Cry the antivaxers and quacks: 'Twas big pharma that led Adam Lanza to kill

By oracknows on December 21, 2012.

Quacks despise science-based medicine in general, but there are certain specialties that they detest more than others. Arguably, the specialty most attacked by quacks is psychiatry. Many are the reasons, some legitimate, many not. In particular, Scientologists despise psychiatry, even going so far as to maintain a "museum" dedicated to psychiatry that they charmingly call Psychiatry: Industry of Death. It's so ridiculously over-the-top, a virtual self-parody, that it almost inadvertently undermines attacks on psychiatry frequently leveled by Scientologists and quacks.

Let's face it, psychiatry hasn't always had the best history. It's a very hard to study human behavior and disorders of human behavior in a rigorous fashion, but to my mind that didn't excuse the the widespread acceptance of the ideas of Sigmund Freud, which were little removed from pseudoscience in many respects. Also, psychiatry has not always had the best history, particularly in the early part of this century. Too often, psychiatry has been used as a tool of control rather than a means of helping people who are suffering. Although there is a ways to go, however, psychiatry in 2012 is much better than psychiatry, say, 50 or 75 years ago. It wasn't so long ago that I wrote about an old time radio show that gave an idea of how fast psychiatrists at a certain point in the last century were to perform lobotomies, despite the extreme lack of evidence for their safety and efficacy. Over the last half-century, better psychiatric drugs to treat different conditions have been developed, leading to their widespread use for a number of indications.

There are, of course, legitimate criticisms of psychiatry to be made, but that's not what quacks are interested in. Their hatred of psychiatry is particularly pure, to the point where they look for any excuse to attack psychiatric medications. One of the more odious byproducts of this is a depressing eagerness among the anti-psychiatry quack crowd to leap on any mass murder that occurs as an excuse to blame the crime on psychiatric medications. I first noticed this particularly disgusting phenomenon in the wake of the Virginia Tech shooting five years ago, and, unfortunately, I'm noticing it again now, in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting, in which a mass murderer, Adam Lanza, gunned down 26 people, including 20 children between the ages of 6 and 7, before shooting himself. A mere two days after the shooting, for instance, Mike Adams, the proprietor of one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet, NaturalNews.com, wrote a post he entitled, Gun control? We need medication control! Newtown elementary school shooter Adam Lanza likely on meds; labeled as having 'personality disorder', in which he ranted:

According to ABC News, Adam Lanza, the alleged shooter, has been labeled as having "mental illness" and a "personality disorder." These are precisely the words typically heard in a person who is being "treated" with mind-altering psychiatric drugs.

One of the most common side effects of psychiatric drugs is violent outbursts and thoughts of suicide.

Note: The shooter was originally mid-identified as Ryan Lanza but has now been corrected to Adam Lanza.

The Columbine High School shooters were, of course, on psychiatric drugs at the time they shot their classmates in 1999. Suicidal tendencies and violent, destructive thoughts are some of the admitted behavioral side effects of mind-altering prescription medications.

Then, rather incoherently, Adams switches gears to the claims that prescription drugs cause 100,000 deaths a year and arguing that guns should't be banned based on this shooting incident but rather psychiatric drugs are at the root of the violence:

For guns to be as deadly as medications, you'd have to see a Newton-style massacre happening ten times a day, every day of the year. Only then would "gun violence" even match up to the number of deaths caused by doctor-prescribed, FDA-approved medications.

Why does America grieve for the children killed in Newton, but not for the medical victims killed by Big Pharma? Are the lives of people on medication not valuable compared to the lives of children in elementary school? Will Obama shed a tear for the victims of Big Pharma, or are his tears reserved only for politically expedient events that push his agenda of unconstitutional gun restrictions?

If our goal us to stop the violence in America, we are completely dishonest if we do not consider the mental causes of violent behavior. And that starts with mind-altering psychiatric drugs which I believe have unleashed a drug-induced epidemic of violence across our nation.

This is a claim we hear frequently from quacks like Mike Adams. Of course, at the time he started making these charges he had no evidence that Adam Lanza was even on psychiatric medications, much less that they caused or contributed to his having turned a school into an abattoir. Of course, little things like facts and science never stopped Adams in his relentless quest to be the firstest with the craziest, and this was no exception. A couple of days ago, not to keep the crazy under check, Adams followed up his original article with one entitled The solution to the insanity: Ban all people on psychiatric medication from owning guns, driving cars or voting for President. In his "satire," he advocated banning people on psychiatric medications from driving, owning guns, or running for public office, proclaiming that "medication makes some people go crazy with violence."

Nice how Mike Adams so casually demonizes those with mental illness, throwing around terms like "crazy."

Be that as it may, Mike Adams isn't the only one doing this. For instance, Teresa Conrick, over at the antivaccine crank blog Age of Autism, wrote a post the other day with a title almost as charming as Mike Adams', Pharmagunddon: School Shooters and Psych Meds. After correctly castigating some media reports that the shooter Adam Lanza had Asperger's, a justified response to the implication in some of these reports that it was autism that lead Lanza to become so violent, unfortunately Conrick goes straight into an anti-psychiatry rant as bad as anything Mike Adams has done.

If there's one thing antivaccinationists are good at, it's confusing correlation with causation. After all, the entire antivaccine belief system involves correlating increasing prevalence of autism over the last 20 years with increases in the number of vaccinations in the recommended childhood vaccine schedule. So it's not at all surprising that Conrick thinks she's found a correlation:

"Despite 22 international drug regulatory warnings on psychiatric drugs citing effects of mania, hostility, violence and even homicidal ideation, and dozens of high profile school shootings/killings tied to psychiatric drug use, there has yet to be a federal investigation on the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence."

"At least fourteen recent school shootings were committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 109 wounded and 58 killed (in other school shootings, information about their drug use was never made public—neither confirming or refuting if they were under the influence of prescribed drugs.) The most important fact about this list, is that these are only the shooters where the information about their psychiatric drug use was made public. To give an example, although it is known that James Holmes, suspected perpetrator of a mass shooting that occurred July 20, 2012, at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, was seeing psychiatrist Lynne Fenton, no mention has been made of what psychiatric drugs he may have been taking.

She then lists 14 more incidence of violence in which the perpetrator was taking psychiatric medications. As I said, confuse correlation with causation for vaccines, confuse correlation with causation regarding psychiatric medications for this issue. So what is the actual evidence? Clearly quackery supporters like Conrick and Adams are not interested in a balanced presentation; they've cherry picked their evidence to find only studies that suggest a link. The most prominent of these studies, which is referred to time and time again by those of Adams' ilk is a study that was published in PLoS ONE a couple of years ago by Thomas J. Moore, Joseph Glenmullen, and Curt D. Furberg entitled Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Towards Others.

Basically, this study was a review of adverse event reports from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) from 2004 through 2009, searching for drugs with a disproportionate number of reports of AEs involving violence towards others. Disproportionality in reporting was defined as "a) 5 or more violence case reports, b) at least twice the number of reports expected given the volume of overall reports for that drug, c) a χ2 statistic indicating the violence cases were unlikely to have occurred by chance (p<0.01)." The authors identified 1,527 cases of violence reported disproportionately for 31 drugs. Some of the drugs included varenicline (used for smoking cessation), 11 antidepressants, 5 sedative/hypnotics, and three drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Among the drugs, varenicline stood out.

Of course, those of you who've been reading my posts on vaccines will see the problem with this study. The AERS database is one letter removed from the VAERS database (i.e., the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System). In fact, these days, it's known as FAERS, the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System, and it serves essentially the same function as VAERS, namely to serve as a post-approval surveillance system, to serve as the "canary in the coal mine," so to speak. However, it also shares all the problems with VAERS. The biggest problem is that FAERS, like VAERS, is a passive reporting system to which anyone can report suspected adverse events:

Reporting of adverse events and medication errors by healthcare professionals and consumers is voluntary in the United States. FDA receives some adverse event and medication error reports directly from healthcare professionals (such as physicians, pharmacists, nurses and others) and consumers (such as patients, family members, lawyers and others). Healthcare professionals and consumers may also report adverse events and/or medication errors to the products’ manufacturers. If a manufacturer receives an adverse event report, it is required to send the report to FDA as specified by regulations. The reports received directly and the reports from manufacturers are entered into FAERS.

I also can't resist pointing out that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Critics of big pharma frequently castigate studies by investigators with conflicts of interest involving big pharma; so the conflicts of interest of the authors of this study are fair game in my book. They're doozies, too:

Mr. Moore has received consulting fees from litigators in cases involving paroxetine, and was an expert witness in a criminal case involving varenicline. Dr. Glenmullen has been retained as an expert witness in cases involving varenicline and psychiatric drugs including antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, mood stablizers, and ADHD drugs. Dr. Furberg has received consulting fees from litigators in cases involving gabapentin.

Kind of like Andrew Wakefield being funded by trial lawyers, isn't it? Dr. Glenmullen has also written books about "solutions" to getting off of antidepressants and castigating antidepressants as causing violence and all sorts of other horrific symptoms. One wonders what Conrick or Adams would say about studies showing these drugs not to be linked with violence if any of the study authors had been paid by a pharmaceutical company to sing the drugs' praises or had written books about how great the drugs were. I think not. Of course, a COI alone does not mean that the study isn't a good one or that it should be dismissed out of hand, nor am I advocating that. I do, however, marvel at how closely the competing interests line up with the findings of the study and am pointing out that the authors do have an ax to grind, which should color your interpretation of their results, along with one's knowledge of how FAERS is like VAERS. Granted, it appears to be more rigorously administered than VAERS in that there is more medical moderation to assess potential plausibility, but it suffers from the same basic issues that VAERS does. Also, in all fairness, the majority of reports to FAERS come from health care professionals.

Be that as it may, this study is clearly based on finding correlations. It is preliminary, but that doesn't mean the authors might not be on to something. After all, given the psychotropic effects of certain drugs it's not implausible that some of them might be linked with violent behavior, and there is certainly other evidence that suggests that certain drugs can make violence more likely. On the other hand, one big problem with studies of this sort is that they rarely control for obvious confounders, such as measuring the baseline rate of violent behavior in patients with the condition who are not treated with the drug in question. As one commenter after a post about this study put it, "Did they screen for people being violent before they took medication? Violent? No, no I was neveeeer violent until I took this pill..." Again, it's all correlation in a database not well equipped to provide anything but preliminary hypotheses to test in more rigorous trials, and there is no control group. An excellent review article points out some of these difficulties:

A number of epidemiological studies suggest that drugs can induce aggression, unfortunately many fundamental limitations exist in these types of studies linking crime to drugs. Most crimes are the result of a combination of factors such as economic, cultural, genetic, environmental, and interpersonal.8,13 Even when the drug is the cause it is often one of many factors that played a part in the event.8 The definition of “drug related” varies from study to study and among individuals. Many epidemiological studies rely on urine testing for drugs of abuse. Standard urine tests are often limited to a handful of substances.16 Certain substances, such as lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), are difficult to detect by standard urine drug testing methods.16 Additionally, reports by offenders may minimize or exaggerate the contribution of drugs to the given crime, leading to complications in reporting. Most forensic cases involve illicit drugs rather than prescription drugs. These drugs often come from clandestine sources, so the purity and authenticity of the substances cannot be certain. Direct human studies related to drug-induced aggression are limited and animal studies may provide as background information as to whether a drug can cause violence, for example cocaine.17

Psychiatric conditions associated with criminality include delirium, delusional disorder, dementias, impulse control disorders, bipolar disorder, depression, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, paraphilias, and traumatic brain injury.18 It is important to emphasize that most persons with mental illness are not violent and just having a diagnosis does not create additional risk for aggression. One could extrapolate that if a drug causes delirium or delusions (especially paranoid delusions) then it could result in violence. Unfortunately, mental illness is often a confounding factor in case reports both clinical and forensic. Mental illness may or may not be addressed in epidemiological studies.

