@13Xanadu You really don't understand what mental illness actually is do you? Don't worry you will soon.
As for 'conspiracies', do you live in the US? If so, go outside and look up. If you're too blind to see the chemtrails as crisscrossing white lines I feel sorry for YOU. There are some people that are too blind and ignorant even with the proof right in front of their face.
You've been stalking me. Apparently you stalk others on youtube. Another person told you to stay out of their channel.
@Ragnarok187 Those aren't chemtrails dum dum those are contrails. BIG Difference. Condensation and Poison are two different things. If you took your car up to those altitudes it would do the same thing. Get your aluminum foil hat and go hide in an underground bunker. Maybe you should look up Distrails while you are at it. No wait..Do do that..You'll think that somehow the U.S. Gov't is magically trying to erase all of the clouds out of the sky to destroy the ozone layer. Get an Education!!
@SacredSocietyAP Yes there is a big difference between contrails and chemtrails. Contrails last for maybe 30 seconds. Chemtrails last for 2-3 hours or more. Ask your parents or grandparents if 10-20 years ago planes left huge criss-crossing white lines in the sky. Take your own advice and get an education.
@Ragnarok187 Actually, 10-20 years ago planes did leave trails that lasted for hours. It depends on the high altitude climatic conditions, naturally.. Granted I can only go back about 35 years ago, but yes, they did.
@13Heathens Thank You! Please remember this though. Conspiracy nuts don't care if they are right or wrong. They are simply attention whores. Looking to scare people and piss of those who actually know what they are talking about. Trying to convince them they are wrong just makes them mad because they don't care. They are DRAMA QUEENS looking for a show. Meanwhile they have thousands of people scared out of their mind just for fun and attention. They are losers with NO LIFE of their own.
@Ragnarok187 I don't need to ask my parents or grandparents because 10-20 years ago I was
in the aviation business myself, just like my father and my grandfather. I was raised around aircraft
my whole life. By the way I did get an education, at the Naval Aviation Technical Training Center. All of
my friends that aren't in the music business are pilots and mechanics. You can't fool an expert DUM DUM. Try this shit on someone who DOESN'T know ANYTHING about aircraft.
@SacredSocietyAP You call yourself an expert in aviation and don't acknowledge chemtrails being used? Right, they're all contrails. Just harmless condensation. But as interesting as the aviation industry is and regardless of if chemtrails are fake or not this video relates to psych so keep it on topic. There are plenty of chemtrail vids to argue your point about that subject. But thanks for bringing up an 8 month old conversation to go on the attack. Troll.
@Ragnarok187 LOL Oh so now that I've debunked your whole silly conspiracy you want me to follow the topic of the video. You are a joke and people LIKE YOU who purposely mislead people just to make money on YouTube are complete assholes.
@13Heathens Fine. I'll stay on topic. Women are friggin' nutcases. They commit child abuse 4 times more than the father and kidnap children twice as much as strangers. They also don't pay child support at twice the rate of men. There ya go..On Topic..Women are crazy and should be watched. I believe in PPD..Why? Cause there is proof to back it up in stats of child abuse cases. oh yea..chemtrails are bullshit.
@SacredSocietyAP You didn't debunk anything. You just called yourself an expert and your whole family was in aviation so you know for a personal opinion chemtrails are fake. And I'm not trying to make any money from anyone so its pretty rude labeling me like that. Nor am I misleading people. Do some research. But like I stated before, this video is about psych so keep it on topic. If you wanna troll for conspiracies to throw abuse at there are plenty of other places to do it.
You keep mentioning scientology whenever you mention CCHR. CCHR was founded by scientology yes, but NOWHERE do they promote it, nor does CCHR try to force scientology info on others. Constantly you mention the link, when it really has nothing to do with it. The info CCHR offers has nothing to do with the other. Then you constantly mention 'conspiracy'. And as many people have already stated, this act will support DRUG treatment and research, not alternatives. Drugging new mums will not help.
@Ragnarok187 "Constantly you mention the link, when it really has nothing to do with it."
Don't delude yourself. Would you like links to testimonial pages in which people speak of "specialists which CCHR referred them to directing the patients to Cos? Should I provide links to Cos presentations talking about how through CCHR they're "eradicating" psychiatry? Shall I point you to the writing of LRH where he speaks of the "psyches"? Open your eyes. You're being manipulated.
@13Heathens CCHR presents pretty damn good info, and it's mostly accurate. There are faults and biases in all presentations, theirs AND yours. Everyone has an agenda. I've done plenty of research surrounding psychology and psychiatry (I'm a student of the former). The only research that supports psychiatry (and it's practices and drugging) is the research bought and paid for by Big-Pharma. CCHR offers secondary info for me. My main sources are peer-reviewed articles from the psych literature.
@Ragnarok187 "the research bought and paid for by Big-Pharma"
You may want to reconsider that statement. Psychiatric conditions were being studied long before the development of the first psychiatric drugs. Out of curiosity do you know what a chemical imbalance really is? Been reading peer reviewed articles? Have you looking into the studies of brain structure in relation of schizophrenia and bipolar, or that group in Australia sequencing genes involved in ADHD development?
@13Heathens Conditions were being studied long before meds I agree. It was about social control then, and still control now (they just add money on top). Do I know what a chemical imbalance is that doesn't exist? Let me ask you something. Do you know what a chemical BALANCE looks like? Do you think everything comes down to brain or biology? Do you discount mind? What about the soul? Are you the type that thinks people are merely meat machines to be programmed and controlled?
@Ragnarok187 Social control eh? As apposed to helping someone gain control over their own mental faculties? The mind is inseparable from the brain, regardless of what you may wish to believe. Let's not forget in cases of severe head trauma in which brain damage occurs the sheer volume of recorded instances of complete personality changes. The mind is contained within the brain.
Watch the segment in which i define chemical imbalances before you go down that road.
@13Heathens It takes 1 person to have a disease. It takes 2 people to have a mental illness. How exactly does drugs help a person gain control over their own mental states? That's putting 'faith' into an outside source, that only through drugs can a person get 'well', which they are often told to stay on for a lifetime. How is that helping them gain control? It doesn't help the person, but it damn sure helps those who want to control others. ECT helps to gain control? Drugs help to gain control?
@Ragnarok187 "How exactly does drugs help a person gain control over their own mental states?"
In much the same way insulin helps a diabetic control their blood sugar. However, I don't advocate drug usage. I consider them a crutch which should be discarded over time - in most cases.
@13Heathens Psychiatric drugs are not the same as medical drugs, but I do applaud you for not advocating their usage. What you're trying to do with these vids is commendable. CoS members (and the church itself) should be abolished. But everyone has a right to their own beliefs. If CCHR tells people to see scientologists that's wrong. The info they present on psychiatry however is mostly accurate. CCHR may not be the way to go entirely, but neither is psychiatry. Labels, drugs & torture dont help
@Ragnarok187 Actually the information CCHR (as well as Szasz) presents is decades out of date. They insist long abandoned practices are still used, and further a myth that there's no such thing as mental illness. While I'll be the first to agree that drugs are over used, and misdiagnosis runs rampant in the industry. However. that doesn't invalidate that there are people out there with very real problems. I advocate reform not abolition. CCHR does great harm to people in such a situation.
@13Heathens People have problems with life yes, and the experiences they have are indeed real, but mental illness is a lie. It's not an 'illness' or 'disease', it's a problem coping with difficult circumstances. I know, I've had 10 years personal experience. We both agree on the overuse of drugs and misdiagnosis. Psychiatry will be exposed for the damage it causes and faulty practices (maybe CCHR will be too). The system will be changed soon, which I'm sure we both agree will be a good thing.
@Ragnarok187 "it's a problem coping with difficult circumstances"
You mean like random severe mood swings without a catalyst.. Like a complete inability to focus ones attention, without need for distraction.. Like hearing voices and seeing things that aren't there.. You propose these are the result of poor coping skills?
Yeah, many of the modern diagnoses are BS, however there are some very real conditions for which the notion "People have problems with life" is ... insulting at best.
@13Heathens Mood swings NOW may be traced back to a previous problem. Multiple personalities, where a person switches personalities NOW, is often traced back to sexual abuse. The symptoms or behaviours are often a coping strategy for something in the past (not always an effective strategy mind you). And as for 'schizophrenics' that see and hear things that aren't there... who's to say what is and isn't there? Our senses are limited. Blow a dog whistle, we don't hear it, but a dog certainly does.
@Ragnarok187 I'll have to tell my best friend (Who's schizophrenic) That the dancing field mice Which offered to swear fealty to him if he'd assist in their war against the King of the demonic frog zombies was real. I'm sure he'll love that one.
Naturally you're either ignorant of, or ignoring the brain chemistry studied which had shown that within bipolar subjects it was shown that they have about 30% more neural receptors, or that the chemical pathways in a schizophrenics brain are wider..
@13Heathens I never said it was all real. I said who's to say what is or isn't there. Senses are limited.
If I had a dream, or better yet, a day dream (using my imagination) that I was flying, would I then be classed as schizo because it's 'not real'? Yes some people do have delusional visions they can't control, but not everyone that see's or hears outside 'normal' awareness is ill. And there will be brain differences since those paths are more active and used more frequently
@Ragnarok187 ".. Yes some people do have delusional visions they can't control, but .."
We're done here. You're just being argumentative.. They exist other than the fact you chose to admit they exist, except for when you do.. Peer reviewed articles? The sort which you make excuses for the ones you don't agree with, amd misquote the ones you do?
I'm tired of playing nice with people who are willingly ignorant. Get the fuck out of my channel.
@13Heathens Do you really think all peer reviewed articles will all say the same thing? They don't. Just as we don't say the same thing. We may agree on some things, disagree on others. Psychiatry will be exposed, and the system will change. There are already theories being constructed to explain what 'mental illness' really is, and it's not a chemical imbalance. We all are entitled to our views and opinions. You keep yours, I'll keep mine. You make changes your way, I'll change things my way.
@13Heathens The mind has relations to the brain sure, but it's not a 1 to 1 connection. There's a professor Stephen (Steven?) Laureys who was a neurologist researcher studying a person in a coma. This guy had zero brain functions, yet his mind was still functioning (although somewhat limited). The neurologist was originally a materialist, thinking the same as you, that mind was the exact same as the brain. He's since changed his view after that study/case.
@Ragnarok187 Are you referring to the deep brain function study?
"Laureys' findings merely reinforced the diagnoses the patients had already received, based on standard clinical criteria including the eyeblink test.
Zero brain function?
