Tagebuch 112;2014 englisch

On 06 August 2014



www.antipsychiatry.org

Schizophrenia


A non-existing disease

by Lawrence Stevens, J. D.



(Trans .: Heinz Kaiser)



Address of the English original text:

http://www.antipsychiatry.org/schizoph.htm







The word "schizophrenia" has a scientific sound, which obviously
gives it an in-thing credibility and charisma that seems to blind people. In
his book Molecules of the Mind - The Brave New Science of Molecular Psychology
[molecules of the Spirit - The Brave New Science of Molecular Psychology]
called John Franklin, professor of journalism at the University of Maryland,
schizophrenia and depression, "the two classic forms of intellectual
disease "(Dell Publishing Co., 1987, p.119). According to the editorial of
Time magazine on July 6, 1992 Schizophrenia is the "most devilish of all
mental illnesses" (p.53). This article of Time magazine also notes:
"a whole quarter of all hospital beds in the country are occupied by
patients with schizophrenia" (p.55). Books and articles like this, and the
facts to which they relate (a quarter of all hospitals are occupied by patients
suffering from schizophrenia) mislead most people to believe this, it actually
would be a disease called schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is one of the great
myths of our time.

             In his
book Schizophrenia - The Sacred Symbol of Psychiatry [Schizophrenia - The
Sacred Symbol of Psychiatry] psychiatry professor Thomas S. Szasz, MD says
"There is, in short, something like schizophrenia not at all"
(Syracuse University Press, 1988, p 191). In the epilogue of her book
Schizophrenia - Medical Diagnosis or Moral Verdict? [Schizophrenia - medical
diagnosis or moral judgment] say psychology professor at the University of
California Theodore R. Sarbin, Ph.D., has worked three years in brain clinics
(mental hospitals), and James C. Mancuso, Ph.D., psychology professor at the
State University of New York at Albany: "We have come to the end of our
journey Among others, we have attempted to show that it lacks the schizophrenia
model of the undesirable behavior of credibility the analysis led us inevitably
to the conclusion.. that schizophrenia is a myth "(Pergamon Press, 1980, p
221). In his 1988 published book Against Therapy [Undo therapy], says the
psychoanalyst Jeffrey Masson, Ph.D., "It will give us more and more aware
of the hazards, if you labeled someone with a disease category such as
schizophrenia, and many people begin to realize that there is no such a
category "(Atheneum, p.2) not a clearly identifiable disease is, rather,
the so-called schizophrenia is a nonspecific category that includes almost
everything with what a human being in the able to do, think or feel, but this
is opposed by the majority of other people, or of the so-called schizophrenics
themselves. There is hardly a so-called mental illness that had not been
eventually referred to as schizophrenia. Since schizophrenia is a term that
includes virtually everything a person can think or do not like other people,
it is hardly to describe objectively. Typically, definitions of schizophrenia
are vague or contradict each other. For example, when I asked a physician, an
assistive Superintendenden a state brain clinic to define my concept of
schizophrenia, he replied in all seriousness: "split personality - this is
the most popular definition" In contrast, a pamphlet "National
Alliance for the Mentally Ill "with the title" What is schizophrenia?
":" schizophrenia is not split personality "in her 1985 book
published Shiz-o-PHRE-nia: Straight Talk for Family and Friends [Shiz-o-PHRE-never:
Frank Words for family and friends], says Mary Ellen Walsh "schizophrenia
is one of the most misunderstood diseases of our planet. most people think it
would be to have a split personality. most people are wrong. schizophrenia is
not split personality in several parts . (Warner Books, p 41).

