Psychiatry and big pharma

SLUSK

There seems to be a trend in that more and more people are diagnosed with some sort of mental illness and they then get put on meds to "treat" this illness.

It is also no secret that psychiatrists have received kickbacks from big pharma to get people on psychiatric drugs.

The reason I post it in this forum is that in all other forums they would call me a conspiracy theorist and say I'm not qualified to make any statements since I have no education in psychology.

It is no secret that big pharma profits from more and more people being diagnosed as mentally ill so why do people look at me weird when I say psychatry is not about treating people, it is about social control and profits for big pharma?

Mahatma coat

ADD is not a disease, its being a dozy git

Asperger is not a disease, its being an annoying git

Depression is not a disease, its being a moany git

Fatigue is not a disease, its being a lazy git

PTSD is not a disease, its being a wimpy git

Kleptomania is not a disease, its being a theivin git

Alcoholism is not a disease, its being a drunk git

Tourettes is not a disease, its being a mouthy git



these are just a few examples of the conspiracy.

Pharmacists invent a drug

then

Psychologists invent a disease

SLUSK

Giving a depressed person antidepressants will probably make the symptoms go away while the person is "medicated", I think cocaine and E's also will make the symptoms go away.

The antidepressants are to my understanding legal narcotics.

Mahatma coat

SLUSK wrote: »

Giving a depressed person antidepressants will probably make the symptoms go away while the person is "medicated", I think cocaine and E's also will make the symptoms go away.

The antidepressants are to my understanding legal narcotics.

Yup :D

Also Ritalin IS Speed.

Actually on the subject of Legal/ Illegal Drugs

Cocaine would be far better for people than some of the drugs they get prescribed at the moment.

and there have been a few studies that showed E's help with PArkinsons

espinolman

Psychiatry was researched and developed in nazi concentration camps


http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=10&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com%2Fsavepenry%2Fnazi.html&ei=w-zKSoqlCeSNjAez0NyoCA&rct=j&q=psychiatry+researched+and+developed+in+nazi+concentration+camps&usg=AFQjCNHFjj7Z8ugywyYCzoN2oYI6Qpkmtw From this link:

1941
German psychiatrists train the Nazi SS on mass murder techniques they learned from experimenting on mental patients. The program is extended to Dachau and other camps under the code name of 14f13. Himmler uses experienced psychiatrists to go to camps and eliminate "asocial elements" "excess prisoners." This was officially called Operation 14f13. Physicians push for widespread extermination of inmates, while some concentration camp personnel try to keep people alive to help the war effort. Doctors have the responsibility for killing at the camps, using methods they perfected on mental patients. "Medicalization" legitimizes widespread extermination. Reich Interior Minister orders that all Jews in German mental hospitals be killed. Roving bands of T4 commissions select those too ill to work & Jews and Gypsies in camps and send them to gas chambers at the psychiatric hospitals.

Hadamar (psychiatric killing institution) has a special celebration to commemorate the cremation of "mental patient" number 10,000. The entire staff participates and each receives a bottle of beer.

In Massachusetts, inmates are placed in "mummy bags" which are refrigerated to lower their body temperatures in hypothermia experiments.

Viktor Brack, one of the heads of the euthanasia program, sends a report to Himmler stating how XRays can be used to sterilize people.

I.G. Farben Industries (manufacturer of synthetic oil and rubber) chooses a site near Auschwitz because of the accessibility of slave labor. The overall operation is known as I. G. Auschwitz. Other large firms follow suit. I.G. Farben controls the firm that produces gas used by medical personnel in the camps. This begins the use of gas for mass exterminations outside of psychiatric hospitals. I.G. Farben pays the SS a labor fee of 3 Reichsmarks a day for each inmate; 1 Reichsmarks a day for children. By September, 1942, I.G. Farben is running its own concentration camp. At Auschwitz, gassing is initially tested on 600 Russian prisoners of war and 200 hospital patients. Labor camps are converted to killing centers. Gas chambers are dismantled and reassembled at these camps. T4 personnel accompany them, their salaries paid by Hitler's private chancellory.

90,000 German psychiatric patients are murdered; 71,000 in hospital gas chambers.

Blowing up mental patients with explosives is tried. This method is abandoned as needing too much cleaning up.