The perception of sound in healthy people involves the coordinated communication of many brain areas, and whereas they saw similar, widespread patterns of activation in the MCS and control groups, those patterns were absent in the PVS patients.
Do you really think the government is going to actually make something really work?
That is the real question. If you do then you should have stayed at home with mom and dad. Yes throw more money at things is like adding more fuel to the fire.
Funny that Obama PROMISED US that we would be told about a bill *BEFORE* it went to congress. He called it "transparency". But you apparently don't see a problem with congress passing bills we don't even hear about.
You REALLY think that all of a sudden our government is going to do research on ALTERNATIVES to drugs when it comes to treating depression in women? Dream on...
@LindaKay1948 Research grants are made available. It's all a matter of which groups apply for those grants. The government itself doesn't do research, they merely provide available funding for interested parties which will do said research.
@13Heathens Let me put it this way. Do you really think our government is interested in funding research that seeks alternatives to drugs? I don't think so. The profit motive for pushing them is too strong. You've got a lot of people who would lose their job security.
@LindaKay1948 The government itself doesn't technically care one way or the others. There may be some government officials and special interest groups which could seek to try to block such things, but the govt itself doesn't really care.
Years ago there was a govt research grant provided to research "why pizza burns the roof of your mouth" .. Our government is willing to throw money at some of the most bizarre things. The issue you would have to have concern about would be the lobbying power of the special interest groups.
(survivor030406 cont.) "History shows that these programs do stuff in the real world that they don't want published. Another concern is the news that the Teenscreen program had a false positive rate of 85%. The kids were driven straight to the psychiatrist office to get prescriptions, sometimes without even getting the parents consent first. Go ahead and flame away with your Glen Beck wanna-be denigrations, but it's pretty obvious why so many people do not trust these kind of programs."
survivor030406 wanted me to post this for him, as, when he tried to post it, it didn't work for him. He wrote, "I hope this isn't construed as off topic.. I'd like to compare this act to Teenscreen. Isn't this bill worded pretty much the same as the Teenscreen statement about their program? Saying nobody is forced etc? (to be continued...)
Melanie Stokes DID get psychiatric "help", including a cocktail of drugs and electric shock treatment BEFORE she jumped out the window of a Chicago hotel, and to her death. This kind of "treatment" for postpartum depression evidently didn't work for her. Why would we want to make sure all new mothers are screened so that, if they answer the questions the wrong way, toxic and disabling drugs are pushed on them? (I speak from experience. I suffered great loss. See my channel.)
several comments from "1thebabyalex" were removed due to a lack of relevance. The topic of this discussion is the Mother's Act. If you want to discuss psychiatry feel free to do it in as a reply to an appropriate video - for example my 13H refutes CCHR series, which covers many Psychiatry related topics.
Alex you've not been blocked, however I use you in further posts to keep to the topic of the video which you are responding to.
.. I know the circular logic that you're attempting to cite. Your wording in the above statement is a bit foolish. You see I'm not a researcher, nor is it my job to provide such education.. but all that aside.
PPD is not completely unknown, but what is currently known is inadequate. Thus to better understand PPD it needs further research. As the understanding of it increases the better people will be able to be help patients understand the risks warning signs and (currently unknown) causes.
I dont have a problem you stuffing your kid with anti-depressants and heavy drugs, up to you. But you dont come and tell me how I should raise mine! Deal?
And it doesnt matter if its Scientology, the Pope Himself, a local priest or a doctor protesting, they protest for me.
Dear 13th Heathens! What risk are you talking about???? For millenia mothers were able to give birth and raise kids. What screening is neccessary? You probably dont have a single child man!
I have two kids, actually, and their mother did suffer from PPD, which is what the mother's act is all about.... which you would have known had you paid attention to the video.
The Mother's act is to promote further studies to help better understand PPD and its causal factors, as well as provide education as to what it is and the risk indicators are, increase public awareness, and to find better treatments.
Next time try making a comment with some relevance, thanks.
named, committed suicide following months of treatment for PPD including four hospitalizations, at least four different drugs documented to cause suicidal ideation, and electroshock therapy.
You seem to believe what people say based on little more than that they say it (like the woman on the clip), the references I make are all out there to find. There is no point in me bothering with you.
You are right in principal, it would be good to have successfull non harmfull medicine but the afformentioned harmfull treatments would themselves never have seen the light of day in the 1st place had they not been presented with good intentions.
Only time will tell but for some the "track record" means they would rather not wait to find out if they are to end up like Melanie Stokes on a new, different brand name.
Forcing people to take drugs is not treatment. The use of psyche services should be available to All who voluntarily seek such service (coercive service is an oxymoron). Coincidentally, many women seeking help ostensibly for "PDD" (no psychobiological marker to date) are oftentimes socially and economically marginalized, frustrated and lonely. A "right" to be treated should also imply the right to not be treated; the latter being nearly impossible. Treatment should reflect our cultural values.
of the primacy of the individual, rather than the therapeutic agenda of the state vis a vis socially problematic individuals (non-criminal). Is the threat of suicide-or its ideation-grounds for involuntary mental incarceration? Who is the psychiatrist an advocate for? The individual or society? If the latter, then, arguably, there is more to PDD "research"-a foregone conclusion-than meliorative therapy. If mental illness were clearly biological, then there be no juridical right to force treat.
Recently the FDA have put black box warnings on Zyban and Chantix (drugs which have already been approved and on the market for quite a while) for serious adverse mental health affects including depression, suicide and hostility. Drugs which where not originally intended for psychiatric purposes.
Zyban is Bupropion hydrochloride also marketed as Wellbutrin, an anti-depressant.
I'm not saying that they will put Mothers on Wellbutrin but if the side effects of the kind of drug you would give to PPD include depression, suicide and hostility.
I might not have a point seeing as obviously they would give mothers something different, which doesn't have such negative effects despite the fact that the afformentioned drugs were on the market for many years and that was only disclosed recently.
... Did you actually listen to the video prior to replying? The mothers act is to help increase public awareness, study the causes of PPD, and develop new treatments.
So once again I must ask about the relevance of your comments.
The earlier comment about me enjoying this knowing the subject might make me look insensitive, its just that I am desensitized after everything Ive seen.
A healthy about of cynicism is a good thing, however too much tends to get in the way at times. Sometimes programs with the greatest intentions bring forth the greatest catastrophes..
But in some cases, if the cause is worth enough, the attempt is what's vital. Ignoring things like PPD won't make them go away. All you can do is to start initiatives that may at least provide a shred of hope.
Vagueness can be a strong point as you put it but only in an ideal world I think.
With the unknown it is likely for those who stand to benifit from being right to want to be right whether they are right or not. So rather than science this situation could end up as the more powerfull presiding over contention.
I think what seems to have been a difference of opinion between us despite that we agree on a number of things, illustrates the ambiguity of the act which can be interpreted in different ways.
There's not much else to learn, other than studying the subject, what sounds credible or not and finding who said it, why and if they are bias.
The ambigouos Mothers act if passed is something which will have to prove itself not to be a pharma ploy to those who think it isn't.
I have just looked at the senate govt website about this and as far as what they intent to do it goes litte further than saying "Screening" "Identification" "Treatment" "Educate" "Health care" "Support" "Research" "Discover".
Impressive words.
Hypothetically either "Drugs" or "Vitamins" (like you mentioned for pallegra, vitamin B3 niacin) could be equally applicable to the context as a whole, so its like supporting a bill which is as ambigouos as the example I gave for J walking earlier.
Yup it's very ambiguous, but the J-Walking example was way over the top.
That vagueness is actually a strong point, and would allow more groups to seek funds for research, which will increase the chances of finding a viable resolution.
If it specified psychiatric medications in the bill I'd be waving my arms calling fowl right there next to you. If you aren't sure of the cause you can't limit the fields of research.
HaHa! Stop this!! Tonite is my spliff night and I'm trying to chill... with a touch of Tarkovsky.. (yep the mental disease!) .. Maybe tomorrow ( my lsD-Day) I will send ya more colourful comments! ;-)
On wiki for PPD there is information to nutritional and dietry approaches (all of which are referenced incase you thought I was a "Nut" or just "making it up").
Maybe medication was only mentioned once but that seems significantly more detail than she has given about anything else such as with the ambiguous New treatments why the lack of detail if so keen to prove to us its not just a pharma front? Does the bill itself say New treatments too?
Am I keen to disprove a conspiracy theory? The bill wasn't drafted by a drug company, but by someone who's wife had a horrible time with PPD. I did state that in the video, didn't I?
And yes, new treatments, research, and education. The anti-psyche movement is just jumping at shadows on this one.
Right now the "best" solution available to physicians is to throw anti-depressants at a person, instead of treating the underlying issue.
I don't know about you, but I'd prefer a better option for physicians.. Roughly 70-80% of psychiatric meds are prescribed by physicians, NOT shrinks.. which I consider to be the vast majority of psyche-drug related problems which face us today.
Shrinks providing psyche meds test blood levels, doctors don't.
Yes, psych drugs have also been advertized in the media rather than presciption.
For niacin, I think its pallegra you are talking about. Athough not PPD but so far you have given more detail about therapy other than medication than the female speaker on the clip.
I will also mention that the woman with PPD who died you are referring to in the drafting of this bill, was on medication and receiving electroshock therapy.
This is an interesting conversation I am enjoying it. As to whether she whether being suicidal prior to treatment is relavent to whether she was iatrogenically killed is subjective unless the science can be presented as to why she died. At best being drugged and shocked obviously didn't stop her death.
On that I agree. the treatment she was given was clearly ineffective. If she had proper treatment available her death may have been preventable. However there is no currently not enough known about PPD for such a treatment to exist.
All the doctors, or shrinks, can do is experiment with different treatments and hope that it helps their patient. The goal of the Mother's act is to change that, and encourage research that may bring to light a treatment that's more reliable than throwing a dart at the proverbial dartboard of treatment options.
It doesn't have to be representative of the "average" shrink either, not if its a key opinion leader such as Robert Spitzer who admitted "may have got it wrong" with 30% of ADHD cases or Dr. Joseph Beiderman who is currently under investigation by the Senate Finance commitee. Look it up if you want.
Not enough is currently known about postpartum depression. A better understanding of the biological level causes will allow for better treatment options.
Increasing awareness of the risks and warning signs will help new mothers be prepared for potential future emotional hardships.
Not all problems which have a psychological manifestation are psychological in origin. You're not too good at this, are you?
I didn't say enough is already known about postpartum depression and I didn't say it was not biological in origin.
