"Mental" patient in straitjacket.
3rd Dimension
The Psychiatry Hoax of the Century.
By Philior
Denouncing a crime.
This article is written to denounce a crime, or I should rather say "crimes". The criminals who perpetuate these crimes are still free to go on perpetuating them, while they belong to one of the most respected groups of the population.
The more a person may be considered a danger to the ruling establishment, the more this person is at danger of becoming a victim of these criminals, depending to what extend the person him-/herself belongs to the ruling establishment.
Anyone can be declared "mentally unstable", "psychotic", "obsessive", or suffering from "compulsive behavior" and be robbed of their own mind by this caste of psycho-criminals, i.e.: most of the psychiatrists and psychologists of this world.
However, as is required for any crime investigation, certain procedure
should be followed, and answers should be given to the "who", "what", "how",
"where" and "why" of the crime. So let's stick with that.
Who are the criminals?
Perhaps it's better to ask: who not? Are there psychiatrists and psychologists who are not criminal? Yes, there are, thank the divine. Besides those who act out of sheer ignorance, there are those who through genuinely human-friendly research have brought great insights into the human psyche and those who have been able to treat people with genuine love, while some have actually succeeded in finding treatments that can bring genuine and wholesome relief of problems associated to the mind, which we will discuss to a limited extend below. And there are those psychiatrists and psychologists who are truly devoted to denouncing the criminal and unscientific practices of their less well-intentioned colleagues.
However, the bulk of those belonging to the caste of psycho-criminals are willing complices in a crime they willingly commit on their hapless victims.
Some of the most notorious criminal psychiatrists and psychologists include:
Sigmund Freud, Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron (ex-president of both the American Psychiatric Association and
World Psychiatric Association), and most of the "mainstream" practitioners.
What does the crime consist of?
The crime not only consists of a ruthless attack on the minds of billions of people worldwide and/or involuntary detention, in many cases these attacks result in destroyed lives or death.
Much of present day's approach to the condition of the mind is based on the work
of Sigmund Freud, even though many psychologists would contest that. While many of his ideas
have been replaced by new ones, many of these new ideas have been built on, or are formulated
in response to Freud's, while he played an undeniably important role in popularizing
psychology and psychotherapy.
However, if anything, having developed his own brand of psychotherapy,
this man is guilty of nothing less than quackery
While he was right about the fact that disturbing events in someone's life, often at an early age, can have big consequences for someone's behavior and state of mind (as others had noticed before him), the idea that a person would heal by making him relive the traumatising event has never been proven, and often people who get psychotherapy come out more disturbed than when they started it... Upon closer inspection, it must be concluded that Freud's own writings and statements show that his entire theory about healing through psychotherapy is full of errors and contradictions, while it seems he never cured anyone through the technique himself (although in some of his writings he claimed to have cured ALL his patients, in other writings he makes it clear he cured no one, ever). This can be verified by anyone who will make the effort to do so and will not be discussed here due to the elaboration it would require. For a well researched analysis I refer to the work of Max Scharnberg (assistant professor), in particular his paper called "Two miracles about Sigmund Freud" found online through the links at the end of this article.
It must be pointed out that Scharnberg does endorse "behavior therapy", also called Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT). This is a therapy that is fundamentally different from Freud's, and was developed by Albert Ellis. Instead of concentrating on events of the past, its goal is to "correct" attitudes and notions the patient may have about things and possibly ensuing behavior. While this may seem a sensible and logical approach to emotional and behavioral problems, in fact, it's just as much quackery as Freudian psychotherapy only much more dangerous, as the psychologist is given authority (being a censor) over the patient's beliefs. The question then is: who censors the beliefs of the therapist?
In fact, Ellis through his therapy forces upon patients a religious
form of rationalism (which when scrutinized is often much less rational than is pretended) that rejects
all alternative views, they be philosophical, metaphysical, political, sexual, spiritual, religious, or perceptional.
The same is the case for all other therapy forms that have been derived from Ellis' method and which
concentrate on "correcting" notions and behavior.
While it's good and healthy to ask logical questions about someone's beliefs and notions, and that this fact
alone can help people overcome certain mental and behavioral problems, pretending that one has the
only correct answers to such questions is wholly inappropriate given the multifacetedness of existence, and
can be very harmful. This is where an initially healthy and logical approach of a problem turns into quackery.
Although Ellis may have had good intentions developing his method and although his approach does ask some healthy questions, in fact he created the perfect model for organized "thought policing". Governments like that of the USA are in the process of adopting laws that would make it possible to force people being vaccinated against certain diseases as the Government sees fit. From that stage it's a small step to force people to be "mentally sanitized" and give them a brainwash and make sure they stick to the party line. The time this will really happen may seem far away, but actually there are psychologists who have already publicly proposed such compulsory "treatment"...
While things like giving attention, having a good talk and clarifying some things up can have a beneficial effect, it has never been conclusively proven that it's not these things but strictly the methods of Freudian psychotherapy, REBT or other forms of psychotherapy as such that seem to help people in a certain amount of cases.
The major problem and flaw of all
the research on the effectiveness of psychotherapy up to present is the fact that only in a few cases
the methods of placebo verification and the assessment of it have been viable.
The only viable way to do a placebo verification for something like psychotherapy is not by using a placebo pill "treatment", "relaxation therapy" or "attentional control" as it has been done, but to have a placebo psychotherapy session by untrained and unprepared but "mature, intelligent and friendly" people who talk with patients for the same duration as is done for the psychotherapies being researched (these should not be students of psychology, psychiatry or cross-disciplines). While some of the results would be fairly irreproducible, it would be the only way to assure that none of the commonly known professional techniques are applied on purpose, while guaranteeing fairly spontaneous reactions, yet at the same time it would maintain the purpose of a placebo, namely that of giving the patient a genuine impression that he/she is being given a treatment that is supposed to work while it also offers intense human interaction as is the case for the "real" therapies.
In fact, Ethan Watters & Richard Ofshe in their book "Therapy's Delusions" report
that "In a review of forty-two studies comparing professional therapists with paraprofessional therapists
(such as teachers given the job of counselling students), only one study showed that the trained therapists
got better results. Twenty-nine studies showed no difference between the two groups, and the remaining twelve
studies showed that the paraprofessionals actually outperformed the professional therapists." (p. 130)
Note that although I agree with the above observation of Watters and Ofshe, in their book they make a case for
mental problems purely having physical causes, which view should absolutely be rejected, as we'll see later
on in this article.
Prioleau, Leslie; Murdock, Martha; Brody, Nathan in their paper "An analysis of psychotherapy versus placebo studies.", Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 1983 Jun, v6 (n2):275-310, mention in the Abstract that after reanalyzing the benchmark research of M. L. Smith et al (1980) the conclusion is that:
"The only studies clearly demonstrating significant effects of psychotherapy were the
ones that DID NOT USE REAL PATIENTS. Generally, these studies involved small samples and brief treatments,
occasionally described in quasi behavioristic language. FOR REAL PATIENTS, THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE
BENEFITS OF PSYCHOTHERAPY ARE GREATER THAN THOSE OF PLACEBO TREATMENT."
