Our Concerns: The Witt-Doerring Youtube Channel

[[Co...]]

48 minutes ago, [[D...] said:

If you shut this down youre shutting free speech here. You are sending a message that this is not a free space, is a place where you have to obey and not go against the mainstream.

@[Ma...] this is not Twitter or Facebook where thay have censored for years anything that goes against their mandatory thinking.

'Free speech' is abstract concept. I presume your refer to the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution. In it's entirety:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

For the sake of argument, let us assume that the US Constitution applies to a British owed website (and it might, since the site is hosted in the US). The problem, though, is that 1A applies to Government, not private enterprise and individuals.

All spaces operated by private individuals apply their own rules - ALL OF THEM. Their being afforded the right to set their own rules for the spaces they control is actually a free speech principle. You being unable to override this is not.

Having said that, BB tries to be as unrestrictive as possible. But member-safety overrides our desire to allow members as much freedom of expression as possible. Longer-term members will know just how much more open BB is to debate than other benzo forums (and similar places) which have come and gone over the years. For the most part, those other places closed partly/largely because they could not get the balance right when it came to rules and freedom of members to manage themselves.

[[Co...]]

55 minutes ago, [[L...] said:

Nice attempt to use group inclusion as persuasion. I would say almost all members seem to disagree fairly strongly.  Some a little too enthusiastically  

You should look at reactions. Most who have supported this notice have not posted to this thread. Whereas, about three members (are who seem largely against it) have made up about half the posts here.

[[Co...]]

42 minutes ago, [[D...] said:

and you are?

Obviously, a fellow member expressing her opinion.

[[Le...]]

4 minutes ago, [[C...] said:

You should look at reactions. Most who have supported this notice have not posted to this thread. Whereas, about three members (are who seem largely against it) have made up about half the posts here.

can you explain these reactions you are referring to?  do you mean reactions to individual posts?

I do agree the the louder few are more hindrance than help. Of course i consider myself somewhat in the middle   

Edited June 5 by [Le...]

[[Co...]]

1 minute ago, [[L...] said:

can you explain these reactions you are referring to?  do you mean reactions to individual posts?

I do agree the the louder few are more hindrance than help. Of course i consider myself somewhat in the middle   

Yes, reactions to individual posts (bottom right of each post). Those reactions can be clicked for a break down.

[[Le...]]

1 minute ago, [[C...] said:

Yes, reactions to individual posts (bottom right of each post). Those reactions can be clicked for a break down.

hard for me to come to a conclusion. was especially difficult when i see my own reactions coming down on both sides. I agree and disagree with some from both sides. 
 

The use of authority bias in the first post still really troubles me though. Using four “medical professionals” opinions as references against someone very critical of the way the field is practiced is concerning for me. 

[[re...]]

I guess my biggest blind spot in all of this is. If the majority of your members support this kind of thing and are anti Witt Doerring and want him banned. Then just do it if that is your stance.  Why even create a thread "fishing" for reactions.   It is very confusing to me and the intent of even creating a post. Just institute the rule and be done with it. I highly doubt we are the minority here, but who knows. I will always try to do my best to retain a critical mind. 

[[Co...]]

29 minutes ago, [[L...] said:

hard for me to come to a conclusion. was especially difficult when i see my own reactions coming down on both sides. I agree and disagree with some from both sides. 
 

The use of authority bias in the first post still really troubles me though. Using four “medical professionals” opinions as references against someone very critical of the way the field is practiced is concerning for me. 

All four of them are very sympathetic to BB and the plight of our members. Their natural learning is to support those who too apparently support the cause. One doctor (not a member of BB) wrote in relation to the drug experimentation by the Witt-Doerrings (quoted here with his permission):

Any medication use should he guided by a proper understanding of the labeling.  Medications should also be taken to treat a distinct medical purpose and/or medical condition.  Any person taking medications for the purpose of experimentation will be subject to a different set of risks and benefits compared to individuals taking medications for a true medical purpose.  Physicians taking medications without a true medical need and/or for the purposes of experimentation may be violating professional and ethical standards.  Such physicians engaging unprofessional activities, and posting about such activities to social media platforms, may be referred to state medical boards for ethics and professional violations.  Additional actions may be referred to specialty boarding entities for additional sanctions and/or consideration for board revocation.

Frankly, we did not need to hear that from a doctor - it was obvious to the admins and me.

[[Le...]]

