Psychiatrists Say Trump Mentally Ill

TruthFact
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
January 10, 2018

—After investigating psychiatry for two decades, I’m confident that, if we could go back and rewrite history, deleting all psychiatrists on the planet, so they’d never exist—deleting their diagnoses and their drugs—this would have resulted in a massive upsurge in mental health, moving forward—

The Daily Mail: “A group of leading psychiatrists told a conference that Donald Trump has clear hallmarks of mental illness that compromise his role as president. Twenty-five researchers made a drastic break away from ethical standards by meeting at Yale University on Thursday to discuss evidence questioning the commander-in-chief’s mental health.”

Psychiatrist Allen Frances, who has played a central role in defining mental disorders, disagrees. He wrote in the NY Times: “Most amateur diagnosticians have mislabeled [Mr. Trump as having] narcissistic personality disorder. He may be a world-class narcissist, but this doesn’t make him mentally ill.”

Dr. Frances makes an interesting point. He distinguishes between behavior and earning a badge for having a particular mental disorder.

For example, a person can be sad, but that alone doesn’t make him a candidate for the label, “clinical depression.” A person can take aggressive actions against authority, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he is suffering from Oppositional Defiance Disorder.

Consider the accusation that Trump has Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). What does that mean? What is the official definition of NPD? Here is an excerpt from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the official bible of the American Psychiatric Association. Go ahead, plow through it, it’ll only take a minute:

“The definition of NPD states that it comprises of a persistent manner of grandiosity, a continuous desire for admiration, along with a lack of empathy. It starts by early adulthood and occurs in a range of situations, as signified by the existence of any 5 of the next 9 standards (American Psychiatric Association, 2013):

  • A grandiose logic of self-importance
    • A fixation with fantasies of infinite success, control, brilliance, beauty, or idyllic love
    • A credence that he or she is extraordinary and exceptional and can only be understood by, or should connect with, other extraordinary or important people or institutions
    • A desire for unwarranted admiration
    • A sense of entitlement
    • Interpersonally oppressive behavior
    • No form of empathy
    • Resentment of others or a conviction that others are resentful of him or her
    • A display of egotistical and conceited behaviors or attitudes”

“…No actual physical characteristics are seen with NPD, but patients may have concurrent substance abuse, which may be seen in the clinical examination.”

Got it? Now, think about this: NOWHERE IN THE DEFINITION IS THERE ANY DEFINING DIAGNOSTIC TEST.

No blood test, urine test, saliva test, brain scan, genetic assay. Nothing.

What you’ve just read is a collection of behaviors. This collection was assembled by a committee of psychiatrists, who decided that, taken together, they added up to a mental disorder.

There is no defining diagnostic test for NPD.

We’re talking about psychiatrists sitting in a room and arbitrarily deciding that a cluster of behaviors adds up to an official mental disorder.

These psychiatrists are playing word games. They’re inventing so-called mental disorders.

Underneath this story about Trump and the shrinks, there is a far more important truth. Psychiatrists are world-class purveyors of fake news. They always have been. Because you see…

None of the roughly 300 officially certified and labeled mental disorders has a defining diagnostic test. None.

If you have the tenacity, read through the whole psychiatric DSM bible and you will see for yourself.

Or read this brief exchange. In a PBS Frontline episode, “Does ADHD Exist?” Dr. Russell Barkley, an eminent professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, spelled out the fraud clearly.

Here it is.

PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

BARKLEY: That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid.

Oh, indeed, that does make them invalid. Utterly and completely. All 300 mental disorders. Because there are no defining tests of any kind to back up the diagnosis.

Psychiatrists can sway and tap dance all they like and they won’t escape the noose around their necks. We are looking at a science that isn’t a science.

That’s called fraud. Rank fraud.

Imagine this. You walk into a doctor’s office, you talk with him for a few minutes, and then he says: “You have cancer. You need to start chemo at once.”

After you recover, you say, “You didn’t give me a test.”

And he says, “Well, we don’t need a test. We know what the symptoms are because we convened a high-level meeting of oncologists last year, and we listed the answers to the questions I just asked you. You gave those telltale answers. So we start chemo tomorrow. We may also need to surgically remove an organ or two before we’re done.”

That’s psychiatry. That’s the way it works.

Those boys have quite a con going. And now, from a few hundred miles away, they’ve diagnosed a sitting president.

Well, why wouldn’t they? They’ve been shucking and jiving all the way to the bank for the entirety of their professional lives.

Do you like Trump? Do you hate him? Do you think he’s nuts? Sane? Whatever you believe, it has nothing to do with the official pronouncements of psychiatry.

Psychiatry has become an arm of technocracy—an attempt to organize society according to a list of so-called mental disorders parading as science.

