Our Concerns: The Witt-Doerring Youtube Channel

[[Su...]]

11 hours ago, [[C...] said:

"Lack of interviews" - I don't quite follow. I assume there is a missing word there.

But I get the gist - and I agree. (And not just about me being 'level-headed'.  ) I really do not like the heavy use of shock tactic clickbait.

I have watched some of the interviews. Though, except for the one with the pharmacist I listed in my opening post, I do not think I watched any of them right through. They were uncomfortable viewing, and I (and the admins) did not have time to watch more than a small sample anyway.

There can be therapeutic/cathartic to let a patient/client to let it all out of course. But I question the benefit of publishing similar content at Youtube. As you say, it is often alarmist. And it also might be unhelpful to the interviewee who is in distress.

If there is particular video you think I should watch, please let me know - it difficult to comment further without referencing a specific interview.

It is disappointing to observe the lack of monitoring of feedback from distressed viewers to his video content. It is not even that they are simply distressed (and ignored), it is that they are distressed by the content Witt-Doerring chose to publish. As a psychiatrist, he surely has a greater responsibility to the content he choses to upload to his Youtube channel and the impact it has on his generally already distressed viewership.

I recall the scientologist video. Alas, another one I did not have time to watch. I'll take a look now.

Unfortunately, there is quite a lot of acceptance of 'information' emanating from scientology within certain parts of the wider benzodiazepine, antidepressant and psychoactive medication ecosphere. For example, although its policies appear to disallow it, and Robert Whitaker attempts to distance Mad in America (MiA) from any association with Scientology, a seemingly large proportion of its community members (and even some of its bloggers) openly promote materials originating from CCHR (Scientology front group for pushing antipsychiatry propaganda). This seems to be allowed by MiA. Not only is it wrong, it is detrimental to being taken seriously and in the promotion of positive change. Anyone who pushes Scientology or materials originating from CCHR surely will be dismissed (and very understandably so) by competent medical professionals as wrong at best, or more probably, dismissed as 'a crank'.

Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Commission_on_Human_Rights

This is an old blog entry from MiA. But it and (in particular) the comments are informative:

https://www.madinamerica.com/2014/07/response-end-rethinking-psychiatry/

Because of content like the above, I cannot take MiA seriously. Nor anyone who pushes Scientology/CCHR (materials).

I’m learning how to use the new BB format so apologize for my replies being scattered about and around here. I should have deleted “lack of” but suspect you’ve seen interviews I’m referring to, and I’m not exactly in the mood to go look for it right now, but one I recall off the top of head was his interview with a grieving widow who lost her husband who was unknowingly dependent on benzodiazepines and lacked proper medical support to safely discontinue them. JWD did not behave like a trusted counselor or therapist, he let her go and didn’t talk back with rational comments, instead he almost lead her on one reply that I recall and I paraphrasing him, was when he questioned her about whether or not it was even worth discontinuing benzodiazepines because you may not recover.  

Thank you for posting those links about CCHR and Scientology.  One of my friends named Steve got enmeshed in Scientology when he was a young needy man going thought a rough time.  When he left Scientology about 10 years ago, they tried to destroy him by labeling him a “suppressive person.”  This is how a cult behaves, not a religion and for those who questioned his story, he is social media savvy and recorded and published it.  

[[Co...]]

On 16/06/2024 at 01:43, [[S...] said:

I can see why you can’t understand this, I apologize for the confusion, yes, you are correct,  I wrote this sleep deprived and  I should have deleted “lack of” and it would read more coherently.

No worries. Many of my typos originate from half-arsed edits. In fact, I just corrected a couple in my response you where I mentioned your typo.  

[[Sn...]]

@[Co...]

Colin, what are your thoughts on Laura Delano. She has been diagnosed with bipolar in the past, healed herself from psychiatry, doesn't believe in psychiatry, bi-polar and psychiatry anymore. 

https://m.youtube.com/@LauraDelano/videos

Also, you say that there are people who have an organic defect in their brain. Do you have any evidence for that, because I don't believe there is any.

Also, I see a lot of you talking that you don't like religion (I don't like it either). But psychiatry is like a religion, because none of the things they claim can be proven. You can believe in it, or you don't. Feelings can't be scientifically determined. I do believe there is a spiritual aspect attached to mental health. I don't think it's all in the brain, maybe even none of it. Nobody knows. I also have a big problem with putting mental problems into all those little boxes, and attaching a medicine too it. Everybody has different issues. 

Also Colin, could you restore my initial response. You have responded to it, so it's better if it stays. I deleted it because I didn't want to get into discussion with my brain pressure and empty head, but here I go again 😅. 