2 minutes ago, [[C...] said:

All four of them are very sympathetic to BB and the plight of our members. Their natural learning is to support those who too apparently support the cause. One doctor (not a member of BB) wrote in relation to the drug experimentation by the Witt-Doerrings (quoted here with his permission):

Any medication use should he guided by a proper understanding of the labeling.  Medications should also be taken to treat a distinct medical purpose and/or medical condition.  Any person taking medications for the purpose of experimentation will be subject to a different set of risks and benefits compared to individuals taking medications for a true medical purpose.  Physicians taking medications without a true medical need and/or for the purposes of experimentation may be violating professional and ethical standards.  Such physicians engaging unprofessional activities, and posting about such activities to social media platforms, may be referred to state medical boards for ethics and professional violations.  Additional actions may be referred to specialty boarding entities for additional sanctions and/or consideration for board revocation.

Frankly, we did not need to hear that from a doctor - it was obvious to the admins and me.

yea while I have no issue with it because I consider the current understanding of these products so limited that almost all use of them as experimentation. I dont respect the opinion in that reference and find the argument there part of the issue in the profession. 

I will also admit to a bit of intellectual snobbery which is very funny now since I am so diminished and also much tempered as I grew up be because I became aware of my own limitations. I am completely crap at many things that come easy to others. 

I spent a lot of my time in school mocking all the people pursuing what we called the pseudoscientific trades. The aspiring doctors and economists we were tutoring. The trade seems to attract a lot of stable, determined, status seeking, and very rationally challenged people. Funny attitude that lingers in me but you develop a lot of biases when you see the majority of these groups struggle with things that come so easy like symbolic logic. 

The point is I read that reference and just want to debate almost every phrase. 

[[Co...]]

1 hour ago, [[r...] said:

I guess my biggest blind spot in all of this is. If the majority of your members support this kind of thing and are anti Witt Doerring and want him banned. Then just do it if that is your stance.  Why even create a thread "fishing" for reactions.   It is very confusing to me and the intent of even creating a post. Just institute the rule and be done with it. I highly doubt we are the minority here, but who knows. I will always try to do my best to retain a critical mind. 

We do not operate that way. When we make a decision where we expect a significant proportion of the membership will dislike or will not understand our reasons, we allow for feedback. As I stated in the opening post, we are highly unlikely to change our position, but would rather members in disagreement have some form of outlet to express themselves rather than just shut down their voices.

Having said that, given the number of other members who have simply 'liked' posts rather than comment, I cannot help but feel they are being pushed out from commenting. I am not saying this is deliberate, but it appears to be the case.

We have made our decision, stated our reasons, and allowed for comment (including dissenting comment). But I think many members are being excluded from comment because a small number of members (on the other side) are so up in arms.

[[ba...]]

I know how it feels to be cut off from your meds. I know how it feels to be desperate for help when you are going through discontinuation, tapering, or not tapering and are overwhelmed by what you are experiencing. I also know that without information, one can be vulnerable to people who make claims that appeal to you.

An example would be someone selling a book, a diet, or their own remedies claiming it will fix you. There is no place for that in this forum, or the others that are active. I recall a time about a year ago where  a member came on here claiming Jesus had healed her, and everyone who got right with God would experience instant healing. That post was pulled  after pushback from members, me included. 

JWD is promoting his clinics via his vids. Some of the content is questionable. In his defence, he provides  a tapering protocal, and access to medication to do a taper, which at this time, is the most effective and least damaging modality for discontinuing psych drugs. But at the end of the day, his content is to attract patients. 

Personnally, I find his fees exorbitant, and at my snarkiest, I think of his practice as a "pill mill."

I also find it so very very sad that there is so little support in both the psych literature, and in it's practice, that people may have no option but to turn to someone like JWD to get off the meds. If the psych community would get its head out of its butt, and start taking this crisis seriously, stop overprescribing, and help wean people off of meds safely, JWD would not have a practice.

I have watched about 15 of his videos, and I don't see anything that I can apply to aid me in my own healing. He freely admits he doesn't have all the answers, and some of his opinions are questionable, some of his content is innapropriate. I saw  one video where someone wrote "Please help me." in the comments. That made me so downhearted. I wish I had responded to that person and suggested they seek a group, and assured them that support and help is out there.

As to the side discussion regarding psych medication, and what place it currently holds, I am with Shayna personnally. Once I get off these horrible drugs, I will never go back. I will never trust psychiatry again. I think it is barbaric and dangerous to put people on any the many drugs that lead to dependence, and to invalidate that reaction once it happens.  It has harmed me terribly. Responsible prescribing, full disclosure, and non drug therapies can be very helpfull. I wish that had been my experience, and I wish it was the psychiatric model for treating mental illness and trauma.  

Simply, "First, do no harm."