(emphasis mine)
In an article by Berman, J. S. & Norton, N. C. (1985), "Does professional training make a therapist more effective?", Psychological Bulletin, 98, 401–407, based on analysis of research results they conclude that:
* Reasonable placebos (pills) are as effective as psychotherapy.
* Minimally trained (2 hours to 2 days), uneducated, and inexperienced individuals are just as effective as highly trained, highly experienced psychotherapists [which definitely proves the effect of the "human factor" seeing that inexperienced but FULLY trained psychologists get notably less good results than experienced psychologists, probably because they are too burdened by their newly acquired methodology, while Hiatt and Hargrave proved on the basis of a study by Brown, Dreis, and Nace,1999, that the most experienced therapists - with +/- 18.2 years experience - also get less good results than medium experienced therapists - with +/- 12.9 years experience - probably because those most experienced therapists moved back to more strict methodology. And Christensen and Jacobsen, 1994, found that increasing the amount and type of training and experience that most therapists receive may lessen therapeutic effectiveness]. Actually there is a slightly negative correlation between therapists’ education and the effectiveness of psychotherapy. [Another study compared the effectiveness of applicants for secretarial jobs with that of highly trained and highly experienced therapists, and found no difference...]
* Self-help methods are just as effective and more cost-effective than psychotherapy.
* Untrained, uneducated, and inexperienced people are just as accurate when making clinical judgements as psychologists. Psychologists are only slightly more accurate when they use valid tests that the non-psychologists are unfamiliar with.
Anyway, in most cases of phobia caused by a trauma, and certain cases of depression, psychotherapy in its present forms MUST ultimately be ineffective considering the fact that it doesn't cure occurring disruptions of the body's energetic system, which will be discussed later.
Even though psychologists and psychiatrists may hide behind a facade of good intentions and reasonableness, Freudian psychotherapy, REBT and other psychotherapies can degenerate in a malicious power play between the "therapist" and the "patient", especially when the first tries to abolish certain notions the latter may have, even if these notions may be well founded yet don't fit in the therapist's views.
Although opinions differ, some recognized possible negative effects of psychotherapy and REBT are: exacerbation of a depression, suicidal ideas/gestures, hopelessness for any recovery, humiliation, low self-esteem, acting-out of sexual/aggressive impulses, increased dependency on the therapist, guilt may be absolved too much, altruism may collapse in efforts to build up the "self", heritage may be undermined in efforts to show how the past had bad effects, and the companions of the patient may be seen as antagonists because of the therapy.
In "Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change", 3rd ed. Wiley, New York 1986,
written by Lambert, Shapiro, & Bergin - on the effectiveness of psychotherapy - it is specified that
psychotherapy seems to work for many (but far from all) cases of depression and anxiety, (while no
comparative study has been made between the effects of psychotherapy and a mere sympathizing and realistic talk).
Nevertheless, as the "Handbook" mentions, studies of psychotherapy for depression
show that treated patients
at the end of therapy are still more depressed than the general population norms. Thus, remission is generally
NOT complete and generally one can't claim patients are "cured" by psychotherapy.
As for most cases of phobias caused by trauma, many cases of depression are also linked to a disturbance of the body's energetic system which will be discussed later. Pretending that such cases can be cured by psychotherapy (or drugs) is like saying that a broken leg can be cured by having a good talk and giving a pad on the back...
The "Handbook" also mentions that the "more severely disturbed borderline and psychotic" patients are more likely to "deteriorate", especially with therapies that are designed to challenge, break down, or undermine habitual coping strategies. In group settings, authoritarian leaders, using expressive techniques of confrontation or brutal honesty are associated with deterioration. While clinicians may observe negative effects of individual therapy on a marriage, systematic data supporting this outcome is lacking.
Deterioration in the National Institute of Mental Health's study of depression was somewhat higher for cognitive behavior therapy (10%) than other treatments (4%).
It also mentions that for alleged cases of schizophrenia, psychotherapy (especially verbal) has no advantages by itself. While anti-psychotic drugs appear to be somewhat "effective" (where according to the researchers patients show "positive symptoms" - we'll discuss how "effective" these drugs really are in a moment), and a combination of drugs and psychotherapy appear to be better than drugs alone.
These facts seem rather significant and disturbing to me. It means that not only are people arbitrarily given the label of being "psychotic" or "schizophrenic" (as I will show in a moment), the trend is that psychotherapy either doesn't help or gets them in significantly worse shape than before (if before therapy there were any mental problems at all)! Not only does it show to what extent psychologists don't understand certain cases that may appear to be mental, behavioral or emotional problems (but aren't necessarily), it also shows that an apparent absence of self-criticism has allowed for almost a century of "treatment" according to wrong principles. I'd call that criminal, considering the fact that it has been proven by the studies mentioned above that these treatments don't work in many cases. And as I already mentioned, studies that pretend to show effectiveness of psychotherapy for other cases fail a viable placebo verification/comparison.
Once you see all the facts like those named above about psychotherapy, it becomes easy to understand that in fact most psychotherapists are really willingly or unwillingly guilty of quackery, or at best of being heavily overpaid for what should be otherwise be a normal chat. Typically, unpublished data on one large sample of therapists shows that MOST therapists had very MUCH psychotherapy themselves (quite possibly 10 times that of an average client receiving "therapy"), and MUCH if not MOST of this after they become licensed practitioners. The research in question doesn't make it clear whether this is a sign of some sort of professional deformation or significant maladaptation and/or mental instability. Personally, I'd opt for the last two possibilities, which means we should probably see most psychotherapists as "victims" who promote methods that don't even work for themselves, instead of seeing them as die-hard criminals...
While Freud is guilty for giving a pseudo-scientific basis to psychology and psychiatry, and Allen guilty of inventing a method for ideological tyranny that puts the mind in a straitjacket, the CIA-funded Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron rather has the profile of a genuine bloodthirsty serial-killer, having a record of torturing many of his patients-victims, and even his own wife, in the most horrible ways, mainly in order to find successful techniques for controlling the human mind. Many of his patients were tortured to death under the banner of receiving "treatment". You can read more on the sinister Dr. Cameron and his crimes at the links given at the end of this article.
However, MOST of the "mainstream", i.e. conventional psychiatrists and psychologists are guilty of many crimes, including things like quackery, physical and mental abuse, deceit, murder, a.s.o.
Psychiatrists and psychologists are given medical education to a certain degree. That's why psychiatrists and most psychologists hold the title "MD", which stands for "Doctor of Medicine", while many psychologists only hold the title "Ph.D.", which stands for "Doctor of Philosophy". However, normally they are trained to diagnose only a limited number of physical diseases. As a consequence, they are often incapable of diagnosing correctly if something like a depression, or listless behavior is the result of some mental or emotional state or of a serious disease like cancer. It has been shown that the result of this is that up to 40% of all diagnoses of depression are misdiagnoses of common and uncommon physical illness. There are at least 75 diseases that first appear with mental, emotional, or behavioral symptoms. People with these diseases often get locked up in psychiatric hospitals...