Quote

And all of the above applies to all areas of medicine. Do you propose that we cease all medicine? (Rhetorical question.) I assume not. You are looking at the problem from a black and perspective - this is unhelpful, because it means there can be no meaningful discussion.

This is completely different. If you break your arm, for example, doctors know exactly how to treat it and they know the outcome. Another example, I had an infection and I was treated with antibiotics. The doctor told me what would happen. And it happened that way. This is not the case with psychiatric drugs. It's a Russian roulette. 

 

 

 

Edited June 16 by [Sn...]

[[Le...]]

12 hours ago, [[S...] said:

I’m learning how to use the new BB format so apologize for my replies being scattered about and around here. I should have deleted “lack of” but suspect you’ve seen interviews I’m referring to, and I’m not exactly in the mood to go look for it right now, but one I recall off the top of head was his interview with a grieving widow who lost her husband who was unknowingly dependent on benzodiazepines and lacked proper medical support to safely discontinue them. JWD did not behave like a trusted counselor or therapist, he let her go and didn’t talk back with rational comments, instead he almost lead her on one reply that I recall and I paraphrasing him, was when he questioned her about whether or not it was even worth discontinuing benzodiazepines because you may not recover.  

Thank you for posting those links about CCHR and Scientology.  One of my friends named Steve got enmeshed in Scientology when he was a young needy man going thought a rough time.  When he left Scientology about 10 years ago, they tried to destroy him by labeling him a “suppressive person.”  This is how a cult behaves, not a religion and for those who questioned his story, he is social media savvy and recorded and published it.  

He wasnt stoned to death or crucified?  Got off easy compared to what some of the larger cults have done.  Good thing the older cults arent so tech savvy I guess or they may swap to online bullying instead. 

[[Md...]]

On 03/06/2024 at 13:33, [[j...] said:

@[Mi...] so you’re ethically fine with a doctor that experiments on himself with prescription medication that he doesn’t need and then broadcasting that to the world?

I am. Every doctor who prescribes medication should actually know what it's like to be on this stuff before they hand it out like candy to patients. It should be a pre-requisite, imo. 

Also, in what video does Dr Josef himself actually deny Covid? What's the exact quote? I'm genuinely curious. I haven't read the entire thread, so I may have missed it. I also don't have any desire to sit through such a lengthy video that doesn't interest me, but since it seems Dr Josef has been accused of denying COVID, I'd at least expect the accuser to provide the actual quote in context, or even a time stamp in the video. Doesn't seem like too much to ask. 

I actually find this a bit interesting, because I had a conversation with his wife about long covid, and there was zero denial about Covid in that conversation. Obviously, Marissa and Dr Josef are two different people and just like any married couple can have opposing views, so color me intrigued. 

Edited June 17 by [Md...]

[[Co...]]

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

I am. Every doctor who prescribes medication should actually know what it's like to be on big pharma garbage before they hand it out like candy to patients.

Also, in what video does Dr Josef himself actually deny Covid? What's the exact quote? I'm genuinely curious. 

Dr Josef Witt-Doerring, then goes on to use his personal experimentation as evidence to rubbish Zoloft. His experience holds no evidentiary value. And to present it as such, to (largely) vulnerable viewers, is unethical and, frankly, asinine.

Heh. I was about review the video Antidepressants Nearly Ruined my Marriage ('We Tried Zoloft') for quotes, but I see that JWD has removed it. Evidently, the good doctor has had second thoughts. IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED IN THE FIRST PLACE!

[[Md...]]

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

Dr Josef Witt-Doerring, then goes on to use his personal experimentation as evidence to rubbish Zoloft. His experience holds no evidentiary value. And to present it as such, to (largely) vulnerable viewers, is unethical and, frankly, asinine.

Heh. I was about review the video Antidepressants Nearly Ruined my Marriage ('We Tried Zoloft') for quotes, but I see that JWD has removed it. Evidently, the good doctor has had second thoughts. IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED IN THE FIRST PLACE!

I think you've missed my point, but that's quite alright. No sense in reiterating it.

Just for the record, I am a patient of Dr Josef's, and have scrolled through this thread. I haven't read every post, but my overall opinion is that it's been a massive dumpster fire. So far I've mostly seen nothing but back and forth bickering, as opposed to an actual healthy discussion.

I'm not just saying this because I'm a patient of Dr Josef's and feel the need to defend him. Far from it. In fact, I've  already expressed some of my own concerns on these boards about his YouTube channel in the past. But because of the way the admins (including yourself) and some of the members have decided to approach this topic, I'm a bit turned off, and personally feel this could have been handled with more diplomacy, open mindedness, and less fired up emotions. 

For example, here you are shouting at me (that's what all caps signifies on the internet, which I'm sure you're aware), and for what? Did you actually accomplish anything productive by reacting that way? 

