Tuesday, December 1, 2020

Comments by Nijinsky

Showing 100 of 483 comments. Show all.

  • I agree completely.

    This one part of a quote of Justice Stevens is quite amazing: “As for deterrence, he said that because such people were more likely to act on impulse than were other people, the death penalty’s existence was less likely to come to their minds to inhibit them from committing capital crimes.”

    I found this easily enough, even from google, which points out the death penalty isn’t a deterrent:

    https://www.amnestyusa.org/a-clear-scientific-consensus-that-the-death-penalty-does-not-deter/

    And what kind of ground are we standing on when one doesn’t kill one person in order to not allow another person to kill you, or someone else? Which I’m not saying to excuse killing someone: anyone, including the person that’s supposed to be deterred by believing killing another person for just means is how one creates discipline and a working society, and if he doesn’t murder someone, he gets to demand someone be executed.

    You put forth the idea that executing someone is a deterrent, and you quake people who are trained to do exactly that, kill people to prevent people from killing people. It’s also against human nature to want to kill another person, that’s not natural. In the army, they have to brain wash soldiers to see the enemy as inhuman; that’s also what corporate media does with a whole range of people, cultures, and even countries, when they need to paint something as evil. That for a population that already thinks being alarmist is what maintains safety. People who are brainwashed to not feel safe unless they see some danger at large they are actively fighting against, whether it’s really there or not. That’s all seen as necessary for societal well being, when in reality it does exactly the opposite; it creates the problems it says it’s exposing while denying how it’s causing them, and then covers that up.

  • I just read that myself somewhere, someone’s “mental health” and then they say he didn’t reach out for help.
    Here: ‘He struggled with ethical problems in medicine, his growing depression and corona isolation. He may not have asked loudly enough for the needed help.’
    From this article. https://slippedisc.com/2020/10/violinist-who-became-doctor-takes-his-life-during-covid/

    And then the issue of ethical problems in medicine is brought up…
    And in “mental health” is there an ethical issue regarding practice, or that there’s more recovery when there isn’t any…. um practice, that is

  • boans, but that’s like trying to… I don’t know what to say…

    They think they are trying to help you, and you’re being non compliant, and/or resisting, or whatever it adds up to for them to decide they can assault you, even lie (who was it that is recorded as advising parents to knock chairs over to make it look like their child is violent, when trying to get your child committed!? And that man has been on Charlie Rose who had a whole series acting like they “know” that mental illness is because of a chemical imbalance, and that medications are necessary, rather than they are with true articulate science the one cause of chemical imbalance that can consistently be found in psychiatric treatment, something the alleged diseases do not show to be in true science)…

    When you compare them to ISIS, they only are going to decide further you’re non compliant etc..

    They don’t see it as assault, and they don’t see all the damage they do as damage; they can’t see that when other methods help people but don’t validate theirs that they might have to question what they are doing; they don’t see that when there’s absolutely simple explanations for what’s going on which antidote their alarmist habits, that they are being alarmist;

    And the craziest thing is that you can’t reason with them, which is what they decide about you, because you actually are reasonable; you actually have to believe insane things or act like you do, in order to get by them.

  • I really find this too easy, given how we are supposed to see things, to mention the Islamic State. As if they have anything to do with Islam to begin with, and further more, if you are referring to ISIS, that was a Caliphate that was allowed or encouraged to grow by the US and allied powers, thinking they would help take down Syria, which again is another strategical interest gone sour, like Osama bin Laden was, who first was hired by the US to mess up Aghanistan before that went the other direction. And this is endless, not to speak of people calling themselves Christian that destroyed and are still destroying beautiful peace loving and nature loving indigenous cultures all over the planet. If one is going to make remarks concerning extremism or fundamentalism, one really only has to look in one’s backyard: Rhode Island, for example.

  • Kristen, I wouldn’t be so quick to go on that their motivations were money. Because this kind of story happens and can happen at just about any psychiatric institution, regardless of whether they are making a profit or not. It’s maybe best not to try to make anything out of what they were doing, other than point out how unprofessional it was. They otherwise might try to make out you’re paranoid. I’m not saying money wasn’t involved, because the whole phenomenon is driven by guilds, corporate media and wallstreet investments; so even if that one hospital wasn’t trying to make more money, it’s still further up the ladder; and they would list supposed medical concerns just like that, either way, and could and/or might try to make you out to be paranoid or making up conspiracy theories.

    I don’t think that psychiatrists often can differentiate between how they have been indoctrinated to interpret what they call symptoms, and what’s really going on. Your story points that out quite sufficiently, that they couldn’t tell the difference between normal symptoms of heat stroke, and mania from bipolar, then adding on, it becomes hard to remember all of it…

    What would linisopril have to do with a normal heat stroke? And then they bring up a false diagnosis of “stable, non-bleeding arteriovenous brain malformation.” which you now know was “a developmental venous anomaly, a harmless, symptomless, birth defect that occurs in 1 out of 50 people. So symptomless and harmless that it is rarely detected except at autopsy. A brain AVM, the original diagnosis, being much more serious although considered stable. DVA’s by comparison, don’t hemorrhage/bleed” The Linisopril would have been for the false diagnosis? And the bipolar diagnosis just shows what it shows, it reads like some kind of magic fundamentalists believe in, and you’re not even allowed to attribute what happened to a heat stroke anymore.

    I really wonder whether the doctor asking you whether you wanted a catscan already had other ideas in his head, which is then what spelled itself out over the next 11 days, anyhow. that’s how they got you in the system anyhow. I’m assuming that if you had said you didn’t want a catscan you could have walked free and wouldn’t have been available for them to start making up more stuff. Having said you wanted a catscan did that make you available for them to start trying to pin bipolar on you, or would they have tried that anyhow? And if they had that in their minds, would not wanting a catscan have prevented making you available? Such people really simply aren’t in their right minds anymore, when they think a “mental disorder” is going on. And they then think a person doesn’t know themselves what’s going on with them. And society increasingly has the same phobias, which I think is what your lawyer was trying to point out. You should simply be able to point out how what they did was false at many levels now, already. They can’t even see that it’s a simple sun stroke, and were wrong about the brain abnormality.

    You can imagine how fundamentalist some people are. And the only way they can believe in “bipolar” in many ways is by being alarmist, because the science involving it doesn’t really add up beyond their statements that they don’t really know how the brain works although they can’t really prove it’s a chemical imbalance (while their “medications” have been proven to cause chemical imbalance), and that they believe that they are making headway with “compelling” evidence, while the treatment that’s been put in place has caused a whole epidemic of the problem rather than a lessening, and thus you have more alarm rather than reason and logic.

    In fact, to deal with all of it and not completely lose it, you have to be quite a bit more informed that the “normal” person, and to not lose it you have to have more compassion with people who simply don’t know any better or better able to detach from an extremely disturbing situation than most people would be capable of.

    And the utter convolution of saying that you never had bipolar symptoms before, because you take magnesia, this to disregard it was a sun stroke, and then offer zyprexa…

    And you can easily read how much bipolar is over diagnosed, and the whole push with “medications” such as zyprexa which have collectively caused billions of dollars in fines because of withholding information about known side effects, or how such “medications” cause brain damage, this with a false diagnosis of a brain malformation….

    I don’t even go to see a primary care physician anymore. I’ve heard to many stories, and I have a diagnosis. I had gone to the ER for a simple allergic reaction to oregano oil, and they were ready to give me a prednisone pill, or something like that, which I said no to. I was then listed as “refusing” that, the doctor using such terminology. The doctor who was quite nice and social, did state that quite aggressively all of a sudden in contrast to his otherwise friendly demeanor. I did fill out a prescription for that, which I never took, especially after reading that it makes one in twenty psychotic. But they were going to just give me such a pill at the ER. The allergic reaction had no difficulty dissipating within a short period.

    Thank you for sharing your story.

    If I was going to be sarcastic, I’d try to point out that even zyprexa with all of its magic qualities, hasn’t been shown to prevent heat stroke.

    This stuff is just unbelievable.

    And it’s tragic.

    A person who was forced on zyprexa, in an asylum setting, they wouldn’t even be able to tell such a psychiatrist the truth they might find out about the efficacy of such medications, they probably couldn’t list their side effects and get decent or conscientious acknowledgement, nor for withdrawal symptoms….

    Those people can be quite brainwashed, and fundamentalist, and don’t have realistic flexibility in their thinking, when they encounter such…

    The best you can do is often just get out of the situation, and show there’s a different way. You just can’t engage with them directly….

  • A friend of mine, since having committed suicide, was actually held within an asylum, after being committed, because she still got up in the middle of the night and had a cigarette, but then went back to sleep.

    This is serious criteria for determining someone’s mental health?

    Another friend of mine, still alive but highly disabled by the system, and I would say showing severe symptoms of anosognosia because of the drugs she was forced on, they were going to keep her there longer because of her relationship with nature. She sees nature as being part of the Kingdom of Heaven, and so she entertains parts of it as representing her connection with people she has lost in her life. There was a crow or so that, during a time in the bleak courtyard and the asylum, the only plant life there having somehow sprouted up between the cracks in the concrete, but a crow flew near by, or another bird I don’t remember, and made a sound. My friend said that was her mother, I think it was her birthday even. That was overheard by someone working there, and they were going to keep her another week, at least. I called up there and let them have it, talking about persecution of indigenous religious beliefs: by some miracle this pundit of institutional conformity ( and by all means he was “nice” about it, as if saying they were just trying to make sure was assuring to anyone, when they hadn’t even asked her with any insight as to why she said that ) it seems he somehow got her let out the next day. She’s actually totally unaware of how much the drugs effect her, and thinks that she can just get off of them, when she wants to, but has no idea at all to be aware of the withdrawal symptoms, or how to deal with them; and since I’ve known her for more than 20 years has constantly gotten herself into trouble when she tries to get off of the drugs. Her whole family is also oblivious. Sadly she can be quite apologetic about the system, she has a trust fund and had an apartment big enough to take someone in, someone also in the mental health system, but when he started acting out, and she wanted him out of the apartment, instead of just asking him to leave or even trying to, she had him committed. Later she admitted that to do that you have to exaggerate and lie. Recently, having moved into a foster care facility, the lady in charge also told me how she’s able to work the system, and knew exactly what to say to get herself committed to the asylum, for petty reasons, which she has called a second nursery school. This 1000 dollars a day or so resort, that the government pays for, mostly. And she really was in trouble, given the withdrawal symptoms, and her anosognosia regarding the effect of the drugs; but going to the asylum isn’t going to help with such stuff. Recently, which is the past 5 or 6 years, she’s had herself committed, before that was forced.

    But here with such petty things being used to determine whether someone is sick or not, what Willoweed brought up: how much is this really about turning off your mind when you have natural responses to a non working society, or distress regarding said non working society you won’t get points for bringing up, or that might start seeing that there’s something more worth it to invest in, involving thought, beyond the boundaries one is supposed to keep to be considered responsible!?

    And 1000 dollars a day in an asylum, and you’re let out when…

    When you agree that you’re sick, because the psychiatrist doesn’t like you playing with your hair, can’t tolerate you disagreeing with him when he’d have to listen to your side of the story, and have empathy…

    Who knows what…

    The friend of mine who committed suicide (who actually at one point had the same guy committed she had taken in, as the other had, come to think of it) just prior, I think the last time I visited with her, she showed me how she couldn’t sit still, how her hands would start shaking, and told me how the psychiatrist at the asylum had said to her that if she didn’t willingly start taking this, that, and then another drugs (or at least two, but I think at least three, I don’t remember exactly) that he wasn’t going to let her out. And he was aggressive and threatening.

    Who is determining this stuff!? And statistically THEY are the ones whose “treatment” correlates with the spike in mental illness, AND with the violence associated with people who are supposed to be forced on this treatment, which is the PR spin. Like the Reichstag incident with Hitler; make people think they are being attacked (and cause that attack yourself, or do and say it’s the enemy) and you can control them. And then more disability, loss of life, loss of life expectancy, withdrawal symptoms, side effects, societal paranoia, loss of self initiative, more cost to everyone but the drug companies and those investing in their bonds and stocks.

    It really doesn’t make sense, and the article above points out that when you take them out of the picture, that there isn’t really any correlation with anti-depressants helping depression.

  • Paula, thank you for your heartfelt response.

    I really don’t know what to say about all of that. It certainly taught me to NEVER go to such people for help. The amount of hard liner indoctrinated pretense, really doing nothing but showing how easily a person is controlled by unrealistic fear, when it’s accepted as a societal norm.

    And what’s most disturbing to me, perhaps, is would a vet go to such a place, having already been through a war where there’s such game playing going on, for whatever reason (read Confessions of an Economic Hit Man) where people were controlled by fear to do truly dehumanizing things etc…

    Well, I’m repeating myself, but they then end up having to deal with the same thing over again, only with people who act like they’re giving medical help rather than excusing violence in a war. Here it’s also extremely covert, rather than exposed violence. And it’s perhaps such an attitude why people don’t know better regarding excusing wars, given how easily they are made to believe there’s some evil out there, whether it’s an alleged chemical imbalance or “the enemy” who is as human as the other side would one be allowed to gain perspective: “If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we would find in each person’s life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility.”
    Henry Wadsworth Longfellow POET

    Just to be completely clear, I only called that place thinking I might be able to talk to someone, simply about not doing things that I felt were harmful to me in the long run (smoking and drinking too much coffee). “Why am I doing this, this could be detrimental to me in the long run?” And at that time I really had no repertoire of thought to realize there were really subtle quiet thoughts that I was pushing to the side, feelings I hadn’t been encouraged to have, in the harsh riot of calculations based on what you can get or not (socially, economically, institutionally, politically and territoriality…etc.) in this artifice called society. I guess they were just feelings that I thought if I really felt them, that they would destroy me, like I had to get rid of them somehow. It’s only after that when everything fell apart and I was put on disability that I found that at times I had two choices, I could fragment into a frustrated person that thought all life had failed me, or I could go to the computer with my midi keyboard and synthesizer, and compose music. Which happened by itself, music then became that innate place a person has they can go to with their emotions, that’s universal to the human condition, and beyond. Not that I could at the time exactly equate it with emotions, it was just something to do where I could do something, my reflexes could relate to something abstract enough it was outside of what was labeled as having done anything or not. Something to do that allowed me to feel alive, like water to a parched plant. There are of course other things I did, like go for a bike ride taking a pack of colored pencils and art paper with me, and marvel at the array of colors in nature, would I try to reproduce what I saw with the pencils on the paper. But I’m quite sure that psychiatric drugs would have destroyed that, the natural flow.

    A person that has been traumatized can transcend trauma with another language, like in dreams which could be seen as a sort of fiction where things are symbolic, or then any of the arts. All of the “non reality based stuff” that could be labeled as psychosis. Most of the great artists have been dubbed with some sort of diagnosis post humously, if not schizophrenia then bipolar often, because of the way they went to another place in the mind, to a language that transcends trauma rather than uses it as excuse for the mind control. You’re not supposed to feel things like that, you’re not supposed to allow your mind the freedom to create scenarios, depictions of things symbolic enough that it transcends boundaries, there was supposed to be something wrong with them. Basically because they dared to go someplace that was universal, where there wasn’t separation between people anymore.

    Telling a vet, who can’t feel at home anymore in society with what war has done to him, that they have a chemical imbalance, is like telling someone who has contusions that there’s something wrong with their tissues or their skin. Only here we’re dealing with something more objective than what is tangible in the physical, because it’s not going to go away, you can remove yourself from a physical object, but you can’t just discard your emotions, your thoughts, you can’t push them away, and there’s the rub, they’re not going to go away.

    Do people really have to disable their minds to believe in magic charms?

    “Just take this pill, it will bring you happiness.”

    What if we were meant to feel our feelings, and that when we really allow ourselves that space, they connect us with the rest of life, and we find we’re not separate to begin with? All that crazy stuff might dig up some ingrained fears left buried out of despair, change our reflexes and bring a whole new path our way, that was just waiting…

    And I mean just feelings, not I have to do something to get rid of that feeling, I don’t like it, it makes me angry; I think that’s interfering with the intelligence behind the feelings. What people think is something to medicate to eradicate could be the very stuff that connects us with each other…

    http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-the3.htm

  • Suicide prevention lines are “insane,” I clearly don’t know what to say about it.
    I had called one years ago (more than 30), not because I was suicidal, but because I felt that I was so distressed that I wasn’t taking care of myself, I was spending the whole night on my parents porch, smoking and drinking coffee. I had had quite a bit of societal betrayal, and didn’t understand it at all. I had specifically told them this (that I felt I wasn’t taking care of myself drinking too much coffee); to add on to this, the amount of coffee I was drinking did help to make me paranoid, but I told them how much coffee I was drinking.

    I was invited to come talk to them, where they had a building; clearly I wasn’t at risk enough for them to send police over etc. It’s one of the most bizarre situations I’ve ever had when I went to their building. I couldn’t hardly have a conversation with the lady that was supposed to be there to talk to me because the phone kept ringing and she’d pick it up. And they get really serious, all activate as if there’s some critical thing going on, which wasn’t at all, one lady took such a stance it looked like she was ready to give me an anal probe or something. Any sort of conversation I had amounted to really nothing, but that at one point they even told me that they wanted to have me committed, but I mentioned that I had a therapist (maybe they had tried to call my parents who weren’t home, I don’t know) but they got the therapist, this was just a lady I went to to talk about my dreams for dream interpretation, but she was some kind of legitimate therapist, so they did listen to her who told them that I was fine, that I lived with my parents etc..

    And this was supposed to be a suicide prevention line. I have to admit that’s incredulously unwitty to call a place like that, but I didn’t know who to call. I was just concerned about myself; but simply going there and talking to them was incredibly dangerous. And although I told them about the amount of coffee I was drinking — which I mentioned as a sign I wasn’t taking care of myself, although I wasn’t suicidal at all — there wasn’t ONE peep about that, or that maybe I shouldn’t drink that much coffee (or smoke), or that if I was really upset about stuff that I should relax, take a walk, do something to calm myself like meditate, sit by a lake, all of a host of things, NOTHING was said about this, but one lady actually, when I told her I liked to write poetry, had the false indoctrination to tell me that she was concerned about me because she wanted me to do creative stuff, and if I took “medications” then I would be able to write poetry. Just absolute brain washing. Utter nonsense. Medications that turn off self initiative, that dull the mind, that cause one’s thoughts to recede as if they’re being cut off, that’s what I’ve heard from other people, and seen myself; and that was supposed to help me write poetry.

    You also can easily do a search about how coffee can cause paranoia, and it’s chemically explained quite clearly.

    And I say that it was unwitty to call a place like that, but clearly I didn’t have anyone to talk to, even though my parents are both psychologists, they never understood simple things about children needing to feel free to express themselves, so they can relate to their own instincts, their own feelings, their own perceptions, experiences and intuition; but my parents were more interested in using stuff like the Myer Briggs to analyse our personality, assign us personality traits; and then more stuff at home I won’t get into that’s just too sordid. Not a healthy environment for emotional health.

    Neither was it helpful to call a suicide prevention line just to have someone to talk to. They had no idea of how to just make someone feel there was someone to listen, and when they tried to make out they had concern, along with acting so alarmed that any sensitive person would feel threatened, they said things to me that I already knew were totally untrue, and I just simply didn’t respond at all. Like talking to robots, you can just hear them going through indoctrinated prefabricated snippets, and acting really concerned, which at that point could have been someone trying to tell me what could happen would I not sacrifice a goat, or a dove, or something worse I won’t mention. It’s just amazing how childish those people are, and you can go to any indoctrinated bunch of good doobies working the system, and you get the same kind of inexplicable responses. Only this involves a person’s life, and people that have already been seriously traumatized, in a way that society ends up discarding them do they actually show signs of what they’ve been through. Having the police pick them up and escort them to a place where they will get more abuse really ISN’T going to help: where they are told that medications that don’t help them they have to take for their whole life, that their brain has been broken, and after having suffered through questionable wars find themselves part of one against feelings, and the brain itself, the way such drugs disable natural brain functions.

    My heart goes out to any veteran that has ever had to do with those people….

  • From the Vice article, a statement by Nev Jones:

    “Yet Jones said that in the time she’s been involved in pushing for better mental health treatment, she has seen increasing polarization, and much of that she contributes to Whitaker and his work. She gets contacted by parents semi-regularly who have read Whitaker’s books and then refuse to let their children start or remain on anti-psychotics—even in cases where medications were working well and the young person wanted to continue with the medication. “This is not at all getting away from coercive relationships,” Jones said.”

    And then from the blog on this site, a conversation between her and Sandra Steingard:
    “And overall, there’s so much we don’t know, so much we don’t understand. So, acknowledging heterogeneity, acknowledging a very high degree of uncertainty about just about everything, including ways of addressing long-term disability—I personally see this as the necessary starting point of any discussion. Instead, at least at the time, I think it was common to see Open Dialogue deployed as a quasi-magical bullet and means of (for some people literally) eliminating psychosis. And likewise, I felt that many people took up Anatomy as ostensible proof that antipsychotics were the primary cause of sustained or chronic psychosis (through supersensitization) and also that the case was more or less settled with respect to long-term iatrogenic harms.”

    I find this particularly misleading to bring up heterogeneity, and then try to discredit so much that truly brings in information and methods that otherwise would be dismissed and/or overlooked. That way anything that might dissuade a person from mainstream convenience or practice supposedly gets in the way of heterogeneity, despite the whole play on words, and the catch phrase “acknowledging heterogeneity.”

    Open Dialogue and Healing Homes of Finland have been shown to work; and they should be tried, should be allowed to be tried out in the USA without prior discriminatory fabrications. The reason they haven’t been tried is because they would go against the mainstream biological model of mental illness, its ideology the unproven chemical imbalance; anything contrary to that is, as we hear again, called a fantasy, is made out to be unrealistic. Methods that work should be tried before anyone decides whether it’s a “fantasy” that they would work.

    And those methods really aren’t anything like:

    “Well, we have these “medications,” that don’t really work in the majority of cases, but we promote that to be the case when they work for an interim, although afterwards there’s more disability, more relapsing, loss of life, side effects, withdrawal symptoms and fear of symptoms that might otherwise have been experienced and understood so that they quiet down or dissolve altogether. There’s also a spike in the diseases these medications are said to heal, along with the added disability, more relapsing and the other things I already mentioned. And we say it’s treating a chemical imbalance, but really causes one by disabling the mind, which we also see as healing, although we’re basically lying to you, but that’s to get you to take your drugs. Now beheading someone also alleviates psychiatric symptoms, but we find the side effect of death a bit too severe, although the medications, for say psychosis, do in general take 20 years off of your life expectancy disabling your mind, it’s not the sudden death as in beheading, and so we can disable that little noggin up there and keep you alive for awhile, although there’s loss there. OK!?”

    I also find it distressing that a clinician would go against parents that were responsible enough to read non mainstream material, gain information that’s more accurate than they were told, information that was suppressed: in fact information that would their child end up in the mental health system and put on such medications, would the child themselves express the scientific truths of how the medications aren’t really treating a chemical imbalance and how the medications are causing iotragenic harm, the child could be seen as non compliant and forced on the medications. To read that Nev said she’s disturbed by parents taking their children off of medications, she says were working, although statistically those medications if they are helpful are only helpful for an interim, and people do better to get off of them eventually, Nev also mentioning that people then also don’t want to try medications that can be extremely difficult to get off of, and cause further problems, as if there’s something wrong there: that further makes me question what’s going on. It also sounds to me that Nev has convinced some of her clients that the drugs work, saying that children don’t want to get off of the medications, and then goes against the parents, even when they don’t want the children to start on the medications. THAT, in fact has caused children to be taken away from their parents. Parents who are dilgent enough to do research beyond the boundaries of standard treatment propping up Wallstreet games, corporate media control, and it’s “economy.” Mindfreedom has two such stories of children that their parents took to the ER, the children were understandable distressed about a physical condition, then advised to try an anti-depressant, and the parents simply stated the scientific truth about such medications, which then was seen as a danger to the children (to know the truth, what’s shared in for example Robert Whitaker’s books); two different mother’s lost their daughters to being institutionalized for simply expressing the scientific truth about anti-depressants. And it also was the daughter’s own choice to not go on such drugs. And with the amount of med students on anti-depressants https://www.idealmedicalcare.org/75-med-students-antidepressants-stimulants/ and the propaganda that’s indoctrinated, it’s not unreasonable to wonder how many nurses and doctors there are that think that such dangerously addictive substances should be administered when there’s normal distress that would go away with proper medical help for a truly physical conditions, which is why someone would go see a nurse or a doctor. In fact that’s happened with someone I knew. A lady came to the US from an East Block country, had been promised work, that and some paper work that should have been cleared weren’t for some bureaucratic reason, and she was left without work, and the distress about that. THEN she had to deal with some nurses who promoted anti-depressants, but the lady had a mother that was a nurse back in her homeland, and the mother had diligently studied the truth about anti-depressants and was wary about that, so the lady said she didn’t think that was a good idea, and probably shared some information that then caused the nurses to start becoming vigilant against her, and her children were taken away from her, basically because her house wasn’t as neat as they felt it should be. The lady was quite responsible and clear in her head, she just had a lot going on and her house was a bit messy, which it often is with children, and she went against being advised to to on anti-depressants.

    Since I’m going on about such stuff, involving paranoia and the mental health system. I also ran into a woman out of nowhere at a bus stop about a decade or so ago, started talking to her, and found out she had been hauled across state lines and put in jail, in my city again, because social workers had talked to her mother, and the mother had accused her of stealing her money. The truth actually being that the mother at one point could have ended up in jail but the daughter decided she should be looked at by the psychiatric division to avoid being put in jail; the mother apparently was treated and then went back to live in her house but took an alcoholic in with her there, she could have lost the house, the daughter put her whole 401K into the house with a reverse term mortgage, but the mother managed to mess that up as well; ended up somewhere in a foster care or so, and then accused the daughter of something she hadn’t done at all, and the nurses believed that. The nurses or social workers believed that the daughter had stolen her mother’s money, when in reality she had lost her 401k trying to help the mother, that managed to still lose the house the 410k of the daughter had prevented from being repossessed at first. The poor daughter wasn’t allowed even a credit card when the police picked her up with several SUVs, was hauled across state lines, held in jail overnight, then had to talk to a judge on video camera who said: “you’re fine, you just have to do some paperwork, you can go home,” where upon the daughter asked how she was supposed to do that, she had no credit card or ID? The judge said that was her problem, and then I happened to run into her after she went to see if friends of hers were around, using her last change for a bus ride; but her friends were on vacation or so. I actually gave her money for a bus ticket, which she returned to me as soon as she got home, by sending me a money order; I helped her find a center for women where she could spend the night before taking the bus, and prevented her from losing her job because she couldn’t get home in time. All of that impossible situation because the nurses again think something is going on, and wouldn’t care to find out beyond that.

    And who is prone to believe in fantasies!?

  • I thought I was finished, and then remembered there was talk of “magic bullets.”

    Here, from Nev:

    “And overall, there’s so much we don’t know, so much we don’t understand. So, acknowledging heterogeneity, acknowledging a very high degree of uncertainty about just about everything, including ways of addressing long-term disability—I personally see this as the necessary starting point of any discussion. Instead, at least at the time, I think it was common to see Open Dialogue deployed as a quasi-magical bullet and means of (for some people literally) eliminating psychosis. And likewise, I felt that many people took up Anatomy as ostensible proof that antipsychotics were the primary cause of sustained or chronic psychosis (through supersensitization) and also that the case was more or less settled with respect to long-term iatrogenic harms.”