For neuropsychologists things are a bit different, seeing that their job is to evaluate brain damage. They search for physical causes (f.i. through scanning the brain), give proof of the brain damage and determine if and how it can be treated, while as a general rule, even when not finding any physical problems, psychiatrists and psychologists (excluding neuropsychologists) will ASSUME a physical, mental or behavioral cause for symptoms that are ill defined to begin with (more on that in a moment), and then start "treating". Unfortunatley, even many neuropsychologists can get catched up in this methodology.
Typically, neither psychiatrists nor psychologists are ever taught how to administer a test or make a diagnosis for mental "health", only for mental "disease"... Psychiatrists and psychologists don't even agree amongst themeselves on what a healthy mind IS...
When psychiatrists and psychologists DO get their hands on a genuine case of mental or emotional disturbance, they make themselves guilty of preferring to prescribe "treatments" for problems that are obviously not correctly treated that way (of which present day psychotherapy methods are an example, as discussed above) if they exist at all in the way they define them. To illustrate the effects of common "treatments" like drugs or physical coercion methods such as straitjackets, isolation cells, etc...: it's obvious that when someone is stressed or greatly excited, prescribing a smack with a sledgehammer will "neutralize" that person for a while, which may be interpreted as the hammer having had a "calming" or "soothing"(!) effect, but for the person with a conscience it's clear that the last thing such a treatment does is healing that person from whatever problem he/she is suffering from and which caused the condition... Yet this type of treatment is precisely what is generally applied in conventional psychiatry. I'll say more on that in a moment.
Some psychiatrists and psychologists are also guilty of giving a pseudo-scientific basis to discrimination based on social characteristics, and consequently based on color, degree of wealth (or the absence of it), and what have you. This pseudo-science has become known as eugenics, and its consequence has been millions of forced sterilizations, abortions, and breaking up of families, as well as other inhumanities.
And as if being guilty of the most severe form of charlatanry, discrimination and murder
wouldn't be enough, there are also many cases of psychiatrists and psychologists abusing their victims
physically (in other ways then mentioned above) and sexually ...
How do they do it?
It's simple. All they have to do is say their victim is "mad", or to put it into the jargon: "mentally unstable".
Some people can truly be mentally handicapped or "retarded" and have a low IQ and/or incomprehensible behavior, while others can have neurological problems resulting in a wide range of problems like amnesia (loss of memory) or an altered perception of things, which can lead to incomprehensible behavior. This article is not written to denounce anything about these conditions or the admirable people who treat them, it is written to denounce the other so called "mental" conditions and the way they are generally treated.
In a fairly recent interview, Albert Ellis, the inventor of REBT, said that: "... all of us, were born disturbed ...". With such ideas, strictly speaking nobody is free of the risk of being physically, mentally and emotionally abused by psychologists or psychiatrists.
Worldwide there are millions of people involuntarily locked away, generally innocent, in mental institutions, rotting away under often abominable circumstances (even if the circumstances may be hygienically sound - as may be the case in most Western institutions - being locked away under restraint isn't exactly a holiday...).
While in the past, psychiatric institutions were ideal to clean the streets of people considered "embarrassing" to the community and/or society in general, or threatening to the ruling establishment, today the selection process is more subtle, where the accent is less put on cleaning up "embarrassing" people, but rather on people who don't behave in the way dictated by the "norm", and who could therefore become a threat to the ruling establishment (like people deeply involved in metaphysical practices that don't follow the established guidelines and therefore break the control the authorities may have over society), people who are a direct threat to the ruling establishment (like political activists), people who have genuine emotional problems for which conventional psychiatry has no healing solution, and the relatively few people who have a genuine physical mental disorder (f.i. Dow syndrome) and victims of mind-control practices whose programming is breaking.
Most of the people who suffer forced "treatment" are most often people who are already isolated to a certain degree, and will generally not have many people behind them to denounce their unjust treatment, or the fact that their lives are being destroyed.
Today, like in the past, in most cases locking someone up in a psychiatric institution or imposing some form of mental "treatment" on someone has hardly anything, if anything at all to do with the person's pretended psychiatric problems. In many cases the basic motto is: "If you want to kill the dog, just say it's mad...".
One of the most abused diagnoses in today's psychiatric practice that can be used to lock someone up against his/her will, is for example that of "psychosis". The term has been used for anyone who behaves in a way off the norm, or dares to talk about things that don't fit generally accepted views or standards, or that could be a threat to those in power. The official handbook of psychiatric pathology has things arranged in such a way that in fact the label can be stuck on ANYONE, sane, insane, I'd even say: alive or dead!
Today, "psychosis" is generally defined as: "...a non technical term used to describe a mental state, in which contact with reality is severely impaired. Symptoms include delusions, hallucinations, and bizarre behavior. Schizophrenia, manic, and delusional depression can produce psychosis. Psychosis can be chronic and lifelong, as in schizophrenia or it may be acute and temporary, as in a reaction to extreme stress."
So, in order to declare someone "psychotic", all that is necessary
is to show that the person suffers from "delusions", "hallucinations" OR
"bizarre behavior". So what is "bizarre behavior"? Some people would
already classify having an original haircut or dressing in
ways that deviate from the norm as "bizarre behavior", and as amazing as it may seem,
people have indeed been locked up in a psychiatric institution for such trivial things (although typically,
the official reason given for it would then be sought in one of the other "symptoms")... So what
about the rest? Are people who are obsessively passionate about things like football, cars,
women, men, cats or other, guilty of "bizarre behavior", and therefore
"psychotic"? According to the definition they ALL are!
And would directing traffic while being stark naked be "bizarre behavior", or should
doing so in a funny looking suit be classified as such? You could say the latter is accepted as
being normal behavior, but that doesn't objectively mean it actually IS...
And who is to say what is a "delusion"?
Some psychiatrists would define a delusion as being "a strong belief held on insufficient grounds".
The question then in turn is: "insufficient grounds" to whom?
In fact, determining if something is a delusion or not almost always depends on an arbitrary non-objective
judgement. If 200 years ago you would have said that humans could fly like a bird, if only they'd use
the right contraption for it, that would have been seen as a massive "delusion", therefore,
in today's psychiatric practice, you'd be considered suffering from a "psychosis"...
And if someone says that he "is" Bonaparte or related to the Queen of England, would that be a delusion? Again, that depends on who's judging about it. It may well be that the person affirming to be Bonaparte in fact is saying that he feels like this historic figure, even if he says he is the guy. And as far as being related to the Queen of England is concerned, her lineage is millennia old, and spreads out throughout the population. So yes, chances are not small at all for an average English or even European person to be (distantly) related to that woman. So what is a delusion? Saying these things are possible, or saying they aren't?