Edited June 17 by [Md...]

[[Co...]]

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

I am. Every doctor who prescribes medication should actually know what it's like to be on big pharma garbage before they hand it out like candy to patients. 

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

I think you've missed my point, but that's quite alright. No sense in reiterating it.

How so? (Genuine question). Doctors should not take medications unless it is to treat an actual medical condition. Should doctors take insulin, levothyroxine, or hypertension meds to see what they feel like? (Rhetorical question.)

Earlier in this thread, I posted (with his permission) a quote from one of the doctors we consulted. He stated:

Quote

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.

The above is surely correct.

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

Also, in what video does Dr Josef himself actually deny Covid? What's the exact quote? I'm genuinely curious. I haven't read the entire thread, so I may have missed it.

Have you not viewed the Exposing Big Pharma's Dark Influence on Medicine: Eye-Opening Interview with the Redpill Pharmacist ('Exposing Big Pharma') video? My actual comment regarding this:

Quote

JWD and Atkinson also promote COVID-denialism, anti-vaccine propaganda, homeopathy, and other pseudoscientific medicine.

Witt-Doerring not only chose to interview COVID denier and anti-vaxxer, Graham Atkinson, but JWD uses a clip of this to open the video. And if you watch a bit further into the video, the 'Red Pill Pharmacist' explains that COVID vaccines change human DNA - this is complete and utter horseshit. Atkinson also claims that the vaccines were untested - this is total nonsense. And not only does Witt-Doerring fail to challenge these dangerous and baseless claims, but he agrees ('yeah') and immediately states how he loves Atkinson's blog. JWD then recommends viewers to visit and read Atkinson's blog. To be clear, Atkinson is a COVID-denying, anti-vaxxer, and this is what all his writings, videos and interviews are about.

You really need to watch the video. (Or if you have already watched it, watch it again.)

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

Just for the record, I am a patient of Dr Josef's, and have scrolled through this thread. I haven't read every post, but my overall opinion is that it's been a massive dumpster fire. So far I've mostly seen nothing but back and forth bickering, as opposed to an actual healthy discussion.

There were some posts to this thread which have wandered away from the matter at hand. But your pointing to this is deflection. I note that you have failed to address any of the points raised in my opening post. You complain about others not addressing these serious matters, but you then fail to do so yourself.

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

I'm not just saying this because I'm a patient of Dr Josef's and feel the need to defend him. Far from it. In fact, I've  already expressed some of my own concerns on these boards about his YouTube channel in the past. But because of the way the admins (including yourself) and some of the members have decided to approach this topic, I'm a bit turned off, and personally feel this could have been handled with more diplomacy and less fired up emotions. 

To repeat from my opening post:

Quote

As already stated, our views regarding much of the content appearing at Josef Witt-Doerring's Youtube channel are shared by the medical professionals we consulted, by many member comments at BB, and even in comments by JWD's own supporters at his channel. If there was a single problematic video in the review sample, we might take the view that it was an aberration and contact JWD privately to address our concerns. However, much of the content we sampled and reviewed contained highly problematic materials (and not all are represented above). We also note that negative comments at Youtube from JWD's own supporters/subscribers have failed to prompt him to pause and reconsider—nor has he responded to critical comments to any the videos we reviewed. The (escalating) use of scaremongering, clickbait and irresponsible shock tactics by the Witt-Doerrings appears to be wilful.

Witt-Doerring (as far as I can tell) never responded to any of the criticisms and concerns expressed commenters/subscribers at his Youtube channel. And problem content is common at his channel. What would you have us do when we discover multiple examples of highly problematic materials (and only from a small sample of the videos, and only some of which I I exampled in my opening post)? My bandwidth is limited, but there surely will be a lot more of it. There have been grumblings for a year or more at BenzoBuddies about Witt-Doerring's YT channel, and commenters to his videos at YT have raised similar concerns. And, if anything (judging from the small sample I viewed), content at the channel has become more (not less) concerning over time.

The 'diplomatic' thing would have been for the Witt-Doerring's to publicly apologise for their behaviour, for the content appearing at the channel, and to provide an undertaking to be more responsible in the future. Unless I've missed it, none of this has occurred.

I'll add, that we could have chosen to instead publish a notice, simply informing members of our decision, and lock the thread and disallow any comment. But we have always allowed for discussion and feedback when we tackle significant issues or post important notices. (After all, BenzoBuddies is discussion forum.) If we instead simply told members how it is, and shut down any comment, I think members would be less happy (including those who disagree with our position). In the round, the thread sometimes going off-topic or even becoming a bit messy is small price to pay.

[[Md...]]

