Why I Refuse to Read Anatomy of an Epidemic

Natasha, perhaps it doesn't bother you when people attack you, but come on. This is not okay for anyone to be subjected to, much less a more vulnerable group who may be less able brush it off. UNhealthy place indeed

Yes, Natasha, you've made it quite clear,through your stance on freedom of speech, that the mentally ill are in fact mistreated, their suffering and personal experience invalidated by others who lack empathy; for that, I thank you. And all my best to you, L.J., Thank you for sharing your story. True mental health will only be achieved when all psychiatric patients have a voice and are able to tell their stories without being attacked.

LJ, thanks for sharing your story and providing the links you shared above. I hope you have a support system that is helping you with your path to recovery.
I posted this earlier and my comment was deleted, yet the awful abusive posts still remain. I fail to understand this moderation decision and perhaps that makes the point better than Whitaker could...

Thank you Guy for posting on this thread and to others who posted in support, but had their posts deleted.
It has been a distressing experience, having shared on Healthyplace and on Natasha's blog.
Cyberbullying and harassment are very serious things, and are magnified when one suffers from any sort of ailment.
But, the responses from Healthyplace and Natasha speak to their truth.
There remains much stigma and insensitivity in society along with much inadequate information.
I hope that my willingness and strength in putting my story out there, has helped even but one person to use discernment, read up on the facts and to know that it is courageous to speak your truth, even in the face of others who lack a compass of empathy.

Well, thanks for finally posting my comments, but you still haven't deleted the abusive comments from weeks ago. I am surprised that someone of your mental health expertise would allow such hateful and disrespectful comments on your blog. I'm disappointed and have lost faith in this site. Mentally ill people deserve far better treatment. I look forward to reading "Anatomy of an Epidemic". I'm open minded and intelligent, so i'm sure i'll enjoy the book. I look forward to learning more about the psychiatric industry and how it's patients are truly treated.

PS. Glad to see my comments are awaiting moderation, when an extremely abusive comment towards mentally ill people has not been removed from this mental health website in 2 weeks. Cheers!

Betty said something on August 10th that no mental health advocate would ever want on their website. I think it's the most insulting comment I ever heard about a mentally ill person. I'm surprised that you missed it and hope you remove it before someone is triggered. This is supposed to be a healthy place after all. Why is so much verbal abuse overlooked?

Btw Natasha, seems like you missed some disgustingly abusive comments. I hope you could moderate some more, for the sake of your followers who might be triggered by some very disturbing remarks on mental illness. Cheers!

Wow, after all the heated comments, I definitely will read the book. Sounds like there might be some good food for thought In its pages. Very interesting topic.

Dean Koontz says:
August 15, 2015 at 8:17 pm
“Among predatory beasts, any display of weakness is an invitation to attack”
Who's a beast?

Actions speak louder than words...
Re: Betty Sainz comments of August 10, 2015 at 9:12 PM.

"betty sainz says:
August 20, 2015 at 4:41 pm
Any display of genuine illness or misfortune is met with support and hearts filled with compassion."

Any display of genuine illness or misfortune is met with support and hearts filled with compassion.

"Among predatory beasts, any display of weakness is an invitation to attack".

In order to sell their authenticity they even pretend not to be able to spell and use proper grammar. But, notice how they spell a word correctly, sometimes, and incorrectly at other times. Occasionally, their comprehension skills are fine and at other times, when they want to convince us of their traumatic brain injuries from antipsychotics, they can barely make sense. Mind you, we are not supposed to notice. We are only to pity the severely damaged former psych patients.

Your comments were inappropriate and abusive. They should not have been allowed to continue. There is a difference between discussing an issue, and attacking a person. It also is against the Healthy Place posting policies, as I read them. Free speech isn't free when it hurts others. Compassion and empathy go a long way.
Here are some links that are worth viewing, from a variety of sources, parents who have lost their loved ones due to psychiatric medications, and from other members of the medical community who have a differing view.
This is about choice, and empowerment, which requires a whole story to be told. Informed consent is the foundation of any therapeutic relationship. Some people are helped, while others are harmed. There is no disputing that, it is a fact.
https://www.linktv.org/programs/the-dark-side-of-a-pill
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gazEyr86RVY
http://overmedicatedandundertreated.com/
http://www.everydayhealth.com/columns/therese-borchard-sanity-break/are-we-overmedicating…
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/opinion/difficult-decisions-in-treating-adhd.html?_r=0
http://www.breggin.com/
http://tabitagreen.com/her-lost-year-book/
This is my last post on this thread. As I said earlier, I don't promote stigma, and I don't "bash" other sufferers.