The review article also points out that many drugs have been linked with violence based on various evidence but that it's really hard to demonstrate in any given case that a specific drug contributed to a specific act of violence. Unfortunately, that's exactly what Adams and Conrick are doing: Trying to blame psychiatric medications for Lanza's rampage, even though it's not even clear whether he was on psychiatric medications, and, if he was it's not known which one(s). A previous report allegedly from Lanza's uncle that he was on Fanapt was apparently highly dubious.

Be that as it may, regardless of whether Lanza was taking medications of any kind, psychiatric or other, there is no evidence that it was medications that caused his murderous child-killing rampage, any more than there is evidence that mental illness caused him to kill. Indeed, apparently he was assigned a school psychologist because of his social awkwardness and fear that he would be bullied by others or might harm himself. At this point, we just don't know, and all too often people without a definable mental illness do truly evil things for reasons known only to themselves. While I can understand why a clueless wonder like Mike Adams is so anxious to blame evil acts on the products of big pharma. He thinks big pharma is the root of all evil and that the only answer are his "natural" cures. Conrick, on the other hand, has a special needs children. In correctly castigating writers who tried to imply that autism somehow led Lanza to kill, she turns right around and implies that it was medications associated with psychiatric conditions, thus demonizing those with psychiatric conditions as potential killers through their medications.

For shame.

More like this

Andrew Wakefield wins an award just as he jumps on the anti-psychiatry bandwagon

I certainly don't even try to keep secret my opinion of Andrew Wakefield, the British gastroenterologist who is almost single-handedly responsible for bringing the measles back to the UK, thanks to his bad science, for which he was well-paid by trial lawyers and his falsification of data and…

Mike Adams sinks to a new low

I've written a lot about Mike Adams, the man who founded NaturalNews.com and has been one of the most prominent promoters of quackery on the Internet. Indeed, Mike Adams appears to be battling it out with Joe Mercola for the title of owning the biggest quackery website on the Internet. There's one…

Attack of the child zombies!

I was glancing at the Huffington Post today when I ran into yet another piece of what I wish was absurdist health reporting. Unfortunately, it's meant to be taken seriously. What's even worse is that there is a real problem hidden in the hyperbole, but the author's over-the-top rant does more to…

The fixed mindset of medical pseudoscience

One of the key principles of skepticism, particularly in medicine, is that correlation does not necessarily equal causation. I emphasize the word "necessarily" because sometimes skeptics go a bit too far and say that correlation does not equal causation. I myself used to phrase it that way for a…

Congratulations on your drug induced happiness, Melissa G.

This is simply snide. I happen to have a close friend with rather severe bipolar disorder. Several years ago, a therapist convinced this person to abandon medication. The decay, which I had seen on a number of occasions, proceeded like clockwork, with incoherent, screaming phone calls, police visits, bringing home random "friendly strangers," hospitalization, too-early discharge, a repeat of the foregoing (during which the friendly strangers burglarized the abode), and, finally, eviction.

If you're doing fine off meds, that's great. Don't presume to run around randomly trying to shove Breggin down people's throats and copping an attitude in the process.

@OffMeds - perhaps you need to re-read Melissa's comment....because I don't think she's saying what you think she's saying.

Narad, no one should just "abandon medication" since the withdrawal effects can be extremely dangerous, which is why people should be safely weaned off all psychotropic medication over a period of time. On that note, I am not "randomly trying to shove Breggin down people's throats and copping an attitude in the process". I very specifically mentioned on my post that his book helped me and was congratulating Melissa G for being able to reach a place of well being through mind altering drug use.

Lawrence - Which is why I asked Melissa to elaborate on her personal experience.

@OffMeds - passive-aggressive much?

Nope, Lawrence. Just trying to have an intellectual conversation.

I very specifically mentioned on my post that his book helped me and was congratulating Melissa G for being able to reach a place of well being through mind altering drug use.

Horseshıt. "Drug induced happiness" is a straight-up insult, as is "mind altering drug use," implying that the benefits aren't "real." Indeed, the further implication is that person in some sense is no longer "real," having an "altered mind." Perhaps you should discuss your passive-agressive, evasive communication skills with the therapist that you've found.

@OffMeds - your attempt to start off the conversation using purposely passive-aggressive language is certainly not a good place to start...I agree with Narad.

I smell a little smugness here too......'I was able to get off my medications so that makes me superior'. No word or thought that maybe you had outgrown an adolescent illness???? Calling someone elses happiness 'drug-induced' is insulting to say the least. Why don't you just say what you mean by that, that Melissa G's happiness is fake?

Well, Narad, psychotropic medications are by definition mind altering drugs since they affect the neurotransmitters of the brain. There is nothing passive - aggressive nor evasive about my communication skills. My communication style is very calm and direct.

Hmm, I think I may have lost a previous comment to the spam filter. In any case, I will repeat the salient point: Trolling much, Off Meds?

Agashem - Way to put words into someone's mouth - I never claimed to be superior. Melissa herself asserted in her post that she is happy now that she is medicated. Medications are drugs. So, she herself, claims that her happiness was brought about through drug use. And, no - I never had an "adolescent illness"; just some typical adolescent issues. I never called Melissa's happiness fake - that's a conclusion you came up with all on your own.
;

Oh, Edith, I actually rarely spend time on these sites. However, I do have about 20 minutes left before getting to the gym, so any more comments are welcome.

Edith Prickly, I actually rarely spend time on these sites. However, I do have about 15 minutes before getting to the gym so any comments during that period are welcome

I apologize for the repeat post. Thought it didn't go through the first time.

I...was congratulating Melissa G for being able to reach a place of well being through mind altering drug use.

I...was congratulating Melissa G for being able to reach a place of well being.

OffMeds, are you really trying to claim that there is no difference in tone between the above two statements? Come on. If you were purely being congratulatory you would not have included the last 5 words.

"I can only go by my personal experience; I was put on prozac when I was 14 years old and started experiencing weird floating sensations and slight hallucinations. My depression got so bad after awhile that I made an almost successful suicide attempt and was diagnosed with Bipolar and treated with lithium, zoloft and risperdal. Things just went from bad to worse. I felt confused a lot of the time, slipped in and out of depressions and got into my fair share of physical fights. The doctors kept tweaking my medications around – depakote, neurontin,lamictal, geodon, abilify, seroquel, zyprexa, ativan, trileptal, haldol… Until I was completely incapacitated."

Do I detect a troll here...who claims he was *treated* with 15 different medications...then received ECT?

He now *claims*...

"And, no – I never had an “adolescent illness”; just some typical adolescent issues. I never called Melissa’s happiness fake – that’s a conclusion you came up with all on your own."

"Typical adolescent issues", eh?

Off Meds,
Can you please elaborate on what you meant by the following:

Could you elaborate on the statement “would not go back to the hell of my pre-medicated emotions for love nor money”? Are you saying that you don’t need love or money to survive in this world? If so, what planet are you living on?

Are you not familiar with the idiom Melissa G used, were you going for some form of joke, was this a sincere (though oddly worded, at least to me) request for information, or what? Thanks.

Well, Narad, psychotropic medications are by definition mind altering drugs since they affect the neurotransmitters of the brain.

This doesn't mean anything. You are positing some sort of "pure" brain state, which doesn't exist. Exercise affects neurotransmission. Your use of "drug induced" is simply perjorative.

AdamG, Once again, Melissa herself attributes her happiness and well being to medications which are drugs. The drugs she uses are mind altering since they affect the neurotransmitters of the brain. I was congratulating her for being able to reach a place of well being and happiness through her choice of drug use. Now, I have to get to the Gym. Farewell everybody!

One more comment before I go back to my life. I am not a man. I am a woman, Lilady. My story is very true and it happens to many people. I'm guessing you all work for Big Pharma. I will leave by saying I refuse to argue with Idiots - that is what I pay my lawyers for.

I actually rarely spend time on these sites. However, I do have about 20 minutes left before getting to the gym, so any more comments are welcome.

Don't forget to practice sticking the flounce.

@off meds

Yawn, the old Pharma shill gambit, a sure sign that you have been lying this whole time and have nothing intelligent to add to the conversation.

Why should we believe a word that you say?

And yes, I have had friends who have been on psychotropic meds, and have had their QOL improve dramatically, so my anecdote trumps yours, troll.

Jeez, point out that someone is starting off a conversation using the wrong tone & they get all uppity....wow.

I’m guessing you all work for Big Pharma.

And I'm guessing you work for Breggin. Two can play the shill game!

Also I always feel the need to post this hilarious video every time the Shill Gambit is so obviously employed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cG8RksCfxcw

Do I detect a troll here…who claims he was *treated* with 15 different medications…then received ECT?

For serious bipolar, it's entirely possible to run the gamut of available agents in various combinations. ECT strikes me as a bit iffy in this regard, although I'm aware that it's sometimes used. What is vastly more iffy is the claim of being "court ordered to undergo 12 ECT treatments." This is a very specific claim. Can a court give permission to administer ECT? Demonstrably in New York and Minnesota, at least, and no doubt others. But the patient has to have been found by a court of law to be incompetent to make decisions concerning their own care. This is a very high bar. The question here is whether a court would order a specific number of such treatments (suggesting that the situation was one of involuntary hospitalization) or whether the authority to authorize them has been delegated to a guardian or conservator.

And...I'm guessing that "Off Meds" is a sock puppet.

My story is very true and it happens to many people.

Forced ECT? No, not really. That's why these cases tend to make the news. In Illinois, in fact, it turns out that court-appointed guardians do not even have the right to approve such treatments without a full court proceeding.

I should not have assumed that you all work for Big Pharma, but based on this thread a am able to make an accurate assumption that Narad and Liladay have nothing better to do than sit in front of their computers everyday/all day. I have a question that might get your panties all up in a bunch - Why is it that the antipsychotic abilify is being advertised to people who are suffering from depression? Furthermore, why do they not mention in the commercials that abilify is in fact an antipsychotic? I apologize in advance if I am unable to immediately reply to anyone's comments - I have to go celebrate my friend's birthday with a little mind altering champagne.

#501 Wow, that is really rude.

Speaking for myself, drugs do not induce "happiness" in me.

They do, however, allow me to distinguish between what is me and what is my illness. I get just as sad as I ever did, but the difference is that now, like those fortunate enough to possess normal brain chemistry, I can still function through it.

I believe my personal testimony is just as valid as yours. This is precisely why science is needed, yes?

The meds that "Off Meds" mentioned really can cause people horrific problems when they are incorrectly prescribed by physicians who don't pay attention to what they are doing or how their prescriptions are affecting their patients.

I am of the opinion that too many people are inappropriately labeled as having a psychiatric illness just because physicians don't know what else to attribute their symptoms. These are important issues that I feel need more attention across the medical field. Closer attention must be paid to the medications being prescribed, their side effects, interactions and adverse reactions.

"Off Meds" is extremely rude, especially towards "Melissa G" as most everyone here has already pointed out. "Melissa G" has every right to make her own informed decisions as to her own health care. She was never rude to "Off Meds" and didn't deserve such rude remarks.

Now, I must go quickly. At last, my monthly check from Big Pharma has arrived. I may have to buy a bigger house or perhaps my own bank, as so much cash is hard to fit in one place. Should I invest in gold? Well, in any case, I'm off to fly my private jet to Europe. I'm in the mood for some nice wine, cheese and crackers. Maybe I'll hire a private hot air balloon and go for a tour. I have plenty of money, Big Pharma has been good to me. (what is the smiley face symbol for disgusted with the BS accusations of people being Pharma Shills?)