I did say that there are financial ties between the pharmaceutical industry and psychiatry and provided a way to find out more about that, so in spite of the fact I used the word "validate" there is still conflict of interest if PPD where fully understood. My mistake for using the word "validate" which I can see might have made it look like I was saying PPD is not valid.
It certainly did imply that you were invalidating PPD. Thank you for clarifying that.
There are many problems which have a psychological manifestation, which are not treated using psyche meds. For example there is a condition resulting from a niacin deficiency which exhibits symptoms similar to schizophrenia.
It's all about finding an appropriate treatment, instead of just tossing pills at a person and hoping they'll work.
Has the narrator actually read all the stuff about financial ties between psychiatry and the drug industry recently? like a search for DSM in the NY times? or is this clip some kind of joke?
Incase he is too slow to undertstand, in laymans terms thats:
The people who sell the drugs giving money to the people who validate the disease.
Your comment is not relevant. The word "disease" is a misnomer used by critics, and is neither correct nor accurate.
The percentage of lead shrinks that got where they are with an economic boost from drug companies is neither representative of the average psychologist/psychiatrist, nor is it relevant to legislate discussed in this video.
Increasing public awareness, funding research, and looking for better treatment methods is of great cultural importance, you're rhetoric is not.
Its hard to understand your writing but it looks like you are thinking very hard about this, if you can't see the conflict of interest when doctors are paid by people who sell the treatement as opposed to being paid by the tax payer or patient then there is no point in talking to you.
More doctors are paid by those selling treatment, than shrinks actually. Are they trying to take over the world too? *snicker*
One of the most serious issues we have is that most research is funded by private (corporate) interests. Federally funded research does not bear the same pressure to reach the sorts of conclusions that will benefit some company with an agenda.
You really need to learn to look at the big picture, instead of taking a stance based on a snap-shot of reality.
So now you are telling us about research funded by corperate interests and how other doctors take money from those selling the treatment as well.
Is there anything else you would like to ad to my argument?
I agree, you are right about looking at the bigger picture, unless otherwise you mean that so long as its not just psychiatry that is corrupt then its not all that bad.
The isn't a single field of research, in which there isn't some level of corruption.
If you condemn the entire psychiatric industry for those few that have been corrupted by corporate interests, you must also condemn every other industry in which the same thing occurs.
corruption within any group is a bad thing, however understanding that it's merely a reflection of society is part of that big picture.
Some have indeed misused it over the years to that end. This is not even a moot point. The pharmacalogical science is pretty impressive, if one admires the doping of brains, on nothing more than speculative models of brain function. Much of the technical nature and flim flam science at the employ of shrinks is as deceiving for them as it is for the public at large. My whole contention is that mental illness is not mental disease, no matter how many biologistic terminology is thrown into the fray
I find myself saying that too often - It's not a diease. It's only Szasz and the rest of the anti-psyche crowd that call mental disorders diseases. In some cases there are biological factors, however that still doesn't make it a disease. It's a misnomer which is melodramatic and misleading.
It's only Szasz and the rest of the anti-psyche crowd that call mental disorders diseases: The disease paradigm is Repudiated by Szasz, et. al.
This mental illness qua disease, in its present engenderment, is still nascent, and psychiatry has set itself the hard task(slippery slope) of remaining true to its paradigm.
The confluence of profit, the misapprehension of shrink qua physician, meaning well, are a perilous mix. Big pharma and the MH system stand to gain, even if it be incidental.
It might be an issue of expediency also, getting the Mother's act passed. This key legislation would make for a much more efficient means of keeping tabs on women who are at risk of PPD(read: poor, young, socially isolated), and having a means of following up on this vulnerable population. This a law that is, in a way, a piece of social engineering, an endeavor to see that the lower classes are subject to the manipulations of the mental hygienists.
The counter argument could be made that PPD is a diseased state of the brain, an bona fide illness that attacks, regardless of social station. I will aver to this reposte most graciously. However, this still does not refute and discredit my prior contention, which is, this is just another piece in the social engineering puzzle.
Mental hygienist? You may want to doff a tinfoil hat before using that term too much. PPD is disorder which has a psychiatric manifestation.. not a disease. Most likely a hormonal imbalance wreaking havoc with brain chemistry..
But without proper research we'll never know for sure. PPD does strike people in all walks of life, so your own counterargument is valid.
Sometimes "social engineering" really is just trying to make life better for people - ooh the horror, LOL!
Sorry, but I cannot agree with the state of present-day psychiatric discourse and praxis. Heathens, you are a man of sound intellect, and I respect much you have to say, but I feel that psychiatry, in its present engenderment, has no business setting the world straight. Still, individuals need to clinge to the idea that the universe is ordered. Sorry, I have to just partially agree with you.
The source of my contempt with the MH profession is in the power and authority that they arrogated to themselves, and of course the hubris with which these same "well-meaning" professionals set out to help. Institutional psychiatry is the greatest evil, as if the contractual-freely entered into-isn't a slap in the face to anyone who values individual freedom and dignity. I know this might come off as hyperbole, but psychiatry needs some serious, meaningful reexamination/ substantive critique.
On that point I mostly agree with you. Most of the shrinks I've dealt with that work in institutions - within the US - are incompetent at best. I am, however, unwilling to condemn the entire field.
There are good shrinks, and bad shrinks, however the bad ones certainly are more memorable - as well as more likely to vie for authority.
Our point of departure might be a reflection of our personal political outlook, as well as the means we go about deconstructing the discourse being critiqued. There is no doubt that this U.S. qua Therapeutic (pharmacracy a la Szasz) state is no laughing matter, and something to be bantered about like eggheads in their ivory towers. Psychiatry is so much about coercion and control. I would aver that it does help people, but so do other broken systems.
Psychiatry isn't about coercion or control. Some have indeed misused it over the years to that end. As for the "drug" side of the equation - the highest percentage of psychiatric medications perscribed are by physicians, not shrinks.
You see a political issue, where I see a social issue. So many Americans would rather take a magic pill, in stead of actually dealing with their problems.
I think that the medicalization of everyday life has molly coddled Americans to expect labels for otherwise normal human affect (social anxiety disorder being one of many salient examples). I agree, there are some really good shrinks out there, those who are more philosophically pragmatic, and less scientifically materialistic-the paradigm that seems to inform the aggregate of the profession, and which has led to the present form of biologistic flim flam discourse and perilous practices.
The truly sad thing about the bill being proposed in Melanie Stokes' name, is that there is a Youtube username amyphilo, lying about the facts of her case to promote her own twisted agenda.
You are reading the bill as it is intended to be understood. However, you are not taking into account that government and major industry, such as the pharmaceutical use these bills and law as excuses to tare down family life. I have personal experience with this issue, and it was not one worth remembering.
Shouldn't mothers be able to decide for themself whether they are depressed or not? You liberal bastards make me want to puke. You are too ignorant to see why things like this are destroying our civil liberties and even the most simple things like to THINK FOR OURSELF. Any time you want to debate 13heathens let me know you stupid fuck.
Well, I usually bristle at the gun-toting, angry white man stance, but, you do have a good point, even if stumbled upon completely by accident. Actually, the MH profession and big pharma stand to gain much from this key legislation. No conspiracy need be thought of, the system is already in place for everyone to be medicated into compliance.
I think that psychiatry needs to be greatly overhauled. However, the power of the profession has a toehold on so many aspects of human conduct, and the state licenses MH professionals, and thus there is the backing of the state. It would be a tangled mess to undo, if reform were to take place.
What I meant was that if a doctor thinks the patient's state of condition is potentially harmful to the patient or others than the patient can not refuse treatment. treatment meaning hospitalization, medication, ect... . On another note, I think that psychiatry as compared to other branches of medicine is much more limited in knowledge. fighting cancer or diabetes is much different than fighting depresion. mental illnes is oversimplified and i think overtreated.
No one forces a person to take SSI's. You go to your General Practitioner discuss things with him, he may give you a perscription, you then have the choice wether to actually go to a pharmacist and fill the perscription.
Scientology is again stepping on peoples basic human rights, trying to dictate to its members that they are not allowed to consider using anything but the 50 year old bull shit a Sci-Fi author dreamt up.
I am not a scientologist by the way. and I am not claiming that mental illness doesn't exist. I am going to go to medical school. I Am simply saying that SSRI drugs are pushed so much with big money and there mechanism of action is oversimplified. In fact nobody knows for sure how SSRI drugs work. There are different theories. Other treatments are great but i have a feeling that this is going to turn into an easy money SSRI hustle.
If there is not enough research to know how to treat PPD then why do psychiatrists treat it with SSRI?(others: smoking, PMDD, bipolar, depresion, OCD, ect.... ). Are all those diseases caused by a simple low concentration of 5-HT in the synapse?The problem with this bill is the screening that will take place. I promise that with government supported screening there will be overdiagnosis because people are going to make money. when you are diagnosed legally as crazy you have no rights.
To play the devil's advocate, I have to say that there really is little known about Post-partum depression concerning etiology and triggers. But, I am going to guess that, based on the latest scientific speculation, there is little to go on when listing PPD as a brain ailment, and instead, is most likely an existential issue. Still, it must be a bummer to feel let down after giving birth. However, I don't think medicating should be considered while nursing.
The psycho-pharmaceutical industrial complex informs so much of our lives, mostly for the worst, insinuating its influence into our homes, schools, and so many other public spheres. This generation is by far the most overly prescribed and medicated in American History-or of the world, for that matter. Humanity has given up much freedom and personal liberty to the MH profession, and has actually been made more vulnerable and sicker (meds) in the process. PP depression IS an EXISTENTIAL issue.
And because I am a man (not a Scientologist, thank you very much), I cannot have insight into aspects of the human condition? PP depression, as it is called, is no more a disease state or neurochemical imbalance that all the other 370 plus DSM listed disorders. Its just another example of the incursions into our lives, thanks to the power wielded by medicine and the state. Some women get blue after giving birth, that is a state of mind, not something to medicate, but to ponder and work through.
Thanks, Planet Scientology! I just knew I didn't need antidepressants! Or some evil therapist. All I need is to conceive a child, get demoted for refusing an abortion, have silent birth, deny post-partum depression, & raise my child to full maturity in just six short years! Then it's a billion year contract and off to the Estates Project Force...
This is why "unbelievers" are tarred as "enemies" by these cults. Anyone who provides information that seems contradictory to the cults message is seen as an enemy and must be gone after and silenced. It does not matter what it relates to or who it affects, if the cult perceives the message as contradicting their message.
