WHY
THE SUBJECT OF
"MENTAL HEALTH" IS
SO
CONFUSED AND SO
BADLY MIS-MANAGED
In
the same way that the word “catch” can mean “catch” the ball,
the “catch” on the door, “catch” the thief, do you “catch”
my meaning and there's a “catch” in this somewhere, so the words
“mental health” have us fooled with one genuine and several false
meanings - invented solely for profit !
The two longest existing
fields of mental health investigation and treatment are of course
psychiatry and psychology, going back as far as Wilhelm Wundt of
Leipzig. And
whilst historians tell us
that “mental” practices have been with us since time immemorial,
it was the work and dominating character of Wilhelm Wundt of Leipzig
which earned him his reputation as the “father” of today’s
psychiatry.
Born
in 1832, he is acknowledged as the major influence on other
researchers such as Pavlov 1849, Freud 1856, Adler 1870, Jung 1875,
Ellis and others, all of whom have contributed to the various views
and practices of clinical psychology, psycho-therapy and psychiatry
as we know them today.
It
is interesting however, that more recent and current giants of mental
theory and practice, such as Emeritus Professor Thomas Szasz (holder
of the Chair of Psychiatry at New York State University), and Dr
Matthias Rath MD (world famous nutritionist) have, along with many
other enlightened and internationally revered psychiatrists, spent a
considerable part of their professional lives condemning the
status-quo psychiatry of Wundt, Pavlov and Freud as being not only
out-of-date, but also ineffective and in fact a downright danger to
the lives of a majority of mental patients at the receiving end of
what these practitioners consider to be “treatment”.
However,
even without these expert denunciations, psychiatry’s lack of
successful results has been increasingly condemning psychiatric
theories and practices for well over a century. So much so that
current practices and repeated treatment failures are now
understandably inhibiting the enrolment of new students into
psychiatry.
The
main division in the mental health field is between the “talking
therapies” and the
invasive “treatments”
which cut, electric-shock, drill or drug-poison the patients body in
a vain attempt to “improve”
his mental faculties and emotive behaviour.
Whilst
we are “advised” that, in this country, pre-frontal lobotomies,
leucotomies and other brain operations are more and more confined /
restricted to the alleviation of accidental damage to the brain, this
is far from true internationally and in fact such operations, as well
as Electro Convulsive Therapy (ECT), are still weekly carried out
under the direction of British psychiatrists in a vain attempt to
“modify” the behaviour of U.K. mental patients.
Because
the results in most cases include the patient “quietening down”
and, like a whipped dog, becoming “more under control” there are
still psychiatrists who believe they are succeeding !
However,
patients and families seldom if ever regard the results of these
treatments as “improvements” in the patient’s lifestyle.
The
fastest expanding of psycho-pharmaceutical treatment modalities is of
course the escalating prescribing and usage of (mainly addictive) toxic pharmaceutical
drugs for a widening selection of so-called ”mental disorders”.
The American Psychiatric Association’s “Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders” continually expands its
lists of such conditions – NOT on the basis of scientific proof –
but solely on a show of hands at boozy psychiatric conventions.
Their
purpose, for health insurance and profit reasons, is to try and
demonstrate an expanding demand for mental health services to justify
private and public health systems buying more and more drugs each
year – many of them addictive and thus with a built-in never ending
demand potential.
Today’s
vested interest psycho-pharmaceutical fraternity is the
“pincer-movement” which seeks, and too often succeeds, in
controlling government health policies. The “psychs” create the
demand for treatments via counselling sessions, and then the
“pharmas” satisfy that demand by supplying the prescribed drugs –
not directly to the patient – but to the Department of Health and the NHS,
so that the psycho-pharms can be paid by the government rather than
by the patient.
Which
brings us to the “talking therapies”. These are delivered not
only by psychiatrists, but also by psychologists, psycho-therapists,
psycho-analysts and even hypnotists. And as you might expect, there
are good and bad amongst them.
The
“bad” are those who apathetically stick to what they have been
taught on their training courses – irrespective of the poor results
or lack of patient improvement over which they are presiding.
And
the “good” are those who have recognised that their “technology”
is not only desperately old-fashioned, but also ineffective, often
damaging and without doubt in critical need of revision and
modernisation.