Narad: I dunno about the meds- it isn't unusual for an incompetent doctor to pile on the drugs. As for the ECT, I live in MN, and even here ECT is rare enough that I was unaware it was still legal.None of my doctors have ever recomended ECT for me.
Off Meds: Please keep in mind that meds are not sure fire. Just because they didn't work for you or me doesn't mean they aren't a valid line of treatment. I weaned myself off anti-depressants, but that doesn't mean I get a licence to be smug or snide about it.

Narad: I dunno about the meds- it isn’t unusual for an incompetent doctor to pile on the drugs. As for the ECT, I live in MN, and even here ECT is rare enough that I was unaware it was still legal.

PGP, I think I fully acknowledged that I've seen an instance where just about everything has been thrown against a refractory situation. Not all at once, mind you, but over time and, yes, of course, in different combinations. As for ECT, from the hour or so of quick reading that I did, it looks as though Minnesota is one of the states more likely to allow court-mandated ECT.

If you look at the article I linked, it obviously gets more complicated, with Arizona seemingly giving free rein to guardians, but I would strongly reiterate that I do not have anything resembling a state-by-state overview of the law on this subject. I was not surprised that Illinois was raised as a more restrictive example in the Arizona piece, as that's a statute that I've read in detail in the past. In fact, I've praised the likes of Szasz and Laing here for helping to get the ball rolling on much needed legal reforms in the '70s. That doesn't mean I have much patience for long-gone etiological hypotheses or cranks such as CCHR.

I have a question that might get your panties all up in a bunch – Why is it that the antipsychotic abilify is being advertised to people who are suffering from depression?

Aripiprazole is an atypical antipsychotic that can be used as an adjunctive therapy with a regular antidepressant. It seems to have rather interesting binding affinities. Do you have any objection to it other than the presence of the word "antipsychotic"?

I'm still *stuck* on "Off Meds" statement about her mental state that caused her psychiatrist to 15 medications...before she underwent "court-ordered ECT treatments"...in New York no less, 20 years ago.

"And, no – I never had an “adolescent illness”; just some typical adolescent issues. I never called Melissa’s happiness fake – that’s a conclusion you came up with all on your own.”

Feel free now, to stick the flounce Off Meds.

@lilady, "Off Meds" is acting like a real jerk. Are you doubting, however, that a physician in New York would not be so outrageously negligent that they would not prescribe 15 or more medications all at the same time? I hope you realize that this does in fact happen, and in New York, and not even 20 years ago.

Sometimes I feel like many of people that post here are in some zone of rational thinking and behavior that is missing in the rest of the world. lilady, worse things happen in New York medical care, but not being able to provide the evidence at this time and on the Internet makes it very hard to dispute.

@538, ^ Instead of "able", "privy" might be a better choice of words.

My entrance into the world of psychiatry began when I was 14, 21 years ago in NYC, because I was struggling with an eating disorder. After 11 years of being on close to 20 different psychotropic medications prescribed by the best NYC psychiatrists on the upper west side, as well as others at NY Presbyterian Cornell Columbia in Westchester, I was forced to undergo ECT treatments at Lenox Hill Hospital by Dr. Fox, who asserted that I was not responding to all the medication therapy when it was really the meds that were causing all the "symptoms" in the first place. Now, feel free to shut up about about something you know nothing about Lilady - MY LIFE!

Why is it that the antipsychotic ability is being advertised to people who are suffering from depression?

Just guessing now, but major depression is classified as a psychosis.

@lilady, “Off Meds” is acting like a real jerk. Are you doubting, however, that a physician in New York would not be so outrageously negligent that they would not prescribe 15 or more medications all at the same time?

Fifteen psych meds simultaneously? Show me an example, S.

@Off Meds, You came here to this blog to make a point about how you were treated by some doctor. If you can't or won't provide enough of an explanation to people so that they can understand your point, then that's on you. Don't tell people to shut up because you give a lame argument. You were rude to Melissa and commented on her life, which you know nothing about. So who should shut up?

My Post was just removed - I will try again. My entrance into the world of psychiatry began 21 years ago when my parents sent me to a psychiatrist on the Upper West Side here in NYC. Over the course of 11 years I was prescribed close to 20 different psychotropic medications by some of the best psychiatrists in NYC and at New York Presbyterian Cornell Columbia in Westchester. At the age of 25, Dr. Fox at Lenox Hill Hospital here in NYC ordered me to have ECT treatments because he said I was not responding to all the medication. My parents later told me that I went before a judge, but I don't remember because I was so incapacitated. I finally found an ethical psychiatrist who narrowed my medications down to one - Lamictal. And now I am medication free and have never been as happy and high functioning as I am today. Now, feel free to shut up about something you know nothing about Lilady - My Life!

Dear Narad, one day I will. I promise. They weren't all psych meds, but many were, LOTS. More than 15 overall, and across many drug classes, plus other stuff.

S - Is that enough information for you or do you want my social security number so that you can obtain my personal medical records?

After 11 years of being on close to 20 different psychotropic medications prescribed by the best NYC psychiatrists on the upper west side, as well as others at NY Presbyterian Cornell Columbia in Westchester, I was forced to undergo ECT treatments at Lenox Hill Hospital by Dr. Fox

By this account, you were 25 years old at the time and thus could not have been "forced" into ECT had you not been declared incompetent by a court.

"Off Meds" why are you posting comments here? Do you want to make a point of some kind, or just insult people? If you have a problem with a doctor, then you should have filed a complaint or at least attempted to ask someone else for help at the time. Why go off on everyone here and now?

My Post was just removed – I will try again.

Nothing appears to have been removed.

And Just to clarify - I was not on 15 medications at once. I was on close to 20 different psychotropic medications over the course of 11 years.

Yes, Narad, I went before a judge when I was at Lenox Hill Hospital here in NYC. Wow, you people have no hearts or souls... or brains. I gotta get to bed, losers.

@Off Meds, were you violent and threatening others? Why did they force you and declare you incompetent?

Why is it that the antipsychotic ability is being advertised to people who are suffering from depression?

Just guessing now, but major depression is classified as a psychosis.

Not where I come from, HDB. "Psychotic features" are mentioned as an MDD specifier on p. 377 of my DSM-IV (really, under "Mood Disorder NOS," 296.90), but it's nothing intrinsic.

And Just to clarify – I was not on 15 medications at once. I was on close to 20 different psychotropic medications over the course of 11 years.

As I stated earlier, this is not something that I question, given the diagnosis that you advanced.

Yes, Narad, I went before a judge when I was at Lenox Hill Hospital here in NYC. Wow, you people have no hearts or souls… or brains. I gotta get to bed, losers.

You did not clarify this until after I had made a reply to the comment that you later asserted had been "removed." (Apparently, people sometimes people don't see their comments promptly; this is of no consequence.) The main point at the moment is that you pretty much came out of the gate being insulting and appear to be continuing with that theme, despite being treated fairly reasonably.

If you want to revive the discussion about Breggin that has already occurred, or the modern legal status of psychiatric treatment, or indeed psychiatric practice itself, you're going to have to start coherently responding when you get answers to questions that you yourself have asked and drop the failed flounces and "losers" routine.

At first it was 15 drugs that Off Meds was prescribed...and now she says it was 20 drugs...which I assume were not prescribed "all at once".

It certainly wasn't "typical adolescent issues" (eating disorder and "physical fights"), that caused her parents to take her to a psychiatrist for an evaluation. The physician tried various types of psychiatric drugs, before ECT was suggested.

As far as I know, ECT was suggested, because none of the many drugs and no combination of drugs were working to treat her major depression (and/or eating disorder).

No one compelled "Off Meds" to come here and post her smug snide remarks and I suspect she still has "issues" with the people in her life who cared for her during those many years, both before and after her treatment, for her multiple psychiatric diagnoses.

(hint) When you post on other sites, try not to libel the physician who provided care for you, Off Meds.

Narad: Fair enough. I haven't had reason to dig into MN's laws regarding the mentally ill- though in light of Sandy Hook, I really should. It'd be nice to know what laws could be used against me, or what rights the mentally ill have here. (Obligatory disclaimer, I have never been a danger to anyone but myself, but I do not have a trusting nature.)
However, I will say that I know a woman who for a while was taking more meds for her depression than a young man she knew who was taking chemotherapy. So, that's why I initially found Off Med's story a teeny bit credible. As she goes on, I find that I have more doubts.

Narad, before I get to bed, since I do have a lot of important things to do tomorrow, if you look at the thread you will notice that I did state that I was court ordered to go for ect treatments in my first post. This occurred at Lenox Hill Hospital in NYC after being under the care of Dr. Fox who thought I was incompetent of making my own decisions at the time. Perhaps you would like to call Dr. Fox himself and have a conversation about what goes in the hospital where he practices. I believe I have been very coherent in expressing my views and explaining my personal story. I am not a psychiatrist and therefore do not have a DSM readily available to quote definitions of so called unscientifically proven mental disorders.

lilady, your stupidity wants to make me call my lawyer so that he can reply to your comments. I didn't start getting into physical fights until AFTER i was diagnosed with bipolar and put on a cocktail of medications. I never stated the specific number of pscyh meds I was on, I just listed a bunch I knew I was on over the course of 20 years. And yes, a lot of young girls suffer from eating disorders and self image issues. My parents thought that they were doing their best by sending me to a highly recommended psychiatrist in NYC. After all is said and done, they wish they had sent me to a therapist to talk about my issues.

However, I will say that I know a woman who for a while was taking more meds for her depression than a young man she knew who was taking chemotherapy. So, that’s why I initially found Off Med’s story a teeny bit credible. As she goes on, I find that I have more doubts.

Like I said, I don't have doubts about the number of different drugs that might have been prescribed over the course of a decade's worth of treatment for bipolar disorder. Indeed, I don't find the story incredible at all, but I think it's probably lacking some important details.

I don't know what to say about the woman you report on, other than that I hope you're not making any assumptions based on the number of different bottles that might be hanging around.

As for Minnesota, I can dig up the statute for you, but the recent cases that have been in the news have been Ray Sandford and Elizabeth Ellis. Please be very, very careful in vetting the sources if you look into these.

@ Off Meds: Go then and call your lawyer. Make certain you provide your lawyer all the comments you have posted here. I bet (s)he is accustomed to your telephone calls.

@ Narad: A link to a compilation of every State's laws, regulations and procedures for civil committals:

http://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.org/storage/documents/Standards_-_Th…

Narad, before I get to bed, since I do have a lot of important things to do tomorrow, if you look at the thread you will notice that I did state that I was court ordered to go for ect treatments in my first post.

Yes, you did, but it was done in a manner that only served to confuse precisely what you were asserting. Indeed, the issue of where the 12 in "12 ECT treatments" is still somewhat obscure.

This occurred at Lenox Hill Hospital in NYC after being under the care of Dr. Fox who thought I was incompetent of making my own decisions at the time.

You have stated this already, and nobody has disputed it that I've seen.

Perhaps you would like to call Dr. Fox himself and have a conversation about what goes in the hospital where he practices.

This seems like a singularly fruitless suggestion. I will note in passing that Lenox Hill seems to be a fairly swanky joint. Indeed, on second thought, I think I'll return to it below.

I believe I have been very coherent in expressing my views and explaining my personal story.

I'm afraid that I cannot concur with your self-assessment here.

I am not a psychiatrist and therefore do not have a DSM readily available to quote definitions of so called unscientifically proven mental disorders.

I am not a psychiatrist either, nor do I believe that I have attempted to lead anyone to think otherwise. This is not an obstacle to having a couple of DSMs around, and the invocation really had nothing to do with you in the first place.

However, where you will very certainly find conflict with me is if you're going to finally get around to laying down the belief that "so called unscientifically proven mental disorders," which I take to be a clumsy assertion that mental disorders don't exist. You told a story, and I take it that you noticed that I also told a story. There is someone that I care about that would be homeless, in a state institution, or dead if it weren't for psychiatric intervention, so if you try to pull the "it doesn't exist" routine with me, rest assured that I've been familiar with the material since, judging by your own reportage, before you even hit puberty.

