Replies

Come out of the cloisterd hallways of sterile academia and experience real life, so as not to appear as you do, a lying buffoon.

You know you're losing an argument when you need to resort to baseless ad hominem attacks. By the way, I'm not just an ivory tower academic. I work with clients in the real world, thank you. My concerns grow precisely out of clinical work with real people and what I am seeing happening in the field. I've consulted with many other clinicians on this, and while not all agree with my opinions, the majority I've consulted with share my concerns.

Second, as has been discussed with you before, you're wrong to think that anti-psychotics are limited only to those patients who absolutely need them, after all other options have been exhausted. The stuff is being handed out like candy now to kids and the aged even when no serious, in-depth psychological assessment has been completed, with minimum intake interview, and even when it is contra-indicated due to side effects.

The $1.4 Billion fine paid by Eli Lilly illustrates the point clearly. The pharmaceutical companies are marketing the drugs off-label, for conditions that they were not meant to treat, and in some cases, where the side effects are far worse than the symptoms for which the drugs are used to treat. Nausea being a case in point. Many physicians are obliging the drug companies, whose reps continue to minimize the side effects. This is serious enough that many states filed suit against Lilly, and they are now paying the largest fine, for CRIMINAL CONDUCT, ever paid by a pharmaceutical company. And I am the one minimizing things? Yeah, right.

You know you're losing an argument when you need to resort to baseless ad hominem attacks.

Now that is just funny.

bdeaner (#28 this thread): "You sound like one of those drug rep whores" or this one (#37 this thread): "I suspect your psychology is not that different from the guys who rammed those planes into the towers on that day".

I don't take issue with your beliefs as stated on this thread. It's a great big world, and frankly, I suspect that (as is often the case) the truth lies somewhere in between the position you have staked out and the position taken by those you argue against.

But for you to pretend that you are being victimized by vicious ad hominems, while remaining lilly white pure yourself, is, as demonstrated, laughable.

The stuff is being handed out like candy now to kids and the aged even when no seriou

hyperbole , since I've been admonished that I can't call it what it is. The article contains the paragraph that was scrubbed by the moderator, you are misinforming Freepers across the board that psychiatrists have some recourse to administer meds forcibly. This is a ...hyperbolic statement.