Alberta court just signed off on a $7.5m Paxil birth-defect payout. - GSK still won’t say the drug did it. - Lawyers still take their cut. - The kids still have the defects. - Same old Paxil routine. - Settle. Deny. Move on. If the evidence was that weak, they wouldn’t keep writing the cheques. canadianlawyermag.com/practi…

If only the FDA had acted in the public interest rather than the psycho- pharmaceutical interests when they knew the damage these drugs cause... more than 30 years ago

👇

piped.video/Om2J9g-ssKo?is=flsM… Look at the financial conflicts of the 1991 FDA Psychopharmacologic Drugs advisory committee members at the end of video. Majority had ties to makers of antidepressant products. There was no voice representing the public on this committee then. Fast forward, I spent the last 9 years as consumer Rep on this same committee. I was often only NO vote.

👇

"And for some people, man, it's doing this weird thing where it doesn't just kill their sexual feeling, like they no longer orgasm, but they don't have any sexual desire anymore, like ever." @joerogan once again mentions the speech by PSSD sufferer Lauren Friedman (@lololizzle).

👇

ADHD drugs are handed out like candy when the FDA requires a black box warning for addiction—even when taken as prescribed and the US DEA classifies them as Schedule II drugs with a “high potential for abuse”— in the same category as OxyContin and fentanyl.

Ban Coercive Psychiatric Practices and Abuse Global health and human rights agencies—including the United Nations (UN) and World Health Organization (WHO)—report that coercion and human rights abuses remain entrenched in mental health systems worldwide. Both have called for the abolition of such practices. Coercive psychiatric practices include involuntary hospitalization, forced drugging, electroshock, seclusion, and physical, chemical, and mechanical restraints. The WHO warns that coercion “can inflict severe pain and suffering…with long-lasting physical and mental health consequences,” leading to “substantial trauma and even death,” and that these practices “violate the right to be protected from torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.” Urgent Changes and Abolition Measures Needed: • Abolish all coercive practices, including involuntary hospitalization and forced treatment. • Eliminate financial incentives that support institutionalization and coercion. • Ban forced drugging and community treatment orders, which violate fundamental rights. • Replace forced interventions like drugging, electroshock, and psychosurgery with fully informed consent-based approaches, guaranteeing the right to refuse treatment. • Reject the biomedical model approach to mental health. • Shift from pharmaceutical and neurobiological dominance toward rights-based models of care. • Mandate legislation that prohibits all involuntary measures and requires non-coercive responses in all mental health services. • Respect advance directives (Psychiatric Living Wills), ensuring people can refuse psychiatric interventions during a crisis. • Ensure accountability by enforcing penalties for violations, • Guarantee access to justice, including the right to file complaints, challenge abuses, enforce rights, and prosecute or penalize those responsible for abuse and coercion, along with providing civil, administrative, or criminal sanctions and compensation. “All persons should be able to exercise their right to give free and informed consent to accept or reject treatment in mental health systems. Denial of legal capacity, coercive practices, and institutionalization must end.” – World Health Organization Ultimately, all forced treatment, especially electroshock, psychosurgery and other damaging brain-intervention treatments must be banned. In 2025, at the United Nations’ global human rights epicenter in Geneva, CCHR International addressed a UN committee, calling for the abolition of electroshock and forced drugging—especially of children—while citing governments’ failure to enforce strong penalties against those responsible for such abuse.

👇💯

💯

Welcome to the world of psychiatry— diagnosis by opinion and drugs by "trial and error"

“All psychiatrists have in common that when they are caught on camera or on microphone, they cower and admit that there are no such things as chemical imbalances/diseases, or examinations or tests for them. What they do in practice, lying in every instance, abrogating [revoking] the informed consent right of every patient and poisoning them in the name of ‘treatment’ is nothing short of criminal.” – Dr. Fred Baughman Jr., pediatric neurologist

Controversial treatment still used on 2,500 Brits a year as survivor says it 'felt like rape' - Electroshock therapy is still being used on around 2,500 people a year in the UK, but a huge new survey of patients worldwide has reignited fears over consent and memory loss dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-…

👇

The hearing on Prozac held in 1991 was not just on SSRIs causing suicide, but also violence towards others. Look at the conflicts of interest of the FDA panel voting on whether to warn the public at the end of the video.

Typical 👇

🙌To the Few Psychiatrists Who Still Believe in ECT: See You in Court madinamerica.com/2026/08/to-…

The mental health industry’s incompetence is on full display— In the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, a forensic psychologist called as an expert on criminal responsibility—tasked with evaluating her mental state while she was on a cocktail of psychiatric drugs—admitted on the stand he had never even heard of akathisia (a severe drug-induced inner restlessness that can drive people to suicide or violence), one of the most common and dangerous side effects of the antipsychotics prescribed to her. Asked what it was, he replied, “I’d have to look it up.” How does someone claim to assess a mind shaped by those drugs without knowing what the drugs can do to it? A simple Google search for “main side effects of antipsychotics” brings up akathisia immediately. This level of ignorance is how the industry operates. Psychiatrist Jennifer Tufts claimed the FDA’s black-box warning on antidepressants and suicidal ideation applied only to children—when it covers adults through age 24. Common sense dictates the risk does not vanish the day after a patient’s 25th birthday. Psychiatric nurse practitioner Rebecca Jollotta apparently couldn’t be bothered to look up that insomnia is a primary side effect of Zoloft; instead she treated Clancy’s 48 hours without sleep as “unusual” evidence of bipolar disorder and added the antipsychotic Seroquel. This wasn’t science — it was a marketing campaign that rebrands SSRI side effects as a new disease, a practice exposed in a $1.4 billion settlement over related off-label promotion. Sejal Shah A Harvard-affiliated psychiatrist still repeated the long-debunked marketing campaign that SSRIs correct a “chemical imbalance” or “lack of serotonin”—apparently never having gotten the memo that this theory was debunked years ago (and which psychiatrists claim they don’t use anymore). This level of ignorance and incompetence is not rare. It is mainstream psychiatry and the mental health industry being exposed for what they are.

