|
A whole branch of science turns out to be fake
By Jon Rappoport
Devotees of science often assume that what is called science
is real and true. It must be. Otherwise, their faith is broken. Their
superficial understanding is shattered. Their "superior view" of the
world is torpedoed.
Such people choose unofficial "anti-science" targets to
attack. They never think of inspecting their own house for enormous
fraud.
For example: psychiatry.
An open secret has been slowly bleeding out into public consciousness for the past ten years.
THERE ARE NO DEFINITIVE LABORATORY TESTS FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDER.
And along with that:
ALL SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS ARE CONCOCTED, NAMED, LABELED,
DESCRIBED, AND CATEGORIZED by a committee of psychiatrists, from menus
of human behaviors.
Their findings are published in periodically updated editions
of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM),
printed by the American Psychiatric Association.
For years, even psychiatrists have been blowing the whistle on this hazy crazy process of "research."
Of course, pharmaceutical companies, who manufacture highly
toxic drugs to treat every one of these "disorders," are leading the
charge to invent more and more mental-health categories, so they can
sell more drugs and make more money.
But we have a mind-boggling twist. Under the radar, one of
the great psychiatric stars, who has been out in front in inventing
mental disorders, went public. He blew the whistle on himself and his
colleagues. And for several years, almost no one noticed.
His name is Dr. Allen Frances, and he made VERY interesting
statements to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: "Inside the
Battle to Define Mental Illness." (Dec.27, 2010).
Major media never picked up on the interview in any serious way. It never became a scandal.
Dr. Allen Frances is the man who, in 1994, headed up the
project to write the latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the
DSM-IV. This tome defines and labels and describes every official mental
disorder. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.
In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, "Scientist At
Work," Daniel Goleman called Frances "Perhaps the most powerful
psychiatrist in America at the moment..."
Well, sure. If you're sculpting the entire canon of
diagnosable mental disorders for your colleagues, for insurers, for the
government, for Pharma (who will sell the drugs matched up to the 297
DSM-IV diagnoses), you're right up there in the pantheon.
Long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Dr. Frances talked to Wired's Greenberg and said the following:
"There is no definition of a mental disorder. It's bullshit. I mean, you just can't define it."
BANG.
That's on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg,
looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, "Well, I knew
there would be a problem."
After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg,
"These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible
to define precisely with bright lines at the borders."
Frances should have mentioned the fact that his baby, the
DSM-IV, had unscientifically rearranged earlier definitions of ADHD and
Bipolar to permit many MORE diagnoses, leading to a vast acceleration of
drug-dosing with highly powerful and toxic compounds.
Here is a smoking-gun statement made by another prominent
mental-health expert, on an episode of PBS' Frontline series. The
episode was: "Does ADHD Exist?"
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 (Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and
neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center): 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.
Without intending to, Dr. Barkley blows an ear-shattering whistle on his own profession.
So let's take Dr. Barkley to school. Medical science, and
disease-research in particular, rests on the notion that you can make a
diagnosis backed up by lab tests. If you can't produce lab tests, you're
spinning fantasies.
These fantasies might be hopeful, they might be "educated
guesses," they might be launched from traditional centers of learning,
they might be backed up by billions of dollars of grant money...but
they're still fantasies.
Dr. Barkley is essentially saying, "There is no lab test for
any mental disorder. If a test were the standard of proof, we wouldn't
have science at all, and that would mean our whole profession rests on
nothing---and that is unthinkable, so therefore a test doesn't matter."
That logic is no logic at all. That science is no science at
all. Barkley is proving the case against himself. He just doesn't want
to admit it.
Psychiatry is all fraud all the time. Without much of a
stretch, you could say psychiatry has been the most widespread profiling
operation in the history of the human race. Its goal has been to bring
humans everywhere into its system. It hardly matters which label a
person is painted with, as long as it adds up to a diagnosis and a
prescription of drugs.
300 so-called mental disorders caused by...what? No lab
evidence. No defining diagnostic tests. No blood tests, saliva tests,
brain scans, genetic assays. No nothing.
