Tom Cruise says He knows the history of Psychiatry

[DLRDUDE]

Ole Tom cruise is gay

Tom Cruise and Rob Thomas caught in bed
Permalink | Tuesday - June 28, 2005
If there's one thing I know, it's that random gossip from total strangers based on absolutely no facts is true about 100% of the time. That said, here's an email that reader Rob decided to forward in.

So, I work with this girl who has a family friend that works in PR in Hollywood, and she always has fun little scoops about celeb stuff. Well, if this is true, this is just ridiculous! So, the whole Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes thing - apparently, it is, like we all thought anyway, a ridiculous PR thing. Tom Cruise was supposedly caught in bed with Rob Thomas (the lead singer of Matchbox 20) by Rob Thomas's wife, Marisol. Rob Thomas is also a Scientologist. Obviously, nobody wanted this to get out, and Marisol was going nuts threatening to expose them. I think that she might be getting paid off, but to preempt any rumors about Tom, the Scientology people as well as Tom's PR people basically recruited Katie Holmes to play this part of Tom's super-excited girlfriend, and they are just paying her a b*ttload of money. I guess they also woo'd her with promises of what this would do for her career, since she's at best a B-lister. But I guess now Marisol is so annoyed at all of the press Tom and Katie's relationship is getting, she's threatening to go public, spill the beans, and file for divorce.
Sure, why not.

[Mr. G]

So Hardrock69 say's he has evidence but he won't post it. Gee I wonder what that means. Of course the APA doesn't mention that the FDA is putting homicide and suicide warnings on Psych drugs now. Gee I wonder what that means. So far all the Pro Psych people go out of thier way to ignore that fact.

[BOMBER]

Originally posted by MAX
G'Day Mark!!!

What kind of shit did he do while in Oz?

Just a couple of weeks ago Cruise did an interview whilst out here to promote his new flick with 60 minutes,here in Australia.
The journalist who did the interview was told he had to go to a couple of hours lecture on scientology if he wanted the interview.
Anyhow the journalist went along to the lecture so he could do the interview.
The 1st question asked of Cruise was why did I have to go to the scientology lecture to have this interview?
Cruise told him that he didn't have to go.
Then the journalist asked him how Cruise felt about people who thought the religion was for freaks,Cruise got angry as with the journalist and said nobody has ever said that to him before.
Then the journalist asked Cruise about Niciole,Cruise told him to put his manners back in and that he was stepping way out of bounds here.
The journalist then told Tom that these are questions people want to know about,Tom's reply was that only he wanted to know about them.
It was pretty funny,and then at the end Cruise thanked him on the interview,patted him on the back and said great interview.
People here think his a dick more than ever now.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Mr. G
So Hardrock69 say's he has evidence but he won't post it. Gee I wonder what that means. Of course the APA doesn't mention that the FDA is putting homicide and suicide warnings on Psych drugs now. Gee I wonder what that means. So far all the Pro Psych people go out of thier way to ignore that fact.

I believe that's for on anti-depressants for kids for example. Let's not make sweeping generalizations.

[Nickdfresh]

I wonder if Scientologists are now "investigating" MATT LAUER like they tend to do to intimidate any critics or questioners?

[Vinnie Velvet]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I wonder if Scientologists are now "investigating" MATT LAUER like they tend to do to intimidate any critics or questioners?

With these freaks, you just never know.

[Vinnie Velvet]

Originally posted by BOMBER
Just a couple of weeks ago Cruise did an interview whilst out here to promote his new flick with 60 minutes,here in Australia.
The journalist who did the interview was told he had to go to a couple of hours lecture on scientology if he wanted the interview.
Anyhow the journalist went along to the lecture so he could do the interview.
The 1st question asked of Cruise was why did I have to go to the scientology lecture to have this interview?
Cruise told him that he didn't have to go.
Then the journalist asked him how Cruise felt about people who thought the religion was for freaks,Cruise got angry as with the journalist and said nobody has ever said that to him before.
Then the journalist asked Cruise about Niciole,Cruise told him to put his manners back in and that he was stepping way out of bounds here.
The journalist then told Tom that these are questions people want to know about,Tom's reply was that only he wanted to know about them.
It was pretty funny,and then at the end Cruise thanked him on the interview,patted him on the back and said great interview.
People here think his a dick more than ever now.

