wow. They need to do the same for all medicine as a whole and redo the whole thing. Bet you they cannot do this in the US with all the pharma $$$ going on. US companies run the health system.


[www.guardian.co.uk]

"There is no scientific evidence that psychiatric diagnoses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are valid or useful, according to the leading body representing Britain's clinical psychologists.

In a groundbreaking move that has already prompted a fierce backlash from psychiatrists, the British Psychological Society's division of clinical psychology (DCP) will on Monday issue a statement declaring that, given the lack of evidence, it is time for a "paradigm shift" in how the issues of mental health are understood. The statement effectively casts doubt on psychiatry's predominantly biomedical model of mental distress – the idea that people are suffering from illnesses that are treatable by doctors using drugs. The DCP said its decision to speak out "reflects fundamental concerns about the development, personal impact and core assumptions of the (diagnosis) systems", used by psychiatry."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2013 07:36PM by Panchito.

Its called psychiatrist health But all I see is chemical containment.

SHOCKER: HOW MANY DRUG PRESCRIPTIONS ARE WRITTEN IN THE US EVERY YEAR?



MIND BOGGLING REPORT: HOW MANY DRUG PRESCRIPTIONS ARE WRITTEN IN AMERICA EVERY YEAR?

by Jon Rappoport

September 14, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com



Medical News Today reports that, in 2011, there was a modest uptick in the number of prescriptions written in the US.



The increase brought the total to: 4.02 billion.



Yes, in 2011, doctors wrote 4.02 billion prescriptions for drugs in America.



That’s an average of roughly 13 prescriptions for each man, woman, and child.



That’s about one new prescription every month for every American.



The Medical News Today article concluded, “…the industry should be heartened by the growth of the number of prescriptions and spending.” Yes, I’m sure the drug industry is popping champagne corks.



We’re talking about prescriptions here. We’re not talking about the number of pills Americans took. We’re also not counting over-the-counter drugs or vaccine shots.



Pharmacopoeia, a 2011 exhibition at the British Museum, estimated that “the average number of pills a person takes in his or her own lifetime in the UK is 14,000.” That’s as a result of prescriptions. Including over-the-counter drugs, the 14,000 number would swell to 40,000 pills taken in a lifetime.



What are the effects of all these drugs?



We are looking at a supreme Trojan Horse that is rotting out America and other industrialized countries from the inside. Wars, no wars, economic deprivation, economic prosperity, the drugs continue to do their work, debilitating and ruining and terminating lives.



Many sources can be cited to confirm this assessment.



On January 8th, 2001, the LA Times published an article by one of the best medical reporters in the business, Linda Marsa: “When Good Drugs Do Harm.” Marsa quoted researcher Dr. David Bates, who indicated that, in the US, there are 36 million serious adverse reactions to medical drugs per year.



On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published the most stunning mainstream estimate of medical-drug damage in history: “Is US health really the best in the world?” The author was Dr. Barbara Starfield, a respected public-health researcher at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.



Starfield concluded that medical drugs were killing Americans at the rate of 106,000 per year.



This is a conservative sketch of the Trojan Horse that has been placed in the center of the industrialized world.



The pharmaceutical juggernaut will continue, no doubt about it. The only question is, how many people will wake up and seek another way?



The destruction of societies by medical drugs goes far beyond what some people call “over-prescribing.” This isn’t just a tilt in the wrong direction. It isn’t simply errors of judgment compounded by the number of doctors dispensing medicines.



Those are all polite terms suggesting the situation can be corrected through a show of good will and better judgment. That will never happen.



Countries of the world are literally being assaulted by pharmaceutical companies and their foot-soldier doctors. It’s chemical warfare.



To even begin to see light at the end of the tunnel, hundreds of millions of people must add themselves to the rolls of those who already are pursuing better health through natural means.



We need an all-out rebellion against the Pharmacopoeia.



Not even the Nazis and their dearly beloved cartel, the monster IG Farben, dreamed of the day when the citizenry would line up and demand to ingest more and more life-destroying chemicals.