Now, I believe that I have been fairly patient here, but this does not seem to have been adequate to your expectations. So let us review some of the foregoing comments that you have advanced. You were treated at Lenox Hill. Your parents told you that you "went before a judge." You have claimed that you need to get "to the gym" and have to go to a party for "a little mind altering champagne." You have twice invoked your "lawyer(s)."

This reads an awful lot to me like someone who is still living off of their parents.

^ "where the 12 in '12 ECT treatments' came from"

@ Narad: A link to a compilation of every State’s laws, regulations and procedures for civil committals

That's OK, but I doubt it's enough to really understand what's going on in any particular state. Just looking at the Illinois section, it doesn't even give a clear view of the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Code, much less the case law or the practicalities. I do not mean to condescend in the slightest, but this is very messy stuff. I perhaps ought not to have offered to dig up the Miinnesota statute.

"lilady, your stupidity wants to make me call my lawyer so that he can reply to your comments. I didn’t start getting into physical fights until AFTER i was diagnosed with bipolar and put on a cocktail of medications. I never stated the specific number of pscyh meds I was on, I just listed a bunch I knew I was on over the course of 20 years."

Check your post # 499 above "Off Meds"; you listed the names of the 15 meds you were on. Check your post # 540 for this "...Being on close to 20 different psychotropic medications.....I was forced to undergo ECT treatments". You weren't "forced"...you had a guardian appointed for you and you don't even remember the civil committal hearing.

"And yes, a lot of young girls suffer from eating disorders and self image issues. My parents thought that they were doing their best by sending me to a highly recommended psychiatrist in NYC. After all is said and done, they wish they had sent me to a therapist to talk about my issues."

So, it was an "insignificant" eating disorder and/or self-image (body dysmorphic disorder), eh...and not just "the usual adolescent issues"?

Your still questioning why your parents sent you to a psychiatrist...when, as you claim, a "therapist" to talk about your issues, would have sufficed.

Perhaps a short stay in a State psychiatric center twenty years ago, would make you appreciate how your parents were supportive of you and supported you financially, for all the adult years you required treatment.

@ Narad: I've attended civil commitment hearings held in a State Psychiatric Center and I've seen patients in State and privately-run psychiatric units. I've even seen one ECT treatment where the patient himself agreed to the treatment, because of his very deep depression. It was not comparable to what has been portrayed in movies.

Ooops, we cross posted at each other.

Involuntary committal is a "messy" (and complicated) procedure, because of patients' rights. It's a downright awful experience for a parent or sibling to make a decision to try and get their loved one into a treatment facility.

Involuntary committal is a “messy” (and complicated) procedure, because of patients’ rights.

And not just for that reason, but as I'm tired and have delved into matters that involve other people (as well as myself, of course; it can be a frustrating balacing act), I think it would be best if I laid off.

Why is it whenever someone comes to argue about psychiatric meds, they turn up with anecdotes and not data?

@Off Meds

Why is it that the antipsychotic abilify is being advertised to people who are suffering from depression? Furthermore, why do they not mention in the commercials that abilify is in fact an antipsychotic?

Yet another assumption you make is that all of us live where you live and have the same advertising standards as you. Here in Australia these things aren't marketed on TV.

Now, feel free to shut up about about something you know nothing about Lilady – MY LIFE!

To be fair, you're the one who came here and started posting personal info. If you didn't want it questioned, you shouldn't post it. You also seem to think that personal anecdotes shouldn't be questioned: they should, and we're on a science blog, so even moreso it will be questioned.

Yes, Narad, I went before a judge when I was at Lenox Hill Hospital here in NYC. Wow, you people have no hearts or souls… or brains

Or, they're asking you questions in order to understand your comments and put it into context with the larger issue: that is, of psychiatric meds being useful for most people.

And great job of ignoring and dismissing the numerous people here - myself included - who have mental health issues and experiences of their own. Especially when all of us would admit that psychiatry is far from perfect and that we all have concerns over the laws and freedoms to make our own choices.

I am not a psychiatrist and therefore do not have a DSM readily available to quote definitions of so called unscientifically proven mental disorders.

Aaaand now the victim blaming comes out... I refer you again to my first sentence of this comment.

lilady, your stupidity wants to make me call my lawyer so that he can reply to your comments.

Threatening law suits is certainly no way to win friends here.

My parents thought that they were doing their best by sending me to a highly recommended psychiatrist in NYC. After all is said and done, they wish they had sent me to a therapist to talk about my issues.

This is a legitimate criticism and probably if you take a breath, we could all talk about it in a reasonable manner. Everyone here I guarantee you is just trying their best to understand your circumstances and your viewpoint.

It certainly wasn’t “typical adolescent issues” (eating disorder and “physical fights”), that caused her parents to take her to a psychiatrist for an evaluation.

I know of a child who years ago was taken to a primary care physician and prescribed powerful psychiatric medications such as anti-psychotics, for much less than an eating disorder or depression. I am just not in a position to name names, discuss specifics or upload medical records. What is the best way to participate in conversations as this without being able/privy to provide such documentation?

As far as I know, ECT was suggested, because none of the many drugs and no combination of drugs were working to treat her major depression (and/or eating disorder).

"Off Meds" stated that she was forced by court order to undergo a series of ECT. Should an adult suffering from MDD or an eating disorder be forced to undergo ECT for such diagnoses? Should anyone, regardless of their diagnosis or their crime (aside from "Off Meds") be "forced" to receive ECT for any reason? If any one other than the patient is making decisions about their medical care, then it is not the patient's decision, and the patient may very likely have little say in such decisions or even have their objections noted in their records.

I really should. It’d be nice to know what laws could be used against me, or what rights the mentally ill have here.

Aside from "Off Meds'" story, it's not always about the law, but about having the wrong person PO'd/angry at you, and then having physicians or others believe their interpretation of events and case history rather than yours. It could also be about fear. People fear what they don't understand, and make allegations and draw conclusions tainted by those fears. Their recall of past events may be skewed due to their fears and emotions, and when those people are in a position of authority or have a lot to lose if their own true actions or behavior became known, then they may do anything in their power to stop it, which could include attempting to have someone wrongfully diagnosed or even committed.

My parents thought that they were doing their best by sending me to a highly recommended psychiatrist in NYC. After all is said and done, they wish they had sent me to a therapist to talk about my issues.

Sometimes parents make the wrong decisions, and not everyone should become a parent in the first place. Good intentions do not necessarily make for a good parent. I'm very sorry you have suffered so much.

"Off Meds", I find your story credible. You are angry about what has happened to you and that anger seems to be coming across in your tone and choice of language. Do your best to not get angry at people who do not fully understand or who may question your story. You have a powerful forum here, please don't blow your opportunity to make a difference by throwing around insults.

@ S: No one asked "Off Meds" to come here and insult another poster and she persisted telling us her anecdotal snippets of her psychiatric history.

We simply do not know what precipitated her involuntary committal...her parents had to tell her the circumstances. At any time she could have just stopped posting. She posted so many disjointed comments and failed to realize that she named the 15 medications that had been tried on her ("not together"), but over a period of years.

She is clueless how fortunate she was that her parents were supportive of her by providing private (and hugely expensive) care for her mental problems...which she now minimizes...for all the years that they did.

I personally don't want to see her come back to post here, because this is not a *group therapy* site.

@lilady, I don't think she "failed to realize that she named the 15 medications that had been tried on her (“not together”), but over a period of years." She offered a sample list of the medications she was taking. Her sentence even ended with an ellipsis, suggesting that there were more medications than the one's listed.

I agree that we don't know what precipitated her involuntary committal.

She is clueless how fortunate she was that her parents were supportive of her by providing private (and hugely expensive) care for her mental problems…which she now minimizes…for all the years that they did.

Some psychiatrists have been found guilty of some really horrific acts and have long histories of improperly diagnosing patients and over-medicating them. Just because a parent has good intentions and sends a child to a hugely expensive, private facility does not mean that the quality of care was appropriate or sound. It is not until patients complain, and oftentimes very publicly, that such injustices become known. When such patients do complain publicly, they are likely to meet with fierce resistance.

She seems to acknowledge that her parents did have good intentions and only wanted to help her. I don't see her faulting them for that. It seems that even they may have realized that they made the wrong decision and should have sent her to counseling instead. I don't see how this minimizes their efforts, as it just acknowledges that they now know that they made a big mistake. Money, leading medical facilities, and more physician-patient time do not necessarily buy quality medical care, but you could have never convinced me of that years ago.

True, this is not a group therapy site, but I have seen 'therapy' done here before. She blew it here with the insults.

"Now, I believe that I have been fairly patient here, but this does not seem to have been adequate to your expectations. So let us review some of the foregoing comments that you have advanced. You were treated at Lenox Hill. Your parents told you that you “went before a judge.” You have claimed that you need to get “to the gym” and have to go to a party for “a little mind altering champagne.” You have twice invoked your “lawyer(s).”

This reads an awful lot to me like someone who is still living off of their parents."

Right, Narad, because anyone who talks to their parents, goes to the gym, has a social life and a lawyer MUST still be living off their parents. Just like anyone who is up all day and night responding to every comment on this thread MUST be a psychiatrist who's constantly doing lines of crushed adderal off is/her DSM. AS I said in an earlier post, I refuse to argue with idiots - that is what I pay my lawyers for. Gotta get back to work.

And yet, Off Meds, you keep coming back. Rationale?

AS I said in an earlier post, I refuse to argue with idiots – that is what I pay my lawyers for. Gotta get back to work.

So that's how many flounces in less than 12 hours? The patience that other commenters have shown with you is admirable, but I'm not buying the story as presented. You show up on a two-month old thread to post a suspiciously well-rehearsed testimonial conversion story history of being put on multiple medications, shill for a book by an "expert" with dubious credentials but stellar PR skills, snipe at the first person who responds to you and continue to snipe while protesting that you are far too busy and important to answer anyone's (perfectly legitimate) questions. Textbook troll behaviour, IOW. If you've truly got better things to do than post here, why do you keep coming back?

OffMeds, you asked the following question:

Why is it that the antipsychotic abilify is being advertised to people who are suffering from depression? Furthermore, why do they not mention in the commercials that abilify is in fact an antipsychotic?

You received the following response:

Aripiprazole is an atypical antipsychotic that can be used as an adjunctive therapy with a regular antidepressant. It seems to have rather interesting binding affinities. Do you have any objection to it other than the presence of the word “antipsychotic”?

Do you intend to follow this up, or was the original question a nonquestion?

Wow. OffMeds is a real testimony to the success of the psychotherapy industry.

Yup, Marc, Just as Viktor Frankl is a real testimony to the success of the Holocaust.

Wow, an entirely unironic Godwin! Rare these days.

@Adam - wow, off the deep end without an expletive-filled diatribe first....I'm impressed.

AdamG, I was not familiar with Godwin and his argument for a person who is inflicted by a very lonely internet addiction (wonder what they will be prescribing for that condition soon?) since this is actually my first time posting comments online. I prefer to socialize face to face. But just looked him up - interesting; I'll remember that. Well, I'm done with my workday - off to the Gym here in the Big Apple!

Pretty sure you still have no clue what a Godwin is.

Well, I’m done with my workday – off to the Gym here in the Big Apple!

Why do you keep repeating this? Nobody cares.
Thanks for the super interesting information that you're in the Big Apple though, I was like totally unable to see your location listed as New York in all of your other inane comments.

Keep on flouncin' :)

It's reeeally starting to smell like dirty socks in here. Off Meds is sounding a lot like the pothead troll used to when he would try to evade the ban hammer by assuming a new identity and pretending he'd never posted here before.

