Mood Swings

I'll hang out with Healy and Lane anyday....I know my brain was fried on all this crap...no doubt in my mind at all.

I'm finally recovering my sanity, unfortunately my body is suffering from the detox...freedom from drugs saved my brain, but my body is having a hard time catching up...

you guys need to study withdrawal...it's really ugly and you know nothing about it!!

I've taken 5 years to do it and educated my kind and cooperative psychiatrist along the way who kindly afforded me my right to self-determination after I realized that all that Healy says is right on and I was never mentally ill to begin with.

In the 1950's, an American TV show host shocked the nation and made everyone laugh by testing a product he advertised on his show. The host was, I think, Arthur Godfrey; the product was dog food.

We applaud the work of Dr. Healy and other physicians who ask hard questions, of Senator Grassley and the patient-consumer movement in exposing the ties between pharma and the mental health industry.

Exposing and cutting pharma perks might not be as effective as establishing - let's call it the Fido Rule: Anyone who writes assessments of drugs the pharmaceutical companies have on offer must *try* them.

Ready for your medicine, Dr. Ghaemi?

Bipolar Disorder (manic-depressive illness) has been defined as a major affective mood disorder in which one alternates between the mental states of deep and brutal depression and embellished elation.
These mental states can last for months in some bipolar disorder patients. These cyclical episodes are a catalyst for noticeable psychosocial impairment. Also, the episodes of both manic phases as well as depressive ones can last anywhere from weeks to months.
Bipolar Disorder also affect’s one’s cognition, emotions, perceptions, and behavior- along with psychosomatic presentations (such as pain with depressive episodes, for example). It is thought to be due to a physiological dysfunctional brain in one affected with bipolar by many.
Yet Bipolar allows for exceptional abilities when a bipolar person is in their manic phase at times, as illustrated on the following link: (http://www.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=mad-genius.htm&url=http:/...).
The etiology for bipolar disorder is unknown. As many as half of those suspected as having a bipolar are thought to have at least one parent with some sort of mood disorder similar to bipolar disorder, which suggests a genetic predisposition may be present.
Because of the complexity associated with bipolar disorder, greater than 50 percent of those afflicted are misdiagnosed as major depression, or perhaps schizophrenia.
It is also believed that bipolar presents itself with symptoms associated with the definition of bipolar when one is between the ages of 15 and 25 years old. The disorder was entered in the psychiatrists’ bible, the DSM, in 1980, although bipolar disorder is thought to have existed for quite some time.
Also, those with bipolar are thought to be in possession of heightened creativity during their manic phases, as well as they have accelerated growth of their neurons. This is not necessarily a bad thing, it seems. Conversely, those with bipolar disorder experience up to 3 times the number of depressive episodes as manic ones.
Research has determined that as many as 15 to over 30 percent of bipolar patients commit suicide if they are left untreated, or undertreated. Also, as many as half of those affected with bipolar also have at times severe substance abuse issues along with their bipolar as well. Co-morbid medical conditions should be taken into consideration when evaluating one suspect of, or having bipolar disorder.
Bipolar patients are also often experiencing anxiety issues that vary, and are treated often as a result of these medical issues. The disorder varies as far as severity goes- with some bipolar patients being more severely affected than others. In fact, there are at least 6 classifications of bipolar, according to the DSM.
Bipolar patients are thought to be symptomatic half of their lives. As stated previously, the depressive episodes occur more frequently than manic ones. When symptomatic, bipolar patients are thought to be rather disabled, according to some, when in their depressive state in particular. The diagnosis has become more frequent recently. In one decade, the assigned diagnosis of bipolar rose from being about 25 per 100 thousand people to being 1000 per 100,000 people.
Most diagnosed with bipolar are not diagnosed based on solid, comprehensive, or psychiatric review that is often absent of valid or standard diagnostic methods. Some believe as many as 5 percent of the human population may be affected by bipolar disorder- which may include as many as 12 million people in the United States. This is if the diagnostic criteria developed by others were to be fully utilized. An emphasis should be implemented by the health care provider to utilize available clinical evidence, and review this scientific literature.
