The Chemical Lobby: Priestcraft Masquerading as Science‏

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Science and religion appear to be at loggerheads with scientists inquiring into topics that the minions of the material Creator claim as their own domain. On the other hand, there are people who profess to advocate science, but who approach it as if it were a religion. Roman despots are not nearly as detrimental to the pursuit of inquiry as are "scientists" with an economic interest in their pet theories. The latter class of people form a caste of priests who jealously guard the magic formulas for their chemical communion wafers. Scientific inquiry that threatens their monopoly is rejected out of hand and tarred with the label of a Hollywood cult.

Imagine a group of people with little knowledge of electronics. As they investigate the operation of a computer, they discover that interfering with the circuitry causes a malfunction. They establish a "scientific" theory that all malfunctions stem from circuit failures. They find ways to "treat" a faulty machine by inducing a secondary fault that does not fix the machine, but makes the primary fault less striking. The machine malfunctions, but the "treatment" of inducing a secondary fault causes the machine to malfunction in a more graceful manner.

Another group of people approach the machine using a different tack. Rather than trying to determine its failures, they seek to determine its capabilities. These people want to know how to use the computer for higher purposes than as consumers of fault injection methods. They work with it to find ways of improving its use. They modify its programming to have it perform miraculously. Naturally, their successes are sneered at by the fault injection specialists. Improvement in capability can only occur as a result of circuit failure. These highly performing machines are to be treated with fault injections to make them more "normal."

There is more to a computer than electronic circuitry. Likewise, there is more to the nervous system than neurons. This may seem obvious to lay people who espouse the notion of a magical entity that will outlast the decay of the neurons, but it seems counter-intuitive to people who have been indoctrinated into bio-chemical dogma. Of course, there is a third group of people who buy into neither magical craft. These people are faithless in the eyes of the former and unscientific in the eyes of the latter. Some even think of them as followers of L. Ron Hubbard despite a lack of any logical connection.

The pill bottle priesthood is a powerful lobby in the halls of governance. They have ties to the military and to law enforcement as well. Do you have experience with any chemical communion?

Comments

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Some even think of them as followers of L. Ron Hubbard despite a lack of any logical connection.

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

Lock me up, please. I agree with everything he said.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I noticed that his observations are based on the history of psychiatry, not on his involvement in Scientology. Perhaps the latter led to the former, but that is not always the case. There are people who have studied psychiatry without any involvement with Scientology whatsoever.

The interviewer recognizes that there are abuses of pharmaceuticals, but attempts to base his defense of the profession of psychiatry on the anecdotal evidence of those cases that could not be considered abuses. That is like saying that the Nazis were okay because some people found them to be helpful.

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

and old drug legalizer friend of mine used religion and Big Pharma for years.

Doctors= miracle working priests not to be questioned
drug ads=holy text not to be questioned
pills=communion wafers not to be questioned
Big Pharma=Vatican oversees all, benefits the most
sales staff=deacons of the message
hospitals=places of worship

Most mass murders are committed by otherwise normal people on psychotropics.

*In before "BUT I TAKE X AND IT Y's!"

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I would have expected you to post something about enabling chemical communions with rave parties.

You have reminded me of a psychiatry convention in San Francisco. One of the doctors attending the convention observed homeless people on the street and saw them as people in need of medication. I see homeless people on the street but see them as victims of psychiatry.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

It might surprise you to learn that the lack of spiritual or enlightenment value to modern medicine is rather non-sequitur to the whole thing. What I find strange is how people disparage psychiatry for (essentially) lacking the "true answers" to life or happiness, when in fact psychiatry has no truck with finding true answers or happiness. So then, once this criticism is made, the person then immediately adopts the psuedo-religious mindset of what he or she ostensibly decries, in order to "prove" the illegitimacy of modern medicine since it doesn't, you know, bring enlightenment. Well, it never was meant to bring anything like that in the first place. And nobody says it does.

The whole thing is terribly ironic. So basically they want us to discount pyschiatry because it doesn't do something it wasn't designed to do, then offer their own superstitious malarky as a replacement for the perceived failings of their straw-man. Basically, it's par for the course in psuedo-science land.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Most mass murders are committed by otherwise normal people on psychotropics.

Citation?

[fornikate.livejournal.com]

what

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Whatever.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry I don't know who we're talking about.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Who would you like to talk about?