Wow, an entirely unironic Godwin!

I don't know that that's technically a Godwin. What I do know it that it's searingly ironic.

What I do know it that it’s searingly ironic.

Oh, for sure. By 'unironic Godwin' I guess I really meant 'sudden holocaust analogy deployed by someone apparently oblivious to Godwin's Law'

Oh, look - you're all still here. So I was correct in my assertion that you're all internet addicted losers. Thanks for giving me and my man something to laugh about over dinner. Oh crap! I'm bouncing the flounce again! Better go before I stick my laptop in my mouth and make another unironic or an even worse searingly ironic Godigidy!

Oh, look – you’re all still here.

So are you, genius.

So I was correct in my assertion that you’re all internet addicted losers.

And, apparently, in addition to being unable to follow a conversation that you yourself initiated, you're just hanging around to offer incredibly stupid insults.

@Off Meds - I was going to ask someone to tone it down a notch, assuming that there had been a colossal misunderstanding, that people had said things a little too forcefully, and that people were writing at cross purposes. However, I can't find anything in your most recent message besides a desire to just be a jerk. And I'm sad and disappointed about that. I'd hoped for something better.

There are plenty of jerks in this world; why do you have to be one too?

sigh - I meant "I was going to ask everyone..." in my previous.

Off Meds:

At least you've confirmed that psychiatry has nothing to offer the insufferable jackass.

So Off Meds came here to have a conversation about psychiatry and decided to ignore reasonable questions and comments and instead go straight into ridiculous banter. What a waste of a perfectly good opportunity to engage in an interesting discussion of the pitfalls and benefits of the current mental health system.

I was going to ask [everyone] to tone it down a notch, assuming that there had been a colossal misunderstanding, that people had said things a little too forcefully, and that people were writing at cross purposes.

She only seems to have two points, which she promptly demonstrated herself to have no interest in discussing in anything resembling an intelligent fashion. The first is this:

Based on my personal experience and the stories of others, psychotropic medications destroy lives in the same way street drugs such as cocaine, crack and heroin do.

The second is that psychiatric disorders don't actually exist.

(Well, and that, apparently, anybody with a serious mental illness could be just like her were they only to see the light.)

Thanks for giving me and my man something to laugh about over dinner.

So you and your man find it humorous that you comment on an Internet blog and immediately begin demeaning Melissa about her personal choice in medical care? The insults that you have made to other people here are funny?

I thought that you didn't like the way you had been treated in the past. Did people make you feel worthless, treat you like sh!t? Like your opinion and your decisions weren't important and you just didn't matter? Huh, little girl? If that's the case, why do you think it is acceptable for you to go around and insult other people and treat them like crap too? You came here to start a fight and you got one. Good for you. So funny.

Off-topic: S, did you ever look into Tor or any of the other privacy suggestions?

@Narad, I did look into them. I settled on choosing Tor, but I am heeding your advice and need to read more about it before installing it. I've been preoccupied with other things lately and have not been able to do anything with it yet. Mostly, I don't want to install any software that might mess up my computer and cause me to have to do a reinstall. I forgot to thank you and the others here for the suggestions. Thank you :-)

Thanks for giving me and my man something to laugh about over dinner.

OOOH BURN, there's an imaginary boyfriend who thinks we're all losers too! Is he a really, really, really ridiculously good-looking supermodel who also runs a school for kids who want to learn to read real good?

Why do you keep repeating this? Nobody cares.
Thanks for the super interesting information that you’re in the Big Apple though, I was like totally unable to see your location listed as New York in all of your other inane comments.

Clearly Off Meds does not really live in New York but wants us to think so, for reasons known only to him/her/itself.

So Off Meds came here to have a conversation about psychiatry

I see nothing to indicate that. The insults and flouncing started immediately after the initial post, which says to me it came here to pick a fight with the skeptics. It's a troll.

#579 "a person who is inflicted by a"

You mean "afflicted."

@Edith

Betcha he's French.

The insults and flouncing started immediately after the initial post, which says to me it came here to pick a fight with the skeptics. It's a troll.

I'm more of the slightly different "I wanted to throw my weight around interpretation.

I’m more of the slightly different “I wanted to throw my weight around interpretation.

She's angry because we didn't immediately agree with her and she won't or isn't able to explain herself without the insults, so she needs to act superior.

I'm struck by how often we see people overgeneralizing from too little data, often from a sample size of just one. Whether it's a brain cancer patient surviving after being treated with antineoplastons, a person who feels that psych medication did them more harm than good, or someone who believes that all white men are sexual predators, it's the same pattern we see repeating over and over. This human tendency might have kept us alive on the African savannah, but it certainly seems to cause us problems in the modern world.

Krebs: case in point I see that your Mayor is trying to get rid of your beloved urban foxes. Please give them some extra chicken for me!

sheepmilker,

Please give them some extra chicken for me!

Consider it done; hopefully it will make them less likely to snack on human babies. It was an alarming incident but, as you suggest, extremely rare. I also find it hard to understand how a fox gained access to a small child, especially given the recent cold weather. We haven't had a window open in months and my wife is a fresh air fiend.

What ever happened to "Melissa G"? Did she OD on all her happy pills? Or is she really "Narad" or "Edith Dickly" or perhaps the wife of "AdamG" ? Oh, I'm such a bouncing flouncing godigity trolling jackass who only wishes I were from New York. I'm actually really glad I decided to post - this is all very entertaining.

@ Krebiozen:

Well, I hope that the long arm of the law does not grab YOUR foxes.

So far, ours are strictly suburban, residing in and around parks with wooded areas. My friend and ex, respectively, observe and feed their own little friends in their respective ends of the park that extends alongside river.

There was a great effort to spay and neuter feral cats: this is lamented by another gentleman who lost his cherished 'Sheila' to an unobservant driver.. no replacement thus far.

What ever happened to “Melissa G”? Did she OD on all her happy pills? Or is she really “Narad” or “Edith Dickly” or perhaps the wife of “AdamG” ? Oh, I’m such a bouncing flouncing godigity trolling jackass who only wishes I were from New York. I’m actually really glad I decided to post – this is all very entertaining.

@Off Meds, you should print out your responses here and discuss them with your psychotherapist. It might be helpful for him/her to understand how you express yourself and handle conflict. I had some empathy for you in the beginning regarding your allegations that you were over-medicated, but seeing the way you are treating Melissa is despicable. Get some help and leave her alone.

BTW - thanks for the tips on Tor. I will be installing it shortly - after all, I wouldn't want anyone to gain knowledge of my very secret, remote location and all the websites I visit, or anything else on my computer.

@ S: I told her up thread when she *threatened* to call her lawyer, to go ahead and do it...and make certain to email her/him all her nasty bullsh!t that she has posted here. I'm certain she calls her lawyer all the time.

Time to put "Off Meds" in the Ignore Bin.

OffMeds @604

What ever happened to “Melissa G”?

I imagine she has no desire to interact with anyone who has been as rude to her as you have been.

"S" - Thanks for the advice. I will print this thread and discuss it with my psychotherapist. In fact, I'll keep a hard copy of it on my person at all times as a constant reminder of how I handle conflict. Well, gotta flounce off to lunch!

We need new trolls. This one even makes DJT look interesting.

@flip - yes, the self-aggrandizing arrogance & moronic tone is quite boring....

Remote location in the Big Apple?
By the way, I am someone who could have sympathy, except for the tone of the comments. A family member was admitted to a psychiatric hospital due to medication problems. Said family member is on different meds and doing fine. I understand the point, but not the tone.

#606 @S

You know, I'm starting to think she's just been lying from start to finish. I think it's likely that a person who has actually been mentally ill would have more sympathy for others who have suffered.

@Khani, "a person who has actually been mentally ill" -- perhaps the problem is that you should be using the present tense.

@Khani, I really do not believe that she is lying. I think she is very angry about how she has been mistreated and expects people, even strangers on the Internet, to believe her story. When her story was questioned, instead of explaining it, she became defensive and gave an outburst of anger followed by accusations. That was then fueled by other comments, and it took off from there. She dug into Michelle at first because she couldn't accept that someone could have a positive experience with medications when she had not. Michelle's honest and straight-forward comment did not validate the harm Off Meds feels has been done to her.

It seems like she has been mistreated, or at least she believes that she has been mistreated. Clearly, she is lacking some communication skills on how to deal with difficult situations. All in all, it is a learning process to come out of difficult situations like hers, I would imagine. I've never had ECT or known anyone who has. In any case, I believe her. I've seen similar reactions to similar situations in person many times. I think it is hard for people to realize that not everyone is always out to 'attack' them, but sometimes people listening need to ask questions in order to understand any given situation better. It's hard to appreciate that when one comes from a very dysfunctional environment where emotional or even physical attacks are the norm. You brace yourself after every spoken word, and attack first. It's like emotional survival. I would guess that Denice could explain this better.

I explained my story in my very first post. I became angry when people began accusing me of lying. I never, nor would ever, accuse anyone of lying - especially someone I do not know - unless there was hard evidence. I have suffered an extreme amount at the hands of psychiatrists who over medicated me and electroshocked me, but clearly no one here has any sympathy for that or wants to even hear that. I think it is only human nature to get angry when others are making false accusations towards you. I apologize if my tone was too harsh at times - People tend to have a bit of a tough attitude where I'm from. I sincerely wish everyone a happy and healthy Valentine's day. I might be flouncing now, but I'm still not even sure what that means - like I said, I'm new to this. Again, Happy Valentines Day :)

@Off Meds, you gave a lengthy description of your suffering. That is an anecdote. Melissa G responded,

While I extend my empathy and condolences for the pain you went through, Off Meds, my experience was completely the reverse– I am well and happy now that I am medicated, and would not go back to the hell of my pre-medicated emotions for love nor money.

She did not deny your suffering; she did not argue with you or call you a liar; she merely gave her own anecdote, just as valid as yours, and you immediately insulted her:

Congratulations on your drug induced happiness, Melissa G. Could you elaborate on the statement “would not go back to the hell of my pre-medicated emotions for love nor money”? Are you saying that you don’t need love or money to survive in this world? If so, what planet are you living on?

You were not reacting to someone else; there were no other comments in between. You just decided to gratuitously insult her. That set the pattern for the conversation, so you really should not be surprised that other people were less than friendly to you initially. Your responses of course fully confirmed the bad impression you made initially.

^ @616, substitute "Melissa" for "Michelle". Sorry about that, Melissa G.

Oh, please - I asked her to elaborate. Why was her life a living hell before she was able to reach a state of happiness and well being through medications? She never explained her story but then I immediately got attacked and was accused of lying by so many others. I did not insult her. I asked her to elaborate in a very typical Brooklynese tone. Oh great, now everyone knows I'm from Brooklyn. Again, I did not mean to insult anyone, but I understand that some people are more sensitive than others. I apologize if I hurt Melissa's feelings.

Isn't it *odd* that I located a 2002 thread that discusses a particularly vicious troll who used the 'nym "Off Meds". That "Off Meds" person was located in Las Vegas, Nevada.

I noticed for a few days that this thread came back active but it's been a week I've been off RI.

@ Off meds,

I've been on treatment from 2 psychiatrists, the first one adverse to medication overprescription but with a wrong diagnostic so he ended up prescribing the canadian version of depakote for bipolar disorder (my real diagnostic is post-traumatic stress disorder but he never diagnosed me as such).

The second psychiatrist do research on medication for schizophrenia and he's on call for when doctors need advices on cocktail of medication, be it psychiatric or not. His most recent case study was the medication of a client doing chemotherapy and he was called on to prescribe medication which would not interfere with her chemotherapy.

Both doctors have PhDs in addition to their MDs but the first one is a machine to diagnose autism case and he's just about perfect to do that, just that the rest of his practice lies in the 60's and really pales in comparison to the second....the second doctor has his PhD in medication studies (don't remember exactly which field, they're both french natives but it must pharmacology or a similar field).

