Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

wonderpup

Who Do You Trust?

Recommended Posts

I heard a programme on radio 4 the other night about how psychiatric illnesses in the US are defined by a sort of panel of medical experts and their definintions are then used to decide on which drugs are used to treat the illnesses.

It turns out that almost all of the experts on the panel are in the pockets of the companies that manufacture the treatments, which is real handy since it allows the illnesses and their treatments to be defined more or less at the same time :lol:

Is there any part of society now that is not corrupt in some way? Who do you trust now? Is there anybody left?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I heard a programme on radio 4 the other night about how psychiatric illnesses in the US are defined by a sort of panel of medical experts and their definintions are then used to decide on which drugs are used to treat the illnesses.

It turns out that almost all of the experts on the panel are in the pockets of the companies that manufacture the treatments, which is real handy since it allows the illnesses and their treatments to be defined more or less at the same time :lol:

Is there any part of society now that is not corrupt in some way? Who do you trust now? Is there anybody left?

there was this famous experiment that showed psychiatry for the utter sh1te that it is.

The experiment went one further:

"The pseudopatient experiment:

For the purposes of the study, eight "pseudopatients" (associates of Rosenhan selected to be a group of varied and healthy individuals) attempted to gain admission to psychiatric hospitals. During psychiatric assessment they claimed to be hearing voices that were often unclear, but which seemed to pronounce the words "hollow", "empty", and "thud." No other psychiatric symptoms were claimed, and apart from giving false names and employment details, further biographical details were truthfully reported. If admitted, the pseudopatients were asked to "act normally," report that they felt fine and no longer heard voices.

The pseudopatients were: a psychology graduate student in his twenties, three psychologists, a pediatrician, a psychiatrist, a painter and a housewife. None had a history of mental illness. If admitted, they were to act normally and not display any obvious psychopathology. Subjects were to remain as inpatients until they were discharged by the staff at their hospitals, who were not privy to the experiment and believed the subjects to be real psychiatric patients.

All eight were admitted, seven with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, the last with manic-depression. Even after admission, none of the pseudopatients were identified as impostors by the hospital staff, although other psychiatric patients seemed to be able to correctly identify them as impostors. In the first three hospitalizations, notes of remarks made by actual patients to pseudopatients were kept and 35 of the total of 118 patients expressed a suspicion that the pseudopatients were sane. All of the pseudopatients were discharged with a diagnosis of schizophrenia "in remission." Their stays ranged from 7 to 52 days and the average was 19 days.

Hospital notes indicated that staff interpreted much of the pseudopatient's behavior in terms of mental illness. For example, one observer labeled the note-taking of one pseudopatient as "writing behavior" and considered it pathological. In contrast, actual patients would accuse them of being researchers or journalists based entirely on the same writing behavior. Once admitted and diagnosed, the pseudopatients were not able to obtain their release until they agreed with the psychiatrists that they were mentally ill and took antipsychotic medications.

"I told friends, I told my family, 'I can get out when I can get out. That's all. I'll be there for a couple of days and I'll get out.' Nobody knew I'd be there for two months … The only way out was to point out that they're [the psychiatrists were] correct. They had said I was insane, 'I am insane; but I am getting better.' That was an affirmation of their view of me." David Rosenhan in the BBC program "The Trap."[2]

:ph34r::ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave
just to add,

in a world full of labels, is it possible to be a free thinker ?

why is an alternative theory point of view, to those in power, automatically prefixed with the word 'conspiracy' :ph34r:

Clever marketing isn't it

It's rather like advertising. The moment the words 'Conspiracy Theory' are mentioned, people immediately have an image of a tinfoil hat in their head. Bang goes any serious debate. To me, David Icke is a more more credible commentator on where we are heading than the mainstream media which s pretty crazy. Not so sure about the lizard people though. That's really pushing the boat out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clever marketing isn't it

It's rather like advertising. The moment the words 'Conspiracy Theory' are mentioned, people immediately have an image of a tinfoil hat in their head. Bang goes any serious debate. To me, David Icke is a more more credible commentator on where we are heading than the mainstream media which s pretty crazy. Not so sure about the lizard people though. That's really pushing the boat out.

I have read that he did this bit on purpose, but I can't remember why (something to do with his safety iirc). Not sure I believe it or not though. (the reason, if it is true)??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have read that he did this bit on purpose, but I can't remember why (something to do with his safety iirc). Not sure I believe it or not though. (the reason, if it is true)??