             The
American Psychiatric Association's (APA's) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (Second Edition), also known as DSM-II, 1968 edition, defines
schizophrenia as "characteristic disturbances of thinking, mood or
behavior" (p.33) The problem with this definition is that virtually
everything people reject or hold for abnormally, eg every so-called mental
illness, fits this definition. In the foreword to DSM-II says Ernest M.
Gruenberg, MD, DPH, Chairman of the American Psychiatric Association's
Committee on Nomenclature: "Consider, for example, the mental disorder
that is named in the Manual as 'schizophrenia', ... even if you had tried it,
the committee could reach no agreement on what this error is "(p ix). The
third edition of the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, 1980 edition, commonly called DSM-III, was quite outspoken about the
vagueness of the term. It reported: "The delimitation of the concept of
schizophrenia is unclear" (p.181). The 1987 revision published DSM-III-R,
contains a similar statement: "It should be noted that no single feature
or immutable available exclusively in schizophrenia is to be found"
(p.188). DSM-III-R says the same thing via a related diagnosis, schizoaffective
disorder: "The term schizoaffective disorder was used in very different
ways, since it was introduced for the first time as a subset of schizophrenia,
and he is one of the most confusing and controversial concepts of psychiatric
nosology [pathology] is (p.208).

            
Especially noteworthy in today's prevailing intellectual climate where
primarily biological or chemical reasons as the cause for mental illness are
believed what DSM-III-R about such physical causes of this all-encompassing
concept of schizophrenia says is: It is said that a diagnosis of schizophrenia
"should be made ​​only if no organic cause can be found, which caused the
disruption and to their continued existence contributes (p.187). This
definition of "schizophrenia" as a non-biological is underscored by
the 1987 edition of the Merck Manual of diagnosis and Therapy, which says that
a (so-called) diagnosis of schizophrenia is made ​​only if the conduct in
question is not due to an "organic mental disorder" (S.1532).

             Let
the psychiatrist E. Fuller is a statement Torrey,
MD face, which this in his 1988
published book Surviving Schizophrenia: A Family Manual makes. He says
"Schizophrenia is a brain disease, today we know it is definitely"
(Harper & Row, p 5). Of course, if schizophrenia is a brain disease, then
it is organic. Nevertheless, the official schizophrenia definition, as
maintained by the American Psychiatric Association in its "Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" for many years and has been
published, has expressly excluded organic disorders caused. Only in 1994, with
publication of the DSM-IV, the negative criterion of the biological causes of
schizophrenia was removed from the definition. In "Surviving
Schizophrenia" [schizophrenia survive] Dr.Torrey admits "the
prevailing psychoanalytic and family interaction theories of schizophrenia
their existence to that in American psychiatry had precedence" (p.149),
which seems to take this into account.

             In the
issue of November 10, 1988, the journal Nature, has the geneticist Eric S.
Lander of Harvard University and MIT the situation in the following summary:
"The Justice Potter Stewart of the U.S. Supreme Court declared in a famous
Obszönitätsverfahren that, although he strictly speaking can not define what
pornography is," I know it when I see it "Psychiatrists are in a very
similar situation. what the diagnosis of schizophrenia betrifft.80 years after
the term was coined to describe a confused state, including a mental break-up
of the functions of thought, the feelings and behavior, it remains no
universally accepted definition of schizophrenia. "(P.105)

            
According to Dr. Torrey in his book Surviving Schizophrenia, the so-called
schizophrenia comprises several widely spaced personality types. Below are
paranoid schizophrenics, the delusions and / or hallucinations have that feel
either pursuing or have size delusions. Hebephrenic schizophrenics, where
"well-developed delusions usually missing. Catatonic schizophrenics, with
tendency to posturing, severity, numbness, and often mutism, or in other words,
sitting around in a motionless, on the environment unresponsive attitude (as
opposed to paranoid schizophrenics, to suspicion and volatility tend), and
simple schizophrenics, which show a loss of interest and initiative, as the
catatonic schizophrenics (but not so strict) and which, unlike paranoid
schizophrenia, delusions and hallucinations are missing "(S. 77)