My point is, I'm taking a cocktail of medication, but there's no overprescribing. Period. but my concern is that there's a real need of guidelines in prescription practices and also medication weaning practice and doctors shouldn't need a PhD in pharmacology to be effective prescribers but sadly, I have the best experience with them.

I want to be a doctor too and have been considering (so far) psychiatry, surgery (neuro), or radiology. You might notice that they're in increasing scale of science with the latest two heavily science based but as far as psychiatry goes, it's not as science-based as the rest of medicine is (I failed to find a weaning protocol to wash out medication effect on pubmed despite hours of searching) and unfortunately, I have no science-based advice given your medication load because my course in brain physiology never included information about medication and I don't have any course on medical physiology to be able to give an informed opinion.

Alain

Oh, please – I asked her to elaborate.

You "asked her to elaborate" immediately following a direct insult, and your putative question was completely incoherent unless further interpreted as another insult.

Wow, you've got a lot of time on your hands, Lilady. Never been to Vegas myself, but I guess there's some one there who also decided to go off his/her meds.

@ lilady,

The 2002 thread, where it is?

Thanks

Alain

Alain - cool. I suggest you keep up with your studies and reach for the stars. Sounds like you're a very ambitious person - I respect that, bro. Truly.

Alain, I personally have had wonderful experiences with surgeons and radiologist (I had malignant melanoma 5 years ago) Psychiatrists not so much. But that's only my own personal experience.

I want to be a doctor too and have been considering (so far) psychiatry, surgery (neuro), or radiology.

Alain, that first choice is a noble one, but it's frustrating as hell. I think I've mentioned this before, but a couple of years ago, I ran into an old college acquaintance who had burnt out on geriatrics. When I asked him what he was retraining for, it was psychiatry. All I could muster was an offer of good luck.

Have you thought about something with a little bit less odds of grinding you down?

Alain - I personally have had wonderful experiences with surgeons and radiologists (I had malignant melanoma 5 years ago). Psychiatrists not so much. But that's my own personal experience.

You're right, Narad. It doesn't seem like psychiatrists really enjoy their work - based on my experience, they always seem a bit cold. I dated a radiologist for a while who loved his work and found it very rewarding.

@ Narad,

Radiology seem to be the best fit for me based on my experience in neuroimaging (off meds: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=alain+toussaint if you're curious). I have the desire to help and I know it's possible with psychiatry (well, my doctor does it but I make that easy in my case...) but it seem that peoples need to want to change if their doctors are actually able to help them, otherwise, we're just powerless (even with involuntary commitment...)

Alain

You’re right, Narad. It doesn’t seem like psychiatrists really enjoy their work – based on my experience, they always seem a bit cold. I dated a radiologist for a while who loved his work and found it very rewarding.

Do me a favor and quit trying to pretend that your history here can magically be distracted out of existence. Try addressing this for a start.

Wow, Narad. You get so angry so easily. And you seem to know so much about psychiatry for someone who claims he isn't a psychiatrist. I knew a girl who was only on Abilify to treat her depression and I do find the advertisements misleading. Does that answer your question?

And, pursuant to #632, don't try to put words in my mouth. I wasn't making any assertion about whether "psychiatrists really enjoy their work," I was stating that, akin to geriatrics, it's hard.

I knew a girl who was only on Abilify to treat her depression and I do find the advertisements misleading. Does that answer your question?

No, it does not answer the question in the slightest. And I'm not angry. Perhaps this is a word that you use by default for other perceptions.

I was not at all trying to put words into your mouth. Where did you get that from? I simply stated that based on my experience with several, they do not seem to enjoy their work as much as surgeons and radiologist - referring to Alain's posts about his career aspirations.

I was not at all trying to put words into your mouth. Where did you get that from? I simply stated that based on my experience with several

Perhaps you have forgotten the prefatory "You’re right, Narad" before advancing your own story.

Like I said, Alain. Respect. And it sounds like you may have had some things in your life that needed to be changed and you were able to recognize that. Are you taking any other medications other than Depakote? I was on that in my early 20's and it made me severely nauseous.

Sorry, Narad. Perhaps I misinterpreted what you were saying. It happens.

Off meds:

I was weaned off the depakote (never had any issues with it except lack of focus or concentration) but currently, I'm taking five meds, one for the thyroid gland, one for ADD, the rest for psychiatric problem but I will get weaned off from them in the next few years. Never had any nausea regarding meds.

Alain

@ Alain: I would be very careful responding to "Off Meds" and providing her with any personal medical history.

@ lilady, Ok.

Alain, Can I ask why you will be weaned off of them in a few years?

Alain, I also experienced lack of focus and concentration as a side effect of many meds I was on - for me, that was a pretty big issue since I prefer to be alert.

Alain, Can I ask why you will be weaned off of them in a few years?

Because I'm in remission, I won't need them anymore (except for the thyroid gland and maybe the ADD medication).

Alain

Sorry in advance if this is posting twice. It didn't seem to post the first time. Anyway, Alain. I too experienced lack of focus and concentration as side effects of many meds I was on. And for me it was a big issue since I prefer to be alert.

Alain - Interesting, in all my years as a psych patient I never heard the term remission used. Maybe psychiatry is different here. Well, I wish you all the best.

@ Alain: My friend's son was on Depakene syrup (he couldn't swallow capsules), as treatment for a difficult-to-control seizure disorder.

He had some breakthrough Lennox-Gasteux seizures during the ten years he was taking the medication. Just at the time my friend's father was about to undergo serious surgery, her son developed hives and the Depakene had to be withdrawn immediately (in the hospital).

Dilatin Infatabs (Phenytoin), were substituted along with Lorazapam which prevented multiple seizures (for about 18 months), when he went into status epilepticus. I cared for him in the hospital and just before the "seizure team" at the childrens hospital was about to suggest general anesthesia to (hopefully) stop the seizures, I suggested a trial on Mysoline (Primidone), and he received a loading dose. Within a few hours the hundreds of seizures per day he was experiencing lessened, and within 12 hours they stopped.

Now, Dilantin and Mysoline are not "supposed" to be effective treatments for Lennox-Gasteux seizures, but that regimen has been in place for him for more than 20 years.

(Yes, the control of seizures for some children is a *crap shoot*)

@ Alain: I would be very careful responding to “Off Meds” and providing her with any personal medical history.

I concur, Alain. You represent nothing but a tool of perceived opportunity for her.

@ lilady,

How did your nursing courses prepared you to make that suggestion?

@ Narad,

Got it and I knew it; I was prepared to be used as tool of opportunity but all I advocated was SBM as my current doctor practice it and I am one case where the doctor did well (same for Melissa G) and the treatment worked.

Alain

@ Alain: Nursing courses? No. "On the job training", caring for my son who had a severe grand mal and psychomotor seizure disorder.

For the first six years of his life, his seizures were extremely difficult to control, in spite of 4 potent anti-convulsant medications that were titrated every few days. I made *friends* with the director of a medical laboratory who would run the sophisticated serum blood level testing, whenever my son was in seizure crisis and whenever he was hospitalized. (The hospitals at that time (1976-1982), were not equipped to run those tests and would send his serum to a research center for testing). I also had his neurologist contact the director of that research center who did not see patients, but he agreed to meet with me.

When you have children who have partially controlled or uncontrolled seizures, you become quite knowledgeable about anti-convulsants and their interactions/serum therapeutic ranges.

I'll catch you later Alain, and good night. :-)

Ah, I can't sleep. Narad - How dare you call Alain a tool. How rude - I suggest you apologize.

I think Alain is a very nice person and I was just trying to have a conversation with him. Sure he needs to work on his English a bit, just like I have to work on my attitude, but people can't help where they're from.

No Little Lady - please don't flounce now. I just woke up and was looking forward to all your lil-insults.

Ah, I can’t sleep. Narad – How dare you call Alain a tool. How rude – I suggest you apologize.

Either you're straight-up troll or unable to read, johnnycakes.

Twas Big Pharma that led me to start posting here. BIG PHARMA!!

I prefer pancakes

Twas Big Pharma that led me to start posting here - BIG PHARMA!!! Blame them!

I prefer pancakes

If you put your finely honed mind to it, you might figure out why I chose that term.

I truly believe that you know you're doing okay if you can always laugh at yourself. I've also noticed that Shrinky-dinks seem to be lacking in the sense of humor department.

Why don't my messages post the first time? I'll try again - I truly believe that you know you're doing okay if you can always laugh at yourself. I've also noticed that Shrinky-dinks seem to be lacking in the sense of humor department.

Oh -now it's posting

How dare you call Alain a tool. How rude – I suggest you apologize.

I feel the need to revisit this. Indeed, one might suspect that saying such a thing as I did to someone who is well known, well respected for openness, and well liked might be considered a form of condescension.

I offer the following as apology.*

* Yes, I know there are technical issues. I'm about to keel over.

Wow, Narad - I can see you have trouble controlling your violent outbursts. Perhaps you should try Haldol? I'm keeling over as well.

Twas BIG PHARMA, I tell ya! BIG PHARMA!!!!

Wow, Narad – I can see you have trouble controlling your violent outbursts.

And I see that you don't understand French or have any knowledge of 1970s cultural icons.

Holy Moley, did 'off meds' find solace in another form of psychotropic medication? Perhaps in the form of fermented grape juice or perhaps something a little more illegal? Makes me pine for the old trolls who were consistently confused and one note.

Narad, your last post was #666 - Are you the Devil incarnate? Twas Big Pharma that led me to this site! Why?! Why?!

However, given that you've now invoked haloperidol, I'm still waiting on a coherent answer to this. As you have instead attempted to broaden the field, I would ask that you compare and contrast the mechanisms of action between the agents that you have trotted out.

Because, it's surely not as though you're just bobbing for words that you've never given a moment's serious thought to, right?

Narad, your last post was #666 – Are you the Devil incarnate?

If you wish, sure. The perceived world is the unconscious mind, if you want the advanced summary.

Narad, I guess you're just not as witty as I am. If you don't get it, then you simply don't get it. Like I said, I truly do believe that you know you're doing okay if you can always laugh at yourslef.

Like I said, I truly do believe that you know you’re doing okay if you can always laugh at yourslef.

I take it this includes chuckling idiotically at one's own cleverness while sending off insulting remarks to unknown people in a forum that one has randomly decided to invade.

I don't need to be told about how the perceieved world relates to the unconscious mind - I once had a very bad trip on trileptal. And I was just kidding about the Devil thing - evil is very rare these days and you seem to be a really nice guy who's genuinely concerned about the wellfare of others.

I've been insulted on here far more times than I have insulted anyone else. What can I say - I'm a fighter. A true survivor. Must be in my blood - after all I've been through I should be dead or in an insane asylum for life.

Evidently Off Meds is one of those who believes she can be as nasty, spiteful, and unpleasant as she wishes and then avoid the natural response to her behavior by whining that "it's just a joke, can't you laugh at yourself the way I'm laughing at you?"

I’ve been insulted on here far more times than I have insulted anyone else.

Tally it up, in detail. You're the one that came right off the rail with an insult and hasn't been able to let up. Or get around to answering some of the straightforward questions that resulted from your own remarks rather than patting yourself on the head.

Read through the thread again - I've answered all of the straightforward questions, some multiple times because the same questions were being asked over and over again. And it looks like anyone who has come to this thread with a story of how psych meds have harmed them or a loved one is immediately shot down.

Off Meds says, "I’ve been insulted on here far more times than I have insulted anyone else". Partly that's because she interprets anything other than fervent agreement as an insult -- witness her insults to Melissa G who did nothing but respond to her anecdote with another anecdote -- and partly because each of her rude, spiteful, and unpleasant comments were responded to by a number of other commenters, as naturally occurs on a forum, her nastiness was reflected back on her, multiplied.

