Scientology - dangerous and stupid?

[nexus100]

Drugs

It seems there is the idea extant that "meds" as these psychiatric drugs are called are different from other drugs.

All any "mental" drug can do is slow things down or speed things up. That is with regard to one's viewpoint. If you are talking about the "right level" of meds all you are refering to is the level that speeds or slows the action of the world to the point where the individual is comfortable with it.

Just about the worst thing a person can do to himself is camp on a harmonic emotional thread. Your best bet is to be fluid, to understand it as best you can, and release threads to increase understanding if you wish to do so. Children go up and down threads easily. Adults, at least in the US, are given the idea that that movement is not "stable" and tend to freeze on one emotion or in a narrow band. That is understandable.

But to enforce it on children is at best a very high level of ignorance.

 

[gomorrhan]

A person's viewpoint is the only potential a person has to play the game, to understand, to grow if that person chooses. Whatever helps best a person to maintain that viewpoint is worth doing, FOR THAT PERSON. I think vast numbers of children are being forced to take psychiatric drugs-millions of them whose viewpoint is less than it could be without them.

The US does not take a very spiritual viewpoint. If you look at TV, video games, lack of exercise, poor diet, and the small amount of attention, communication and stability with many parents as well as that parent's own lack of spiritual understanding it isn't surprising chilldren appear to have problems.

In Washington State there are required courses for teachers to spot so called "disorders" in order to refer children for drug application. Thirty years ago this would have been considered insanity. The average teacher is barely qualified to teach, much less to refer people for dangerous mind altering drugs.

Scientology is not the only method to use to help people. It is not a case of the COS vs. psychiatrists. It is much more a case of drug companies using their massive influence to drug children who don't need it and aren't helped by it in order to make money. This is in my opinion a crime.

Agreed, except I think there's a conflation of two things here. While I agree that psychiatric interventions are overused and often to the detriment of children, I don't think that the other alternative is necessarily a spiritually based intervention, since there is no evidence for the existence of a spiritual being. Psychological interventions, yes, there is plenty of evidence for the existence of mentality, there is simply no reason to believe that the mentality is spiritual.

 

[nexus100]

Agreed, except I think there's a conflation of two things here. While I agree that psychiatric interventions are overused and often to the detriment of children, I don't think that the other alternative is necessarily a spiritually based intervention, since there is no evidence for the existence of a spiritual being. Psychological interventions, yes, there is plenty of evidence for the existence of mentality, there is simply no reason to believe that the mentality is spiritual.

Most "behavioral problems", which are the reason drugs are given are likely non-existent or related to the home or diet in my opinion. I heard a report that the average person in the US eats less than ONE serving of vegetables a day that isn't fried, as in french fries. Our sugar and sodium intake is off the charts and there are hundreds if not thousands of food additives including pesticides, antibiotics, preserving agents, coloring agents, none adequately tested for their effect on humans. Add to that the incredible absence of child exercise due in part to parent's understandable fear of letting their child do unsupervised activity-I'd say there is adequate intervention possible without attacking the spiritual angle.

 

[gomorrhan]

I'm not attacking "the spiritual angle". I just don't think there's any reason to address it, unless the person is hung up on it. I totally concur that there are probably a lot of kids whose children have dietary problems and sleep problems that are misdiagnosed as attention deficit problems or other emotional disorders. This doesn't mean they all are!

The fact that there is a problem with misdiagnosis and pharmaceutical pushing doesn't mean that the solution is Christian Science, that's my point. Which doesn't mean you were pushing that, just I wanted some clarification.

 

[nexus100]

I think the greater issue is why anyone thinks drugging people on a mass basis is useful or at least not open to question. That idea comes from the medical community-not in the US a very advanced group when it comes to understanding the nature of life. Schools long ago became tools for various groups to experiment on, from civil rights advocates to socioloigists to psychologists to drug companies to teacher's unions. Their entire structure is flawed which is why drugs could be so easily brought in in the first place.

One can arrive anyway, which is the good news. But none of the above makes is easier.

 

[thetanic]

All any "mental" drug can do is slow things down or speed things up.

Not really. How an SSRI works, for example, has nothing to do with speeding up or slowing down; it has to do with getting a signal to cross a gap when it's not making it already.

You've got an axon, and between that and the next neuron is the synaptic cleft, and on the far side, you've got receptors. If there's not enough neurotransmitters of that same kind in that synaptic cleft, the electrical impulse in the brain won't cross the cleft and reach the receptor for that neurotransmitter.

If there's "too many" neurotransmitters of a given kind in the synaptic cleft, they get reuptaken. Some people's brains think "too many" is a low enough quantity that the signals don't cross. We call that depression.

An SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) simply inhibits the reuptake process for serotonin in order to ensure there's enough serotonin in the synaptic cleft for the signal to cross the synaptic cleft.