The Scientologists who gravitate to Szasz's critical discourse, are cherry picking the aspects of his thinking that the COS regards as demonic within the profession, much as the Christian regard of Satan. However, to draw such a simplisitic notion is shortsighted and typical of the dogmatic views that the COS must maintain of the MH profession in general. Without the 1950s view of shrinks(LRH had unsuccessfully sought the help of shrinks in the VA), the COS would loose much of its punch
Much needed informative video! So important for those who tend to NOT listen to the facts!
CCHR would prefer a bunch of mom's to "go over the edge, hurt themselves and/or their children" then state THEY could have prevented all of this with vitamins and counseling in order to get a grant from the government?
Hell, Jett Travolta just died do their beliefs..but hey who cares right? They are playing Russian roulette with people's lives!
Thanks again 13Healthens! Keep educating the public!
I have my day off today, so I have time to do a little digging. I am really nonplussed by what I discovered about the CCHR, as my great hero, civic libertarian, and critique, Thomas Szasz, has been a guest of the CCHR as a lecturer.
you know, if co$ really believed there was no such thing, shouldnt they support a bill that researches it to try and prove themselves right? more proof cchr and scientology have no idea what their talking about and know they cant back up their statements.
I thought that CCHR was a "respectable" organization that had been co-opted by the COS? I know that Thomas Szasz, a psychiatrist by profession for several decades, has done much to bring the abuses of psyches to the fore. And as for the advances in neurology and genetics, I wouldn't know the first thing about these, as it pertains to brain research.
CCHR respectable?? Many words describe the CCHR but respectable is not one of them. The CCHR is a Co$ front group determined to destroy psychiatry with lies & propoganda. The CCHR still today would have you believe frontal labotomies are an everyday occurance & ECT is still performed the way it was in the 1950's.
I am not altogether familiar with the Citizens commission on human rights, however, I am thinking that the COS did not form this commission, but, instead, like the Cult watch org.(name?), was coopted for its nefarious agenda. I will do further research on this, as it warrants some looking into.
I have a feeling trying to do this sort of thing is going to get senators and congressmen interested, and pissed off.
And the result will be they research into CCHR. And they'll learn what Wise Beard Man and Anonymous have been pointing out about them.
They just blew their legs off with a mortar. I can't believe this. They were wise enough to tell Tom Cruise to knock it off, but apparently not smart enough to know CCHR is going to expose them as idiots.
Applied research into psychiatric "illness" is still very wanting. I don't necessarily poo-poo the efforts of those seeking to understand brain function better. But, to this point in the science, docs are still medicating behaviour, not actual know neurological disfunction. If so many psyche "diseases" exist, then should neurologists be the ones diagnosing and treating, rather than shrinks? The current count on psyche disorders is at over 370 in the DSM-IV. I think that the MH prof. is wont.
Name a GP that doesn't diagnose based on symptoms?
Why is this concept, that is prevalent in all medicinal practices and not exclusive to psychiatry, beyond most people? Seriously, look at how many non-psychiatric diseases and conditions are treated based on symptoms. Why do people suddenly expect psychiatry to be held to a different standard??
I truly don't understand what you are saying. Are you apolgetic of the practice of psychiatry-as-medicine in toto? Are you saying that, because psychiatrists diagnose mental illness on symptoms, as doctors do, that the profession is beyond the pale of legitimate critique? I would posit that psychiatrists have co-opted the disease model of sickness, yet, the DSM-IV is the tool used to diagnose, and label, individuals with inappropriate BEHAVIORS. Mind states are not necessarily disease states.
The need for harder science in the MH discourse is just the tip of the iceberg. The real issue is, do medically trained doctors have the exclusivity of knowledge of human behaviour? I really don't think that brain science has flowered yet, and the future may hold great promise. However, for the time being, we are dealing with human beings, and the care of the "soul". So, it cannot hurt to keep the dialogue going, and the research funded.
^ There is a far cry from legitimate critique and the disgusting scaremongering and misinformation being put out by the cult front group the CCHR. If legitimate critique had anything to do with this discussion then wouldnt the fruits of what research has discovered not be front and centre in the campaign to oppose this act? How can you reasonably expect to hold discourse over treating conditions with groups like the CCHR when they deny those conditions even exist?
Indeed. I agree most passionately. This COS and psychiatry has to be exposed for the Red-scare era crap that it is. The 1950's is not the same socio-political landscape as present day. Yet, the COS still employs the same half-truth rhetoric of its McCarthyistic counterparts.
also, my sister had ppd with her 2nd child. I could be wrong but I think it is more common in the 2nd birth. anyway, her baby suffered a bit because she was not diagnosed early.
they are both quite well now but it got kinda scary. this is important for both moms and babies.
Great work 13 & Red. Postpartum depression is real. I've witnessed my wife go through it & it is a serious health issue. Any bill that will encourage more research, improved services & treatments (not just medications) & better education for families can only be a good thing.
meh, let Scientology sounds like idiots in their crusade. It will give them more bad PR and hopefully another comically entertaining interview with Tommy Davis. Srsly, I'd pay money to see him make an fool of himself again, lol.
Thanks for the news 13H, didn't know about this act. I look forward to it helping future moms in the U.S.
I'm on the same page. I've seen improvements with balancing hormones nutritionally to a positive degree, but research is not supported in this area. If we could help with integrative health and understand how "if necessary" a medication could help, then I'm all for it.
I talk to a new mom right now who is going through it and yes, there is no proper treatment for her medically, its like, let's see if this works and then they leave her on her own with no education. Its very frustrating for her.
Epic ! spread the word loud and clear 13H and Red ! Every one should know this truth for what it is pure help for mothers not to drug up the mothers. If this bill was passed a while ago the whole sad story of Yates would never have happend.
Well done 13H and Red, the more new Mothers that are educated about PPD or as it is known in Australia, Post-natal Depression, the more women won't think that they are alone and that there is no hope for them.
I can't imagine what it must feel like to suffer from this horrible condition. Imagine looking at your new born child and wanting nothing to do with it, then blaming yourself for having these terrible thoughts. CCHR needs to fuck off, sometimes vitamins & a sauna just won't do the job.
$cientologists lying? On mah intertubes? Surely you jest, after all they iz the "most ethical people on the planet," amirite? Heh... everywhere ya turn is a $cilontololligy front group... it's like stepping on cockroaches.
@13Xanadu You really don't understand what mental illness actually is do you? Don't worry you will soon.
As for 'conspiracies', do you live in the US? If so, go outside and look up. If you're too blind to see the chemtrails as crisscrossing white lines I feel sorry for YOU. There are some people that are too blind and ignorant even with the proof right in front of their face.
You've been stalking me. Apparently you stalk others on youtube. Another person told you to stay out of their channel.
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 Those aren't chemtrails dum dum those are contrails. BIG Difference. Condensation and Poison are two different things. If you took your car up to those altitudes it would do the same thing. Get your aluminum foil hat and go hide in an underground bunker. Maybe you should look up Distrails while you are at it. No wait..Do do that..You'll think that somehow the U.S. Gov't is magically trying to erase all of the clouds out of the sky to destroy the ozone layer. Get an Education!!
SacredSocietyAP 4 months ago
@SacredSocietyAP Yes there is a big difference between contrails and chemtrails. Contrails last for maybe 30 seconds. Chemtrails last for 2-3 hours or more. Ask your parents or grandparents if 10-20 years ago planes left huge criss-crossing white lines in the sky. Take your own advice and get an education.
Ragnarok187 4 months ago
@Ragnarok187 Actually, 10-20 years ago planes did leave trails that lasted for hours. It depends on the high altitude climatic conditions, naturally.. Granted I can only go back about 35 years ago, but yes, they did.
13Heathens 4 months ago
@13Heathens Thank You! Please remember this though. Conspiracy nuts don't care if they are right or wrong. They are simply attention whores. Looking to scare people and piss of those who actually know what they are talking about. Trying to convince them they are wrong just makes them mad because they don't care. They are DRAMA QUEENS looking for a show. Meanwhile they have thousands of people scared out of their mind just for fun and attention. They are losers with NO LIFE of their own.
SacredSocietyAP 4 months ago
@Ragnarok187 I don't need to ask my parents or grandparents because 10-20 years ago I was
in the aviation business myself, just like my father and my grandfather. I was raised around aircraft
my whole life. By the way I did get an education, at the Naval Aviation Technical Training Center. All of
my friends that aren't in the music business are pilots and mechanics. You can't fool an expert DUM DUM. Try this shit on someone who DOESN'T know ANYTHING about aircraft.
SacredSocietyAP 4 months ago
@SacredSocietyAP You call yourself an expert in aviation and don't acknowledge chemtrails being used? Right, they're all contrails. Just harmless condensation. But as interesting as the aviation industry is and regardless of if chemtrails are fake or not this video relates to psych so keep it on topic. There are plenty of chemtrail vids to argue your point about that subject. But thanks for bringing up an 8 month old conversation to go on the attack. Troll.
Ragnarok187 4 months ago
@Ragnarok187 LOL Oh so now that I've debunked your whole silly conspiracy you want me to follow the topic of the video. You are a joke and people LIKE YOU who purposely mislead people just to make money on YouTube are complete assholes.
SacredSocietyAP 4 months ago
@SacredSocietyAP ".. you want me to follow the topic .."
Actually, I would prefer if people do keep on topic. That goes for the two of you, Ragnarok187 included.
13Heathens 4 months ago
@13Heathens Hey I'm not the one that went off topic. He brought up the 8 month old convo. I'd prefer to stick to the psych.
Ragnarok187 4 months ago
@13Heathens Fine. I'll stay on topic. Women are friggin' nutcases. They commit child abuse 4 times more than the father and kidnap children twice as much as strangers. They also don't pay child support at twice the rate of men. There ya go..On Topic..Women are crazy and should be watched. I believe in PPD..Why? Cause there is proof to back it up in stats of child abuse cases. oh yea..chemtrails are bullshit.
SacredSocietyAP 4 months ago
@SacredSocietyAP You didn't debunk anything. You just called yourself an expert and your whole family was in aviation so you know for a personal opinion chemtrails are fake. And I'm not trying to make any money from anyone so its pretty rude labeling me like that. Nor am I misleading people. Do some research. But like I stated before, this video is about psych so keep it on topic. If you wanna troll for conspiracies to throw abuse at there are plenty of other places to do it.