Sorry - has been immediately shot down.

Read through the thread again – I’ve answered all of the straightforward questions

Not only have you completely failed to answer a very straightforward question about Abilify, you have tried to muddy the waters by tossing in Haldol. Perhaps it is you who should read through the thread again.

Still stuck on Mel, huh? I already apologized for hurting her feelings - I truly did not mean for my tone to be so offensive, but I understand that some people are more sensitiev than others.

I feel that I did answer that question to the best of my ability - am I the only one laughing here? God, I love laughing...

sensitiev - I meant sensitive. That was my french typing.

Whether you like me or not you gotta admit, I'm funny.

@Off Meds, your totally uncalled-for insults to Melissa G were just the beginning. You followed up by calling every commenter a pharma shill, suggested you were going to call your lawyer on lilady or the commenters in general, and then said all the commenters are "internet addicted losers". And that's just through comment #584.

@Off Meds: "Whether you like me or not you gotta admit, I’m funny."

Not even remotely.

@Narad, Thanks for the video, great way to start the morning (way too early: 8:14am....)

Alain

What can I say – I’m a fighter. A true survivor. Must be in my blood – after all I’ve been through I should be dead or in an insane asylum for life.

Off Meds - You may be a "fighter", but is seems that you enjoy it - fighting. Of course, that's your choice, if you want to live your life fighting everyone who holds an opinion different to yours. Referring to your snide remark to Melissa G is a good example of picking a fight and trying to demean her when she was utmost polite, honest and straight-forward with you. Keep treating people like that, and you will have to keep fighting. I would have had more respect for you if you had stated that you intentionally made that remark to her because you were angry, and admitted and apologized for your behavior, instead of trying to excuse it as your sense of humor.

@Off Meds

. I have suffered an extreme amount at the hands of psychiatrists who over medicated me and electroshocked me, but clearly no one here has any sympathy for that or wants to even hear that.[...]And it looks like anyone who has come to this thread with a story of how psych meds have harmed them or a loved one is immediately shot down.

Then you either ignored or didn't understand my post to you, nor anybody else's.

You also didn't come here to post a story about your life, you came here with the intention of telling people meds are useless for mental health issues. This is a science blog, so naturally the regulars here will debate any point of you which involves the science of medications.

I agree with the others, you simply launched into a tirade without much to provoke it. And then got bored of waiting for people to respond to your idiotic trolling.

Sigh... I'm seriously missing Squidymus now. Don't you hate that, you only like them once they're gone?

Whether you like me or not you gotta admit, I’m funny.

No, just incredibly unimaginative and dull.

... Someone please post the link to the 2002 thread because I can't find it.

Funny? No,
Off meds seems to assume that she is owed something because she had bad experiences with members of the medical community. If so what she is owed is due from the doctors by whom she was ill-treated and not the commenters here.
She is not the only one who has had to endure suffering in this life. That is why the earth is not called heaven. It happens to all of us.

#689 is in moderation... too many darn links!

I asked her to elaborate in a very typical Brooklynese tone. Oh great, now everyone knows I’m from Brooklyn.

Interesting. Sh*tznoxeplainia/Fear Fraud & Force's initial post @458 shows Bronx, NY as the location. FFF disappears for a couple of weeks, then another obnoxious twit from New York with a strangely similar conversational style shows up and starts trolling all the people who argued with its previous incarnations - and tries to evade criticism by claiming to be a young woman with a lurid history of psychiatric abuse. Now it's posing as a hard-boiled chick from Brooklyn. What stereotyped persona will it inflict on us next?

I might be flouncing now, but I’m still not even sure what that means – like I said, I’m new to this. Bullshit. Time to get a new shtick loser, you've beaten this one into the ground.

#616 @S You're probably right.

It's just hard to believe that someone who has had real issues and overcome them would administer a verbal kick like that to a fellow-sufferer with no more provocation than having experienced success differently.

I guess some people are just different.

Slightly edited version of the comment that went into moderation:

I asked her to elaborate in a very typical Brooklynese tone. Oh great, now everyone knows I’m from Brooklyn.

Interesting. Sh**znoexplainia/Fear Fraud & Force’s initial post at 458 shows Bronx, NY as the location. FFF disappears for a couple of weeks, then another obnoxious twit from New York with a strangely similar conversational style shows up and starts trolling all the people who argued with its previous incarnations – and tries to evade criticism by claiming to be a young woman with a lurid history of psychiatric abuse. Now it’s posing as a hard-boiled chick from Brooklyn. What stereotyped persona will it inflict on us next?

I might be flouncing now, but I’m still not even sure what that means – like I said, I’m new to this.

Nice try. Time to get a new shtick loser, you’ve beaten this one into the ground.

Alain- I can see you've been practicing your English...
" @Narad, Thanks for the video, great way to start the morning (way too early: 8:14am….) "
Not one mistake in that sentence, except maybe for a comma being where a period should be. But, other than that, all the words flowed together very nicely. I'm impressed, Bro. I'm impressed.

Edith - you really are a Prick. And a stupid one at that.

Edith – you really are a Prick. And a stupid one at that.

Well, I have been served. I'm going to go drown my sorrow in some mind-altering champagne, then have a laugh with my imaginary boyfriend about Internet trolls who don't know when to quit.

Edith - that sounds about right, except I'm guessing you couldn't even find yourself an "imaginary boyfriend". The best you can do is accuse people of lying. That takes brains - real brains, especially when your last name is Prick.

@Off Meds-Has your technique of using juvenile insults instead of evidence ever worked?

I use plenty of evidence; She accuses me of being someone else, making up my story, having an "imaginary boyfriend" and her last name is in fact PRICKly.

Edith: I've got the popcorn and I'm sitting back watching the show...while Narad cuts her off at the knees. :-)

@lilady: given that my ex's parents are both from Brooklyn, are some new friends, I'd personally say she's not one of the best examples of someone from there.

I DID get a snicker out her reading you 'nym as "little lady" rather than your location of LI.

While I won't comment on her purported medical history, I will again say that I am glad I have not met her in meatspace. I assume she is as unpleasant in person as she is in her writings.

@Off Meds - How long have you been off your meds?

lilady: quite the performance, isn't it? We should send Off Meds over to the TMR blog for lessons on how to throw a real diva tantrum. "Her' game is getting weak.

Speaking of weak:

The best you can do is accuse people of lying.

Not "people", just you.

OT: I would think that it should already be well known that use of dopamine agonists may cause compulsive behavior in some people.

http://www.webmd.com/parkinsons-disease/news/20130103/compulsions-parki…

http://www.insidermedicine.com/archives/Psychiatric_complications_of_Pa…

An interesting development on another thread previously inhabited (infested?) by FFF - there is a new commenter calling himself Ben who just posted a rambling summary of interviews with ambiguous quotes from psychiatrists pasted in: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/12/24/andrew-wakefield-wins-an-a…

And back on this thread, it seems that Off Meds has finally stuck the flounce. I wonder why?

@706 - This is just too much BS to keep track of. No wonder Orac needs a whole team of regulars here to help. Just when I think someone like Off Meds comes along with a legit complaint, and was even treated a bit rough, you guys start piecing this together.

Say it ain't so, Off Meds? Are you now posting under different names on RI, all at the same time? That sure makes it rough for patients with legitimate complaints of a similar nature to be taken seriously. If you're doing this, who do you think you're helping?

So, you admit that you're "a whole team" - well, at least I finally got that outta ya. MI Dawn - that's such a pretty photo of you - was it taken at your ex's parents' home here in Brooklyn? BTW, is MI short for Michigan or miniature? Lilady - One more word outta you young lady and I'm calling my lawyer! Hahaha - or should I type lol lol lol...
And no, I'm not posting anywhere else "s"- I honestly don't have time for that. But keep accusing people of doing things they are not. You people seem to have an extreme amount of time on your hands.

Here's six more words outta me. Now call your lawyer...6 times.

So, you admit that you’re “a whole team” – well, at least I finally got that outta ya.

You're slow, aren't you?

Well, we shot the line and we went for broke
With a thousand screamin' trucks
And eleven long-haired friends of Jesus
In a chartreuse microbus.

(I can do Alice's Restaurant, too, if you want.)

@off meds

Going for the vexatious lawsuit path?

Better be prepared to pay lilady a lot of money for harassment.

(I can do Alice’s Restaurant, too, if you want.)

My treat. This is the least I can do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNLE5z7jNaM

You know, if one person, just one person, does it, they may think he's really sick, and they won't take him.

And if two people, two people, do it -- in harmony -- they'll think they're both faggots, and they won't take either of 'em.

And if three people do it, three -- can you imagine, three people walking in, singing a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out? They may think it's an organization.

And can you, can you imagine 50 people a day -- I said
50 people a day -- walking in, singing a bar of Alice's Restaurant, and walking out? Friends, they may think it's a movement.

And that's what it is.

KIDS, REHABILITATE YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY.

"Going for the vexatious lawsuit path?"
Not at all - it was a joke, but I can tell nobody here has a sense of humor. And since I prefer interacting with people who do, I must be flouncing off again. Before I flounce, didn't some of you already suggest putting me in the "ignore bin"? Where's the "teamwork" guys? I wanna see some team spirit - just ignore me already. Hope everyone has a fun filled exciting weekend :)

this is actually my first time posting comments online

Where'd you pick up the emoticons?

I sometimes text genius, and send emails. It's Saturday evening - I gotta bounce, I mean flounce.
P.S. Narad, you're not being a very good team player

Oh. I forgot to add this emoticon ;) - I learned that from my blackberry, and Sarah Palin . Peace out!

I sometimes text genius

Somehow, I doubt that brevity would lead to this outcome in your case.

Sorry for my long flouncing - had to get back to my life for a while. So, young lady, you're an ex Brooklynite who now lives in Long Island? How bout that. Wanna meet at Roosevelt Field for some shopping? How bout this, we can meet at the food court -I'll buy you some popcorn and then I'll even treat you to expensive Nordsrom hosiery. What part of Brooklyn are you from? And don't tell me Williamsburg or Park Slope.

Wanna meet at Roosevelt Field for some shopping?

This is the worst parody of The Warriors ever.

I was going to address Off Meds' comments on the modern mental health system, but then realized there was no point. Why? Because every single accusation she makes against the modern mental health system - feel free to point out any exception I missed - is dependent upon her perceptions. If we do not believe her perceptions to be accurate, we have no reason to think her critiques of modern medicine are accurate.

She claims that when she said "Congratulations on your drug-induced happiness" to someone who had done her no wrong, she didn't perceive that statement as being any different from the simpler "Congratulations on your happiness." Even in the rather unlikely case that that's true, what it tells us is that her perceptions are so unreliable as to make her opinions of little weight.

@Narad - there actually is a mall on Long Island called Roosevelt Field. Nassau county.

@LIlady - i need to figure out how to send you my email again.

@ MI Dawn: You could always get in touch with our mutual friend to get my email.

@Antaeus

If we do not believe her perceptions to be accurate, we have no reason to think her critiques of modern medicine are accurate.

I don't believe anything about "her"....

A more blatant display of trolling I haven't seen. "She" has nothing to offer other than a story that, even if it is true, adds nothing to the debate even as anecdotal evidence. "She" is just being disruptive and slyly insulting to anyone who engages with "her".

Ignore "her" and she will either go away or make such a fool of "herself" that Orac will have to get the ban hammer out again.

@ Mark L: I *suspected* from the early comments, that he/her/it was trolling...later comments *confirmed* my suspicions.

I don’t believe anything about “her”….

May I ask what information you would require from "her" in order for you to believe her story?