Hitler officially orders the general euthanasia program terminated due to an outcry from churches and public, but it in fact increases, with more and older children being killed. Over 5,000 children are killed. Various psychiatric methods are used to "treat" children including beatings and electric shock for bedwetting. In August, the killing of mental patients by gas stops and death by starvation, drugs and failure to treat infectious disease begins (covert euthanasia). Approximately 300,000 mental patients are eventually killed by gassing, injection and starvation under this official program. Many thousands were murdered previously by covert means. Many institutions in Germany (e.g., Berlin, Silesia, Baden, Saxony and Austria) are closed entirely, as all the patients are liquidated. Approximately 100,000 German mental patients starve to death after the "end" of the euthanasia program. No resistance is voiced to the killing program from the psychiatric community. A killing center is dismantled and reassembled in the East. The murder continues but more quietly, up until and even briefly after the German surrender. 10

December 10, Himmler orders the Doctors involved in the euthanasia campaign to "comb out" prisoners in concentration camps for killing. Among those involved are psychiatrists Heyde, Nitsche and others.

Ciaran500

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ADD is not a disease, its being a dozy git

Asperger is not a disease, its being an annoying git

Depression is not a disease, its being a moany git

Fatigue is not a disease, its being a lazy git

PTSD is not a disease, its being a wimpy git

Kleptomania is not a disease, its being a theivin git

Alcoholism is not a disease, its being a drunk git

Tourettes is not a disease, its being a mouthy git

What the fuck?

I assume you have no experience of any of these with someone you're close too.

espinolman

Ciaran500 wrote: »

What the fuck?

I assume you have no experience of any of these with someone you're close too.

The drug companies do invent diseases to boost drug sales:

http://www.naturalnews.com/002884_disease_drug_companies_fictitious_diseases.html

If you look at the above link you will see that The Royal College of General Practitioners in the U.K. has accused drug companies of inventing fictitious diseases

Ciaran500

espinolman wrote: »

The drug companies do invent diseases to boost drug sales:

http://www.naturalnews.com/002884_disease_drug_companies_fictitious_diseases.html

If you look at the above link you will see that The Royal College of General Practitioners in the U.K. has accused drug companies of inventing fictitious diseases

Did you read the article or just the head line?

They're accusing them of "over hyping" conditions, not inventing them.

EDIT: I also wouldn't be looking for my news from a pro Scientology or even consider them anyway trustworthy.

espinolman

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Did you read the article or just the head line?

Yes i did read it , what is the red star about on your signature , are you into communism ?

Ciaran500

espinolman wrote: »

Yes i did read it , what is the red star about on your signature , are you into communism ?

Click it, its a symbol adopted by a band.

MrBill

Nazi rocket scientists sent the Yanks to the moon. Does that mean the moon is evil or just a conspiracy?

And I agree, what's with The Star? Get that crap out of here or I'll report you.

6th

Anymore off topic posting and people WILL be banned.

Penn

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ADD is not a disease, its being a dozy git

Asperger is not a disease, its being an annoying git

Depression is not a disease, its being a moany git

Fatigue is not a disease, its being a lazy git

PTSD is not a disease, its being a wimpy git

Kleptomania is not a disease, its being a theivin git

Alcoholism is not a disease, its being a drunk git

Tourettes is not a disease, its being a mouthy git



these are just a few examples of the conspiracy.

Pharmacists invent a drug

then

Psychologists invent a disease

While your grasp on some of these diseases is shocking, I would agree that some pharmaceutical companies may be treating minor afflictions with placebos moreso than spending lots of time and money on minor ailments.

Do they even make drugs for alcoholism?

6th

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ADD is not a disease, its being a dozy git

Asperger is not a disease, its being an annoying git

Depression is not a disease, its being a moany git

Fatigue is not a disease, its being a lazy git

PTSD is not a disease, its being a wimpy git

Kleptomania is not a disease, its being a theivin git

Alcoholism is not a disease, its being a drunk git

Tourettes is not a disease, its being a mouthy git



these are just a few examples of the conspiracy.

Pharmacists invent a drug

then

Psychologists invent a disease

Banned for 48hrs.

Obviously trying to be controversial and get a reaction. I call that trolling.

Emme

SLUSK wrote: »

It is no secret that big pharma profits from more and more people being diagnosed as mentally ill so why do people look at me weird when I say psychatry is not about treating people, it is about social control and profits for big pharma?

Some people do benefit from licenced psychiatric medicines but if you look at the small print you will see that many of the side-effects are the same as the disorder itself. Long term use of these medicines can be damaging. Many people who are on these medicines don't need to be on them but it's easier for a GP to prescribe them than to suggest changes in diet and lifestyle to the patient. Some patients themselves are looking for a quick fix and haven't got the determination to make the lifestyle changes needed to improve their mental health.