A subjective questionnaire called the Mental Status Examination is often utilized when diagnosing one suspected has having bipolar disorder. Many believe the diagnosis has increased recently due to the progressive treatment options now available. It is an argument of increased awareness versus over-diagnosis.
Yet the diagnosis is vague, as children and adolescents are often absent in research with bipolar. Also, there is not any objective diagnostic testing to rely upon for bipolar. There is also a mental diagnosis of what is called mixed depressive disorder, which is one with depression who also has minimal manic episodes.
Many younger than 18 years of age are prescribed atypical anti-psychotics as first line treatment, which is largely not recommended as treatment options. In fact, close to half a million of those younger than 18 years of age are prescribed the atypical anti-psychotic Risperdal alone, it has been determined. The class of medications overall is thought to be prescribed to about 10 percent of those non-adults thought to have bipolar.
While not recommended, about a half of all those assessed as being bipolar are prescribed antidepressants, such as SSRIs, as first line treatment. It has been suggested that this class of drugs has decreased the risk of suicide attempts compared with other classes of antidepressants for close to 20 years.
Yet tricyclic antidepressants have been determined to be efficacious in over half of those diagnosed with bipolar - with a greater amount of research behind this class of drugs. Furthermore, therapy with any antidepressants has been associated with what is known as treatment-emergent mania. This is when a bipolar disorder that is in a depressive state rapidly enters a manic phase. This occurrence can be unmanageable by the bipolar disorder patient.
The most recognized treatments for bipolar long term are lithium (Ekalith or Lamictal- along with an anti-convulsant. Sugar intake is thought to vex the symptoms of one with a bipolar disorder as well.
Atypical anti-psychotics have been prescribed for bipolar, which change some aspects of the brain, physiologically, as does the disease itself. In fact, one may argue the brain becomes more efficient due to both the disorder and the treatment with the atypical anti-psychotics. Yet many recommend the utilization of this class of drugs with bipolar disorder only if psychosis is present as well.
As many as 15 percent of bipolar disorder patients diagnosed as such are prescribed an atypical presently. This class of medications may be particularly beneficial for those women who are diagnosed with bipolar who are pregnant, however.
Lithium, which is essentially a very light metal with low density in which the salts are obtained for medicinal treatment, and an anti-convulsant are believed to be standard bipolar treatment, pharmacologically, studies have shown. This is due to Dr. John Cade and his examination with lithium and its benefits with those who have psychotic excitement close to 60 years ago.
Ekalith is believed to be both neuro-protective as well as having an anti-suicidal affect in those believed to be bipolar- and is viewed as a mainstay as far as treatment for bipolar goes with many who treat the disorder. Lithium is thought to regulate the calcium molecule in the brain, so this and valporate are historically the medicinal treatment options preferred for those with bipolar disorder.
Bipolar is difficult to detect, and is often diagnosed as major depression with many affected by this disorder. There is no objective criteria protocol available to utilize when assessing any patient believed to be suffering from any mental disorder. So such mental disorders that are diagnosed are ambiguous, yet that does not conclude that such disorders do not exist, such as the case with bipolar disorder.
Yet perhaps a health care provider should be very thorough and knowledgeable when assessing a patient believed to have a mental condition such as bipolar. As should the health care provider keep in mind that the ultimate goal with this disorder is to stabilize the mood of the one affected.
www.dbsalliance.org
www.nmha.org
Dan Abshear
Author’s note: What has been annotated is based upon information and belief.

Last month I became a new grandma. I was walking on air helping my daughter in law get ready. Shopping, setting up the nursery, etc. (Little sleep, lots of energy, talking to co-workers, feeling great!) Two weeks ago my car broke down and put a major financial strap on us. (The shopping last month probably did not help) So I'm grumpy, sleepy, not talking to many people, achey in my shoulders and neck, feeling like crap.