Cruise is off his rocker.

What an idiot.

The more he opens his mouth, the more people hate him.

[Northern Girl]

Shields Rips Cruise's 'Ridiculous Rant'

Jul 1, 7:29 AM EST

The Associated Press

NEW YORK -- Brooke Shields took aim at Tom Cruise's "Today" show diatribe against antidepressants, saying the drugs helped her survive feelings of hopelessness after the birth of her first child. In an op-ed piece published Friday in The New York Times, Shields criticized what she called Cruise's "ridiculous rant."

Cruise had criticized the actress for taking the drugs, and became particularly passionate about the issue in an interview on "Today" last week.

"You don't know the history of psychiatry. I do," Cruise told Matt Lauer.
He went on to say there was no such thing as chemical imbalances that need to be corrected with drugs, and that depression could be treated with exercise and vitamins.

"I'm going to take a wild guess and say that Mr. Cruise has never suffered from postpartum depression," Shields wrote.

She added that Cruise's comments "are a disservice to mothers everywhere. To suggest that I was wrong to take drugs to deal with my depression, and that instead I should have taken vitamins and exercised shows an utter lack of understanding about postpartum depression and childbirth in general."

Shields said she considered swallowing a bottle of pills or jumping out the window at the lowest point of her depression following the birth of her daughter, Rowan Francis, in 2003. A doctor later attributed her feelings to a plunge in her estrogen and progesterone levels and prescribed the antidepressant Paxil.

"If any good can come of Mr. Cruise's ridiculous rant, let's hope that it gives much-needed attention to a serious disease," she wrote.

Shields described her post-childbirth experiences in the book "Down Came the Rain: My Journey Through Postpartum Depression."

Cruise is a follower of Scientology, a religion that teaches that psychiatry is a destructive pseudo-science.

In an interview with AP Radio Wednesday night, Kelly Preston, who is also a Scientologist, defended the actor's "Today" show comments about Shields.

"If you're going to be advocating drugs, which she does in her book, you need to be responsible for also telling the people of the potential risks."

Preston also said Cruise's heated debate with Lauer was "very helpful because it's just raised awareness. People are talking about it now, and that's what they should be."

"Whatever your political, social or religious background, this is an issue that affects all of us," she said. "It is not just a Scientology issue."

[diamondsgirl]

That shit can be quite serious. Sometimes more like a psychosis than a depression.

Yeah...give the ol' gal some vitamins...she'll be fine.

He'd probably just divorce her ass.

[BITEYOASS]

I think Brooke can take Tom out in a fight. She's freakin twice his height and the Napoleon complex ain't gonna scare her one bit.

[rustoffa]

Maybe those dudes that squirted him with water threw some prozac in and it got in his eyes?

Now he's trippin' on liquid eye acid!

[Mr. G]