These drugs help some patients but they are over-prescribed. There are children on Ritalin who would be far better off cutting out fizzy drinks, sweets and chemical additives from their diet but their parents are either too busy to implement this or they don't know any better. Education is key.

Big Pharma are out to make money first and foremost. The social control part of it is nice too, you don't see many inmates of psychiatric institutions wearing straitjackets these days. These drugs are routinely given to soldiers on the front line to keep them pepped up and in the right mindset.

If you want to socially control the general population it's easier to do so by putting neurotoxins like fluoride in the water and in toothpaste.

uncleoswald

SLUSK wrote: »

It is no secret that big pharma profits from more and more people being diagnosed as mentally ill so why do people look at me weird when I say psychatry is not about treating people, it is about social control and profits for big pharma?

People probably look at you weird because of the massive jump in logic you make from pharmaceutical companies make profit when people buy their product --> its all about social control and they make up illness. Why do you even have to put in the "it is no secret that company makes profit from selling their product" line? Of course economics isn't a secret, every indusrtry works with the same principle. Also there is a good chance that the people you are taking to know people who work in these industries and know they are not villains from a Bond movie.

humanji

SLUSK wrote: »

There seems to be a trend in that more and more people are diagnosed with some sort of mental illness and they then get put on meds to "treat" this illness.

It is also no secret that psychiatrists have received kickbacks from big pharma to get people on psychiatric drugs.

The reason I post it in this forum is that in all other forums they would call me a conspiracy theorist and say I'm not qualified to make any statements since I have no education in psychology.

It is no secret that big pharma profits from more and more people being diagnosed as mentally ill so why do people look at me weird when I say psychatry is not about treating people, it is about social control and profits for big pharma?

That's a horrifically sweeping statement. The rumour of psychiatrists only being out for social control and profits is Scientology propaganda. The problem is not psychiatrists telling people they're mentally ill at the drop of a hat, but people wanting an excuse for their miserable lives. They don't want to blame themselves.

ADD is a great example of this, where it is a real mental illness, but it's not as common as you'd think. You simply get a lot of bad parents not wanting to face up to their responsibilities. And as a result, you get people like Mahatma Coat labelling anyone who genuinely has a problem as faking it.

Pharmacutical companies will always be out to make money (they're companies after all), and there will be some psychiatrists who will abuse patients trust (in the same way that there are arseholes in every occupation). In general, psychiatrists a loath to prescribe drugs as they only reduce sympthoms and don't treat the cause.

King Mob

What I don't get is: how come the psychiatrists are evil because they make money and therefore must lie about stuff all the time but sites like http://www.naturalnews.com couldn't possibly be lying or evil even though the site is choc full of advertising for various snake oils.
http://www.naturalnews.com/PulseProductNews.html

And this is before you even look at NaturalNews' startling ignorance of science and medicine.

MrBill

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ADD is not a disease, its being a dozy git

Asperger is not a disease, its being an annoying git

Depression is not a disease, its being a moany git

Fatigue is not a disease, its being a lazy git

PTSD is not a disease, its being a wimpy git

Kleptomania is not a disease, its being a theivin git

Alcoholism is not a disease, its being a drunk git

Tourettes is not a disease, its being a mouthy git



these are just a few examples of the conspiracy.

Pharmacists invent a drug

then

Psychologists invent a disease

6th, Don't you think you're a little guilty of over-bannmanship?

His is a commonly held opinion among are large part of the medical profession. Most of it is quite true except for the tourette's part. We've all seen them around now and then, and that's a bona fide syndrome.

What he was saying was that physchiatry has fancy new labels for "conditions" that we've long had more accurate words for.

I'm sure that people who, for example, have been concussed a number times suffer from proper depression. And others are born with a predilection to it. But the vast majority of people that are being prescribed anti-depressants are simply sad because they are not happy with their lives.

Another current trend (as he pointed out before he was BANNED FOR 48 HOURS) is for people who have difficulty fitting in to be convinced that they are semi-autistic. Ridiculous.

It's not trolling, it's just calling BS on people who can't find their bootstraps.

uprising

SLUSK wrote: »

There seems to be a trend in that more and more people are diagnosed with some sort of mental illness and they then get put on meds to "treat" this illness.