My point is last month I was walking on air, and this month I'm anxious, nervous, and crying. I guess I'm bipolar? SOMETIMES life just happens. SOMETIMES people are labled in haste. SOMETIMES people are medicated that really don't need it. SOMETIMES stress management, coping skills, keeping things in perspective, and TIME (Our natural healer) is all we need.

I'm not saying that medication is never in order, I'm just saying that we need to be VERY Careful in medicating and labeling people.

REMEMBER: What we thought we new 20 - 30 - 40 years ago is all mostly defunct now. Do we remember when radical lobotomy was the God Send cure for insanity??

Regarding Nassir Ghaemi's helpful post a few comments are in order

1. Its very useful to be reminded of Jasper's neuromythology concept that was directed at Kraepelin among others.

2. In so far as the class of mood stabilizers now contains the antipsychotics and these give rise to tardive dyskinesia and other neurological syndromes as well as increased risks of stroke they are clearly not neuroprotective.

3. While Nassir has misleadingly used the term post-modernist to describe my position, he is not the first. Its unlikely that anyone versed in postmodernism would see as a fellow-traveler someone who has an extensive background in biological research in nervous disorders, who has co-authored a postive history of ECT and who in this book, as well as Mania, and all other books clearly endorses the reality of mental illness.

More to the point, no-one who has (accidentally) made a career out of arguing for the reality of drug induced changes (albeit injuries) can be seen as postmodernist. Even this posting in this blog makes clear claims for the reality of drug induced diabetes, and suicidality.

There is a simple way to sort out who's the postmodernist in this correspondence or among the readership - anyone who agrees that psychotropic drugs have side effects is not a postmodernist.

But beyond this, there is a common problem Nassir, I and all readers of this blog have. It goes back to Jaspers. How to establish the clinical reality of psychiatric conditions. Jaspers didn't turn to operational criteria. He turned to clinical judgement - only a experienced clinician can do the job.

While this might have been possible in the pre-psychopharmacological era, it is not possible now for clinical judgment to hold the fort against other forces. In the early psychopharmacological era there was great hope that biological markers such as the dexamethasone suppression test might both buttress and extend clinical judgment but both biological research and clinical trials have become marketing copy.

How at present do we move forward from this position? Many hopes rest on biological resarch but its simply being prudent rather than postmodern to note that even this is not incorruptible.

I am pleased to see articles in Psychology Today that question blind acceptance and use of pharmaceuticals.
The PRIMUM, the primary commandment of medicine, is "First DO NO HARM". Yet around a million Americans die of the effects of legally prescribed pharmaceuticals every year.
We who are, were, or remember, those whose courses of psychiatric treatments caused illness, disability or death, have been very badly let down. Physicians, it is time for you to wake up.
Patients will find this factual, quick reference list of psychotropic drug side effects from the wickedly funny Bonkers Institute very useful.
http://www.bonkersinstitute.org/simpleside.html

I no doubt believe psychotropics are over-prescribed, but no one is forcing a pill down anyone's throat. People who take the time to research thier own possible mental disorder and carefully monitor thier reaction to drugs can make an informed decision about taking them. Most people want an easy fix. There isn't supply without demand so we can't blame everything on the "evil" pharma companies. As for my own experience, I suffered from crippling anxiety for 23 years. I did not think drugs would help and was very hesitent to try even a low dose. Finally I began taking Paxil and it literally changed my life. I felt normal and capable for the first time ever and all those comments about just "suck it up", or "everyone has some anxiety" began to really upset me. I can assure you not everyone has the type of anxiety I have, most don't even come close and only a change in my biology was the ticket to my recovery. I have since gone on a very low dose of Zoloft and at times take nothing. Paxil was indeed horrendous to come off of but it no doubt saved my life. As long as people are informed about withdrawl and side-effects and can make thier own decision about thier treatment, we don't really need anymore "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" mantra. I get it already, I should be able to function well without medication, but guess what? I can't.