Other easy victims for being given the "delusional" label are those who are victims of physical abuse, torture and rape by prominent politicians, or worse, who are victims of mind-control, of which one result can be that they suffer from MPD, i.e. Multiple Personality Disorder, which has been renamed into DPS, Disassociate Personality Syndrome. Seeing that psychiatrists as a rule always choose the side of the one who they view having the most interest staying friends with, these abused people almost always end up being diagnosed as "psychotic".
Another "symptom" of psychosis that is extremely useful for such cases where something is covered up, is when someone can be said to be "not in touch with reality", which is about as substantial a description as the non-defining term "delusion".
However, it's great to use on those people who report on phenomena that aren't explained by conventional science or divert from the generally accepted norm. Thus, those who have seen UFOs, or even more, been contacted or abducted by ETs would typically be said to hallucinate and are therefore prime candidates for being stamped "psychotic", although there have been a few rare psychiatrists who have done serious research into such cases.
It's also a great label to use for anyone who is informed and talks about the mechanisms behind the world's political and economic manipulations by powers that are secret to the big public, and which is commonly known as the "NWO conspiracy". In fact, in the psychiatrist's textbooks it is exactly said in these terms, namely that if a person mentions knowing about or being the victim of a "conspiracy", THAT is a sure sign of a psychosis! It would then be called "paranoia", or "paranoid schizophrenia".... And most Westerners think that only the Russians would lock dissidents up in mental institutions to get a brainwash...
The term can also be fatal for people who have "enlightening" experiences of a metaphysical nature or who become aware of dimensions or realities that have not yet been successfully described in a way that is accepted by the scientific establishment or society in general. Such people can say things and "see" (or understand) things that would normally not be understood or seen by others, and consequently be said to "hallucinate", or to have "lost it".
Some people can even hear voices or see things that others don't see.
This then is seen as a sure sign of extreme psychosis.
But why would these phenomena have to be defined as abnormalities having physical or biochemical causes?
If that would be the case, it would be remarkable enough to do nothing about it, but simply study
the phenomenon!
In fact, it's well possible that many of these phenomena are simply related to paranormal perceptions,
something not recognized by the established "scientific" world (even though there are several
physicians who have established the PHYSICAL possibility and probability of such phenomena, see the metaphysical
links on this site). But there
are cases where the voices and hallucinations are a creation of the mind, yet perceived as
occurring outside the person perceiving them, while in other cases the voices come from split personalities,
as can be the case for victims of mind control.
Although often applied to people having remarkable experiences, anyone can be given one or more of the classifications of the definition used for psychosis as you see from the first examples, especially when presenting things in a way that is biased on "nailing" the person...
Typically, the very term "psychosis" is completely non-descriptive just like its alleged symptoms, as it comes from the Greek words "psyche" meaning "mind" and "osis" meaning "condition" or "process". Thus it means nothing more or less than "condition" or "process" of the mind. How could anybody associate such a name with a disease?
If you still have doubts that really ANYONE could be labelled "mentally insane", then let's take a look at what is said to be "schizophrenia". In the textbooks used by the psychiatrists it is stated that psychosis is a form of schizophrenia (and/or that the latter can cause the first). The term "schizophrenia" comes from the Greek words "skhizein" which means "to separate" or "to split", and "phrenos" which means "thought". Thus it stands for "split thought" while it has become popularly known to mean "split personality". It's a fact that some people can develop so called "splits" in their personalities, also called DPS (see above). However, through time, the diagnosis of "schizophrenia" has been given to cases that have little or nothing to do with DPS, and you'll be truly amazed to see how easy it is to declare someone - you or anyone else - of suffering from "schizophrenia", now also called "Neurobiological Disorders" (NBD)...
To get a picture of what over the years has been considered "schizophrenia", let's take a look at several textbooks that are all supposed to give its full "definition".
Neil R. Carlson, an authority on the matter, in his "Physiology of Behaviour", sixth edition, 1998, defines schizophrenia as "a serious mental disorder characterized by disordered thoughts, delusions, hallucinations and often bizarre behavior.".
Notice that the definition of each term used in this definition is greatly open
to discussion, as with the definition of psychosis. As a matter of fact, there is hardly any real
difference between this definition of schizophrenia and that of psychosis as given above, where the
only difference could be said to be the use for psychosis of the term "contact with reality severely
impaired", while for schizophrenia "disordered thought" is seen as a typical symptom.
Besides the fact that both can be attributed to just the same thing, the question arises: what can
actually be said to be "disordered thought"? Could we say it means "illogical"? If that's right, then
we should acknowledge that maybe "treating" someone who suffers from extreme stress, by tying
that person into a straitjacket or exposing him/her to other forms of physical abuse and therefore
increasing the amount of stress isn't exactly "logical", and therefore a prime example of
"disordered thought". Are the psychiatrists using these practices
therefore all schizo? According to their own definition, THEY ARE!!!
In fact, this definition of schizophrenia offers nothing that can be used to determine a true
mental abnormality, in a way that would be free of arbitrary non-objective judgement.
So if the above definition seems too vague or requiring an all too subjective judgement, then
let's look if we can find something more
substantial, like say in the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders" also known as DSM
of the American Psychiatric Association.
In its second edition, known as DSM-II, published in 1968, schizophrenia is said to consist of
"characteristic disturbances of thinking, mood, or behavior", (p. 33).
Hmmm...., I guess then that includes the fact that I never walk underneath a ladder...
Can't say this definition will make us be any more objective than Carlson's.
Their 3rd edition, published in 1980, known as DSM-III, says: "The limits of the concept of Schizophrenia are unclear...", (p. 181). Wow, that surely helps filling the gaps left open by the first DSM definition...
The revision of that edition published in 1987, DSM-III-R, will surely help us then, no? It says: "It should be noted that no single feature is invariably present or seen only in Schizophrenia"... (p. 188). Ahhhhha....?!?
To make things easier, 5 different types of schizophrenia are said to exist,
namely the paranoid type, disorganized type, catatonic type, undifferentiated type and residual type.
What's neat about it is that someone can always be made to fit in the so called "undifferentiated type"
if he doesn't fit in any of the others. That type is described as "a form of schizophrenia that
is characterized by a number of schizophrenic symptoms such as delusion(s), disorganized behavior,
disorganized speech, flat affect, or hallucinations, but does not meet the criteria for any other type
of schizophrenia.". It brings us right back to where we started our search for a substantial definition...
In his book "The Complete Guide to Psychiatric Drugs", Edward Drummond, M.D., Associate Medical Director at Seacoast Mental Health Center in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, states: "There is no accepted etiology [cause] of schizophrenia although there have been many theories. [...] The unfortunate truth is that we don't know what causes schizophrenia or even what the illness is.".
Because nobody knows what schizophrenia IS, it's customary to give this diagnose purely based on the symptoms attributed to it. And as we've seen, these are totally non-descriptive, and can only be used in non-objective ways.
Thus, in other words, they've got nothing even identifiable for schizophrenia. NOTHING! So everyone is schizo, and ALL should be treated for it! Can you see the magic formula of a booming business here?