It is irrelevant whether I believe her story or not. Someone standing up and shouting "look at me, I don't take any medication now and I have a fabulous life" adds nothing to the argument on either side, and that is all Off Meds has done before going on to try and antagonise everyone.

Narad, you, as well as others on your team, seem to be exhibiting the signs of "Advice Deficit Disorder" which, of course, is a new disorder that will be recognized in the next DSM. I heard from Dr. Oz, or maybe it was one of those really good looking doctors on my TV, that this disorder is being treated with pure Chrystal Meth. Young Lady, you are exhibiting all the signs of "Your Own Advice Hyper-Activity Deficit Disorder", which is being treated with pure cocaine. I strongly suggest that you snort all drugs as directed since both are classified as stimulants and affect the dopamine levels of the brain, as do many antidepressants, and can lead to side effect such as hostility, aggression and worsening of the aforementioned new "ADD" and "ADHD" disorders. I have no way of proving if I am a "her", "she" or "it" unless I post a photo of my vagina, which I am not willing to do. Before I "flounce", I will leave you with some links to some of my peeps (some, may they rest in peace). Hope you enjoy. And keep taking your prescribed drugs for all your "Advice Disorders".
Once again, I apologize in advance if I am unable to promptly respond to all comments ( that is if your new version of "ADD" and "ADHD" isn't being rectified through prescribed drug), I was recently diagnosed with a current form of Drapetomania.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q96-e042bk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyX7dHmaRlA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J91ti_MpdHA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj7GmeSAxXo

there actually is a mall on Long Island called Roosevelt Field. Nassau county.

Oh, I had no doubt about that. The reference was to this. And we all know how that worked out for Luther.

@Off Meds - Reading your comments, and seeing the first two videos @729, as well as listening to the last one, all I can say is that you are stigmatizing yourself. You're doing a great job of it too. Good luck to you.

May I ask what information you would require from “her” in order for you to believe her story?

For my part, the question doesn't mean anything. I nonetheless do not believe that it's employed—the combination of obvious inability to either manage anger or, in fact, think tends to be something of a stumbling block in this regard. As I stated earlier, granting the rest of the story, this has trust fund written all over it.

I don't need luck for I have great fortune. We're all laughing, dancing and toasting to some "mind altering champagne" here in NYC. All our best to everyone! Flouncing off now!!!

@offmeds - thanks for proving how much of a "douchebag" you are.....I wonder if you were really ever trying to make a point or just interested in trolling.

"S" We're just wondering why you didn't view the third video; Did you feel "threatened" by it, or her?

@Lawrence et al: I've decided OM is not worth responding to. He/She/It was rude and demeaning almost from the get-go and the tantrums for attention get as much as they deserve - none from now on It's like dealing with a toddler and I've had enough of them for the current time.

Yes, Miniature Dawn, that is precisely why you should be giving your toddler stimulants, instead of love. I'll leave you with another great song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=if-UzXIQ5vw

I noticed that one of my posts did not go through. I'll repeat "S", why did you not view the third video? Did you feel "threatened" by it, or her?

#734 @lawrence

I think we all know the answer to that already.

" Young Lady, you are exhibiting all the signs of “Your Own Advice Hyper-Activity Deficit Disorder”, which is being treated with pure cocaine. I strongly suggest that you snort all drugs as directed since both are classified as stimulants and affect the dopamine levels of the brain, as do many antidepressants, and can lead to side effect such as hostility, aggression and worsening of the aforementioned new “ADD” and “ADHD” disorders. I have no way of proving if I am a “her”, “she” or “it” unless I post a photo of my vagina, which I am not willing to do."

Busted, Off Meds...what makes you think any of us want to see your crotch shots?

@ Narad:

".... As I stated earlier, granting the rest of the story, this has trust fund written all over it."

I *wonder* if he/she/its parents have any money left after the parasite siphoned all his/her/its inheritance prior to this. Smart parents would have their remaining money placed in a trust so that the greedy unemployable sponge wouldn't end up on the streets.

I’ll repeat “S”, why did you not view the third video? Did you feel “threatened” by it, or her?

I viewed the third video. It was the first two along with your comments to others here that I consider as stigmatizing, as mentioned in the fourth video. Best wishes to you. I'm gonna follow MI Dawn's suggestion @735.

I don’t need luck for I have great fortune.

«Ἡράκλειτος ἔφη ὡς ἦθος ἀνθρώπῳ δαίμων.»

Oh, Young Lady, I personally have never taken any crotch shots, and please, please, do not post any of yours. I have no trust fund, but I do have a great, very true story, that according to many influential people, whom I will not name, is worth a fortune multiplied by infinity. Stay tuned.... And I don't mean to your computer screen ;)

Alright.... don't tell me, let me guess-
it's a reality television show ....or a screenplay.

"A great many influential people, whom I will not name....."

No reality television show...or a screenplay, Denice. Just the delusional ramblings of an internet troll who is unemployable and who resides under a troll bridge. Sorta reminds me of Thingy.

It actually reminds me more of DJT, but that's just because it favors the same "carhorn debate" tactics. "I was obnoxious to you; that surely demonstrates that my side of the argument is more correct than yours!"

So just to torment the troll, let's swing this bus back onto its course and talk about Lanza and related topics.

Have we heard of any Aspergers folks being negatively affected by the lunatic fringe or the Lanza incident?

Slightly off topic, but I saw this sign on the way home today:

Alcohol doesn't cause violence
/other side of rotating sign/
Blame and punish the individual

It really threw me for a moment. On the one hand you have the responsibility of the individual to not get drunk and not be violent. On the other hand you have alcoholism. I was struck between thinking it was blaming the victim, and actually making a valid point.

I know it doesn't quite fit with the actual post's topic, but it's better than playing avoid-the-troll and this seems like the perfect place to discuss something that's not quite fitting for current discussions elsewhere.

One psychologist is still attempting to link Lanza's behavior to Lyme disease. Dr. Rick Sponaugle, the Florida doctor mentioned in this article, has been mentioned in the comments here before.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/11/did-adam-lanza-have-lyme-disease/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy8073O2Gqw

Oh great, OM has learned to post links. Let's see how far this will deteriorate.

I'm not sure what a music video has to do with the subject.

Slightly off topic, but I saw this sign on the way home today:

Alcohol doesn’t cause violence
/other side of rotating sign/
Blame and punish the individual

The is inital point is perhaps arguable (e.g., if alcohol increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior in response to cues that would normally be perceived as aggressive, one could argue for causality), but I don't get what the point of the sign is in the first place. Drunks are being persecuted?

Maybe they're saying that voluntary intoxication shouldn't be a mitigating factor in criminal trials? Though I don't think it is now, but juries might treat it as such.

Drunks are being persecuted?

the sign is more likely about violent or abusive criminal behavior being faulted on the alcohol, rather than an individual's choice to get drunk.

People who have committed acts of violence, especially domestic violence, too often IMO have their charges dismissed, fines lessened, or are excused from jail time if they can successfully plead that alcohol or drugs were the cause of their behavior. They blame the alcohol for their violent assault, instead of taking responsibility for their own decision to become intoxicated.

@755 - Failed to close the italics.

@flip - Was anything else written on the sign? Sometimes signs have the name of their sponsor shown in the bottom corner.

Maybe they’re saying that voluntary intoxication shouldn’t be a mitigating factor in criminal trials? Though I don’t think it is now, but juries might treat it as such.

I suppose true incompetence might serve as an argument against mens rea (e.g., "I didn't realize that this wasn't my house and refrigerator and couch, sorry"), but this still just strikes me as perplexing. Violent crimes turn merely on the act itself.

Violent crimes turn merely on the act itself.

That is in an ideal situation, and there may be laws that state that should be the case, but that is not what always happens in practice. Oftentimes and especially in the case of domestic violence, the perpetrator is given 'consideration' for the fact that they were under the influence when the assault occurred. Their sentence may even be lessened in some cases due to their successful defense in shifting the blame to the alcohol, especially if they promise not to drink again or go to counseling or rehab. In some cases it just creates a revolving door - get drunk, commit assault, blame the alcohol and promise to attend rehab and 'play nice'. Shortly thereafter, the cycle repeats itself - get drunk, commit assault...

That is in an ideal situation, and there may be laws that state that should be the case, but that is not what always happens in practice.

That is pretty straight common law, not an ideal situation. I'm not asserting that sentencing may not be mitigated (and certainly not that 12-step programs, "counseling," etc., haven't insinuated themselves into the courts), but voluntary intoxication worsens one's defense in a criminal case, because it is basically an admission that one did not act as a reasonable person. And, of course, there's the issue of plea bargains and the goals of family courts and so forth.

But I'm still not getting this sign.

@Narad - Thanks for explaining more. Now that I better understand your point, I agree with you. It seems the signs are sponsored by the NightClub Owners Forum along with initiatives of the Australian Sex Party.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/nightclubs-slam-liquor-licence-rules-201…

http://nightclubownersforum.com/id9.html

@S #760

The Australian Sex Party are libertarians - this would explain their desire to ensure that the nightclub owner's are not held responsible for any externalities.

#748 It sounds like a thinly-veiled gun rights ad to me.

It seems the signs are sponsored by the NightClub Owners Forum along with initiatives of the Australian Sex Party.

Oh, that explains a lot. In the U.S., it appears that 38 states have some sort of dram-shop act, which makes statutorily clear just who the relevant "individual" is for purposes of liability.

Khani:
The closest thing, oddly enough, was an AOA grandmum warrior who was complaining that the local school had suspended her autistic grandson because he was exhibiting stalkeresque behaviors toward a female schoolmate. The sad thing is, is that the admins would have totally ignored the same behavior in an NT kid. I'll dig up the link tomorrow, have to call it a night soon.
But other than that, nothing that's been reported. Yet.

Dammit, you got there before I did. Yeah, that's the same ad I was talking about.

To put it into more context: It was both near a large football stadium, and close to the city. Police in the city centre often deal with late-night violence (including a lot of deaths) on the weekends, which usually involves heavy drinking. Add to the fact that a lot of the pro footballers have issues with drinking/violence over the years (including lots of sexual harassment claims) and very rarely do they get punished in a way that most people would.

Being more responsible about drinking - which is a fair point - is also being pushed by the police. Although not in the way this billboard does it.

The Australian Sex Party are libertarians – this would explain their desire to ensure that the nightclub owner’s are not held responsible for any externalities.

Actually the Sex Party are kind of whacky libertarian hippies. Or at least that's the impression I have of them based on very little. I haven't read much about them, but they're for a range of rights, including gay marriage, women's rights (ie. abortion), and things like that. They're a fringe group, leftier than the Greens (which is pretty left) and probably right-ier than the right. That they're also with the nightclub owners is not surprising to me, given that the Party seems to be made up of mostly young people.

Personally, I find the whole ad distasteful. As business owners, they should be interested in doing more to prevent violence - it's bad PR for a start - not washing their hands of the situation and suddenly deciding that their bartenders might need more training of when to cut off drinks. As with everything, it's a little too complex to pin responsibility on one thing.

@Narad

Thanks for the link to that paper. I'll have to scrounge up $20 to read it, but the abstract was interesting.

Cry the antivaxers and quacks: 'Twas big pharma that led Adam Lanza to kill

More like this

Andrew Wakefield wins an award just as he jumps on the anti-psychiatry bandwagon

Mike Adams sinks to a new low

Attack of the child zombies!

The fixed mindset of medical pseudoscience

Turning out the lights and moving on: Goodbye, old ScienceBlogs blog, hello new blog

A quick update on the migration to a new domain

A change is gonna come. Respectful Insolence is moving.

And the box of blinky lights has arrived in Manchester for QEDCon

On the "integration" of quackery into the medical school curriculum

What makes a supernova so super, anyway?

Friday Cephalopod: Giddyup, my great pink steed!

California, Drought, Pineapple Express, Geological Imperative, Evacuations