Of course, we are bad horrible people, while psychiatry is good.
How DARE somebody to have adverse reaction to HEAVENLY meds? How DARE somebody recover in their own way?
Yeah disgusting. What are people thinking having opinion?
(Notice how horace and betzy actually attack people while "whitaker groupies" only attacked theories in the beginning? Sure I made pharma snide, because I was sick what was said here from psychiatry defenders. Funny what can they get away with. But it's good it's here, everybody can make their own mind.)

"I think it’s dangerous to make the kind of argument Betty uses above. First, it is ridiculous to state that it’s impossible to know whether psychiatric drugs caused any of LJ’s side effects... Anyone who tries to argue that there’s no proof any side effects came from these drugs is demonstrating willed ignorance." snap
Ridiculous? That's insulting. And, who said it is impossible to know? No one. Personally attacking someone for what they never said is absolutely wrong.
"You have no evidence the drugs you took created a single negative side effect." sainz
If you do, share it, please.
Classic example.

Why not share with everyone the biological markers as evidence that meds created the very injuries you insist they created? Let's see the proof. Why is it a primary argument of theirs that there are no biomarkers for mental illness and not apply the same reasoning to their own conclusions?

Now that is fascinating. Accused of belittling individuals, as if that is something those who live to condemn psychiatrists never engage in, they hunt and attempt to belittle anyone who doesn't accept their every word. They even humiliate and falsely accuse a person kind enough to allow them to express themselves on her website, "pharma funded."
Certainly, part of the credibility problem these self-proclaimed crusaders face is their hypocrisy, rage and overly sensitive reactions for whomever they don't like. Only they are entitled be rude and vicious!
Sorry folks. Time to grow up, that is, if you truly aspire to affect change.

Thanks, Natasha, for stepping in and insisting on civility. Here's a sample of commenting guidelines from Robert Whitaker's mental health related site.
http://www.madinamerica.com/posting-guidelines/
From the guidelines:
"We find that a public space that allows abusive, disrespectful, or off-topic comments shuts down conversation and benefits very few people. . . . This kind of abusive environment mirrors and perpetuates the very problems we would like to address."
Thanks again, and keep up your good work!

Hi folks,
Okay, I've moderated things here a little and I must now ask that people stop the personal attacks. It's really not appropriate. Please try to raise the level of discourse to discussing the issue at hand. I will start moderating out comments that don't do this.
Thank you,
- Natasha Tracy

It is rich that betty calls somebody mentally disturbed while going on violent rage about people with different approach to wellness.
Is she so scared about how Pharma stocks? Or does she feel if she spews enough venom on non-pharm approaches her meds will start magically working? Or?

This needs to stop. Seriously. Do you not understand I am a real person on the other side of the computer screen?
Some of these posts are abusive and amount to bullying.
Had I realized my sharing would result in such vitriol that would be allowed to continue, while attacking me personally, I would not have shared.
Please, stop.

[moderated]

If Natasha really cares for good of their reader's she'd censore these individuals. However, she let's them attack and villify people, because they are on her, Pharma-paid side.
Really, wow. Blaming the victim of being mistreated. Attacking somebody because they had bad experience.
Well. pro-psychiatry people painted nice picture of themselves once again. Maybe meds fried their sense of empathy. Maybe they never had it.
Whitetaker fans took their life in their hands eventually. Unlike some.

I'll second R's suggestion that [moderated] commenting as betty-Horace-donald spew her poison somewhere else.

Beat it, pal.

Betty & Horace et al
Critcizing people is one thing but belittling them is whole different ball of wax altogether. If you need to tear people down to build yourself up then it says a lot more about you than it does about others...

Go spout your lies on Whitaker's garbage dump. Funny. These Self-pitying liars believe no one can be critical of them! They honestly believe others don't have the right to criticize them, to expose their lies and challenge them. They believe they have achieved some special status, based on their contrived mistreatment, that they alone are above suspicion. Talk about narcissism. Leave it to the mentally ill to try to frame the nature of the discussions about their own persecution from anyone they choose.
Sure R. Whatever you say.