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

How so? (Genuine question). Doctors should not take medications unless it is to treat an actual medical condition. Should doctors take insulin, levothyroxine, or hypertension meds to see what they feel like? (Rhetorical question.)

Earlier in this thread, I posted (with his permission) a quote from one of the doctors we consulted. He stated:

The above is surely correct.

Have you not viewed the Exposing Big Pharma's Dark Influence on Medicine: Eye-Opening Interview with the Redpill Pharmacist ('Exposing Big Pharma') video? My actual comment regarding this:

Witt-Doerring not only chose to interview COVID denier and anti-vaxxer, Graham Atkinson, but JWD uses a clip of this to open the video. And if you watch a bit further into the video, the 'Red Pill Pharmacist' explains that COVID vaccines change human DNA - this is complete and utter horseshit. Atkinson also claims that the vaccines were untested - this is total nonsense. And not only does Witt-Doerring fail to challenge these dangerous and baseless claims, but he agrees ('yeah') and immediately states how he loves Atkinson's blog. JWD then recommends viewers to visit and read Atkinson's blog. To be clear, Atkinson is a COVID-denying, anti-vaxxer, and this is what all his writings, videos and interviews are about.

You really need to watch the video. (Or if you have already watched it, watch it again.)

There were some posts to this thread which have wandered away from the matter at hand. But your pointing to this is deflection. I note that you have failed to address any of the points raised in my opening post. You complain about others not addressing these serious matters, but you then fail to do so yourself.

To repeat from my opening post:

Witt-Doerring (as far as I can tell) never responded to any of the criticisms and concerns expressed commenters/subscribers at his Youtube channel. And problem content is common at his channel. What would you have us do when we discover multiple examples of highly problematic materials (and only from a small sample of the videos, and only some of which I I exampled in my opening post)? My bandwidth is limited, but there surely will be a lot more of it. There have been grumblings for a year or more at BenzoBuddies about Witt-Doerring's YT channel, and commenters to his videos at YT have raised similar concerns. And, if anything (judging from the small sample I viewed), content at the channel has become more (not less) concerning over time.

The 'diplomatic' thing would have been for the Witt-Doerring's to publicly apologise for their behaviour, for the content appearing at the channel, and to provide an undertaking to be more responsible in the future. Unless I've missed it, none of this has occurred.

I'll add, that we could have chosen to instead publish a notice, simply informing members of our decision, and lock the thread and disallow any comment. But we have always allowed for discussion and feedback when we tackle significant issues or post important notices. (After all, BenzoBuddies is discussion forum.) If we instead simply told members how it is, and shut down any comment, I think members would be less happy (including those who disagree with our position). In the round, the thread sometimes going off-topic or even becoming a bit messy is small price to pay.

Sorry, Colin, but engaging with you on this topic just isn't worth my time. You're 18 pages into this already and haven't accomplished anything but polarity. 

@[je...]Can you please do me a favor, and delete my account? This is actually something I've been meaning to request for a little while now, as these boards are just as helpful as they are toxic. Thank you, and best of luck to everyone here. 

[[Co...]]

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

Sorry, Colin, but engaging with you on this topic just isn't worth my time. You're 18 pages into this already and haven't accomplished anything but polarity. 

Well. It seems that Witt-Doerring has removed at least one video as a result of our notice - I'd count that as an achievement.

And to add: acquiescing and failing to challenge such materials (especially when they are being propagated by someone with a voice within the wider benzodiazepine use/withdrawal community) would have been a great disservice for all those BB members who rely upon psychiatric services.

[[Le...]]

very tiresome and repetitive. like trying to cure religious people. i am done with this thread too. was fun for a while but arguing isnt how you change minds. 

[[Co...]]

14 hours ago, [[L...] said:

very tiresome and repetitive. like trying to cure religious people. i am done with this thread too. was fun for a while but arguing isnt how you change minds. 

I'm not really expecting to change minds (maybe at the edges, if I am lucky).

We expected our notice to be somewhat divisive (I even expressed this in my opening post). But we considered the matter far too important to ignore. And when there are additional comments which challenge our decision, of course I will respond.

[[Le...]]

6 hours ago, [[C...] said:

I'm not really expecting to change minds (maybe at the edges, if I am lucky).

We expected out notice to be somewhat divisive (I even expressed this in my opening post). But we considered the matter far too important to ignore. And when there are additional comments which challenge our decision, of course I will respond.

I more meant challenging faith through argument wasnt going to work. You cant combat faith with reason.

 

 May I ask if you have a bias due to continued long term drug dependence?  I will drop it if you say “that isnt ok of me to ask anyone” or however you want to deflect if you dont wish to disclose. 

[[Co...]]

