Posted by med_empowered on February 23, 2007, at 13:37:38
In reply to Am I the only person bothered by these articles???, posted by UgottaHaveHope on February 23, 2007, at 11:36:08
I've been a fan of Whitaker ever since "Mad In America"
Now, he's considered a "radical," but that's just because of where his research led him. As I understand the story, here's what happened: he was working for the Boston Globe, and he was to do a series of papers on the progress in the treatment of schizophrenia. He thought it would end up being old drugs=bad, new drugs=miraculous, but then he actually did the research and...it didn't turn up anything like that. I read "Mad In America" and I think everyone should; psychiatric patients, psychiatrists, psychologists, people who know someone who is "mentally ill"....
what's disturbing about Whitaker's opinions and research isn't their harsh tone--its that their harsh tone is very well-supported by decades upon decades of research. He's anti-neuroleptics because he's one of the few researchers to look at the issue from an unbiased, objective viewpoint and arrive at the conclusion: neuroleptics are very, very bad drugs. It isn't anti-psychiatrics propaganda. When I read the book, I thoroughly re-researched his data, thinking I'd fine misrepresentations or something like that--NOTHING. He's dead on accurate when he says neuroleptics shut down higher brain functions and are more a way to quiet people than to help them.
poster:med_empowered
thread:735309
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20070219/msgs/735410.html