It is also no secret that psychiatrists have received kickbacks from big pharma to get people on psychiatric drugs.

The reason I post it in this forum is that in all other forums they would call me a conspiracy theorist and say I'm not qualified to make any statements since I have no education in psychology.

It is no secret that big pharma profits from more and more people being diagnosed as mentally ill so why do people look at me weird when I say psychatry is not about treating people, it is about social control and profits for big pharma?

I believe more people actually are depressed these day's, but there's definately an over prescribing of anti depressant's. I was taking various anti depressant's in the past (till he found one that worked) and the thing's mask, disguise, have adverse side affect's that I was never made aware of until they popped up, I just stopped one day and the effect on my body and mind were scarey.
I 100% think that they are actually made to keep you depressed, and more suicide prone to be honest.

Undergod

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ADD is not a disease, its being a dozy git

Asperger is not a disease, its being an annoying git

Depression is not a disease, its being a moany git

Fatigue is not a disease, its being a lazy git

PTSD is not a disease, its being a wimpy git

Kleptomania is not a disease, its being a theivin git

Alcoholism is not a disease, its being a drunk git

Tourettes is not a disease, its being a mouthy git



these are just a few examples of the conspiracy.

Pharmacists invent a drug

then

Psychologists invent a disease

That's ****ing disgraceful. You realize how glaringly you misrepresent several of the conditions there?

These conditions exist, the conspiracy perhaps lies in how the medical profession and pharmaceutical industry approach the treatments.

King Mob

Has any one considered that these conditions exist and that you mightn't have the expertise and knowledge to actually determine that these conditions don't exist.

I think we can all see that MC's post is not based on anything resembling fact.

espinolman

King Mob wrote: »

Has any one considered that these conditions exist and that you mightn't have the expertise and knowledge to actually determine that these conditions don't exist.

Are'nt psychiatric disorders voted into existence by a show of hands , ADHD was voted into existence by the American Psychiatric Association in 1987 .

humanji

espinolman wrote: »

Are'nt psychiatric disorders voted into existence by a show of hands , ADHD was voted into existence by the American Psychiatric Association in 1987 .

They don't sit around a table flipping coins. They research conditions as best they can.

SLUSK

humanji wrote: »

They don't sit around a table flipping coins. They research conditions as best they can.

What is or is not a mental illness is quite arbitrary, not long ago homosexuality was considered a mental illness by these people. Other people who engaged in sadistic or masochistic sex acts were also labeled mentally ill.

Everything that slightly deviates from "the norm" seems to be labelled a mental illness. In the Soviet Union they used psychiatry to look in people deemed to be enemies of the state, the were considered "mentally ill".

It is no secret that psychiatry is about social control.

weiss

I wouldn't say there's a conspiracy amongst psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies to invent mental illness and then a cure, not all psychiatrists atleast.

But I do know there's alot of coverup goin on and it's unfortunate you have alot of ignorant uneducated individuals who dismiss all the factual information out there freely available.

But you see, those people would never "have time" to do any actual research, just enough to dismiss it all..because it's outside their little make belief world where everything is perfect.

But it's perfectly clear to me (I personally did research alot on this subject some years ago) people who suffer from depression would certainly be much better off with a healthy diet, plenty of excercise, abstain from alcohol/drugs and receive counselling for whatever their problems may be than be prescribed anti-depressants or some other muck god knows what effect it will have on your mind and body.

Family and friends can provide good support too, but unfortunately not everyone has supportive family or friends.

Making a person dependant upon anti-depressants to feel better is not a solution, it simply prolongs the suffering and in some cases has led to people committing suicide and terrible acts of crime...truly bizarre crimes where you can't come to terms why a person would do such a thing.

Of course, certain people in society need to be sedated, however someone suffering from insomnia for example should not be prescribed olanzapine which is a highly dangerous drug, but this has indeed been happening in Ireland...unbelieveable to be honest, but unfortunately true.

Most people might say about a man who kills himself "he was depressed" but never question the fact the drugs he was prescribed increased his suicidal tendancies, perhaps pushed him over the edge.

When Prozac was developed, the makers of that drug during their scientific trials, noted that it increased suicidal tendancies - this information was covered up.

How many people then died as a result of this coverup? we honestly don't know, we will probably never know.there are some reported cases of course, but we'll never have a complete picture.

I don't know if Ireland is an isolated case or it's something common around the world, but the anti-depressants for people depressed is a dangerous path we're travelling, completely unncecessary.

