Depersonalization Support Forum banner

A little more about my Tom Cruise rant

8610 Views 67 Replies 15 Participants Last post by  Sojourner
I did some research about the Church of Scientology after finding out Tom Crusie was a devote member of. No wonder he denounces psychiatry since it is the Church's no.1 enemy. I stumbled upon this great site which tries to inform the public about the dangers of this Church, and that it posts many many secret documents ( including many written by hand from L.Ron Hubbard himself).

All I can say is that this religion/philosophy is just as dangerous as it claims psychology and psychiatry to be.

What a load of sci-fi crap. And off course there is some sort of a deal between the church and all these stupid celebs that are members.

Anyway, yes psychology/psychiatry has a long ways to go before it solves and solidifies any claims. However to say that psychiatry/psychology is a pseudo science is quite effrontery.

All sciences started out as hypotheses, and went through an abudant amount of trial and error before any kind of fact could be declared. This is what is going on with these Anti-depressants. There are side-effects which can be very bad for some and we truly do not know if they can cause some permanent changes. However this is the price you have to pay for science. Without mistakes there can be no progress. Yes, I understand that the pharmaceutical companies make big $$$ of these drugs and probably want people to be depressed, anxious, etc however to give such a label to all the millions of psychologists, researchers who are doing all this work just because of the few big drug companies is an insult. Im sure that there are plenty of researchers/psychologists who really are passionate about there work and want to make a difference.

There are many theories in astronomy and many facts that need to be sought out, yet we do not dare to call it a pseudo-science.

You need to start somewhere and starting with chemical imbalances starts like a good starting point,

See less See more
1 - 9 of 68 Posts
Scientology probably does suck because it seems to complicate and make people even less likely to still consider that psychiatry makes huges mistakes in its pill dispensing and makes it even harder for the people who have been hurt not helped by psychiatry to have a voice of opinion still.

Engendering the unfair stereotype that if you have views, which are anti-psychiatry not just always politically correct, and (pro-psychiatry) that you are just a minority cult or going to be put in a certain reject box scientologist or not, isn't helpful for victims of it.

What about when tardive 'akathisia' drives someone into having suicidal feelings, worse still 'causes' them to attempt to put themselves out the indescribable pain their in and feeling within their spinal column,
when it activates on neuroleptics, or SSRI's?

Even though it can be treated, this condition/side effect is almost denied being a possible reality, within mainstream psychiatry. Is it then not even more unfair, when someone still has apparently to respect the status of a psychiatrist, otherwise to be ridiculed or possibly called a scientologist or oddity,

on the merits of a psychiatric doctor being intellectual and therefore correct on everything involving their subject, even though being incapable of realising that not everyone, not half as many as publicised reacts to these things in a tangibly benefitting way, and it sometimes costs the patients life.

The fact that this person may have been to medical school for over 10 years, and still doesn't seemingly have a clue about what they are doing, when making people extremely disturbed from the specific side effects of these meds sometimes, is why it is scarier still.

See less See more
Will do you have the 'Power' to give a more expansive and a response which has constructive purpose?

+ what does flotsam mean please?

Grandma!!!! :D
Pure Narcotic I agree with you.

'Person3' you wrote that some people have prexisting disorders might push someone very close to the edge over the edge.

Whether or not you believe that is true or not, or whether the person just became ill on the medication depending on the particular patient, is it still important not to disposably push any patient 'over' the edge, when these meds do hurt people so that nobodies life is lost, just because not 'every' person gets what would be self-measured as a bad reaction? It seems a little non-equal.

I disagree with your view because its not accurate, but its cool I don't think an argument like situation will help either. You must be unaware yet or unknowing about the details some of the specific side effects like 'tardive akathisia' which causes absolutely unbearable suffering for example, of some of these tablets.

Disagree with you mostly and know different Welshlad... Although I think that most psycho-active substances including psych meds have the abillity to personify or intensify someones feelings, this is not the whole picture at all to explaining the unpredictability of many of the current medicines in the psych. family.

Besides even if you think thats true, saying that the drug is a gamble and that it works only for some if your in a good mood about taking it in the first place or not apprehensive about its effects, then its seems funny that its being given to treat depression of which the symptoms are always of a negative nature.

Funnily enough a lot of people who decide to try this may be being told it is to 'raise' their mood because of the drugs percieved or marketted benefits, would it be then be normal to request they are not depressed already and that this is the only way it will enhance their mood?

If thats true, it sounds about as scientifically sensible as saying that wine will make you cheery, if your already in a good mood, but if your in a bad mood it'll make you more miserable.

Insulin for diabetes is drugs for depression is not a cross-comparable argument to most if not all of how effective current psych med's are, because there is nowhere near the same precision or understanding of their nature, compared to insulins effect on 1 thing.

Even most psychiatrists will admit there is no understanding of how exactly they work. We don't know enough about the brain yet to completely understand the nature of chemical imbalance.

Your right that 'all' meds have side effects even parecetamol has side effects this is true. Infact anything foreign used in the body will have alterations and effects on the body, whether it be parecetomal, paxil or taking a sports supplement.

But isn't more important, the 'extent' to which a side effect causes harm or the significance? such as when an effect is either dangerous, fatal, or causes excruciating suffering and pain.

You just don't understand the 'extremity' of people's appauling reactions to this stuff or the specific and nameable awful side effects which are selfishly under-researched and bypassed or even forgotten as significant in favour of the drug.

If you are sayin in the way it comes across, then at current you don't have an educated clue that some of these side-effects can't possibly be to do with just a will of a person's mind to their preconceived idea of what the medicine will do to them.

That would be similar to saying that someone who took Phen-Fen who was scared or apprehensive about taking it, is why they may have suffered heart valve damage, which of course is impossible.

See less See more
Phen-fen actually was a 'brain' drug, but not really labelled in the same category as current psych meds (ie. like SSRI's) etc., but it did work on the brain, it partly effected dopamine.

But one specific side effect caused heart-valve damage, which is why it was banned.

You have no ability to change the functioning of your other organs by thinking, but that is possible with the brain.
Besides, your thinking 'can' have an effect on the way areas such as your heart work, if you are excited or nervous, or learning to get through a panic attack, the response travels and begins from the brain, and your thinking.

But when a drug causes a side-effect or specific negative symptom which is physical, that the drug has directly caused, and people react differently, it can't possibly be a product of someones thinking (ie. tardive dsykinesia for example).

Dealing with a panic attack, through a psych med or through your own resolve or thinking, are two completely different attitudes in looking at (that) particular problem.

Hi Sojourner/Argument maker!, I just chose to remove my post where I said I thought you should stay on this forum, because of reading the almost laughably strange and religously interconnected weird things, you have written to Rula. (about something to do with the power of Satan or you deciding that she thinks she is a god or something lol).

1 - 9 of 68 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.