Ragnarok187 4 months ago
You keep mentioning scientology whenever you mention CCHR. CCHR was founded by scientology yes, but NOWHERE do they promote it, nor does CCHR try to force scientology info on others. Constantly you mention the link, when it really has nothing to do with it. The info CCHR offers has nothing to do with the other. Then you constantly mention 'conspiracy'. And as many people have already stated, this act will support DRUG treatment and research, not alternatives. Drugging new mums will not help.
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 "Constantly you mention the link, when it really has nothing to do with it."
Don't delude yourself. Would you like links to testimonial pages in which people speak of "specialists which CCHR referred them to directing the patients to Cos? Should I provide links to Cos presentations talking about how through CCHR they're "eradicating" psychiatry? Shall I point you to the writing of LRH where he speaks of the "psyches"? Open your eyes. You're being manipulated.
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens CCHR presents pretty damn good info, and it's mostly accurate. There are faults and biases in all presentations, theirs AND yours. Everyone has an agenda. I've done plenty of research surrounding psychology and psychiatry (I'm a student of the former). The only research that supports psychiatry (and it's practices and drugging) is the research bought and paid for by Big-Pharma. CCHR offers secondary info for me. My main sources are peer-reviewed articles from the psych literature.
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 "the research bought and paid for by Big-Pharma"
You may want to reconsider that statement. Psychiatric conditions were being studied long before the development of the first psychiatric drugs. Out of curiosity do you know what a chemical imbalance really is? Been reading peer reviewed articles? Have you looking into the studies of brain structure in relation of schizophrenia and bipolar, or that group in Australia sequencing genes involved in ADHD development?
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens Conditions were being studied long before meds I agree. It was about social control then, and still control now (they just add money on top). Do I know what a chemical imbalance is that doesn't exist? Let me ask you something. Do you know what a chemical BALANCE looks like? Do you think everything comes down to brain or biology? Do you discount mind? What about the soul? Are you the type that thinks people are merely meat machines to be programmed and controlled?
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 Social control eh? As apposed to helping someone gain control over their own mental faculties? The mind is inseparable from the brain, regardless of what you may wish to believe. Let's not forget in cases of severe head trauma in which brain damage occurs the sheer volume of recorded instances of complete personality changes. The mind is contained within the brain.
Watch the segment in which i define chemical imbalances before you go down that road.
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens It takes 1 person to have a disease. It takes 2 people to have a mental illness. How exactly does drugs help a person gain control over their own mental states? That's putting 'faith' into an outside source, that only through drugs can a person get 'well', which they are often told to stay on for a lifetime. How is that helping them gain control? It doesn't help the person, but it damn sure helps those who want to control others. ECT helps to gain control? Drugs help to gain control?
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 "How exactly does drugs help a person gain control over their own mental states?"
In much the same way insulin helps a diabetic control their blood sugar. However, I don't advocate drug usage. I consider them a crutch which should be discarded over time - in most cases.
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens Psychiatric drugs are not the same as medical drugs, but I do applaud you for not advocating their usage. What you're trying to do with these vids is commendable. CoS members (and the church itself) should be abolished. But everyone has a right to their own beliefs. If CCHR tells people to see scientologists that's wrong. The info they present on psychiatry however is mostly accurate. CCHR may not be the way to go entirely, but neither is psychiatry. Labels, drugs & torture dont help
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 Actually the information CCHR (as well as Szasz) presents is decades out of date. They insist long abandoned practices are still used, and further a myth that there's no such thing as mental illness. While I'll be the first to agree that drugs are over used, and misdiagnosis runs rampant in the industry. However. that doesn't invalidate that there are people out there with very real problems. I advocate reform not abolition. CCHR does great harm to people in such a situation.
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens People have problems with life yes, and the experiences they have are indeed real, but mental illness is a lie. It's not an 'illness' or 'disease', it's a problem coping with difficult circumstances. I know, I've had 10 years personal experience. We both agree on the overuse of drugs and misdiagnosis. Psychiatry will be exposed for the damage it causes and faulty practices (maybe CCHR will be too). The system will be changed soon, which I'm sure we both agree will be a good thing.
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 "it's a problem coping with difficult circumstances"
You mean like random severe mood swings without a catalyst.. Like a complete inability to focus ones attention, without need for distraction.. Like hearing voices and seeing things that aren't there.. You propose these are the result of poor coping skills?
Yeah, many of the modern diagnoses are BS, however there are some very real conditions for which the notion "People have problems with life" is ... insulting at best.
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens Mood swings NOW may be traced back to a previous problem. Multiple personalities, where a person switches personalities NOW, is often traced back to sexual abuse. The symptoms or behaviours are often a coping strategy for something in the past (not always an effective strategy mind you). And as for 'schizophrenics' that see and hear things that aren't there... who's to say what is and isn't there? Our senses are limited. Blow a dog whistle, we don't hear it, but a dog certainly does.
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 I'll have to tell my best friend (Who's schizophrenic) That the dancing field mice Which offered to swear fealty to him if he'd assist in their war against the King of the demonic frog zombies was real. I'm sure he'll love that one.
Naturally you're either ignorant of, or ignoring the brain chemistry studied which had shown that within bipolar subjects it was shown that they have about 30% more neural receptors, or that the chemical pathways in a schizophrenics brain are wider..
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens I never said it was all real. I said who's to say what is or isn't there. Senses are limited.
If I had a dream, or better yet, a day dream (using my imagination) that I was flying, would I then be classed as schizo because it's 'not real'? Yes some people do have delusional visions they can't control, but not everyone that see's or hears outside 'normal' awareness is ill. And there will be brain differences since those paths are more active and used more frequently
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 ".. Yes some people do have delusional visions they can't control, but .."
We're done here. You're just being argumentative.. They exist other than the fact you chose to admit they exist, except for when you do.. Peer reviewed articles? The sort which you make excuses for the ones you don't agree with, amd misquote the ones you do?
I'm tired of playing nice with people who are willingly ignorant. Get the fuck out of my channel.
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens Do you really think all peer reviewed articles will all say the same thing? They don't. Just as we don't say the same thing. We may agree on some things, disagree on others. Psychiatry will be exposed, and the system will change. There are already theories being constructed to explain what 'mental illness' really is, and it's not a chemical imbalance. We all are entitled to our views and opinions. You keep yours, I'll keep mine. You make changes your way, I'll change things my way.
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@13Heathens The mind has relations to the brain sure, but it's not a 1 to 1 connection. There's a professor Stephen (Steven?) Laureys who was a neurologist researcher studying a person in a coma. This guy had zero brain functions, yet his mind was still functioning (although somewhat limited). The neurologist was originally a materialist, thinking the same as you, that mind was the exact same as the brain. He's since changed his view after that study/case.
Ragnarok187 1 year ago
@Ragnarok187 Are you referring to the deep brain function study?
"Laureys' findings merely reinforced the diagnoses the patients had already received, based on standard clinical criteria including the eyeblink test.
Zero brain function?
The perception of sound in healthy people involves the coordinated communication of many brain areas, and whereas they saw similar, widespread patterns of activation in the MCS and control groups, those patterns were absent in the PVS patients.
Try harder.
13Heathens 1 year ago
One word to stop depression......"Cannabis."
123backinyerface 1 year ago
Do you really think the government is going to actually make something really work?
That is the real question. If you do then you should have stayed at home with mom and dad. Yes throw more money at things is like adding more fuel to the fire.
dragonseptor 1 year ago
Funny that Obama PROMISED US that we would be told about a bill *BEFORE* it went to congress. He called it "transparency". But you apparently don't see a problem with congress passing bills we don't even hear about.
VonHelton 1 year ago
You REALLY think that all of a sudden our government is going to do research on ALTERNATIVES to drugs when it comes to treating depression in women? Dream on...
LindaKay1948 1 year ago
@LindaKay1948 Research grants are made available. It's all a matter of which groups apply for those grants. The government itself doesn't do research, they merely provide available funding for interested parties which will do said research.
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens Let me put it this way. Do you really think our government is interested in funding research that seeks alternatives to drugs? I don't think so. The profit motive for pushing them is too strong. You've got a lot of people who would lose their job security.
LindaKay1948 1 year ago
@LindaKay1948 The government itself doesn't technically care one way or the others. There may be some government officials and special interest groups which could seek to try to block such things, but the govt itself doesn't really care.
(continued)
13Heathens 1 year ago
(Continutation)
Years ago there was a govt research grant provided to research "why pizza burns the roof of your mouth" .. Our government is willing to throw money at some of the most bizarre things. The issue you would have to have concern about would be the lobbying power of the special interest groups.
13Heathens 1 year ago
(survivor030406 cont.) "History shows that these programs do stuff in the real world that they don't want published. Another concern is the news that the Teenscreen program had a false positive rate of 85%. The kids were driven straight to the psychiatrist office to get prescriptions, sometimes without even getting the parents consent first. Go ahead and flame away with your Glen Beck wanna-be denigrations, but it's pretty obvious why so many people do not trust these kind of programs."
LindaKay1948 1 year ago
survivor030406 wanted me to post this for him, as, when he tried to post it, it didn't work for him. He wrote, "I hope this isn't construed as off topic.. I'd like to compare this act to Teenscreen. Isn't this bill worded pretty much the same as the Teenscreen statement about their program? Saying nobody is forced etc? (to be continued...)
LindaKay1948 1 year ago
Melanie Stokes DID get psychiatric "help", including a cocktail of drugs and electric shock treatment BEFORE she jumped out the window of a Chicago hotel, and to her death. This kind of "treatment" for postpartum depression evidently didn't work for her. Why would we want to make sure all new mothers are screened so that, if they answer the questions the wrong way, toxic and disabling drugs are pushed on them? (I speak from experience. I suffered great loss. See my channel.)
LindaKay1948 1 year ago
Linda, out of curiosity, did you actually listen to the audio, or simply comment?
13Heathens 1 year ago
@13Heathens I read the info at the right of the video.
LindaKay1948 1 year ago
several comments from "1thebabyalex" were removed due to a lack of relevance. The topic of this discussion is the Mother's Act. If you want to discuss psychiatry feel free to do it in as a reply to an appropriate video - for example my 13H refutes CCHR series, which covers many Psychiatry related topics.
Alex you've not been blocked, however I use you in further posts to keep to the topic of the video which you are responding to.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Dear 13th!
Tell me this:
0:56 Education about PPD. 1:09 Increase research.
Are you about to educate people on things you are just about to research?
How is that?
csurmi22 2 years ago
.. I know the circular logic that you're attempting to cite. Your wording in the above statement is a bit foolish. You see I'm not a researcher, nor is it my job to provide such education.. but all that aside.
