control
necessitated by
The At-Last Diminishing Effects of Spectacles
say hello to
Drone Surveillance, Corporate Armies and Once-Secret Weapons
openly deployed on American streets and elsewhere
The Orwellian Shift
requiring
The Shedding of Your Blood
or