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

What I got from it was


T͔̰̗͙̈́̄ͤ̏̔h̖͚̼͗̿ͬͪ̚͘e̠̞͚͍͗̿ͩ́͝͡ ̛̗̞̞̬̔́̉̚C̵̻͉̆̾̉̈ͫ̂̐̕hͭ͌̏͆̔͢͏̼ḙ͉̝͖̂̃͋m͕̺͕̝̲̬̦͇ͨ̃͋ͩi̷̢̡̬̻͚̦͐̔ͣ̀͛̾ͩͮͅc̴̖̘̐ͪͩͣ̉ä̮͉̣̆̓͘lͬ̿͞͏̞̙͙̘ ̙͎̥̘ͪ̾̏ͦ̂ͮ̈̔̏͢͝L͈̱̻͖͊ͫ̓͆͜o͚̙͉̟͓̙ͤ̉ͯ̚b̷̛̪̯̳̣̘̺͌ͪ͒̈̈͠b̶͈̜͍̈́͌ͩͧ͊ͣ̉̕͢y̡̺̺̤̞̯̠͓̻͂̃́́̄̊͑̈:̸̱̗͓̘͈̥̃̒ͪ ̸̯̤͕̩̲̿ͬͯ̀ͨͧ̂͋̿͡͠b̴̤̖̗̐ͦͥ͗̚͞l̸̫͈͑͢ȧ̷̋ͨ̔ͮ͋҉̹̹̣̙͙͇̕ͅ ̛̼̋̊ͤ̾ͣ̎̿̀b̬̺͚̮̙͊͑͂͛ͧͅl̦̤̐̔ͧͪ̍͒ͮ͑̕͠à̌͌ͬ͊̓͏̨̙͙͢ ̴̨̭͔̺̠͓̭̈͡b̠̬̟̺͐̓̊̄̋̋̈́ͨͅͅl̗̺̖͖͚̞ͦ̌͛̃̊͆ͅa̶̳̩̜̩̮̳̭̾̈̔̈́͆ͤ̂
̶̗̳͈̼ͦ̂P̷͇̔ͯͥ̈́ͧͣ̚͢r̬̱̱̘̲̲͚̮̿̌̏͂͆͋ͦͨ̚i̞̲͊̆̆eͫ͐͆̀̽̔̓͐͏͈͙͚͖̝͉͈̼͘͡ͅs̝͍̩͖̬̪̬ͯ̀̀͢͝ͅt̤͓̞̏͠c̴͍͔͙͉̼̙͋ͯ͐̀̅͠r̢̞̺̱̰̤̔͒ͦ̋ͭ̾͘͝a̫̫̼̭͉̦͚͖̫ͪ͂̄̽̄̈͑f̸̛̱̩̝̜̼̜͚ͩ̋̾͐̾̈̓ͨ͆ẗ̷̯̙͙̣̭̱̖̤͆̓͡ ̧͓̯͙̥̠̯̫̓̋̽̽̀ͣ̒M̶̩͙̬͙̪̥ͦ͗ͨą͇̘̲͍̩̠͂̍͂̽̿ͦ͞ș͈̞̬̥̗̹ͦ̇̓ͭ̓q̞͇͇̝ͫ͗̊̀͐u̜͉͉͎͚̱ͦ̊ͤ̌ͣ̋̕ę̸̘̲̥̥̘͕̦̣̞̅̅̒r̺̺̗͑̔ͬͪ̓ͦ͒͂a̴̰͈͙̤̭͎̗̙̠ͪ̄ͦ͂͗͊͟d̯̰͙͇̙̄̍ͤ̆ͪ́̈́i̮̳̤̬̺̟̹̣ͧͩ̈́ͨ́̆͛ͭ̚̕͟n͚̲̩̹̟̐̽͆͛ͩ͗͑̀̀͢g̽ͨ̅̉̊̒҉͚͕͍͘̕ͅ ̢̨̮͔͎͔̣̳̫̾ͮ͊̅ͭ̑
̧͙̻͉̺̫̽̿̕ǎ̬͖̰͇͍̖͂̐̾̈͝s̸̞̯̻ͣ͑ͨ̽̃ͨ͘͞ ̺̙͚̦̊̆̀ͫ̚͜S̶̸̭̱̙̟̫̳͎̣̈́͊͘c̻̞͚͈̣̮͐͂͜i̴̸̢̤̪͖̫̎̇ͪͅͅe̡͇̞̺̜̮̖͋͠ͅͅn̪̙͆ͣ̔̋̾ͣ̂́̚c̡̗͕̅̍ͪͭ̔ę͕͍̱̼̤̬͒ͧ̔̑͒̒ ̡̘͎͚̔̿͌ͅcͤͫ̋͂̍͏̖̜͔̟̖̤͔o̩̻̖͍̙̦͉ͦ͑̊̽ǹ̵̜̖͊̾̿͝s̺̯̯̃̈p̳̲ͮ̒͛̓̇ì̸̴͚̙̞͓̥̱͔̂̀̊̓ͪ͂̒ͮr̨̜̜͕̳̼̪̘͕͊̾͗ͤ̒͊ͥ͗͝ǎ̶͖̻̼̣̗̱̰͑̉ͦ̀c̳̙̠͓ͬ̈͡ÿ̹̱̌̌͟͞!̛̜̖ͪ͌ͩ̂͋̓̑ͨ͆
͊ͯ̍̉̔͝͏̟̝͖̟̞͕b̴͙̋͛̀̀́͠l̢̰̝̲̊̋͊̀a̟̟̖̰̚ͅ ̶̹͔͚̖̹͚̘̿́̀̏͒̒b̷̝̺̘̞̼̠ͫ̃ͮ̊l̸̠͖̦̹͓͖̥ͧ̈a̧̎ͦͯ͌ͪ̚͏̮̦ ͨͦ̄̏̉ͦ͊ͩͤ҉̤͕̙̥̦b̷̟͙̫̝̦͙̬ͥ̍̐ͧ̎ͮͥ̚l̶̴̨̥̝̭͋̓ͬa̸̶̼̞̲̥̳̪̓ͬ͌͜ͅ