They
therefore often become researchers and experimenters, asking new
questions and seeking new answers, as a result of which many are to
be found in our universities.
There
are also clinical psychologists who mix Freudian ideas with drug
prescribing and hypnotism, those who borrow from other practices and
those who develop successful practices of their own by combining
careful scientific observation with humane goals for their patients.
Anyone
who has fully studied the basics of Hubbard’s Dianetics and
Scientology principles, will quickly recognise that the current
fashion amongst psychological talking therapies – Cognitive
Behavioural Therapy (CBT) – is no more than a failed effort to
combine two separate facets of Hubbard’s 1950s and ‘60s works
into one, in the hope of establishing a structured new approach.
Whilst
Hubbard's original separate concepts worked well and still do, they
had two separate goals in mind, so that, when they are amalgamated as
in psychologically plagiarised CBT, they tend to cancel one another
out and so produce strangely mixed results or mainly nothing of
lasting value.
In
his book: “A DICTIONARY OF THE MIND, BRAIN AND BEHAVIOUR”, well
known international lecturer and broadcasting Doctor of Psychology
Chris Evans (who has over one hundred scientific and technical papers
to his name) provides us with “a basic introduction to the terms
and ideas central to psychology” and psychiatry, and to what he
describes as “a clear, invaluable source of reference for
students”.
Whilst
the English dictionary tells us that “mental” means “appertaining
to the mind”, and that “mental health” defines the working
condition of a person’s mind, it is clear that neither psychiatry
nor psychology can provide a working definition of what the mind
itself is. Evans’ dictionary says:
“At
one time the mind was (correctly) equated with soul or spirit and
assumed to be the conscious “control mechanism” for the body and
qualitatively different from it. Freud’s ideas complicated this
picture by introducing the disturbing notion of the power of the
“unconscious”, which downgraded the status of the mind’s
conscious component.”
“Pavlov
and the Behaviourist School further eroded its significance by
ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF MIND from all experimental and
theoretical considerations, and criticising anyone who dared use the
word for being ‘mystical’ or ‘unscientific’.”
“Today,
whilst few psychologists think of mind as a spiritual entity
separable from the brain and body, most now accept that the richness
and reality of mental life cannot be denied and that a
place must be found for the word
“mind” in
comprehensive theories of human behaviour”.
Unfortunately,
that “place” is STILL to be found in both psychiatric and
psychological theories and practices, all of which are without
knowledge and understanding of the existence of “mind” and
“soul”, which billions of religious adherents have held to exist
for generations.
Whilst
psychiatry is still a large
(but shrinking) world-wide industry, its reputation as a
profession and science has never been lower. Jokes about “shrinks”
and “how many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?”,
etc., have never been more in vogue than today, and apart from the
failures of their so-called “treatments”, there are every day
reports of unethical conduct, fraud and serious abuse of patients.
In
fact it is now clear that psychiatry’s main role today is as the
U.K’s ‘pusher’ of addictive pharmaceutical prescription drugs.
BUT
HOW DID PSYCHIATRY GET INTO THIS STATE ?
And
it doesn't take long to recognise that whilst psychiatry and
psychology have derived their basic operating data and principles
from mice, rats, Pavlov's dogs and other animals, Hubbard's
“DIANETICS: The Modern Science of Mental health”, was based
exclusively on a study of Mankind's mental processes.
An
extremely vital factor, because Man's minds are quite different from
other flesh and blood animals – which of course accounts for why
Man is without question the dominant species on Earth, even though
physically weaker than many other species.
Described
in its own training and reference literature as: “The branch of
medicine which deals with mental disorders, their origins, diagnosis,
treatment and prevention”, modern psychiatry is revealed in
that same literature as being comprised of a wide range of
disagreements between various schools, factions or ‘authorities’
arising from “a long and controversial history”.
It
is therefore not surprising that Dr Chris Evans’ authoritative
description and definition of psychiatry concludes with the following
revealing paragraph:
“The
trouble with psychiatry today is that it is still without a working
theory, not just of the mind but also the disturbed mind. Even a
definition of ‘mental illness’ is not easy to come by, so perhaps
it is not surprising that to this date psychiatric methods have
inevitably been of a hit or miss variety” !
