Think about it: The human mind and human brain is perhaps the most mysterious and misunderstood part of the body. When something is wrong with it, there can never be any truly accurate way to pinpoint exactly whats going on. Psychiatry is using chemicals to temporarily counteract a theoretical cause of some random ailment that is diagnosed by observing the external effects of the illness or disorder, assuming of course that it actually exists, or is happening in that particular experiment's (or patient's) mind.
These chemicals must fit the approval parameters of the pharmaceutical industry, or else they cannot be prescribed. Yet the meds that are administered often times have side effects identical to the symptoms they are supposed to be treating. Who's to say that whatever temporary progress that is being made is not simply the brain and body ignoring the initial flaw to combat a more dangerous and dire affliction which is the effects of these new meds in the system? Most of the meds
2007-03-28
20:02:13
·
4 answers
·
asked by
Rick R
5
in
Social Science
➔ Other - Social Science
in psychiatry are literally just the street drugs we have banned or their chemical components with certain amounts of neutral agents that allow it to be passed off as legal or humane treatments. When a psychiatrist prescribes something, he is essentially just being an effective salesman for the pharmaceutical industry. AND to top it all off, the psychiatrist has the authority to decide whether or not the newest experiment/customer is mentally competent enough to decide if he wants or needs to buy! Experimental drug use administered to treat ailments that are based in area of the human body and enigma that is almost completely a mystery to us, and consequently incapable of being truly proven or disproven to a bunch of consumers that can be subjected to personal whims of a 'professional' opinion, hence eliminating that pesky consumers right to buy or refuse to buy. They are marketing agents in a profitable business catering to a field that is at it's best questionable and in experimental
2007-03-28
20:10:36 ·
update #1
stages! How can you justify referring to that as a science? with all those flimsy variables, it is merely a subject of fantastic debate, and a matter of convenience for an incomprehensive and wary society and a lucrative business! What say you, for or against my own arguments how do you see it, and if you agree, why? If not why and how do justify it, and what can you present that can reasonably counter what I said? I'm genuinely interested in this... I'd love to know.
2007-03-28
20:15:47 ·
update #2