    This is quite amazing, actually, that the real thing that’s common, and that is prevalent worldwide in “developed” countries, and that people are confronted with, aggressively indoctrinated about, and intimidated with, is the magic bullet that psychiatric medications get rid of “psychosis.” What Open Dialogue does is to show a way that statistically DOES help with psychosis, rather than the true magic bullet of the chemical imbalance theory, which truly delves into the area of “there’s so much we don’t know,” because the whole story of how that works doesn’t add up to what the medications really do (they cause chemical imbalance rather than to treat it), nor do the statistics add up to getting rid of psychosis in general because they lead to more disability, relapsing, loss of life etc as well as a spike in the occurrence given the general implementation of the chemical imbalance theory as treatment in psychiatric diseases, and so all that’s left is that for those who it seems to help “we don’t know how it works.” In contrast what we DO know is that Open Dialogue statistically is more effective, in fact is effective rather than causing more of the problem it is said to heal. And Anatomy of an Epidemic also simply shares information that was there to clearly see, and should be shared so that it’s known, explaining the whole spike in mental illness. Anatomy of an Epidemic simply showed the correlation with the implementation of anti-psychotics and the increase in relapsing, disability, and statistic occurrence of the disease or diseases psychiatric medications were said to heal, since both ADHD medications and anti-depressants could and did and DO lead to further diagnosis where anti-psychotics end up being prescribed.

    And no I don’t think it’s open minded to convolute informed consent with information, that when warned about, people would correlate with “magic bullets” to avoid what they are warned about. In fact that’s quite reckless to negate such needed input, for whatever excuse, for anyone to make an informed well thought out decision. As well as it being recklessly dismissive to not promote methods that have been shown to work, against those that are accepted, but haven’t been shown to work but for a minority.

    There you have “magic bullets.”

  • I don’t think that Nev sees what Anatomy of an Epidemic is about, it’s simply what it is, reporting the statistics of what correlates with the increase in mental illness, and how anti-psychotics being prescribed, being recommended to the extent that they are and also being forced on people contribute to that. Those are facts, that’s not hypothesis. And Robert Whitaker isn’t at all trying to eradicate any use of anti-psychotics, which from Nev is used against him, as if that’s the result of his books. Because it ISN’T the responsibility of people who have have their whole life harmed by anti-psychotics to have vital information that could have prevented this pushed to the side because someone feels that it’s pill shaming. Or that because information that was suppressed when shared prevents those who would have been helped by anti-psychotics, when would such information be withheld ignores the whole consequent spike that clearly correlates with anti-psychotics.

    I also find it a mental fabrication to say that Open Dialogue imported here is a “Fantasy” (something that TRULY IS hypothesis, which she uses as an excuse to dismiss something that’s completely valid), because she finds that: “the idea that one could relatively neatly import an intervention from a rural, culturally homogeneous region of a high-income Nordic state with universal healthcare, robust social welfare systems, tuition free higher education, and so on, to parts of the US with deep poverty, entrenched structural racism, urban violence, etc., seemed like a fantasy.” That’s really quite aggressive dismissal of something that has been proven to work, and that HASN’T been tried in the US, simply because it’s not as pro drug as mainstream treatments promoted by pharmacy guilds, and the economics that sells drugs. And for her to stereotype Finland, deny that the same distress could happen there in other ways than happens in America, because in America we have:”deep poverty, entrenched structural racism, urban violence, etc.” as an excuse in dismissing as “fantasy” something that has been proven to work, that’s beyond concern, and is more actual paranoia masked with fabricated concern. Sorry. I have to call it for what it is here. And if it worked where there’s according to her less societal distress then why wouldn’t it work where there’s more societal distress. To simply dismiss even trying it and then calling it a fantasy facilitates what? There’s not enough resources to easily try it out!?

    What goes on then when someone has other ideas that should be tried out or investigated, that then is called a “fantasy” and are dismissed as such, when they come for help in working those ideas out as a patient? And are met with advice and ideas listing their own thoughts as a “fantasy” rather than what they propose should be looked into, tried out, given leg room like anything else. Soteria project hired people that were egalitarian, simply interested in what another said, the weird stuff: everything, and this cost less money and was more effective. Is that another “fantasy?” That also is something that was dismissed, although proven to be effective. A “fantasy.” How would this compare to a clinician patient relationship when someone proposes something? As if this can be known beforehand whether it has relevance or would work or help, and instead dismissed as a “fantasy.” Or listed as a fixation, when someone really feels it should be given legroom. In the same fashion, in that “rural, culturally homogeneous region of a high-income Nordic state with universal healthcare, robust social welfare systems, tuition free higher education, and so on” a region, where they don’t have .7 % of the people in jail, don’t maintain the death sentence, don’t incarcerate under inhumane conditions people for the length of time happening in the US, that it’s a fantasy a less severe penal system would work here with our: ” deep poverty, entrenched structural racism, urban violence, etc.” Whether she believes that or not, it’s the same argument so many people use to excuse the US incarceration level.

    It’s not as if Open Dialogue wouldn’t give people a chance of, as Nev states: “beginning to see the experiences that get labeled as psychosis as rich, complicated, meaning-laden, and fundamentally bound up with identity and selfhood..and thus centering meaning-making in clinical contexts, rather than reductionistic forms of therapy or intervention that primarily aim to contain, ameliorate, or enable “self-management.” Which Nev says is the change she wants to see.

    Open Dialogue already does that, and gives a person the place to feel safe to start finding the means to express their identity and selfhood.

    When something works it works, it’s really easy to make up intellectualized arguments that sound plausible as to why something won’t work to avoid the challenge a different method offers to what one has become invested in, and has a vocation in.

    And I’ve gone on enough now about “fantasies.”

  • And then Hurford talks about medications being like the “foundation” of a house. And without a foundation you can’t build the rest of the house.

    WHAT!?

    I have to laugh about something that totally isn’t funny…

    Causing a chemical imbalance that’s been proven, in the guise of treating one that’s alleged, in the process causing a whole epidemic of the “diseases” said to be treated, and then saying one needs the leeway to be able to force treatment more or advocate for it, or advertise it, or more money for research because there’s “compelling” evidence you will find the chemical imbalance that’s alleged, although the evidence that the chemical imbalance you are causing by treating an alleged one isn’t just based on compelling evidence you will find it, being that the chemical imbalance you’re causing by treating the alleged one: it’s already there and been proven…..

    And then it’s stated that the alleged chemical imbalance is taking away a person’s civil rights, which AGAIN is cause to take those away as well, along with causing a chemical imbalance that wasn’t there before while advertising you are treating one..

    Give people a chemical imbalance they didn’t have before, by saying you’re treating one.

    Take away civil rights because an alleged disease is doing that, which is quite amazing that “psychosis,” has THAT MUCH control over the whole judicial and medical system, which might actually mean that there is MORE psychiatric disease that’s not been diagnosed is it truly causing anyone to lose their civil rights, but then it’s those really taking away civil rights that need to be looked at.

    I didn’t know Hurford had such insight, although her aim is a bit askew. It’s those people giving you the right to take away civil rights that are the psychosis, the alleged disease, investigate that a bit more and you might get somewhere….

    HOW can one take this seriously!?

    Oh I forgot. I’ts like diabetes. This alleged disease that’s said to be caused by a chemical imbalance so you treat it by causing a proven chemical imbalance that’s shown to cause an epidemic of the alleged disease (still not proven to be caused by a chemical imbalance unless it’s from treatment when one treats the alleged chemical imbalance by causing a proven chemical imbalance) and all of this is how you create the foundation, NOT mind you for an epidemic, but for how you treat this alleged disease…

    And THEN you can start to build a house…

    (!?!?)

    Let’s see

    the foundation is creating a proven chemical imbalance by saying you’re treating an alleged one

    on top of that you can build a house

    brick number one: “the relapsing and disability and loss of life, along with side effects, and the loss of civil rights and self determination, this is from a disease caused by an alleged chemical imbalance, not from the proven chemical imbalance that’s the treatment.”

    brick number two: “If I or anyone with a diagnosis like mine doesn’t understand that, they have anogsognosia, which DOESN’T come from the medications causing the chemical imbalance, that’s treating an alleged one.”

    brick number three: “That people in developing countries where there’s no money for such medications do better, doesn’t mean that rich countries might try that, it means that one should develop those countries to be more rich, although that depletes their resources sort of like the medications do to my body causing side effects, but that’s progress.”

    brick number four: “It’s not that the arts, or philosophy, or great scientists in history that have created our culture had healthy minds, they’ve all been dubbed with psychiatric diseases as well, and it would be better if one could create a time machine to go fix them up, then society would be so much better, although there’s no proof for that either, as little as the chemical imbalance of the alleged disease has been found, but don’t suggest to create a time machine, that would be against the beliefs of statistical based norms and unhealthy emotionally, something the drugs can fix, again. And no, this isn’t because a time machine might disprove our theory.”

    brick number five: “Go volunteer to be a peer support specialist, give up on the time machine.”

    brick number six: “Don’t pay any attention to the foundation by now disintegrating, that’s because you need more medications.”

    brick number seven: “put that on the new and improved foundation….”

    brick number eight: “I know the foundation collapsed again, lets try shock therapy now.”

  • Um…
    The article reads a bit like something from eonline or a gossip column. Albeit she has snippets of information from a whole array of areas, but she dots back and forth from this one to that one much like the reports of what so and so is wearing, who is together with another or not or was etc. There really isn’t much depth, as much as she’s trying to make out she has real concern. She’d have to go deeper into the issues than dotting back and forth.

    It’s really depictive of people’s inability in general of maintaining attention, the ten second sound byte generation.

    One of the things I find most distressing are the blips or blurbs of statements about or from Irene Hurford, whose article in the New York Times I also have read now, linked from the Vice article. Her article already is another catchy piece designed to pique people’s interest and doesn’t venture into the territory of people who don’t read such articles to entertain the knowledge of being up on things, people who are most likely to end up targeted by much of psychiatry’s diagnosis and lack of acknowledgment in their environment. And the strangest thing is that’s actually touched on in the article itself (buy Love rather than Hurford), like what I’ve seen from a church that comes to the local mission and hands out used clothes and ziplock bags full of peanut butter sandwiches, junk food, little bottles of shampoo and soap, other little tokens like a necklace with a crucifix on it; and then remains proud of doing their part when they do this twice a year or so and then lock their doors behind them. And the lack of real substance to me points out that she really doesn’t have the ability to relate to someone she deems as being “psychotic,” and instead uses her concern of something she’s incapable of relating to to mask her inability, making out she’s involved with critical decision making instead. And that’s the simple truth for me. There are people who don’t get alarmed about “psychosis,” have no need to analyze it, that leave it to work itself out, or are able to make a person feel supported enough, without that soft lurking quiescent buzz in the background of I-might-have-you-committed. She talks about someone who when his father came to visit him went off of his meds and started smoking dope a lot. There’s absolutely no discussion what so ever about why he was on meds to begin with, why there was no support enough that allowed him to relate to his feelings enough to see that smoking dope every day wasn’t helping him, which in this case wasn’t, all of the dynamics with his family that become apparent with anyone still cogent about cause and effect aren’t even referred to, and then he’s back in the school whose “medical” programs regarding what he’s been through mostly push that into the background to promote what he’s already been forced into. And dope and psychiatric drugs both mess around with brain chemistry, what’s going on with someone that they prefer disabling what their brain itself might be trying to express, something that one would think has become uncomfortable to them, which both sides of the supposed support system (Hurford or the family) seem to show why there’s such discomfort and the reflex towards disabling the mind to avoid thoughts and feelings that have become uncomfortable, whether it’s with psychiatric drugs or dope. Then she talks about someone who had Aids, came into the ER and said they were a profit: sorry I mistyped it’s spelled Prophet, that REALLY was a “Freudian,”. She had him medicated, and knows nothing about him from there on. Ending the piece with: “I never found out what happened to him. I think about him often; I question my decision each time I do.” Wow! That’s a sly way to point out you need help understanding what you’re doing, but not really going forth to find out because of reticence. Just that she wanted to help becomes enough. The badge the medical establishment gives her, and thus she has to do “something.”

    Hurford’s approach isn’t even all that mainstream, she will say that psychosis isn’t just non reality based garbage, but the question still remains WHY someone like her is given the power they have, when there are many people who don’t become alarmed, who don’t need to feel they are helping by taking on such a badge, but that have the ability to understand the symbolism, the need for reflexes, memories, beliefs to come out in the open through a means, in this case labeled psychosis, that might expose the reflexes, memories, beliefs whose interactions with the brain are labeled as symptoms of psychosis, and give them leg room to not remain hidden in the interplay or reactions to life, and then a person might move beyond their present limitations; but then we come across the very fabric of society, the people Hurford and Shayla Love know how to get to read their writings, dotted with acceptable blurbs for those who want to know “something,” where they can assimilate a host of things without going deeply enough into any of them to go beyond such hip hop repertoire. Safe stuff to go to any school, church, parks and recreation classes, neighborhood leagues, Girlscout or Boyscout get together, sports club, political party etc. and start sharing how up you are on stuff.

    And Hurford talks about how “psychosis” is taking a person’s civil liberties away, which is a quite “amazing” concept. Decorated with their supposed inability to realize something is wrong, Thus she “medicates.” But speaking of what’s wrong, it’s not mentioned how psychiatric drugs have lead to more disability, relapsing, loss of life and paranoia about “psychosis” along with recycling of it with that paranoia strengthened and supported even when alternative approaches lead towards more recovery, whether the symptoms are gone because they were understood or simply not medicated; one wonders how one can respond at all to such an amazing convolution of what’s going on. “What we cause more of by taking away your civil liberties is taking away your civil liberties, so we continue to cause more of it to save your civil liberties, which we took away.” And WHAT is cause and effect!? That a psychotic person would have to deal with such indoctrination, such convoluted “logic,” and be a different effect from what those taking away their civil liberties are causing, and then have to figure out how to escape from such a situation!?

    I also find this something akin to confusion technique, all of the hip hop blurbs, because there are too many references to too many people, without delving any deeper, and one becomes incapable of remembering anything beyond a blurb, with the amount of stuff popping up; and would you want to address any of it, you have to start looking deeper yourself, after having identified the stuff that needs looking into; and then further more knowing by then that you are going to encounter stuff that just doesn’t fit this hip hop blurb world. It’s not quick fix, fast food enough. Can’t get it at the drive through or order it online with a few clicks. Not hanging on the corporate media output tree where cherries are ready to be picked.

    Shayla Love also mentions a clinician Nev Jones, who has concern about polarization, and mentions Robert Whitaker’s books as causing this: that parents refuse to allow their children to continue on medications (even when the medications were helping), or to start on them, this then is one anecdotal story from one clinician (one “cherry”); but has no reference to what extent the true evidence that’s not anecdotal is shared in Whitaker’s books, and yet implies that that shouldn’t be looked at or believed because of one anecdotal story. And the real polarization is apparent again. Don’t mention serious research that I can dot around and find one anecdotal story to contradict, when the serious research is already suppressed, and not in line with guilds, economic bubbles and corporate media.

    So, if someone comes up to you and seems to be psychotic, and tells you they are a prophet, at least ask them how you spell that…

  • mmarti2007

    Apart from seeing close friends lives destabilized by the mental health system, committing suicide or dying of other related causes brought on by the mental health system, I actually forgot that I know a story of someone being directly killed by the mental health system, in the city I live in. I only heard about it from someone who was a friend of a lady barber, who knew a poor elderly man who got thrown into this mess, where the lady barber had been trying to intercede and become his legal guardian. The poor old man had gone to the hospital distressed because of a valid skin condition. Because he was distressed they had suggested he take an anti-depressant, which he declined, and then he got committed. And that’s simple distress because of a skin condition. At one point he was in an asylum getting shock treatment, and the barber (who I still have to look up, I only know where she works) she was trying to become his legal guardian, but was being prevented by lawyers who had taken over his money, and consequently also being paid to be his guardians I think, the barber lady was told by the poor old man: “get me out of here, they’re killing me,” and next she heard he had an apartment for awhile, but then died. They had managed to take over his whole life. House Everything… Mindfreedom had TWO stories like this of girls who with their mother had gone to the ER, and when the mothers had stated they didn’t want their children on an anti-depressants for valid distress involving a physical condition, the girls were both thrown into the system, and were ward of the state.

    Stuff anyone of us hears regularly that others wouldn’t believe. It’s also QUITE scary the amount of nurses that go on anti-depressants, also when they are still in school.

    https://www.idealmedicalcare.org/75-med-students-antidepressants-stimulants/

    And you just have to truly research what anti-depressants really do to be highlyg concerned about how much anosognosia is going around regarding what the “medications” really do with the people who are supposed to tend to the sick.

    If your son is foaming at the mouth, because of the medications, and it’s not acknowledged that that could be causing him to choke, and that then it’s listed he’s trying to do that on purpose, this is so pretentious that most people would shriek upon hearing such nonsense, but people like us hear it regularly regarding psychiatric treatment reports.

    One can only assume, given that your son never wanted to abruptly be forced off of clozapine, that he wasn’t told why he needed to have blood tests, and wasn’t told that if he refused them that they couldn’t keep him on clozapine. When I do a search for clozapine and blood tests, it also mentions that when someone has been on it as long as your son was, they only require blood tests every month; but it’s quite clear that they didn’t avert at all a crisis, and didn’t tell your son they needed blood drawn to get his prescription, and when the pharmacists said he needed the blood test, they didn’t give him one afterwards. Here:
    https://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/cpd-and-learning/learning-article/how-clozapine-patients-can-be-monitored-safely-and-effectively/11138788.article?firstPass=false
    it says that after one has been on clozapine for 34 weeks (your son was on it for 16 months) that one only has to have monthly blood tests, so they still had two weeks to get the next test in. And that’s information that’s freely available online. And clearly if they had told your son this, he would have complied with a blood test, it really wasn’t that he was refusing all blood tests.

    I have to tell you that I’ve experienced this all over the place, that as SOON as people think that you’re crazy, you can’t do any normal thing that they might be suspicious of without them adding on ad hoc diagnosis. It’s not a pleasant experience to have a needle stuck in you every week, and it should be understandable should someone not like it – if that is even the case that he refused – but to not make it clear why it would be necessary, while it’s completely clear that he would have complied since he called you up begging you to get them to reinstate his clozapine, that’s highly irresponsible. It’s like your son is supposed to be a mind reader, when there’s no way he could know that the blood tests are necessary or his clozapine won’t be refilled. It sounds like mostly that because he didn’t want a test, and wasn’t compliant, that they hurled their own irresponsibility at him for not telling him why the test would be necessary when then he would have taken it. And it seems that they cover all of that up thinking he’s being non-compliant, as if he’s supposed to be a mind reader or be seen as non compliant. And that’s another thing; as soon as they think someone is crazy, they don’t openly talk to that person anymore, but get together and make ad hoc diagnosis, without even finding out what’s going on with that person. Here, all they had to do is tell him why the blood test was necessary. And one is left having to convince them that they aren’t dealing with or relating to you anymore; instead of them honestly or openly dealing with you, you have to deal with paranoia do you have what’s really normal healthy self determination anymore, or question them about normal things anyone should want to know. WHERE ELSE in medicine do they do such things?

    We all have heard this story about psychiatric drugs being like diabetes – which isn’t true https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OVNiLKjMME – but can you see them not telling a person that he needs blood work to get his prescription filled, when he is on diabetes medications, and then taking him off of them without telling him beforehand why the test work is necessary if he declined such tests although would have taken them did he know they were necessary. But here, someone can’t not want to take a test they aren’t informed of as to why it’s necessary, without being treated as if they are supposed to know that. And who is the “professional!?”

    And EXCUSE ME, but someone is going to say there’s something wrong with me when I think: “you know that’s just like fascism: when you’re not allowing yourself to be controlled by another, when you don’t just simply to as you’re told, you’re non compliant.” And all they had to do is explain why the blood tests were necessary. It’s about someone not questioning them, and doing what they are told to do, or be seen an non compliant, or showing “symptoms” of a “disease.”

    And how did he get two black eyes, and how is him foaming at the mouth because of medications equated with a suicide attempt on his part, and how can it not be seen that a medication that they are informed of he can’t take is going to cause terrible side effects when given to him (while going cold turkey off of others, and not just one)!?

    And mmarti2007. This is all really disturbing stuff, that would push anyone over the deep end. I hope you do things like take walks, watch sunsets, do yoga, meditate, listen to calm soothing music, go to museums, read books that sooth you about life and that it all comes out in the end, read poetry, write poetry, play a musical instrument, eat healthy food (lots of vegetables and green stuff). I’ve taken a break from the computer twice writing this, to do yoga. This is all highly abusive distressing stuff that most people when they hear about it either don’t believe it, disassociate from considering it, or even blame it on the victim.

    And I would perhaps encourage you not to watch scary movies that are full of scary chase scenes making you feel something is after you, because that adrenaline will put you on edge and rob you of the answers that might be there when you haven’t been driven to distraction and desperation; even when you feel guilty you’re not doing something, or feel like you’re being defeated not doing anything, it could be better to just let go of stuff, and let the truth shine, because that’s not going to go away. None of us can know what went on with these terribly paranoid brainwashed people to get them into such a fascist state, but sometimes, when we get out of the way, the the turth (or God if you will) has the chance to shine through.

    These people are going to fixate on anything they have the chance to “diagnose” in order to disassociate from all the compromises they’ve made in life. Like the old church bitties that start gasping when anyone shows up in easy clothes, too colorful clothes or behavior, hair too long looking too much like the pictures of Jesus etc..

    There’s no great loss in getting out of the way, sometimes.

  • mmarti, you stated: ” Then, in his 10th month there, they received over $7000 in backpay — things happened and he began asking about the money. That very day – they instantly “ran out” of his 500mg of Clozapine. He immediately called me, scared, asking if he was going to have to go to the hospital. I assured him I would call to get his Clozapine reinstated. I called and was met with incompetent, defensive, rude staff members, blaming my son for everything.”

    Could you tell us more about what these people said? Because not only did they take him off of Clozapine, which one just can’t do cold turkey, certainly not ignoring the effect; but they also put him on Haldol, which you told them that he can’t take. I don’t think that would happen in any other branch of the medical community that it’s simply ignored that someone already had a bad reaction to a medication, or that they don’t acknowledge withdrawal symptoms in such a manner. In fact in other branches they would ask you, such as the question whether you’re allergic to antibiotics. And he could have died from it (and you were almost not allowed to see him), which brings another matter up, that often after someone dies in an asylum that there isn’t any proper autopsy done, and the reporting of how often psychiatric drugs kill someone is under reported, although we still hear about it. And it hasn’t stopped, and the psychiatrists are only given a hand slap. Probably there’s been no action by the system regarding the psychiatrist that abruptly changed his meds and then put him on haldol while no one would listen to the fact that it was known he couldn’t take that drug. ALL psychiatric drugs have bad side effects which are often not tended to. And they aggressively attribute withdrawal symptoms and side effects to an alleged disease…

    I mean this should be reported such behavior. Sherry Julo who wrote this blog has quite a few stories of how she wasn’t listened to as well. And that’s all allowed in the system, and the horrible effects are somehow excused, even when they kill people.

  • mmarti I read your response, and also your post from more than a year ago: https://staging-madinamerica.kinsta.cloud/2016/06/abolishing-forced-treatment-in-psychiatry-is-an-ethical-imperative/#comment-157028
    I don’t know what to say other than I’m trying to not cry, just so I can stay clear and maybe send some hope, some healing energy, and then a tear trickles down, regardless…

    It’s ABSOLUTELY insane. Someone that had difficulty because they tried a street drug, doesn’t need to be assaulted with other controlled substances, that’s truly insane. Don’t even try making any sense out of it.

    And I don’t know how to commend your behavior that you got your son OUT OF such a situation, and spared his life. It’s like anything I’d say wouldn’t be enough.

    I’ve seen this myself, when someone in an asylum was prescribed said medication, and then got out, but couldn’t get nor had a prescription for it — I think there was no psychiatrist available, I can’t even remember exactly, but it was so irresponsible you just go into shock trying to cognate it — and then had to titrate off of what she willingly was taking that they had put her on in the asylum, but they couldn’t get her a prescription for when she got out!? They have enough money for fooling everyone with ads, and enough money to imprison someone within an asylum, and enough money to keep the psychiatrists in their niche https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/What-Is-the-Average-Psychiatrist-Salary-by-State But force taking someone off cold turkey, not listening to advice regarding ill effects of the new medications forced on him which he already couldn’t tolerate; ignoring signs of how it’s killing him…

    And it seems it just started because he dared to ask something about where certain money went, which it seems you can’t ask them; which I don’t know if that was the case, but why could it or would it be?

    From what I’ve seen, as soon as you are monitored by them, there’s a whole list of normal concerns you might have that you can’t voice, or be seen as disruptive, non compliant, you name it….

    If that was the case, they probably tried to make him out to show signs of paranoia, because he had a legitimate question about where the money went.

    That’s really just torture and mind control, that’s not medical treatment.

    What is going on with a “society” that can just assault someone with labels and pills, and have the “society” ignore what the pills are doing, or they’d have to question the labels!?

    I have to deal with that every day, although I’ve never been forced on a psychiatric drug, and never taken any, people are so ripe as to how they’ve compromised themselves to a dysfunctional society, and so in need of not questioning their brainwashing lest the whole pretense they think their existence is based on would fall apart believing they are in danger would it, that they are so stuffed with labels they pop right out of them at any moment causing alarmist responses have they heard anything about someone being “crazy,” or anything that goes with social non compliance. And they’re more up on that then what’s really going on, which explains a lot… And they’re real spiteful, angry, resentful, hateful. Once they think anything’s going on, you can’t do anything unusual, or else.

    Anyhow

    To show that I’m still “crazy,” and “non reality based” to those people, I’ll say that it’s not crazy to trust God, and that is realistic.

    And don’t worry about those people, don’t let it get to you, who knows what they went through to get the way they are, but if you let go of it that can be attended to by what other people would say is impossible…

    You’ve already done quite a few “impossible” things just to save your son’s life.

    “Impossible” things aren’t impossible…

    And my heart goes out to you…

  • I feel so for you, what you’ve been through. Like running around in a war zone, no one wanting to hear the horrors it leaves you in while they keep the war going. This whole war against the brain’s natural responses, you can see that even calling something a panic attack can be predatory to get you to become a drug company consumer. The very labeling of any symptoms itself.

    You’ve come a long way not giving up, thank God you didn’t, and are doing something to help thousands of others. That’s beautiful! Thank You for sharing your story so that others know they aren’t alone!

    Sometimes when it seems that my brain has abandoned me, just waiting a bit longer while thinking it’s not going to something surprisingly kicks in, I’ve noticed myself, if that helps at all (not all the time, but it’s so soothing when it does): Am I going to remember that word? What was I doing again? Why am I in this room?

    Everything labeled as a psychiatric symptom can have an intelligence of its own, that when allowed to just be felt rather than reacted to (I don’t like this feeling, how can I get rid of it, what drug will help, this is going to ruin my life if it doesn’t go away) can be much gentler and more subtle and more helpful than trying to get rid of it, although we’re trained to think we have to.

    It’s not just psychiatric drugs, it’s the whole consumer oriented society people are trained to think will solve their problems; everything from food to entertainment to technology. And we’re incredibly being setup to be consumers.

  • In reply to Steve, adding on to his comments.

    Since this blog is about whistle blowers being suppressed, an attempt to get it back on topic.

    I think it’s divisiveness that divides the two political parties that together with their arch of two polarized poles pressing against each other create basically the business party, one big party. Divide and conquer. Both parties that it’s made up of exploited to be causing the divide demanding that people chose between the two. And it’s exactly that which has kept the hegemony and the economy of the psychiatric treatment that this blog and Robert Whitaker’s amazingly articulate exposé tries to point out treats whistle blowers the way it does.

    I also find it divisive to lineup everything that appears to be on someone’s political platform, that regarding politics where it could change at any moment, certainly after elections; and then to tag anyone that at any point is in accord with anything in that line regarding certain issues as being a supporter of that side, next comes the label of what’s wrong with the whole “other” side. That’s like saying if you buy ANY groceries at the wrong store, you’re ruining the economy. One place might have better vegetables, and another better of something else, and the third that one thing you need although everything else you don’t find up to par.