PPD is not completely unknown, but what is currently known is inadequate. Thus to better understand PPD it needs further research. As the understanding of it increases the better people will be able to be help patients understand the risks warning signs and (currently unknown) causes.
13Heathens 2 years ago
I am not attemting to cite anything, I am pointing out how extremely illogical is what you say.
Mothers act is a hoax and it just made me sure CCHR is on the very right path!
I wish them well!
csurmi22 2 years ago
I dont have a problem you stuffing your kid with anti-depressants and heavy drugs, up to you. But you dont come and tell me how I should raise mine! Deal?
And it doesnt matter if its Scientology, the Pope Himself, a local priest or a doctor protesting, they protest for me.
csurmi22 2 years ago
The mothers act isn't some ploy to drug kids. You should consider listening to the audio before commenting again.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Dear 13th Heathens! What risk are you talking about???? For millenia mothers were able to give birth and raise kids. What screening is neccessary? You probably dont have a single child man!
csurmi22 2 years ago
I have two kids, actually, and their mother did suffer from PPD, which is what the mother's act is all about.... which you would have known had you paid attention to the video.
The Mother's act is to promote further studies to help better understand PPD and its causal factors, as well as provide education as to what it is and the risk indicators are, increase public awareness, and to find better treatments.
Next time try making a comment with some relevance, thanks.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Melanie Blocker-Stokes, for whom the act is
named, committed suicide following months of treatment for PPD including four hospitalizations, at least four different drugs documented to cause suicidal ideation, and electroshock therapy.
You seem to believe what people say based on little more than that they say it (like the woman on the clip), the references I make are all out there to find. There is no point in me bothering with you.
Yimmery 2 years ago
The mothers act is to increase awareness, establish risk factors, research the causes as well as more effective treatments... still.
Talking about ineffective treatments reinforces the need for such a bill. You're being argumentative for no logical reason.
13Heathens 2 years ago
You are right in principal, it would be good to have successfull non harmfull medicine but the afformentioned harmfull treatments would themselves never have seen the light of day in the 1st place had they not been presented with good intentions.
Only time will tell but for some the "track record" means they would rather not wait to find out if they are to end up like Melanie Stokes on a new, different brand name.
Yimmery 2 years ago
Forcing people to take drugs is not treatment. The use of psyche services should be available to All who voluntarily seek such service (coercive service is an oxymoron). Coincidentally, many women seeking help ostensibly for "PDD" (no psychobiological marker to date) are oftentimes socially and economically marginalized, frustrated and lonely. A "right" to be treated should also imply the right to not be treated; the latter being nearly impossible. Treatment should reflect our cultural values.
1thebabyalex 2 years ago
of the primacy of the individual, rather than the therapeutic agenda of the state vis a vis socially problematic individuals (non-criminal). Is the threat of suicide-or its ideation-grounds for involuntary mental incarceration? Who is the psychiatrist an advocate for? The individual or society? If the latter, then, arguably, there is more to PDD "research"-a foregone conclusion-than meliorative therapy. If mental illness were clearly biological, then there be no juridical right to force treat.
1thebabyalex 2 years ago
The mother's act does not enforce treatment of any sort.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Recently the FDA have put black box warnings on Zyban and Chantix (drugs which have already been approved and on the market for quite a while) for serious adverse mental health affects including depression, suicide and hostility. Drugs which where not originally intended for psychiatric purposes.
Yimmery 2 years ago
Relevance?
13Heathens 2 years ago
Zyban is Bupropion hydrochloride also marketed as Wellbutrin, an anti-depressant.
I'm not saying that they will put Mothers on Wellbutrin but if the side effects of the kind of drug you would give to PPD include depression, suicide and hostility.
I might not have a point seeing as obviously they would give mothers something different, which doesn't have such negative effects despite the fact that the afformentioned drugs were on the market for many years and that was only disclosed recently.
Yimmery 2 years ago
... Did you actually listen to the video prior to replying? The mothers act is to help increase public awareness, study the causes of PPD, and develop new treatments.
So once again I must ask about the relevance of your comments.
13Heathens 2 years ago
i cant think of a better way to get people to support your views than to be overly belittling and sarcastic
birdsh20 2 years ago
thank you so much for finally providing a rational video about the MOTHER's Act. It's so refreshing.
mishela12000 2 years ago
Ha!! You mother .. you!! ;-) Genius!!
lostinthelandoflies 2 years ago
The earlier comment about me enjoying this knowing the subject might make me look insensitive, its just that I am desensitized after everything Ive seen.
Yimmery 2 years ago
A healthy about of cynicism is a good thing, however too much tends to get in the way at times. Sometimes programs with the greatest intentions bring forth the greatest catastrophes..
But in some cases, if the cause is worth enough, the attempt is what's vital. Ignoring things like PPD won't make them go away. All you can do is to start initiatives that may at least provide a shred of hope.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Vagueness can be a strong point as you put it but only in an ideal world I think.
With the unknown it is likely for those who stand to benifit from being right to want to be right whether they are right or not. So rather than science this situation could end up as the more powerfull presiding over contention.
Yimmery 2 years ago
That all ties into the corruption which was referenced earlier. It's a factor in any program of this sort.
I certainly wont argue with you on that!
13Heathens 2 years ago
I think what seems to have been a difference of opinion between us despite that we agree on a number of things, illustrates the ambiguity of the act which can be interpreted in different ways.
There's not much else to learn, other than studying the subject, what sounds credible or not and finding who said it, why and if they are bias.
The ambigouos Mothers act if passed is something which will have to prove itself not to be a pharma ploy to those who think it isn't.
Best wishes, I'm done.
Yimmery 2 years ago
I have just looked at the senate govt website about this and as far as what they intent to do it goes litte further than saying "Screening" "Identification" "Treatment" "Educate" "Health care" "Support" "Research" "Discover".
Impressive words.
Hypothetically either "Drugs" or "Vitamins" (like you mentioned for pallegra, vitamin B3 niacin) could be equally applicable to the context as a whole, so its like supporting a bill which is as ambigouos as the example I gave for J walking earlier.
Yimmery 2 years ago
Yup it's very ambiguous, but the J-Walking example was way over the top.
That vagueness is actually a strong point, and would allow more groups to seek funds for research, which will increase the chances of finding a viable resolution.
If it specified psychiatric medications in the bill I'd be waving my arms calling fowl right there next to you. If you aren't sure of the cause you can't limit the fields of research.
13Heathens 2 years ago
HaHa! Stop this!! Tonite is my spliff night and I'm trying to chill... with a touch of Tarkovsky.. (yep the mental disease!) .. Maybe tomorrow ( my lsD-Day) I will send ya more colourful comments! ;-)
lostinthelandoflies 2 years ago
J walking - "Punished in some way"
Slap on the wrist or death row?
"New treatments"
What next a new law which says Doctors shall "make people get better".
Yimmery 2 years ago
Put away that tinfoil hat please.
13Heathens 2 years ago
On wiki for PPD there is information to nutritional and dietry approaches (all of which are referenced incase you thought I was a "Nut" or just "making it up").
Maybe medication was only mentioned once but that seems significantly more detail than she has given about anything else such as with the ambiguous New treatments why the lack of detail if so keen to prove to us its not just a pharma front? Does the bill itself say New treatments too?
Yimmery 2 years ago
Am I keen to disprove a conspiracy theory? The bill wasn't drafted by a drug company, but by someone who's wife had a horrible time with PPD. I did state that in the video, didn't I?
And yes, new treatments, research, and education. The anti-psyche movement is just jumping at shadows on this one.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Right now the "best" solution available to physicians is to throw anti-depressants at a person, instead of treating the underlying issue.
I don't know about you, but I'd prefer a better option for physicians.. Roughly 70-80% of psychiatric meds are prescribed by physicians, NOT shrinks.. which I consider to be the vast majority of psyche-drug related problems which face us today.
Shrinks providing psyche meds test blood levels, doctors don't.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Yes, psych drugs have also been advertized in the media rather than presciption.
For niacin, I think its pallegra you are talking about. Athough not PPD but so far you have given more detail about therapy other than medication than the female speaker on the clip.
I will also mention that the woman with PPD who died you are referring to in the drafting of this bill, was on medication and receiving electroshock therapy.
Yimmery 2 years ago
I, personally, have a huge issue with those advertisements. They feed off of that little bit of
hypochondria in all of us.
She'd been suicidal prior to the first of her three hospitalizations over a 7 week span.. aka before the meds and shock treatment.
head to melaniesbattle(dot)org for more on that.
And good call BTW, I was referencing Pellegra. My little way of saying better treatment requires better understanding.
(BTW; we can discuss modern ECT if you'd like. it's not that big a deal)
13Heathens 2 years ago
This is an interesting conversation I am enjoying it. As to whether she whether being suicidal prior to treatment is relavent to whether she was iatrogenically killed is subjective unless the science can be presented as to why she died. At best being drugged and shocked obviously didn't stop her death.
Yimmery 2 years ago
On that I agree. the treatment she was given was clearly ineffective. If she had proper treatment available her death may have been preventable. However there is no currently not enough known about PPD for such a treatment to exist.
13Heathens 2 years ago
All the doctors, or shrinks, can do is experiment with different treatments and hope that it helps their patient. The goal of the Mother's act is to change that, and encourage research that may bring to light a treatment that's more reliable than throwing a dart at the proverbial dartboard of treatment options.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Monday is my ECT day... {-0 ...
lostinthelandoflies 2 years ago
It doesn't have to be representative of the "average" shrink either, not if its a key opinion leader such as Robert Spitzer who admitted "may have got it wrong" with 30% of ADHD cases or Dr. Joseph Beiderman who is currently under investigation by the Senate Finance commitee. Look it up if you want.
Yimmery 2 years ago
That's not relevant. There are good shrinks and bad shrinks.
Also I personally would have issues with anyone claiming to have diagnosed someone as ADHD without using all the the appropriate tests.
The Eye tracking test should always be used, it's the best tool in the testing battery.
13Heathens 2 years ago
5:25 as ambigouos as you are does that mean;
A) drugs AND other treatments
or
B) drugs OR other treatments?
If A then it makes little difference 100% of intended will be on drugs.
If B then youve got a drug free control subject in the masses on your hands to show us how "great" your drugs are.
Yimmery 2 years ago
Sorry I don't have, nor do I provide drugs.
Not enough is currently known about postpartum depression. A better understanding of the biological level causes will allow for better treatment options.
Increasing awareness of the risks and warning signs will help new mothers be prepared for potential future emotional hardships.