Go spout your venom somewhere else!

"I was prescribed psychiatric medication while a functioning adult, working, having connections and meaning in my life, respected in my community.
The side effects then led to a more serious diagnosis, the claim that the symptoms demonstrated a “hidden” illness."
Funny. You don't have any evidence that the more serious diagnosis you received had anything to do with the drugs you were taking. You draw that conclusion, number 1, because you want to. 2, you lie.
"Dr. Moncrieff writes “psychiatry has its head in the sand.” Strong words from a practicing psychiatrist about her own profession." Who cares what she says, besides you and your fellow groupies? Most doctors disagree with her.
"Second, to say that a person is to be blamed for a lack of common sense demonstrated by choosing to follow a doctor’s orders is laughably poor logic..."
You blame doctors for everything. LOL. That's laughable. Let's pretend you can read. Every psych med is packaged with clear warnings about adverse reactions. You are responsible for reading them and heeding their warnings. [moderated]

Oh stop it. You have no proof she was injured by the drugs she took. You make assumptions based on your desire to trounce psychiatry; you lie and exaggerate. And, who said doctors are supposed to help people--without risk? From where did you acquire that ridiculous idea? You are adults, big girls, correct? No one forced drugs down your throats. And, don't go into involuntary commitment. Don't even try it. If you were so out there that you wound up being treated against your will, blame yourselves. Stop making baseless, immature, pity me, excuses for all your horrible, terrible, dire, indescribable suffering. For once, take responsibility for yourselves. You, the ultra-sensitive, blame everyone else for my problems, a.k.a. Whitaker's groupies (all 5 or 6 of you) have lives consisting exclusively of blaming psychiatrists for all your many woes. Go for a walk and let go of your obsessions to target others for all your misery. Smile. Laugh once in a while. Tell a joke. Stop ruminating on your terrible victimization.
I found websites where the benefits of the drugs prescribed by psychiatrists are lauded. Golly, how about that! That must mean they do some good.

I clicked on the link that Karen Taylor provided (thank you, Karen) and found a troubling article by psychiatrist Joanna Moncrieff. Dr. Moncrieff cites the Wunderink and Andreasen studies, which suggest that “the standard approach to treating serious mental health problems may cause more harm than good.” (uh oh)
Dr. Moncrieff states that these studies indicate “antipsychotics are bad for the brain and can reduce people’s social functioning when used continuously over long periods.”
She’s more direct in her criticism of her profession than Robert Whitaker is. Dr. Moncrieff writes “psychiatry has its head in the sand.” Strong words from a practicing psychiatrist about her own profession.

http://joannamoncrieff.com/2013/12/20/psychiatry-has-its-heads-in-the-sand-royal-college-…

I think it's dangerous to make the kind of argument Betty uses above. First, it is ridiculous to state that it's impossible to know whether psychiatric drugs caused any of LJ's side effects. Psychiatric drugs are well documented to cause side effects that can be severe even to the point of being disabling. Anyone who tries to argue that there's no proof any side effects came from these drugs is demonstrating willed ignorance.
Second, to say that a person is to be blamed for a lack of common sense demonstrated by choosing to follow a doctor's orders is laughably poor logic. If psychiatry is a field of medicine that helps people, it follows that trusting your psychiatrist's orders is the best course of action. If your advice to someone is that common sense indicates that they should refuse treatment, then you are arguing that psychiatry is so fatally flawed that we cannot trust those care providers.
So which is it? You cannot argue in favor of psychiatry and blame its victims for seeking treatment. Common sense dictates that we seek the least harmful route. Betty's comment contradicts itself.

Typical crybaby ranting of a hypersensitive, it is all your fault, immature Whitaker groupie.
/ j';/

Hey LJ, thanks very much for sharing your story here about the iatrogenic harm you experienced from psychiatric treatment. You are not alone. As a matter of fact, a story which echoes some of the elements of your own account was recently published on Robert Whitaker’s site, Mad In America. I’ll try to share a link here.
http://www.madinamerica.com/2015/07/one-familys-encounter-with-modern-psychiatry-and-a-ca…
When people attack you for speaking your truth, I hope you can take some comfort in understanding that they do so from a place of ignorance and fear. And, when you are attacked, be assured that what you are sharing is worthwhile and is having an impact. Congratulations. Take courage, and please continue to speak up! I bet Mad in America would be interested in publishing your story. Please consider submitting an essay to the personal stories editor, Laura Delano who, by the way, also credits Anatomy of an Epidemic with saving her life! You'll find that Mad In America is a safe place to share your experience.

