Hi, thanks for posting and sharing your reaction to what I'd said. I'm going to respond to tominous next, so check for that comment too. > I'll be honest, and

Hi, thanks for posting and sharing your reaction to what I'd said. I'm going to respond to tominous next, so check for that comment too. > I'll be honest, and say that your post set off what I'd call my "Crank/Crackpot Detector". I know, right? It's usually safe to assume that conventional practices are what they are because they're the best we have, at the present time. > Each psychotic break is correlated with increasingly grim outcomes, such as a homelessness, permanent care, and suicide. Robert Whitaker proposes that patients did much better before the psychiatrists had drugs to put them on: people had "episodes" from which they frequently recovered. Page 7 of "The Case Against Antipsychotics" [1] begins a discussion of studies of psychotic illnesses in the pre-drug era. [1] http://www.madinamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/The-Case-Against-Antipsychotics.pdf http://www.madinamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/The-C... > It's true, chemotherapy is poison, but oftentimes it's the best we have to work with. Sometimes science takes detours before it rediscovers that which was previously unpopular. This article demonstrates that progressive oncologists are beginning to recognize the errors of their predecessors: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/magazine/warburg-effect-an-old-idea-revived-starve-cancer-to-death.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/magazine/warburg-effect-an...