Years ago, I remember hearing stories about children who were abused by family members or people with alcohol problems being placed in psychiatric units where they mixed with some of the most horrible people imaginable.

Is this really a place for someone who suffered a traumatic experience ike child abuse?

Some of the kids would have grown up and now have regular respiridone injections.. i find it very sad to see a persons life destroyed because of so much ignorance in the system.

At the end of the day, you have to look out for yourself or your loved ones and realise that just because the doctor tells you or some loved one to take a drug, doesn't necessarily mean it will help you.

Nor does that insinuate the doctor knows it won't do you any good, but doctors only have so much time for people.

The only person that cares about your wellbeing is yourself and perhaps family or friends.

People who believe in the system of caring for each other are naive.

just my 2 cents.

King Mob

I think people here are mistaken in believing untrained opinion equals scientific evidence.

Mental Illness isn't decided by a show of hands (I'd love to know where you're getting that from btw.)

It has a strict definition as well.

A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern that occurs in an individual and is thought to cause distress or disability that is not expected as part of normal development or culture.

Homosexuality is not a mental illness because it does not cause distress or disability (it's prejudice that causes the distress.)
Feeling sad after a loved one dies is not a mental illness because it is expected as part of normal development or culture.

Post traumatic stress disorder is a mental illness because it causes distress and disability that is not expected as part of normal development or culture.

humanji

SLUSK wrote: »

What is or is not a mental illness is quite arbitrary, not long ago homosexuality was considered a mental illness by these people. Other people who engaged in sadistic or masochistic sex acts were also labeled mentally ill.

Everything that slightly deviates from "the norm" seems to be labelled a mental illness. In the Soviet Union they used psychiatry to look in people deemed to be enemies of the state, the were considered "mentally ill".

It is no secret that psychiatry is about social control.

Just so you know, there's a tad bit of a difference between the past and the present.

espinolman

King Mob wrote: »

Quote:
A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern that occurs in an individual and is thought to cause distress or disability that is not expected as part of normal development or culture.

You did'nt give a source for that quote , i have hightlighted and underlined two words in that quote , you see "thought to cause" - well thats not scientific , where is the science there , to arbitrarily decide someone has a mental disorder , and who gets to decide what is "normal" development or culture , sounds communist to me that .

King Mob

espinolman wrote: »

You did'nt give a source for that quote

No one else is giving any sources for any of their "facts" how come you don't ask them?

I got that quote from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_illness

Who in turn got it for here: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/cgi/mesh/2009/MB_cgi?field=uid&term=D001523
and here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Classification_of_Diseases
and here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders

espinolman wrote: »

, i have hightlighted and underlined two words in that quote , you see "thought to cause" - well thats not scientific , where is the science there , to arbitrarily decide someone has a mental disorder , and who gets to decide what is "normal" development or culture , sounds communist to me that .

Ok first that definition isn't the sum of the science done.
For a new condition to be accepted to be a mental illness there must be good peer reviewed scientific studies showing it's existance, it's effects and symptoms, the people it effects and sometimes it's cause.

For example do you think PTSD does not cause distress or disability?
Or that it is part of normal culture or development?

Maybe you can show a single currently classified mental disorder that does not fit the definition?

This process isn't arbitrary or done by a show of hands, why do you think it is?

Mahatma coat

King Mob wrote: »

No one else is giving any sources for any of their "facts" how come you don't ask them?

I got that quote from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_illness

Who in turn got it for here: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/cgi/mesh/2009/MB_cgi?field=uid&term=D001523
and here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Classification_of_Diseases
and here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders


Ok first that definition isn't the sum of the science done.
For a new condition to be accepted to be a mental illness there must be good peer reviewed scientific studies showing it's existance, it's effects and symptoms, the people it effects and sometimes it's cause.

For example do you think PTSD does not cause distress or disability?
Or that it is part of normal culture or development?

Maybe you can show a single currently classified mental disorder that does not fit the definition?

I'll get back to why PTSD is a normal human developmental reaction and how Psychology has damaged an important healing process,

but first

This process isn't arbitrary or done by a show of hands, why do you think it is?

http://www.adhdtesting.org/

from link wrote:

No scientific validation other than this DSM-IV list is ever presented. It is critical to restate the fact that the American Psychiatric Association (APA) voted ADD in as a “mental disorder” by a show of hands (majority vote) in 1980 at their committee meeting, without scientific evidence present. It was placed in the DSM-III (third edition). In 1987, ADHD was voted in by a similar show of hands (majority vote) as well and placed into the DSM-IV (fourth edition). Both committee meetings failed to produce and or demonstrate scientific evidence to support these disorders as brain malfunctions, diseases, chemical imbalances, neuro-biological conditions, illnesses; all of which are popular terms coined and marketed today.

thats where people are gettin the idea of a show of hands.