Healthy place needs to put the disclaimer, not all sufferers are welcome, so people are warned of the risk of sharing. Not a safe place.
I praise Whitaker for his courage and steadfast integrity and I think the rest of you need to educate yourselves, his evidence is solid, but then that is why ignorance is bliss, yes?
Done with these *un* healthy place blogs, I don't bash other sufferers. Nor do I promote stigma.
Take care.

Your experience is yours. You have no evidence the drugs you took created a single negative side effect. You didn't have to do what a psychiatrist suggested. Don't blame others for your failure to use common sense. Whitaker's groupies are notorious for blaming everyone else for all their agony. They suffer like no other group, too. Self-pity is a constant theme in their comments.
I don't believe her, either. Her co-haters sound exactly alike. Woe is me!

I cried tears of joy the day Whitakers book was published.
I only wished my dear Mother who stood by me through years of agony had been alive to see it.
I was prescribed psychiatric medication while a functioning adult, working, having connections and meaning in my life, respected in my community.
The side effects then led to a more serious diagnosis, the claim that the symptoms demonstrated a "hidden" illness.
This was the beginning of the end, more medication, cognitive impairment, symptoms so disabling I lost everything, my job, hope.
After years of torment I weaned myself with the help of my family from the psychiatric medication that was the cause of my suffering.
I am still very much disabled, still suffering from the side effects, some of them permanent.
Reaching out to the mental health profession for care was the single most life crushing decision I ever made.
Whitaker did not say all medication was bad, he said there is a place for it but that considering the spin from the psychiatric community and the pharmaceutical community, the disability rates for mental illness, it would seem, should be going down, not increasing as more people are labelled, stigmatized and the quality of their lives and functioning is limited by treatment. These are facts, from the SSA itself.
Your experience is your own, and your seeming lack of willingness to honor the experience of other sufferers is distressing.
You might want to actually read the book before you trash a man who has given a voice to millions of us who were ignored.
I am not anti-psychiatry, I am for responsible psychiatry. And you should be, too.

"How do I know this? Well, rather than reviewing his book I reviewed some of the studies he cites and the claims he says are backed up by those studies and I found them to be fallacious at best. Sure, he cites studies, he just contraindicates what the study actually proves. And nothing ticks me off more than this because people believe him just because there is a linked study – no one ever bothers to check that the study says whatever Whitaker says it does." Natasha
Just like the Whitaker worshipers to misconstrue the facts. She researched his resources and found him wanting.

To me the crux of the matter is if a person with bpd must opt for medications and feel productive or he/she must avoid medications and limit the possibilities for a better quality of socially accepted life. That ,these medications have pluses and minuses ,is well documented. Shall we listen to a doctor or a crusader journalist whose conviction is anti-psychiatry.In case if a person accepts the second option above,has the anti-psychiatry team put in place an alternative model of care?

You are a riot, Mathi.

This author states right up that she's ill-informed - she refuses to read the book because she finds the author's viewpoint, which differs from hers, to be too infuriating to stand - but then rants and raves in a frothy-mouthed rebuttal of the argument she hasn't read.
First of all, she claims to be interested in "good science", which means she ought to be embarrassed by how unscientific she is being.
But what terrifies me is that Natasha is so convinced that she knows it all already. "Why bother read his book," runs her argument, "when I already know he's wrong." The arrogance is breathtaking. She has no shadow of a doubt that her prevonceived ideas are correct. She believes she has no more learning to do. Doesn't it freak you out to think that your doctor probably has the same belief?!? And if so, he or she will keep doing what she was taught in medical school until the day she dies, even after it's proved wrong?!?
Such blinkered arrogance is all too common among scientists and the medical community. And you know what? That's how mistakes get made.
Scientists who think they already know the answers nake mistakes. Why? Because what do they do when confronted with results that don't fit their preconceived notions? They explain it away. They disbelieve the results. They make an excuse. They fudge the results.
But even if the scientists can accept the new information, you can be certain that the medical community won't. Because they will fly into illogical knee-jerk fits of rage at having their all powerful, all-knowing status questioned.
Heres the thing: Scientists don't want to be proven wrong, and medics don't want to change. And there you have the reasons for the diabetes epidemic, the obesity epidemic and now it seems, the mental health epidemic, too. Pure and simple, these epdemics were created because for periods of thirty or fifty years, scientists explained away results they didn't like, and the medical community went into a mouth-frothing fit of apoplectic rage at any suggestion that they might need to change.
This post is a perfect example of that knee-jerk, illogical rage against challenging new information which has caused the overwhelming evidence to be ignored for decades, and the lives of thousands of people to be compromised. This post is an example of how the scientific and medical communities fail us.