It goes along the line of "lizards=code word for zionists" and he used this to keep the ADL off his back. Not sure if that was his intention or not, but that is the rumour AFAIK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've actualy had some dealings with shrinks, and their tendancy to treat everything as symptomatic is downright funny at times.

Psychiatry is a cult, complete with high priests and acolytes. Their real blind spot is a failure to recognise that they themselves are part of the ecology they are trying to investigate By playing out their role as 'doctors' they generate a range of behaviors in their 'patients' that they then faithfully record and extrapolate from- blissfully unaware that they have conditioned that very behavior themselves.

Why does a guy who deals in the mind need to wear a white coat to work? Pure voodoo.

We've all but forgotten now how the Soviet Union employed the Psychiatric model as the ultimate way of dealing with dissent- anyone who wanted to change the system was simply diagnosed as insane and locked away.

why is an alternative theory view to those in power prefixed with the word 'conspiracy'

Langauge conditions thought. Every time I hear the word 'insurgents' on the news I can't help but admire the adroitness with which these terms are coined and applied- with the media seemingly quite happy to play along. Not so very long ago those Afgan 'insurgents' were 'freedom fighters'- when it was the russians they were fighting and not us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave
I've actualy had some dealings with shrinks, and their tendancy to treat everything as symptomatic is downright funny at times.

Psychiatry is a cult, complete with high priests and acolytes. Their real blind spot is a failure to recognise that they themselves are part of the ecology they are trying to investigate By playing out their role as 'doctors' they generate a range of behaviors in their 'patients' that they then faithfully record and extrapolate from- blissfully unaware that they have conditioned that very behavior themselves.

Why does a guy who deals in the mind need to wear a white coat to work? Pure voodoo.

We've all but forgotten now how the Soviet Union employed the Psychiatric model as the ultimate way of dealing with dissent- anyone who wanted to change the system was simply diagnosed as insane and locked away.

Langauge conditions thought. Every time I hear the word 'insurgents' on the news I can't help but admire the adroitness with which these terms are coined and applied- with the media seemingly quite happy to play along. Not so very long ago those Afgan 'insurgents' were 'freedom fighters'- when it was the russians they were fighting and not us.

Isn't that what Jacqui Smith did recently when someone wrote an article describing her as being a nutcase. She ordered that the poor soul be subjected to psychiatric tests? :lol:

Every time I hear the word 'insurgents' on the news I can't help but admire the adroitness with which these terms are coined and applied- with the media seemingly quite happy to play along.

The most obvious one to me (and it feels like I'm being pinched everytime I hear it) is the way 'Downturn' has replaced 'recession' or 'depression' in all discussion relating to the financial crisis.

Jaysus, that drives me nuts every time I hear it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"One flew over the cuckoo's nest" covered some of this brilliantly.

Yeah. Those pseudo-patients should count themselves lucky they got away with their frontal lobes still intact!

While psychiatry may be a dubious science, it's still preferable to

(only for those with a strong stomach - unless, of course, watching a "doctor" hammer an ice pick through someones eye socket and 3 inches into their brain and wiggle it about doesn't bother you).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah. Those pseudo-patients should count themselves lucky they got away with their frontal lobes still intact!

While psychiatry may be a dubious science, it's still preferable to

(only for those with a strong stomach - unless, of course, watching a "doctor" hammer an ice pick through someones eye socket and 3 inches into their brain and wiggle it about doesn't bother you).

I watched it. It did bother me. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It turns out that almost all of the experts on the panel are in the pockets of the companies that manufacture the treatments, which is real handy since it allows the illnesses and their treatments to be defined more or less at the same time :lol:

Is there any part of society now that is not corrupt in some way? Who do you trust now? Is there anybody left?

It is worrying but on the other hand, thats capitalism for you.

I didn't hear the programme but I assume its the old Tufts study leading on from the Ritalin case in 2000 (the plaintiffs couldn't prove their case btw)?

Those "financial links" included ownership of drug company stock, travel expenses, research funding, consulting fees and payment for gifts.

Problem is, if you want to cut out research funding, then you can't have anyone involved in research at all, it would have to be all practitioners. Can't have "Castalian" people in Ivory Towers in the 21st century can we. Hack out consulting fees and you are down to practitioners who aren't considered (as the Americans have it) the "go to" leading experts in their fields. What are you left with? People who aren't involved in new developments either in an academic or an industry setting updating a manual with new developments.

Unfortunately it probably is corrupt, but its easier to say that than to figure out how it could be done differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eight
Langauge conditions thought. Every time I hear the word 'insurgents' on the news I can't help but admire the adroitness with which these terms are coined and applied- with the media seemingly quite happy to play along. Not so very long ago those Afgan 'insurgents' were 'freedom fighters'- when it was the russians they were fighting and not us.