             The
1968 edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-II, noticed a person who is very
happy (experienced pronounced elation) could be due to its known as
schizophrenia (schizophrenia, schizoaffective type, excited) or very unhappy (schizophrenia,
schizoaffective type, depressed) (p.35), and the 1987 edition, DSM-III-R says,
a person can be diagnosed as schizophrenic when it shows neither joy nor
sadness (no sign affective expression) (S .189), which Dr. Torrey in his book
"simple schizophrenia" calls (Gefühlsabstumpfung) (p.77) Psychiatry
Professor Jonas Robitscher, JD, MD, writes in his book "the Powers of
Psychiatry", people between happiness and sadness back and forth, the
so-called manic-depressive, or bipolar mood swings sufferer could also be
described as a schizophrenic: "Many cases are diagnosed in the United
States as schizophrenia, would get in England or Western Europe the diagnosis
manic depressive" (Houghton Mifflin, 1980, p 165) the supposed
"symptoms" or a definition criteria of "schizophrenia" are
truly so wide, people are referred to as schizophrenic because they have
delusions or because they do not have, because they hallucinate or not because
they are erratic or immovable, because they happy, sad, or happy or sad, or because
of happiness and sadness feelings alternate. Since no physical causes of
schizophrenia were found, this disease, as we shall soon see, are defined only
in terms of symptoms, which, as we see, could be described as ubiquitous.

             As
attorney Bruce Ennis in his book "Prisoners of Psychiatry" says:
Schizophrenia is a so-encompassing term and so includes a wide range of
behaviors with one, that there are very few people who are not held in one way
or another opportunity for schizophrenic could be. (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
Inc., 1972, p 22). People who are obsessed with fixed ideas or feel compelled
to perform certain actions, such as repeated hand washing, are normally
considered to obsessive-compulsive disorder a sufferer. Nevertheless, even
people with obsessions or compulsions were already referred to as schizophrenic
(eg, by Dr. Torrey in his book Surviving Schizophrenia, p 115-116).

             In
Surviving Schizophrenia Dr. Torrey quite frankly confesses the impossibility to
define what is "schizophrenia". He says: "The definitions of
most of the diseases of mankind were brought to the destination ... Almost all
diseases there is something that can be seen or measured, and this can be used
to define the disease and, by others. indistinguishable pathological conditions
not so with schizophrenia to this day we have not a single thing that can be
measured and from where we can say., and yes, that's schizophrenia Therefore,
the definition of the disease is a source of great confusion!. . debates (p.73)
What puzzles me is give up, how to make this statement in accordance with
another, which he makes in the same book I had already cited Something detail
it reads as follows:.. "schizophrenia is a brain disease today we know it
definitely. It is an actual scientific and biological entity as clearly as
diabetes, multiple sclerosis and cancer scientific and biological entities are
"(p.5) How can you know that schizophrenia is a brain disease, if we do
not know what is schizophrenia?

             The
truth is that the label of schizophrenia, such as the labels pornography or
mental illness, disapproval which indicates which the label is attached and
nothing more. As "mental illness" or pornography,
"schizophrenia" does not exist exists in the same sense as cancer and
heart disease, but only in the sense that good and evil exists. As with all
other so-called mental diseases, the diagnosis "schizophrenia" a
reflection of the values ​​of the speaker or the diagnostic physician, or his
thoughts on how to be a person 'should', often coupled with the wrong (or at
least unproven) assumption that the disapproved thinking, the feelings, the
behavior of a biological malfunction results. Considering the many different
uses into account, it becomes clear that "schizophrenia" has no
special meaning as "I do not like". For this reason, I lose some of
my respect for 'mental health professionals' when I hear them use the word
schizophrenia in a manner that reveals they think it's a real disease. I do this
for the same reason as I would lose respect for someone's perception or his
intellectual integrity, after I had heard how he admired the emperor's new
clothes. The layman's definition of schizophrenia, although still making
self-contradictory, a certain sense. Once the term schizophrenia is used but in
a way that shows that the speaker thinks it is a real disease, it means nothing
else than to admit that he does not know what he is talking.

             Many
mental health "professionals" and other "scientific"
researchers believe trotzallem continue, "schizophrenia" is a real
disease. They are like the crowds that examine the new clothes of the emperor,
unable or unwilling to see the truth, because so many others have said before
them, there really. A look at the Index Medicus, an index of regularly
published medical journals, listed under "schizophrenia" article
reveals how widespread the myth schizophrenia is now. And because these
"scientists" believe, "schizophrenia" is a real disease,
they try to find physical causes.