Becky, where do you get the idea that nobody is forcing pills down anyone's throat? Thousands of mental patients in the US and thousand s more around the world are force-drugged every single day! If people were allowed real informed choice about whether or not to take these drugs, I'd have no problem with thta. What I object to strongly are laws that force toxic drugs on unwilling people!

ah, yeah, Becky...sorry you are grossly misinformed...not only are people literally PHYSICALLY forced to take meds...hundreds and thousands of others are manipulated to believe it's their only option.

psychiatry is an industry of coercion, overt and covert both.

and David, as much as I like what you have to say about the mythology around mental illness and the fallacy of drugs...

I'm sorely disappointed and can't even begin to figure out how in the heck you can support ECT when there is so much documentation on how brain damaging it is.

People can put up barriers for non-compliance but it is illegal in this country to force medication on anyone. As a therapist who works with psychiatric consultants, a person's right to refuse medication is written in stone. Are some people without the cognitive abilities to make informed choices taken advantage of? Maybe. It's probable, but I assumed this article was a response to patients who are attempting to deal with thier own mental disorders on accord of thier own free will. That is certainly the majority of people I suspect are responsible for growing mumbers of psychotropic use.

Becky YOU'RE WRONG...there are laws in numerous stats that allow people to enter others homes an force drugs on them...

ALSO I WAS FORCED drugged!! I asked not to be and they injected me forcibly...

please you are actually making a fool of yourself and liars of the hundreds and thousands of people who have had their human and civil rights blatantly violated.

here begins one article on the issue:

Every other week, Jeff Demann drives to a clinic in rural Michigan, drops his pants and gets a shot of an antipsychotic drug that he says makes him sick.

"If I don't show up, the cops show up at my door and I wind up in a mental ward," says the unemployed 44-year-old, who lives on disability in Holland, Mich.

http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/62/81/

it's euphamistically called "assisted outpatient treatment'

Read up Beckie, do some googling...

Becky, I've worked in the mental health field for over 20 years, including 10 years as a cabinet-level official in a state mental health authority, and you are simply incorrect about it being illegal to force-drug people in the US. That would be news to thousands of people who are force-drugged acorss our country. Any time you'd like to be introduced to hundreds of people who are on forced psych meds, let me know, I can certainly arrange for that.

Many states, including New York, where I live, have involuntary outpatient commitment laws (in NY, the program is perversely called "Assisted Outpatient Treatment") in which people who have not been declared incapable of making their own medical decisions are court-ordered to take psych meds.

People in inpatient units may technically have a legal right to refuse meds unless they are declared incapable, but usually if they refuse, they are brought to competency hearings where their refusal to take drugs is presented as evidence of their incompetence!

Prof. Ghaemi points out that Prof. Healy has forgotten about (or has decided to ignore) the work by Kraepelin. At the turn of the 20th century well before pharmaceutical influence, Emil Kraepelin through only careful observation described the various manifestations of manic depressive insanity that is identical to the bipolar spectrum often talked about now. This is nothing new. And it is unfortunate that Prof. Healy essentially skipped over the really good work of Kraepelin. I, for one, am glad that doctors don't look at bipolar disorder in such stark terms as Leopold. According to Healy's strict definition, I just suffered from recurrent depression and should stay on anti-depressants. But all they did for me was make me more depressed (something often seen in bipolar patients). Only when my doctor considered the "soft" signs and got me on something (aka mood stabilizer) other than an anti-depressant, did the depression and the other distressing "soft" signs go away. Does that mean I'm bipolar? I don't know. The whole semantics game gives me a headache. All I do know is that it was a real disease that robbed me of two decades and impeded my career. With the right medications prescribed with Kraepelin's work in mind, I now have a clear mind free of depressions and delusions and now I see I have a life and a future.

On the website posted by Anonymous there are "educational" links at the bottom for different mental health disorders. These are actually ads by different pharma companies.

They basically say:
We don't know what causes XX. We believe it might be genetic.