Then there's the side effects.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Most "behavioral problems", which are the reason drugs are given are likely non-existent or related to the home or diet in my opinion. I heard a report that the average person in the US eats less than ONE serving of vegetables a day that isn't fried, as in french fries. Our sugar and sodium intake is off the charts and there are hundreds if not thousands of food additives including pesticides, antibiotics, preserving agents, coloring agents, none adequately tested for their effect on humans. Add to that the incredible absence of child exercise due in part to parent's understandable fear of letting their child do unsupervised activity-I'd say there is adequate intervention possible without attacking the spiritual angle.

Have you ever read a book called "Supersize Me?". It's by a guy (Morgan Spurlock I think) who tries to live for a month on nothing but fast food, mainly hamburgers, and who chronicles his reactions to this in detail. It's a good read.

He wrote a follow up to this in which he makes suggestions for how America's diet could be improved.

The New York "subway vigilante" of 1984, Bernhard Goetz, also tried to run for mayor of New York on a program including an exclusively vegetarian diet for New York's schools, hospitals etc.

I agree, the existing situation is bad and it is in the UK as well although some efforts are being made to improve this.

 

[nexus100]

Our opinions differ. If you think drugging kids is a good idea they differ massively.

I am quite sure we are spirits and the spiritual truth is paramount. If you don't believe we are spirits you won't likely see it that way.

The science you quote is conjectural as justification for drugs in my opinion. Since no adequate valuation of physical issues is carried out in nearly all drugged kid cases there's no way of telling what might fix the issue-if there is one beyond kids trying to be kids.

 

[nexus100]

Have you ever read a book called "Supersize Me?". It's by a guy (Morgan Spurlock I think) who tries to live for a month on nothing but fast food, mainly hamburgers, and who chronicles his reactions to this in detail. It's a good read.

He wrote a follow up to this in which he makes suggestions for how America's diet could be improved.

The New York "subway vigilante" of 1984, Bernhard Goetz, also tried to run for mayor of New York on a program including an exclusively vegetarian diet for New York's schools, hospitals etc.

I agree, the existing situation is bad and it is in the UK as well although some efforts are being made to improve this.

I haven't read it. Bernie Goetz may not be the best PR advocate, however! Did he say he was affected by his diet?

Some states in the US are doing things too, as in banning vending and coke machines from the schools. (There never were such machines at my schools in the olden days.) And the US government is taking steps about what advertising can occur on morning TV. But action toward food manufacturers is what is really required and with food prices shooting up double digits that is likely a ways away.

 

[Zinjifar]

I don't think anybody's claiming that 'drugging kids' is a 'good idea', although, I'm perfectly willing to accept that *some* kids are helped in *some* circumstances by taking any of a variety of drugs, including psychopharmica *and* antibiotics, antihistamines and even aspirin (to keep it in the 'a' real, and despite the danger of triggering the ryes syndrome crowd), but, at the same time I think it's both legitimate and widely accepted that overdiagnosis and overprescription is an ongoing problem.

Zinj

 

[Voltaire's Child]

It seems there is the idea extant that "meds" as these psychiatric drugs are called are different from other drugs.

All any "mental" drug can do is slow things down or speed things up. That is with regard to one's viewpoint. If you are talking about the "right level" of meds all you are refering to is the level that speeds or slows the action of the world to the point where the individual is comfortable with it.

Just about the worst thing a person can do to himself is camp on a harmonic emotional thread. Your best bet is to be fluid, to understand it as best you can, and release threads to increase understanding if you wish to do so. Children go up and down threads easily. Adults, at least in the US, are given the idea that that movement is not "stable" and tend to freeze on one emotion or in a narrow band. That is understandable.

But to enforce it on children is at best a very high level of ignorance.

Great post!

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Have you ever read a book called "Supersize Me?". It's by a guy (Morgan Spurlock I think) who tries to live for a month on nothing but fast food, mainly hamburgers, and who chronicles his reactions to this in detail. It's a good read.

He wrote a follow up to this in which he makes suggestions for how America's diet could be improved.

The New York "subway vigilante" of 1984, Bernhard Goetz, also tried to run for mayor of New York on a program including an exclusively vegetarian diet for New York's schools, hospitals etc.

I agree, the existing situation is bad and it is in the UK as well although some efforts are being made to improve this.

Yes, and in this documentary, he also showed a school that switched its lunch program from fast food to poultry, fish, veggies, etc and how the kids did better in their classes.

 

[Axiom142]

I don’t want to be seen taking sides here, as I think that a lot of good points have been well made.

I am definitely not a fan of psychiatry as I have seen the results of psychiatric treatment first hand and the destructive results it can bring. It is quite clear that much psychiatric treatment is simply about hiding symptoms without addressing the root causes. But, it is equally clear to me that not all psychiatrists are totally evil and intent on enslaving all spiritual beings and bringing destruction to the entire universe. For Hubbard to make this claim is manifestly ludicrous. I have no doubt that there are many psychiatrists who are good people and want to help others. They just don’t have the requisite knowledge and tools to do the job.

Personally I believe that many of the problems of ‘mentally ill’ people could be addressed by just some or all of the following:

• Having good friends to turn to for help and advice.
• Taking a long hard look at their own lives and tackling the actual problems.
• Eating a balanced diet free from overly processed food.
• Getting regular exercise.
• Having a good laugh once in a while.