7 hours ago, [[L...] said:

I more meant challenging faith through argument wasnt going to work. You cant combat faith with reason.

May I ask if you have a bias due to continued long term drug dependence?  I will drop it if you say “that isnt ok of me to ask anyone” or however you want to deflect if you dont wish to disclose. 

That's a slightly odd question. I have - I think - explained the reasons for our stance quite well. There is no hidden agenda here.

But to answer your question: no, I am not dependent upon any medication. I took clonazepam for 4 years at 4.5mg/day. And then tapered off over six months, completing my taper at the end of January 2003. And except for a medical emergency a few years ago (I was in severe pain), where they administered a one-off dose of benzodiazepine to sedate me, I have not taken a benzodiazepine since.* And I have never taken any other psychoactive medications. (I was prescribed clonazepam for its anticonvulsant properties.)

* I should add that I experienced no negative effects from this one-off dose. It was medically necessary and it worked as intended.

I experienced all kinds of problems due to my use (and then withdrawal) of clonazepam. I would never go back to that medication (excepting a medical emergency). If I instead let my personal experiences (and biases) rule me, I might take the view that benzodiazepines should be banned. But I recognise that my personal experiences are mine alone; and personal experiences and circumstances are far from uniform. Just as with all medications.

[[Co...]]

On 16/06/2024 at 14:35, [[S...] said:

@[Co...]

Colin, what are your thoughts on Laura Delano. She has been diagnosed with bipolar in the past, healed herself from psychiatry, doesn't believe in psychiatry, bi-polar and psychiatry anymore. 

https://m.youtube.com/@LauraDelano/videos

I know nothing about her - so I cannot comment. But I do try to avoid forming general opinions based upon anecdote. Or where I make use of anecdote, I try to make this clear. And we need to be careful about their use. As they say, the plural of anecdote is not data.

On 16/06/2024 at 14:35, [[S...] said:

Also, you say that there are people who have an organic defect in their brain. Do you have any evidence for that, because I don't believe there is any.

There is a huge amount of evidence for this. Studies of siblings, identical twins, and in some cases, brain scans.

I did not mean 'Organic Mental Disorder'. I used 'organic' in a broader sense of the word. So, not just things like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. (I probably should not have used the word 'organic'.) I mean things like depression and neuroses, where the cause is something innate to the individual. ie They would have suffered from the condition irrespective of their upbringing. Nurture vs Nature: it is both, or either.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8922370/

On 16/06/2024 at 14:35, [[S...] said:

Also, I see a lot of you talking that you don't like religion (I don't like it either). But psychiatry is like a religion, because none of the things they claim can be proven. You can believe in it, or you don't. Feelings can't be scientifically determined. I do believe there is a spiritual aspect attached to mental health. I don't think it's all in the brain, maybe even none of it. Nobody knows. I also have a big problem with putting mental problems into all those little boxes, and attaching a medicine too it. Everybody has different issues.

Lots of things in medicine cannot be 'proven'. Just because we do not properly understand a disease, it does not mean that it does not exist; and just because we do not properly understand the mechanism of a treatment, it does not mean that it does not work. We have a very poor understanding of anaesthetics, but they clearly work.

On 16/06/2024 at 14:35, [[S...] said:

Also Colin, could you restore my initial response. You have responded to it, so it's better if it stays. I deleted it because I didn't want to get into discussion with my brain pressure and empty head, but here I go again 😅.

I cannot restore it for you. But here you go - you can edit your post for yourself:

Quote

Those people rely on psychiatry because they have been drugged and now can't live without the drugs anymore. 

Studies have been done that 90% of the people going through psychological crisis all recover in time without drugs. The other 10% that don't take drugs don't have the right circumstances in life to get better. Those who take drugs rarely get better. 

Psychiatric drugs makes things worse, it causes illness and chemical imbalance. It changes the brain. This is not scaremongering, it's the truth. 

Psychiatry has been causing havoc since it was invented. It should have never existed. Mental problems are caused by life circumstances causing trauma, sadness and fear, and they should be treated with love, empathy, understanding, compassion and lots of exercise. Also trying to find out what makes the person happy, because happy people don't have mental problems. Help them find the right people around them in life, the right job, the right hobbies, and so on. Not slander them with illness and diagnosis. Psychiatric hospitals should be replaced with treatment centers in a nice quiet environment where people can exercise, swim, relax, have fun and talk about their problems with emphatic caring employees. Make them happy again, prepare them for a return to society, all WITHOUT DRUGS. 

Psychiatry needs to stop and there should come a new whole new system based on that. Psychiatry is not based on science at all, it's just full of assumptions. The main treatment is based on drugs, they don't know anything else. Also, there is a lot of money involved and not everybody in the pharmaceutical industry has the best intentions. Statistics show that society is getting sicker and sicker because of all of this, there is even written a book about it called 'Anatomy of an epedemic.' 