Google is a wonderful little thing init.

King Mob

Mahatma coat wrote: »

I'll get back to why PTSD is a normal human developmental reaction and how Psychology has damaged an important healing process,

Before you do, is this opinion based on scientific fact or anything supported by scientific evidence?

Mahatma coat wrote: »

but first



http://www.adhdtesting.org/



thats where people are gettin the idea of a show of hands.

Google is a wonderful little thing init.

And that's just about as supported as it was when people here where claiming it.

Is there any actual evidence for it?

indough

Mahatma coat wrote: »

http://www.adhdtesting.org/

also from this website:

"This website is operated by Ablechild.org (Parents for Label and Drug Free Education). The intent of this site is to educate and inform the public on the issues surrounding ADD/ADHD, the testing, and the drugs involved. Since there is no medical proof of any ADD or ADHD "disorder", we ask that you do not use this site for medical reasons. For real medical solutions please contact your doctor - for real educational solutions contact your school."

Mahatma coat

King Mob wrote: »

Before you do, is this opinion based on scientific fact or anything supported by scientific evidence?

Psychology isnt Science, its wishy washy quackery dressed up as medicine, its no more a field of medicine than your Beloved Homeopathy, its conjecture and speculation with fancy buzzwords.

And that's just about as supported as it was when people here where claiming it.

its a fairly well known detail about ADHD, the fact that you chose to ignore it says more about your willingness to enter into an open and honest debate really

Is there any actual evidence for it?

whats the point?

Back your points with Evidence, show us how ADHD Came to be recognised as a disease as you understand it.

King Mob

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Psychology isnt Science, its wishy washy quackery dressed up as medicine, its no more a field of medicine than your Beloved Homeopathy, its conjecture and speculation with fancy buzzwords.

Ironic wording.

Why do you think Psychology isn't science exactly?

Mahatma coat wrote: »

its a fairly well known detail about ADHD, the fact that you chose to ignore it says more about your willingness to enter into an open and honest debate really

And for a well known detail there doesn't seem to be anything to support that "it was made up with a show of hands."

I'm not ignoring it, I'm asking to see if there is any support for it.
But I seriously doubt there is.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

whats the point?

Back your points with Evidence, show us how ADHD Came to be recognised as a disease as you understand it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder

Haven't we had the burden of proof talk before?

Now have you considered the possibility that what you believe about psychiatry is based on poor understanding or deliberate misinformation about it?
Or should we just trust the nice Scientologists?

Mahatma coat

King Mob wrote: »

Ironic wording.

Why do you think Psychology isn't science exactly?

Because its not, its something to amuse those individuals who can afford a 3rd level education but dont have the nescessary skills for real course in Science or Engineering or a creative one in Art or Literature, their only viable option is Philosophy or Psychology or one of the myriad of useless and pointless courses designed to relieve these kids parents of vast sums of money. So naturally when all these 'graduates' roll out there needs to be an industry for them, hence the upsurge in Psychology and psychothreapy and Psychoanalysis, its all a load of ****.

if it was a science then there would be a straightforward ish method of testing for it and the test would be standard, its not the test is the arbitrary decision of one of the aqbove mentioned Oxygen thiefs.

And for a well known detail there doesn't seem to be anything to support that "it was made up with a show of hands."

besides the bits that say it was decided by a show of hands :rolleyes:

I'm not ignoring it, I'm asking to see if there is any support for it.
But I seriously doubt there is

and I have provided links that support the position, yet you seriously doubt them, that strikes me as ignoring anything that dosent conform to your world view.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder

I see nothing in there outlining how it came about, or even clearly defining what the disease is, I could sit you down with 50 Primary school students for 48 hours and that list of symptoms, I would challenge you to find one that DOSENT fit the diagnosis

Haven't we had the burden of proof talk before?

We have, its seems you still think it only applies to others.

Now have you considered the possibility that what you believe about psychiatry is based on poor understanding or deliberate misinformation about it?

SNAP

Or should we just trust the nice Scientologists?