Yes, I recognise that there are many people who do suffer terribly from mental or spiritual problems. I’ve seen this and been greatly affected by these myself. In some cases, some sort of intensive therapy is a necessity both for the sufferer and those around them.

But just handing out pills like candy just makes the problem worse. It avoids addressing the causes and masks the symptoms.

Hubbard claimed to be able to help the ‘insane’ very easily. So if they have the ‘technology, why doesn’t the CoS do more to help, instead of just telling people that they must avoid treatment?

This attitude will just cause more tragedies like that of Ellie Perkins: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elli_Perkins

Axiom142

 

[nexus100]

I don't think anybody's claiming that 'drugging kids' is a 'good idea', although, I'm perfectly willing to accept that *some* kids are helped in *some* circumstances by taking any of a variety of drugs, including psychopharmica *and* antibiotics, antihistamines and even aspirin (to keep it in the 'a' real, and despite the danger of triggering the ryes syndrome crowd), but, at the same time I think it's both legitimate and widely accepted that overdiagnosis and overprescription is an ongoing problem.

Zinj

Please note I'm not talking about aspirin or antibiotics or antihistamines, I'm talking about the mind/brain altering stuff. Nor am I talking about adults who have a choice about what they're doing. (On that my opinion has changed.) So long as it is voluntary be my guest. It may be your path to do so. I can't decide that for you.

But kids are seldom given the option whether they want to take the drug or stop taking it. They are much more likely to be the effect of other circumstances, including as said above diet, exercise, family instability, etc. than adults. They may not be able to say or understand what they are feeling. Children get overwhelmed easily when things aren't right. And nothing may be wrong at all.

Sorry for the soapbox but this drives me up a wall. Not your post.

I agree that overdiagnosis and overprescription is an ongoing problem. What we do about it is first off, educate.

 

[Pixie]

Please note I'm not talking about aspirin or antibiotics or antihistamines, I'm talking about the mind/brain altering stuff. Nor am I talking about adults who have a choice about what they're doing. (On that my opinion has changed.) So long as it is voluntary be my guest. It may be your path to do so. I can't decide that for you.

But kids are seldom given the option whether they want to take the drug or stop taking it. They are much more likely to be the effect of other circumstances, including as said above diet, exercise, family instability, etc. than adults. They may not be able to say or understand what they are feeling. Children get overwhelmed easily when things aren't right. And nothing may be wrong at all.

Sorry for the soapbox but this drives me up a wall. Not your post.

I agree that overdiagnosis and overprescription is an ongoing problem. What we do about it is first off, educate.

Well said. I agree with this, children are very sensitive on the whole and many things can be sorted with a good diet and honest loving communication. Anything that changes the chemical balance in a child's brain cannot be good. And as you pointed out Nexus, they have no choice do they? My sense is that nowadays with the way society has turned out, it's the parents that are in overwhelm and just don't have the time, patience and in some cases money to cope with the children in the first place. People ought to start thinking long and hard about whether to have kids or not nowadays, god knows there are enough unwanted ones out there, and they too deserve a chance.

 

[thetanic]

Our opinions differ.

What I said wasn't an opinion (though it was a simplification).

If you think drugging kids is a good idea they differ massively.

I wasn't talking about kids. I was stating that your gross oversimplification was just that.

In fact, because the brain tissue changes so much in structure up until (on average) age 11, giving psychotropic drugs to children under that age may be very damaging long-term if it affects brain structure.

While I do believe in spirit, I don't think that changes the fact that the body is run by the brain, and that neurotransmitters do in fact matter a great deal. Of course, I have the reality of having taken, and seeing the effects of, anti-depressant medications. Only one of them didn't work for me. I'm still on anti-depressant medications for sleep cycle regulation.

(I could be off about age 11; it has been over a decade since I took neurobiology, but it's somewhere in the late prepubescent/early puberty ages.)

 

[thetanic]

Please note I'm not talking about aspirin or antibiotics or antihistamines, I'm talking about the mind/brain altering stuff. Nor am I talking about adults who have a choice about what they're doing. (On that my opinion has changed.)

On this we definitely can agree.

 

[nexus100]

deleted

 

[nexus100]

What I said wasn't an opinion (though it was a simplification).



I wasn't talking about kids. I was stating that your gross oversimplification was just that.

In fact, because the brain tissue changes so much in structure up until (on average) age 11, giving psychotropic drugs to children under that age may be very damaging long-term if it affects brain structure.

While I do believe in spirit, I don't think that changes the fact that the body is run by the brain, and that neurotransmitters do in fact matter a great deal. Of course, I have the reality of having taken, and seeing the effects of, anti-depressant medications. Only one of them didn't work for me. I'm still on anti-depressant medications for sleep cycle regulation.

(I could be off about age 11; it has been over a decade since I took neurobiology, but it's somewhere in the late prepubescent/early puberty ages.)

I appreciate you have different experience. I think the brain notions are largely hokum. But I've had the experience of a tech that works.

However children are my focus. As I said until they have the right to decide for themselves I wouldn't be giving them brain drugs.

 

[laurenBaker9282]

I've never taken a psychiatric drug,