On
the other hand, Emeritus Professor of Psychopharmacology C. Heather
Ashton has lead the field in her research into, and treatment of,
involuntary addiction to benzodiazepines and other tranquillisers –
probably by far the country's most serious and widespread example of
iatrogenically created illnesses.
These
are extremely serious, damaging, costly and extensive health problems,
caused by psychiatry’s main role today as the ‘pushers’ of
addictive pharmaceutical prescription drugs to currently two million
NHS Patients and even more each day.
Criticised
by Ashton, the leader amongst these “prescribing psychiatrists”,
and probably the most damaging, is Professor (Sir) John Strang, who
runs the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College, as well as the
National Addiction Centre at Denmark Hill, both in London.
And
as we enter the field of ADDICTION, we move into that health sector
where today the greatest concentration of psycho-pharmaceutical
attention is focussed.
WHY?
Because
there is nothing easier to consistently sell to any consumer than a substance to
which he or she can be rendered addicted. An addictive substance is
the supreme creator of demand for itself and thus the ultimate
marketing tool.
Furthermore,
because a majority of addicted drug users are seldom gainfully
employed, the whole marketing strategy has been enhanced by the
psycho-pharms having convinced government that the addict himself
shouldn’t pay for his supplies !
YES!
The government have been persuaded by the ever-so-helpful
psychiatric and prescription drugs industries that the vast supplies
of seriously addictive drugs delivered to millions of people in the
UK should be PAID FOR BY THE NHS OUT OF TAX-PAYER FUNDS.
The
cheek, impudence and downright nerve of the whole concept is
breath-taking, and would be admirable if it were not such an
atrocious “con”, ruining millions of lives and being a major
cause of our national inability to recover more rapidly from the
current economic recession and increasing social deprivation.
Because
most of psychiatry has no fundamental or scientifically proven
guiding technology, it is the easiest thing in the world for
well-placed “professionals” like academic John Strang to come up
with “expert” opinions and reports which favour the producers and
suppliers of the addictive substances in respect of which he
furnishes them with well-paid “consultancy services”.
Whilst
Strang is at the sharp-end of influencing government policy, to
ensure that he and other colleagues succeed in their manipulations,
they are backed by numerous so-called “independent” advisory
groups - themselves backed by psycho-pharmaceutical interests.
Roger
Howard, a former local council worker with no recorded training or
experience in addiction rehabilitation, was responsible for the
costly DATS scheme, apparently established mainly to provide
employment for psychiatric staffs from redundant asylums and mental
institutions as a result of the psycho-pharms having persuaded the
then government to introduce “Care in the Community”.
After
establishing “SCODA” and later amalgamating it with the Institute
for the Study of Drug Dependency to form DrugScope, it was mainly
Howard who was behind the founding of today’s National Treatment
Centre for Substance Misuse, where most of the senior posts were then
staffed with DrugScope trained personnel.
In
turn DrugScope spawned the “London Drug & Alcohol Network”,
as well as the “Substance Misuse Skills Consortium”, the
“Recovery Group UK” and “The Recovery Partnership”, all to
provide what they hoped would appear to be other
“independent” voices giving leverage simply by apparent weight of
numbers in the arguments they are determined will take place as part
of the psycho-pharm effort to resist the “lasting abstinence
recovery” and “Payment by Results” drugs strategy.
Howard
also formed the political pressure group “UK Drug Policy
Commission”, where he was CEO and where a non-executive director of
pharmaceutical giant Astra-Zeneca was the Honorary President. Here,
along with ex-NTA Dale-Perera, we also find “Commissioner”
Strang.
The
same Professor John Strang was appointed in 2011 by the NTA to
oversee the implementation of the then Government's recovery plans
via 8 PbR pilot areas over a 3 to 4 year period. These were expected
to deliver success for the government strategy, BUT in fact reported
that “lasting abstinence (and so also PbR) cannot be made to
work, and that the better solution is to prescribe Suboxone or even
to continue with methadone” !