Not all problems which have a psychological manifestation are psychological in origin. You're not too good at this, are you?
13Heathens 2 years ago
I didn't say enough is already known about postpartum depression and I didn't say it was not biological in origin.
I did say that there are financial ties between the pharmaceutical industry and psychiatry and provided a way to find out more about that, so in spite of the fact I used the word "validate" there is still conflict of interest if PPD where fully understood. My mistake for using the word "validate" which I can see might have made it look like I was saying PPD is not valid.
Yimmery 2 years ago
It certainly did imply that you were invalidating PPD. Thank you for clarifying that.
There are many problems which have a psychological manifestation, which are not treated using psyche meds. For example there is a condition resulting from a niacin deficiency which exhibits symptoms similar to schizophrenia.
It's all about finding an appropriate treatment, instead of just tossing pills at a person and hoping they'll work.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Has the narrator actually read all the stuff about financial ties between psychiatry and the drug industry recently? like a search for DSM in the NY times? or is this clip some kind of joke?
Incase he is too slow to undertstand, in laymans terms thats:
The people who sell the drugs giving money to the people who validate the disease.
Yimmery 2 years ago
Your comment is not relevant. The word "disease" is a misnomer used by critics, and is neither correct nor accurate.
The percentage of lead shrinks that got where they are with an economic boost from drug companies is neither representative of the average psychologist/psychiatrist, nor is it relevant to legislate discussed in this video.
Increasing public awareness, funding research, and looking for better treatment methods is of great cultural importance, you're rhetoric is not.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Its hard to understand your writing but it looks like you are thinking very hard about this, if you can't see the conflict of interest when doctors are paid by people who sell the treatement as opposed to being paid by the tax payer or patient then there is no point in talking to you.
Yimmery 2 years ago
More doctors are paid by those selling treatment, than shrinks actually. Are they trying to take over the world too? *snicker*
One of the most serious issues we have is that most research is funded by private (corporate) interests. Federally funded research does not bear the same pressure to reach the sorts of conclusions that will benefit some company with an agenda.
You really need to learn to look at the big picture, instead of taking a stance based on a snap-shot of reality.
13Heathens 2 years ago
So now you are telling us about research funded by corperate interests and how other doctors take money from those selling the treatment as well.
Is there anything else you would like to ad to my argument?
I agree, you are right about looking at the bigger picture, unless otherwise you mean that so long as its not just psychiatry that is corrupt then its not all that bad.
Yimmery 2 years ago
The isn't a single field of research, in which there isn't some level of corruption.
If you condemn the entire psychiatric industry for those few that have been corrupted by corporate interests, you must also condemn every other industry in which the same thing occurs.
corruption within any group is a bad thing, however understanding that it's merely a reflection of society is part of that big picture.
13Heathens 2 years ago
(correction; "There isn't a single field.." etc etc.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Some have indeed misused it over the years to that end. This is not even a moot point. The pharmacalogical science is pretty impressive, if one admires the doping of brains, on nothing more than speculative models of brain function. Much of the technical nature and flim flam science at the employ of shrinks is as deceiving for them as it is for the public at large. My whole contention is that mental illness is not mental disease, no matter how many biologistic terminology is thrown into the fray
whiff1962 2 years ago
I find myself saying that too often - It's not a diease. It's only Szasz and the rest of the anti-psyche crowd that call mental disorders diseases. In some cases there are biological factors, however that still doesn't make it a disease. It's a misnomer which is melodramatic and misleading.
13Heathens 2 years ago
It's only Szasz and the rest of the anti-psyche crowd that call mental disorders diseases: The disease paradigm is Repudiated by Szasz, et. al.
This mental illness qua disease, in its present engenderment, is still nascent, and psychiatry has set itself the hard task(slippery slope) of remaining true to its paradigm.
The confluence of profit, the misapprehension of shrink qua physician, meaning well, are a perilous mix. Big pharma and the MH system stand to gain, even if it be incidental.
whiff1962 2 years ago
It might be an issue of expediency also, getting the Mother's act passed. This key legislation would make for a much more efficient means of keeping tabs on women who are at risk of PPD(read: poor, young, socially isolated), and having a means of following up on this vulnerable population. This a law that is, in a way, a piece of social engineering, an endeavor to see that the lower classes are subject to the manipulations of the mental hygienists.
whiff1962 2 years ago
The counter argument could be made that PPD is a diseased state of the brain, an bona fide illness that attacks, regardless of social station. I will aver to this reposte most graciously. However, this still does not refute and discredit my prior contention, which is, this is just another piece in the social engineering puzzle.
whiff1962 2 years ago
Mental hygienist? You may want to doff a tinfoil hat before using that term too much. PPD is disorder which has a psychiatric manifestation.. not a disease. Most likely a hormonal imbalance wreaking havoc with brain chemistry..
But without proper research we'll never know for sure. PPD does strike people in all walks of life, so your own counterargument is valid.
Sometimes "social engineering" really is just trying to make life better for people - ooh the horror, LOL!
13Heathens 2 years ago
Sorry, but I cannot agree with the state of present-day psychiatric discourse and praxis. Heathens, you are a man of sound intellect, and I respect much you have to say, but I feel that psychiatry, in its present engenderment, has no business setting the world straight. Still, individuals need to clinge to the idea that the universe is ordered. Sorry, I have to just partially agree with you.
whiff1962 2 years ago
The source of my contempt with the MH profession is in the power and authority that they arrogated to themselves, and of course the hubris with which these same "well-meaning" professionals set out to help. Institutional psychiatry is the greatest evil, as if the contractual-freely entered into-isn't a slap in the face to anyone who values individual freedom and dignity. I know this might come off as hyperbole, but psychiatry needs some serious, meaningful reexamination/ substantive critique.
whiff1962 2 years ago
On that point I mostly agree with you. Most of the shrinks I've dealt with that work in institutions - within the US - are incompetent at best. I am, however, unwilling to condemn the entire field.
There are good shrinks, and bad shrinks, however the bad ones certainly are more memorable - as well as more likely to vie for authority.
13Heathens 2 years ago
Our point of departure might be a reflection of our personal political outlook, as well as the means we go about deconstructing the discourse being critiqued. There is no doubt that this U.S. qua Therapeutic (pharmacracy a la Szasz) state is no laughing matter, and something to be bantered about like eggheads in their ivory towers. Psychiatry is so much about coercion and control. I would aver that it does help people, but so do other broken systems.
whiff1962 2 years ago
Psychiatry isn't about coercion or control. Some have indeed misused it over the years to that end. As for the "drug" side of the equation - the highest percentage of psychiatric medications perscribed are by physicians, not shrinks.
You see a political issue, where I see a social issue. So many Americans would rather take a magic pill, in stead of actually dealing with their problems.
13Heathens 2 years ago
I think that the medicalization of everyday life has molly coddled Americans to expect labels for otherwise normal human affect (social anxiety disorder being one of many salient examples). I agree, there are some really good shrinks out there, those who are more philosophically pragmatic, and less scientifically materialistic-the paradigm that seems to inform the aggregate of the profession, and which has led to the present form of biologistic flim flam discourse and perilous practices.
whiff1962 2 years ago
The truly sad thing about the bill being proposed in Melanie Stokes' name, is that there is a Youtube username amyphilo, lying about the facts of her case to promote her own twisted agenda.
mafaldacrumbwitty 2 years ago
I completely agree. If you see any legislation on the bill her mother is standing right there at the podeum supporting the legislation.
mishela12000 2 years ago
Exactly
mafaldacrumbwitty 2 years ago
You are reading the bill as it is intended to be understood. However, you are not taking into account that government and major industry, such as the pharmaceutical use these bills and law as excuses to tare down family life. I have personal experience with this issue, and it was not one worth remembering.
boosuff 2 years ago
Shouldn't mothers be able to decide for themself whether they are depressed or not? You liberal bastards make me want to puke. You are too ignorant to see why things like this are destroying our civil liberties and even the most simple things like to THINK FOR OURSELF. Any time you want to debate 13heathens let me know you stupid fuck.
Mitch03pb 2 years ago
Well, I usually bristle at the gun-toting, angry white man stance, but, you do have a good point, even if stumbled upon completely by accident. Actually, the MH profession and big pharma stand to gain much from this key legislation. No conspiracy need be thought of, the system is already in place for everyone to be medicated into compliance.
whiff1962 2 years ago
propaganda.
Mitch03pb 2 years ago
I like this video 5/5, CCHR is a dangerous operation that is fighting for the global obliteration of psychiatry.
anonymous1312 2 years ago
I think that psychiatry needs to be greatly overhauled. However, the power of the profession has a toehold on so many aspects of human conduct, and the state licenses MH professionals, and thus there is the backing of the state. It would be a tangled mess to undo, if reform were to take place.
whiff1962 2 years ago
What I meant was that if a doctor thinks the patient's state of condition is potentially harmful to the patient or others than the patient can not refuse treatment. treatment meaning hospitalization, medication, ect... . On another note, I think that psychiatry as compared to other branches of medicine is much more limited in knowledge. fighting cancer or diabetes is much different than fighting depresion. mental illnes is oversimplified and i think overtreated.
spc1029 2 years ago
No one forces a person to take SSI's. You go to your General Practitioner discuss things with him, he may give you a perscription, you then have the choice wether to actually go to a pharmacist and fill the perscription.