The FDA Making Treatment Safe for “Chemical Imbalances” That Don’t Exist By Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD Fellow, American Academy of Neurology June 28, 2005
1. Expressing concern about “psychiatric risks”, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) intends to change the warnings for drugs used to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The drugs they refer to are amphetamine-like, Schedule II products: Concerta, Ritalin, Adderall (an amphetamine banned in Canada but not the US) and Strattera. The psychiatric side effects mentioned in the FDA’s release, “FDA: Concerned With Psychiatric Risks With ADHD Drugs,” are “visual hallucinations, suicidal ideation, psychotic behavior, as well as aggression or violent behavior.” But these are not psychiatric side effects at all—they are signs of intoxication, poisoning and brain abnormality because they appear following the administration of a drug, in subjects who were medically normal prior to taking the drug.
How can I say they were medically normal prior to taking the drug? They had ADHD, didn’t they? Psychiatry tells everyone that ADHD is a “disease” and a “chemical imbalance” of the brain, don’t they?
This brings us to the Tom Cruise-Matt Lauer debate on the Today Show, Friday, June 24, 2005, in which Mr. Cruise charged, most importantly, that, “psychiatry is a pseudoscience.”
In a follow-up Today Show on Monday, June 27, 2005, Harvard psychiatrist, Dr. Joseph Glenmullen—one of their own—made clear that psychiatric disorders are not something abnormal within the brain. While pharmaceutical ads and psychiatrist/physician disclosures to patients for purposes of informed consent, routinely portray psychiatric disorders as chemical imbalances/diseases, they are not—not a single one! Not schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, ADHD, post-traumatic stress disorder, oppositional-defiant disorder (ODD), conduct disorder (CD), nor any kind of depression.
Knowing these were the indisputable facts of the matter, psychiatrist Steven Sharfstein of the American Psychiatric Association had no rebuttal. Their “disease” lie was out of the bag. He lamely stated that insurance doesn’t pay for anything but drugs as though this is justification for drugging 20% of the nation’s entirely normal schoolchildren.
Mr. Cruise has done incalculable good for the American people, who are drugged to the gills in the name of “treatment” for invented, fictitious “chemical imbalances.” He has shed the light of day on a fraud.
This brings us back to the FDA and their professed efforts to learn the true “risk vs. benefit balance” for the drugs listed above when used for the fictitious “chemical imbalance” ADHD. This is no light matter considering that 6-7 million U.S. children have been diagnosed/branded with this disorder. Virtually all of them are taking one or more of these drugs which concern the FDA and which will be the subject of a pediatric advisory committee meeting this Wednesday and Thursday.
Now we know the child diagnosed with ADHD is a normal child, and that the only potential for physical harm to them comes from the drugs/chemicals/compounds/poisons, the FDA states are safe, effective and necessary. When did the FDA cease to be a protector of the people? When did they become a part of the industry they were to help regulate?
Through the years of the invented ADD and ADHD epidemics, the FDA has joined psychiatry in speaking of these and all psychiatric “disorders” as if they were actual physical abnormalities/diseases, and drugging children with these addictive, dangerous, deadly drugs, as if they were. But thanks now to Mr. Cruise and to Dr. Glenmullen, we have had our eyes and minds opened to the reality that psychiatry is a pseudoscience, a fraud and a “pusher” of drugs and that there is no such thing as a “chemical imbalance.”

[rustoffa]

People have been bitching about ritalin for YEARS.

Guess what? Malpractice accusations are through the roof. What about a good ol' fashion LOBOTOMY? You know, a spike to the cerebellum through the eye socket. It's no small wonder the shit comes in pill form now, eh?

Carl Sagan's
Baloney Detection Kit


Based on the book "The Demon Haunted World: Science as a candle in the dark" published by Headline 1996.

The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments:


* Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts
* Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
* Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities").
* Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
* Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours.
* Quantify, wherever possible.
* If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.
* "Occam's razor" - if there are two hypothesis that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.
* Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?


Additional issues are

* Conduct control experiments - especially "double blind" experiments where the person taking measurements is not aware of the test and control subjects.
* Check for confounding factors - separate the variables.


Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric

* Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument.
* Argument from "authority".
* Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavourable" decision).
* Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).
* Special pleading (typically referring to god's will).
* Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).
* Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).
* Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).
* Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)
* Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not "proved").
* Non sequitur - "it does not follow" - the logic falls down.
* Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "it happened after so it was caused by" - confusion of cause and effect.
* Meaningless question ("what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).
* Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the "other side" look worse than it really is).
* Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle ("why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?").
* Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).
* Confusion of correlation and causation.
* Straw man - caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack..
* Suppressed evidence or half-truths.
* Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as "police action" to get around limitations on Presidential powers. "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public"

Above all - read the book!

[Cathedral]

I am on Zoloft now, and the sky always looks great to me.

Tom Cruise is a dick and needs to shut up, Zoloft saved my ass from seriously going crazy, just ask Ford, or anyone who was around the last couple of years reading my shit on this board.

The problem with Antidepressants is that people don't take them like they should. I would take them for awhile and then stop, and that was bad ju ju for the Catster.
I have fixed that problem and i was then able to cope with all the shit i have to deal with on a daily basis.

It's like clockwork now and i feel great, and believe me, that is at the very least a 95% improvement for me.

I do however agree that they are not for everyone.
Different people have different needs and what works for one person may not work for another.

[Northern Girl]

Originally posted by Cathedral
It's like clockwork now and i feel great, and believe me, that is at the very least a 95% improvement for me.

That's great to hear, Cat.

Take care!