Sources:

[www.medicalnewstoday.com]



[healthbeat.areavoices.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/2013 03:09AM by riverhousebill.

We need to change our lifestyles. I know that if I had to commute through rush-hour to get to a cubicle for at least 40 hours a week, I'd need some help. No diet or meditation would get me through that hell.

And when you finally get to the cubicle, There is a bunch of people trying to vent on you. They need a 'receptor' to download the accumulated rotten version of things. They are angry at things as they been tought to react that way. Anger is a form of control. So they thing they need control in order to be somebody. They expect you to suck up all their anger so as to understand their story. It is contagious. YOu basically have to be Super Buddha to come out clean.


HH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We need to change our lifestyles. I know that if I
> had to commute through rush-hour to get to a
> cubicle for at least 40 hours a week, I'd need
> some help. No diet or meditation would get me
> through that hell.

Anger is actually an outward manifestation of unresolved/unrecognized anxiety. That's why anger is more commonly associated with men. We don't have the same license to express our anxiety as women do. When it gets all pent up, it eventually releases as anger. I don't believe that people are primarily taught to express anxiety through anger. First and foremost, they're forced to be immersed in anxiety and then taught to suppress its pain by pretending that everything's okay. Repressed anxiety can come through in other ways. It's believed that the 80,000 MEN who suffered from shell shock in WW1 after sitting in bunkers waiting to be blown to smithereens, incurred shell shock because they were not allowed to express their fears. Of course, this is because a society comprised of both men and women told them that it's not attractive or manly when a man complains. The code of "manliness" was so extreme that many of the shell shock victims were executed for cowardice.

[www.bbc.co.uk]
"Officers suffered some of the worst symptoms because they were called upon to repress their emotions to set an example for their men."

Many people are narcisistic but without knowing it

[en.wikipedia.org]

"Narcissistic defenses are those processes whereby the idealised aspects of the self are preserved, and its limitations denied.[1]

Narcissistic defences tend to be rigid and totalistic:[2] they are often fueled by feelings of shame and guilt, conscious or unconscious.[3]"

Narcissistic defenses are amongst the earliest defense mechanisms to emerge, and include denial, distortion, and projection.[4] Splitting is another defense mechanism prevalent among narcissists - seeing people and situations in black and white terms, either as all bad or all good.[5]

A narcissistic defense, with the narcissist's typical over-valuation of the self, can come to the fore at any stage of development.[6]

The narcissist typically runs through a sequence of defenses to discharge painful feelings until he or she finds one that works:[7][8]

unconscious repression
conscious denial
distortion (including exaggeration and minimization) and lies
psychological projection (blaming somebody else)
enlisting the help of one or more of his or her codependent friends who will support his or her distorted view.

I don't know. I try to take a more compassionate approach to psychiatry. This labelling of people strikes me as harsh and ill-informed. For example, my mother the ultra-feminist has a psychiatric pejorative for every man who disagrees with her. Last time I saw her she actually referred to the male cashier at the grocery store as a "textbook narcissist" because he dared to disagree with her on the price of thing of Greek yogurt and be right. Nevermind that she knows nothing about psychiatry and has never even talked to a psychiatrist, she just thinks that she knows. Isn't accusing every one but yourself of being nuts a form of narcissism in itself?

This is what I say to people who go around diagnosing the world with personality disorders: "You know what the one difference is between me and you? I KNOW that I'm a wack job."

People need to label in order to espress themselves. It is a part of communication. Nobody can label correctly as it is all based on relativistic perspective. Yet, it helps. Better something than nothing.

My cat is the gold standard in my life for sane behavior. I measure everyone relative to him.

sane behaviour is then something you define.

I was joking. It's a crap-shoot. That's what I was trying to convey.

cats and dogs are cute. They live a simple live without all the verbal world that we have. Much of this verbal world has been made with interests behind. Behind the words, sometimes there are kite strings to make people do things as a form of manipulation. Cats are inmune.