    If Del Bigtree supported one stance of Trump regarding one particular political issue calling him a hero, doesn’t mean he voted for Trump. He actually works much more with Robert Kennedy Junior, who certainly isn’t in Trump’s party. Are we then to be on Trump’s side because of Del Bigtree working with Kennedy? Are all Democrats supposed to not be in agreement with the Republicans, or Trump or be on the wrong side; or are the Republicans not supposed to agree with the Democrats and not with Trump, or are the Democrats supposed to be in agreement with Trump but not the Republicans; or should they all disagree with themselves and each other to make sure no one is supporting the wrong side; everyone making sure they don’t work with or agree with anyone at all regarding anything on any political platform that could end up supporting the wrong side!? Same with the Bollingers to bring religion into it as well. You’d have to ask them who they actually voted for or support in the next election not just look at one stance they have with one or two issues. And whether they voted for Trump or still support him, which I wouldn’t know but to me looks like they don’t, that has nothing to do with whether their book has helped people, a book that has 88% five star ratings. And they have many success stories helping people with cures. Am I on the wrong side would I want to read the book even if they are Trump supporters when I don’t know if they are and don’t necessarily believe someone else labeling them as such, or am I supposed to e-mail them and anyone else to ask first would I be interested in them or overlook their statement about covid death statistics, although I don’t believe that particular statement but am interested in the extensive research they’ve done on alternative cancer cures?

    And yes I’m being floridly sarcastic spinning something into the absurd to make a point. One should simply be able to have interest in good things one sees in another faction regardless of other points of disagreement.

    This also was about people promoting holistic health and alternative methods. That remains something radically different than what Trump has been touting, save a few points.To round up in such a manner making a conglomeration of so and so’s political platform stating one is on said side given their stance on those issues I think that’s polarizing and exactly how Trump got the support he did; grouping resentments together inside of what’s for who knows what reason called populism, as if it’s popular to just be reactive. In fact I remember that all of the other candidates on their own did better against the other side than Trump did (as Sanders also was polled to do better than Clinton); but Trump went along with polarity and its numbers.

    When you compare a person’s actions to Bush with “you’re for us or against us,” I see that as a clear analogy with content rather than just labels. I find that a clear example of what happens when you dismiss anyone who has political points the same as another seen as the wrong side, and refuse to look at a whole array of other issues; the same anyone not for Bush’s war was seen as against him, regardless of any other issues or any other way. That example has nothing to do with Bush either, it’s an example of behavior not of a person, to dismiss that as incendiary and defaming because Bush is involved, is yet another cleavage. And that’s an example of such behavior rather than excusing it if you are on the “right” side, in this case dismissing those in accord with one specific issue one is against, rather than a military war, thankfully. Beyond that there might also actually be Bush supporters that could use examples of his behavior that were commendable, and that might actually also be so in regards other issues, even ones not involving politics at all.

    Naomi Klein coined the phrase disaster politics, exploiting the fact that a disaster destabilizing a region makes vulnerable people more prone to suggestion; the basic method such psychiatrists as Cameron took part in with MK-Ultra, and what Naomi delineates turned into what she calls the Shock Doctrine in taking over whole economies. And how is this paralleled when someone (mentioned above as a whistle blower) tries to point out that said commodity people desperately might think they or others need isn’t really doing what it’s touted to, and might make things worse?

    Sadly people are dying of covid, but how much is that used as disaster politics because people are desperate for an answer, and in the process of looking for one are assaulted with various factions touting one method and discarding others rather than anyone being allowed or encouraged to take what’s good from all of them. And people that promote holistic health or natural cures really aren’t the ones with all of the money that have been playing disaster politics the whole time.

  • In response to Steve:
    What is choosing sides?
    Because that brings to mind  when Mind Freedom had their freedom strike, a hunger strike and challenged the APA to prove mental illness was biological. Some platitude was delivered about how much disability there is and how much suffering that people can’t adapt to statistical based norms, without addressing at all the actual challenge (can you prove it’s a chemical imbalance), other than stating one should look in textbooks which actually state that there’s no proof, although they list medications as treatment…. that in colleges that since the early 80s have been fronts for investment institutions, although not exactly investment institutions in themselves, and so they’re going to go with the economics of what’s selling statistically and what isn’t.

    But the term “statistical based norms,” that’s like you’re with us or on the other side, which characterizes exactly what kind of statistics are involved, because that isn’t the statistics showing what brings people together, when others are left out and are supposed to think there’s something wrong with them when they can’t adapt to such “statistics.”

    And then there’s “consensual reality deportment,” along with “statistical based norms” used to perceive symptoms of a mental illness.

    Both of us admire Richard’s ability to take care that people aren’t shod to go tramping around reporting false data,

    But when one runs into people with a diagnosis, one runs into people that actually have reason to get disturbed from what they know (about politics and how it doesn’t work), and you learn everything that goes on in such a complex jumble of how not to do it, and it isn’t allowed to go anywhere, or being that that works it messes up our dreams of a better way which we mesmerize people with; so I can go on and on about it, now being assumed to want to take sides, but it’s disingenuous to dismiss the rest of what’s shared when someone doesn’t go along with the statistical based norms of what’s considered statistics regarding what’s coming from organizations that have been shown to put a spin on whatever is corporate enough to be part of mainstream economy, even when the site or group not part of mainstream hegemony is even further off. Simply because they share something that would otherwise be overlooked, and is needed for a complete picture.

  • The two political parties (in the USA) that have created the deadlock (one has maybe 10 percent more change than the other, and we need at least 60 percent) are both actually, as Chomsky states, together the business party, and it’s such behavior that causes the suppression of people like Kavanagh, which this blog is about, because of business interests. Both parties facilitating suppressing whistle blowers regarding the FDA.

    I also think that the war between the two parties is pushing more sensitive issues to the side (including what this blog is about), issues that will continue to kill more people, if not addressed, than covid is going to. And I’ve stated those issues clearly, neither does that mean I’m not concerned about covid or negating those deaths, or overlooking data regarding it, or overlooking how to deal with covid, or agreeing with false statements regarding covid. I don’t think one can discard major issues regarding health and what supports the immune system regardless that other issues are handled badly such as whether one wears masks, whether there’s social distancing and the death count. I think people should wear masks, I go along with social distancing and I don’t think the death count is exaggerated to the extent that’s reported, but I also believe that would people take care of themselves, would they have adequate water, would their environment not be as toxic, would they have any kind of decent working conditions and further more would they be able to take care of themselves that then along with the other measures that that might save more lives than just the measures that are stressed. And I am saying that that goes along with the other measures, not instead of it. But that might save in addition more lives, and also would continue to keep saving lives that were lost before covid ever turned up. To go back on topic, such a lack of being able to take care of oneself given economic standing and environment is used as a means to diagnose people with a mental illness, because of the symptoms that emerge from such lack, such disregard, rather than their living conditions are acknowledged.

    Richard, I’m not on either side, and I’m not going to contribute to the architecture that’s caused the deadlock. As I mentioned regarding polarization, both political parties in the US lean on each other creating an arch with two beams, both beams pressing against each other creating an arch supporting each other blocking any other party or more alternative views; and although you criticize me for stating you are polarizing, say that’s a heavy accusation and negative descriptors, you then do exactly that asking me what side I’m on, as if do I see any good in the other I’m on the wrong one, or that I have to chose sides. That’s polarizing, plain and simple. I’m not going to add to the pressure on either side holding the whole blockage in place.

    Also trying to intimidate that people have to take sides, in whatever conflict, as if that’s the only way or they are required to, also creates the kind of stress that not only causes inability to relate to what’s human on the other side, but causes the immune system to break down with the fight or flight response, which in this case is the fight response.

    My responding to your posts is also over now, your last post was radically off topic and I feel I’m being exploited playing catch for or thrown into someone else’s issues that already are highly off topic and distracting.

  • I’m trying to get this straight, to follow this, and wonder whether this is right:

    When you increase the percentage of children that are apt to get referred to as having ADHD, and also given that children are more likely to have covid, you dramatically increase over a whole arena the amount of correlation with ADHD and covid, because children are more likely to have it regardless of diagnosis. And then include this with age groups where covid is more dangerous, without making age differences, that adds to the scare. Then also negate to add that the younger group which is added to the total, is less likely to get any severe symptoms of covid, although they are included with the total of people that are more likely to get severe symptoms, and you can say that ADHD can lead to covid, and the ADHD should be medicated. And then the correlation with ADHD medications leading to severe symptoms – it breaks down the blood brain barrier, and also shouldn’t be subscribed if children already have breathing problems and/or heart problems – that’s also left out. As is the evidence that ADHD medications in general have troubling side effects, and can give severe side effects, and can lead to further diagnosis which wasn’t the case before such medications were so highly used.

    And I wonder how much I’ll be targeted as “non-reality-based,” would I point out that ADHD medications have created a whole pandemic in itself; leading to future diagnosis, disability, loss of life expectancy etc. and this whole setup is quite profound; because they’re dealing with a definition of an illness that’s not objective (there isn’t any real proof of a chemical imbalance), and what fixes the problem without such an assumption also isn’t acknowledged, added to that the “medications” for the disease aren’t seen to be fixing anything but a behavior that’s critiqued – although that quite marginally, and weighs more on the observance of those dolling out the medications than the person themselves or their family – and there’s no concrete evidence that that leads to better health physically, in fact it’s the opposite; and to go into the extreme, although I’m dolling out a comparison that undoubtedly would be used to make out I’m extremist, it’s like saying that putting your child on a leash, or in a straight jacket and locking him or her up in a closet is helpful when they are in danger of catching something running around too much and being hyperactive, while pushing to the side and suppressing what happens when you actually talk to the child in a way that they can relate to rather than just trying to control them.

    Beyond that in countries where they don’t have $$$$$$$ for medications, and inmates are treated in inhumane ways, they have more recovery; which isn’t to support inhumane treatment, it’s what “medications” really do.

    Or should we bring back the rod to get rid of covid. And is there compelling evidence that locking your children up will send the common flue into outer space where NASA sent a “vinyl” recording of the Queen of the Night aria?

    And would that be a “capitalist” setup to sell record players to the space aliens, or in this case vaccines against the flues that might end up infecting the rest of the Universe, which I do think is a problem.

    Now….

    sorry about that….

    This becomes very sad when children that just possible need a little bit of legroom are rounded up and used as evidence that because they get covid more often and survive it, that giving them “medications” that would compromise their ability to survive it would help others who already are more compromised.

  • You guys, I’m having to laugh at even trying to make sense out of words like capitalism or then socialism, which so often is made out to be the bad guy then..

    What goes on here with whistleblowers being persecuted, because they’d interfere with $$$$$$$$ actually points to a system that is basically what capitalist fundamentalists would say is what’s wrong with socialism, that an elite few can control others, and suppress dissenting information, so…..

    Quite rampant in corporate politics, such “socialism.”

    Or religions that say that the devil is out to torture you and your enemy, but then use him as their “disciplinarian” or “deterrent” would anyone not conform to their ideology and end up in a Hell that would have no function and might dissipate all together did they not need such a “deterrent” for mind control.

  • Regarding that one is supposed to show the change the psychiatrist, or the result, that he wants, but is the psychiatrist even dealing with the person he’s trying to change at all. And what if the person actually believes this?

    I’ve actually walked around for many years (about 25), a fraction of the time (maybe 10 to 15 percent ) being in a state psychiatry could call psychotic, although…

    What am I supposed to say about that,

    It really ended up being as simple as not realizing that I was reflexively pushing thoughts to the side or feelings I had encountered in my youth that then had already received such a critical response that the feelings themselves coming up made me uncomfortable, restless with the unconscious memory of the response to them, and I’d start doing something like drinking too much coffee, sometimes way too much. An attempt to disassociate. Well, then those feelings end up expressing themselves in a sort of dream state, with symbolism, that’s not just psychosis and non-reality based thoughts. And coffee (cigarettes too) act like psychiatric drugs, or are in ways, as is sugar. How they effect dopamine and with coffee at least also serotonin. And any restless anxious behavior trying to get away from an unconscious memory one isn’t able to comprehend can effect the brain, from the simple anxiety. Although ADHD drugs and antidepressants aren’t necessarily an attempt to disassociate from feelings and thoughts, that could be the case, or it could be that a person is forced to see their response as having something wrong with it, a symptom of a disease rather than their own nature an attempt at unconscious dissent or a response to their environment, that’s then called symptoms if it has anything to do with it, but ADHD medications and antidepressants also mess around with brain chemistry enough that one in 20 or so on those drugs end up with a bipolar diagnosis, right next to schizophrenic or schizo-effective. More drugs.

    I knew this the whole time about psychiatric drugs, and how they cause chemical imbalance when they disable one from expressing symptoms, and don’t treat a chemical imbalance but cause one which we are supposed to believe, so I wasn’t going for that; but the amount of ridiculous social behavior from people thinking they “know” you have a disease, and with all of the media hype regarding dangers of unmedicated people, when mostly the danger comes FROM how the medications disable the mind, you get so incredibly targeted by brainwashed people I’m still quite shocked how much that goes on, the same one is shocked at any number of false things people believe, or historically have. And they start talking about you en mass as if you’re some object completely disconnected from your own experience, and when you don’t believe them and/or aren’t following set method anything you do can be misinterpreted, when it’s at all unusual. Anything. Nor are people adverse to lying about you. It’s like I’m supposed to be someone else I never could be, and have tendencies I never could have and convince people that that’s not going to happen, which never could to begin with, in order for them to consider how I actually experience all of this, when I’m experiencing this, not them, although they think they know what’s going on. And that’s not just from psychiatrists who I actually didn’t have to deal with since the psychiatrist I saw gave me the leeway to not take medications and seek alternative routs. And the social behavior I just mentioned is just the instances when they have decided you have a disease, that’s not the hatred the bullying and the mobbing, which anyone being at all different can encounter, whether they have a diagnosis or not.

    I imagine this psychiatrist was talking about the result he wanted, much like someone promotes exerting their ego and redecorating their house, which makes me laugh already: How would the psychiatrist respond would you try to point out that he seems to be quite phobic about listening to what his clients really want? and I wonder how one could conflate that with him thinking his house might talk back to him.

    “Sir, you seem to be so scared of me having my own ideas it makes me wonder whether you have heard you house express dissent from how you redecorated it, and thus can’t deal with anything your brain might entertain that you think is psychotic.”

    One guy that used to live in an apartment underneath me, had been force treated, and had to see a “therapist” but didn’t want to. He told me it ruined his whole day, and he just hadn’t gone to see her, then she called him up and asked him if he needed a ride, where upon he either said no or hung up the phone. The next day the police showed up to escort him to the asylum because the “therapy” he said ruined his whole day was not something he wanted to go to, and in the asylum the psychiatrist asked him whether he thought anyone was after him….

    I was visiting someone at an asylum, she basically had needed someone to talk to as a child, had gotten for some reason hyperactive, and her parents had been told to put her on a drug that caused her to gain weight to such an extent that her father chased her around with a belt chastising her for that, she also couldn’t stay awake to pay attention because of the drugs, where she was further disciplined at school, and her parents told to take part in that. And as it seems endless to go on about such stuff I’ll try to continue, but there’s so many off shoots I don’ t know where it will end up. She had a relationship with a guy, and they were talking about getting married, which the father heard about from the guy but wasn’t supposed to, who you can pretty much guess wasn’t capable of much discussion with such matters, and the girl freaked out and put herself in the asylum and was voluntarily getting shock therapy. I understand that after that she was in a state asylum for a year, but a few (maybe 5 or 6) years ago I ran into her, and I asked her if she had someone to talk to, and she mentioned she lived with her mother and she could talk to her. Seems like a rather bumpy road just to find that (someone to talk to). Anyhow, back in the asylum I went to visit her in, there was a guy standing there that I had seen around, and he was standing at the central desk behind which the attendants and a secretary or so dwelt (computers and other recording devices such as pens at hand, and a phone probably also at their disposal); he looked so much like someone had propped him up there, with his jaw sagging as if he had just watched the most inexplicable thing happen, and so I asked him: “what are you doing here?” and he replied: “I don’t know.” So I simply stated: “Just follow the rules and do what you’re told, and you’ll get out.” When I got to the visiting area, the girl I was visiting and another patient started bounding back and forth like a tennis match with information as to why the guy was there. He had gone to the local “Catholic” hospital in the middle of the city, and had announced that he was pregnant. Now, I have to add that years before this, on a whim to do something crazy, I had called that same hospital and ask a joke inquired whether they had pregnancy tests for males. The lady that answered in a quite mundane voice stated that they didn’t have such tests. In fact she responded so blandly that I later for years wondered if it would have made any difference had responded by asking her to not put her makeup on while I’m asking her a serious question, and repeat the inquiry. I don’t know whether she actually was putting makeup on, it just gave that impression. But of course when this guy walked in there, not only did they not tell him that they didn’t have the ability to determine if he was pregnant, or what that might mean to him, they escorted him to the asylum, where he had been for maybe a month, and was so drugged up he looked like a zombie. The girl I was visiting and the other patients mentioned that the psychiatrists couldn’t figure out whether he thought he was pregnant, or whether he thought he was female. Serious diagnosis! Etc.. And why I’m going on about this is that the other patient had also mentioned how a psychiatrist had asked him whether he had homicidal thoughts: “Would you be here if I had homicidal thoughts,” he said he had responded. And then had of course been asked whether he had suicidal thoughts, and responded in the same vein with: “Would I be here if I had suicidal thoughts,” which he said seemed to make the psychiatrist mad enough that he was happy about that.

    Do you have homicidal thoughts?
    Do you have suicidal thoughts?
    Do you think anyone is after you?

    “No sir, when you force me on treatment, ruin my day by forcing me to talk to someone I can’t stand, I know that’s for my own good…”

    The guy that had some sort of pregnancy did get out, and when I ran into him in the park I later found myself feeding a whole group of sea gulls. Throwing pieces of bread up in the air which they caught.

    I for awhile did this more regularly, fed seagulls. In fact, I had found a whole loaf of discarded bread, which seemed to be in the works for the seagulls. It was just lying there askance half on the sidewalk half on the grass along the path I was riding on my bike after visiting my parents. I could have just left it there, but remembered the seagulls. I had taken it home squeezed and twiddled the soft bread into little balls, where it ended up in the freezer for awhile, till I put it in my back pack and took it with me having it long enough that the balls had melted. I ended up at a store with a big parking lot where the bus stops, and there always are a score of seagulls around there. I started throwing the bread up for them to catch, and I’ve never seen anything like it. The whole colony of seagulls was in the air, together, in complete harmony, and one by one, they took turns catching a piece of bread I threw up, never fighting about it, and letting the next one take his turn. It was the most amazing magnificent thing, and also as mundane to me as being able to breath air whose molecules have the same harmony. I think that the state I was in then could have easily been called psychotic by many people, in fact had I been “sane” I might have tried to make too much out of it, and it wouldn’t have happened.

    That’s called murmurating perhaps, if you’ve seen a whole flock of birds moving through the sky as one, https://theconversation.com/starling-murmurations-the-science-behind-one-of-natures-greatest-displays-110951 An incredible phenomenon of nature. Not something you can accomplish when the goal is the “result” you want, I think you have to be more in tune with harmony than that.

  • In case anyone wonders, by this time what the BLEEP this blog is about by now, down there somewhere I stated this:

    “I think that the Bollingers would be quite able to see what this blog actually is about, and that’s about whistle blowers, and what happens to them. Natural cures have very much the same story, over and over again.”

    Since this has gone way beyond the initial topic of the blog.

    Richard, my point remains the same from the beginning, you are polarizing a discussion using the terminology you use. Pointing out what you think is flawed information from a blog which deserves caution in believing or not is something different than categorizing the whole blog, or the people. That also fails to point out what exactly is flawed information, but instead categorizes a whole site. There basically isn’t ANY source just about that doesn’t have errors in it, that’s just how the human mind works which is more in the world of mental constructs and working those out, so there’s going to be mistakes; which is part of human nature in trying out different beliefs.

    Using such terminology also is nondescript, which you point out several times referring to “capitalism,” while defending mainstream cancer cures, and making it sound as if more natural cures here shared deserve the label of being seen as “capitalistic” and for profit oriented while natural cures don’t at all have the $$$$ to pay for the type of trials that the FDA demands (which the pharmaceuticals do have the $$$$$) although natural cures have been shown to work and there are other less expensive trials as accurate; beyond that the cures that aren’t pharmaceutical are often simply suppressed. And then you talk about who has a voice and who doesn’t, while natural cures DON’T have a voice in such a field and ARE suppressed. And what is the conspiracy theory then, a label or a belief that because they have such money and clout, that the drug companies and the big guys have the cures and the natural cures are “hoax” “nonsense” etc.?

    And the info about the inflated death counts the Bollingers share seems to be quite incorrect (although I’m not going to say that one can simply believe, without question, what the CDC and/or Fauci doles out, but in this case that seems to be accurate from them) but disbelieving the CDC remains what people hold onto when they’ve encountered such suppression by the FDA, but that DOES NOT make them Trump supporters, as little as that Del Bigtree because he also disagrees with mainstream medical belief is in the same ballpark as Trump etc. And you don’t know that about them, and to put them in such a category, also bringing politics into the discussion as if that’s another way to brand them (either way, are they or aren’t they) is again labeling and polarizing and bringing the conversation away from being articulate. It also initiates the architecture of the two main parties needing such polarization as two parts of an arch leaning against each other for two way hegemony.

    You’re creating factions and riffs and cleavages, and inciting divisions as if they are necessary; which is what leads to people getting lost thinking they need to chose sides, losing their voice, and without that they can’t find their way to know what their instincts tell them, which is the only way they can be themselves; and then they can’t find the treatment that would help them.

    I think that the Bollingers would be quite able to see what this blog actually is about, and that’s about whistle blowers, and what happens to them. Natural cures have very much the same story, over and over again.

    They (the Bollingers) state their beliefs very clearly in their “about” link on their site:

    “And the truth is that we should all have the freedom to choose!

    … freedom to choose the best cancer treatment protocol

    … freedom to say “yes” or “no” to chemotherapy

    … freedom to “try” a treatment that hasn’t been “approved” by the FDA

    … freedom to vaccinate

    … freedom NOT to vaccinate”

    And I can NOT keep on responding to a debate that has gone way off topic and out of the ballpark, I don’t have a secretary to keep track of it, and I have other things to do with my time than spending trying to keep track of it which has already been overloading me. You’ve tried to equate a widely diverse group of people: ” the Bollingers, Del Bigtree, Peter Breggin, Trump” as under the same roof and to be treated the same way, when they aren’t at all. And except for a few points you use to group them together they are widely divergent, and I think everyone there but Trump would be quite in agreement with the stance here on psychiatric treatment, but I don’t know other than Breggin their beliefs regarding it.

    And come to think of it in afterthought, you mention those most vulnerable to Covid, but fail to mention that they were already vulnerable to a host of issues such as inadequate, food, water, having to live in a toxic environment, high stress situations regarding economic standing; whether the Covid death rate is accurate again, HARPING on that, getting a whole planet obsessed with that, and overlooking more serious issues (that have been killing people more, and in all likelyhood looks like it will be allowed to continue) issues all of those people have had to deal with the whole time, again is using Covid media as a coverup to neglect more serious issues. Vaccinating everyone in Africa isn’t going to magically feed people or clean the environment there, nor stop wars for example, which is just ONE area.

  • How much is labeling things to discourage further delving into what’s stated any different from disabling the brain with chemical agents from being able to? All because one behavior or statement has been analyzed as dangerous, wrong, psychotic or delusional.

    I lose track of how many times I’m reading through a blog or watching a video on youtube that has truly insightful information beyond the scope of what one is supposed to believe is credible, and then one hears something akin to the moon landing being staged, and a government hoax. And even if that IS conspiracy theory, that doesn’t make the rest of what’s shared the case.

    It’s like people who have been diagnosed with a mental illness. Someone that’s called “schizophrenic,” is going to have gone through stuff that perhaps pushed them over the deep end, stuff they weren’t able to process, stuff they couldn’t get support just being listened to in regards, and stuff that’s beyond the perspective of what most people can even see going on; thus the person having gone through it is going to end up in the ghetto and beyond that the graveyard where such stuff is entertained, and having reached the incredible there is going to be stuff that’s concocted and not accurate, although perhaps symbolic. Stuff that gets in there just because it’s also beyond “sensible” boundaries where sensible boundaries have already been severely broken. But you don’t sort that stuff out dismissing anything that is seen as not sensible, when what the person already has experienced isn’t acknowledged and expression of that also is seen as not sensible.

    Another such example is where there’s talk of close knit alliances that are secretive, and then you hear about a Hapsburg Dynasty cult where there’s cloning going on along with a whole array of leaders that can be entangled into that and other fantastic connections just because of their position. That doesn’t mean everything else that’s brought up regarding elitist alliances is false.

    It’s quite common for a “schizophrenic” to think that there’s someone after them, or that there’s some sort of bugging, some sort of surveillance going on; that doesn’t mean that that’s all hoax, conspiracy theory or only psychotic paranoia. Someone having reached such a point as being called “schizophrenic” is already quite surveyed such that anything he does that’s not understood by those around him can be misunderstood, much like CIA surveillance in ways.

    Using such catch phrases as “nonsense” “conspiracy theory” “hoax,” and the others such as “paranoid delusions,” etc. is very much akin to turning off the brain with neuroleptics disabling it from looking into the situation further. And when it has stopped doing that seeing it as a return of “sanity.” A psychotic delusion isn’t just paranoid nonsense, it could be expressing something that’s hidden; and when there’s one – even very loud outspoken – error of presumption or fabrication in what’s shared, that doesn’t make everything else fill-in-the-blank-with-label-and-dismiss. In fact, there’s quite a bit of information one might need to have that’s going to be included with other stuff that’s not quite processed yet or presumed, or fabricated; the same as what’s contained in “psychosis,” could be symbolizing something that needs to be understood, not dismissed.

  • And sorry Richard, but the Bollingers could be “wrong” about how much the numbers are inflated. I looked myself and compared the numbers for my state with last years, and there are 4525 more deaths than last year, although the Covid deaths are listed as 5264; but there might be still a slight inflation because of the hype, although it doesn’t appear as if it’s to the extent the Bollingers claim. But sorry, the Bollingers I don’t see as not having logical reasons to be paranoid and mistrust the FDA or the CDC; given how alternative cures are suppressed, and what they have experienced as healing may not be given a voice, in comparison to what runs the economy. Someone who is “psychotic” may be paranoid that someone is after them, and be easily impressionable by anything (a chase scene in a movie, the news, church talk about demons etc.) but when you listen to them, and how they really feel, and what is going on with them, the feelings that never were given legroom, you understand why they fall back on that, and you learn that listening to them helps, as it would with anyone; and calling them psychotic, delusional, paranoid and all of the rest does as little as the adjectives you use of “hoax” “conspiracy theories,” “nonsense,” and fortunately I don’t remember the other one….

    And simply beyond that, the deaths caused by such things as sugar, alcohol, processed foods, toxicity in the environment, toxicity in foods even when not processed foods, and the amount of stress people have to live in, and how fear is used as mind control; all of that kills more people, and has been killing more people every month than the Pandemic, and none of that is really dealt with in any way in comparison to the illnesses that are caused by what has been and still is killing people more than the pandemic. Stores are still full of food marketed to make people addicted, a sort of drug to avoid any feelings that are less stimulant oriented, stuff that pushes away more subtle arrays of thinking that simply need space as thought rather than stimulant or anything that physical, simple feelings, thought, space, nothing… and I wonder beyond anything Fauci is doing, would due attention really be paid to all of what I just brought up, how much that would help people simply because it strengthens the natural immune system; and even with social distancing and masks, would due attention be given to everything that has been killing people more and that compromises the immune system so that it can’t deal with illness, how much that would have saved more lives on top of the other measures still kept in place. Simply were it stressed rather than the other measures, WITH the other measures still kept in place. And yet the Bollingers do address those things.

