3 ms·

Most psychiatric treatments either don't work or have terrible side effects. People go off them not just because they're crazy. Which means that mandated treatm

by blfr 4y ago

Most psychiatric treatments either don't work or have terrible side effects. People go off them not just because they're crazy. Which means that mandated treatment boils down to jailing many of these patients indefinitely. I can't find it right now but Freddie deBoer had a pretty good, and by good I mean harrowing, description of psychiatric medication, then medication for the side effects of psych meds, then... It's definitely not like taking antibiotics.

notamy 4y ago
Is it this? https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/the-weight https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/the-weight
- blfr 4y ago
  Yes, that's the one. Thank you.
biomcgary 4y ago
Psychiatric treatments are largely shooting in the dark yet have always been popular among the elite. For example, the inventor of the lobotomy got the Nobel Prize in Medicine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy). The biggest difference today is that drug companies get the money not the surgeons.
denton-scratch 4y ago
> Most psychiatric treatments either don't work or have terrible side effects. Well, yes; even talking therapy can have side-effects (and talking therapy often doesn't work). But I take it you're referring to treatment with anti-psychotic drugs. They have bad side-effects; but they work pretty consistently, in the sense that they suppress delusions and delusional behaviour. > jailing many of these patients indefinitely. That's never the right solution, unless you happen to be the owner of a private secure psychiatric clinic. You confine a patient while you medicate them, and release them a few months later, once they've convinced you they'll take their pills. Then you monitor them in the community, ideally indefinitely. > It's definitely not like taking antibiotics. It surely is not like taking antibiotics. Anti-psychotic drugs are very blunt instruments, including the more recent ones. If you had those side-effects, you'd correctly conclude that the drugs were making you ill.
lamontcg 4y ago
Murdering random people is a fairly terrible side effect of not taking psychiatric treatment.

by blfr 4y ago

notamy 4y ago

Is it this? https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/the-weight https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/the-weight

blfr 4y ago
Yes, that's the one. Thank you.

biomcgary 4y ago

Psychiatric treatments are largely shooting in the dark yet have always been popular among the elite. For example, the inventor of the lobotomy got the Nobel Prize in Medicine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy). The biggest difference today is that drug companies get the money not the surgeons.

denton-scratch 4y ago

> Most psychiatric treatments either don't work or have terrible side effects. Well, yes; even talking therapy can have side-effects (and talking therapy often doesn't work). But I take it you're referring to treatment with anti-psychotic drugs. They have bad side-effects; but they work pretty consistently, in the sense that they suppress delusions and delusional behaviour. > jailing many of these patients indefinitely. That's never the right solution, unless you happen to be the owner of a private secure psychiatric clinic. You confine a patient while you medicate them, and release them a few months later, once they've convinced you they'll take their pills. Then you monitor them in the community, ideally indefinitely. > It's definitely not like taking antibiotics. It surely is not like taking antibiotics. Anti-psychotic drugs are very blunt instruments, including the more recent ones. If you had those side-effects, you'd correctly conclude that the drugs were making you ill.

lamontcg 4y ago

Murdering random people is a fairly terrible side effect of not taking psychiatric treatment.