Sorry Benzobuddies and Colin, I'm not with you on this one. You can't change my mind, they took 22 years of my life, tortured me and accused me of all kinds of sickness and I never even said much, they just made it all up. Everywhere you hear similar stories to mine. Those who still believe in psychiatry are brainwashed and still in denial (just like I once was), but someday they will hopefully find out and free themselves. Nobody, and I mean nobody is mentally ill. It's all temporary. It becomes a permanent problem if you give someone drugs. 

Also, please realize, it's not just benzodiazepines. Benzos's are the worst, but all psychiatric drugs are trash. They're all mind altering drugs, just like for example XTC. 

Not going into any argument or discussion, I'm not going to aggrevate my brain pressure (thanks to psychiatry 🥳).

 

On 16/06/2024 at 14:35, [[S...] said:

This is completely different. If you break your arm, for example, doctors know exactly how to treat it and they know the outcome. Another example, I had an infection and I was treated with antibiotics. The doctor told me what would happen. And it happened that way. This is not the case with psychiatric drugs. It's a Russian roulette. 

Broken arms can be reset poorly, or the mend might be less than optimal for no apparent reason. Antibiotics do not always work. Indeed, some diseases are now virtually untreatable with available antibiotics. There are no guarantees in any area of medicine, or in anything else for that matter. The doctor can tell what they expect to happen, or might happen, but there cannot be certainty.

[[Sn...]]

@[Co...]

Maybe the conclusion of all of this is that psychiatry is way too uncertain and needs to improve their diagnosistic system. Make more use of brain scans and blood tests. More 'I know', than 'I think'. 

And that 80-90% of people don't belong in psychiatry and need to be treated with love, empathy, exercise, a lot of rest and time. A better life. 

That a lot of things are just human nature and emotions, and aren't mentall illness. Like for instance puberty. 

And that medication is way overprescribed. That there is a lot of money involved. 

If there is a cause -> love, empathy, exercise, etc. 

If there's a proven defect in the brain -> medication (which still seems unlikely to me, so it really needs to be proven. It really must be a last resort.)

I want to win running matches to raise awareness, but I don't want leave out a group of people if I do. It's hard to know what to say exactly. Maybe I should just inspire people. 

Anyway, thanks for your responses. Gives me something to think about. 

 

 

Edited June 18 by [Sn...]

[[Co...]]

20 minutes ago, [[S...] said:

@[Co...]

Maybe the conclusion of all of this is that psychiatry is way too uncertain and needs to improve their diagnosistic system. Make more use of brain scans and blood tests. More 'I know', than 'I think'. 

And that 80-90% of people don't belong in psychiatry and need to be treated with love, empathy, exercise, a lot of rest and time. A better life. 

And that medication is way overprescribed. That there is a lot of money involved. 

If there is a cause -> love, empathy, exercise, etc. 

If there's a proven defect in the brain -> medication

I want to win running matches to raise awareness, but I don't want leave out a group of people if I do. It's hard to know what to say exactly. Maybe I should just inspire people. 

Anyway, thanks for your responses. Gives me something to think about. 

Various scan types can demonstrate that people with certain types of psychological disorders are more likely to have structural abnormalities or functional deficiencies. But no type of scan, for any of these disorders, are anyway near definitive. They might sometimes aid diagnosis, that is all. I only mentioned it to example that the are (or can be) structural or functional abnormalities underlying mental disorders. Further, even if we cannot detect any abnormalities, it does not mean that they do no exist. My point being, although nurture is certainly a large facture in the aggregate, it does not account for all psychological disorders. And irrespective of the cause, people suffer from these conditions and they need treating (as best we can). For some, this will require the use of medications.

A quick google came up with this page. It is a commercial site, but it seems to cover all the bases (from my limited knowledge perspective, at least).

https://remedypsychiatry.com/what-brain-scans-reveal-about-mental-illness/

[[Sn...]]

8 hours ago, [[C...] said:

Further, even if we cannot detect any abnormalities, it does not mean that they do no exist.

@[Co...]

This doesn't sit right with me, at all. This means that it isn't a science at all, just assumptions and it rather becomes a matter of opinion. 

Example of physical illness: Broken arm -> 'let's take a photo' -> 'ah, you're arm is broken.' it can always be exactly determined. Except for some unknown or not very well known diseases. You can research the body very well. 

With psychiatry there just isn't any proof and there never will be. Researching the mind is a matter of opinion, it's way too complicated. You can research body cells, but you can't research emotions. 

Since it's a matter of opinion, this is mine, and many others who have gone through it. 