    And sorry, but I don’t look at stuff, to get fixated on one statement, and then give the whole site a label. I would be quite gullible and impressionable towards all sorts of stuff would I operate in such a fashion. Something it appears most ads advertising a commodity, whether it’s ideological or material, are designed to accomplish.

    And what is highly inflated beyond conception, is how much measures taken against the covid pandemic are made out to lead to creating a healthy environment, when a whole host of other issues causing more disease, and having caused more disease the whole time, not only kill more people, but compromise the immune system enough that it also allows covid to cause more deaths. And those issues are not even brought out in a reasonable manner, when we are told the issue is preventing deaths.

  • Sorry, in the above comment, where it reads “nor did I say that those promoting alternative methods might dismiss chemotherapy when it could be helpful” it should have read: “nor did I say that those promoting alternative methods don’t dismiss chemotherapy when it could be helpful,” It gets really to be something strident when both sides dismiss each other, leaving anyone trying to make a decision coerced into thinking there’s only one way, and the other wouldn’t work and should be prevented from being considered.

    And Richard I’m glad you survived cancer however you managed it, that’s great, but I think you have to give people the freedom to follow their own instincts about what treatment to follow. Everybody is different, and everybody responds different to various types of healing.

  • I’d appreciate it if I didn’t have to deal with straw man responses, I am already busy enough. I never anywhere said you weren’t a committed proponent of anti-psychiatry or anti-capitalism at all, which you imply I was making out to be otherwise or unaware of; that also really isn’t pertinent to the discussion, nor does it indicate that psychiatry or capitalism don’t have elements that are helpful beyond such labels; what I posted was simple responses regarding how the cancer Industry could be controlled by guilds and pro-profit, and suppress alternative methods; I also never said that chemotherapy wasn’t an appropriate response that would help people who it would help; what I said is what I said, which I shouldn’t have to repeat, and that’s that the information for alternative methods also deserves representation so that people can make their own decisions. That people have gone for alternative treatment and it didn’t work for them I’m sure has happened enough as that people who went for chemotherapy also weren’t helped enough, nor did I say that those promoting alternative methods might dismiss chemotherapy when it could be helpful. THAT should be a person’s own decision which they can make when both sides are represented without discrimination.

    Ameliorating what you invest in as being serious science that’s legitimate and then dismissing other information as pure nonsense and dangerous and that many people have died following such input doesn’t address anything deeper than more adjectives and what happens on both sides when people’ aren’t given enough information to make their own decisions, given instead “adjectives” and other means of persuasion no matter what side it comes from. I think a person, every person, would have the ability to follow their own instincts, their own intelligence, and their own insights and hopefully find what would work for them otherwise.

    I’m quite capable myself of looking through material and deciding what of it I find helpful, and what I find true, I don’t need anyone patronizing me telling me that everything reported in said site is utter nonsense or any of the rest of your dissuasion to even consider there might be truth there that would be helpful, or even something to consider on my own, rather than having been told how to see it beforehand, even if it’s only part of what’s said on the site that I might find helpful, rather than the majority. Or the other way around that most of it is helpful and the truth to make it something to invest in.

    And I really am starting to find it overloading to have to deal having to navigate through responding to insinuations that I’m not aware of what’s serious science, not aware of what kills many people, not aware of what can be trusted and what can’t; simply would I look into something someone else has clearly dismissed. Or that I’m not carefully siphoning through information would I not take part in such dismissal. Or that I’m jumping on a bandwagon that has a political cover, but is serving a reactionary political agenda.

    NONE OF THAT deals at all with the material at hand, only ways to label it. I thought that goes on enough regarding how people are supposed to see things here in a blog that tries to give people an alternative viewpoint on “mental health” or how to see their own responses to life.

    That you believe you have a healthy skepticism of Western medicine and take certain supplements, doesn’t validate your dismissive remarks regarding a site I’m not even supposed to entertain as having any truth to it at all. And I’m really tiring of even having to find words to respond to any of this.

    I believe both sides of the argument are misleading when they start simply dismissing the other side in such a fashion. Same as any person or any situation you might come across that you are supposed to see as a source of evil or the like. It wouldn’t have come your way if there wasn’t something to see there, I think what you are meant to see will repeat itself then, without any loss of potential as if it will go away. That’s how truth works not having such limitations, and it’s wanting to see it that allows it to emerge, not making out that there’s something against it you have to dismiss.

  • Beyond the preponderance of such name calling as Quacks and Conspiracy Theorists, which takes away from the ability to have a balanced discussion, I don’t agree that one can so quickly call something quackery, whether you agree with their overwhelming criticism of chemotherapy or not, they promote a lot of curing agents that are completely natural and non evasive, and wouldn’t compromise the immune system like chemotherapy does. And there are a number of people that were sent home by mainstream medicine to die because there was no cure – same as psychiatry and its story about chemical imbalances and their drugs being the only cure and what must be promoted, and when it doesn’t work there’s no cure – but there are people that changed their lifestyle and/or tried alternative methods, and recovered their health to become cancer free, despite being told there was no cure. That’s worth hearing about, but those stories and that evidence gets regularly shut down by the FDA, and its cronies. Same as one not hearing the stories of those that recovered from the psychiatric diseases demanding psychiatric drugs, when they did it because they got off of their drugs, or never were on them.
    And a lot of what’s shared there that simply nurtures the natural immune system might be good for anyone, especially those who might be targeted, because of stress, for having a psychiatric illness.

    Again, there are people that were told by the medical profession that there was no cure and that they would die, but were instead healed by alternative methods, quite the same as people told by psychiatry that if they didn’t take their meds they couldn’t function, there wouldn’t be any cure, and yet found alternative methods and recovered; that also should be freely shared, but isn’t.

    And such terms as “nonsense” “conspiracy theories,” “hoax” and “quackery” all within the same two sentences, this does NOT point out to me that a person using such language is duly open to discussion about such points. The whole ARENA of stuff that’s called “conspiracy” theories every time it challenges mainstream academic, religious, political or medical doctrine…, if I would start going on about that I would have to fill books. If one disagrees, then you present a different viewpoint, or forward information, but all terms used above are just as easily used by people pumping up what this blog exposes as being misleading and should be exposed rather than labeled as “hoax,” “quackery,” “conspiracy theories,” or “nonsense.”

    Neither do I think, same as with psychiatric treatments, you can simply dismiss that a lot of the “non quackery” cancer cures aren’t pumped up by money, and that more natural cures aren’t dismissed by the FDA, because of guild, wall street, corporate media, and corporate political pressures. Cancer is even bigger money than psychiatry.

  • Yeah, I use thieves oil diluted with olive oil, and I have a reverse osmosis water filter that takes out the fluoride. Fluoride it is said calcifies the pineal gland, and I noticed that would I sit down just to rest, especially when I was working on fiction, my mind would just go into hyper mode and spin images at me like at least two a second, as if it was trying to get me to dream but had to work against something, when I got a fluoride filter this stopped, and I didn’t dream for a month it seemed, there was so much more resonance in my sleep. But that would all be dismissed.

    Which is another thing to bring up thieves oil, because that’s what was used with the big plague hundreds of years ago, and still works as good as any chemical agent, but then no one can have a copyright on it, and it’s biodegradable, and it doesn’t provoke the super germs like anti-biotics and the rest….

    I don’t know what the FDA would say about thieves oil, like what they made up about artemisia recently, not the FDA but some supposed scientific authority said that, although it’s been an effective cure for malaria for hundreds of years, and helps people that modern pharmaceuticals couldn’t, that using it could cause malaria to mutate, this when it’s been used for hundreds of years, still is fine, and there’s ample proof chemical agents provoke such problems and natural ones don’t. They’ve proven now that Artemesia extract helps with Covid, although the herb unextracted doesn’t seem to do that much, but no one hears about this.

    https://www.dw.com/en/germany-scientists-test-artemisia-plant-against-coronavirus/a-53944514

    In fact I think that helps with all viral infections….

    Sugar, alcohol, medical treatments, heart disease from a bad diet, diabetes from a bad diet etc. all of that still kills more people than covid daily; so why isn’t that rationally dealt with if they care so much about our health, and would changing all of that (getting people off of sugar and bad processed foods, giving them good natural healing help rather than pharmaceuticals), how much would this help, or would it help more than what they are doing, because it would strengthen the immune system. And that doesn’t push one symptom away to create a whole array of new ones all targeted for new drugs that only get rid of one or a few symptom creating new ones (and addiction). And that’s not even mentioning slowing down the pace of life, getting rid of stress: “In addition, medical research estimates as much as 90 percent of illness and disease is stress-related” from https://nasdonline.org/1445/d001245/stress-management-for-the-health-of-it.html#:~:text=In addition, medical research estimates,been linked to stress factors.

    or spiritual healing that always has been there and isn’t going away either, as little as our spirit or our soul is……

    I didn’t even know that about hand sanitizer which is all over the place, I really just thought that it smelled offensive and made the hairs in my nostrils stand on end, like so many other harsh chemicals.

  • Elan, it’s not just side effects, it’s withdrawal symptoms hiding addiction… both being used for further “diagnosis.” In fact that they even acknowledge such side effects and list various symptoms of what they also list as symptoms of a “disease,” considering that listed, it becomes pretty amazing that people don’t immediately start questioning what’s going on, but then again they feel safe being programmed to see pharmaceuticals as creating stability. Despite everything. And the withdrawal symptoms, if at all acknowledged also then are defined the same as symptoms of the disease….

    And enough of the side effects are worse than the initial diagnosis needing “medications” also, as are the withdrawal symptoms.

    It’s like thinking that having terrified a child to stop expressing their feelings, to stop having their own viewpoint, and thus to be open for indoctrination is how you raise children to be good productive beings. And then give them rewards. All to quake an alarm when they show that they don’t even know what they are thinking anymore (they’re “crazy” “psychotic”), and then suppress any method that might help them see it’s not a disease but an attempt to regain understanding of their own subconscious….

    And the real break with reality is the people thinking they have to wield force to make people programmable, as well as disabling their minds with drugs to stop them from being able to question what’s going on.

    As if truth is something you can only instill if you can coerce people into such beliefs by punishing them when they don’t believe it.

  • The “efficacy” as treatment for people with “severe” symptoms of “schizophrenia” or “bipolar,” that any “anti-psychotic” supposedly is, pretty much isn’t true either. Suppressing symptoms, that aren’t objectively discernible amongst different “clinicians,” that are often politically based or biased, based on societal or cultural norms, don’t take into account that they might be expressing unexplored trauma or insights of any sort that’s not understood by the clinicians, or simply a need to break away beyond behavioral confines to allow for whatever else might be experienced there that could be critical to the development of the personality…
    Even suppressing such symptoms, were it a sign of alleviating a disease, doesn’t pan out in the long run, where there’s more relapsing, more disability, loss of life, side effects, more paranoia against symptoms from society: might actually mean that symptoms can be best understood to be expressing something that can be understood in the long run, and not just “non-reality-based” neurology, a disruption, an annoyance, a danger.
    Nor is the idea that a person is a danger to themselves and others panning out, because the treatment has proven to be more of a danger for the person receiving it and for society, given the epidemic, given the paranoia against what otherwise could be understood, and given the danger towards violence that psychiatric treatment can cause with it’s pharmacological agents: all clearly in correlation to the biological model for mental illness, a model that also clearly causes chemical imbalance, although it alleges it treats one.

    Way back in 2003 the Hunger strikers https://mindfreedom.org/kb/2003/ very clearly pointed out how mental illness definitions are more based on societal constructs that define poverty, minority status, and war.

    I hadn’t read the other articles yet, about the supposedly new drug, Lumateperone or Caplyta; How a drug 8 people or so have to be on for one of them to get improvement, and then the others most likely will get bad side effects, not to mention withdrawal symptoms would they want to get off of something that’s not “helping” them; when in reality that help (one in how many?) could be highly deceptive, highly fear based against symptoms that could otherwise be understood, given that in the long run what helps causes more relapsing, recycling, disability etc…..

    And then in the article about Lumateperone: “As Lieberman and colleagues confessed in a 2017 paper, there has never been a “randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study” of an antipsychotic in medication-naïve patients. In other words, there is no good scientific record that these drugs are effective, even over the short term, in psychotic patients whose brains have not been changed by prior exposure to antipsychotics.”

    I have read somewhere recently that whatever they identify as being the organic part of the disease turns up in people that haven’t been on medications yet, and those that are. That’s quite amazing. “WE HAVE FOUND A CAUSE WE CAN CALL BIOLOGICAL, but it turns up before and after medication.” They don’t mention that medication clearly caused swelling of the inner cortex, and shrinking of the frontal lobe, with anti-psychotics, but they said it was from the biological disease, before they were confronted with medications causing that problem; they also say schizophrenia comes from too much dopamine, but don’t share that anti-psychotics for “schizophrenia” in the end cause that as well, because the brain starts to produce more; same with anti-depressants causing serotonin depletion in the end.

    People with a higher intelligence are more likely to have “psychotic episodes,” which means people who are going to be able to see past all of the corruption of “evidence”; people who are more creative are more like to have “psychotic episodes,” meaning people who can relate to an “invisible” world that expresses harmony, even thought it might seem “non reality based” because it’s invisible, people who are oppressed are more likely…

    The dismissal of deaths, during the trials and afterwards, is like a war zone to take over a territory compromising the lives of who already live there, making those who live there scared of themselves, and if that doesn’t work make them out to be dangerous dissidents, and try to make everyone else believe it.

    I’ve been “psychotic” and not only does society try to make you paranoid from understanding what the symptoms express, but it doesn’t even acknowledge that there was a reason for the anxiety or distress that lead to it, as if that never happened, no empathy for listening to a personal experience if it challenges their beliefs; as if it’s not expressing anything; beyond that when the subconscious starts creating perspective as “non reality based” as a dream that has meaning, but can’t be videotaped while it’s happening, that’s not acknowledged; and in such an environment where none of that very human experience is given leg room, is welcomed, is acknowledged, one starts becoming uncomfortable with the natural responses seeking expression, and pushes them away, resulting in a myriad of distractions to avoid such feelings, even what causes annoying “symptoms,” stuff that’s searching expression and won’t be pushed away; and then you might be told “don’t do that,” without again any acknowledgment of what cause and effect is – after years of this, and realizing every time I got “psychotic,” I started doing fill-in-the-blank again, at first fluctuating between the realization of it, and then acting it out again; until I finally realized I was pushing something away; but that also isn’t anything one can define in a “sane” way, it’s more OK, I don’t have to do anything, just feel this uncomfortable thing that isn’t going to hook up with society’s fear based demands that tell me survival isn’t being myself lest I find out who I am…….

    And impossible things would always happen, they still do….

  • Thank you for your response. What I was trying to point out a bit is that it’s not just labeling feelings and responses as pathological, but teaching people to discriminate, to hate, and to feel they are being attacked by what simply could be feelings that need to be felt.

    And it’s acculturated.

    Such strange terms as inability to conform to consensual reality deportment, or statistical based norms I have come upon when people try to defend “difficulty” someone is having regarding “symptoms,” and although when I encountered those terms it was in regards medications, that same idea exists when people chose any number of means to disassociate or push those feelings to the side. Having been ingrained with the reflex that it’s pathological, or an attack, or something to get rid of.

    And what I was trying to get at before I took a side turn in the prior paragraph was that when a group of people bond together with such ideas about conformity, and that when everyone acts out a belief in whatever they use as a bonding mechanism, just moving away from that subconsciously, not being able to adapt anymore, that can bring up a feeling of discomfort, that can be labeled as a symptom of a psychiatric illness (and in many ways the system is set up that way) when in reality it’s perspective that would give true insight, albeit cause difficulty with everyone suddenly being appalled that so and so wore a strange outfit to church, or the mall or whatever happens (someone says something they are supposed to think is crazy, be ashamed of, know it’s going to be ridiculed or cause great shock so they shouldn’t etc.)…

    And that’s not just the DSM, that “statistical based norms,” or “consensual reality deportment.” It’s basic fear based patterning in society, as if everything is safe and in order would everyone adapt to set rules, rules which could be completely arbitrary, just to have something to believe in, rather than having any true logic to them.

    But the real part of being part of a community is to not push those feelings to the side, to listen to that voice, because that’s really something EVERYONE has, even when they are acting out a whole fabricated personality, an ego state trying to be something else, they won’t escape anything as involuntary and part of evolution as feelings they want to push to the side.

    I myself have had what I might term “panic attacks,” or just the feeling of extreme anxiety, when I was drinking too much coffee, and that was oh, more than twenty years ago and I should have paid it more heed for sure. Although at that time I liked the way coffee made me feel what I thought was warm, though really it was more buzzed and artificially stimulated. The “panic attacks” were just trying to maybe tell me not to do so much coffee, and so it wasn’t that I needed another drug to fix it. And I of course by that time, having been marginalized and diagnosed, was too insecure to be able to truly navigate through that whole matrix to even know I was pushing feelings to the side using coffee as a means to do so. I actually thought I liked coffee so much I felt defeated that it effected me that way. I was in Europe for four years, before all of this, where every time I went to visit a fellow student they would always offer coffee, and then when I came back to the USA and went to colleges, I always ended up in the cafeteria with a cup and a donut or something. I had also started smoking which also has its effects; but later in life when I had what I would term as extreme disturbing stuff going on I didn’t know how to process, and again caused me to feel a way that I wanted to get rid of those feelings, I ended up sitting on my parents porch the whole night smoking and drinking coffee. That’s thirty years ago. It took me thirty years of going in and out of what could be seen as psychotic episodes (fueled by coffee and cigarettes although I stopped with cigarettes 14 years ago) before I realized that the whole blanket of emotions I was avoiding were OK for me to feel. Whether that’s simply being scared I wouldn’t fit into whatever I had been programmed to believe survival was, or whether that was not seeing there were other ways, or whether that was not being used to how quiet and involuntary the real guidance was. The kind of stuff we all do for what we believe is “survival” thinking we have to do “something” because otherwise everything will fall apart. It took me thirty years to find out what was really going on, and I never was on psychiatric drugs. Just seeing the friends I had already had on such agents go through what they did, and also information from Mind Freedom, taught me early on to avoid that; but I wasn’t aware how I was pushing my own thoughts away, much the same people are taught to believe psychiatric drugs are some magic to get rid of bad feelings or behaviors. And that’s really not just coffee or cigarettes which is what I’ve mentioned so far, that’s all sorts of behaviors and ways of responding, or the desires of just frantically thinking one chance or the next was how I would fit into the system, and then having it sabotaged because I would get “psychotic” again, which really was simply feelings taking on symbolism in “psychotic” scenarios, akin to fiction and what it does to have meaning; because there is something going on there beyond it just being “psychotic.” Since I’ve learned that I was pushing those feelings away that I could just give some leg room, not push to the side, sort of surrender to, and that then there’s no need for the whole “psychosis,” machinery. It was Charlie Goldsmith pointing out how even what we call anxiety has a natural intelligence would we just allow ourselves to feel it rather than pushing it away, and then it’s had its say and can dissolve. And I can’t really describe exactly what it is I learned not to push to the side, it becomes more a realization that there’s a whole other way of responding. Even when I knew that starting to drink coffee again, which I had stopped for months, that it effected me, I would after months of “sobriety” find myself starting to drink 3, 4 or more cups a day, and after a week or so would end up in this state where something else would take over that could be labeled as psychotic. By some miracle I never was forced drugged because that would have been the end of me. I went through on and off coffee like that for four years although by far most of the time I wasn’t “psychotic,” but then I heard something Charlie Goldsmith said, and realized that was something I was pushing to the side that made me reflexively start drinking coffee, that was a conditioned reflex towards whatever it was that I was pushing to the side, and that then I started drinking too much coffee, which could have been anything (whole list of “bad” habits) to disassociate. And I can’t really put it into words other than it’s just something else besides: “Don’t do THAT!,” which then includes everything I start doing when “psychotic.” It’s really weird because I can’t put it into words, maybe it doesn’t need words, it’s just a different way of responding. More of a surrender than thinking I have to do something. I imagine if I had had a different childhood and had parents that were more interested in allowing me the space to express my feelings, my thoughts were they different than theirs, and my insights and experiences, that then I would have been more used to responding in what I call a different way I can’t really describe, but then I wouldn’t have maybe found it for myself. So it isn’t really labeling it as trauma from my youth either.

    Even at a spiritual level there’s a difference between things that are tangible enough that you think you can describe or identify them, and stuff beyond that. When I was having the crisis that got me to start drinking coffee the whole night on my parents porch, I had gotten baited by psychic people that actually used the spiritual energies to point out worldly stuff, and also stuff about past lifetimes that does no one any good unless you let go of it (as if there’s some judging authority in Heaven akin to our legal system punishing people for transgressions in past lives), but the hyped up energy of knowing things you don’t need to and making it into something else than it is, this I associated with drinking too much coffee (because it made me aggressively want to know), and then would along with just being frustrated out of my mind drink coffee the whole night buzz myself up hoping to get some vital information, as if it was some sort of ammunition. Whatever there was for me to know at such a level only came to me after I stopped acting out in such a manner, and then it was still stuff to let go of. After so many years with channels, mediums and psychics, some real spiritual healers came in my life. And incidentally, after seeing the first one, a healer from the Philippines called a psychic surgeon, which he would say is not an accurate term along the lines I just pointed out, after he treated me in a way that this world would say is impossible but with him simply happens, I somehow knew I was given 20 more years in my life, which would be the amount of time that psychiatric drugs might take off of a person’s life, in general, the lessening of life expectancy with anti psychotics. I simply knew that there also was just on this earth, a place for me to go to feel such healing, such “impossible” things rather than thinking that something so beautiful couldn’t exist, and knowing that might have given me a place to let go so that I wasn’t baited into the system by all of their provocations. But the healers and the healing energy work very differently from “psychics,” and such…

    It’s not about something the ego makes you think you need to know

    It’s simply that there is something there beyond that…

    Over the years I’ve seen and talked to quite a few healers, and Jesus has become my friend. Just that, a friend, not an object…..

    It’s difficult having gone the wrong direction, but that’s how we learn, when you go the wrong way, you only learn more why the right way works, and that’s really the only thing that could remain from it….

  • Rose, I notice you’re still using the terminology “panic attack,” which is then used as a “symptom,” needing you know what. What if that was just a normal response to whatever was going on, and if you allowed yourself to just feel that without labeling it, even if you didn’t like it, it could have just been trying to tell you that you could manage your time better than trying to stay up all night, and the quiet would have come from that, but just calling it a panic attack is how you get baited into the system. I think.

    Because it seems that along the way you had a voice trying to tell you this isn’t right, which you mentioned……

    I think you’d be surprised what peace that voice can bring in contrast to…..

    Everything is supposed to be measured in physical terms, but what if that voice comes from another place without such orders of difficulty, even though the response is to think: “no, I need fill-in-the-blank instead?

  • The point I was trying to make is how people that support using violence (whether it’s just or criminal, actually) use the same “evidence” that there is a “lessening” of symptoms of the problem in order to deny that in reality in the end there’s more of it, which you see with any system which supports such ideas. Every “government,” fighting the most wars, having the harshest penal system shows what the result is. The same as the mental health system saying they are creating healing by suppressing symptoms, symptoms that when not truly attended to cause more of the problem.

    And Caroline really!? You actually try to put forth that there’s no rule of law, or even that without the ability to wield the right to punish people who don’t follow set laws there’s no “government?” Which in reality you make out only exists then if those rules are enforced by a system allowed to traumatize others when they don’t follow those “rules.” And when you have a system where people are on mass controlled by fear in such a manner than you have “rules of law?” There are natural laws, by the way. When you are kind to someone it changes their metabolism, how their body responds to stimuli, and that promotes healing… compassion,… empathy; and yet there was never need for any enforcing agent to create such an effect when it evolved as part of the human experience and how the body responds. Is that supposed to not exist then, because it’s better to traumatize people into behaving a certain way. And then there are natural laws, no penal system is enforcing those, and without such “enforcement” water still boils at the same temperature; only if that rule is broken that’s called a miracle, but those happen under completely different rules than believing traumatizing a person to be controlled is effective.

    Jesus talked about a Kingdom of Heaven, I don’t think the rules in that kingdom have any need to punish or control people wielding the right to traumatize them when they don’t obey set array of commands or “rules.” In fact they have nothing to do with that other than to show there’s a different way, a way that works.

    And Caroline it really concerns me, because you mention fears about withdrawal induced manic psychosis, but…
    Endeavors, as much as they have become part of your heart, they might be getting you to go along with all sorts of stuff that, when you are that vulnerable, and trying to deal with even the heartbreak of having thought too well of them or if not them others, because going off of “medications” is going to heighten intelligence to see such things and sharpen the memories, there’s going to be stuff you have to let go of, even though it consequently makes you feel like you are nowhere, and then you are offered these “magic” solutions backed up by what seems like the power to make change, and that will make you “manic.” The real solutions don’t involve the stress or the “magic.”

    And I notice I’ve been trying to explain things, things that are extremely difficult to explain, and which one has to experience, or realize you already have and weren’t cognizant of it.

    So, I found this I shared with a healer, which might make what I was trying to say a little clearer, but I really have to bow out now:

    There’s a term called the Atonement, and as Jesus was explaining that I got a visual image, something akin to rays of energy or light, like a blossom or a fountain, but there’s an incredible ability to sort of accelerate and catch something, which was the first thing that expressed itself about it. But then I understood, it’s like it when someone sees something, something akin to catching someone from running into the street when there are cars rushing by, or before they would fall or anything like that. But with the atonement, it’s that it catches us before we would invest in the wrong thing. Because really, when we believe we need to invest in defenses, we actually invest instead in needing something against something else, and actually are demanding a reason for such a defense, which we are making up out of fear of letting go of what in reality is demanding it (the defense) be justified, and thus causes the problem. You can see that is so many places. The police, the military, all places where the right to traumatize others is given and invested in; and were society not worshiping that kind of mind control people never would invest in using trauma for criminal gain. It wouldn’t occur to desperate people having been discarded by society, and having lost faith in anything free of that, like spirit is meant to be.

  • When you think you need “defenses” you also need whatever you believe you need the defenses for in order to excuse that; and then you believe yourself separate from what you’re defending against. You also believe all of the time and space and physical “reality” that consequently gets put into play has to do with needing defenses, rather than not needing defenses you wouldn’t need an excuse for them. Thus we have the whole supposed impasse, and are told that things don’t go away like that, and it’s crazy to believe you have such ability such that by looking at things differently they change, or it’s arrogant to think you have such ability. Would one truly pay attention, you might see how much stress you cause in your life denying this, and what resentments you put on anyone else not taking part in believing that what doesn’t work needs more people to believe in it, as if then it would be working. And then instead failing to allow yourself to gain such perspective, or assimilate what’s really happening that points out such truths. And thus you have to make yourself separate from it otherwise not needing an excuse for defenses the problem would go away along with the excuse you’re defending, which is the real cause not what consequently happens to show you you could have let go of it, could have responded differently, could have seen things differently. You also then limit what you call the physical to being deprived of the “miracles” that would otherwise happen to solve the problem what they would do non violently. And then there’s even fear against, that, because when a thought system is – even non violently – shown to be in error, people might still have to such a degree invested in it that they perceive a great loss. And can fuss endlessly about this, pointing out a myriad of occurrences they refuse or fail to see aren’t truly caused by anything outside of themselves. And you’re doing that, it’s not anything outside of you you need to defend against. That’s why Jesus tried to teach forgiveness. Because it works, it’s what changes direction to alleviate a cause rather than bury it by the effects is elicits that are blamed on something else.