We think its an imbalance in brain chemicals XX or XX. But we have no way to test or know for certain what level your brain chemicals are at or where they should be.

We aren't even sure how our drugs work on the brain. We believe that they either increase absorbtion of XX chemical or block XX chemical. They may also increase the production of XX chemical. But since patients seem to get better we'll go with that.

In one ad it claimed that this drug could simultaniously help if you had too much of a chemical or too little of it. WOW!!! Self regulating and adjusting meds??

After all we can't test to confirm or deny any of what we said. Take them and tell us how you feel in a couple of weeks. If your not better, I'm sure that there are other drugs we can try, and try, and try until we get it right.

P.S. We do know the side effects of our drugs, and here they are. . .

Caveat Emptor

From a genetic perspective, looking back, there are and have been shades of deprssion and manic depression all through my family for generations. Watching it up close with my child for eighteen years until his death, I saw 1. Initial mis- diagnosis and ping pong ball in-out of hospital for the first three years. 2. Prior to that, no help at a major ivy league university for a brilliant student who was unable to get out of bed and was dismissed twice for bad grades 3. Correct diagnosis and a flourishing life for several years, broken into by manic psychosis and suicidal depression. The full swing - the real McCoy - from terrifying, frightening, and dangerous disapearances while in mania/psychosis all the way down down down to catatonia while an inpatient, off all drugs, to achieve an accurate and appropriate diagnosis and treatment by lithium. Terrifying periods of acute suicidality followed in the end by agreed-due ECT due to total collapse of the family. Sleep deprivation and fear can also take a toll on a loving and caregiving family, after all.

Sadly, late entrance into the Medicaid System and coersion through lies ended up with my child dying in less than two years from an atypical antipsychotic.

How can the learned doctors above prattle on about this and that while people are dying in their childhood, adolescent, and young adult years, knowing of these deaths? Why are they in a profession which results in death far too often? Is it really a profession when what is really being argued is semantics and what someone said back in 1900? How can they look us in the eye when there has been no criminal trial or other similar responsibility taken by medicine, the industry, or government? While I may respect their skill at the academic medicine game, I do not respect that they can take a dime from this industry, or not park themselves in front of their academic societies and tell them to fold their tents. Or the few crusaders in government, for that matter.. Where is the hard science? Where is it? How can you listen to the pain and suffering and agony and know and still stay in this "field"?

I always thought that the first thing medical students learned was "First, do no harm." The Hypocratic Oath. Where does this oath show up in what now looks to me like a pseudo-science? How can I ever, ever see it otherwise after being steeped in so much death caused by the very medicine you ask or tell or make us take?

I am a practicing psychiatrist in the US and could not agree with Dr Healy more in regards to his contentions in this interview. There is such a thing as BAD. To see someone in the throws of manic psychosis who has not slept for days, has grandiose delusions, non-stop speech and who is totally unhinged from objective reality is remarkable. Almost no one I see who has been given the DX of BAD by other Drs, many their family Dr has ever had such an event documented or even provides self report of it no do their family. Most of them can and have been easily led to provide leading information like "Donna" who most of the time is depressed but who's objective symptoms of mania never rise to the level of gross dysfunction and certainly not manic psychosis. Rarely are they anything other than what sounds like euthymia. These pts come in wanting to see there experiences through the paradigm of BAD. To convince them they do not have a major mental illness nor will they benefit from the scores of psychotropic drugs they have usually already taken is very difficult. They have a hard time understanding how Drs can look at the same thing and see it so differently. That is at the core of this problem. Psychiatric pathology has become so ubiquitous as to become meaningless. If you ascribe to the belief that mood lability=BAD than you treat everyone who has a self report of labile mood and irritability with lots of drugs. What is remarkable to me is that the average community psychiatrist, as far as I can see has been so easily led down this road in such a brief period and does not seem to care that there is almost no evidence that such an approach makes people better nor do I see them actually informing pts of the real risks of such drugs. Like Dr Healy, I certainly do not deny that some emotional states may best be understood under the paradigm of illness but these are few and we understand nothing more of real consequence than we did 100 yrs ago about them. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something or as very low standards for what constitutes compelling evidence or knowledge.