But psychiatrists continue to assert they are the masters of
causation. They know what's behind "mental disorders." They're in
charge.
What about the generalized "chemical imbalance" hypothesis
stating that all mental disorders stem from such imbalances in the
brain?
Dr. Ronald Pies, the editor-in-chief emeritus of the
Psychiatric Times, laid that hypothesis to rest in the July 11, 2011,
issue of the Times with this staggering admission:
"In truth, the 'chemical imbalance' notion was always a kind
of urban legend---never a theory seriously propounded by well-informed
psychiatrists."
Boom.
Dead.
The point is, for decades the whole basis of psychiatric drug
research, drug prescription, and drug sales has been: "we're correcting
a chemical imbalance in the brain."
The problem was, researchers had never established a normal
baseline for chemical balance. So they were shooting in the dark. Worse,
they were faking a theory. Pretending they knew something when they
didn't.
In his 2011 piece in Psychiatric Times, Dr. Pies tries to
protect his colleagues in the psychiatric profession with this fatuous
remark:
"In the past 30 years, I don't believe I have ever heard a
knowledgeable, well-trained psychiatrist make such a preposterous claim
[about chemical imbalance in the brain], except perhaps to mock it...the
'chemical imbalance' image has been vigorously promoted by some
pharmaceutical companies, often to the detriment of our patients'
understanding."
Absurd. First of all, many psychiatrists have explained and
do explain to their patients that the drugs are there to correct a
chemical imbalance.
And second, if all well-trained psychiatrists have known, all along, that the chemical-imbalance theory is a fraud...
...then why on earth have they been prescribing tons of drugs to their patients...
...since those drugs are developed on the false premise that they correct an imbalance?
The honchos of psychiatry are seeing the handwriting on the wall. Their game has been exposed.
The chemical imbalance theory is a fake. There are no
defining physical tests for any of the 300 so-called mental disorders.
All diagnoses are based on arbitrary clusters or menus of human
behavior. The drugs are harmful, dangerous, toxic. Some of them induce
violence. Suicide, homicide. Some of the drugs cause brain damage.
So the shrinks have to move into another model of "mental illness," another con, another fraud. And they're looking for one.
For example, genes plus "psycho-social factors" cause mental disorders. A mish-mash of more unproven science.
"New breakthrough research on the functioning of the brain is
paying dividends and holds great promise..." Professional PR and
gibberish.
Meanwhile, the business model demands drugs for sale.
So even though the chemical-imbalance nonsense has been discredited, it will continue on as a dead man walking, a zombie.
Two questions always pop up when I write a critique of
psychiatry. The first one is: psychiatric researchers are doing a
massive amount of work studying brain function. They do have tests.
Yes, experimental tests. But NONE of those tests are
contained in the DSM, the psychiatric bible, as the basis of the
definition of ANY mental disorder. If the tests were conclusive, they
would be heralded in the DSM. They aren't.
The second question is: if all these mental disorders are
fiction, why are so many people saddled with problems? Why are some
people off the rails? Why are they crazy?
The list of potential answers is very long. A real
practitioner would focus on one patient at a time and try to discover
what has affected him to such a marked degree. For example:
Severe nutritional deficiency. Toxic dyes and colors in
processed food. Ingestion of pesticides and herbicides. Profound
sensitivities to certain foods. The ingestion of toxic pharmaceuticals.
Life-altering damage as a result of vaccines. Exposure to environmental
chemicals. Heavy physical and emotional abuse in the home or at school.
Battlefield stress and trauma (also present in certain neighborhoods).
Prior head injury. Chronic infection. Alcohol and street drugs.
Debilitating poverty.
Other items could be added.
Psychiatry is: fake, fraud, pseudoscience from top to bottom. It's complete fiction dressed up as fact.
But the obsessed devotees of science tend to back away from
this. They close their eyes. If a "branch of knowledge" as extensive as
psychiatry is nothing more than an organized delusion, what other aspect
of science might likewise be parading as truth, when it is actually
mere paper blowing in the wind?
|
No comments:
Post a Comment