So true.

French resistence = Insurgents.

Dad's Army = Insurgents.

eight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So true.

French resistence = Insurgents.

Dad's Army = Insurgents.

eight

What's wrong with using the word insurgent? It's meaning is quite neutral - it just means someone who is rebelling, and makes no judgement about the justness of their cause. What I hate is the arbitrary use of the word "terrorist" purely to demonise enemies of the state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its happening in all walks of life including prison judinging from these articles.

Worshipping psychology

http://www.insidetime.org/viewsearchresults.asp?article=437

Prison psychologists are breeching Code of Ethics and Conduct.

http://www.insidetime.org/viewsearchresults.asp?article=393

Is your budgie a psychopath?

http://www.insidetime.org/viewsearchresults.asp?article=341

Is your budgie a psychopath - part 2

http://www.insidetime.org/viewsearchresults.asp?article=473

All the links from a prisoner mag, something you want to tell us tricky? :blink:

To be fair most psychologists I know are somewhat skeptical as to the validity of most of psychology.

Shame the same isn't true of economists :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DisposableHeroes

Drug rep's regularly take GP's out to lunch to flirt with them and push their latest products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook
I've actualy had some dealings with shrinks, and their tendancy to treat everything as symptomatic is downright funny at times.

Psychiatry is a cult, complete with high priests and acolytes. Their real blind spot is a failure to recognise that they themselves are part of the ecology they are trying to investigate By playing out their role as 'doctors' they generate a range of behaviors in their 'patients' that they then faithfully record and extrapolate from- blissfully unaware that they have conditioned that very behavior themselves.

Why does a guy who deals in the mind need to wear a white coat to work? Pure voodoo.

We've all but forgotten now how the Soviet Union employed the Psychiatric model as the ultimate way of dealing with dissent- anyone who wanted to change the system was simply diagnosed as insane and locked away.

Langauge conditions thought. Every time I hear the word 'insurgents' on the news I can't help but admire the adroitness with which these terms are coined and applied- with the media seemingly quite happy to play along. Not so very long ago those Afgan 'insurgents' were 'freedom fighters'- when it was the russians they were fighting and not us.

Agreed.

language is thought.

Which is why the state always tries to control and dictate which words are acceptable and which are not. By seeking to constrain the language of debate they seek to constrain our capacity to think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
just to add,

in a world full of labels, is it possible to be a free thinker ?

why is an alternative theory point of view, to those in power, automatically prefixed with the word 'conspiracy' :ph34r:

Good point. Conversely why do some automatically brand the rejection of a "conspiracy" as slave-like behaviour?

IMO free-thinkers must be prepared to consider some theories to be conspiracies and some statements of those in power to be logical and truthfull. Free-thinkers by definition do not work for one side or the other.

PS I've not found a way of removing the apparantly obligatory bull /neither/ bear labelling employed here. Any ideas how to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a related note, anyone hear the proggie about a panel of psychiatrists - the ones that agree on illnesses, how they are defined and treated which guides the psychiatric community (aka the big bumper book of belm), have in most cases got interests in the pharmaceutical companies.

Basically the logical eventual conclusion is to have everyone declared to be suffering from some sort of mental condition and to be permanently medicated. (life tax or SOMA l can't decide.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Psychiatrists never wear white coats. Do you get your knowledge of psychiatry from watching movies?

Indeed, mine turned up in a checked shirt on Monday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On a related note, anyone hear the proggie about a panel of psychiatrists - the ones that agree on illnesses, how they are defined and treated which guides the psychiatric community (aka the big bumper book of belm), have in most cases got interests in the pharmaceutical companies.

Basically the logical eventual conclusion is to have everyone declared to be suffering from some sort of mental condition and to be permanently medicated. (life tax or SOMA l can't decide.)

I think that's what the OP was talking about. Yes, interesting and slightly worrying from the viewpoint of someone that is going through the mill of the local primary mental health care unit (psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker, nurse etc)

One of the contributors to the programme, Dr David Healy, appears to have long cast doubts over the efficacy of newer types of antidepressant meds, particularly with respect to the way that they have been pushed through various approvals processes. Some interesting reading at:

http://www.healyprozac.com/default.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Healy_%28psychiatrist%29

That said, I can report that my latest antidepressants (escitalopram) are working an absolute treat, unlike the other substances I have been prescribed.

(edited for tiepohs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   291 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.