On top of things, while there is no substantial or physical way to describe or even identify schizophrenia, psychiatrists have nevertheless chosen to rename it into "Neurobiological Disorder" (NBD), that way suggesting that it would be a clearly defined physical, i.e. neurobiological disorder, which it isn't. Seeing how non-defined schizophrenia is, one can only conclude it isn't even a disorder at all...
In any case, as you can see from the examples, none of the conditions named above, if existing at all, are caused by something that one could logically hope to cure with "anti-psychotic" drugs, i.e. mind-numbing and incapacitating substances that can reduce its consumers to plant-like zombies (when high doses are applied), at least suppressing their mind and cause things like speech impairment, thus making it impossible for the person to function properly.
And this brings me to the essence of the crime of the bulk of psychiatrists: the rape of the mind.
The comparison between sexual rape and mental rape should prove enlightening. While both are despicable and deeply traumatizing to the victims, it must be acknowledged that while during sexual rape one is violated in ones most intimate sexual parts, mental rape intrudes on that which one has as the most intimate part of ones entire being: ones mind.
A trauma that is the consequence of sexual rape is mostly related to
the reaction of the mind, and the physical disturbance and phobia it has
caused. This type of disturbance can in many cases be solved by EFT, as
we will describe below. On a physical level, generally the consequences
should not be durable.
However, with mental rape through the use of pharmaceutical means or electroshocks the
attack is directly on someone's most intimate being, and in many cases
with a permanent effect due to the nature of the drugs used, besides the fact that
in some cases someone may be forced to take drugs or be inflicted electroshocks against
his/her will which adds to the rape also being violated on a physical level.
Although in all three cases the results are devastating, which one do you think is worse? And what would you think of having all three at the same time, as frequently happens...?
Besides the mental violence, the sheer physical violence that is used in psychiatric institutions can hardly be underestimated. Doctors, nurses and warders can assault and physically abuse patients, at will, virtually unpunished. If the patient attempts to fight back, this will be used against him/her, where the patient is accused of having a hysteric fit... While simple resistance as such is seen as "abnormal behavior" which may mean that someone who is detained against his/her will may be detained even longer... By the way, refusing to take mind debilitating or otherwise sickening drugs is also considered such resistance and can also have consequences for a "patient's" detention. Drugs can also be given by force intravenously while otherwise psychiatric nurses check the patient having swallowed their drugs (the trick you see in movies of someone pretending to swallow a mind debilitating pill doesn't work in real-world psychiatric institutes).
What is most frightening is that the physical and mental abuse is nearly completely
invisible to the public. Even heavily criminal prisoners have the right to see their lawyers, daily if necessary.
If a prisoner would have been severely beaten, his/her lawyer could notice this and request
an inquiry or other measure.
But "mental" patients can be isolated indefinitely, with no appeal possible, at the wits
of the "doctor" in charge... This means any physical harm can be done to the patient,
without anybody ever having to find this out...
And when an ex-patient wishes to file a complaint of physical or mental abuse,
he/she will find it almost impossible to be taken serious, seeing that his/her accusations can all
too easily be dismissed as craziness... Tough luck.
You might say: "hold a minute, isn't everybody allowed to see a lawyer when
he/she wants to, even when in a psychiatric institution?".
Well, basically ... yes. But when someone is locked up against his/her will
in a psychiatric institution, this often happens without a warning. Once locked up, if the "patient"
is lucky enough not to be drugged up or electroshocked to the point where it becomes impossible
to speak or think straight, or when not simply put in a straitjacket and/or into an isolation cell,
he/she must be fortunate enough to find a phone, money for it, and a good lawyer's phone number.
If he/she isn't insured or doesn't have
the financial means to pay a lawyer, contacting an independent lawyer is generally totally useless, while arranging
for one who will work free of charge as is possible in some countries, may bring all sorts of formality problems
that make swift action impossible.
Depending on the country, in that case, the patient will have to do with a lawyer that is attributed
by the authorities in order to handle the formalities for locking him up. Generally, these lawyers work closely
with the psychiatric institutions, and are the last to help a patient out of problems with them.
As the saying goes, the patient then finds himself in a "cul-de-sac"...
As shown above, anyone can be diagnosed with a "psychosis" or "schizophrenia" and locked up involuntary. But while for getting these diagnoses, generally some event of a certain magnitude has occurred, the psychiatrists and psychologists have managed to put at risk anyone who happens to live through an emotional low and makes this known. The diagnose that is used in that case: "depression".
For years there has been a worldwide campaign with the motto: "depression is an illness". Thanks to this cunning quasi-diagnose billions of people have been prescribed mind-suppressive drugs or, in some countries, the middle-ages-like electroshock therapy, while there are many cases where people have been locked up in psychiatric institutions based on that diagnose, in many cases against their will. It's the mental "disease" that is diagnosed the most of all in the world. While in the best case the drugs can have effects comparable to light narcotics like Morphine or Marihuana, with the drugs as well as the electroshock therapy the main effect is that comparable to being whacked by a sledgehammer.
Why do psychiatrists want to make us believe this is a way to treat a condition of depression? And why do they have to make us believe it's a disease at all, seeing that it isn't?
Like no other, the retired neurologist Fred A. Baughman explains why depression (which also used to be called "melancholia") is not a disease, just as is the case for ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder), anxiety, OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder) and schizophrenia. In an interview with Insight Magazine he says:
"... this same psychiatric community says even depression is a disease resulting from a chemical imbalance. They also say that OCD is a disease with a known chemical abnormality of the brain. In neither case is there proof to support either claim. Through the years, though, they've gotten to fudging their line a bit, saying instead: 'Well, it's a psychiatric disorder'."
And in a letter he wrote to U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher in response to Satcher's Report on Mental Illness, he writes:
"Having gone to medical school, and studied pathology — disease, then diagnosis — you and I and all physicians know that the presence of any bona fide disease, like diabetes, cancer or epilepsy, is confirmed by an objective finding — a physical or chemical abnormality. No demonstrable physical or chemical abnormality: no disease!
You also know, I am sure, that there is no physical or chemical abnormality to be found in life, or at autopsy, in 'depression, bipolar disorder and other mental illnesses'. Why then are you telling the American people that 'mental illnesses' are 'physical' and that they are due to 'chemical disorders'?"
Baughman concludes his six-page letter to Satcher by saying that:
"Your role in this deception and victimization is clear. Whether you are a physician so unscientific that you cannot read their [the American Psychiatric Association's] contrived, 'neurobiologic' literature and see the fraud, or whether you see it and choose to be an accomplice — you should resign."
To make it completely clear, let's recap that: THERE SIMPLY HAS NEVER BEEN GIVEN ANY PHYSICAL OR CHEMICAL PROOF that conditions called "depression", "bipolar disorder" and other mental illnesses exist! NEVER! So much for psychiatry or psychology being "exact science"...
The fact that a depression can be caused by a disease like cancer doesn't mean depression as such is a disease. And the fact that certain depressions are "maintained" (not "caused") by disturbances in the body's energy system, which is shown by the fact that they can be resolved with EFT (which I'll discuss in a moment) also doesn't mean that depression is a mental or physical disease. In that case it just means it's a condition that can be resolved by a manipulation on the body together with the mind.