Scientology is again stepping on peoples basic human rights, trying to dictate to its members that they are not allowed to consider using anything but the 50 year old bull shit a Sci-Fi author dreamt up.
hartman5555 2 years ago
I am not a scientologist by the way. and I am not claiming that mental illness doesn't exist. I am going to go to medical school. I Am simply saying that SSRI drugs are pushed so much with big money and there mechanism of action is oversimplified. In fact nobody knows for sure how SSRI drugs work. There are different theories. Other treatments are great but i have a feeling that this is going to turn into an easy money SSRI hustle.
spc1029 2 years ago
If there is not enough research to know how to treat PPD then why do psychiatrists treat it with SSRI?(others: smoking, PMDD, bipolar, depresion, OCD, ect.... ). Are all those diseases caused by a simple low concentration of 5-HT in the synapse?The problem with this bill is the screening that will take place. I promise that with government supported screening there will be overdiagnosis because people are going to make money. when you are diagnosed legally as crazy you have no rights.
spc1029 2 years ago
To play the devil's advocate, I have to say that there really is little known about Post-partum depression concerning etiology and triggers. But, I am going to guess that, based on the latest scientific speculation, there is little to go on when listing PPD as a brain ailment, and instead, is most likely an existential issue. Still, it must be a bummer to feel let down after giving birth. However, I don't think medicating should be considered while nursing.
whiff1962 2 years ago
Existential issue? You obviously are either a man or a Scientologist.
mafaldacrumbwitty 2 years ago
The psycho-pharmaceutical industrial complex informs so much of our lives, mostly for the worst, insinuating its influence into our homes, schools, and so many other public spheres. This generation is by far the most overly prescribed and medicated in American History-or of the world, for that matter. Humanity has given up much freedom and personal liberty to the MH profession, and has actually been made more vulnerable and sicker (meds) in the process. PP depression IS an EXISTENTIAL issue.
whiff1962 2 years ago
Unless you are a woman who has suffered from PPD, don't describe it. It is NOT an existential issue, moron. PPD is a medical condition.
mafaldacrumbwitty 2 years ago
And because I am a man (not a Scientologist, thank you very much), I cannot have insight into aspects of the human condition? PP depression, as it is called, is no more a disease state or neurochemical imbalance that all the other 370 plus DSM listed disorders. Its just another example of the incursions into our lives, thanks to the power wielded by medicine and the state. Some women get blue after giving birth, that is a state of mind, not something to medicate, but to ponder and work through.
whiff1962 2 years ago
lol.
mishela12000 2 years ago
I've got a few things for that guy to ponder and work through
mafaldacrumbwitty 2 years ago
awesome video!
emprise 3 years ago
Thanks, Planet Scientology! I just knew I didn't need antidepressants! Or some evil therapist. All I need is to conceive a child, get demoted for refusing an abortion, have silent birth, deny post-partum depression, & raise my child to full maturity in just six short years! Then it's a billion year contract and off to the Estates Project Force...
"We are the authorities on the mind." LOL!
thedonzerlylight 3 years ago
This is why "unbelievers" are tarred as "enemies" by these cults. Anyone who provides information that seems contradictory to the cults message is seen as an enemy and must be gone after and silenced. It does not matter what it relates to or who it affects, if the cult perceives the message as contradicting their message.
RyuDarragh 3 years ago
The Scientologists who gravitate to Szasz's critical discourse, are cherry picking the aspects of his thinking that the COS regards as demonic within the profession, much as the Christian regard of Satan. However, to draw such a simplisitic notion is shortsighted and typical of the dogmatic views that the COS must maintain of the MH profession in general. Without the 1950s view of shrinks(LRH had unsuccessfully sought the help of shrinks in the VA), the COS would loose much of its punch
whiff1962 2 years ago
I made this comment on a YT video about Dr. Szasz lecturing at a CCHR event. He is a reformist libertarian psychiatrist of some fifty years.
whiff1962 2 years ago
Much needed informative video! So important for those who tend to NOT listen to the facts!
CCHR would prefer a bunch of mom's to "go over the edge, hurt themselves and/or their children" then state THEY could have prevented all of this with vitamins and counseling in order to get a grant from the government?
Hell, Jett Travolta just died do their beliefs..but hey who cares right? They are playing Russian roulette with people's lives!
Thanks again 13Healthens! Keep educating the public!
MARYBLEUZ 3 years ago
where does the father's post partum depression come into play ?
jvforever72 3 years ago
I have my day off today, so I have time to do a little digging. I am really nonplussed by what I discovered about the CCHR, as my great hero, civic libertarian, and critique, Thomas Szasz, has been a guest of the CCHR as a lecturer.
whiff1962 3 years ago
whiff1962, If you have the time, take a look at the series if vids 13Heathens put together refuting CCHR's "Psychiatry Industry of Death"
deisel1967 3 years ago
You and Thomas Szasz are two people who NEED psychiatric help
mafaldacrumbwitty 2 years ago
you know, if co$ really believed there was no such thing, shouldnt they support a bill that researches it to try and prove themselves right? more proof cchr and scientology have no idea what their talking about and know they cant back up their statements.
laladiel 3 years ago
I thought that CCHR was a "respectable" organization that had been co-opted by the COS? I know that Thomas Szasz, a psychiatrist by profession for several decades, has done much to bring the abuses of psyches to the fore. And as for the advances in neurology and genetics, I wouldn't know the first thing about these, as it pertains to brain research.
whiff1962 3 years ago
CCHR respectable?? Many words describe the CCHR but respectable is not one of them. The CCHR is a Co$ front group determined to destroy psychiatry with lies & propoganda. The CCHR still today would have you believe frontal labotomies are an everyday occurance & ECT is still performed the way it was in the 1950's.
deisel1967 3 years ago
I am not altogether familiar with the Citizens commission on human rights, however, I am thinking that the COS did not form this commission, but, instead, like the Cult watch org.(name?), was coopted for its nefarious agenda. I will do further research on this, as it warrants some looking into.
whiff1962 3 years ago
I am a firm believer that psych drugs for both parents is prolly a good idea immediately after having a baby lol.
HouseSpiderAnon 3 years ago
I have a feeling trying to do this sort of thing is going to get senators and congressmen interested, and pissed off.
And the result will be they research into CCHR. And they'll learn what Wise Beard Man and Anonymous have been pointing out about them.
They just blew their legs off with a mortar. I can't believe this. They were wise enough to tell Tom Cruise to knock it off, but apparently not smart enough to know CCHR is going to expose them as idiots.
rametarin 3 years ago
Applied research into psychiatric "illness" is still very wanting. I don't necessarily poo-poo the efforts of those seeking to understand brain function better. But, to this point in the science, docs are still medicating behaviour, not actual know neurological disfunction. If so many psyche "diseases" exist, then should neurologists be the ones diagnosing and treating, rather than shrinks? The current count on psyche disorders is at over 370 in the DSM-IV. I think that the MH prof. is wont.
whiff1962 3 years ago
Name a GP that doesn't diagnose based on symptoms?
Why is this concept, that is prevalent in all medicinal practices and not exclusive to psychiatry, beyond most people? Seriously, look at how many non-psychiatric diseases and conditions are treated based on symptoms. Why do people suddenly expect psychiatry to be held to a different standard??
themadhair 3 years ago
I truly don't understand what you are saying. Are you apolgetic of the practice of psychiatry-as-medicine in toto? Are you saying that, because psychiatrists diagnose mental illness on symptoms, as doctors do, that the profession is beyond the pale of legitimate critique? I would posit that psychiatrists have co-opted the disease model of sickness, yet, the DSM-IV is the tool used to diagnose, and label, individuals with inappropriate BEHAVIORS. Mind states are not necessarily disease states.
whiff1962 3 years ago
The need for harder science in the MH discourse is just the tip of the iceberg. The real issue is, do medically trained doctors have the exclusivity of knowledge of human behaviour? I really don't think that brain science has flowered yet, and the future may hold great promise. However, for the time being, we are dealing with human beings, and the care of the "soul". So, it cannot hurt to keep the dialogue going, and the research funded.
whiff1962 3 years ago
)) legitimate critique?
^ There is a far cry from legitimate critique and the disgusting scaremongering and misinformation being put out by the cult front group the CCHR. If legitimate critique had anything to do with this discussion then wouldnt the fruits of what research has discovered not be front and centre in the campaign to oppose this act? How can you reasonably expect to hold discourse over treating conditions with groups like the CCHR when they deny those conditions even exist?
themadhair 3 years ago
Indeed. I agree most passionately. This COS and psychiatry has to be exposed for the Red-scare era crap that it is. The 1950's is not the same socio-political landscape as present day. Yet, the COS still employs the same half-truth rhetoric of its McCarthyistic counterparts.
whiff1962 3 years ago
A slight oversight: I meant to to say that only the COS needs to be exposed, for its threadworn arguments contra psychiatry.
whiff1962 3 years ago
I think the fact that Brooke Shields had ppd, had it treated, and was criticized by you know who is a very direct reason that the Sci's hate this.
She also is from New Jersey and has done tourist ads for that state.
gobbism 3 years ago
also, my sister had ppd with her 2nd child. I could be wrong but I think it is more common in the 2nd birth. anyway, her baby suffered a bit because she was not diagnosed early.
they are both quite well now but it got kinda scary. this is important for both moms and babies.
gobbism 3 years ago
do you lurk on whyweprotest . net ?
bbugmenott 3 years ago
i had it twice, i got help in the UK, my kids and i pulled through fine. i hope to god those morons don't stop the bill.
selfhealed 3 years ago
Great work 13 & Red. Postpartum depression is real. I've witnessed my wife go through it & it is a serious health issue. Any bill that will encourage more research, improved services & treatments (not just medications) & better education for families can only be a good thing.
As for the CCHRessential services
deisel1967 3 years ago
meh, let Scientology sounds like idiots in their crusade. It will give them more bad PR and hopefully another comically entertaining interview with Tommy Davis. Srsly, I'd pay money to see him make an fool of himself again, lol.
Thanks for the news 13H, didn't know about this act. I look forward to it helping future moms in the U.S.
mavis13 3 years ago
I'm on the same page. I've seen improvements with balancing hormones nutritionally to a positive degree, but research is not supported in this area. If we could help with integrative health and understand how "if necessary" a medication could help, then I'm all for it.
truvelocity 3 years ago
I talk to a new mom right now who is going through it and yes, there is no proper treatment for her medically, its like, let's see if this works and then they leave her on her own with no education. Its very frustrating for her.
truvelocity 3 years ago
that is exactly why the MOTHERS Act is so important
mishela12000 2 years ago
And great work Red, too.
45564766 3 years ago
I will spread the word. Great work, 13H!
45564766 3 years ago
You and Red are 9000 kinds of Win.
Snarkonymous 3 years ago
Epic ! spread the word loud and clear 13H and Red ! Every one should know this truth for what it is pure help for mothers not to drug up the mothers. If this bill was passed a while ago the whole sad story of Yates would never have happend.
Loki13xx 3 years ago
Well done 13H and Red, the more new Mothers that are educated about PPD or as it is known in Australia, Post-natal Depression, the more women won't think that they are alone and that there is no hope for them.
I can't imagine what it must feel like to suffer from this horrible condition. Imagine looking at your new born child and wanting nothing to do with it, then blaming yourself for having these terrible thoughts. CCHR needs to fuck off, sometimes vitamins & a sauna just won't do the job.
SlappyThePenguin 3 years ago
$cientologists lying? On mah intertubes? Surely you jest, after all they iz the "most ethical people on the planet," amirite? Heh... everywhere ya turn is a $cilontololligy front group... it's like stepping on cockroaches.
ChristianlySkeptical 3 years ago