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

That's kind of over-stating it. We still don't know what glial cells do exactly, or why. People have strange mysticisms about the brain. There is no great understanding or progress in poking various parts of the brain and seeing what happens; it isn't anymore informative than poking someone's finger with a needle and seeing what happens. It's just that once you say "brain", people get all spooky and superstitious about it. Many "modern" or "materialist" types get a weird body-dualism when it comes to the brain.

As an example, you may learn that various areas of the brain are "associated with" certain physiological or psychological responses... until you realize, however, that these "areas" are really just averaged measurements over thousands of subjects, each with variances in the involvement of said "area", so really all you get are these useless, vague, ill-defined morphological maps that have little purchase in reality, other than as a statistical model. Neuroscientists, of course, are fully aware of the limitations of what we're doing and researching, it's mostly other people from other disciplines that take some neuroscience and stretch it into quasi-scientific and speculative hogwarsh.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

The magic is not in the ailment itself, but in the sleight-of-hand that convinces people that a reduction of symptoms addresses an actual cause.

[devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com]

I'm an expert on psychiatry. In a previous life I was Sigmund Freud's smarter brother. Before that, I was a lizard.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Cool. Are you hoping to score a prescription to some excellent mind-altering substances?

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I get it. There's too much to know and not enough time to know it. That's why certain people go to med school. That's why it takes a decade of education/practice to become a medical doctor. When doctors tell you what's wrong with you, you're hearing the why, but not the how. You're not hearing the minute details of knowledge crammed into their brain that got them to that decision. They could write a dissertation on the two sentences they just told you.

But that's the way things are. Not out of cruelty or malevolence, medical professionals engage in coercion to get a patient to do what they want. Because a patient's informed consent is an illusion. Either you're doing exactly what this doctor wants, or you do what another doctor wants, or you do what you want, which is probably dying. You don't have a real choice in the matter, because you're not a doctor.

Your comparison between science and ritual is completely ignoring the scientific method. Scientists are not in the business of knowing, they're in the business of observing. They make conclusions based on observations, and are fully willing to discard their conclusion should new evidence surface. It's a constant process. There is no end. In religion, there is an end, and it was deigned millenia ago. By equating anything in religion to science, you demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding. Fozzy bear already spelled this out clearer than me, but basically you're accusing science of something it wasn't designed to do.

[devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com]

Bingo.

[404.livejournal.com]

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I just realized that that is a chemical lab-rador.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

I don't mix religious and scientific jargon for the same reason I don't mix alcohol and painkillers...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Your fear of deadly language is unfounded.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I agree. Many times people have extended my distaste for corrupt psychiatric practices to more legitimate forms of medical treatment. It is one way of abusing me and whitewashing offenses at one stroke.

[kardashev.livejournal.com]

Meh, there's two sides to this. On the one hand, I've heard big pharma canvasses doctors trying to get the to prescribe all sorts of new drugs, marketing them to doctors as "the next big thing, in each case. There's also been cases of doctors over-medicating patients. Ozzy Ozbourne is a famous example of someone who was overmedicated for years. I can buy that. Pharma corps and doctors want to make a fat profit, after all. But on the other hand, I've known severely mentally ill folk who simply could not function without various anti-psychotics. And by not function, I mean a choice between either starting a drug regimen or eventually dying.

All in all, it never hurts to get a second opinion from a different doctor.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

I would fear the drug makers before the couch surfers. They are the ones that make the big profits, and dump all kinds of cash into fear of the "psycho-mimetic".

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I have heard of psychiatrists living in fear of blowing the whistle on heavy-handed pharmaceutical marketing practices. They have more to fear than I do.