Psychiatry is fake science that can be used to discredit, minimize, accuse, deride, treat (with alarmingly toxic drugs), and eliminate any individual for any reason.

Now that is a good example of insanity. Of the criminal variety.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com

Advertisements

Do 5 Million Americans Really Have Bipolar Disorder?

Source: GreenMedInfo.com
Dr. Kelly Brogan M.D.
June 8, 2016

Bipolar Disorder is one of the biggest mental health concerns in the United States, but instead of addressing the true, spiritual nature of the disease, the normal course of treatment involves harmful pharmaceuticals. 

“I have Bipolar disorder”

…say 5.7 million Americans.

These patients have been labeled, categorized, and offered an understanding of themselves as diseased, sick, and permanently broken.

Considered one of the more severe mental illnesses, perhaps because it presents almost as an amalgamation of psychosis and depression in particularly volatile form. In my training, I was taught to medicate these patients, often with multiple medications, and often against their will.

Poetically, these patients, desperate to understand who they are in a system that condemns them to a life of struggle and suffering, will be vindicated by modern science.[1]

The Modern Science of Bipolar Disorder

Modern science honors complexity. It seeks to revel more and more in a picture of dynamic interconnectedness between bodily systems and between bodies and nature. This science is embodied by new fields with long names, like psychoneuroimmunology, and by a burgeoning literature exploring our microbial selves.

Modern science[2] has this to say about Bipolar:

The very fact that no single gene, pathway, or brain abnormality is likely to ever account for the condition is itself an extremely important first step in better articulating an integrated perspective on both its ontological status and pathogenesis.

Did you catch that?

The implications of this statement decimate the current myth of an inherited chemical imbalance underlying Bipolar Disorder. No, you weren’t born with a brain chemical problem that you are destined to manage with prescriptions for your entire life. This is a complex syndrome, personal to you, that has to do with how your lifestyle exposures are interacting with your genes – yes your stress, food, sleep (or lack of it), chemical exposures. All of these variables impact how your genes are expressed and are within your control.

So if Bipolar isn’t an inherited chemical imbalance, then what is it?

Just like depression (and ADHDOCD, Panic Disorder, and even Schizophrenia), what we are calling Bipolar is a fever of the body. It is a symptom that serves as a final common pathway from many different sources.

The incidence of Bipolar disorder appears to be skyrocketing because people are struggling with more and more complex physiologic and pyschospiritual crises and because the guild of psychiatry is generating more patients through medication treatment. I remember that, even over the course of my residency, Bipolar and its “softer” variant Bipolar II, seemed to be ballooning in incidence, now encompassing up to 13% of the population.[3] In fact, according to Robert Whitaker’s platform, madinamerica.com:

Prior to 1955, bipolar illness was a rare disorder. There were only 12,750 people  hospitalized with that disorder in 1955. In addition,  there were only about 2,400 “first admissions” for bipolar illness yearly in the country’s mental hospitals.

Outcomes were relatively good too. Seventy-five percent or so of the first-admission patients would recover within 12 months.  Over the long-term, only about 15% of all first-admission patients would become chronically ill, and 70% to 85% of the patients would have good outcomes, which meant they worked and had active social lives.

So we have more diagnosis, but we also have more people actually struggling with what is labeled as Bipolar. What’s driving these struggles?

This root cause perspective leads us to consider at least 3 major contributors that need to be examined for potentially reversible and resolvable triggers.

Inflammation

Inflammation is the body’s purposeful messaging system around perceived distress or threat. It results from myriad sources from psychosocial stress to gut microbial imbalance to toxicant exposure (environmental to pharmaceutical), and in today’s environment, can be persistent and chronic. Research has elucidated several important factors around Bipolar states and inflammatory response, namely that both mania and depression are associated with increased inflammatory markers[4] [5], which track linearly with symptoms.[6] Immune dysfunction[7] that results from prolonged inflammatory signaling can easily provoke the canary in the coalmine – the thyroid, documented to be altered in the setting of mania.[8] In fact, those with a Bipolar diagnosis can be 2.5 times more likely to have elevated thyroid hormone levels.[9] In this way, bodily disharmony from gut to immune to hormones can express, in some people as severe depression alternating with periods of extreme behavioral impulsivity.