             How
psychiatrist William Glasser, MD, in his 1976 published book Positive
Addiction, says: "Schizophrenia sounds so much like a disease that
prominent scientists be tempted to seek a cure for this (Harper & Row, p
18). . this is a ridiculous notion, since these assumed prominent scientists
"schizophrenia" can not define, and consequently do not know what
they are looking.

            
According to three psychiatry professors at Stanford University
"two hypotheses have to search for a biological substrate of schizophrenia
determined." They say these two theories are the Transmethylations
hypothesis of schizophrenia and the dopamine hypothesis of schizophrenia. (Jack
D. Barchas, MD, et al, "Biogenic Amine Hypothesis of Schizophrenia,"
published in Psychopharmacology:. From Theory to Practice, Oxford University
Press, 1977, p 100) The Transmethylations hypothesis was based on the idea that
schizophrenia is caused by a different formation methylisierter amines (?) in
the metabolism of so-called schizophrenic, a formation, as it also produces the
hallucinogenic drug mescaline luck. After the evaluation of various experiments
to verify this theory, they conclude: "More than two decades after the
introduction of the Transmethylations hypothesis have not identified any
evidence of a causal relationship or involvement in the development of
schizophrenia." (P.107)

             Who
teaches at Columbia University psychiatry professor Jerrold S. Maxmen, MD,
describes the second biological theory of the so-called schizophrenia, the
dopamine hypothesis in his 1985 book "The New Psychiatry"
laconically: "... many psychiatrists believe that when of schizophrenia
increased activity in the dopamine receptor system in the game is ... the
symptoms of schizophrenia would partly stem from the fact that receptors are
overwhelmed by dopamine. "(Mentor, p 142 & 154). But in the above
article the three psychiatry professors at Stanford University say these
"direct evidence that dopamine is involved in schizophrenia, the researchers
still did not succeed" (p.112) 1987 Professor Jon Franklin says in his
book "Molecules of the Mind "," The dopamine hypothesis was, in
short, the wrong "(p.114)

             In the
same book, Professor Franklin accurately describes finding efforts, other
biological causes of so-called schizophrenia: "As always, schizophrenia is
a disease of symptoms during the 40s and 50s, hundreds of workers employed by
scientists from time to time so, samples of body reactions and. fluids tested.
they tested skin resistance, cultured skin cells, analyzed blood, saliva and
sweat, and stared thoughtfully into test tubes with schizophrenic urine. the
result of all these efforts was a continued series of announcements that this
or that distinguishing feature was found. One of the first researchers has, for
example, claims to have a substance isolated from the urine of schizophrenics,
the spiders to bring to spin crooked networks. another group said that the
blood of schizophrenics contains an erroneous form of adrenaline that causes
hallucinations. Yet another put forward the theory that the disease arises due
to vitamin deficiency. Such developments led to large newspaper reports, which
suggested in general, or flatly foresaw that the riddle of schizophrenia is now
finally solved. Unfortunately, none of these discoveries withstood the light
closer examination. (P.172)

             Other
efforts to demonstrate a biological reason for the so-called schizophrenia,
have included brain scans of identical twins, of which only one was considered
schizophrenic. They actually show brain damage in so-called schizophrenics who
has not the twin. The shortcoming of these studies is that the so-called
schizophrenics inevitable brain-damaging drugs, neuroleptics called, were administered
as a so-called treatment for his so-called schizophrenia. These brain-damaging
drugs are the ones not so-called schizophrenia, responsible for brain damage.
Anyone who was "treated" with these drugs will have such brain
damage. The fact that the brains of eccentric, hateful, imaginative or
intellectual disabilities are so far damaged that you can call them
schizophrenic, with drugs, one of which is claimed (wrongly) that they have
antipsychotic properties, is one of the saddest and irresponsible consequences
of today's widespread belief in the myth of schizophrenia.