I think it's a spiritual crisis. You have high vibrations (love) and low vibrations (fear). I think unhappiness and fear just causes psychological issues and that the mixture of those issues depends on what kind of person you are. I think people should just follow their harts (the YouTube channel from Laura Delano calls it 'inner compass'.) and try to be happy and that their issues in time shall be resolved. Psychiatric drugs prevent that process. In rare occasions (emergencies) it maybe should be used, but not for a long time.

I think the ones that rely on psychiatry just believe whatever they've been told, and that they've been made sick by the medication, just like I was. 

I do believe there a things you are born with, for example ad(h)d, high intelligence or autism. But mentally ill from birth? No. If it happens later on there is always a cause. It can maybe also come from allergies to food and things like that. 

I'm sorry Colin, but I think we just don't agree with eachother and that's okay 🙂. 

This was one of the reasons I left a while back by the way, I thought psychiatry couldn't be discussed and that I would be banned if I spoke out about it. I'm glad it's open for discussion. 

 

 

 

Edited June 18 by [Sn...]

[[Co...]]

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

@[Co...]

This doesn't sit right with me, at all. This means that it isn't a science at all, just assumptions and it rather becomes a mather of opinion.

I am attempting to avoid assuming anything. You assumed (above) that all mental illness is the result of environment. But there are plenty of studies which demonstrate that there are genetic factors involved.

A quick Google search turns up this:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00702-020-02188-w

There are numerous studies and articles. I don't think there is any doubt that genetic factors are definitely part of the mix, and its significance varies according to the condition.

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

Example of physical illness: Broken arm -> 'let's take a photo' -> 'ah, you're arm is broken.' it can always be exactly determined. Except for some unknown or not very well known diseases. You can research the body very well.

Just because a disease is less easy to determine, it does not mean that we should doubt its existence. This is true of many physical diseases too. I am unsure of the point you are attempting to make there.

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

With psychiatry there just isn't any proof and there never will be. Researching the mind is a matter of opinion, it's way too complicated. You can research body cells, but you can't research emotions. 

Since it's a matter of opinion, this is mine, and many others who have gone through it.

Mental disorders is not a matter of opinion. They exist. Of course they are more difficult to study than many (but not all) physical diseases. But this does not equate to them being 'a matter of opinion'. There are symptoms. Yes, the symptoms can be appear nebulous to us. But an expert (a psychiatrist) is better able to determine a diagnosis than you or me. I would suggest that it is more complicated (and with few definitive diagnostic tests) compared with most physical disorders, but this does equate to the disease's non-existence. At one time, there was no medicine or medical treatments for any illness or injury - things progressed. Psychiatry is a relatively young discipline with few to no definitive tests available. This is why an experienced expert is valuable. I know relatively little about cars. When they break, I contact an expert - they can usually diagnose the cause of the problem and fix it. It is the same with most things in life.

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

I think it's a spiritual crisis. You have high vibrations (love) and low vibrations (fear). I think unhappiness and fear just causes psychological issues and that the mixture of those issues depends on what kind of person you are. I think people should just follow their harts (the YouTube channel from Laura Delano calls it 'inner compass'.) and try to be happy and that their issues in time shall be resolved. Psychiatric drugs prevent that process. In rare occasions (emergencies) it maybe should be used, but not for a long time.

So, it seems that it comes down to faith for you; I do not know I can possibly respond to you in a meaningful way if it comes down your beliefs.

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

I think the ones that rely on psychiatry just believe whatever they've been told, and that they've been made sick by the medication, just like I was. 

I do believe there a things you are born with, for example ad(h)d, high intelligence or autism. But mentally ill from birth? No. If it happens later on there is always a cause. It can maybe also come from allergies to food and things like that.

The research disagrees with you.

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

I'm sorry Colin, but I think we just don't agree with eachother and that's okay 🙂. 

This was one of the reasons I left a while back by the way, I thought psychiatry couldn't be discussed and that I would be banned if I spoke out about it. I'm glad it's open for discussion. 

There is no 'ban' as such. You are free to detail your own history and how you feel about it. But BB is not an anti-psychiatry website. So we do not allow content posted with the intention to rubbish the whole discipline. Many of our members rely upon psychiatry and psychiatric medications. And although I expect just about all of members would agree that there are problems within psychiatric practice, this does not mean that it is without merit. Medicine is difficult, and psychiatry might be the most difficult discipline in some respects. But like all medicine, it will surely improve over time.

Anyway - yes, let's leave it there. This is way off topic.

[[Co...]]

On 15/06/2024 at 08:03, [[S...] said:

I checked out his Twitter profile and was unsurprised to see him post about how he recently interviewed a Scientologist, as if his guest was involved in a legitimate religion and not a destructive cult.