I must add that I have a 32 year old son with schizophrenia, and he  can't function and interact with the world without medication. The meds are the best thing he can utilize to live somewhat of a life. They are not as helpfull as I would like, and his various doctors have over prescribed other meds I dont think he should be on (including benzos.) However, without his abilify, he is insane, dangerous, and far to ill to find sanity through any kind of counseling or will power. Hence, some people benefit from long term medication. My son is one of those people.

Whatever your stance on Collins decision to not allow JWD's videos to be promoted here, Collin has done his due diligence in seeking medical councel, watching the content, and come to the conclusion he feels best supports this community. 

JWD's clinic and vids are an anomouly, and there has been a lot of discussion about it in other posts. Naturally, it needs to be evaluated by the admins to determine if that content has a place here. I side with Colin on this, but I am not passionate about it. I can see both pro and con in his decision. I respect both sides, however, I  respect Collin and the team for looking out for the members, and I feel I understand why this decision has been made.

 

 

 

 

 

[[re...]]

Baddove:

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!! Great great and well spoken post. 

All we GOT is JWD so you know the bigger picture is bad when the mainstream psychiatric and/or current medical model won't at least EVOLVE to something even close to what JWD is saying here. 

[[re...]]

I can almost GUARANTEE that once most of your members taper and if they get to the other side with clarity and health then they WILL be anti psychiatry for life. 

[[Le...]]

5 minutes ago, [[b...] said:

If the psych community would get its head out of its butt, and start taking this crisis seriously, stop overprescribing, and help wean people off of meds safely, JWD would not have a practice.

It is really too bad that a person having some of the largest effect and promoting the change almost all of us want has been vilified here where the most support should be.  I really hoped for rationality and argument here. It never works though. 

[[pi...]]

1 hour ago, [[r...] said:

I can almost GUARANTEE that once most of your members taper and if they get to the other side with clarity and health then they WILL be anti psychiatry for life. 

You are making  a rash judgement, projecting your opinions on everyone else. Avoiding benzos and other mental health meds does not make someone anti psychiatry. I will not take a benzo again but I know full well that some people need psychiatric help as well as medication. 

[[Le...]]

3 minutes ago, [[p...] said:

You are making  a rash judgement, projecting your opinions on everyone else. Avoiding benzos and other mental health meds does not make someone anti psychiatry. I will not take a benzo again but I know full well that some people need psychiatric help as well as medication. 

yea. this has been discussed a lot. by far the majority will be the other group that accepted medication in a vulnerable moment and will be better off free of them. I dont think anyone thinks there are zero people benefitting. well i dont think that anyhow. 

Edited June 5 by [Le...]

[[Co...]]

38 minutes ago, [[p...] said:

You are making  a rash judgement, projecting your opinions on everyone else. Avoiding benzos and other mental health meds does not make someone anti psychiatry. I will not take a benzo again but I know full well that some people need psychiatric help as well as medication. 

For some balance, here's a short video from another Australian psychiatrist. His style and approach are very different to that of JWD. And although he makes of some media gimmicks (Dr Syl Reacts... - that type of thing - which do not appeal to me), the few videos I've watched appear balanced and responsible. His channel is actually far more popular than JWD's too. Just goes to show that you do not need to resort to shock tactics to gain clicks and subscribers.

Now, he does not concentrate on benzodiazepines, antidepressants and withdrawal. Rather, it is psychiatry across the board. But I think some here will find his content interesting.

[[Le...]]

not bad at all. much more measured but i wonder if his enthusiasm would increase like jwd after seeing a few hundred who suffered seriously. I believe thats what is going on with him in a very similar way as it is with us members who have suffered through it. 

Edited June 5 by [Le...]

[[Co...]]

15 minutes ago, [[L...] said:

not bad at all. much more measured but i wonder if his enthusiasm would increase like jwd after seeing a few hundred who suffered seriously. I believe thats what is going on with him in a very similar way as it is with us members who have suffered through it. 

You mean, a form of conformation bias? Well, maybe. But given some of historical material he covers in his videos (two of the videos I highlighted), he seems to have always leant this way. He also described being into 'self help' before studying psychiatry. So that might factor into thinking too.

[[Le...]]

confirmation bias?  maybe but not really what I was getting at.  even second hand witnessing some of the more extreme cases could really make you doubt the trade in a harm to benefit way. 

 

my own example is that the about 20sec cycle i was in at the beginning of WD was much much worse than the times I was almost killed. so i experienced something 2160 times a day decreasing to about 24 times per day at the 1 year mark much worse than dying. using that average of those two I experienced terror beyond being murdered almost 400k times in a year.  how much good can the trade do to balance that harm out. I am very aware this affects my judgement a lot. I cannot answer that question and trust my answer.  