I posted the following comments on the other discussion flowing from this debate, but they apply to some of the comments on this webpage:

There is evidence that "true" bipolar disorder and schizophrenia have similar genetic vulnerabilities - lots of certain genes and you have a risk of schizophrenia, moderate number and it is more likely schizoaffective, less but still substantial number of these genes and more likely to get manic-depression if you are going to get ill (and environment will play a factor as to when and if).

As far as I know ADHD (which is a bunch of symptoms and behaviours that can have any of a wide number of causes, including as David Healy says boys with neurodevelopmental pathways that were not particularly problematic in past cultures but don't cope with the academic classroom demands of modern life) has no genetic relationship to the psychotic spectrum (manic-depression - schizoaffective - schizophrenia).

Whilst some bipolar-II disorder may be incomplete manifestations of manic-depression/bipolar-I, most of the softer "bipolar disorders" are on this count more likely to lie with the neurotic spectrum of mental disorders - where psychotherapy, family therapy, parenting training, lifestyle changes, mindfulness and relaxation-training etc have more potential and drugs much less.

We should probably return to earlier nosologies and dispense with bipolar disorder and go back to cyclothymia as a personality trait/disturbance that can be more manifest in some people during stress/anxiety/depressive reactions.

True manic-depression does need to be detected and treated early in its course but obviously not at the expense of picking up 100,000s of children and teens with other problems and misdiagnosing and overmedicating them.

Also as to Prof Ghaemi's point "3" about not giving atypical antipsychotics as "mood stabilizers" on scientific grounds - I agree from my experience and reading of the literature. But demoting Prof Healy's "historical and political critique" is to ignore or perhaps try and "stay above" the real socioeconomic context that psychiatric research and practice occurs in.

It is not just history but current affairs that reveals how pharmaceutical interests warp the clinical studies in their favour. $25billion annually for antipsychotics and antidepressants (report in Boston Globe unclear if just means USA or global figures) can have a warp-drive effect on our profession with its (at this stage in history) rather limited hard scientific evidence base.

Prof Ghaemi you really should, if you haven't yet done so, read through the "Zyprexa documents", "Seroquel documents", or documents concerning Risperdal and paediatric psychopharmacology that are available on websites like www.furiousseasons.com

Also there is now a substantial body of academic literature - for instance a meta-analysis (Lexchin in BMJ) showing the odds ratio of pharma sponsored studies finding in favour of their drug over placebo or older comparison agent is 4 times as great as fully independent studies of the same drugs.

It becomes very clear just how well organised and pervasive the massaging, suppression and selective reporting of data is and how sophisticated the marketing of soft bipolar has been. I know from many of my colleagues there is a growing cynicism about much CME and research. There seems to be a growing crisis of trust in the academic literature analagous to the crisis in finance over toxic derivatives and opaque banking methods.

The recent American Journal of Psychiatry's editorial statement, whilst couched in polite language could not be a more damning critique of the current political context of psychiatric research and practice. It was good to see.

I agree that political/historical analysis is important and that the pharm industry has manipulated science (my new statistics book is the first of it's kind to be explicit and detailed about this) but it is not sufficient

My post was meant to show scientific errors of fact that the political critique cannot obviate

Political analysis by itself neither establishes nor refutes scientific questions like the extent of the validity of bd in adults or children and it should not be used to ignore or distort valid science. Otherwise we are merely replacing cultural for biological reductionism

I agree with David and it is those persons who are a grave risk to themselves and others who may be forced to take medication. My comment about people not being forced to take medication was in refrence to the general population as I tried to clear up in my second post having been rudely called a "fool." Obviously this blog is about the nature of disease and the benefits or risks of drug therapy. If there is no choice in the matter than why are we having this discussion? The fact remains that the majority of people do have the option of either taking medication or refusing medication and by studying disorders such as bipolar we are attempting to make that decision a more informed one.