    The whole mental health system is a good example of this. When “medications” turn off “symptoms” for an interim, and the cause isn’t deal with, that’s called healing, and the whole consequent epidemic that comes from it is blamed on the “disease” rather than the lack of perspective, even when people who aren’t “medicated” in general do better beyond the initial interim when symptoms are suppressed and before there’s the eruption of relapsing, paranoia against normal human responses to difficult or unusual situations, more disability, lose of life expectancy, a plethora of side effects. Thus go “defenses” against a “disease.”

  • I’m not going to dwell on this, and only briefly looked over responses, after bowing out, which I’m still doing: Bowing out.

    Again to point out what’s “marketed” to be a solution, but might be the opposite. Beyond the Nuremberg trials, it’s in many ways the international court which set Germany up for Hitler to take over before that, given how much debt was piled on them [Germany] after WW1, and Hitler could deceive a desperate people and himself. It’s also now the international court, the IMF etc. along with political behavior, that is what is decimating countries where extremism pops up. Not to mention what is happening to the environment, and already happened to indigenous cultures all over the planet that respected the environment. And we’re to believe that’s promoting a working economic system and the consumer oriented society it’s exploitation offers is “happiness,” or the pursuit of it.

    And what I believe is a rule is that when you stop investing in what causes a problem: that violence is a means to an end, and supposedly stops violence: then you get a different society, which every country that has a more compassionate penal system has shown to be the case.

    I also think it’s a rule that you aren’t separate from the actions that happen in your life, or the time and space “around” you, and that it’s a sad misrepresentation of what the human condition is to make out that there are such boundaries. With what’s called psychosis already, which is an emotional projection of issues a person when allowed to can learn to understand and reach in to a part of themselves that deals with how they respond to life, given memories, beliefs, etc; that changes what can’t be seen as physical yet because it is the future, and so is more objective than physical reality. I think thought is the same, and when you stop thinking you need the right to wield violence and that punishing people is a proper mind control method, then you stop making that part of reality. And then time doesn’t have to repeat itself trying to show you that you are investing in the cause and pushing the solution to the side, and in reality judging yourself; judging yourself as if you’re crazy that thought itself would make a difference, even with what happens physically or plays out in time.

    I don’t see thought or the mind as being so weak that it has to invest in violent control tactics, and looking for morality to justify violence gets in the way of peace rather than it creates it, and doesn’t really solve the problem but puts into ideology exactly what gets corrupted into what you say you are trying to prevent. Both sides believing violence is a means to an end. And the side actually respected as an authority having more the means to put an end to it, by not investing in violence as a means to an end, and not putting such ideology out to get corrupted.

    That there’s another way is what Jesus taught me himself, and it works.

  • Caroline: There isn’t a penal system on the planet that doesn’t disregard collateral damage, putting innocent people in jail, or as in the United Stated executing innocent people such as Troy Davis. I don’t think that’s a working system, and what Jesus truly taught is something different, which his parable was part of sharing. And that is a working system. It also deals with the cause rather than perpetuating the philosophy that causes the problem: the idea that violence is necessary to control people, and trauma or deterrent is a valid mind control method. A society that doesn’t breed such ideology won’t have what it’s trying to prevent excusing violence as if it’s a moral tool. That violence is a means to an end is then instead seen to be something to discard both for the “perpetrator” and the “means of defense.”

    Further more, when I share (in another blog, which you responded to Caroline) the fact that perhaps Jesus was homosexual and relates to me free to express it, or that his life would have been different had he something such as that to surrender to, such intimacy, you mention that the “Pope,” a man who perpetuates the erroneous pretentious idea that homosexuals are sinners (but you should love them), that he tells me that Jesus is madly in love with me. Oh. Really!?

    And then Jesus parable about the Good Samaritan gets turned into a discussion promoting the penal system rather than what it’s about, this in a blog about marketing. The Catholic Church – which in contrast to the DSM not anymore saying homosexuals have something wrong with them, still perpetuating such nonsense – and the penal system which arrests someone for walking around non violent but naked are excused and marketed then?

    The truth isn’t something that you can defend with violence, with excuses for punishing those that don’t follow it, because then it’s not truth anymore, it’s mind control. I already stated that. As moral as you think you are being about what you believe is necessary with violence, you can’t be defending the truth, and so you are not dealing with the real situation. You aren’t communicating to humanity, to any other human. You haven’t looked at what’s really going on. You haven’t addressed the causes. And you’re perpetuating – with a double edged sword – what causes the problem. You’re not relating to the person, and you’re not relating to the whole matrix that causes the problem. And you’re perpetuating it.

    And nothing can destroy the truth. Jesus wasn’t crucified, he was resurrected. And I REALLY don’t think he’s going back to saying we need the very institutions that put a death warrant on his teachings. For what? So we can “understand” his parable by warping it out of context?

    And as I said already, investing in the very system that allows people to be arrested, taken to the the asylum, and force treated, isn’t going to change what’s going on, but showing there’s another way yourself: that will. And letting go of what is in collusion with what doesn’t work will show you there’s another way. Saying that your life is in disarray because of that-system, and then promoting the very tools that keep it in place, doesn’t work.

    Trying to control other people using punishment is what fascist systems do, and criminals, and people that are offended that what works is robbing them of the idea that when they try to control another using punishment they are good, and just and better.

    I’m going to bow out of this discussion now and spend time with my “invisible” friend thanking him for being there. Someone who was able to direct me away from what doesn’t work to what does, and have even physical healing take place, although that’s not what it’s about, since that could be anything to show there’s another way.

  • I really don’t think that Jesus parable was about making sure the robbers get punished, in fact it was about the opposite.

    Punishment in reality is nothing more than a means of mind control, and the very reason you have a psychiatrical institution playing game theory with gain and loss, along with perceived punishment or loss when not going along with the program, and thus you have a bunch of people who don’t know what they are doing at all.

    Truth simply speaks for itself, and remains separate from needing such means to make it out to be the truth. You can’t punish someone to see the truth, that’s mind control, the truth speaks for itself, and has to otherwise it isn’t the truth. And if our whole society would be concerned about helping people who have been wounded, rather than getting points for it, or deciding for some reason they are undesirables, we’d have a different society, that understands trauma.

    There’s really no difference in logic for the robber or the people that are supposed to punish the robber, in that they both think that violence is a means to an end, only the robber might sooner find out it doesn’t work, since he or she doesn’t have societal backing for their behavior; and so might sooner question it. And then there’s the whole lack in society that caused the abandonment of people who become robbers, which is economic as well as the simple ideology society has about how you control a populace, which involves justified violence, and wars, and the rest of it: nurtured fear, discrimination,stereotyping and prejudice which then leaves a person unable to see how they might find what truly might otherwise be there for them, including thought.

    Instead of deciding who is supposed to help you, you might find that you don’t need an insurance to pay for the right helper, and you don’t need a
    “church” making you feel you are founded in your process, or any other institution, and that simply being human is enough. Rather than “they” are supposed to do it, so if they don’t everything is in a disarray.

    Or was the person that got hurt supposed to decide that the pharisees should help him, and then punish the robber, rather than seeing there’s something else that helps, which represents a whole other way of thinking?

    And when you show what works, you’re showing what the truth is, to say that needs defense through punishing those that don’t see that really means you’re trying to defend something else, something that isn’t the truth anymore, but an excuse for wanting to control others.

  • You’re balancing on a very thin line when you say the “doctors,” don’t spike someone with blood thinners. There are enough medications that aren’t good for your heart, and then there’s the neglect towards issues like diet, exercise, enough rest, true emotional health, giving someone the strength to feel they can get out of uncomfortable situations rather than “cope” and get sick or fight and get stressed out and sick.

    The present pandemic, which is all over the planet, and the whole political change of scenery; there are a whole list of things that presently kill more people than viruses, yet there’s nothing in comparison done about it. The first month of the pandemic more people died (in developed countries at least) because of the effects of sugar than the whole total so far of the pandemic, or something like that; and then you have the ALSO completely preventable problems in the developing country like food shortages etc..

    And we will never, as far as I know, have herd immunity to sugar, or to starvation.

    It’s more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ in ways than it’s truly caring about your health.

  • I’m sorry, this: “We become scared of stuff that would help us, because of how it had been accepted, and the electric shock to our system when the whole arena of memories kicks in can be quite severe.”

    I meant to say we become scared of stuff that would help us, because of how it had NOT been accepted in our environment, whether socially or family or institutional of whatever. Stuff we tried to express and was met with weird discrimination. And it causes a lot of anxiety when those feelings come back, the electricity behind all the memories even. But you can learn to actually feel those feelings and feel safe in your own space, who you are, not how you’re supposed to respond.

    And it’s really hard when you just try to communicate something, and get the strange response from others that don’t want to accept the simplest thing. Caroline, you seem really positive, and it sounds like you wanted to simply share that you had found a place you feel at home at, this to the psychiatrist, but his response was truly bizarre, and truly paranoid and psychotic. And then psychotic becomes a strange word, because those who are labeled “psychotic,” actually really have been dis-inhibited from continuing to fit into a programming that doesn’t really work for them (or work for someone to be true to their humanity), but those labeling them are the ones that really would show the symptoms they are seeing in another. Fundamentalism is the real problem regarding anything that’s not reality based. It just makes no sense to deny what really statistically has lead to healing, the rest is all indoctrination, brainwashing. He’s the one that has a riff with reality, he needs to perhaps be deprogrammed. Getting rewards from the economic system doesn’t mean that your beliefs are reality based. But don’t you compromise the rest of your life trying to say things to him he would discriminate against, how you said you deal with it is great.

    But psychotic becomes a strange word, I don’t see it myself as something that has the properties of how it’s defined by the mental health system. And how they define it shows mostly more signs of what they call an illness than is the case in who they are diagnosing. And so I don’t really like to call them psychotic (the one’s doing the diagnosing) as non reality based as their thinking might be, because psychosis is something more sensitive, and reaches out into someone’s soul; the brainwashing that’s non reality based doesn’t do that, doesn’t have such sensitivity and doesn’t reach into someone’s soul, and it doesn’t give emotional wounds legroom to express themselves, neither does it give alternative insights that are necessary such legroom. It’s all backwards.

  • Heh, there’s a wonderful site https://www.mygoodhabits.com/ and its helped me.
    He would let you join without paying anything, have you no money, or just for $29.95 for three months, or $14.95 for one. That’s American dollars. He has a section called Emotional Healing where he shares a technique, and also has people who have followed the technique or he helps to follow it. It helped me incredibly finding out how I was disassociating from feelings that I never had been allowed to express in my youth, and those feelings were trying to give me guidance. You know, just a different way than the norm. But the discomfort when the feelings would reemerge when I needed them, when everything came into play, in how to deal with this “society,” with how to actually say anything in it (which you have gone into quite fully regarding knowing how to deal with what you describe). It might be like whatever you went to the psychiatrist for just needed a bit more space to NOT fit into society, or what another part of the mind controlled by fear thought was how things should be.

    We become scared of stuff that would help us, because of how it had been accepted, and the electric shock to our system when the whole arena of memories kicks in can be quite severe.

    I really don’t think you’re going to go into another psychosis, you seem too grounded for that, I think you will find that quiet inner voice, and even though it seems like there’s some great loss to stop responding to everything that’s what we’re supposed to believe life is about, it wouldn’t at all be a loss, and the peace there is resonant gentle and soothing instead of it being a loss or that it’s scary.

    I kept on getting “psychotic” when I drank too much coffee, realized that, but then somehow had a switch that I would start with too much coffee again (also because the “psychosis,” was expressing something of what I was trying to push away, and that needed to be expressed). That was when I really needed to just stop disassociating from feelings I had a reflex to push to the side, because they never had been accepted, it was like there was suddenly a blank space. I just hadn’t learned to trust those feelings, to let go like that. And it really is like what Jesus taught, because you just let go to something more gentle. And THAT was what balanced me out, NOT just trying to discipline myself to not drink coffee, because it wasn’t really about that, it was about seeing that there was something else, that I didn’t have to push those thoughts away.

    And so, it could just be that when you allow those feelings, even letting go of thinking you need to respond to the psychiatrist etc. that that’s what it’s about, not whether you need the drugs to not have whatever it’s called because of the withdrawal.

    And it sounds like the psychiatrist might be gaslighting you. There also are pill splitters, would you want to reduce your dose, and he wouldn’t find out. There would be nothing wrong with not telling him, even lying would he ask. It might be much more just a stage of relaxing to get off of the drugs than what you’re scared of. But above everything I would suggest you give yourself the time for some peace of your own, whatever calms you down. Without any guilt. When you get really upset don’t feel like you have to respond to the system at all, they only use that against you anyhow.

    Does this help to think that really the fear of getting off the drugs has to do with how it might bring up feelings you’re used to pushing away, and it’s more about accepting those feelings, to just feel them (whether they are good or bad), and then you can process them, and also let go of them? Everyone has this from their past, whether it’s family or society, that they weren’t allowed to express certain things, and so push those feeling to the side. And it could just be allowing yourself the space to just go into a space where you’re not trying to rationalize, but just not push the involuntary part that feelings move through away, like mindfulness or meditation. But it’s maybe more a conscious way of responding to reflexes at the moment…..

    I’m writing quite hurried right now, and will look back with more “time.” Or at least when I don’t feel so rushed with a number of things going on…..

  • Yes, I think we all think that, why has God done X, Y and Z to us, but maybe that’s the illusion. Maybe we’re more in control, and when we practice what I found in A Course in Miracles to help, that it’s really just shifting to something else that was there the whole time, and we were in control, and that’s how we learn.

    It’s really just a friendship with Jesus, understanding what he went through rather than making an object out of him, which is what I think the Catholic Church does too much, and I don’t think that’s completely fair to him. I can not agree with their stance on homosexuality, for example, or a list of other things in that category. There is a wonderful lady who was, and probably still is, Catholic her whole life. She had miracles start to happen after she visited Fatima, an itching in her fingers that when she touched people miracles would happen. People from all over the world came to see her, she was on Television, and yet the Catholic Church didn’t even acknowledge what was happening or let her give a healing get together in their church.Here is a wonderful blog her friend and facilitator has written, he passed away a few years ago http://leaholof.blogspot.com/ The Catholics left this nasty superstitious denial of her abilities https://www.catholicdoors.com/isit/isit05.htm I think Leaholof has retired now, though.

    I’m just trying to show how much there is of healing, and of stuff that the institutions as they are, and the powers that be, deny. And when a person has been forced to conform to all of that, and they start to wake up finding themselves in no man’s land, the psychiatric system would often sooner find them “psychotic,” then even have interest in finding out what’s truly going on, and what that has to do with an innate beautiful part of being human that’s trying to express itself.

    Psychiatry might say that Jesus had any of a number of things wrong with him. And would he try to express how difficult his life was, because of his nature, because of how he was persecuted, because miracles happened around him and people either denied it or wanted to exploit him mostly; I really don’t think psychiatry would understand hardly any of that. I don’t think he needed anti-depressants for example. And I don’t think he needed to be on dopamine antagonists because he thought he talked to God. And because he could sooth the minds and heal many of the people psychiatry says it has the right to treat, they would further more have problems with him.

  • I’m still puzzling about this, how to have made such a statement and to be clear about it, while changing the whole concept of Jesus. If one believes in reincarnation, which isn’t linear no one reincarnates in a body: there would be no reason to reincarnate were there not a multiplicity going on, was it instead linear. That’s like saying you can build a house without looking for the materials, in this case what gives time meaning, but if one believes in reincarnation then during the time Jesus had his short tragic life, he did see me, although I was a woman then, and there’s still a resonance there transcending the limitations of “THAT” time. That also alleviates Jesus of having to be an institution. He can simply be human.

    And why isn’t this allowed?

    There IS a whole other dimension to what it is to be human, and that’s so innate to what it is to be human that it doesn’t really allow people to be anything else, doesn’t make them one of the assembly of parts that go to make up what’s made out to be necessary to safeguard a territory (physical or mental); you can’t limit yourself to such a territory to begin with, you would never find the parts for the house, the house beyond time, the one that gives you space for life to have meaning.

    Why you have a soul.

    ALL of the non-reality-based stuff going on with “psychosis,” taps into that innate part of being human. When it tries to depict something the mind hasn’t quite grasped, whether it’s memories the conscious mind doesn’t know is effecting it emerging in supposedly non real scenarios trying to make a safe connection to realizing the memory, or the spiritual concepts that come out of transcending such trauma actually showing what’s real about life rather than defending something you could never be, or the imaginative insights that have to come in from the edge of the Universe or what’s called left field, or simply the need to dis-inhibit oneself beyond silly pretentious rules everyone follows just because everyone does (for their ego) rather than they truly make any sense, or instincts trying to emerge giving guidance for life involving everything I’ve already listed… all of that goes on with “psychosis.” There isn’t a time when I got “psychotic,” that something didn’t happen that might be called impossible, or metaphysical, a miracle, or supernatural, exactly because my lack of worldly “reason,” allowed it. Had I been sane it wouldn’t have had the legroom.

    There IS a whole other part of being human, so human that it’s not going to adapt to such limitations as “sanity” says it needs. And what’s really insane is trying to be that, something that can survive in such limitations. Because you’re making yourself out to be something impossible, and you’re not. What’s impossible is that such limitations exist, what’s called impossible: non-reality-based.

    There’s no need to be scared of it, just because if you stop pushing it away it will make sense.

  • Just to summarize this post.

    When a person hasn’t been given the environment to get in touch with their own instincts, their own feelings, their own insights especially when they were supposed to see thing differently, and often were forced to not express themselves or met with derision and chastising along with other methods of traumatizing someone into not expressing themselves; when those feelings come back up, which they are meant to, then it has already become a conditioned reflex to push them away. And the real discomfort from the feelings come from that, not from the feelings themselves. This can be the same way with feelings in general that we don’t like and want to go away. Most of the discomfort could be from not feelings those feelings. Much, and too much of our whole society also is based on pushing those feelings away, the whole economic, consumer oriented and social setup, as well as what’s even called entertainment seems to often mostly be to give means for people to have a way to push those feelings to the side. And then there’s the anger, the depression and the feelings of inadequacy when we don’t have the means to push those feelings, feelings we need to feel, to the side. It could just be the feeling not to have to take sides. A more quite mindset.
    And it’s really quite a simple thing to help a person realize when they are doing this, rather than to strengthen whatever image they are supposed to have of themselves, and what’s running them. Simple anxiety for example, is treated in a way as if one should get rid of it, and yet what happens when you just allow yourself to feel it without responding to it? What if when you allow yourself to process it that it then goes away?
    I think there are a whole array of inner voices that are meant to give guidance that can help us would we just allow ourselves the space to feel stuff we think we need to push to the side. And there’s no loss in not being part of a world that would make us out to be crazy would we not push those insights to the side. There’s lots of stuff that happens, amazing stuff that otherwise wouldn’t be allowed to, would we expect life to be sane.

  • Does what psychiatry says psychosis is have much to do with it? Funny, you know someone that’s actually, I don’t know, learned a language, and can speak it with the natives, or has learned to swim, or has been to a country or a city and knows the layout, the map; it gets awfully strange when those people (the ones that have been psychotic, and namely the ones that have been through it and are over it, understand it) they have to depend on people that haven’t been to the country, that can’t speak the language, that can’t move around in it, that HAVEN’T been psychotic and recovered. You depend on those people to have anything you say be considered valid. That’s pretty strange. Added to this on is talking about something that you can’t just simply go to and map out, speak the language or move around in, because you have to have gone through it, otherwise it remains sort of invisible beyond what the psychiatrists make out of it, and then while really not having the experience to know what’s going on, they call you non-reality-based. And they really can’t know without having been there, and they’d have to really instead listen to those that have, it doesn’t at all work any other way.

    What is a paranoid schizophrenic supposed to be when the person labeling him is paranoid to see it for what allows it to heal, or exist at all to lead towards healing or insight or anything at all that’s worth mentioning (that it’s not a permanent chemical imbalance), and refuses to be realistic about this, and then dowses the person’s response with “medications” (said to be treating a chemical imbalance but scientifically causing one) which prevents them (the “patient”) from having a healthy enough brain to figure it out; thus not only preventing the psychiatrist from knowing what’s on, but the “patient” from figuring it out themselves!?!?!?!?!?

    I’ve had years, or lives trying to figure this out, to let it be and have enough room for it.

    Just my own “stuff.” I had found out that cigarettes, that when I started smoking, I’d end up in an “episode,” something I knew was non violent, but scared other people, and I knew that psychiatric drugs wouldn’t help. So I stopped smoking, but was quite shocked to see that I got more unsettled in an “episode,” and years went by, lots of social betrayal and attempts to exploit me while I wasn’t “psychotic,” which pretty much explained the “psychosis,” or the need to be in a place where people wouldn’t find me fit for their society. And then I noticed that I would have started drinking a copious amount of coffee when “psychotic,” and knew this, and stopped. But there was this weird switch going on that after awhile I’d just start drinking coffee again, and have an “episode.” I mean I had kept myself from drinking coffee, and would be fine, and then….. But then I ran into the teachings of how much we take on habits to disassociate from feelings, and in my case I found they were really just the feelings, the instincts, the insights, the instincts I had as a child but was never allowed to express, and when they would re-emerge needing leg room after awhile, the discomfort, the feelings of being oppressed would get me to start drinking too much coffee, too much to be “sane” anyhow. And it worked actually.

    It’s a language, when “psychotic” it’s your unconscious speaking to you however it can, symbolism, scenarios possibly called non reality based rather than fictional, which might still be what it is, which is a human need, given the amount of it in novels, myths etc., or however it expresses itself, because sometimes because of the dis-inhibition quite otherwise impossible things happen, even metaphysical or miraculous things. And so even when I could have been called non reality based in my thinking, this was beyond objective reality, because it involved my reflexes, and thus the future. The future not being something that’s EVER objective in such a fashion, and only exists in context to your reflexes. And so there are emotional wounds, and trauma, but the psychosis is REALLY just trying to show you that there is a language that can help you understand that, understand your reflexes and change your life, and so it’s not really so much about trauma, as about the miracle that it is to be human, and that we all can transcend, and even forgive trauma, that there’s a language teaching us that. Who we really are.

    I wouldn’t ever turn towards coffee like I did, I didn’t even know why when I had. But the simple knowledge – Charlie Goldsmith in his mygoodhabits.com site helped with this – that I had feelings I was pushing to the side, this helped me understand why I had such a reaction, so instead I give legroom to those feelings. They really before that were just sort of blank space. And it’s amazing how much control we really have over our lives when we simply switch to something a little bit more subtle, a little more detached, show a little non attachment, and just allow things, even when at first it felt uncomfortable.

    It’s really insane, there’s supposed to be all of this “guilt,” for behaving a certain way that doesn’t fit in with social norms. The most ridiculous rules, and the rub is that everyone (well not “everyone” just the mob) they believe that adhering to those rules gives them pride, and without that they think they’d fall apart, and so they wouldn’t even know what they’re thinking anymore, they become so programmed. Run around outside naked, and feel the air against your skin, and the sun, and you’re a maniac that gets arrested and drugged up, because of it. Oh, but the whole arsenal of social control tactics, all the way to torture methods and how to blow up all human life on the planet at least 20 times with nuclear weapons to make sure the enemy is dead, this is all highly funded. EXTREMELY frustrating. And then there’s all of this privilege to be violent, to have a whole policing system when you obey the rules, as if that works to create a society. All of it was so confusing to me, that a completely “non reality based” voice had to turn me away from who knows what, like someone so confused they don’t end up being hit by a car for want of not seeing what they are doing, or where they are going. That I would believe ANY of it makes any sense, or is a means to any end at all.

    An African Violet had just blossomed, the color magenta that’s actually not in our color spectrum https://www.biotele.com/magenta.html our mind fills it in. Whether it was the color of the violet or the blossoming, but the MOMENT I saw it I heard a voice: “SHUTUP we’re praying,” and it was so apparent, like a spring that had been let lose, that I argued with it. But it did get me to change course, and even a physical healing took place, something I’m still getting to know, because you can feel the difference of letting yourself get riled up or letting go, of actually forgiving, not buying into guilt. But I argued with the voice, thought it was Jesus, told him that he might have stayed around a bit longer, since he said that the flowers that are thrown on the compost heap to be burned are more splendid than Solomon’s robe, and yet we are worth more than that. Making such a remark when one sees a beautiful flower. He had friends in the Mediterranean he could have gone to visit rather than sticking around with the end we all know was the result. And who’s to say he doesn’t agree with me, since that’s PAST history. And he’s been with me at a level of intimacy I think that gave him another place to surrender to, but that’s all psychotic. Crazy. How dare I say such things. A voice popping out of nowhere because I saw a flower.

    I don’t know, psychosis, fiction, imagination. Why do we have fiction? I had gone to a miracle crusade, years ago, with someone who took me there that I didn’t know was so paranoid. Since has become a social worker, anyone surprised? And during the “crusade” I found myself, my mind placed me that is, in a movie where there’s love making going on at the end of the scene. How does this happen that after seeing a movie you end up inside of it, which I think is the idea the whole time upon watching it, a place to give subjunctive place, to gain perspective, to go beyond your limitations, physical or conceptual. AT first it was just someone that ends up as a ghost later on getting the other person not to be so serious. Something I’ve found out since, being that with creativity you have to, you can’t keep at something without letting it go, and then it speaks for itself. Going through my day I would find whatever I’d been working on take a new turn. Working on a musical composition a light would go on in my head, just like the voice, and I’d hear the music take a new turn, but that was when I’d stopped trying to do anything consciously. I might be making good in the kitchen. So here I am, with what I feel is Jesus trying to make love to me, and I didn’t know you can’t just tell another person that, and made the mistake of telling someone who then called up my father trying to convince him I was going crazy because I was talking about making love to Jesus. Mind you this same person (now a social worker) bragged about coming down to the living room of where she was staying in college, and being greeted with a whole assortment of guys who she says she had all made dates with, not caring the amount, but no, one can’t talk about anything as decent as Jesus making love to you.

    Years pass, I had to get away from that person and her “spiritualist,” channeling friends, and turned to a few true healers, got to know that better, studied A Course in Miracles a lot at times, and then actually had the new miracle, thanks to his voice, and found that no that wasn’t crazy at all from the beginning of back then, that perhaps Jesus really DID need a place he could go and simply surrender and completely be himself, and that was part of the miracle. REALLY! Because I had had a whole shift, physical healing, but then had to actually look at how it happened, that it was me taking a turn away from responding to frustration, and then, the “physical problem” slightly coming back, I had to surrender to everything that I thought would happen if I wasn’t “vigilant” in warding away what would happen if I wasn’t, and the physical problem went away, because I wasn’t trying to defend myself from it. Instead surrendering, and even then finding I could give Jesus a place to surrender to….

    And I wonder if this is crazy enough, to talk about being put inside a movie (what actually is imagination or fiction, or why do we have movies, and what’s acting), to hear a voice (and no I didn’t read it in the bible or even A Course in Miracles) and have it have meaning rather than it’s a hallucination, and at that a really earthy voice from someone that is supposed to be a holy icon, and physical healing, and everything beyond formalism (I’m male by the way, not that I was during the time Jesus was on the earth, I understand, and he had seen me then too)….

    But this changes everything, when the space to give legroom to emotions turns into a whole other kind of healing, something that’s been suppressed when it doesn’t follow social constructs of control, when it doesn’t feed those controlling the economic system, when it doesn’t give authority to those worshiping what they can control of the physical and try to indoctrinate people to be fearful of anything else a bit less tangible to their controls. Giving a “psychotic” person space to know what their mind is trying to express might create such havoc for “society,” that it’s basic tenets might have to be questioned, is why whoever has been through it, which is the only way one can find out by listening to them, that it’s made out to be something else by those that can lock you up and force drug you!?