Some psychiatrists would claim that the fact that psychiatric drugs stop (or greatly reduce) the thinking, emotions, or behavior that is attributed to the mental illness that is treated, proves that there is a biological cause of that mental illness. However, this is one of the most silly reasoning ever seen.
To illustrate this, I could give the example of how although knocking someone out with a sledgehammer stops any unwanted behavior or symptoms the person shows, this doesn't mean the behavior or symptoms have "biological" causes (also called "endogenous"), other than the fact we're dealing with a living entity that can be stopped in its actions by brutal force. That its actions can be stopped doesn't say anything about the question if the living entity was showing "abnormal" behavior or that the "treatment" got it "cured".
However, some people would object to that example that this is not the way psychiatrists "treat" their patients, and that their treatments don't knock people out. Yet this is simply not true, since just like the type of drugs commonly used, giving someone electroshocks and locking someone up in a straitjacket, on a bed, or in a safe-closet are just as violent and neutralizing. Nevertheless, I'll give an example that may be more clarifying as far as the use of drugs is concerned:
Let's say someone is doing something you don't
like. Say that person is doing something like playing the piano (unwanted noise),
having a loud party (unwanted noise and display of liveliness), or continuously complaining
about his boss at work (unwanted critical approach, especially if that boss is you)...
Because you want that person to stop, you force him to take a drug that
would disable that person so severely that the only thing he
can do is discontinue his activity. The result would f.i. be that the fingers of the piano-player can't
find the piano keys anymore while the party person is made completely lethargic-comatose, and the
complainer is made to forget ALL his memories while also being given a speech impairment or is simply
robbed of his capacity of critical thinking...
All in all pretty close to the sledgehammer treatment, no?
But would this mean that the piano playing, the party-enjoying person and the complainer
were "cured" by the drugs, or that those activities were caused by a disease anyway?
Yet this is precisely what the
psychiatric community would like us to believe! And by the way, ALL psychiatric drugs function precisely
in the way as described above, it's not exactly constructive stuff...
The crime of the bulk of psychiatrists and certain research institutions is that they know very well that conditions like "depression", "anxiety" and other such diagnoses are not diseases. They know that - when not caused by a physical disease like cancer or a physical deformation - they're a logical result of "negative stress", but they hide it from the unknowing public.
All aspects of stress symptoms and what its effects are have been known since at least the 1st world war. This includes the true nature of depression. Some of the most advanced research has f.i. been done by the British Tavistock institution, which did research on WW1 soldiers who suffered severe war-traumas, like "shell-shock"... These soldiers would be so traumatized that f.i. they couldn't keep their arms and legs still, trembling like a leaf in the wind, or would have a whole varied range of phobias, like fear of crowds or loud sounds.
What's more, there has been plenty of clandestine and secret research into how humans behave when under stress, as done f.i. in the concentration camps by Nazis like Joseph Mengele, by the CIA in their MK-Ultra project ("MK" stands for the American-German "Mind Kontrolle") and other secret organizations.
Continuous severe stress can't only lead to what is called a "depression", it can also lead to hallucinations, and as a consequence odd behavior. In that case, a person suffering from this escalated form of stress would be called "psychotic", in fact a quasi-diagnose. It can also lead to autism.
Criminal behavior is ALWAYS related to stress. It may come from stress
caused by the wish to obtain the means for living while it's viewed by a person these
means are out of his reach unless criminal methods are used to acquire them,
which may result in robbery or other types of theft. It may come from stress caused by the wish to be loved, which
may result in rape. Or it may come from stress (generally at an early age) that caused such
a big frustration that the result is highly evil acts, like freak murders, although such
acts can also be related to what some would call "demonic possession", where
the "demon(s)" are not exactly those of the Bible, but entities occurring on
different planes of existence, i.e. in other dimensions. Obviously, it's most rare to see such
"possession" of a person's mind recognized by a psychiatrist or psychologist,
even though to be convinced such things exist it merely suffices to visit a genuine medium (who will easily
prove his genuineness by the sheer quality of his performance) or an appropriate voodoo ceremony...
By the way, any of the reasons to become criminal described above applies in part to many
of the criminal psychiatrists and psychologists, who may think that in order to provide for
their livelihood they have no other options than
to pursue their criminal line of action, who look for recognition (of the bad kind),
who are frustrated in an evil
way, or who are even possessed in some cases.
If pushed to the extreme, like by consistent torture, stress can lead to a complete disassociation of ones personality, which may result in a DPS (Disassociated Personality Syndrome). It's this phenomena that makes so called "mind control" possible, where a person can be made to do anything without the person's main personality ever being aware of it (see the links at the end of this article for more on this subject).
In such extreme circumstances, stress can also lead to hallucinations. Fortunately, relatively few (but surprisingly many!) people are ever confronted with such extreme forms of stress, and generally people are dealing with lesser forms of stress that can nevertheless have a huge impact on their behavior and personalities.
One important subject that must be addressed in this context is the question of to what extent people can be held responsible for their actions that may result in a crime, if we have to acknowledge that conditions like psychosis and schizophrenia don't exist.
Well..., what's wrong with holding people unaccountable for their actions due to serious unresolved negative stress and its potential effects, such as hallucinations? Acknowledging that these can be the result of stress leads to a much more rational assessment of things, and allows for help that will be all the more accurate and efficient.
What most people don't know and what can make an enormous difference in understanding things, is that there is "positive stress" and "negative stress".
A typical example of positive stress would f.i. be physical stress such as occurs when jogging or working out in the gym. Another example would be the stress occurring when you have to solve a problem on your work, while having no significant constraints and having all the necessary tools at your disposal.
These are forms of stress that a normal person can generally handle favorably. In many cases it can even stimulate the person to higher achievements. That's why I call it "positive stress".
Now a typical example of negative stress would f.i. be the case where a paralyzed person in a wheelchair would face the need to move out of somewhere quickly because someone is threatening his/her life with an axe. Normally, a healthy non-handicapped person would run away quickly, or if trained in martial arts, disarm the thug. However, this is not possible for the person in the wheelchair. This then gives non-beneficial unresolved negative stress, mostly mental. It's a form of stress that a person can not handle.
Research with animals such as rats has shown that stress that can't be handled leads to symptoms like paralysis of the muscles and modified behavior.
What happened during the experiments was that two male rats were confronted with each other. When after a fight for domination, one of the rats was defeated, it was noted that this rat would have created a certain chemical substance in his blood that would cause muscle paralysis to a certain degree. In the long run, this paralysis and accompanying lethargic behavior could even lead to his death, while it has been noted that continuously negatively stressed animals (like humans) grow less big than those who don't continuously live through negative stress.
Other typical examples of negative stress can f.i. include stress that is provoked by the loss of a loved one, the breaking up of a love relation, losing ones job with little perspective of replacing it (like when nearly at the age of retirement), losing all ones possessions as through some disaster, a.s.o. Negative stress will occur in these instances depending on how well or not the person can deal with the stress causing situation.