Edited June 7 by [Le...]

[[Ma...]]

53 minutes ago, [[p...] said:

You are making  a rash judgement, projecting your opinions on everyone else. Avoiding benzos and other mental health meds does not make someone anti psychiatry. I will not take a benzo again but I know full well that some people need psychiatric help as well as medication. 

There is one thing that I would like to point out. We tend to talk about psych meds or mental health meds in general as if all of them were the same. I have myself done it in my posts. But, always in my opinion and out of my personal experience, benzos and ADs are very different drugs. I am here in BB because I want to stop taking my benzos, which I was given for grief, not for my base depression/anxiety disorder that was under control with ADs (and still is, thank god). I didn’t need benzos,and I knew, but I chose to take them to alleviate my pain. I somehow knew also that they were sort of addictive, from the beginning I was kind of worried just about how I would do to stop them and sleep again. Of course I didn’t know about all the terrible withdrawal symptoms which my doctor didn’t tell me about because she didn’t know either and still doesn’t really. My point is that if this forum was anti pschyatric meds in general I wouldn’t be here at all and I wouldn’t have benefitted of the great help this place and its members are offering here, both in terms of getting actual help with devising a good plan for tapering (Colin is a invaluable help in this and always ready to give it, free of charge by the way) and also in terms of getting a lot of support and learning from everybody. If I had seen the ‘you thing’ video by the Witt- Doerings posted here I wouldn’t have joined, that’s for sure. So, I applaud the team’ s decision as explained in this thread.

[[Le...]]

15 minutes ago, [[M...] said:

There is one thing that I would like to point out. We tend to talk about psych meds or mental health meds in general as if all of them were the same. I have myself done it in my posts. But, always in my opinion and out of my personal experience, benzos and ADs are very different drugs. I am here in BB because I want to stop taking my benzos, which I was given for grief, not for my base depression/anxiety disorder that was under control with ADs (and still is, thank god). I didn’t need benzos,and I knew, but I chose to take them to alleviate my pain. I somehow knew also that they were sort of addictive, from the beginning I was kind of worried just about how I would do to stop them and sleep again. Of course I didn’t know about all the terrible withdrawal symptoms which my doctor didn’t tell me about because she didn’t know either and still doesn’t really. My point is that if this forum was anti pschyatric meds in general I wouldn’t be here at all and I wouldn’t have benefitted of the great help this place and its members are offering here, both in terms of getting actual help with devising a good plan for tapering (Colin is a invaluable help in this and always ready to give it, free of charge by the way) and also in terms of getting a lot of support and learning from everybody. If I had seen the ‘you thing’ video by the Witt- Doerings posted here I wouldn’t have joined, that’s for sure. So, I applaud the team’ s decision as explained in this thread.

This was discussed too. jwd isnt completely anti psych drugs. definately pro any reasonable measure to avoid them though which is reasonable considering the outcomes.  this is very threatening to anyone using them. if we didnt have the option of a easy solution tossed and marketed to us then many people would find a healthier way.

i am in no way saying that your choice is wrong for you. it may even be the best choice for you. 

Edited June 5 by [Le...]

[[Ma...]]

2 minutes ago, [[L...] said:

This was discussed too. jwd isnt completely anti psych drugs. definately pro any reasonable measure to avoid them though which is reasonable considering the outcomes.  

I am referring to a particular video with a particular message. It has also been largely discussed that the team is not completely anti all JWD videos and messages.

[[Le...]]

1 minute ago, [[M...] said:

I am referring to a particular video with a particular message. It has also been largely discussed that the team is not completely anti all JWD videos and messages.

The you thing video?  completely unhelpful to a person currently in that state.  very often true and has a valuable message for people not in that state. I actually understand peoples objections a little better now. more as it isnt helpful here than overall though which i considered before. thanks. 

[[je...]]

1 hour ago, [[M...] said:

My point is that if this forum was anti pschyatric meds in general I wouldn’t be here at all

I would not be here either @[Ma...]. Before I joined I checked out the culture of this site.  We all agreed to the T&C when we signed up. If I wanted anti psych and big pharma venting I would have joined Reddit. 

The purpose of this ban is to distance ourselves from the content of JWD YouTube channel. There is too much questionable content. We don’t want to be associated with it. I have referred my doctors to BB for tapering information and told them to send their patients here who might need help and support. If they browse here and stumble on JWD YouTube channel where a doctor experiments on himself with prescription medication that he doesn’t need and wasn’t prescribed, then holds that as a badge of honour we’ll be dismissed in a second. Four other medical professionals have already confirmed that his behaviour is ethically and professionally problematic.