    It might just be “crazy” like the rest of life, was anyone paying any attention at all to it. They might notice it’s not quite following their rules.

    JESUS!

    CHRIST!

    Thank God it’s not following their rules.

  • Here’s an article, listing how many Native Americans are killed by the police, and most of the cases involve “wellness checks”

    https://inthesetimes.com/features/native_american_police_killings_native_lives_matter.html

    And sadly, there’s absolutely no talk about how treatment with psychiatric drugs cause, after an initial period where “symptoms” are suppressed, more relapsing, more disability, loss of life expectancy, and than I think one can add paranoia against someone expressing that such treatment doesn’t work, with then the erroneous idea as if more of it is needed and should be forced, or we’re all in danger.

  • This is of course a very serious question. Perhaps the most important thing is that when a person has been given the right to feel suicidal, and been allowed to spill out their life: to talk about why, to experience another person actually listening, that does the most to make them feel as if there’s reception somewhere for their feelings, rather than nowhere. And then they can feel how they feel without believing they need to commit suicide to escape from those feelings, or do other destructive things to themselves. I don’t know what asking a person how they would commit suicide would amount to exactly, whether that would actually help them spill their guts, unless that actually involves allowing the person to express how desperate, and/or abandoned they feel, or hopeless; and that then they find a place that their feelings are accepted; but that depends on what’s behind the question, not the question in itself. If a person would go so far as to have had such thoughts, and then share them is the other person asking them how they would do such a thing capable of actually having empathy with what kind of desperation, what kind of hopelessness, what kind of abandonment would lead a person to start entertaining such strategies. And would the person asking the question be able to give someone the space to feel they could freely explore and express what happened in their life, or what’s happening in their life, or what they are scared might happen in their life to lead to it? Would they even be able to fathom there are very legitimate reasons that when a person is allowed and given the legroom to express them makes them feel less abandoned? They very tone of someone’s voice asking such questions could lead to the person answering feelings there’s reception or not, even thought the person asking the questions thinks he or she can hide their thoughts. And I also wonder whether that’s in reality the best addendum to; “are you suicidal.” It’s sounds like it could be rather clinical objective and cold. And might add up to more cold responses, such as lies about drugs that are made out to help according to information that’s highly tainted if not outright lies. Or promoting answers that the person who has the feelings of desperation already has experienced as not working, rather than truly being empathetic beyond thinking one knows the answers.

    I have to add another personal story here, that’s quite bizarre. When I as having difficulty in my life, and I think this was before I ever was diagnosed (thirty years or so ago), I just was having difficulty, and quite despondent. It’s a long story. It actually involves psychic senses, there was something (someone) I knew would come into my life, out of nowhere, and it didn’t end up being what I thought it would be; and then I got involved with the whole plethora of nonsense behind the techniques of being spiritual (or not spiritual by trying to exploit it) that I had been taught. I was obsessed with trying to find out why this person came into my life, particularly what it had to do with past lifetimes. And before that a very accurate psychic about petty future events no one needs to know could supply such information, but he had become too exploitative of me so I had been forced to get away from him; but there I was still thinking I needed to know things I didn’t, and would sit on my parents porch smoking and drinking coffee the whole night, quite angry determined to know this secret information. And there was all sorts of other social betrayal going on, especially with organizations making themselves out to be spiritual. Anyhow. Finding myself doing stuff out of frustration that I knew wasn’t good for me (no I didn’t really think that smoking the whole night and drinking coffee was good for me) I wondered where to turn, and I thought about calling a suicide line, actually telling them I WASN’T suicidal, but that I was concerned because I was doing things I knew were unhealthy. NOT a good place to turn. They talked to me quite a bit, even listening to the whole scenario of stuff that could be called psychotic, but of course with no ability to relate to what it represented in reality; no real ability to relate to what was going on with me as emotional truth that was seeking development so I could understand what it represented, how maybe fears had gotten tangled up with my reflexes and perceptions, and if understood could change my reflexes and my future, or maybe even the understanding of “psychosis,” in general. Then they invited me to come to talk go them, and I mistakenly did that. One of the most bizarre scenes in my life. In ending up upstairs somewhere, in what seemed to be some kind of tower, and trying to talk to someone the phone kept ringing connecting people up to the wrong number, which I wondered whether it was some metaphysical warning going on (how much stuff that didn’t belong but that rang in their mind concerning indoctrination would they not see was a mis-connection while they were judging me?), and of course the whole conversation added up to nothing much, or not more than they were pretty much telling me they were concerned about me and wanted me committed; but when I told them I had a sort of therapist, they called her, and she told then I was OK, that I lived with my parents, that I had support or so, that it wasn’t necessary to commit me. That was just a therapist my mother had been paying for me to talk to about my dreams, mostly. But they dropped it. Basically my life could have ended there, had I been committed, as vulnerable as I was, just because I thought they might actually have helpful input.

    AGAIN a whole bizarre thing involving negating what’s really going on, even if it’s physical involving substance one is imbibing. There wasn’t ONE mention of whether drinking coffee the whole night might be causing me to get paranoid. Instead, there was effort in seeing whether committing me would help, where I would have been inflicted with more substances messing up my mind, and end up not being able to chose myself regarding would I imbibe or not anymore, NOR to be given any true information so informed consent was going on, but actually did I KNOW the truth about psychiatric drugs, would I express that, that would be seen as a danger like in any fascist regime or fundamentalism like in religion when someone speaks against their ideology.

    I somehow got out of there, and actually called back there, and a really bizarre woman, to whom I had mentioned I wrote poetry, with a voice sounding like it was stuck on some pre-fabricated synthetic intelligence channel, with appropriate sing-song inflection and intonation to sound concerned about effect or pretense rather than truth – sort of like the butterflies, flowers, happy people smiling at each other lilting happily through life you see in drug commercials, or for the latest new and improved flavor in junk foods – she actually tried to convince me that the “medications” would help me write poetry, and that she was “concerned’ about that.

    Just like the Messiah of Handel on Lithium, or anti-psychotics they “know” would be an improvement. Why would that be?

    The local asylum out fit here, called “Pine Rest,” of all things, which makes me wonder whether that’s more appropriate for a mortuary, since it talks of “rest,” as in put to death and bury that annoying part of yourself society doesn’t give you easy points for giving legroom, they actually had on television paintings of Van Gogh, and music of Beethoven, and said they both had mental illnesses, and their lives would have been improved with “medications.”

    And they didn’t even mention that they must have built a time machine to accomplish and prove that.

    I didn’t even call them up and ask them about their time machine.…

    “How is your time machine doing? I want to meet Beethoven and Van Gogh!”

    Miracles happen…

  • 30-Watt lightbulb this story isn’t even unusual, in fact when closely looked at, there are elements of psychiatric authorities or concerned citizens displaying this kind of corruption and paranoia in most if not all cases involving incarceration, diagnosis etc. All because they think there’s some danger, and are so sure of it that they feel free to lie, distort and manipulate through strategical untruths what’s going on. All the way from the basis of whether they are dealing with a chemical imbalance to a person’s behavior to begin with.

    I had a friend, who since had committed suicide 12 years ago, who was committed to an asylum, with such lies that when I passed by the whole chase scene, and the police were at her house, and if I simply greeted her (she was outside on her steps) while her “friends” were “informing” the police about stuff, that a police officer told me if I didn’t move on I would be arrested. When I asked why, he said I would be arrested for disrupting an investigation. So, I went home and called non emergency dispatch to tell them that her “friends” had trespassed into her house to call her case manager, after scaring her so badly that she had run away from them and her house. Of all things non emergency dispatch told me that she had been taking her clothes off in public. I had been with her when her friends scared her, and after she took off, at first trying to get away on my bike which was locked and clamping down on the pedals that wouldn’t move being locked with such fright that she ripped her Achilles tendon, and then she had run off; the first thing that one of her “friends” said to me was: “she’s running around naked.” Afterwards, I found out that what dispatch told me, and what her friend determined she was doing, that that wasn’t going on at all, and hadn’t been. She hadn’t been taking her clothes off, and neither had she been running around naked. But And if I simply was around without such paranoia I was interfering with an “investigation.”

    OK!

    Well, and then her Achilles tendon having been ripped, and needing attention, which expressed itself by there being swelling up to her knee while she was in the asylum, and that not being looked at although she was in a wheel chair consequently (apart from for fun that she in the asylum allowed visitors to scoot around in wheel chairs that were just sitting there not being used, and then the next time we visited the workers being panicked that anyone might be using them and had been told to be wary), no one cared to really find out what kind of a physical wound she had which was why she was in a wheel chair, and by the time she got out her Achilles tendon was ruined for life, and she couldn’t walk around without that disability.

    And there are really vulnerable people that already have been made terrified of behaviors they don’t understand themselves, behavior that in contrast to the paranoia against them are completely non violent, and yet they end up thinking that such paranoia is logical, or they just give up even trying to refute any of the lies, as little as one can get people to question the ideology of a fascist system.

    I’m glad you somehow got out of it. Being in an asylum because you wanted to kill a cat you don’t own, and then not getting the treatment you needed because of an infection, that’s something they might cover up as well, if you hadn’t survived.

    I’ve had people trying to say that my thoughts were non reality based, while they made up more stuff about me that was completely not reality based, nor would they question it, the same as any officiated paranoia. There was one yoga teacher with parks and recreation who was also a social worker, and I actually heard a voice tell me to just stay away from her, and not ask questions, although I was really just interested in yoga. I had noticed how alarmist she might respond if I simply asked any question like anyone might, so I just ignored it, which I shouldn’t have. She thought I was in love with her (I’m gay, she couldn’t do anything for me, plus I found her repulsive and coy, and was quite a bit amused at how pretentious she was, and how she was trying to create following with such artifice). I couldn’t really make out what was going on, and was for a couple of days having thoughts that might be called “psychotic,” although I already saw after two days they weren’t what I thought, and since I completely understand the symbolism. But because I was “psychotic,” she could make me out to be someone that might get violent, and she got a restraining order, and when I simply wanted to correct the whole list of whatever it was (lies, paranoia, incorrect assumption) that amount to non reality based paranoias, she actually, after propping herself up in her chair and taking on the kind of sing song voice people take on trying to convince you they have the answer, said to the judge:
    “I know, I know, he doesn’t hear voices, he sees things that aren’t there, it’s non reality based.”

    After I had heard a voice telling me to just completely stay away from her. And to tell you the truth, I didn’t really have it through that people like that existed, and how completely totally indoctrinated and brainwashed they can be.

    If I went out the same door everyone else did, which I ended up usually doing all myself because everyone else had left. I had to put the clothes over my jogging outfit back on, and her yoga didn’t really calm me down and had to rest a bit, so I most of the time was the last person out the door when she and everyone else had left. But if I ever went out the same door anywhere near the time she did, even though I didn’t nothing but go straight to my bike and leave, then I was following her to her car. And mind you, she would always in a coy voice wish me a good night. I didn’t know she had friends walking her to her car because she thought I was in love with her, which I wasn’t.

    And there’s a whole list of other presumptions. And lies.

    I had mentioned that her ghetto blaster that she played music on from a CD had one speaker that was giving out static, and she pulled a face as if to denigrate parks and recreation saying it was just for them, and she didn’t want to buy a new one. That turned into me supposedly saying I didn’t like her music (I had never said anything about whatever music she played). She had also mentioned while talking to someone else while I was slowly getting my stuff together to leave, that she had bought a bunch of chocolate, and I had recently found out that putting coco powder in your oatmeal gives you the same resonant buzz as chocolate without the sugar, and when I tried to mention this to her having overheard something she said, she tried to make out I was mad at her for eating too much sugar, and also said she didn’t know I paid such attention to what she said (apparently she was supposed to watch out with sugar) and then tried to make out that because I listened “intently” to what she was saying that I was in love with her. In all honestly I was quite a bit amused, like when you’re reading a story and there’s a really bizarre pretentious character that lives their life quite different that yours, and you would read the description. It WASN’T because I was in love with her at all.

    And then she started groaning right in front of me (I had to sit in the front of the class because I didn’t wear my glasses to do yoga, so otherwise couldn’t see) about how she had just had to have vaccine shots because of her job in a hospital. I asked her if she was a nurse, she told me she was a social worker, and then I simply asked whether vaccines really helped as much as they say they do. And mind you, unbeknownst to me, she was getting herself all riled up about stuff that wasn’t going on at all, which I don’t think is good for anyone’s immune system. And she had started the conversation talking to someone on my other side, right through me, and then said I rudely started taking part in a conversation, as if again I’m not supposed to have ears, or even being aware of what she’s going on about means I have dangerous desires to intrude into her life. I couldn’t simply say you have to look at the other side of the argument in a resonant calm tone, or she got all spiked and prickled and annoyed like the spring on a mouse trap had sprung and said: “those who aren’t taking vaccines are making the rest of us sick,” after she said she wasn’t going to have a whole conversation about it. And then I supposedly said that all vaccines were bad, which I hadn’t said, I had mentioned some evidence against vaccines that I had been e-mailed to a parks and recreation person, because I wasn’t taking yoga classes to be told I have to be a consumer of drug company methods, and this is when I mentioned the ghetto blaster where upon they bought her a new one, themselves, because I brought it up, and they said maybe she was scared to ask for on. And I still don’t have any determined stand point one way or the other concerning vaccines, but I look at the other side of it.

    And mind you, if I paid attention one way I had devious desires for her, but then she also mentioned that I didn’t do anything she said, during class, which wasn’t true. During one class I had a back ache and couldn’t to maybe 20 percent of the poses, so I didn’t do them, instead watched her to see how they were done, this turned into me supposedly having my head resting on the wrist articulated on my upper arm, and watching her 80 percent of the class.

    I also got during that time bad eczema, and couldn’t ride my bike to class because the whether was getting colder and I’d have to wear gloves and my hands would sweat which was like torture to the skin because of the eczema, but might take the bus, which I couldn’t because the bike rack was full (I did ride my bike the half mile or so to the bus stop), when I didn’t show up for class SHE ACTUALLY said that I was resentful that there was a disagreement about vaccines, so I didn’t come to class. So, I actually couldn’t not be in class, and couldn’t be in class, and her assumptions could be magical telepathic insights rather than reality based, because she had to again make out that there was something going on which wasn’t going on, all to sooth her brain washing. I don’t know HOW I didn’t go to class because I had resentments, when having tried to get to class I couldn’t get there. Did I have some supernatural control over whether the bike rack was full, and did those bikes materialize out of nowhere, or the whole bus or what? I meant that’s pretty amazing powers on my part. If I WAS resentful, and that’s not why I showed up, I would have had to be able to manifest all of that to express such resentments.

    And that’s just some of it. I could go on and on and on.

    And her whole report read like stuff highschool girls would make up about someone they thought was weird, and this from a social worker. She actually said that I was “creeping” them out. I was just calmly getting ready to leave, and consequently doing that with no interest in her whatsoever but a yoga teacher.

    In fact the stuff that they called psychotic was exactly expressing that. I have a spirit friend who was Mozart’s mother, and who had a really bad childhood, given HER mother. And then Mozart’s mother’s father had lost everything at one point. I somehow, started picking up that stuff like that was going on given investments, and when you invest in the wrong stuff you can lose everything (reality even);while at this time I didn’t know all of the above mentioned extreme paranoia was going on (was being invested in), something so extreme I was disassociating from it, unfortunately. And the whole Hollywood like chase scene that was going on all fired by adrenaline as if there was some imminent danger that really wasn’t there at all. And this or that resonance from another time made me think something symbolic was going on involving Hollywood, and I could go into it more in detail, but it doesn’t matter because it’s subjunctive and could be any of who knows what kind of stuff dreams are made out of, something more objective than anything tangible in the physical because it involves reflexes and determines the future.

    Anyhow, I went on about this here, also

    https://staging-madinamerica.kinsta.cloud/2019/08/blaming-mentally-ill-is-hate-speech/#comment-159669

    What did I make up?

    Back then, what I referred to there was stuff going on like there is now, only it wasn’t the drug companies, it was the Catholic Church taking over the economic system, invading and controlling government, people’s lives. There were harmonics of that going on, and I couldn’t differentiate, if there was any necessary difference to see, you see.

    And there was even a sense of they know psychically what’s going on, and try to scare you, which is what I thought was going on, that the whole media machinery (Hollywood) was doing that, and I could go into stuff Hollywood is lying about or the image games they play, and actual actors coming into my life because I had talked about memories of being the dancer whose name this ID on this site carries, and it’s a big topic for actors, quite a few having played “mentally ill” people while someone actually have gone through it wouldn’t be hired by Hollywood, which already brings out exploitation.

    There was a violin maker, during that time when the Catholic Church was taking over, named Guarneri Del Gesu. And he would go to a Tavern where he heard stories about the stuff going on. And there was during this time a Goodwill store that I went to where spirit seemed to be telling me that a lady working there had also been the one at the Tavern back then, the one handing out drinks and such, possibly the owner. And she ALSO had started acting paranoid, anyhow, it gets complicated because the extremely grim lady who worked at a Goodwill store… and I had seen her son at one point there, and it looked like he was working on the candy machine outside of the yoga studio; and then the male bathroom was locked. I had to use the other bathroom, and that had become symbolic enough.

    And so I thought that the Goodwill lady, and the lady in the Tavern, that her son who I had seen was somehow connected with Hollywood trying to intimidate me that they had connections, and somehow could get into the workings in my life (could get one of their agents into the candy machine outside of the yoga studio), and I was supposed to be intimidated. Someone from Parks and Recreation actually suggested to call the administration of the school that the class was in (it was at night time when no one was in that school), but I actually know that when there’s such stuff going on that marketing agents would try to get as much going on (prattle blither and chatter) in talk about it, just to turn the whole thing around using the gossip for a marketing scheme for whatever, and suppressing the incomfortable truth. More chase scenes, more chatter about some evil, more magnifying social phobias that people are left allowed to go on about rather than about being human, so I tried to explain that to the man from Parks and Recreation who wasn’t intelligent enough to know what I was talking about, and then later mentioned that he didn’t know what I was talking about at all, which he said to others evaluating me rather than being honest enough towards me that I might have explained it to begin with. I would have been happy to hear there wasn’t such a spooky thing going on as a brainwashing organization trying to intimidate me that they could get an agent to being doing stuff to the candy machine outside the yoga studio, while the male bathroom was locked (which was supposed to have a symbolic meaning to it); which I figured out two days later (without calling others who would have thought I was crazy), but then it was too late. And it brought on enough paranoia to get me away from all of it, actually. And you would think both sides would know better, people from Goodwill, or a yoga teacher, especially a yoga teacher.

    I was trying to make a point about investing in such stuff because I was wondering whether that yoga teacher had been the father of my spirit friend (who made bad investments and lost everything), only to realize she was more like the mother, and in trying to communicate any of that it was quite misinterpreted as well. Even like investing in the drug companies (psychiatric drugs) to make a bunch of money, if you would, you’ve lost the truth, and that’s not going to change for it either. Beyond that inciting fear in such a way that intimidation is more important than the truth, and if you win then again you’ve lost.

    I don’t have eczema anymore, by the way, and I don’t end up drinking so much coffee to try to escape away from feelings that I think cause me discomfort (which then end up manifesting like a dream state symbolically, and could be labeled as psychotic), feelings as a child I wasn’t encouraged to feel free to express, and that’s just basic intelligence, and spiritual; so I wouldn’t have this whole calvacade, this whole potpourri, this whole assortment of things I hadn’t sorted out.

    But no, I never was a dangerous schizophrenic at all, I think the dangerous paranoia lies quite rigidly denied on those making out there’s a danger that’s not there.

    But again coffee is a dopamine re-uptake inhibitor, like ADHD medications, and anti-psychotic drugs (for “schizophrenia”) are drugs blocking the dopamine from being able to do it’s work (which actually causes dopamine hyperactivity again because the body then makes more of it, said to be the cause of psychosis); and I don’t think that a re-uptake inhibitor and an anti-psychotic doing all of that messing around with dopamine is in any way going to fix things, let alone that the “science” reported about it all is highly untrue.

    And a lot of people never get a chance to sort any of this out, by some miracle I have.

  • Neesa, if you’re interested in spiritual (or metaphysical) healing, if you want to find real grounded energy in that genre, maybe you might try Charlie Goldsmith. He has had a show called The Healer where he somehow heals people, not to draw attention to himself, but because that’s possible, that there are people born with such a gift, and that should be acknowledged rather than not. He hopes that other people won’t have to go through what he went through, having such a gift. He doesn’t himself get any money for it, because early on in life, when he found he had such an ability, he decided to start his own companies so that he could heal people without asking for money. His gift is simply something that started happening, not something he decided to do; and then he talks about how the first response of people is “that’s been proven to be fraud,” and he jokes that’s the starting point (along with saying it’s pretty rough, while laughing about it), and then he wants to say, just give me a moment of your time and I’ll show otherwise, which he has, and you can see on his show. For a little bit of money you can watch it online several places, and I think it’s completely worthwhile. For ten dollars I bought it on prime video via Amazon, and can watch it anywhere with a computer access. I actually showed some of it to my “therapist” who absolutely loved it. He then also has a facebook site with many videos you can watch, and on many of his healing videos talks about emotional healing. And how in reality we try to push aside feelings, and the discomfort we feel, that we associate with the feeling, is actually us pushing them away. Because we weren’t allowed to feel them growing up, because they don’t fit with the concept of ourselves our ego has concocted, because because. And he talks bout how we take on habits to avoid those feelings, like junk food, like smoking, like all sorts of things, and yes, like Xanax and other psychiatric drugs.

    He also has a website called my good habits https://www.mygoodhabits.com/ also something he gets no money from, he only asks a little membership fee, if you can pay it but then also if you can’t you can request it for free, but he needs money to be able to run the website. He has other people come in there to give good advice, and the Internet site, along with all of the rest of stuff, like protection from hackers, costs money. There he talks more about his emotional healing techniques. He also has offered a free membership to that site at times for anyone to try it out, and did when the current pandemic had started, but you would have had to apply for that sometime in the month April, which would have lasted for a month. He has a big bulk mailing list whenever he does a live healing on facebook, and that he also pays for himself, mentioning that it’s 750 dollars a month.

    Charlie has helped me more than any therapist, because he simply helps you feel your feelings, he’s not offering some unrealistic escape through who knows what (analyses, drugs, some Utopian community more enlightened than the other, the right to be a victim etc.). And just accepting feelings, I thought, is what music is all about. THAT’S quite different than what so often goes on in a professional setting, where the teacher feels free to get sarcastic if they don’t like something, get really offended that someone doesn’t do things according to his or her ideology; and makes that ideology out to be more important than what music really is about, what it’s true worth comes from.

    When Charlie has metaphysically healed people, the responses are quite something, you hear things like: “What the bleeped-out,” then there’s a moment pause and another bleeped-out, or you hear: “that’s freaky, who are you,” or “that’s weird,” or “I’m just weirded out,” what you hear the most is: “that’s crazy,” Well, there you have it….. because something “non-reality-based” happened according to so many people.

    What helped me is becoming aware of what I did when I was disassociating from feelings that wouldn’t go away, no matter how much I had an unconscious reflex to just do whatever when push came to shove, and the momentum had brought them back. One of the things would be drinking way too much coffee, which did make me “psychotic,” although even then the scenarios in the “psychosis,” depicted emotional wounds that if I understood them I could let go of rather than keeping them tangled up in my reflexes, which AGAIN breaks down the idea of reality based or not, because if you can change your reflexes, you change your future, which is more objective than anything tangible to people’s idea of reality based or not. But allowing myself to feel those feelings I would have otherwise tried to push away, that gave perspective, even on whether the “psychosis,” was crazy or not.

    And now music really is meant to do that too. All the arts are. But that’s not how they are taught is it? They’re made out to be a commodity, a consumption. They’re quite often made out to be more something you do to avoid your feelings, and make yourself “feel” a certain way (like chocolate would, or cheese cake, or a cigarettes, or drugs or having more money etc.) But that’s not really feeling.

    People are scared of anything that happens by itself, like say: “psychosis.” Or beyond that imagination itself when it points out what people are trying to avoid seeing. What their feelings might tell them were they given the chance to.

  • Fiachra, I don’t think things are the way the might seem. Given this quote from review of his book.

    “Francis recognizes the vital role of proper pharmacologic treatment, emphasizing that the combination of medication, talk therapy, the practicing of coping skills as a way of life, and belief in something greater is what has enabled him to grow and thrive.”

    And this quote from his article above: “My trials with schizophrenia have taught me that my perceptions carry no resemblance to the item we refer to as reality.”

    Emotional reality IS reality, and in fact it’s the stuff of fantasy or imagination the same as fiction. Fiction, which also gives in a novel, for example, imagination or fantasy the space to depict interactions or communion that give perspective on life, and that’s more than anything “objective” could ever be. Without that being seen as real, it’s like saying you can make a violin without any tools to carve the wood. Your feelings, your instincts, your reflexes, your beliefs, all of what creates the images in our mind determining how we respond ARE what makes our life beyond anything you can pin down AT THAT MOMENT as being real or not real, because you can’t perceive the future. Nor do I believe it’s meant to have the limitations you get with “sanity,” with “statistical based norms,” or any of that belittling terminology that goes on with anyone that simply goes to that part of the mind that determines our reflexes, and allows it to speak. The SAD part is that when someone does that subconsciously, and aren’t able to themselves comprehend what that part of the mind is trying to say about reflexes, then instead of being greeted by people that have had such experiences, and do have such insight or at least believe that it’s possible, they are shut down by being told that it has nothing to do with “reality,” which we here again hear. And “medications” are nothing but a means to turn off the mind by giving it a chemical imbalance, and disabling it.

    “We are such stuff
    As dreams are made on, and our little life
    Is rounded with a sleep”

    https://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/tempest/quotes/page/5/

  • Although I honestly feel woefully inadequate to add to this profoundly scientific discourse, there’s something that might have been overlooked regarding Turpentine.

    You know the fictional character Peter Pan, I think. Well, if you take the sentence: “Peter Pan Tying,” you have a sort of misspelling of P Turpentine. Albeit with a slight Southern accent. And in keeping in sync with the scientific bend this discussion and the whole environment provoking this discussion has taken forth and has been taking forth for quite a long time, you might seriously look into whether there’s a pirate, possibly named Hook, that needs to be tied up, him being a sort of ring leader in the creation of chemical imbalances, probably a lot like the Arch Fiend referred to by many religious leaders. And thus God created: “Peter Pan Tying,” or P Turpentine.

    This might lead to a 12 step program for Schizophrenics who all would (and should) be required to acknowledge that they are powerless against the Hook fiends of chemical imbalance, but P Turpentine or Peter Pan Tying is their salvation along with neuroleptics and any combination or cocktail of other miraculous solvents resulting, which might be referred to as “The Lost Boys”…..

    OK I’m done…..

    I believe in fairies

  • I misspelled than as then here, sorry.

    “Strange, I haven’t read anywhere that when you work people as slaves, in sweatshops or exploit their lives and environment (introducing more toxins) that when they can’t work anymore due to illness or simply having enough of it, that they have less years left than (was misspelled then) when they were being exploited, and thus it’s more productive for them and healthier too to have slaves, maintain sweatshops and deny what economic exploitation does.”

  • Not “medicating” people with neuroleptics increases life expectancy as well as recovery. That’s also the case with whether you force someone to have their lively hood depend on working in a sweatshop, being a slave or living in an economically depressed zone because of corporate exploitation (greed). But then there’s loss of profits, right?

    Strange, I haven’t read anywhere that when you work people as slaves, in sweatshops or exploit their lives and environment (introducing more toxins) that when they can’t work anymore due to illness or simply having enough of it, that they have less years left then when they were being exploited, and thus it’s more productive for them and healthier too to have slaves, maintain sweatshops and deny what economic exploitation does.