Drugs

Rather than parsing them into benefits and side effects, in my opinion, the chemical effects of pharmaceuticals should all be referred to as simply, effects. These effects are not unlike the effects of drugs like cocaine and alcohol – some are desirable or temporarily adaptive, and some are problematic. Many patients begin their Bipolar journey through the gateway drug of an antidepressant. In fact, treatment of depression and anxiety with an antidepressant results in an almost 3 fold increase in diagnosis with Bipolar Disorder,[10] interpreted by another study as 20-40% of all those diagnosed with depression, ultimately receiving a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder.[11] Over time, antidepressants can also perpetuate chronic instability (dubbed “rapid cycling”) and poor functional outcomes[12], which can persist even after the antidepressant is withdrawn. [13]

Perhaps, as Anatomy of an Epidemic argues (and references!), we have pharmaceuticals to thank for the nature of Bipolar disability today:

In the pre-drug era, bipolar patients were usually asymptomatic between episodes; 85% returned to their usual occupations; and they showed no signs of long-term cognitive decline. Today, bipolar patients are much more symptomatic; only about one-third return to their usual occupations; and they become cognitively impaired over the long term.

Perhaps doing something, in the form of medication, is actually worse than doing nothing.

The use of plants such as cannabis and psychedelics may also open up an experience of perceptual expansion that a given individual, their community, and our culture cannot withstand, condone, or support. Evidence is mounting that first episode psychosis can be kicked off by these substance encounters. [14]

The French have even recently coined the term antibiomania to refer to frank mania with psychosis induced by antiviral and antibiotic medication, reversible with cessation of the offending medication. Could pills be inducing what we are calling an inherited chemical imbalance?

Psychospirituality

Psychiatry has a long history of relishing a Cartesian separation between mind and body. Desperate to “medicalize” this field of conjecture and subjectivity, the guild of psychiatry has attached to a biochemical model of pathology while relegating the secondary considerations of “psychology” to supportive therapy.

Is there another layer of root-cause to consider when it comes to mania and depression? If it isn’t an inflammatory process kicked off by environmental mismatch, and it’s not a fire lit by the match of a substance, then could it be a psychospiritual process?

Considering the cultural subjectivity around pathologizing heightened states of energy, it seems that there may be a role for the chemical straight jacket in preserving American ideals around an aspiritual existence.

I’ve written:

Psychiatry pathologizes states of mindfulness, as dissociative, and is quick to label many who would otherwise be regarded as having awakenings, as psychotic. Recent literature even speaks to the difficulty a psychiatrist might have in distinguishing spirituality from psychosis:

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com

_________________________________________________________________

© June 8, 2016 GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.
_________________________________________________________________

Why is the Media So Afraid of This Woman’s Work?

Source: GreenMedInfo.com
GMI Reporter
March 14, 2016

One of the most important books in the history of psychiatry and natural medicine has been published by HarperCollins, who unique among their mainstream publishing competitors, had the guts to release it completely uncensored.

Dr. Kelly Brogan, a holistic psychiatrist specialized in women’s health and  practicing in Manhattan, reveals in A Mind of Your Own: The Truth about Depression and How Women Can Heal Their Bodies to Reclaim Their Lives, that a silent tragedy afflicting millions of Americans is occurring right under the nose of the public, without even a whisper from the medical establishment, regulatory industry, and mainstream media.

Dr. Brogan’s straightforward message is that depression, which according to the WHO is the #1 global cause of disability, and which feeds into a 80+ billion dollar a year psychiatric medication industry, is completely treatable and even reversible with a nutrition-based approach that does not require psychiatric medications. The book not only reveals the unscientific nature of  psychiatric definitions of mental illness (which are arrived at by the psychiatry guild’s process of consensus and not any form of empirical or scientific validation), as well as the conspicuous lack of scientific justification for treating mental illness with pharmaceuticals, but gives the readers access to exactly those protocols, nutritional recommendations, and mind-body practices, she discovered could successfully treat and yes, sometimes cure, her patients.

Could her drug free, evidence-based approach, and use of the “C” word have gotten her blacklisted? Dr. Brogan’s mentor, the late Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez, himself a practicing MD in Manhattan, used the “C” word and for an equally controversial condition, cancer, and is known and loved the world over for his humble success in putting terminal cancers into remission. Throughout his career, his work was maligned, manipulated, and suppressed.

The pattern is obvious.

And so, despite Dr. Brogan’s entirely evidence-based and extremely empowering message,  the book has been unilaterally silenced by the mainstream media after every major news outlet requested and reviewed a copy of the book. This is all the more conspicuous, considering its grassroots validation by becoming a #1 best-seller in both Depression and Holistic Medicine categories before it has was even been released to the public.

Get complimentary access to the 1st chapter, “Decoding Depression” here.

What’s really going on? Why will Dr. Oz, for instance, feature anti-GMO activists, and not a book about our ability to heal without pharmaceuticals? Could the rumors be true, and since the primary advertising revenue for mainstream programming is the pharmaceutical industry, that there is an irresistible incentive to  silence against anything or anyone which would threaten their cash cow, even among the most “progressive” of channels and shows?