Oh look they're scientologists:eek::eek:, attack the post not the Poster aint that how its supposed to go, same with articles, if you can finds flaw with an articles content point it out, simply decrying the authors for not conforming to your world view is a cheap shot.

So point out the Flaws in the Article please

King Mob

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Because its not, its something to amuse those individuals who can afford a 3rd level education but dont have the nescessary skills for real course in Science or Engineering or a creative one in Art or Literature, their only viable option is Philosophy or Psychology or one of the myriad of useless and pointless courses designed to relieve these kids parents of vast sums of money. So naturally when all these 'graduates' roll out there needs to be an industry for them, hence the upsurge in Psychology and psychothreapy and Psychoanalysis, its all a load of ****.

That sounds like a thoroughly researched analysis, totally devoid of personal bias and backed up with solid fact alright.

Wasn't it you who said:

Mahatma coat wrote: »

simply decrying the authors for not conforming to your world view is a cheap shot.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

if it was a science then there would be a straightforward ish method of testing for it and the test would be standard, its not the test is the arbitrary decision of one of the aqbove mentioned Oxygen thiefs.

Again what are you basing this opinion on?
It doesn't look like an informed one.

Psychology is complex. There isn't a single clear unambiguous test.
No one is claiming there is.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

besides the bits that say it was decided by a show of hands :rolleyes:

and I have provided links that support the position, yet you seriously doubt them, that strikes me as ignoring anything that dosent conform to your world view.

No you've shown a site which is deeply embedded against psychology that states this "fact" but doesn't offer any other support except their say so.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

I see nothing in there outlining how it came about, or even clearly defining what the disease is, I could sit you down with 50 Primary school students for 48 hours and that list of symptoms, I would challenge you to find one that DOSENT fit the diagnosis

Here it is clearly defining what the disease is.

ADHD has three subtypes:[29]

* Predominantly hyperactive-impulsive
o Most symptoms (six or more) are in the hyperactivity-impulsivity categories.
o Fewer than six symptoms of inattention are present, although inattention may still be present to some degree.
* Predominantly inattentive
o The majority of symptoms (six or more) are in the inattention category and fewer than six symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity are present, although hyperactivity-impulsivity may still be present to some degree.
o Children with this subtype are less likely to act out or have difficulties getting along with other children. They may sit quietly, but they are not paying attention to what they are doing. Therefore, the child may be overlooked, and parents and teachers may not notice symptoms of ADHD.
* Combined hyperactive-impulsive and inattentive
o Six or more symptoms of inattention and six or more symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity are present.
o Most children have the combined type of ADHD.

Here is a list of the different diagnoses for the different standards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder#Diagnosis

And here it describes how it got into the DSM

The DSM-II (1968) began to call it "Hyperkinetic Reaction of Childhood" even though the professionals were aware that many of the children so diagnosed exhibited attention deficits without any signs of hyperactivity. In 1980, the DSM-III introduced "ADD (Attention-Deficit Disorder) with or without hyperactivity." That terminology (ADD) technically expired with the revision in 1987 to ADHD in the DSM-III-R. In the DSM-IV, published in 1994, ADHD with sub-types was presented. The current version (as of 2008), the DSM-IV-TR was released in 2000, primarily to correct factual errors and make changes to reflect recent research; ADHD was largely unchanged.[4]

Mahatma coat wrote: »

We have, its seems you still think it only applies to others.

So then I've backed up my points, will you not back up yours?

Mahatma coat wrote: »

SNAP

I have that's why I'm asking you to back up your points with evidence I can rely on.

But given your answer I'll assume that you have not considered that you might be misinformed or misled.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Oh look they're scientologists:eek::eek:, attack the post not the Poster aint that how its supposed to go, same with articles, if you can finds flaw with an articles content point it out, simply decrying the authors for not conforming to your world view is a cheap shot.

Seriously?
You don't think Scientology doesn't have an ulterior motive in spreading misinformation?
Like maybe selling their own brand of quackery?
The one based on the ramblings of a mad man?
The one that rids your body of brainwashed alien souls?

Maybe you should do a bit of research into Scientology.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

So point out the Flaws in the Article please

Like the fact they offer no support for any of their claims.
The fact they are arguing against a simplifed strawman rather than the reality?
The fact that they themselves admit that they aren't qualified to give medical advice (but do any way)?

To be honest MC it just looks like you're buying this anti science bull**** straight off the internet because it's anti establishment.