    I wonder how many people listed as dying in un-medicated years had started to have serious health issues because of the “medications,” and took themselves of of them because of toxicity causing somatic disease, and so took themselves off of the “medications” to survive a bit longer, which of course isn’t looked at either, that when someone starts getting possibly life threatening side effects, and takes themselves off of the “medications” whether they lengthen their lives that way isn’t considered. Instead, do they stay on the “meds” then that’s added onto the years the treatment gave them the life threatening conditions and said to lengthen their lives, and do they lengthen their lives by getting away from what was killing them, that’s listed as what killed them, instead. Same as people that eventually found out that the “medications” weren’t helping them actually deal with life’s problems and didn’t afford them enough emotional freedom to express themselves, even though such dissent could cause the same problems as dissenting against any suppression. And then there are the people that can simply feel how the medications suppress their feelings and mute their responses, and cause debilitating side effects, people that really only needed help from those who don’t respond in a paranoid way to such “symptoms” but know how to work with them to create understanding and emotional growth, and even see such “symptoms” as welcome color in an otherwise bland conformist society.

    Which expands the whole delusion. Therapists that actually speak the truth about “medications” and thus go against the whole drug company funded “therapeutics” business, although they get better results, don’t usually fall under many insurance guidelines and aren’t hired or allowed to even speak the truths in formal businesses involving mental “health.” And nothing they do would be acknowledged if they don’t promote “medications,” and be said to cut off the lives of those they could be helping, despite all of the evidence to the contrary.

    And to simply speak about something called emotional awareness, and would someone, anyone simply somehow feel that this isn’t all quite right. Would they know people in the mental health system, have seen what goes on with “treatment” and have a healthy enough brain and enough emotional freedom to have healthy un-indoctrinated instincts and insights kick in as to what’s going on; none of that is allowed, and what does THAT say about emotional health in a field calling themselves mental health?

    If you’re not brainwashed, you’re supposedly psychotic?

  • Excuse me but I’m really not interested in curt ideas of how one can ONCE AGAIN label normal responses to trauma as something severe that we need to cope with (or battle against), and then have bettered our and everyone else’s lives, as if seeing it as being severe and something to get rid of some as sort of heavy undertaking we get points for, simply because we make it out to be severe. I lost track at how often people over react once they believe you’re crazy, and act like there’s as you put it “something seriously wrong,” when what’s really wrong is the ridiculous paranoia, the gossip, the fear mongering, the social ostracizing and the bullying and ridiculing. The very initial thing one goes in to the mental health system believing they are in some sort of grave danger (Trewlany’s favorite line in Harry Potter) isn’t what causes the “episodes” either, it’s the resistance against them, the resistance against seeing it as a normal response, and also then often a response to “medications.” The DSM is a highly politicized bunch of paranoia, full of social constructs that are quite illogical except that it goes along with society’s belief in compromises as magic. (verbose enough?)

    What kind of nonsense is this: “Heh buddy, you know there’s something serious going on.”

    “If you actually followed what correlates with recovery then you wouldn’t have to deal with the result of recycling into “episodes” that wouldn’t be there without the disabling substances that prevented understanding, and recovery, which in this case is simple understanding by allowing someone to go through a process, rather than creating stigma and paranoia against it. And if you haven’t gone through it without trying to prevent it, then you haven’t gone through it.”

  • “My progression from nonpsychotic to psychotic followed a pretty typical course, unfortunately, there was much hesitation in giving me such a “serious” label, when in the end the correct diagnosis saved my life. I come to accept my diagnosis because I want to move on and live my life, helping others, not accepting things like this lead to a life time of questions and anger which isn’t worth it in the end. As tough a diagnosis as schizoaffective disorder has been it has helped me heal and taught me how to help others.”

    “Not accepting things like this lead to a life time of questions and anger which isn’t worth it in the end.” “Things?” What does “things” refer to? There are a lot of “things” you get points for for accepting from society, but cause trouble when you don’t conform, and thus anger and questions.

    Not accepting that you’re taking on a disease label that in contrast to being proven to be biological isn’t although its “cure” has been proven to be, this leads to a “lifetime” of question and anger that isn’t worth it in the end? Why would that be?

    Going against a fascist system (taking away people’s right to dissent from treatment, taking away personal liberties, labeling them as dangerous when they aren’t etc.) can also cause a lifetime of anger and questions. In fact more questions not less.

    I’m quite sure that there are people, and evidence shows they are in the majority, that indeed take on a life time of questions and anger (and suppression) exactly BECAUSE the label isn’t something that addresses what’s going on with them, puts them in a position for extreme discrimination and abuse, some of which you have highlighted, although there’s quite a bit more going on, certainly with people who have never acquired the insight to even know what’s going on and remain disabled lab rats for an ideology that hasn’t been proven to be effective..

    People take all sorts of stimulants to disable their mind. Sugar, alcohol, nicotine, street drugs, sex, shopping, $$$$$$$, junk food, chocolate and then think it’s part of this hard task of being productive, moving on with their life, as you put it. Getting past that annoying part of themselves that gets in the way of the happiness they believe is fulfillment when they’ve become a “productive” part of “society.” In fact they work hard to maintain it. In fact society for the most part nurtures a mindset that is drugged by ideology and maintains it through disabling the mind through various means. Whatever fashion is prevalent in whatever society uses it to judge others. Whatever arbitrary fear based bonding method that the group feels safe following in order to gain self worth above others who for whatever reason don’t follow such doctrines.

    And what you’ve delineated as being a very typical course (from non psychotic to psychotic) also delineates for many people how they got lost in a system at a vulnerable time in their lives, and remain stuck in it, disabled, a mere shadow of who they truly are, disabled and coerced into believing it’s necessary. And to promote a “tough” diagnosis earlier on is exactly what causes such repression.

    Beyond that, the simple right a person should have to their own life, and if there are things that society has difficulty with, and they would rather adapt, and disabling the mind helps them that’s THEIR choice, given informed consent, which usually isn’t going on with psychiatric drugs. That’s YOUR choice, but to call it a disease, to condone it being labeled as something it’s never been proven to be while the “cure” scientifically causes exactly what the disease is said to be (a chemical imbalance), this while most people aren’t informed of that: To call the whole process you have been through, which at this point you say is your own choice, a disease that’s been cured still does not make it a disease that’s been cured. And to label it such is highly fraudulent and misleading. And to label a list of symptoms as something inherent to a disease, be happy they have been alleviated (because you are happier that way) when there ARE a whole array of people who learned to understand the “symptoms” : added to this in this system calling it a disease and touting a cure that causes they very definition of the disease that wasn’t there to begin with, those people aren’t allowed a voice… then this starts creating fear mongering against symptoms, and heralds when they’ve been alleviated rather than understood with a healthy mind.

    sorry…

  • I’m sorry, but this being very true how someone is treated in “psychosis,” but you’ve defined it again for something it isn’t.

    All the violence against one is horrible, but how can one solve this while investing in the very institutions which condone such violence and promote it, and quake it as necessary for “safety.”

    It’s very much the same when someone gets hooked on street drugs, whether it’s through peer pressure, or in this case being forced on them, often through the same lies as peer pressure about street drugs and their wonders. Only here someone is forced on disabling substance and then told how miraculous they are because they disable dissent, they disable the very spiritual-artistic-human expressions that if given just a little bit of legroom would be understood, but would defy the status quo, the common compromises, the whole mind set society holds onto as if their fear based norms created reality, which could never be the case.

    Defending this and supplying videos that erroneously call schizophrenia a brain disease, this is misrepresenting what psychosis is, this is adding to stigma for people that need to get away from being bombarded with such misrepresentations, this is exploiting something that’s not working to make more demands and push to the side the simple things that work, which is non “treatment” with the “medications” that correlate with the whole spike.

    If you actually followed what correlates with recovery then you wouldn’t have to deal with the result of recycling into “episodes” that wouldn’t be there without the disabling substances that prevented understanding, and recovery, which in this case is simple understanding by allowing someone to go through a process, rather than creating stigma and paranoia against it. And if you haven’t gone through it without trying to prevent it, then you haven’t gone through it.

    There is an immense riff here between the need to simply allow inexplicable things like find yourself somewhere you don’t know how you got there (what psychiatric drugs were involved if any that might have helped with the lack of a healthy brain to remember enough, or that might have caused the need to escape?); not being able to express dissent from anything to such a degree that you attach to something you don’t understand yourself (aliens); or having repressed parts of yourself that you don’t even know need expression and you have suddenly a shift from another wise labeled shy personality.

    I might sound a bit annoyed and even impatient but I have had it SO MANY TIMES, encountering someone that understandably has all of these problems and points them out so articulately, and with such justified aggression, but when I offer a simple solution that works, and isn’t part of demanding the system change which isn’t working, I end up on the receiving end because why? Because the war is so just you don’t have to see that you’re ending up promoting what caused it (the problem) for the sake of justice: it’s such a “holy” war.

    “Schizophrenia” is NOT a brain disease, and never has been truly proven to be, unless you include the “treatment” for it, which DOES prove to cause a brain disease. And those are TWO completely different things. When the standard “treatment” correlates with what’s defined as a disease (in fact “the” disease), and the original disease in itself doesn’t, you’re not talking about healing a disease, you’re talking about causing one that didn’t exist before.

    In the meantime there ARE creative spiritual and to use an overused work “enlightened” people who have gotten out of the system, and have turned this supposed disease around to enhance what it is to be human instead, allowing it to be as innate a part of being human as imagination or hope or the fact that “God” exists outside of everything people get in the way of their life making demands on it rather than letting go and seeing what happens. People who have stopped allowing the “left brained” activity with all of it’s game theory fears, and all of its adherence to beliefs that come from social compromises rather than truth, and labels EVERYTHING as being “crazy” that scares it along with the belief in miracles. There are people that have STOPPED allowing that relentless itinerant fussing to get in the way. But that’s just a completely different way and it doesn’t say I need your “hospitals” when I can’t deal with myself, and it doesn’t say I need your “medications” when I don’t understand my responses, and my brain won’t conform to fear based social norms; and when all of that has shown to be a cause rather than a cure, it DOESN’T go there for “healing” or “safety”!

    Because there IS another way, and there ARE other outlets, you just have to let go of the ones that don’t work…. EVEN though there seems to be some immense loss to. This whole idea that SOMETHING needs to be there for me because this problem is so HORRENDOUS! If you didn’t think in such a way about it you wouldn’t be causing it to burst out again trying to show you differently, you wouldn’t be causing it, because you would actually have insight rather than fear.

    And this is supposed to be really harsh right, because this doesn’t empathize with what hasn’t been shown to work, although everyone gets points for investing in it – what doesn’t work, because then there’s more need for it despite that it doesn’t work, because it’s supposed to although it doesn’t – and to not go along with this nonsense is labeled as cruel, inhuman and lacking in concern….

    It’s THAT convoluted.

    I’m not interested in other people misrepresenting what I’VE gone through and was MY experience NOT THEIRS, and then have to be believing it’s necessary for “help.”

    sorry….

    Prince Charming coming riding in with a hypodermic needle full of…….

    (!?)

    Or his “Castle”

    Or being “Faithful” to him

  • Not only have I found it difficult to get someone ever enduring anti-depressants to engage with these very well documented statistics, but I’ve had it where someone already off of them, which the other ended up being as well, that one is there to: you know like a used car dealer where they sell you something that doesn’t work, although you have to pay to get it as well as transport it to where you’ll fix it, and then also pay membership fees, and when you figure out what they should have told you, being nice, they repeat what you said and say that that’s why they people that.

    !?

    Is suicide supposed to exist in Heaven that it’s a thought that doesn’t depend on an anti-depressant, because I think that already would, Heaven existing at all, mean that we have a soul, and that doesn’t die, but thoughts do when they are incapacitated, and that is what ALL psychiatric drugs, and ALL “medical” psychiatric treatments do, and that is disable natural functions of the mind.

    Because that’s then their argument, that stopping anti-depressant won’t stop violence, or suicide or the drug companies lying to everyone.

    It’s all just conformistic convenience, like Johnny Depp making a movie with Mr. Actor who defends his child murdering, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Brando but are we to get him and Johnny to admit how misinformed they’ve put forth truly damaging ideas, it’s oh, but there’s something else that makes people violent, or there’s an excuse for the violence, or it never happened, people like that don’t do such things.

    And children who truly don’t do such (see above) are never sexually molested.
    And chase scenes don’t get people so riled up they don’t know where they are anymore, or how to respond to even trying to cook a meal with the sounds they’ve heard pounding in their consciousness trying to find some entertainment, some leisure for their mind.

    And when Johnny Depp has a hoard of friends and family members as well as his pimp Tim Burton make excuses for his behavior when he assaulted his ex wife numerous times, this is normal for the supposed oddballs to have such drug habits, legal and not.

    OH, and I forgot Time Burton isn’t his pimp. That used to be someone from Russia who didn’t even know who he was, and he got into doing gay porno under a pseudonym. And has been stalking and trying to intimidate me for more than 20 years feeling free to create gossip about me I never invited while surfing on what he lets out about himself, to sexually harass me and stalk me in coffee houses (helped by the family of someone who died from drugs on his property), and oh, he made a movie where a pill magically helps Don de Marcos know who he is again. Or that flick where his love interest gets treated like she’s at a tropical resort after being committed.

    And this isn’t even fictional.

  • To be as honest as possible and try to squeeze a response in

    This whole thing is like saying that the amount of time it takes to make plans that work decides whether they will.

    Psychosis is simply finding what works, for that person who is going through it, you give a person that right and they will. But handing out what-works-for-others-not-going-through-psychosis to gain control so that those who are going through it are hampered, and then say time is involved in a negative way. Why is it negative? Who is stuck not seeing as negative? Is it negative? If it was positive would there be more of it?

    That I would go back now and believe all of whatever wasn’t allowing me to let go of what simply didn’t work, and put how CONFUSING it ended up being when discouraged from finding my own answer in a list of symptoms, as if there was no reason for me to be confused…..

    And now that I’ve gotten this far, it’s not about being a working member of society; it’s about miracles, which were happening the whole time, but in the background and now have stepped forward rather than further away or down under or hidden or anything like that.

    And yet I hear the birds come and cry at my window every day, because of what’s lost to them, thanks to how “man” cares for nature.

  • “Others point out that the fear around the relationship between DUP and outcomes has led to doctors consolidating more authority and more frequently restrain patients at the slightest hint of psychosis.”

    That’s the problem the patients are so ‘cute” and the doctors are so…..

    And the answer probably isn’t taking a squirt gun into “therapy” and shooting the doctor with kool aid.

    Besides, the keys that will release you aren’t ones he can hold, that would be like Hollywood selling keys to the city, or to release Pegasus for a joy ride, or who knows what!?

  • The longer a tree falls to the ground, the more danger there is, because the more impetus it gains falling from its height, the more upon hitting it’s target there will have been gravity involved.

    This is why we should make sure to get hist (oops I mean hit) often as possible by many many missiles called asteroids, then the planet will have more gravity, and the tree won’t take so long to fall!

  • By the way, Washington Irving had Cowotelexomaniac periods – which also, along with the slang which is used usually by men towards women (could mean they’re jealous of all of the attraction that women have they don’t) – the meaning has of a Dutch word for chewing, pronounced the same as Cow (Kauwen); only Cow as onomatopoeia is without the added syntax of the n’s (or being in them [n’s) and knocking u over), however that’s only in certain verbal forms of the infinitive’s conjugation, formally.

    He still has it too, it’s when the paintings get feverish over plagiarism that’s going on amongst those in the library that they have to sit and look at (they really can’t turn their gaze away without causing undue stress to their otherwise peaceful life), and look at while watching them, something they apparently have second thoughts about, and consequently end up a bit climbing the walls.

    It HAS happened that their eyes have flown off, but that’s more Shakespeare, and what happens to Juliet.

  • Yeah, but there’s so much to learn from putting them in little reservoiries like a shell game, to see whether the stupid populace with all of the unwarranted need for honesty they have can figure out what is under what, which hand, why it doesn’t move by itself, and eventually (the populace) only sees (the populace sees, is correct form of the verb to see) what is invisible, because then at least….

    however YOU brought up coding that’s extra-scientific and that’s not even a verb

    Or am I wrong

    Extra-scientific aspects of psychotherapy is coding, which is against alcohol. Ethical aspects is hypnosis against a nervously ticking child.

    I’m surprised you didn’t bring up hypnoses and hippotelexomaniacs related to Rhino it’s brother, that has also made its way into wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nose-picking however, its brother still remains hidden.

    And I don’t know whether in other languages the names for psychiatric diseases use articles that contain gender references.

    For example, if still somewhere homosexuality is seen as a disease of the mind, is that disease then referred to, would a man have it as: “He has her.” “She’s got to be gotten rid of.”
    “We can’t have her around.” “Just read the bible about her.” “The world would be a better place without her.” “If we could just have more laws against her, and better privilege to eradicate her.” “She’s REALLY a danger to our children.” “Just imagine if SHE could actually cause reproduction!?”

  • To the list of platents hovering over one forced on, and forcing them:

    A girl named [redacted], the reincarnation of Charlotte Bronte, working at a foster care facility, but mostly for those called “retarded” or cognitively challenged, WHY such people are put on what’s listed above finally clearly, and the rest.

    So her x-husband (don’t ask me the story, to have to repeat it without serious yowling like what happens when you swing a dead cat by the tail and it starts yowling anyhow giving sign that Jesus is around, the whole history of it which rivals a serial killers, and he, the x was Rasputin) he had stopped working at a place he was forced to dole out such “meds,” and I had the nerve to point out that this didn’t mean he didn’t have concern for the people, because he wasn’t playing the game of catch one who’s vulnerable enough to think they are being helped. This woman who followed me home, took up so much time that I wasn’t walking the dog of my parents house being a different excursion, who got her own house after making sure she made me think I would get another to rent she first sat in instead, and in the mean or somewhere after or before time invited me over to clean the apartment that wasn’t interim but before she moved who knows how many times afterwards as well with another guy or three she changed warrants for, to instead accuse me of being difficult to get close to when I didn’t want to get high with her and the guy she’d been complaining about non-stop who WAS on such meds, and wasn’t her x or another of them; But heh, I point out not handing out such meds is not a sign of not caring, and she explodes in amplified anguish embellished with turgid tears of desire, hurt that I dared not make her out to be compassionate in her devices. Since, she’s had at least two children with different guys, one of the fathers was murdered when he gave the impression of being inchoate in his sincerity; and with yet another she’s now in “domesticity”.

    It’s not just those that produce the meds, those that advertise them, those that patent them, prescribe them and stuff them down the throats of innocent victims, it’s also those that out of kindness make it seem like it’s part of a necessary ritual. If you take that percentage of brain washing out of this study, how much is left at all?

  • The oldest trick in the book, ma[k]e a [] reference that’s not coded and say it’s “around”…

    and I think she did a lot of damage with the publicity she got surrounding that

    And that’s not thinking, and further more, if it was “around” in reference to “publicity…..”

    She’d still not be sitting with him and his cohorts and their booze bottles.

    And it’s called “felicity,” being true to something if you are hired to be a public informant called a reporter.

  • To look at the weaving soliloquy
    Of your thoughts dancing, murmurings of truth
    As far as you can see into the deep
    Blue heaven of being under the sun
    Where it’s human like the birds to have wings
    Only for us it’s imagination
    And that makes it so alright to be here
    That to forget anything else, is love

    I want to apologize that I haven’t posted for awhile, but the dragon keeps eating my home work you see. And that basket weaving class of she knows who, after I got her kicked out of teaching art class where we were not allowed to touch the models we saw doing anything and everything imaginable (even to make them comfortable or give more room for them to be finding themselves), and after you know what and you thought you knew who and the rest of what the f%$#& from the rest of the flock accused of not being able to count when you know this then that the dragon got the leader and it improves the flight…

    They all think I’m back but I’m not the dragon!

  • Throwing the baby out with the bath water is a reference to the times when everyone took a bath in the same tub, and the baby last, so by that time the bath was so clouded that they might not know there was anything as intelligent as a baby wondering why they no longer cared to sustain its life.

    Further more, remembering the kind of out of control behavior, many call crazy, but I wouldn’t insult those diagnosed with such a dilemma to use such terminology at all:

    Someone that doesn’t speak the language is put in an asylum, this I can vouch for.

    Someone who protests is put in an asylum, and the people there tell him that they know he’s not “crazy,” but don’t tell the police that brought him there that they can’t accept such discrepancies and lies.

    I’ve had it that a social worker confronted with the task of being simply honest, as if I’m too receptive to that and being honest isn’t productive, makes out that when she’s at a loss to convince anyone that I’m a danger to anything (which I wasn’t the whole time, at all) that I was supposed to have command dialogue going on to have heard the thoughts she was thinking that she didn’t express verbally, as if they were said verbally, and then further more might have made up afterwards, as if there’s some legal juxtaposition of time would she have to find reason for what didn’t happen in order to make out that she was protecting something that wasn’t helped at all by her indoctrinated brainwashing others were supposed to be infected with or there was some danger that didn’t appear to be there when it wasn’t. And this person still stalks me…. And I by now was supposed to feel free to make up the same lies about anyone that was honest rather than making out a danger was there when it wasn’t honestly at all.

    THAT kind of behavior is throwing the baby out with the bathwater by trying to get others to not even see there’s something vital inside of the cloud they’ve made of what was meant to be fulfilling to stuff one does to feel clean.

    In the same vein, someone actually able to dream and able to express the scenarios related to life, if they actually non violently make such relationship (say like Joseph Jacob’s son exposing his father’s manipulations of inheritence when nature honored honesty rather than device) that there’s a danger there, because it might expose the lies of those thinking truth isn’t truth but a loss to them. Or someone that’s simply walking down the street wearing a different fashion than one, would they actually simply mind their own business and walk past one rather than going a different direction because of a prejudice one might have, that one is free to make up lies about them.

    And what is supposed to be there instead of water to involve such lies?

    The anosognosia of psychiatric drugs that make a person believe that lies are reality because it works for THOSE people to believe there’s a danger there isn’t without honestly checking, and try to make others believe it and that they are helping when they aren’t, and yet…..

    miracles happen

    sorry….

    they do despite all of those lies to the contrary.

  • Just a hopeful guess, but I wonder, would it at all be possible, and is it in any way whatever soever even slightly just a little bit, not too much a bit just a little bit, that I might just endeavor to maintain that having to sit in school many full wonderful hours a day, probably without a pillow to make one too comfortable, probably having to ask to use a bathroom rather than it becoming a hideout, probably a great percentage of the time having to do things that are so necessary they don’t occur automatically which would make one’s mind consequently quite overloaded with possible attempts of distraction that further more should be labeled as inappropriate, that this might possibly would consequently relieve the great concern with those doing these wonderful amazing interventions for young people!?

    For example, when I chimed in about anti-depressants on the bus, because a man said his doctor had advised him, and he mentioned how he used to have a foster care facility there where the famous Columbine shootings took place, and that those two boys would play pool at his facility, and told how they were bullied in school, how the Principle said to go to the Sheriff, and the Sheriff said to go to the Principle, and when the ring leader of the two told his doctor that his new medications (Luvox) were making him have angry hateful thoughts towards just about everyone (his girlfriend, his friends, his parent, etc.) that when the doctor told him to just keep taking them, and so many weeks later the famous incident occurred, that we don’t know who this wise doctor is for his own protection, that the court case was thank GOD paid off by the drug companies (the case against the most wonderful anti-depressant), that the one boy that spoke out against this (which truly concerns me) ended up taken great care of in a foster care facility helped by psychiatric treatment for a chemical imbalance (on medications that left him unable to put the wrong things together that would have otherwise occurred by some fault), that, if I may assume, now such a thing, is all going to be put further into such protective measurements now in California where there will be an amazing reduction in such mass shootings!?

  • seeing as I can’t reply yet, the comment, other one not actually approved of, would here say:

    There are better ways of going psychotic, in order to be deemed a non reliable source, just in case you’ve got the nerve to get yourself into obliviousness, but it’s of course really about aliens with spaceships that come and pick you up, if you’re in need of an air lift, and on anti-depressants, because I really don’t think that you would get shipped over to the USA, just because Russia wanted you treated right.

  • Pretty disgusting. Dangerous people on the streets? Does this mean that anyone not on the streets is less dangerous, because that might be the opposite, actually. Plants, they also don’t live in houses, they might be dangerous too, MORE GENETIC ENGINEERING!

    Perhaps those behind desks devising ways to make money off of the trend to ignore the mother earth (which also doesn’t live in a house, can you imagine how dangerously homeless and uncontrolled by societal dogma such a creature as the mother earth is?), perhaps those behind a desk might be more dangerous. Maybe they should have an experiment and put those behind desks in the situation those who are homeless have, and see whether they are dangerous then or not. And let the homeless run the system, instead, but then they might know it isn’t working to begin with, and might change things too much.

    That someone who is homeless, or someone unable to adapt to a system that’s raping the mother earth, or someone that’s expressing trauma as trauma that they are a danger is utter fallacy of judgment, which I would insult those labeled as such to call crazy. One is supposed to get points for denying what trauma does because it’s supposed to be a social disciplinarian device instead, giving them the right to persecute anyone expressing trauma as trauma.

    But when you get away from the system, you notice that there’s something much more worthwhile there when you just let go of all of i, because it’s never going to work. Those deemed as crazy or dysfunctional to it, are already one step ahead of finding what it is to be real, and human. The Universe is allowed to blossom in their soul.

  • I find it interesting that in the whole article, there’s hardly a comment about why people resort to drugs, regardless of their status in society.

    From the article:

    “She suggests that by segregating moral subjectivities along racial and class lines, psychiatry itself is one of the social determinants of people’s mental health because it creates certain types of identities while limiting others.”

    Isn’t fussing about…

    I really don’t know what to say, because the most aggressive fixated attempts to make me feel there’s something wrong with me, come from people that should know better given the amount of racial prejudice against them, but then they take on an image as defense, and that image is supposed to replace who they really are, an image created by the people putting them down. The very fears that they might feel trauma themselves, and express it to let go of it, and see it doesn’t rule them. Instead they go for the whole image making schpiel.

    But isn’t fussing about what economic status one is in, or minority group, or oppressed race, or any of that, isn’t that just taking away from what they have that those oppressing them have lost? And that also is in reference to those within their own economic status, minority group or race, even be they the majority again in that next fragmented piece of society in terror that they might find out they are human and not its machinery.

    And who is supposed to maintain this image, this “drug,” this idea as to what a person is supposed to have? Wouldn’t the whole thing ( the image, the schpiel ) fall apart if that wasn’t desirable to begin with, regardless of who has attained it and is the object of what you’re supposed to have…

    “………sometimes am I king;
    Then treasons make me wish myself a beggar,
    And so I am: then crushing penury
    Persuades me I was better when a king;
    Then am I king’d again…”

    http://www.shakespeare-online.com/plays/richardii_5_5.html

    And the mind does have the ability to deal with life, without being dowsed with whatever economic, or cultural level of power over it is desired, whether it’s image or lethe, both becoming a drug, the one physical , the other even more addictive…

  • Yeah, but your article does actually address that. If peer support people would be allowed to be peer support people rather than filtered through, as you said: “I think it’s ethically problematic to put “peer” staff in positions where their work is implicitly or explicitly involved with coercion.”
    It’s not just that they are involved with that (coercion), they aren’t allowed to openly dissent from that, otherwise they are more likely to have gotten out of the system. And the ones still in it are going to have acquired quite a bit of political acumen.