             In
1988 published New Harvard Guide to Psychiatry say Seymour Kety S., MD,
Professor Emeritus of Neuroscience in Psychiatry, and Steven Matthysse, Ph.D.,
Associate Professor of Psychobiology, both of Harvard Medical School: "an
impartial reading of the recent literature provides neither the hoped-for
clarification on the catecholamine hypotheses, yet the result is a really
convincing evidence for other biological differences that may characterize the
brains of patients with mental illnesses. (Harvard University Press, p 148).

             The
belief in biological causes of so-called mental illness, including
schizophrenia, comes not from science but from a wishful thinking, or the
unwillingness to deal with the experiential / environmental related causes of
human error or suffering. The repeated failure of efforts to find biological
causes of so-called schizophrenia, it suggests, "schizophrenia", only
to be classified as a form of socially / culturally unacceptable thinking and
behavior, rather than in the field of biology or "disease" be
classified as many people do it.





THE AUTHOR, Lawrence Stevens, is a lawyer, whose area of ​​responsibility,
inter alia, representing psychiatric "patients" heard. His pamphlets
are not copyrighted. You are free to make copies thereof.







1998 UPDATE:

"The aetiology [origin] of schizophrenia is unknown. ... It is widely
believed that schizophrenia has a neurobiological cause. Most notable theory is
the dopamine hypothesis, which asserts that schizophrenia is a consequence of
the hyperactivity of the dopamine-carrying conductors in the brain had. ...
Recent studies have focused on structural and functional brain deviations based
Photos [brain imaging] of schizophrenic and control subjects. Nothing has been
found, and no theory to date can explain the origin and pathogenesis of this
disease complex satisfactory ". Michael J. Murphy, MD, MPH, Clinical
Fellow in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School; Ronald L. Cowan, MD, Ph.D.,
Clinical Fellow in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School; and Lloyd I. Sederer,
MD, Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, in
their textbook Blueprints in Psychiatry (Blackwell Science, Inc., Malden, Massachusetts,
1998), p.1.



1999 UPDATE

"The cause of schizophrenia has not been found until now ..." Report
on Mental Health of U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher, MD, Ph.D. These are the
words issuing the section on etiology (root cause analysis) of schizophrenia.
Subsequently repeated the Surgeon General various unproven theories of the
so-called schizophrenia. He cited that in monozygotic twins compared with
dizygotic a higher probability of establishing to be labeled as schizophrenic,
because of a genetic component of the disease alleged, but he overlooks studies
that showed a much lower compliance in monozygotic twins compared with their
numbers. In his book Is Alcoholism Hereditary? [Is alcoholism hereditary?]
Cites Donald W. Goodwin, MD For example, studies that provide matching rates in
monozygotic twins for so-called schizophrenia of only 6 percent. (Ballantine
Books, New York, 1988, p 88). Dr. Goodwin also notes:.. "Whoever believes
in hereditary reasons for schizophrenia in monozygotic twin pairs might
unconsciously be more inclined to diagnose schizophrenia (. Ibid, p 89) The
Surgeon General cited disturbances in the brain in people with schizophrenia be
called, and overlooks the fact that these disorders are often caused by the
drugs with which to treat the so-called schizophrenics. He even refers to the
dubious dopamine hypothesis. He makes then an advocate of neuroleptic drugs for
so-called schizophrenic although neuroleptics cause permanent brain damage,
externally visible through (in Surgeon General's own words) "acute
dystonia, parkinsonism, tardive dyskinesia and akathisia," though he
admits that this occurs in an estimated 40 percent of all people who take the
drug. it nourishes the (deceptive?) hope to newer, so-called anti-psychotic or
anti-schizophrenic drugs that cause less damage than the older ones.



2000 UPDATE

"There is no generally accepted cause of schizophrenia, although there are
many theories. ... The sad truth is that we do not know what causes
schizophrenia, not even we know what schizophrenia is." Edward Drummond,
MD, Associate Medical Director at Seacoast Mental Health Center in Portsmouth,
New Hampshire, in his book The Complete Guide to Psychiatric Drugs (John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., New York, 2000), pages 11-12. Dr. Drummond graduated from
Tufts University School of Medicine and received his psychiatric training at Harvard University.