" I am an individual who is still recovering from the damage I incurred from taking psychiatric medications for a periond on years...huge chunks of my memory were disappearing, along with my sharp, quick intellegence. Tha work that had come to me so easy became unmanagable. I lost my career, income, benefits, and stability. I could not find a therapist in my area whospecialized in deep trauma initially. Now, having gotten off the medications I had been told I would need totakefor the rest of mylife, some of my memories of my adult children are beginning to return and I am thrilled." Dee Jacobson
I don't believe her. Many of the "I hate psychiatry" fanatics love to post lies of their alleged tortured lives. They try to appear something other than what they really are. Their accounts are too contrived, too perfectly designed to attack psychiatry. After a while, they are easily spotted. They are despicable.

"So Robert Whittiker clearly surrounds himself with a wide range of people..."
Is that right, Big Mouth? Quote some people who make pro-psychiatry comments at MIA.
Confront Suzanne Beachy, too, that deeply grieving mother. MIA grants her carte blanche to insult those with whom she disagrees.
Whitaker is pathetic. "Though the website is now run by a group of people so his input might not be as large as it once was." Who runs it now? Listen up, mouth, Whitaker has complete control over the content oozing from that stinking cesspool. It is a dump, a septic tank trench field gushing waste in every direction. He, ultimately, is responsible for every stupid, unscientific, hate-filled word and phrase uttered from that viper's nest.

Dear Mr. Big Mouth,
E. Fuller Torrey claims that he and his organization do not receive drug company funding. I don't know if that's true or not. I do know that Torrey is a prime source of misinformation, mainly in the form of fear- and hate-mongering against people with the scarier psychiatric labels.
I agree with you that he is not a credible critic of Mr. Whitaker's work. In fact, Mr. Whitaker addressed Torrey's "review" of Anatomy of an Epidemic in this article entitled "Dear Dr. Torrey, Please Stop the Lies"
http://www.madinamerica.com/2012/10/dear-dr-torrey-please-stop-the-lies/

Robert Whittiker is not anti-psychiatry.
A wide range of people write on the Mad in America website: psychiatrists, anti-psychiatrists, social workers, psychologists, survivors of psychiatry, therapists, counsellor, leaders of self help groups for people who hear voices, leaders of other self help groups. So Robert Whittiker clearly surrounds himself with a wide range of people. Though the website is now run by a group of people so his input might not be as large as it once was.
I understand you have not read it as you do not like what it might say and you criticise Robert Whittiker's way of interpreting studies. However others do like his way of interpreting studies and they are not exactly new or novel interpretations. Others have reached similar conclusions before, he merely puts the evidence in a more clear manner than most.
You have not sited what the studies are that Wittiker uses and then said why you think his interpretations are wrong and why others interpretations are better. Until you do that you are presenting a weak argument. You write that he cannot interpret studies very well and say others do it better and reach different conclusions but the only evidence you have is from Torrey Fuller, a man who receives drug company funding.
I therefore ask you if you have any credible independent experts who take apart Whittiker's work? If so can you present them in a future blog? Without that I think you are making accusations but not substantiating them very well, certainly not enough for anyone to make any useful decisions on.
Robert Whittiker has toured the world speaking at conferences on this issue. Perhaps you could invite him to debate his findings with you or an expert of your choice? If you do that I for one would be interested in hearing about that. Until such a debate is held, or a more independent expert than the one you have sited is asked to examine his work I am afraid that your piece is best seen as a biased and provocative opinion piece that is amusing but has little basis in fact or has much in the way of reasoned debate. I love such columns, as sharp opinions make life interesting, but not something one should base serious opinions on.