    Hasn’t the UN actually spoken against forced treatment?

    https://staging-madinamerica.kinsta.cloud/2017/10/un-to-usa-forced-treatment-prohibited/

    https://mindfreedom.org/front-page/u-n-rapporteur-on-torture-calls-for-ban-on-forced-treatment/

  • To make this discussion completely psychotic, not because that’s a disease, because it involves the imagination; and since psychiatry actually is illegal, would one honor the basic tenets of the law regarding harming another or using force that harms another: and would that be uncontaminated with precepts such as a person being a harm to themselves or others, when the implementation of such precepts really statistically has caused more harm to the people seen as a danger, it becomes clear that psychiatry is operating quite illegally in many ways. And to protect people from supposedly doing harm to themselves or others ends up causing more harm to themselves and others. Very much how gangs also operate.

    How do you stop gang behavior? I think that comes from places for youth to go, centers where they can play sports or perhaps get involved with art, social places where they aren’t judged, it’s said that more trees, and parks, and more green from plants helps, there even was an experiment where people prayed regularly, this in Washington DC and the police at first poo poohed it, but crime actually went down to such a degree they asked for it to be repeated. I think that’s a lot like changing society in a way that people are simply listened to, and have a place to go. That they have a place to go rather than have their need labeled as deviant, or diagnosed as symptoms of a disease, that with all of the social parameters of marginalization overlooked.

    And since we are actually talking about illegal behavior, regarding psychiatry, although this is given the facade of being legal, in practice. Were the letter of the law actually honored it wouldn’t be legal. Then changing the nature of peer support, is actually something quite profound. That a person should be welcome to be able to point out what is illegal transcends simple peer support. And not changing that is a bit like when you want to change the social precept governing gangs (because they are illegal, so what governs them is “social” not legal precepts) and that a gang member who would be allowed to be a gang member should only be allowed if they promote other kinds of gang activity that are less rapacious and more non violent. Are the leaders of the gang going to welcome this with open arms? And this doesn’t seem to necessarily work as well as preventing the forming of gangs to begin with.

    But those are just my thoughts, trying to gain perspective using imagination which is subjunctive and entertains potential.

    But yeah, peer support people should be able promote something other than the whole model that’s coerced and forced on people as a cure they aren’t allowed to dissent from nor are allowed to point out its ineffectiveness.

    And with that I am rather blogged out here.

  • The drug companies act like a drug cartel. There’s a famous book about that whose author I can’t remember, but I was surprised to find that all you have to do is do an internet search for “drug companies act like a drug cartel,” and you get a lot of hits.

    That’s gang activity. And I’ve read many evaluations of psychiatry that parallel their behavior to that of pushers, the way they get people addicted, and how they promote the drugs as a necessary remedy which pushers do the same only calling it an escape. Only it’s from the other side of the ballroom: one legal the other not.

    And now Portugal legalized “illegal” drugs which brought the amount of abuse down, I understand. This makes me wonder whether making psychiatric drugs over the counter (I’m just wondering what that would potentially do), which then would leave people with themselves to talk about regarding its effects, and regarding the side effects, as well as withdrawal. They then wouldn’t have a doctor to have to deal with at all, and neither a psychiatrist. And they wouldn’t have to exhibit behavior that would need approval from the psychiatrist (or social worker, or perhaps even family and friends) in order to make their own decisions regarding the effects of the psychiatric drugs. I wonder whether that would promote a better understanding, as well as discussion at all levels of society, including peer support, as to what those drugs really are doing.

    I don’t know, but the preponderance of people who are supposedly touting “objective” truths about drugs when would they speak negatively about the drugs, they would be met with disapproval and labeled as further diseased: if their experience with the drugs weren’t at such a level, and they truly were free to speak to peers, not having to deal with others called authorities evaluating whether the drugs changed their behavior, whether then things would be different, and to what extent.

    And, regardless of whether the drugs are over the counter or not, people should simply be able to speak about how the drugs effect them, and also have enough informed consent that they can recognize effects the drugs could be having, but then the whole scenario would have to be changed. And the focus wouldn’t be on changing the person or getting them to adapt to a society (or a gang), or eradicating behavior that’s challenging, but listening to them.

  • If one is going to talk about taking things to another level, then you might mention how the death toll from coercive, forced or fraudulently advertised treatment in psychiatry perhaps far exceeds what one is discouraged from comparing it to, as well as the length of its “rein.” That also involves ethical quandaries on all sides, including the people who then are told not to compare it.

  • I was simply proposing what would put an end to coercive psychiatry, and then it wouldn’t need any peer support.

    In regards your remark that it wasn’t clear to me what the article was about, or perhaps (for all I know) that proposing a different perspective is out of line when I introduce what I feel is a larger perspective (whether you feel that way or not), I find such “diagnosing” something to avoid and without it my point isn’t difficult to acknowledge.

    I don’t say that it isn’t a good idea to stop “peer support” from propping up the psychiatric system, I simply state that with a different approach you wouldn’t have the coercive system called “psychiatry” needing to be propped up. To stop propping it up would also help.

    The article very clearly points out how present psychiatry corrupted the idea of peer support, and if there was a completely different approach towards mental health or just human nature in general, which I tried to point out, that woud be people simply listened to each other rather than diagnosing, or drugging or coercing into treatment, then there wouldn’t be the whole present psychiatric industry corrupting peer support and needing to color coercion into treatment as healing although it statistically has caused more of the problem rather than a lessening: all that as game for something called “peer support.” And those people would have something to do that less resembled gang activity. That also would make change regarding “peer support.”

    It might also help if such peer support came from people that simply have found what mental health is by listening to others, gaining understanding of human behavior, and instead of having been consumers of “mental health” services had maintained mental health by not diagnosing, not wanting to coerce anyone into treatment and not promote disabling their natural emotional responses by diagnosing or “treating” such responses, whether it’s coercing into change or pharmaceutical. And I think that’s what Soteria house was about in many ways, because the criteria was that instead of judging the patients as being crazy, “non professional,” workers were hired who were simply interested in listening to the patients and the “weird” things they had to say rather than deciding it was an illness to be treated.

    And there are people that simply found or find answers for their “mental health” issues WITHOUT getting involved with psychiatry. In fact, I think that that in general probably would show to be more effective.

  • No one here is denying the holocaust, but to use that as a measuring stick against other atrocities, I find disingenuous.

    In fact the, adjectives, Mr. Stasny used (facile, inaccurate and polemic) when the comparison was made between the millions of people whose lives are lost and squandered (and remains legal), and the Nazi era, those adjectives approach diagnosis. Facile is right next to non-reality based, as is inaccurate, and polemic is right next to what might be used to determine ODD.

    By this time, psychiatric drugging might easily have statistically shortened the lives of more than 6 million people. That’s also systematic, also uses the idea that those people have something wrong with them, and although it doesn’t outright kill them, it ignores the death toll caused by its treatments, which over the years has fooled even more people, or forced more people to follow its tenets, while its death toll continues, and is still in action, and is worldwide and more widespread than Nazi Germany was. To make the moral statement that “the systematic mass murder of innocent people remains in a category of its own” while such a systematic mass murder is going on, only clouded in medical treatment, and then to say that isn’t in the same category I find lacking. In turn, I what if a person who has lost a family member to psychiatry and its lies said about the holocaust: “the systematic mass murder of innocent people hidden as medical treatment remains in a category of its own, and to compare it to the holocaust of WW2 which was open murder I find unwelcome given that murder in the name of psychiatry is covert and thus more corrupt”?

    To name just one class of drug, neuroleptics, that have been proven to shorten a person’s life by 20 years, how many people over the planet (NOT just in Europe) have been put on such a drug, while evidence shows that in the long run they are ineffective? Despite an interim period where “symptoms” are suppressed, or rather trauma that needs attention, or simply room for cognitive understanding that need legroom are suppressed, in the long run the treatment is not only ineffective but corresponds with more relapsing, more cost, and personal and societal paranoia against symptoms that could have been understood, and loss of life.

    That and then the rest of the disabling agents that are touted as cures for emotions, when would one look closely at what this does in society, it adds to the dumbing down of a population that doesn’t acknowledge global warming, or when acknowledged doesn’t do anything critical enough to stop what could be stopped. THAT along with a whole host of other societal issues that aren’t addressed because it might cause discomfort that a disabling agent suppresses. This isn’t as bad as or worse than the Nazi era, which only lasted as long as it had, and is over with. The biological model of psychiatry (which is or during its tenure has been riddled with concept that can easily be seen as clouded versions of Eugenics, Racism, Misogyny, Homophobia, Classism, ) has been around MUCH LONGER than the Nazi era was. In fact it’s worldwide.

    In fact, given the psychiatric drugs Hitler was on, which was massive doses of “happy pills,” or methamphetimes, and the paranoia they created, along with their widespread use in Nazi Germany, there arguably isn’t even a separation between psychiatric drugging and the Nazi killing machine.

    Do a google search
    I did: “Hitler’s happy pill”
    and got a whole list of hits pointing this out
    You could also do
    Nazi’s and Methamphetamines
    of any other number of combinations

    There’s also the fact that Nazis who were put in jail for atrocities, and got out doing half time, then started Bayer aspirin, one of the leading proponents of the medical establishment’s newer aggressive take over of the market, such as we’ve seen with psychiatric drugging.

  • Of course, institutions meant to help people shouldn’t be riddled with pundits who, although advertised as peer support specialists, only tout what they’ve gotten rewards for repeating or punished for would they not repeat.

    But this is a little bit like saying that gang members shouldn’t do drugs, shouldn’t be robbing stores and should instead be gardening, going hiking etc.

    Give them something else to do. Someplace to go.

    Psychiatry exists only because society doesn’t promote people simply listening to each other, anything out of the norm is met with alarm from the person experiencing it to society’s inability to want to understand it.

    If society didn’t make people alarmed about normal emotional responses that go against the grain of indoctrination or dogmaticism, if society didn’t find fault with mildly extremist behavior in stark contrast to the extremist alarm going on in society finding fault with such behavior, no one would be looking for help from what creates such faulty peer support.

  • One has to be truly careful, when one has the idea that something needs to be done, because you can easily end up in the social bonding that emerges heralding ideology rather than results, and that’s not true thinking, that’s indoctrination. Doing nothing, even when that is called crazy, can be more helpful by far. It still remains that many people could not, would not and haven’t survived such “interventions.”

    To mention only a few thing:

    After your daughter clearly had an extremely bad reaction to medications, when she ends up in an asylum, and is again put on the very medications (an anti-psychotic) although one that was a new one, you state that you in “looking back,” think that was a mistake. Why didn’t you at that time become alarmed that the same process was repeating itself? Could you fill us in so we know how to relate to someone who is like you were at that point. Because many people have to try to relate to such beliefs and have no understanding of how to relate except that they know it isn’t going to help, and like me can become quite frustrated being baffled at how to respond.

    Later on you state that you learned (“above all”) that being in the asylum can be bad because a person can be introduced to street drugs. Why is that? One is at least clearly told about street drugs how addictive they are, and what they do to your system, and they aren’t touted as cures for emotional problems (although people might think that they work that way) while with psychiatric drugs such information is withheld or suppressed. With street drugs there’s informed consent much more and thus they also can CHOOSE to not take them and are never forced on them. A person clearly can find out for themselves how addictive they are and that they don’t enhance a person’s life. And street drugs work the same as psychiatric drugs because they are messing around with neurotransmitters, and many or most of them used to be psychiatric drugs half a century or more ago. I would think that above all it’s the stress on drugs at all in the asylum, and that people forced on “medications” that mess around with neurotransmitters while receiving no help with the emotional problems, the need for cognitive perspective or the spiritual awakening that might be going on: that they then are going to turn towards street drugs. You could say the same thing for going to a University, that someone can get involved with drugs or drinking, while perhaps it’s the lack of true interest in the human mind beyond indoctrinating it that it the true danger there. And I’m not condoning street drugs at all.

    And you also state that you didn’t know that symptoms can re-occur when getting off of “medications.” It’s clear then that you weren’t taught this in social work school, but what were you taught that lead you to not see what was going on? And what are those “symptoms?” That the drugs didn’t work in the first place, that whatever “symptoms,” that were suppressed weren’t understood, and when they re-emerged got the same treatment, because they were seen as symptoms not valid expressions of whatever they were expressing and could be given room to express itself? Those are symptoms of suppression from treatment, that’s not even what would have happened leading a person look towards treatment, which adds another problem, the anxiety a person is taught to have about “symptoms,” that might just be normal human responses when not met with such anxiety that “something” needs to be done. Still we’re talking about “symptoms” (anxiety, paranoia perhaps even and then also “medications” toxicity) that come from believing something needs to be done rather than what was there that brought into being such “beliefs.” And how much of those “symptoms,” become simple normal responses that when a person is in an environment not seeing that as a disease, not becoming alarmed about it, that it ceases to be a problem but something that’s embraced and understood. In one area it simply isn’t really engaged with and thus discriminated against, and in another area it’s resolved.

    And then I read the rest of the article and am amazed and happy to see there is a change, but how much of the problem was that “symptoms,” were seen as such rather than something completely normal given the circumstances, and that doing “nothing,” would have from the beginning been more helpful?

    The one thing Soteria house does, I would think, when working with a whole family is to turn around the whole idea of “symptoms,” because I would think it’s the environment defining them as such NOT the person themselves, because the weren’t born, didn’t wake up from Heaven and suddenly start having issues with stuff that when properly looked at would only remind them that they are human rather than some piece of machinery manufactured by society. Rather than “symptoms,” they could see that there was valid emotional stuff, or cognitive stuff not given room to express itself, or unusual experiences that weren’t acknowledged or shown interest in to give a person the feeling they could be themselves regarding what life brought them, all stuff to remind them they are human and where they came from. Stuff and more going on that when not given room to express themselves became instead “symptoms.”

    And sorry but a major turn towards what would help would simply be do NOT get involved with the mental health system or turn to them when you’re having difficulty.

    I don’t even know why this is supposed to be a “disease” anymore. As if innocence is a disease.

    Recently I encountered an energy healer – and have been to a few, one actually had been put in an asylum as a child, because he would see auras which he described, and he would know things like who was on the phone before it was picked up and what they were going to say, but when clear miracles happened a Catholic priest actually decided that he had been given special gifts by the devil and then a special indoctrinated by the church psychiatric decided if Gene had shock therapy that the devil wouldn’t like the feeling of it and let go of Gene. And so Gene actually repressed all of that till his life fell apart, and then the miracles started happening again, and he traveled all around the world even getting the Russian Cosmonaut medal because his pure nature inspired people to find their own inner healer where miracles happen. And when people from Chernoble found healing, he was honored thus. You can hear his whole story here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9edB02jWP0 and see what he does to promote healing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9edB02jWP0 which continues here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSX-gUmxQ3M. Gene passed away in 2009, but I found another healer and was getting in touch with what she does beyond time and space, and it allowed me to feel what actually gets in the way of the healing energies (but that’s crazy in itself, because it’s not from the physical, it’s from the mind, from thought). I didn’t even go for any “psychiatric” problem but a physical one, which has now healed although it’s not supposed to have that way. And I’ve found that after both healings that occurred with Carol and Gene before that, I felt restrained from being active. Not held back but restrained more, because I simply felt detached, not being able to be active and take part anymore fueled by what IS causing the problem while I’m not supposed to be aware of what would prevent all of that, because it’s “crazy”. Not “objective.” https://caroleverett.com/ And that’s the difficult part, because you then see how much “society” gets in the way, and in how many ways. And how many of your decisions are actually to escape knowing what heals, because society doesn’t accept that. In fact, you can’t even go around in society being active about what truly heals, because that’s seen as nothing: too soft, doesn’t give you that spark of thinking you’re combating something to get somewhere, because what heals actually doesn’t need anything to oppose it, it really only need you to allow it. Detach and don’t do anything for awhile and you’ll feel it. Instead society gets in the way. That being what MOST of its defenses do. But if you really let go, you learn soon enough that there’s a whole other world. And “crazy” really isn’t a disease at all, and it’s seeing it as crazy that’s the real mistake beyond ever getting it right, because even a “disease” can teach you there’s something wrong (change your thoughts, change your habit, what you eat, whether you stress yourself out in whatever way: fighting wars no one can win, or simply find the help you need which wasn’t there before), or it can challenge you to change your life to see what’s right, but you decide that something is crazy and you’ve already decided that it has nothing to say, and will never make any sense. That what could change your life has to be eradicated.

    On Amazon Prime there’s another healer. Charlie Goldsmith, who somehow taps into the same wave pattern of what’s “crazy,” and what heals, because the people whose problems go away after Charlie has been the conduit of that say things like: “You’re not for real,” because it’s so totally unusual and amazing to them, or: “that’s crazy,” I don’t know how many times I heard that. Or one lady says: “I’m just weirded out right now.” After she realized she suddenly could do stuff she hadn’t been able to. And she actually WANTED to do stuff that before would have caused pain or discomfort. They here went and revisited someone he had helped when they were filming a show about him (which he didn’t really get paid for paying his own transportation and housing to be in the area in California I think). He started his own company because he didn’t WANT to charge for his gift. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-gQ6oBDpB4

    It’s all really crazy.

    Years ago, I happened upon a medium and a spirit friend had to put him in a trance when he was doubting her information (he didn’t understand the love between me and her I later was told, sort of like Lord Voldmoort not understanding the power of love) and she called me her son, having been Mozart’s mother. What I found, actually, is that Mozart never composed anything, the way the discipline would say. He only simply honored music as an innate place (using imagination of all things) where a person can find a home for their emotions, and gain perspective on life, he responded to the music, and he went there instead of going somewhere that was supposed to be “sane” or “constructive,” or whatever it’s called, and not even to the music would he do that to, something quite impossible when miracles aren’t at all impossible in contrast. And now I’ve found music (and painting, and writing novels, and poetry, and pottery, and whatever) to be healing for me myself, and I haven’t gone up in flames, exploded into forever, but I’m letting it trickle in.

    But REALLY!

    This idea that you have to CONSCIOUSLY do something, that you have to be RESPONSIBLE and take action, this is too ridiculous to call crazy, because if you were crazy, and didn’t do all of that, and allowed something else to be there that doesn’t need anything opposing it (love, the tao, the Universe: One-Song) then all of the stuff that created all of the breadth of evolution in nature, what’s involuntary, what happens by itself, THAT will do things you never thought were possible and greater than ANYTHING you could come with thinking you need to have.

    And it’s crazy…..

  • I know, it’s difficult, but Mr. “Doc.” and his associates can’t control everything that comes into a person’s life, and if you let the things be there that do heal (in contrast) then that does show what heals, and that’s that.

    Being oblivious for an interim period because the “medications,” have disabled natural brain functions, and call that healing really ceases to be less attractive in contrast. And the whole epidemic that has been following after the initial interim wears out, with more relapsing, disability, although it (the epidemic) also increases people’s paranoia against normal responses to difficulty, trauma, unusual things in life and challenges by making out that it’s supposedly a chemical imbalance when it isn’t; when it’s shown that not “medicating” people and acknowledging and tending to those natural normal responses heals the person and changes society for the better, than that will be that as well.

  • another correction

    And then where this fighting can’t exist, where it escapes all of the perceptions of loss, and guilt and whatever else maintains the need for a fight but still exists (possibly in forever where whatever is there can’t be destroyed), and if such a place exists it again wouldn’t be allowed to, whether it’s called Heaven or love.

    It should read something like this:

    And then where this fighting can’t exist, where it escapes all of the perceptions of loss, and guilt and whatever else maintains the need for a fight, where it escapes all of that but still exists (possibly in forever where whatever is there can’t be destroyed), and if such a place exists it again wouldn’t be allowed to, whether it’s called Heaven or love.

  • correction

    “We haven’t even tried this (not forcing treatment or limiting treatment to our treatment), but if it worked what we call needed forced treatment would be shown to not work.

    should read

    “We haven’t even tried this (not forcing treatment or NOT limiting treatment to our treatment), but if it worked what we call needed forced treatment would be shown to not work.

    In other words, we are so sure that the pills will work we won’t try anything else.

    What did Einstein say about being crazy? “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

  • I’ve read this now three times, and I fail to see what the point is.

    To begin with, to site a study studying people being treated for “schizophrenia,” means you are studying people that are “medicated.” It doesn’t at all state that there were any “schizophrenics,” that weren’t medicated. What this is supposed to have to do with Torey’s statement that poor adherence to psychiatric medications brings bad results is beyond me yet, except that then you can ignore whether no medicating them in the first place turns out to be more helpful and preventative. And there’s of course no study listed comparing “schizophrenics,” that aren’t at all medicated to those having poor adherence or good adherence, regarding whether they get violent. In fact, those with “poor adherence,” you can be sure weren’t given the opportunity to be helped to get off of their medications. So it’s really about people not liking the treatment, being forced on it, and then whether they get violent. Siting a study that “schizophrenics,” have a bit more tendency to get violent without also looking at whether “treating” them with medications they aren’t allowed to dislike ups their chance to get violent is pretentious at best. To magically say it’s because of medication non adherence then is quite unscientific.

    And to treat the whole situation in a way (NOT involving “medications”) which promotes recovery, and logically prevents violence, that isn’t even entertained. That would be a treatment (the treatments that have been shown to work like Soteria House, Healing Homes etc.) other than the “treatment” being tested. But it’s not even entertained. The “treatment” entertained is such that when someone doesn’t like it they have – what the author of this article points out – a minor correlation with violence. Mind you, that’s a “treatment that when it forces a person on medications gives them extreme withdrawal symptoms would they not want such “treatment” or the side effects from it. And they for the most part can’t get or have difficulty seeking help for it (coming off the “treatment”), and probably are told that it’s their moral responsibility to endure the side effects that were making them not want to take the medications. On top of that they are most likely being told that the withdrawal symptoms are symptoms of the disease, not of the “treatment.” And then there’s this big statement that some people seem to get violent (although not as bad as five other criteria).

    This is science?

    And the people that aren’t compliant with “treatment,” that aren’t medicated at all, or weened themselves off, there’s enough evidence that they then have way more of a chance of recovery.

    I REALLY wonder though, why in the whole article, it’s not even mentioned about those people, or that poor medication adherence might mean that those are people that feel that the medications don’t work (which has been proven), but they aren’t allowed to have such awareness, and that that by itself is so suppressive and confusing it could make people violent. And that, when they are not allowed to nor their right to express their dislike for treatment is acknowledged, this echoes severe emotional issues that thus are being suppressed echoing the same coercion towards their behavior of expressing dissent or not.

    In fact, that people who aren’t treated with medications have less occurrence of violence isn’t even entertained. That would of course blow the whole argument, and if there’s more recovery, which has been shown to be the case, then there’s more exposing that’s not supposed to happen. Nor is it looked at regarding all of the evidence that psychiatric drugs cause violence, which there is ample evidence of, which was suppressed for years and still is.

    WHY are we supposed to even read this going around in circles completely ignoring the statistics regarding what happens when people AREN’T put on medications!? And why is “treatment” – whether a person is compliant to it or is seen as having poor adherence but still coerced that they should be compliant – that correlates with violence, not at all seen as a possible CAUSE of that violence!?

    That way you could call I don’t know what treatment!

    WHAT are they saying!?

    “We haven’t even tried this (not forcing treatment or limiting treatment to our treatment), but if it worked what we call needed forced treatment would be shown to not work. So here we’re forcing people on our treatment and when they don’t like it and aren’t helped to try something else that has been shown to promote recovery more, they get violent in an extremely marginal way.”

    And then there’s the venues that when there isn’t enough money for treatment, and people at first forced on treatment suddenly don’t get their “treatment,” their “meds,” then they start acting up, so we need more money for treatment. That you could have ever NOT got them addicted to “meds” that only work for a few years before there’s more relapsing, lack of recovery, more cost, more loss of life, more societal paranoia against people not treated by what doesn’t work!? Oh, and when they have withdrawal symptoms and aren’t helped with them and getting off of the highly addictive “treatment” (which would cost less in the long run and promote recovery) then we need more money to “treat” them.

    There was an article in The Onion about the big hole that everyone’s money ends up in, and when it was argued as to whether they would shovel it in or use another manner to dump money in there, someone said:

    “My father works two jobs so you can dump money in the hole, and I want you to use a shovel, not any other method!”

    Why are we even going on about “schizophrenia,” rather than seeing whether the treatment of it is a causing factor: NOT helping a person who wants another method than what they are forced on and they aren’t allowed to say isn’t the kind of treatment they see as working for them, as well as that there’s strong evidence that it doesn’t work, which is suppressed.

    And I’ve again typed in all of the above, checked it over, adjusted it, and only once mentioned how this “treatment” echoes severe emotional issues that already weren’t tended to.

    But I’m supposed to take up the other flag now, and in not tending to them (severe emotional issues) start fighting the cause, which wouldn’t be there if what actually heals was acknowledged rather than fighting about what doesn’t.

    It gets quite something when what truly heals and has no opposition, and so is there when you stop needing to oppose anything, that it’s thus disqualified because it dissolves the whole fight. WHY!? Because it might be called a miracle, and thus be seen as unrealistic? And then where this fighting can’t exist, where it escapes all of the perceptions of loss, and guilt and whatever else maintains the need for a fight but still exists (possibly in forever where whatever is there can’t be destroyed), and if such a place exists it again wouldn’t be allowed to, whether it’s called Heaven or love. That supposedly exists afterwards, if you’re good and judge others… Can’t ever be just now in the moment…..

    Well, I’m done….

  • By the way, I was reminded that there are checks on things like this, and that there’s more than one person involved when any decision about nuclear weaponry, but to me it really is just a point to make as to what’s considered crazy or not.

    I mean, she can say that she had religiosity, and this is acknowledged, but could anyone say that they had been brainwashed to think along the lines of what might be called militariosity (or militarism or whatever the word would be), and that could cause extreme alarm regarding quaking the idea of an enemy (in this case the devil, hell and satanic cults), and that effected their thinking causing paranoia?

  • I’ve listened to the whole two hours of an interview, and I wonder whether anyone else has, and comes away from it quite numb, staring at the walls.

    Marci actually has insight into what went on with her, she even talks about religiosity; and then also very clearly how the “medications” not only took away her ability to see danger, but made her extremely paranoid and out of control.

    I have no idea what The psychologist Kane is going on about, other than, when someone actually has insight, and expresses the consequent emotions in a logical manner, that Kane can’t deal with it, and comes up with this strange diagnosis of borderline. And then to top it off, instead of acknowledging all of the abuse, that Marci very clearly portrayed, she acts as if the danger is in letting her out rather than keeping her in. Kane said: “If Webber were released, she would be at risk “for developing more symptomatology in a community setting,” Kane said, and thus should remain a hospital inpatient.” which sounds like some prefabricated sound byte in order to get points from the system as if it’s working. Look here, we lock these people up, we’re safe. What they’re locking up is the truth from getting out.

    And from this point everything breaks up. Marci actually says that when someone is psychotic and a danger to themselves that they should be hospitalized, but she wasn’t. (!?) In reality, I think she had been hospitalized quite a bit (voluntarily also), and thus she was on a cocktail; and for the present system to function as a place for people to go who are psychotic, because otherwise they are a danger to themselves or others, the whole system would have to change, would the result not be what is HAS BEEN for the past so many years. For this present society to be safe people need to learn how to not get so alarmed that they fall back on the very system causing most of the danger. And she also mentions what kind of clearing she had in the military for nuclear weapons. And so, when someone is involved with a system where would ANY of such weapons be used, it could lead to the end of most of organic life on the planet, and she says this to point out that when they are given special privileges this points out their sanity rather than their insanity. It’s mind boggling. There IS no sanity there to me, and it’s much worse than what psychiatry might do, initially, which isn’t creating weapons of mass destruction that when someone pushes a button most of organic life on the planet can be destroyed. And she’s actually pointing out that someone like her could get clearance, and for all we know could end most life on the planet because otherwise it might go to hell.

    THAT’S how dangerous the present mental health system is, along with the drug company cartel.

    I hope she gets out and points that out, VERY CLEARLY, without trying to make out that she wasn’t crazy, because she was given clearance to be allowed to facilitate most organic life on the planet being destroyed!

    MY GOODNESS!