It's not being able to handle and resolve negative-stress which leads to depression. Thus, it's not a "disease" caused by a biochemical reaction, although chemicals produced by the mind and the body are involved. While a depression is nothing a human can't handle if only he/she can handle the stress that causes it in the first place.
Any medication for depression will at best have the same effect an anaesthetic has during an operation: it simply suppresses the symptoms of trauma (like the suppression of pain caused by the cutting of flesh) but in the process it also debilitates the brain in the same ways as in the examples of the piano-player, the party-man and the complainer given earlier.
Any medication for depression is therefore hardly more "effective" than alcohol or certain mild narcotic drugs, which people often use intuitively or consciously to combat symptoms of stress. As a matter of fact, both of these will generally do less harm (when taken in limited dosages) to a person than f.i. a drug like Prozac, which is known to have serious behavioral and physical side effects, besides the fact that it also contains fluoride, which is a product that is poisonous - another obscured scientific fact (read more about Prozac at the links given at the end of this article, and read more about fluoride here). And psychiatric drugs are dangerously addictive. Stopping "cold turkey" with the consumption of these drugs can be more dangerous than for Heroin or Crack (both hard drugs), because while in the latter cases it results in a reaction where the person will try everything humanly possible to obtain the drugs, in the case of psychiatric drugs, the person can become disproportionately aggressive for no apparent reason, not only towards others, but also towards himself, which in extreme cases can have fatal results...
There are cases where drugs may appear to help, even though they are destructive and addictive. When someone suffers from unresolved negative stress caused by a temporary condition, like when having to deal with a deadline at work, or when having temporary problems with a person, by suppressing that negative stress with drugs for the time the stress is present it may appear like the drugs were effective once the circumstances that lead to the temporary negative stress are gone. In fact, the drugs just suppressed the symptoms and lessened to a certain extent the person's mental capacities and abilities to deal with the problems causing the negative stress.
Interestingly, while most people think that things like depression, anxiety, phobias, emotional blockages and such are caused by the mind, this is only partly true, as it has been shown that the entire body plays an essential role in them.
What happens is that once an event has taken place that ignites negative
stress beyond a certain threshold, this disturbs
the body's energy system. While this energy system of "meridians" is well
known in Chinese medicine, in conventional medicine one is only little
by little taking notice of this well proven aspect of the human body.
Certain people's energy systems are better at evacuating the disturbances than other's,
for various reasons.
However, the saintly psychologist Dr. Roger J. Callahan found out that by applying a few manipulations to the body, concentrating on these meridians, while focussing the mind in a particular way on the problem at hand, most disturbances related to emotional-mental conditions can be made to vanish... generally in only minutes, while tougher cases may need repeated and consistent application over a period of time.
Once this disturbance of the body's energy system is removed, when the person is again confronted with what would normally lead to an uncontrollable stressful reaction, he will be able to act in a balanced way, emotionally unhindered, while it's not so that when a person is cured of a fear of height caused by a bad parachute jump, the person would subsequently dive out of a flying plane without chute. It's the bad emotion that goes away, while the intelligence stays...
With this method a wide range of problems can be truly "treated" and cured, such as phobias (fear of water, crowds, small spaces, failure, spiders, a.s.o.), depressions, alcoholism, and even certain cases of physical problems such as overweight, constipation, lupus, and other. It can even be used to improve ones sport-performance or other performances related to emotions.
This technique is called EFT, which stands for Emotional Freedom technology.
It goes beyond the scope of this article to give a complete description of it, so for more information
about it please consult the links given at the end of this article.
Even if you don't particularly suffer of any mental instabilities, I
can highly recommend to check it out and try doing a few sessions yourself,
if only to improve your golf scores!
Seeing that this is a fairly new technique, one can't blame practicing
psychiatrists and psychologists not knowing about EFT. But, every devoted
practitioner can know that depression is caused by stress, and that treating
the symptoms instead of the cause is not going to do a job that will ever
be truly satisfying or wholesome, much less so if these symptoms are treated
with mind-numbing and incapacitating drugs, electroshocks, or by putting patients into straitjackets,
tiny padded cells, safe-lockers, or harassing them through unreasonable stress causing interrogations,
degradation, humiliation,
discrimination, defamation, disgrace, outlawing, social degradation, absence of rights, uncertainty of future,
life threatening provocations and "treatments", assaults, stigmatizing or yet other psychological or physical
torture methods...
And since these methods can hardly be said to cure the problem,
the only way to treat people in a wholesome way, besides by using EFT, is to take as much as
possible away the stress that lies
at the origin of depression or other symptoms that are caused by the stress, not by adding
to it with any of the torture methods named above or by incapacitating the mind.
Another simple fact that is generally not given attention to is that one of the reasons why a person may not be able to handle stress that would otherwise seem benign may be a lack of minerals intake through nutrition.
Mineral deficiency can cause mental problems, depression and unstable behavior as has been shown in research that was done on prisoners. It was noted during this research that those who would have adequate doses of mineral supplements would show less unstable behavior, less relapses in criminal behavior, no or little depression, and over all get better results with a whole range of things.
Thus, making sure you get the right dose of daily minerals will make you many times more stress resistant and in some people it can make depression disappear completely. This too, is something that most psychiatrists won't tell you, they'd rather subscribe a more expensive "medicine", thus serving the pharmaceutical industry.
A mineral that is particularly important for stress resistance/relief is magnesium, which helps muscles to relax. Other important minerals that should be consumed in extra doses besides as found in trace minerals capsules or liquids are: calcium, iron, zinc, potassium, while one should preferably make sure never to be deficient in any mineral, as all are involved in one or the other process of the body. It may be necessary to do an elaborate medical test to determine what mineral deficiencies may occur for someone. Consult your physician for this.
Nevertheless, even if the occurrence of a depression has been made
possible by a mineral deficiency, then this still doesn't mean the depression is
actually caused by it. Therefore, it still doesn't imply that a pharmaceutical
treatment other than mineral supplementation would be a solution, while
the first would only be a symptoms suppresser while the latter would help
the body to restore it's restoring capacities...
Where does the crime take place?
The attack on the mind occurs all over the world, by psychiatrists as well as general practitioners, in private practices as well as in institutions.
The first psychiatric institution in the world was probably the one called Maristane Sidi Frej, which was built by the sultan Youssef Ibn Yacoub and has been in was in use until 1944. It probably served as a a model for the first psychiatric hospital in the Western world, which was set up in Valencia, Spain, in 1410.
Even these first institutions already basically served to get rid of
unwanted people, besides making it possible to put away people with behavioral
problems and (sometimes) with genuine physical-mental problems.
Why is the crime done?
As mentioned earlier, in the past the prevailing motive for isolating people for so called "treatment" of their mental condition, was getting rid of people who were considered "embarrassing" to the community and/or society in general, or threatening to the ruling establishment. Besides the local wanderers and bums, this could also include people whose family wanted to get rid of for various reasons, not least for money, while sometimes someone could simply be too difficult to live with, and instead of organizing proper care it would be easier to dispose of the person in a mental ward.