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com

—————————————————————————

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

© March 14, 2016  GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.”

Pure Insanity! – Passion for eating healthy food declared a mental disorder by ‘expert’ psychiatrists

Confusion

Source: NaturalNews.com
J.D. Heyes
January 18, 2016

It’s no secret to tens of millions of Americans that Big Food is poisoning us daily with their fare. If that were not the case, then GMO-free restaurant chains like Chipotle wouldn’t be as popular as they are, and sales of organic foods would not be reaching record levels year after year.

Big Food, of course, isn’t taking that lying down. “Mainstream” food producers may be enlisting the help of academia in getting Americans who believe in sustainable, clean food, declared mentally unstable.

As reported by Waking Times, scientists at the University of Northern Colorado, who recently conducted a case study about the obsession with healthy eating, have concluded that such clean-food preoccupation could be a mental disorder. They’ve even given it a name (because you can’t have a disorder without a name, right?) – orthorexia nervosa, or ON for short, and researchers say the condition is made worse by a fear of being unhealthy and shunning low-quality, pesticide-ridden, GMO-laden, gluten-stuffed foods.

It’s ‘mental’ to eat processed foods

As the Waking Times reported further:

The psychologists conducting the study argue that healthy eating can become dangerous if one becomes fixated on the types of ingredients in food, how the food is cooked, and what materials are used to prepare it. Those “suffering” from orthorexia may take extra time to prepare their food and carefully consider what they are willing to eat.

The horror.

The news site noted that today, 90 percent of products sitting on grocery store shelves in the U.S. are packed with processed foods, much of which are scientifically engineered to create physical and mental addiction. As such, these overly processed foods, which are also mega-portioned, have led to all sorts of medical problems – diabetes especially, but also heart disease and cancer, obesity and other chronic conditions. Given that even traditional medical science knows this, why would conscientious efforts by Americans to lower their risk of contracting these diseases – thereby driving the cost of health care down – not be encouraged, rather than vilified and misdiagnosed as crazy?

Continue Reading At: NaturalNews.com

Are “Moody Women” Being Drugged Into Submission By Pharma?

Why Can't A Woman Be More Like A Man?
[Editor’s Note]

For those thinking that this might sound insane, books like Toxic Psychiatry by  Peter R. Breggin, MD – who is Harvard-trained psychiatrist and former full-time consultant at NIMH – detail the rampant drugging of society in an incisive/extensive way.

Furthermore, the work of Jon Rappaport, who is an investigative journalist & researcher of over 30 years into the fields of medicine and more, has been pivotal in me being able to learn about this pervasive, and disturbing trend.  Rappoport’s work can be found at NoMoreFakeNews.com and JonRappoport.wordpress.com

Rappoport provides a great starting point regarding this abstruse topic for those wanting to further research this information:

Psychiatry – The Modern Priest Class

—————————————————————————

Source: GreenMedInfo.com
Margie King, Health Coach

Women are now almost twice as likely to be on antidepressants as men. Why? 

“Why can’t a woman be more like a man?” laments Henry Higgins in the 1964 Lerner and Loewe classic musical “My Fair Lady.”  In the show Higgins is stymied by Eliza Doolittle’s emotional reactions to his science-based efforts to re-engineer her in his image of a proper woman.

Click here for Rex Harrison’s rendition of “Hymn to Him” from the movie.

It’s the age-old problem of men and women having different sensibilities. But fast forward 50 years or so, and Henry Higgins may well have the answer to his problem – antidepressants.

A study published in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry finds that more than 69% of people on antidepressants aren’t actually depressed.  They don’t meet the criteria for major depressive disorder (MDD).  And 38% never met the criteria for other conditions for which antidepressants are prescribed, at any time in their life.  These include obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, social phobia, or generalized anxiety disorder.[i]

But what many of these “patients” have in common is that they are women. The researchers found that being female was statistically associated with antidepressant prescriptions.

In other words, according to actual medical practice, it looks like being a woman may be a treatable mental health condition.

Other major reasons linked to taking antidepressants included being Caucasian, having recent or current physical problems (e.g., loss of bladder control, hypertension, and back pain) or a recent visit to a mental health facility.

Women are now almost twice as likely to be on antidepressants as men.  One in four women is now on psychiatric medication according to Julie Holland, a psychiatrist in New York and the author of “Moody Bitches: The Truth About the Drugs You’re Taking, the Sleep You’re Missing, the Sex You’re Not Having, and What’s Really Making You Crazy.”

In a recent op-ed piece in the New York Times Dr. Holland noted that women are under constant pressure to tamp down their emotions.  “We have been taught to apologize for our tears, to suppress our anger and to fear being called hysterical,” she writes.

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com