Mahatma coat

Just curious, what makes you think the website I linked to are scientoligists????

humanji

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Just curious, what makes you think the website I linked to are scientoligists????

Here's a list of scientology sites. If you use your browsers find option, you'll see the site. And if you go to ADHDtesting.org's links you'll see a large list of Scientology sites.

If this site was truly impartial it wouldn't be linked to a cult that openly bullsh*ts about psychology.

King Mob

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Just curious, what makes you think the website I linked to are scientoligists????

What Humanji said, and the fact it spouts the same anti-science rethoric that the CCHR does.

But as I have pointed out that's not the only problem with the site.

espinolman

A film that really is about psychiatry , here are some clips from it :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16yMagZ5hv8


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8z7-DIa1As&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C7NLpMIC6g

Nick_oliveri

"The Trap", a documentary by Adam Curtis, touches on this. Although not from a monetary view. Its a great documentary to watch but its also hard to watch all three parts in one sitting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trap_(television_documentary_series)

As far as I know he is not a member of any cult.

espinolman

Human beings are not animals

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=4&ved=0CBkQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.buzzle.com%2Farticles%2Fwhat-is-psychiatry-a-common-sense-guide-part-one.html&rct=j&q=PSYCHIATRY+MAN+IS+AN+ANIMAL&ei=ObrUSozqC6PSjAfUz7z-Aw&usg=AFQjCNEvl_zMBMk_SJw8flLJVEMFkQ7K-w

King Mob

espinolman wrote: »

Human beings are not animals

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=4&ved=0CBkQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.buzzle.com%2Farticles%2Fwhat-is-psychiatry-a-common-sense-guide-part-one.html&rct=j&q=PSYCHIATRY+MAN+IS+AN+ANIMAL&ei=ObrUSozqC6PSjAfUz7z-Aw&usg=AFQjCNEvl_zMBMk_SJw8flLJVEMFkQ7K-w

About The Author
For more information about psychiatry, contact the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR). To find CCHR and more of my free articles, go to my home page below.
The HowDo Hub
my main blog

By kieron mcfadden
Published: 5/9/2009

The CCHR is a Scientology front group.

We're not animals but we are infested by brainwashed alien souls.

espinolman

From the CCHR website:

The Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) is a non-profit, public benefit organization dedicated to investigating and exposing psychiatric violations of human rights. It also ensures that criminal acts within the psychiatric industry are reported to the proper authorities and acted upon.

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CA4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cchr.org%2F&rct=j&q=CITIZEN+COMMISSION+ON+HUMAN+RIGHTS&ei=FMTUSufsOuDajQealt39Aw&usg=AFQjCNGxRq6h0Xvt-YywRj4mft_kIZgK2w

espinolman

King Mob wrote: »

The CCHR is a Scientology front group.

No it is not a front group the CCHR was founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and the internationally acclaimed author, Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at the State University of New York Health Science Center, Syracuse.

humanji

So it was founded by Scientology, it's funded by Scientology and it follows the tenents of Scientology, but it's nothing to do with Scientology?

tony 2 tone

espinolman wrote: »

No it is not a front group the CCHR was founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and the internationally acclaimed author, Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at the State University of New York Health Science Center, Syracuse.

So it's an arm of Scientology then?

King Mob

espinolman wrote: »

No it is not a front group the CCHR was founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and the internationally acclaimed author, Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at the State University of New York Health Science Center, Syracuse.

And they are still funded, staffed and supported by the Church of Scientology.
It's policy is directed both by CoS's teachings and it's leadership.
It promotes the same nonsense the CoS promotes.

How is it not a front group of Scientology?

The nuts claim the Holocaust and 9/11 were caused by psychiatrists.

If you want to argue against psychiatry and psychology maybe you shouldn't use sources that base their information on the ravings of a mad cult leader.

6th

king mob, you're very close to baiting.

espinolman

King Mob wrote: »

The nuts claim the Holocaust and 9/11 were caused by psychiatrists.

Aynan al Zawahiri is a psychiatrist , have you not seen this ? :

http://www.google.ie/url?url=http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/teralzawahiri.htm&rct=j&ei=1wPVStGZEZS7jAf99bH5Aw&sa=X&oi=spellmeleon_result&resnum=1&ct=result&ved=0CA4QhgIwAA&q=fbi+most+wanted+,+aynan+al+zawahiri&usg=AFQjCNEoq_pcEW6gjOnogw7SJAKbPKOC4Q