Today, basically the same people can be victims of the psycho-criminals, while it happens more often that people with a behavior that is off the norm are being aimed, as mentioned above.
During its Communist years, the USSR was notorious for its "psychiatric treatment" and "re-education" of political dissidents.
However, today the attack on the minds of the population is more massive than ever, and billions of people are abusively labelled as suffering from "depression", "anxiety", "psychosis" or ADHD.
Children are said to suffer from ADHD when displaying a lack of concentration in school or excessive activity, both of which can often be caused by the same things that cause depression, i.e. negative stress, if they're not simply caused because what they are being taught in school is too boring, not adapted to their abilities or fields of interest, or simply done badly, while a lack of concentration can also be caused by a lingering physical problem or disease, such as the flu.
ADHD as such is not a disease, as is so well explained by Fred A. Baughman (see above). In most cases it's a healthy reaction! Likewise, many super-intelligent children often have very bad results in class, simply because they're bored stiffless, until someone notices their higher intelligence and makes them have appropriate and more advanced things to learn.
The most important reason why the real causes and nature of the alleged ADHD, depression,
and its possibly resulting complications (like the non-conditions psychosis and schizophrenia) are obscured
is that those who have the power to decide
and manipulate what people are told don't want people to know, and will do anything to achieve that.
They do this by controlling what information gets to the public at large through secret organizations
and societies (of which many leading psychiatrists are members), government regulation and the media,
like TV, (science-) magazines, newspapers, a.s.o.
The reason for this censorship is that it serves their purpose for several reasons:
a.
By claiming a child has the "mental" non-disease" ADHD, this avoids acknowledging that maybe what is taught in class is not appropriate for the child, which varies from child to child. It also avoids acknowledging possibly existing deeper problems that may cause a lack of concentration or excessive activity. Many of the reasons that can lead to this are the same as those leading to depression. The reason for not acknowledging them is also the same as for the causes of depression (see below).
By claiming someone has the "depression disease", this avoids acknowledging the stress factor that may have caused a (temporary) "low spirit".
These days depression would typically occur as the result of stress
as caused by things like:
- Financial problems
- Dis-appreciation of an individual's worth (lack of love and respect)
- Unemployment (generally actually financial problems or a dis-appreciation
of an individual's worth, in other words lack of love and respect)
- Problems with personal relations (incl. sexual problems)
- Unresolved health problems
- Many forms of repression of human behaviour, this includes serious
things like not being allowed to voice ones opinion (see the journalists
or other people who are killed for saying or writing what is not tolerated
by those in power), not being allowed to broadcast on the airwaves (for
TV or radio) without a licence, and many other prohibitions. It also includes
trivial things like having to adapt ones behaviour in restrained ways for
certain community circumstances, being regarded as "odd" for dressing (or
behaving) in ways not conform to general standards; traffic jams, a.s.o. It's these
types of things that can typically lead to a general depression for which there doesn't
seems to be an apparent reason (but the other reasons can also have this effect).
- Loss of a loved one
- Break up of a love relation, divorce.
- Problems of various types at work
- The (general) misery in the world
- Spiritual unfulfilment, or a spiritual void. I.e., the absence of a strong spiritual
support or philosophy.
- and many more reasons
By imposing upon people the fact that THEY are suffering from a disease instead of acknowledging the fact that they may have a simple adaptability/compatibility problem, and by imposing that they should accept the world "as it is", is used to put people into the ranks, basically manipulating them into obeying robots. Acknowledging that what is mentioned in the list above would lead to stress and consequently to depression would also mean some real answers must be given to the matters at hand, and some of these answers would unveil the terrible manipulation that is going on in the world, also known as the NWO conspiracy. This now, the authorities will try to avoid at all cost. As Stalin once said: "the most dangerous weapon is knowledge...". Understanding the causes of ones stress and depression will eventually lead to that knowledge...
b.
By claiming that "depression", ADHD, psychosis and schizophrenia are diseases, this makes it possible to give a "treatment" = MONEY!!!
Where this "treatment" can be given by pharmaceutical means, the stakes are incredible. The number of different drugs to treat mental conditions that have been created is enormous, and it has become a business of many billions of dollars...
Don't think this wouldn't be enough reason to sacrifice the lives of millions. The power of money and the pharmaceutical industry over politics is of such importance, that the pharmaceutical industry has even succeeded in outlawing the distribution of knowledge about the health benefits of things like vitamins, minerals and enzymes in association with selling such products. In some countries serious restrictions exist on importing such products, even when not produced by them. Slowly but surely in the EU a law is being introduced that will ban all sorts of such natural products or outlaw such products being sold without a doctor's prescription...
The ECT (electroconvulsive therapy, i.e. electroshock therapy) business in the USA alone is good for a business of $5.000.000.000 dollars. It will take incredible determination to outlaw this 100% criminal physical and mental abuse that leaves ALL those to whom it has been applied crippled to a more or less severe degree...
And last but not least, the mental institutions themselves make a terrific business off the backs of their unfortunate victims. For locking up someone against his/her will in abominable circumstances they charge prices that would make 5 star hotel-resorts blush! Generally, these charges are billed to their victim's insurance companies that can offer the creditworthiness their clients often never could at such prices. Thus, some psychiatric institutions have invented a new profession where individuals are hired to "spot" potential candidates who are well covered by these insurances. Through cunning and trickery they find out if someone is well insured and when this is the case they will do everything to get that person interned, i.e. locked up involuntary. If you say: "but that's a scam!", then yes, that's a scam, but it happens, and it can only happen because of the criminal looseness of society towards the psychiatric profession...
No kidding! Who'd dare to say the psychiatric or pharmaceutical industry would be a
safe keeper of our health, let alone our mental health! They have an offer they think is too good to refuse...
Rounding up the crime.
Normally, when a crime case has been successfully solved, as we can modestly claim is the case here, you expect to be able to have the criminal(s) arrested and judged. Not so, in this case. Just trying to get such a thing done could expose oneself to the very risk of being robbed of ones own mind...
If we want to see justice in this field, we'll have to do it ourselves.
It means that we must stop letting ourselves be fooled by those said to be the greatest
specialists in that field.... we know who they are!
Philior
July 17, 2002
Last updated: September 4, 2002
You can read more on the subject of psycho-crime at the following links:
* The psycho files. All on psychiatry crimes.
* Mind control. All on how the mind can be subjugated
and controlled by applying certain methods. Most of this information touches the subject of psychiatry.
If you think that some essential info or link is missing on this page, please, let me know!
Total amount of visits to this website:
Send this page to a friend!
Click here or on the ET.
If it's not automatically inserted in your message, please copy + paste this URL: http://3rdDimension.online.fr/ .
[ Home- Articles | Links]
http://3rdDimension.online.fr/
Copyright © 2002-2003 3rdDimension