Unfortunately the biopsychosocial model is the cause rather than the solution of today's eclectic mishmash of psychiatry & provides no way out. See my detailed critique of it I my book Concepts of Psychiatry and it's sequel forthcoming from Hopkins Press later this year The Rise and Fall of the Biopsychosocial Model

First of all, while I'm sure Dan's comment was insightful, I didn't read it because it is a novel in and of itself and is difficult to read because it looks like one giant paragraph with no breaks.

Second of all, if I were to interview Jules Angst, I would ask him directly whether he has any grasp of how much damage he has done by bringing another stigmatizing label into the world. I'm sure he would claim that his label has helped more than hurt. I'm sure many many patients would disagree.

Though I applaud Dr. Healy for exposing the fraud of bipolar, psychiatry in bed with Big Pharma and other evils, he fails to see or admit that he remains in this evil system promoting the overall, complete fraud of biomedical psychiatry in general. Many experts like Dr. Fred Baughman, neurologist, Dr. Peter Breggin, psychiatrist and countless others have exposed the evil fraud of psychiatry in bed with BIG PHARMA. The worst part is they DESTROY the lives of those they pretend to help with their bogus labels and toxic drugs when people are experiencing trauma and are vulnerable already. I find it unbelievable that these monsters are now preying on children, toddlers and now trying to go for babies in the womb for their lethal fable labels and deadly poison drugs. It has been proven that psychiatry's "patients" have shortened lives, not to mention a life destroying stigma, inability to get insurance, inability to gain many jobs, etc. These fiends, obviously psychopaths, give no "informed consent" about their unbelievable fraud, lies and greed!

Hope these current "Nazi Doctors" (see book by Dr. Jay Lifton) get their own Nuremburg Trials some day to get what they truly deserve: their own "treatments" including the gas chambers they invented for the so-called mentally ill in Germany before they were used to exterminate Jews and other dissidents!

As Dr. Peter Breggin warns, the most dangerous thing you can do is visit a psychiatrist's office. Their signs should read, "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here."

Psychologists and other mental death "experts" are just as guilty collluding with this evil to stay in this deadly profession using the fraudulent DSM IV compiled by the white old boy network in power who vote in their fraud diagnoses by a show of hands with no medical or scientific evidence or tests whatever!

I could go on but the evil of the mental death profession is well documented on the Internet and elsewhere, but why aren't more doctors and other so-called experts speaking out against this evil? Because too many including the Surgeon General, FDA and others are in bed with Big Pharma and other businesses to maintain any integrity whatever.

As both a client and clinician for over 20 years, I can assure you that many people would not be able to function without psychotropic medications. I don't see anyone critiquing the medical model saying they've suffered from any significant mental disorder. In Michigan, Kevin's law, which authorized involuntary outpatient therapy/medication, was passed (and supported by higher-ups in consumer groups such as NAMI) because of more than a few people that have been killed by someone not taking meds as prescribed (where they had been non-homicidal while taking meds). Advances in neurobiology have enabled thousands of people to be freed from mental institutions. Kevin's law allows for an alternative to involuntary committment to a psychiatric hospital for an indefinite period of time. There must always be a balance between individual rights and public rights (such as the right to be free from harm) and any position which believes either right should be exclusive is not just extremist, it is insane.

I stole the following from the first post. "I'm finally recovering my sanity, unfortunately my body is suffering from the detox...freedom from drugs saved my brain, but my body is having a hard time catching up..."
Many of us are well after detox, from dangerous drugs. The same many of us remain in remission on small doses of effective drugs, mostly genrics.
This writer was once told in the usual biopsychosocial cant, "you need to work on your coping skills." Low doses of mood stabilizer monotherapy made these coping skills remarkably effective. Go figure.

hmmm... pharmaceutical companies also make medicines for every other medical condition. maybe none of these conditions exist. maybe we live in a magical world where no one gets sick.