I was considering splitting out the posts on Scientology - which has since meandered away from discussing Dr Josef Witt-Doerring video content - but instead I will attempt to bring it back on-topic.

When I searched for the videos, I could not locate them. In hindsight, I think I must have came across the podcast versions, or possibly it was later last year when I saw the videos listed at his Youtube channel. Irrespective, they did exist at Youtube, but have been subsequently removed.

An ex-Scientologist Youtuber reviewed Witt-Doerring's video interviews with Scientologists: one, an ex-scientologist; and in particular, a second, with a practicing Scientologist mouthpiece. You might find interesting what Aaron has to say about the interviews, and his speculation as to why the videos have been removed from Youtube

Although JWD has removed the videos, I located the two podcast versions:

Psychiatrist and Scientologist Debate Psychiatric Care | Interview with Thaddeus

Ex-Scientologist Reevaluates Church’s Anti-psychiatry Stance after Devastating Antidepressant Injury

It might be worth listening to the podcasts sooner rather than later, in case JWD removes them too.

[[Co...]]

I see that Witt-Doerring has now removed a second video I detailed in my opening post.

This is what I wrote about each of them:

Quote

 

Video (a): Antidepressants Nearly Ruined my Marriage ('We Tried Zoloft')

JWD and MWD (Marissa, Josef's wife and fellow psychiatrist), describe how they self-prescribed prescription-only medicine for experimental, nonmedical purposes during residency.

Although JWD and MWD did not fulfil the profile for prescribing this type of medication (they were not depressed), and JWD details how he increased his dosage at a rate outside of prescribing guidelines, he examples his experience as evidence to support his views rubbishing Zoloft and psychiatric medication in general. This is unscientific and irresponsible.

Additionally, this video effectively invites the viewer to consider non-legitimate sourcing of and/or experimentation with psychoactive medications as acceptable behaviour. Further, its brazen publication demonstrates another serious error in judgment and an astonishing dismissive attitude towards professional standards and ethics. The Witt-Doerrings appear to view themselves as rule-breakers and mavericks.

I submit video (a) in support of areas of concern 1, 4 and 5.

 

Quote

 

Video (b): I Tried to Quit Residency... She Wouldn't Let Me ('I Almost Quit Residency')

Here, JWD demonstrates a total lack of awareness, and describes how he was labelled as 'unprofessional' by an attending physician during residency, resulting in his mandatory retraining. If you suppose this is him being honest and exampling how he has learned and grown from past mistakes and failures, you would be mistaken. It is quite clear he remains convinced that he was in the right.

The first six minutes or so of the video are probably of greater interest.

I submit video (b) in support of areas of concern 1 and 5.

 

[[Sn...]]

On 18/06/2024 at 15:21, [[C...] said:

 

So, it seems that it comes down to faith for you; I do not know I can possibly respond to you in a meaningful way if it comes down your beliefs.

Just wanted to add that I'm not religious, I don't like religion. And I'm not some kind of super spiritual guy. I'm a huge supporter of real science. But there is also more to life than that, not everything can be proven. 

Think we maybe kind of mean the same thing. If it can't be seen it's psychological or spiritual. 

Peter Breggin is a psychiatrist, he believes in the same thing I was trying to make clear earlier by the way. Power of love and empathy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Breggin

Maybe I'm not wording myself very clear, my head is really empty and full of pressure. I am not really capable of going in to a discussion now, I also may be a little black and white because of the withdrawal. My head isn't clear. 

But yeah, let's leave it 🙂 

Edited June 19 by [Sn...]

[[WU...]]

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

I see that Witt-Doerring has now removed a second video I detailed in my opening post.

I'm sure it is just a coincidence !

[[Le...]]

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

Just wanted to add that I'm not religious, I don't like religion. And I'm not some kind of super spiritual guy. I'm a huge supporter of real science. But there is also more to life than that, not everything can be proven. 

Peter Breggin is a psychiatrist, he believes in the same thing I was trying to make clear. Power of love and empathy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Breggin

Maybe I'm not wording myself very clear, my head is really empty and full of pressure. 

But yeah, let's leave it 🙂 

I do would like to know what you think do Peter Breggin. 

i assume you are someone who prefers reason and rational thought like the majority of people these days. Secular morality is much more appealing to me too. It is sad for me how many people get trained young to accept things without thinking. It leads to a life of lazy thinking like that and being victimized often. I see lots of that in this thread. Also if you need the threat of a space monster to make you not behave horribly then maybe you really should work on becoming less aweful. 

[[Co...]]

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

I'm sure it is just a coincidence !

Surely.*

I do not understand why they were up in the first place. It makes no sense.

* That's just crying out for an Airplane reference.