The Lindsay Clancy case is not an outlier. It is a window into how psychiatry actually operates. Psychiatrists are downplaying the polypharmacy of the 13 different psychiatric drugs prescribed to Lindsay Clancy in just four months, claiming most were “low-dose” and rarely taken all at once. This is an attempt to blunt the public’s reaction to the sheer number of drugs she was given once that information became public. The defense is typical of mainstream psychiatry: ignore the FDA-documented psychological and physical effects of these drugs and the profession’s own minimal standards—standards it routinely fails to meet. For example, the 2026 American Society of Clinical Psychopharmacology (ASCP) task force—one of the main U.S. organizations psychiatrists are supposed to rely on for the practice of psychopharmacology—states clinicians should begin with monotherapy and that “every time you add a medication, you should stop a medication.” Even Stahl’s Prescriber’s Guide—a practical handbook doctors are supposed to use to switch psychiatric drugs—requires accounting for residual activity and half-lives. That means the doctor must factor in how much of the old drug is still affecting the brain so the patient is not exposed to overlapping or conflicting drug effects, unexpected side effects, or withdrawal while the new drug is being introduced. These are the low bars psychiatry sets for itself. In the Clancy case, even these lowest of bars were ignored. Current FDA labeling and clinical guidelines have long recognized that even low-dose psychiatric drugs can require weeks—or longer—to taper and clear, leaving residual effects that continue to act on the brain. In reality, “weeks” is often not long enough. The fact that HHS and SAMHSA are now developing new clinical guidance and training on tapering and deprescribing only confirms what has been known for years: residual effects from these drugs can persist well beyond a few weeks, and current practice has failed to account for it. With current FDA labeling and clinical guidelines, fluoxetine’s active metabolite can persist for weeks. Short-half-life agents such as paroxetine and venlafaxine are well-known for producing anxiety, irritability, and insomnia during withdrawal. Benzodiazepines can trigger rebound anxiety or paradoxical excitation. SSRIs themselves can cause activation, heightened anxiety, insomnia, emotional blunting, or intrusive thoughts. When these drugs are piled on in quick succession by multiple uncoordinated prescribers—sertraline, fluoxetine, mirtazapine, trazodone, zolpidem, lorazepam, clonazepam, diazepam, quetiapine, lamotrigine, and others—no clinician can distinguish drug side effects, residual effects, withdrawal, interactions, or the underlying condition. The patient’s condition deteriorated under this uncontrolled pattern of one psychiatric drug being piled on after another. What this public trial has exposed is how ignorant mainstream psychiatrists are of what has already been publicly proven or disproven. Dr. Sejal Shah, presented as an “expert” as an Associate Chief at a Harvard-affiliated hospital, explained SSRIs as correcting a “lack of serotonin” in the brain—the debunked chemical imbalance myth that mainstream psychiatry claims to have stopped using decades ago. Yet this Harvard psychiatrist apparently didn’t get the memo. Or psychiatrist Jennifer Tufts, who claimed the FDA’s black-box warning on antidepressants causing suicidal ideation applied only to children. The actual FDA warning covers adults through age 24. And as common sense would dictate, there is no scientific basis for claiming the risk vanishes the day after a patient’s 24th birthday. Psychiatric nurse practitioner Rebecca Jollotta responded to Clancy’s extreme reaction to Zoloft—48 hours without sleep—by declaring it “unusual” and evidence of possible bipolar disorder, then prescribing the antipsychotic Seroquel. This was not clinical science. It is the same pharmaceutical marketing script engineered in the early 2000s: reframe SSRI-induced agitation and sleeplessness as “unmasked bipolar” so another profitable drug class can be added. Internal Lilly materials trained sales representatives in exactly this diagnostic switch. The company later paid $1.415 billion to settle charges that included illegal off-label promotion of Zyprexa for such uses. This trial is showing the public that the emperor—psychiatry—has no clothes. Behind the titles, Harvard affiliations, and talk of chemical imbalances and “unmasked bipolar” sits a profession that runs on behavioral checklists, not science. It shows little interest in ruling out real physical causes—such as thyroid problems in the postpartum period—before prescribing psychiatric drugs. Side effects are rebranded as new disorders and used to justify the next prescription. Drugs are piled on with no reliable way to know what remains in the patient’s system, no required training in how to take people off them safely, and no accountability when the resulting deterioration is labeled a new “mental illness.” This is not an unusual case. This is mainstream psychiatry in every day practice: no medical workups for underlying physical conditions—just label, drug, and then blame the damage from the drugs on the patient’s ‘disease.’”