John
Strang is thus perfectly placed to ensure the drug rehab sector
remains a profitable psycho-pharm marketplace for prescription drugs,
by pseudo-scientifically convincing the Government that its drugs
strategy goals, based on “recovery” to “lifelong relaxed
abstinence” are not viable.
Today's
psycho-pharm strategy is based on completely eliminating the
residential rehabilitation and recovery sector, and replacing it
entirely with “treatment” based totally on prescription of
addictive pharmaceutical drugs to “manage” the increasing numbers
of methadone, buprenorphine, naloxone and Suboxone addicts, as a
result of which we find one of the leading rehabilitation sector
magazines today asking: “IS THE SECTOR LIVING ON BORROWED TIME ?”
The
psycho-pharms make massive amounts of money in two separate ways.
WHETHER
USING ILLICIT DRUG BARON SUPPLIES, OR LEGAL PHARAMAEUTICAL
PRESCRIPTIONS, EACH U.K. ADDICT,
IS DAILY TAKING AN ADDICTIVE SUBSTANCE WHICH HAS TWO MAIN PROPERTIES:
1) It
quickly relieves the patient's current craving for that drug, and,
2) A
few hours later, it re-creates that same irresistible craving for
that substance by triggering the same “cold turkey” withdrawal
symptoms.
This is the prime example of a
“vicious circle”, and the main unique sales proposition which the
ruthless marketing of addictive products depends on to create and
maintain irresistible demand – whether those products are
illicit or legal.
IT IS JUST THAT
SIMPLE, but in addition to medically hooking increasing numbers
of NHS patients on addictive pharmaceutical drugs, this fundamentally
simple sales strategy has been successfully hidden by numerous
psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies to allow them to build
another similarly gigantic and lucrative business called: “Illicit
Drug Addiction Treatment and Management”.
As a result, huge amounts of
money are made by various psycho-pharms out of getting millions of
N.H.S. patients legally and involuntarily addicted for life,
and IN ADDITION further huge amounts of money are made by
other psycho-pharms who are “treating” and “managing” the
habits of those who have been persuaded into addiction by the illegal
Drug Baron's street and school-gate drug pushers.
And because successive
Ministers and Officials have over the last 69 years allowed
themselves and their policies to rely on psycho-pharm “advice”
and “guidance”, we not only have a working population
increasingly decimated by addiction, we also have a National Health
Service financially crippled by it, plus a tax-paying population who
are paying to maintain all this addiction – because the
psycho-pharms have now basically made nearly ALL addicts and
addiction quite “legal” !
In
terms of “Mental Health”, which is today so intimately linked
with addiction, the “bad” are the psychologists, the Ministers
and the Officials who are the policy and decision-makers who keep the
“ugly” psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies in their
controlling positions SOLELY to make more turnover, more profit,
higher wages, higher bonuses, bigger dividends and more Corporation
Tax.
The
“good” are the Scientologists and Dianetics practitioners who,
increasingly, are training families and individuals to cure genuine
(not invented) emotional and mental conditions, and whose numbers -
on a worldwide basis - are beginning to overtake all other forms of
false psychiatric “Mental Health” handling.
AND
ALL IT TAKES FOR AN IMPROVING REVOLUTION IN “MENTAL HEALTH” TO
GET UNDER WAY, IS FOR GOVERNMENT MINISTERS AND OFFICIALS TO START
MEETING WITH AND LISTENING TO TRAINED SCIENTOLOGISTS.
THAT'S
IT !
THAT'S
WHAT PSYCHIATRY AND THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY FEAR MOST. That's why they have spent the last 67 years and billions of $Dollars
blackening L. Ron Hubbard, deriding Scientology, side-lining and
mocking Dianetics, and making it as difficult as possible for
Hubbard's work to be recognised and used.
This
is what Psychiatrists and Big Pharma fear the most.
Nothing
more than Ministers and Officials starting to meet, question and
listen to Scientologists !
Don't
you wonder - just a little - why this might be ?
___________________________________________________
This
is a report from:
A.W.A.S.H.
Addiction
Withdrawal Advisory
Services & Help
The
people who successfully
train addicts to cure
themselves.
____________________________________________________
The internet address of this
report and other associated reports is:
