Thank you for this interesting lecture-I do have to say however that even the diagnostic terms we use for “mental illness” are based in psuedo science but amazing how much they are now touted as truth or conventional wisdom.
Positivist assertions and Freudian-like labels - accepted, not just as assumptions but as axiomatic truth by those allowed to run Mental Health and most of the public!
Very well spoken, clear and powerful flow of information. Listening to this lecture felt like hearing answers to a bunch of questions I didn’t even know I had. I dream of having the gift of developing my theories/thoughts as perfectly as this.
@@cynthiaennis3107 glad you see it. They regard those who are unfortunate enough to come under their radar as non human, as things . If you are old they totally disregard you and what you say. I have seen this first hand. They state that you do not have any privacy or human rights. The act they operate under is a scam as it is there to make you feel safe but there is no safety when you are written up, discounted, gossiped about and character assisted by the department wherever you go. They are like the hound of hell and then scratch their heads and wonder why their victims commit suicide to get away from their abuse. Don't complain because if you do they will crucify you. Family is their best source of information if they are hostile and want you gone anyway the better. Tgey eill never change and many lives have been lost because of their work practices.
I was told be the department after they corrupted the complaint system , I have been cleared of all mental illnesses, that they would never stop. I was not told what they would never stop so I can only conclude that they would never stop their behaviour. Which is. 1. Writing incorrect information on nursing notes in order to gain a diagnosis .2. Contact all people you have ever spoken to where on the phone or personally and ask them to get information on you. 3. Follow you around. 4. Ring you up and pretend to be someone else. 5.4 Pending to be your doctor and have the right to say you consulted with you even although that is false. 5. Character aspirate you where ever you go. 6. Create stakeholders behind your back. 7. Prescribe drugs in a strength that you know is life threatening 8. Set up incidences where they hope you will be placed under psychological duress. Actually my son paroted this one off 4 5imes in one conversation he stated if you place someone under psychological and emotional duress long enough they will collapse. All of the above with the added denying of human rights and privacy is what has been dubbed as gaslighting after the movie of the same name. So I was told by two departments 1. The complaints department 2. The governance department that the South Australian mental health department will gas light me for the rest of my life. Now seeing as I am in NSW cleared by 4 doctors, before they got yo them, of all mental illnesses and they were prohibited from pursuing me from Jan 4th 2019 I would endeavour to say that they are unreasonable and extreme in their actions.
@@alexandraquijada2329 you are right this should be fixed as controlling behaviour in any relationship is abuse. Families who have narcissism or psychopaths in their personality make-up do attack someone in the family that they feel they can get away with this kind of abuse. They will chase them down even if they leave the town, state , phone number or change their name. When they do this they have a psychiatric illness and are dangerous to their victim.
Very informative video. I work in mental health and it's scary how much pseudoscience and "If it feels true it is true" makes it into therapy sessions. I'm interested why he excluded religion from his definition of pseudoscience though. As a former Christian of 30+ years it's very apparent to me how religion fits every bullet point/criteria of pseudo science spelled out in this lecture.
At 47:29 he starts discussing “treatments that harm” people - and he is discussing treatments which have actually been SHOWN to cause harm. People developed critical incident stress debriefing, “scared straight” techniques, and the DARE program, with the best of intentions. But we know now that these programs do NOT work and are a waste of time, energy and money.
my "psychiatrist" bully me through my family and his wife who phone my family making the "psychiatrist" like an emperor. and they call that "treatment". he always seems so rational and refers me to others as "patients" who is always crazy. he makes himself a victim, when I communicate with him about the bully which is actually his true profession! he threatens me with lawsuits if i don't admire him and still want to communicate. he feels so good about himself.
@@l21n18 He's not trying to prove a paper. This is a talk, not a peer review session. It seems Julie is happy to see some debunking amidst a culture which spreads nonsense, which I can only commend.
@@gessie even if it’s an informal talk, you should still be accurate. “Nonsense” has to be doing more work as a word for you, which is odd because very few things are nonsense. Much of deboonking is done by those as thoughtless as those they debunk
@@l21n18 I would agree, except the definitions are well-defined and publicized already. That, combined with this being a talk, means it's easy to go overboard in the amount of information presented.
Therapy like CBT never worked for me. I end up arguing and disagreeing with the therapists and their methods and conclusions. For me therapy is not life-changing and I think the sessions I received caused more harm than good.
CBT works on average for ~60% of people who work diligently through the entire protocol. It may simply be the case you fall in the 40% for who it isn't effective and should be treated with a different modality. It doesn't mean therapy doesn't work, just that that one treatment wasn't effective but others are.
I enjoyed listening to Dr. Tolin discuss the 9 tactics that folks use to promote pseudoscience, starting at about 31:25. However, I do want to know what the point of “hypnotizing” a chicken might be.
Dale Carnegie called it the three yesses. The idea being that if you could get the subject to say yes *two* times the likely hood of them saying yes to the third (and real closer) was increased. Teaching the technique to my kid and having him ask me if he's been a good boy and do I love him.....can I have that toy? Was so cute to watch.
Good lecture. I have been thinking exactly as David Tolin has been thinking. Someone who is a future therapist, I strive to avoid psuedoscientific methods in favor of scientifically sound information and methods. There is so much work in the field to do and so many poorly done scientific papers making deductive claims and conclusions that are not supported by the findings, but by which can be reached after ideological confirmation bias. Whenever I review my work, the studies I cite and use as sources for my claims, I tend to also represent the whole context of the study. What it shows, what it does not show, what is questionable and so on so forth. In other words, I try to be very careful about what is known and what is unknown. I can give educated guess, predictions and estimations but again I also tend to give the context which is assumptions in some of these cases, such as crime rates for example. I also think that there is a lot of very passionate, very well intention'd professionals in the field whom also unfortunately tend to cause more harm than good by letting their emotions get the best of them instead of rational discourse, empirical evidence and scientific pursuit. It is not the professionals either however, not of the field itself as professionals from other fields tend to overextend to fields they do not belong to, like politics and Psychology. How about the public then? Well it is not to say that public at large is stupid, in fact I would say that public at large tends to be quite smart and have a lot of insight. However, they are not usually very well educated about particular fields of science and they do not possess knowledge. There is this sense of striving for perfectionism so this is not always recognized but intellectually honest people will recognize what they know well, what they have some conception off of but not enough to qualify as experts and then things that they know nothing about. For example. I am studying Psychology and minoring in Neuroscience. I am a son of a Biologist and my sister is a Medical Scientist. I know decently about the fields that my father and sister has a lot more expertise on and I am trying to built my theories according to all these fields and many more so that it does not contradict what other relative fields know. And like I said, I study Psychology and Neuroscience, so I have a relatively " good " understanding of how human psyche works for example. But if you would request me to talk about rocket science, I would decline the invitation because I literally do not know pretty much anything about rocket science. I know very little chemistry from my own studies and its relations to the fields of Biology and Medical Science but that is pretty much about it. Some people however, are what I call " feelers ", essentially they are people who rather act on based on their feelings rather than the more scientifically oriented " thinkers " as I like to call these two archetypes of people. The latter one, as you could guess, are more inclined to think before feeling and think before acting wheres the former group is more impulsive and tend to act before they think and emphasis is on how the information they absorb makes them feel rather than what is actually there and true. The " feelers " are the people who are far more likely to get sucked up along with these sort of psuedoscientific products, theories and whatnot wheres it is usually thinkers in the form of psuedoscience who tend to exploit and prey on emotion. Whether it is selling a " miracle " - product, an idea or what name you. Abuse industry is one good example of such case. Poorly done science that sounds scientific and intellect enough but which is usually utter bogus most of the time. However it passes because it makes people feel confirmed and validated.
Um ok you talk about building your ideas on facts instead yet go off on a completely pseudoscientific idea of archetypes of thinkers and feelers which Also sounds rather self serving in this context as I well rational People like me won’t get caught into this because I’m a thinker. You should know if you are as well informed as you claim That emotions play an important part in making decisions they are not just useless fluff. Furthermore you have no idea what the public knows or doesn’t yet you feel free to pontificate on it.
@@l21n18 You should probably read my comment again. I didn't say emotions do not play a part in decision making, I said the archetypes both utilize feeling and thinking but one prioritizes one while the other is the opposite. My comment on the public is just to point out that one shouldn't be arrogant and underestimate what people know, but rather respect them enough to listen and who knows, maybe learn something new as well in the process. Anyway my original comment was made 5-years ago.
@@Jenkkimie the archetype thing is silly was my first point and I think people who buy into it and see themselves as thinkers are the more likely to be led astray by their biases
Excellent points made at the heart of Swedish science faculties. Being Swedish they don’t make eye contact with each other anyway . That’s possibly a pseudoscientific hypothesis in itself.
The statement that Science hasn't found "Energy Fields" in Biology would really be news to the Science of Biophysics which subject matter includes Biophotons, Bioelectricity, Biomagnetism in fact I would go further & say there is no Biology without Physics no matter how much you want to abstract it away
Just a quick question when the act these guys work under state that they must have informed consent, that they must protect a vunerable person from everyone who is a danger to the psychological well-being and they are not allowed to investigate peoples lives, contact even relatives without consent, go over state borders, listen to conversations they are not involved in, monitor electronic devices. How can they get information without being in the state, talking to the person or consulting with them. But it seems that the south australian mental health department is able to violate tge lives of the vunerable and fragile at will. One lady thry have been doing this to since she was violently raped at 17 was so traumatised by the unethical actions of the department she told me they knew every place she lived in, every town she went to, every shop she snopped at every person she saw. That sent her into total traumatic melt down never having any privacy, never having her human rights observed. She is still under extreme trauma it wasn't bad enough for her to be gang raped but the department added continually to her trauma on a daily basis.
The only valid question is - has anyone been cured? Does it help the patient or the practitioner? Anything else is just hot air and clutching at straws.
Pablo Rooney: You are absolutely right! Hence solution focused therapy! "If it's working then keep doing it. If not then do something else." Solution-Focused and Empowerment therapy are the only two treatments, that I am aware of, which shift the focus of authority and expertise onto the client / patient. The only two that do not adhere to the defect model of treatment. May want to read "saving normal" by Allen Frances, "Manufacturing Victims" by Dr. Tana Dineen, and "Psychology Gone Wrong" by Tomasz Witkowski & Maciej Zatonski.
No one is ever cured under their treatment. If you recover they don't like it and will become a bad smell around your life behind your back. They don't like being wrong because if you disagree you must be mentally ill. It is fraud.
Pseudoscience can be a good thing if you are a doctor getting money from the gov’t. You really don’t have to do anything bcuz nobody expects crazy people to improve.
The treatments he is talking about are irrational in their acting and show irrational thinking. I have found that in order to gain support the mental health department will go from person to person and character assinate their target in order for them to be without support , isolated and socially abandoned. They then use this , hoping that their actions will psychologically damage their target in such a way that They will react to the situation that the department has created. That is what the law calls " criminal " activity.
Mental Health people are actually logical and rational - the key is to reject their bestial assumptions and build a cathexis. As Marianne Williamson says, "Produce Yourself!"
Great lecture..more relevant than ever now in 2023. As a :victim" of the draconian section 135act mental health care detention.. ultimately the result of a complaint I made to the police over three years ago relating to new neighbour's and a stream of malicious intrusions that followed.. On the police recommendation I attended an interview with themselves then with their suggested medical colleague "psychiatrist" (now much to my regret) the report that followed was defamatory and a damning read littered with negative bias! I complained to "Mersey Care" an amendment was offered..but to date the report of errors /lies) has not been rectified after many requests!..Meanwhile my police complaint request was never pursued..the psychiatrist collusion and the spurious medical report clearly did what it intended! I moved area shortly afterwards.. So after the late 2019 event .Mersey Care decided to reactivate the drama by detaining me! So I'm into my sixth week at the Hartley Centre Southport ..awaiting legal representation! An outrage and power grab...
Family Psychologist John Roseman warns parents - "Do not allow your child to be sent for a Mental Evaluation. That's about the worst thing you could do!" / Rosemond has offered to debate any psychiatrist about the existence of ADHD or ADD - but none of them will debate!
@@rebelandseektoprosper8268 when you have an anger response to a simple lecture or conversation you will find that they h ave stepped on your pet deception with truth and as deception loves to hide it cause an angry response.
@@wendyhamilton1318 so you don't think someone can be angry with what someone says because they truly think it's bad, false, stupid information, only the hidden truth? Or harmful information?
@@rebelandseektoprosper8268 actually no anger is a violent expression that causes only harm and is just an outworking of a bruised ego. I disagree with you but there is no anger in me towards you. I am totally against the mental health industry and my studies have shown that it is not medicine, never helps anyone and causes great pain, anguish and harm but I hold no anger towards them
Tests to have done following ECT: ua-cam.com/video/7BaWGCwnxLg/v-deo.html Contact the DK law group in CA to see about joining current national product liability suit around ECT devices if you have had ECT. See other videos as it pertains to medical malpractice under youtube heading of ectjustice.
"Science" is a methodology, but distinguishing between "science and pseudoscience" is political. When I advocate for "science", especially as a scientist, I should rightly be regarded with suspicion. Guess who is funding my research...?
Not hard to guess. There is no methodology in psychiatry. It is pseudo-science. I have listened to a lot of them for and against their own medical discipline. Most now state that they are on a whole delusional . I saw an interview with the psychiatrists who started the DSM it was frightening to say the least as this book of opinions about behaviour is what is used even in the legal system to box in people . Every statement in this book is not only unscientific but was put together by a few drunk psychiatrists who eliminated any behaviours from the book that they did and then tried to state that these behaviours came from a diseased brain. If this is so and they state that it is a scientific book and discipline within medicine then they are schitzophrenic. The most amazing comment I heard from the lectures was that the most dangerous thing a person can do is go and see a psychiatrist. All psychiatrists must first be a medical doctor which means they take an oath of doing no harm, ethical and moral bahaviour respect human rights, autonomy of a person and confidentiality of information with respect of individual privacy. They do not keep their oath and everyone who is unfortunate enough to fall into their web of deceit are lucky if they get away from them.
@@jeanthornton2441 The devil is in the details. Sometimes a psychiatrist is helping me fit more congruently with my sociocultural context, and sometimes a psychiatrist is aiding the sociocultural hierarchy in marginalizing me. I don't disagree that the whole profession tends towards pseudo-science, especially given the reliance on statistical research when most practitioners have only a minimal grasp of inferential statistics.
@@howardpatters3461 the statistical research is a small group of drunk people doing a show of hands, it is a con. You were saying you had a problem. Psychiatrists do not understand the soul where you issues of life , how you act , what you think are. Trust is one thing misunderstood. If you don't blindly trust they say you have trust issues. But to blindly trust is to act foolishly. Look at trust this way. You trust people be to and act exactly according to who they are. When you look at things squarely you do not have a trust issue and you have good strong boundaries. Now look at socialising. To say you socialize today is to say you go out with the crowd , do what they want and feel comfortable while with all people no matter what they are doing. Again to blindly do this is foolishness as you are doing it in order to fit in so you will not be seen as antisocial. As with trust use it wisely socialize with those who fit your fit. Not talking about being biased but being sensible. Think about this and give yourself a break.
@@howardpatters3461 the reasoning is simple psychiatry guilt you into thinking you have a non existent problem. They feed off insecurity, rejection and emotions that bring fear and harm . They then bully you into thinking they are right. Once they do that they introduce drugs that harm your life unto death.
he would say your parents are this and that and therefore you are. ...there is no connection at all. what he says in all in his mind. I dare not oppose. he already attacked me several times. all i have to say is you are so good ...and pay. my younger sister helps the bully a lot. his accounts rely on her who buys a lot of his drugs and spends a fortune on him.
There are some cognitive errors being made. There is such a thing as science and pseudoscience in regards to more concrete areas like the physical sciences. Science relies on accurate measurements. If accurate measurements can be made then there will be pseudoscience and science within that domain. If accurate measurements are not possible, then the scientific method can't be applied so any claims are pseudoscience. Mental wellbeing can't be measured accurately, therefore almost all scientific claims will be pseudoscience. I think this guy misses these very important points.
Mental wellbeing can be assessed through self-report. Even if you are not directly measuring psychological pain or disorder, if someone asks for help it's a good proxy to assume they are suffering. What's not easily measured are all the variables of biology and environment that produce mental states. That said, there is always some clever way to test a more salient part of the mechanism, even in complex systems. Those basic tests should be incorporated in the canon of the science. Now, once one incorporates what we know, a lot is still missing, and there should be both a willingness to accept speculation and an effort to improve tests. Psychology nowadays have developed many lab cognitive and behavioral tests and neuroscience. That should be taken serious.
He has used a technique here he reviewed in his lecture of focusing attention AWAY from his own beliefs and techniques and focusing attention on what he states is wrong with the field. That's number one and while I agree with his skepticism, he would be unlikely to enjoy having it applied to himself here. But we should. Number two is that he is using ENEMIES here, which are what he calls unscientific or pseudoscientific methods. He AVOIDS the PUBLISHED ETHICS OF PSYCHIATRY--which I INSINUATED for most of this video is in fact Psychiatry, but here at the end of the lecture, I see I was wrong. He does avoid being at all critical of Psychiatry--he only takes on what he describes as Pseudoscience in Psychologic practice and nutrition. He avoids ANY real skepticism of the process of DRUG APPROVAL. He PRESENTS the drug approval process as having a very high bar(which is NOT the case, particularly in "Neuroleptics", comparing it to the bar being set low for Psychologic practice. I agree with his basic POINT--but he uses excess bias which is demonstrably wrong--in making it--which uses, once again, a reverence for the example of the drug approval process as a process involving a "high bar". Well it may be a relatively high bar---it is VERY FAR FROM A TRULY high bar at all. And it reinforces the general FACT that ALL practitoners within the scope described as the field of mental health(or what I call the mental illness system, which is a much better description)either approve by silence or by passivity or by failing to state a belief on the subject the ridiculous proliferation of drugs in our society, and as such, continues to live within the construct analagous to that of the Nurse to the Physician--well yes, we may know more sometimes, but we dare not say anything because we owe our livelihood, even when we attack the so called Pseudoscientific community amongst us, to the maintenance of knowing where we must stay within the mental illness system organizational system--ie, subservient to the great gods of Psychiatry. To which I say:PFFFFFF!
this guy understands psychiatry so well. and all of the so called techniques which you can characterize as sales. they are very seductive when approaching you because they simply think these are easy money. they just want to have the easy money. talk therapy is not worth a penny.
This is mostly nonsense simply because the speaker, David Tolin, makes assertions without providing any epistemic framework for his models. In science you can never just make assertions or treat frameworks as scientific by assertion alone. Every single assertion requires a complete, tested foundation and fallacy-free argument. While his goals here are admirable, it's clear he still believes pseudoscientific psychiatric assertions and practives, re-catagorizing them as possibly belonging to either/or science-pseudoscience (again, without justification). Instead of appealing to Epistemology or referecing those that worked on Theory of Science like Epistemologist Karl Popper, he relies on subjective statements by people whose expertise was not in that field. Popper famously critisized both Psychology and Psychiatry as complete psuedoscience and wrote to Psychiatric Critic Dr. Thomas Szasz about his problems with Psychiatric and Psycho-therapeutic claims and treatments. It's exceptionally clear that David Tolin is not interested in an epistemic/scientific approach to weeding out issues in Psychiatry, but instead seeks to desperately blur the lines to justify his use of cognitive dissonance.
Psychotherapy helps, but not because there is a Psychologist next to you, but because you are taking time, thinking about your problems or what make you life harder and you are searching for solutions. The truth is the psychologist does not really helps you... He or she has no effect on you. He or she only takes your money very easily for something you have done yourself... No ?
@@janedoe6704 In my opinion, this pseudoscience is such a swindle. They sit on the sofa listening to people and collect a lot of money for it (which might even be my tax money). They don't even have any responsibility or professional risk. With an engineer, computer scientist, businessman, surgeon, etc. you can prove when mistakes have happened. I have never heard of a psychologist being sued because of a wrong treatment or doing things worse...
Caroline Leaf is a Clinical Psychotherapist - a psychiatrist debated her and said she wasn't qualified about Mental Health, since she hadn't written 50 research papers!
@@rebelandseektoprosper8268 it is a documented fact that psychiatry is pseudo-science. It is smoke and mirrors. Clever wording to confuse the ignorant. In fact the so call imbalance in the brain function that they say causes mental illness was debunked in 1950 the only way you can cause the type of imbalance thry talk about is by using their drugs. If you take them long enough your brain stops trying to balance itself and shuts down giving you permanent brain damage they ever gave a name for it, excuse my spelling, tartive dystopia. When you end up here they say sorry but you have permanent brain damage. No psychiatric drug works any other way. No psychiatric diagnosis is a real disease. The dsm was constructed when a group of psychiatrists got together over a wine or two throwing out all behavioural symptoms they have and simply by raising their hands votes on what they called a set of behavioural acts that could be put together and when together is a behavioural problem. To fix the behaviours they dislike thry will lie, bully, torment, set up and drug in order to make people behave the way thry think normal behaviour should be. It is another firm of dictatorship.
@@wendyhamilton1318 100% I've got personal experience with that, happened to me but also neuro plasticity and expressing genes in a positive way reverses the disease they created
@@rebelandseektoprosper8268 Chris there is no mental illness as described in the dsm 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5. This is proven fact. If you have taken drugs to fix a personality problem you have been deceived. Your personality is on the energy level not in the physical. To damage the physical to fix something that does not exist in its realm is quackery. Which , from the beginning ,is what psychiatry is. Man is body , soul and spirit . We are triune. Our personality love, hate, etc are in our spirit. Hard to explain. But psychiatry has always denied that we are more than bones, muscle and nerve ending with no soul, no spirit. Get a better source of help one that will help you without harming your body. Personality problem ,unless violent, are usually gauged by the environment. If you are different they will find fault in you, report you, dislike you, make up stories to fit their ideas and false memories of you in order to justify themselves and demonise you. The mental health department loves this feeds on this and enables all abusers. This is how they operate.
@@wendyhamilton1318 You don't understand what I'm trying to say, I'll be more clear, I'm 100% on board with what you are saying when it comes to psychiatry, I don't think mental illness exists before treatment in how they say it does, I've been down the rabbit hole of the DSM and found out the in efficacy and lies in psychiatry and big Pharma.
Someone messaged me saying that they are criminals. I have studied every mental health act in Australia, the discipline of psychiatry from its beginning, psychology not from the beginning as it branched out from psychiatry. This is what I have found, my personal findings. Thry act outside the act above their authority, target all those , even psychiatrists who are whistle blowers, if you dare to point out what they have stated is not even close to the truth, dely complaints to cover their breaches, bully the weak and vunerable, stand over those they consider weaker than they are. In fact every psychiatrist must first become a doctor before they continue their studies to become a psychiatrist . When you become a doctor you are ethically bound to do no harm and to work for the good of the patient. As no person is ever healed by psychiatry and those on drugs or have had extreme therapy like brain surgery or electric shock are permanently brain damaged some so badly that they can never recover, some are pushed to suicide by the treatment to get away from the abuse. It is not a science, it is not a medical procedure it is simply a power game over those who society rejects or are so fragile society frightens them or so vunerable due to societies abuses in order to have social prestige, power and money.
@Targetta that is so true they operate outside the law and without ethics. Thry monitor people in their homes, evaluate their private conversations without being in them, set people up to be tested by sets of questions or have relatives send them reports on how you look or what you talk about. They operate behind the backs of the fragile and vunerable. The worst of it is that not only are they operating unlawfully but they place people under extreme duress , divide families, start up gossip, spread their opinion everywhere. All this is gaslighting. Thry operate with narcissistic tendencies and then say they are looking out for , helping, assisting their victim. That is insane.
I wonder what his thoughts might be on "effective" therapy by which the prison system treats prisoners according to "Enneagrams" about their personality and behaviorisms. It seems not a far fetch to believe these convicted people are being conned into believing they are getting better in just the same way they believe reading scripture would actually benefit them. This reminds me of the Purple Hat Therapy in a way.
Mental health is when life gets hard but you want a legitimate excuse to give up without feeling shameful. A diagnosis/label takes away the blame from you to external circumstances.
Agreed, even if it is derivative. During the Nurenburg trials, Gestapo X was asked abut his construction of the third Reich? His reply was the 1929 book ' Propaganda" by Edward Bernays (the father of PR) step one...pick an enemy. Lawson di Ransom Canyon
Astrology *has* changed. Vedic or Indian astrology as it's called. It actually even 'keeps up' with the 1 degree per 72 year change due to the precession of the equinoxes. It's just that scientific. Good talk!
This guy is arrogant. If psychotropic drugs worked all would be well. All psychiatry pushes drugs. Only 25% of psychiatrists do therapy. They write scripts. Get back in treating patients with therapy and maybe folks wouldn’t be seeking alternative treatments.
My guess the proximity of money and people with urgent and ill defined problems which are largely self reported and self described, a well educated class of practitioners but lacking discipline due to the difficulty in diagnosis or pricing efficacy or malpractice. This can lead to a lot of people doing their best and reporting anecdotal evidence. But it creates the environment for pseudoscience to thrive.
@@l21n18 the plant. You know, something called phytochemistry. Is paragoric, which led to the use of morphine pseudoscience? I think this type of thing is backpedaling so the pharma industry can monopolize what's left of naturally derived drugs leading to new synthetics and drugs. Just like they fear Benson compounds in the Oriental poppy plant being synthesized by cartels. You know, because fentanyl isn't already an issue. It's still not an excuse, what they've done with the private citizens rights. Schools should licence people to treat and prescribe themselves different compounds safely, every American citizen deserves that birthright, the model we have today give the rights of the individual to a representative of the state, taking the I from medicine. Which is why our current model is failing people and creating a bunch of either damaged and sick people or drug addicts. If someone gets out of control you revoke their right to treat and you prescribe a physician to guide and work with them along with pull certain licensures or have them work with that physician or go to a treatment program.
@@l21n18 there are many different models of what I just said that can be implemented. As well as easing people with training in schools to implementing this model. What we have in ways is pseudoscience because it does not respect the potential of every human being in the society and empower their rights to know what they are using and how it works in the body. No person should use a drug unless they know how it works or have weighed all of their options. Doctors do not properly respect that and just decide what they think is right. Which is why alternative treatments like ketamine, MDMA and psilocybin therapies are just re emerging from the underground onto the mainstream. There is also evidence that the anti nausea drug onadestron can help relieve symptoms with OCD or other conditions. Many drugs can be used atypically, including stimulants for certain conditions like OCD and benzodiazepines for unrest or OCD related to to high of gaba levels, especially in people adversely affected by small amounts of alcohol or social alcohol consumption. Having it atypically effect their gaba levels. Drugs like the benzodiazepines, prescribed only when they are not drinking can greatly improve the quality of life for them if they have such issues. It is commonplace that the person is seen as an alcohol abuser and is diagnosed with something like delerium tremens and given antipsychotics which cause long term chronic health issues. This is a large part of the problem with today's prescribing and societal model. It is doing harm regardless of the oath every single doctor makes to do no harm. It is the greatest lie ever told and it's been told to Evey single American citizen. Since the false advertising act, because we went from one end of the spectrum of anarchy to total control. Instead of teaching Americans to be Americans.
@@l21n18 addiction around the world could be crushed by a revamping Of the model in an instant. The resources would be there to monitor and deal with the problem through community and policing could be used where it need be. Instead of on prosecuting crimes that, if the model was not as it is currently, would not exist.
A very Western, patriarchal presentation. Global perspectives, Eastern cultures, indigenous cultures, etc. are not represented here. He makes a lot of claims and innuendos that suggest that methods of healing around the globe that have shown efficacy for thousands of years are pseudoscience.
If your green tea from the Kilimanjaro cures headaches, then it will be possible to show that through science. Science is an universal approach. It's not the method of Western society, it's the best method to discover the laws of the universe, including whether your tea cures headaches. If you can't show through science, you have a hypothetical theory (or a hypothesis), which can be right or wrong, but not a scientific theory.
@@l21n18 its not vague, the dude in the video literally said what it is, it's a Method. So to make science all you need to do Is follow the scientific method
Dr. Tolin is a psychologist, not a psychiatrist. Psychologists are not licensed to prescribe medications. I think he’s intelligent and brings up interesting topics here, but of course you are free to disagree with me.
The statement that the field of Astrology has not changed is complete rubbish, new whole systems of Astrology are been added to the Subject all the time & changes to existing Systems also happens
Psychiatry is pseudoscience: since healing people by helping them to train an emotional + dedicated cathexis - is ignored by Standard of Care psychiatrists!
Thank you for this interesting lecture-I do have to say however that even the diagnostic terms we use for “mental illness” are based in psuedo science but amazing how much they are now touted as truth or conventional wisdom.
Positivist assertions and Freudian-like labels - accepted, not just as assumptions but as axiomatic truth by those allowed to run Mental Health and most of the public!
Very well spoken, clear and powerful flow of information. Listening to this lecture felt like hearing answers to a bunch of questions I didn’t even know I had. I dream of having the gift of developing my theories/thoughts as perfectly as this.
The innocent people suffer under this unethical discipline. The industry depends of the ignorance of their victims. This needs to change.
I couldn’t agree more!
@@cynthiaennis3107 glad you see it. They regard those who are unfortunate enough to come under their radar as non human, as things . If you are old they totally disregard you and what you say. I have seen this first hand. They state that you do not have any privacy or human rights. The act they operate under is a scam as it is there to make you feel safe but there is no safety when you are written up, discounted, gossiped about and character assisted by the department wherever you go. They are like the hound of hell and then scratch their heads and wonder why their victims commit suicide to get away from their abuse. Don't complain because if you do they will crucify you. Family is their best source of information if they are hostile and want you gone anyway the better. Tgey eill never change and many lives have been lost because of their work practices.
I was told be the department after they corrupted the complaint system , I have been cleared of all mental illnesses, that they would never stop. I was not told what they would never stop so I can only conclude that they would never stop their behaviour. Which is. 1. Writing incorrect information on nursing notes in order to gain a diagnosis .2. Contact all people you have ever spoken to where on the phone or personally and ask them to get information on you. 3. Follow you around. 4. Ring you up and pretend to be someone else. 5.4 Pending to be your doctor and have the right to say you consulted with you even although that is false. 5. Character aspirate you where ever you go. 6. Create stakeholders behind your back. 7. Prescribe drugs in a strength that you know is life threatening 8. Set up incidences where they hope you will be placed under psychological duress. Actually my son paroted this one off 4 5imes in one conversation he stated if you place someone under psychological and emotional duress long enough they will collapse. All of the above with the added denying of human rights and privacy is what has been dubbed as gaslighting after the movie of the same name. So I was told by two departments 1. The complaints department 2. The governance department that the South Australian mental health department will gas light me for the rest of my life. Now seeing as I am in NSW cleared by 4 doctors, before they got yo them, of all mental illnesses and they were prohibited from pursuing me from Jan 4th 2019 I would endeavour to say that they are unreasonable and extreme in their actions.
@@jeanthornton2441 no better example of what you just said that whats happening with Birtney Spears
@@alexandraquijada2329 you are right this should be fixed as controlling behaviour in any relationship is abuse. Families who have narcissism or psychopaths in their personality make-up do attack someone in the family that they feel they can get away with this kind of abuse. They will chase them down even if they leave the town, state , phone number or change their name. When they do this they have a psychiatric illness and are dangerous to their victim.
Very informative video. I work in mental health and it's scary how much pseudoscience and "If it feels true it is true" makes it into therapy sessions. I'm interested why he excluded religion from his definition of pseudoscience though. As a former Christian of 30+ years it's very apparent to me how religion fits every bullet point/criteria of pseudo science spelled out in this lecture.
At 47:29 he starts discussing “treatments that harm” people - and he is discussing treatments which have actually been SHOWN to cause harm. People developed critical incident stress debriefing, “scared straight” techniques, and the DARE program, with the best of intentions. But we know now that these programs do NOT work and are a waste of time, energy and money.
If they were not hiding behind the department or their doctorates they would be in jail along side all psychopaths
He forgot SSRI
Assault, and making people into pleasure + pain animals - which is really their view of Hobbesian human nature! @@jeanthornton2441
my "psychiatrist" bully me through my family and his wife who phone my family making the "psychiatrist" like an emperor. and they call that "treatment". he always seems so rational and refers me to others as "patients" who is always crazy. he makes himself a victim, when I communicate with him about the bully which is actually his true profession! he threatens me with lawsuits if i don't admire him and still want to communicate. he feels so good about himself.
He's speaking the truth! Well said. But I feel like the audience is not happy hearing this. They might need some therapy after all this truth.
Why would you say that? Also he makes some bland assertions about what the public believes without showing any data
@@l21n18 He's not trying to prove a paper. This is a talk, not a peer review session.
It seems Julie is happy to see some debunking amidst a culture which spreads nonsense, which I can only commend.
@@gessie even if it’s an informal talk, you should still be accurate. “Nonsense” has to be doing more work as a word for you, which is odd because very few things are nonsense. Much of deboonking is done by those as thoughtless as those they debunk
@@l21n18 I would agree, except the definitions are well-defined and publicized already. That, combined with this being a talk, means it's easy to go overboard in the amount of information presented.
@@gessie no they aren’t
Therapy like CBT never worked for me. I end up arguing and disagreeing with the therapists and their methods and conclusions. For me therapy is not life-changing and I think the sessions I received caused more harm than good.
So you could be borderline.
@@a_l_e_k_sandra Borderline what?
@@martynblackburn9632 an individual with a borderline personality disorder, as implied humorously in this speech.
CBT works on average for ~60% of people who work diligently through the entire protocol. It may simply be the case you fall in the 40% for who it isn't effective and should be treated with a different modality. It doesn't mean therapy doesn't work, just that that one treatment wasn't effective but others are.
Another disease-like label!@@a_l_e_k_sandra
Ahhh - this is sunshine in a cloudless sky! Thank you David
How is psychiatry useful if you can't give the right diagnosis and therefore the right treatment. I'm sure you know what i mean by that.
Always work toward the development of a Cathexis - which is what mental health is!
In this lecture many vague thoughts are formulated clearly in a masterful way!
I enjoyed listening to Dr. Tolin discuss the 9 tactics that folks use to promote pseudoscience, starting at about 31:25.
However, I do want to know what the point of “hypnotizing” a chicken might be.
Sounds like garbage
32:35 Getting someone to start saying "yes" is a cardinal rule of salesmanship.
Dale Carnegie called it the three yesses. The idea being that if you could get the subject to say yes *two* times the likely hood of them saying yes to the third (and real closer) was increased. Teaching the technique to my kid and having him ask me if he's been a good boy and do I love him.....can I have that toy? Was so cute to watch.
Yes
Pushing fear and coercion helps to yield yeses! If you complain about the drugs - your psychiatrist may double the dosage!
Good lecture. I have been thinking exactly as David Tolin has been thinking. Someone who is a future therapist, I strive to avoid psuedoscientific methods in favor of scientifically sound information and methods.
There is so much work in the field to do and so many poorly done scientific papers making deductive claims and conclusions that are not supported by the findings, but by which can be reached after ideological confirmation bias.
Whenever I review my work, the studies I cite and use as sources for my claims, I tend to also represent the whole context of the study. What it shows, what it does not show, what is questionable and so on so forth. In other words, I try to be very careful about what is known and what is unknown. I can give educated guess, predictions and estimations but again I also tend to give the context which is assumptions in some of these cases, such as crime rates for example.
I also think that there is a lot of very passionate, very well intention'd professionals in the field whom also unfortunately tend to cause more harm than good by letting their emotions get the best of them instead of rational discourse, empirical evidence and scientific pursuit. It is not the professionals either however, not of the field itself as professionals from other fields tend to overextend to fields they do not belong to, like politics and Psychology.
How about the public then? Well it is not to say that public at large is stupid, in fact I would say that public at large tends to be quite smart and have a lot of insight. However, they are not usually very well educated about particular fields of science and they do not possess knowledge. There is this sense of striving for perfectionism so this is not always recognized but intellectually honest people will recognize what they know well, what they have some conception off of but not enough to qualify as experts and then things that they know nothing about.
For example. I am studying Psychology and minoring in Neuroscience. I am a son of a Biologist and my sister is a Medical Scientist. I know decently about the fields that my father and sister has a lot more expertise on and I am trying to built my theories according to all these fields and many more so that it does not contradict what other relative fields know. And like I said, I study Psychology and Neuroscience, so I have a relatively " good " understanding of how human psyche works for example.
But if you would request me to talk about rocket science, I would decline the invitation because I literally do not know pretty much anything about rocket science. I know very little chemistry from my own studies and its relations to the fields of Biology and Medical Science but that is pretty much about it.
Some people however, are what I call " feelers ", essentially they are people who rather act on based on their feelings rather than the more scientifically oriented " thinkers " as I like to call these two archetypes of people. The latter one, as you could guess, are more inclined to think before feeling and think before acting wheres the former group is more impulsive and tend to act before they think and emphasis is on how the information they absorb makes them feel rather than what is actually there and true.
The " feelers " are the people who are far more likely to get sucked up along with these sort of psuedoscientific products, theories and whatnot wheres it is usually thinkers in the form of psuedoscience who tend to exploit and prey on emotion. Whether it is selling a " miracle " - product, an idea or what name you. Abuse industry is one good example of such case. Poorly done science that sounds scientific and intellect enough but which is usually utter bogus most of the time. However it passes because it makes people feel confirmed and validated.
Well starters it's wise to discredit 99.9 percent of drug study's.
Because the study's are done are either tied back to the drug company.
As do rambling run on flights of fancy. Remember he said that their is no difference from Science and Pseudo science. (3:10)
Um ok you talk about building your ideas on facts instead yet go off on a completely pseudoscientific idea of archetypes of thinkers and feelers which
Also sounds rather self serving in this context as I well rational
People like me won’t get caught into this because I’m a thinker. You should know if you are as well informed as you claim
That emotions play an important part in making decisions they are not just useless fluff. Furthermore you have no idea what the public knows or doesn’t yet you feel free to pontificate on it.
@@l21n18 You should probably read my comment again. I didn't say emotions do not play a part in decision making, I said the archetypes both utilize feeling and thinking but one prioritizes one while the other is the opposite. My comment on the public is just to point out that one shouldn't be arrogant and underestimate what people know, but rather respect them enough to listen and who knows, maybe learn something new as well in the process. Anyway my original comment was made 5-years ago.
@@Jenkkimie the archetype thing is silly was my first point and I think people who buy into it and see themselves as thinkers are the more likely to be led astray by their biases
Excellent points made at the heart of Swedish science faculties. Being Swedish they don’t make eye contact with each other anyway . That’s possibly a pseudoscientific hypothesis in itself.
Severe & sustained emotional abuse causes duress...extreme distress...which can cause all manner of mental/psychological distress.
The statement that Science hasn't found "Energy Fields" in Biology would really be news to the Science of Biophysics which subject matter includes Biophotons, Bioelectricity, Biomagnetism in fact I would go further & say there is no Biology without Physics no matter how much you want to abstract it away
Psychiatry in itself is a psuedoscience.
Just a quick question when the act these guys work under state that they must have informed consent, that they must protect a vunerable person from everyone who is a danger to the psychological well-being and they are not allowed to investigate peoples lives, contact even relatives without consent, go over state borders, listen to conversations they are not involved in, monitor electronic devices. How can they get information without being in the state, talking to the person or consulting with them. But it seems that the south australian mental health department is able to violate tge lives of the vunerable and fragile at will. One lady thry have been doing this to since she was violently raped at 17 was so traumatised by the unethical actions of the department she told me they knew every place she lived in, every town she went to, every shop she snopped at every person she saw. That sent her into total traumatic melt down never having any privacy, never having her human rights observed. She is still under extreme trauma it wasn't bad enough for her to be gang raped but the department added continually to her trauma on a daily basis.
Psychiatrists think like a formula!
The only valid question is - has anyone been cured? Does it help the patient or the practitioner? Anything else is just hot air and clutching at straws.
Pablo Rooney: You are absolutely right! Hence solution focused therapy! "If it's working then keep doing it. If not then do something else." Solution-Focused and Empowerment therapy are the only two treatments, that I am aware of, which shift the focus of authority and expertise onto the client / patient. The only two that do not adhere to the defect model of treatment. May want to read "saving normal" by Allen Frances, "Manufacturing Victims" by Dr. Tana Dineen, and "Psychology Gone Wrong" by Tomasz Witkowski & Maciej Zatonski.
@@T5607-o1s nice! Thank you!
No one is ever cured under their treatment. If you recover they don't like it and will become a bad smell around your life behind your back. They don't like being wrong because if you disagree you must be mentally ill. It is fraud.
@@jeanthornton2441 whoa! Sooo spot on!
Maybe the investors! 😉💰💰💰
He's a great scientist and therapist.
Pseudoscience can be a good thing if you are a doctor getting money from the gov’t. You really don’t have to do anything bcuz nobody expects crazy people to improve.
you understand these charlatans very well. they don't care. but love money dearly. and still claim they are very good and helpful
There's no accountability in the current Mental Health system!
The Archangel Lucifer seemed to be helpful!@@robertcorderchiang3947
very important topic!
Great lecture! Thank you!
Brilliant content....👍
The treatments he is talking about are irrational in their acting and show irrational thinking. I have found that in order to gain support the mental health department will go from person to person and character assinate their target in order for them to be without support , isolated and socially abandoned. They then use this , hoping that their actions will psychologically damage their target in such a way that They will react to the situation that the department has created. That is what the law calls " criminal " activity.
Mental Health people are actually logical and rational - the key is to reject their bestial assumptions and build a cathexis. As Marianne Williamson says, "Produce Yourself!"
So those who disagree with their psychiatrist get labeled as "Borderline". That alone should be cause for concern.
Psychiatrists use these invented diagnosis as weapons to overpower their victims.
Hubristic and of little comprehension!
Happened to me!!
Great lecture..more relevant than ever now in 2023.
As a :victim" of the draconian section 135act mental health care detention.. ultimately the result of a complaint I made to the police over three years ago relating to new neighbour's and a stream of malicious intrusions that followed..
On the police recommendation I attended an interview with themselves then with their suggested medical colleague "psychiatrist" (now much to my regret) the report that followed was defamatory and a damning read littered with negative bias! I complained to "Mersey Care" an amendment was offered..but to date the report of errors /lies) has not been rectified after many requests!..Meanwhile my police complaint request was never pursued..the psychiatrist collusion and the spurious medical report clearly did what it intended!
I moved area shortly afterwards..
So after the late 2019 event .Mersey Care decided to reactivate the drama by detaining me!
So I'm into my sixth week at the Hartley Centre Southport ..awaiting legal representation!
An outrage and power grab...
Family Psychologist John Roseman warns parents - "Do not allow your child to be sent for a Mental Evaluation. That's about the worst thing you could do!" / Rosemond has offered to debate any psychiatrist about the existence of ADHD or ADD - but none of them will debate!
Very informative, thanks!
My major is dance, but I don't want to be dumb :P so I listened and took notes. VERY interesting stuff I learned a lot
Dance training by Julia C. Christensen!
This is a very important talk - must watch!
Important bullshit. He's just Beating Around the Bush just like I want to beat his fucking head in!
Chris why?
@@rebelandseektoprosper8268 when you have an anger response to a simple lecture or conversation you will find that they h ave stepped on your pet deception with truth and as deception loves to hide it cause an angry response.
@@wendyhamilton1318 so you don't think someone can be angry with what someone says because they truly think it's bad, false, stupid information, only the hidden truth? Or harmful information?
@@rebelandseektoprosper8268 actually no anger is a violent expression that causes only harm and is just an outworking of a bruised ego. I disagree with you but there is no anger in me towards you. I am totally against the mental health industry and my studies have shown that it is not medicine, never helps anyone and causes great pain, anguish and harm but I hold no anger towards them
Tests to have done following ECT: ua-cam.com/video/7BaWGCwnxLg/v-deo.html
Contact the DK law group in CA to see about joining current national product liability suit around ECT devices if you have had ECT. See other videos as it pertains to medical malpractice under youtube heading of ectjustice.
ECT - from WW1!
"Science" is a methodology, but distinguishing between "science and pseudoscience" is political. When I advocate for "science", especially as a scientist, I should rightly be regarded with suspicion. Guess who is funding my research...?
Not hard to guess. There is no methodology in psychiatry. It is pseudo-science. I have listened to a lot of them for and against their own medical discipline. Most now state that they are on a whole delusional . I saw an interview with the psychiatrists who started the DSM it was frightening to say the least as this book of opinions about behaviour is what is used even in the legal system to box in people . Every statement in this book is not only unscientific but was put together by a few drunk psychiatrists who eliminated any behaviours from the book that they did and then tried to state that these behaviours came from a diseased brain. If this is so and they state that it is a scientific book and discipline within medicine then they are schitzophrenic. The most amazing comment I heard from the lectures was that the most dangerous thing a person can do is go and see a psychiatrist. All psychiatrists must first be a medical doctor which means they take an oath of doing no harm, ethical and moral bahaviour respect human rights, autonomy of a person and confidentiality of information with respect of individual privacy. They do not keep their oath and everyone who is unfortunate enough to fall into their web of deceit are lucky if they get away from them.
@@jeanthornton2441 The devil is in the details. Sometimes a psychiatrist is helping me fit more congruently with my sociocultural context, and sometimes a psychiatrist is aiding the sociocultural hierarchy in marginalizing me. I don't disagree that the whole profession tends towards pseudo-science, especially given the reliance on statistical research when most practitioners have only a minimal grasp of inferential statistics.
@@howardpatters3461 the statistical research is a small group of drunk people doing a show of hands, it is a con. You were saying you had a problem. Psychiatrists do not understand the soul where you issues of life , how you act , what you think are. Trust is one thing misunderstood. If you don't blindly trust they say you have trust issues. But to blindly trust is to act foolishly. Look at trust this way. You trust people be to and act exactly according to who they are. When you look at things squarely you do not have a trust issue and you have good strong boundaries. Now look at socialising. To say you socialize today is to say you go out with the crowd , do what they want and feel comfortable while with all people no matter what they are doing. Again to blindly do this is foolishness as you are doing it in order to fit in so you will not be seen as antisocial. As with trust use it wisely socialize with those who fit your fit. Not talking about being biased but being sensible. Think about this and give yourself a break.
@@jeanthornton2441 I don't follow your reasoning, but I appreciate your effort to encourage growth in my awareness.
@@howardpatters3461 the reasoning is simple psychiatry guilt you into thinking you have a non existent problem. They feed off insecurity, rejection and emotions that bring fear and harm . They then bully you into thinking they are right. Once they do that they introduce drugs that harm your life unto death.
he would say your parents are this and that and therefore you are. ...there is no connection at all. what he says in all in his mind. I dare not oppose. he already attacked me several times. all i have to say is you are so good ...and pay. my younger sister helps the bully a lot. his accounts rely on her who buys a lot of his drugs and spends a fortune on him.
There are some cognitive errors being made. There is such a thing as science and pseudoscience in regards to more concrete areas like the physical sciences. Science relies on accurate measurements. If accurate measurements can be made then there will be pseudoscience and science within that domain. If accurate measurements are not possible, then the scientific method can't be applied so any claims are pseudoscience. Mental wellbeing can't be measured accurately, therefore almost all scientific claims will be pseudoscience. I think this guy misses these very important points.
Mental wellbeing can be assessed through self-report. Even if you are not directly measuring psychological pain or disorder, if someone asks for help it's a good proxy to assume they are suffering.
What's not easily measured are all the variables of biology and environment that produce mental states. That said, there is always some clever way to test a more salient part of the mechanism, even in complex systems. Those basic tests should be incorporated in the canon of the science.
Now, once one incorporates what we know, a lot is still missing, and there should be both a willingness to accept speculation and an effort to improve tests. Psychology nowadays have developed many lab cognitive and behavioral tests and neuroscience. That should be taken serious.
He has used a technique here he reviewed in his lecture of focusing attention AWAY from his own beliefs and techniques and focusing attention on what he states is wrong with the field. That's number one and while I agree with his skepticism, he would be unlikely to enjoy having it applied to himself here. But we should. Number two is that he is using ENEMIES here, which are what he calls unscientific or pseudoscientific methods. He AVOIDS the PUBLISHED ETHICS OF PSYCHIATRY--which I INSINUATED for most of this video is in fact Psychiatry, but here at the end of the lecture, I see I was wrong. He does avoid being at all critical of Psychiatry--he only takes on what he describes as Pseudoscience in Psychologic practice and nutrition. He avoids ANY real skepticism of the process of DRUG APPROVAL. He PRESENTS the drug approval process as having a very high bar(which is NOT the case, particularly in "Neuroleptics", comparing it to the bar being set low for Psychologic practice. I agree with his basic POINT--but he uses excess bias which is demonstrably wrong--in making it--which uses, once again, a reverence for the example of the drug approval process as a process involving a "high bar". Well it may be a relatively high bar---it is VERY FAR FROM A TRULY high bar at all. And it reinforces the general FACT that ALL practitoners within the scope described as the field of mental health(or what I call the mental illness system, which is a much better description)either approve by silence or by passivity or by failing to state a belief on the subject the ridiculous proliferation of drugs in our society, and as such, continues to live within the construct analagous to that of the Nurse to the Physician--well yes, we may know more sometimes, but we dare not say anything because we owe our livelihood, even when we attack the so called Pseudoscientific community amongst us, to the maintenance of knowing where we must stay within the mental illness system organizational system--ie, subservient to the great gods of Psychiatry. To which I say:PFFFFFF!
He talks in z way that seems to be sort of minupulative.
Some will not agree and we call them borderline, this got my like
this guy understands psychiatry so well. and all of the so called techniques which you can characterize as sales. they are very seductive when approaching you because they simply think these are easy money. they just want to have the easy money. talk therapy is not worth a penny.
Uh so they say and putting pills into people is? You realize that’s one thing they use now
They will draw a blood test on someone who is suspected of skipping their psych drugs! @@l21n18
Imploration and exploitation!
This is mostly nonsense simply because the speaker, David Tolin, makes assertions without providing any epistemic framework for his models. In science you can never just make assertions or treat frameworks as scientific by assertion alone. Every single assertion requires a complete, tested foundation and fallacy-free argument. While his goals here are admirable, it's clear he still believes pseudoscientific psychiatric assertions and practives, re-catagorizing them as possibly belonging to either/or science-pseudoscience (again, without justification). Instead of appealing to Epistemology or referecing those that worked on Theory of Science like Epistemologist Karl Popper, he relies on subjective statements by people whose expertise was not in that field. Popper famously critisized both Psychology and Psychiatry as complete psuedoscience and wrote to Psychiatric Critic Dr. Thomas Szasz about his problems with Psychiatric and Psycho-therapeutic claims and treatments.
It's exceptionally clear that David Tolin is not interested in an epistemic/scientific approach to weeding out issues in Psychiatry, but instead seeks to desperately blur the lines to justify his use of cognitive dissonance.
Huh?
Psychotherapy helps, but not because there is a Psychologist next to you, but because you are taking time, thinking about your problems or what make you life harder and you are searching for solutions. The truth is the psychologist does not really helps you... He or she has no effect on you. He or she only takes your money very easily for something you have done yourself... No ?
Yes. That is exactly what it is.
You forgot the fact that some therapist are abusive and can actually make clients worse. Everyone always forgets that.
@@janedoe6704 In my opinion, this pseudoscience is such a swindle. They sit on the sofa listening to people and collect a lot of money for it (which might even be my tax money). They don't even have any responsibility or professional risk. With an engineer, computer scientist, businessman, surgeon, etc. you can prove when mistakes have happened. I have never heard of a psychologist being sued because of a wrong treatment or doing things worse...
Caroline Leaf is a Clinical Psychotherapist - a psychiatrist debated her and said she wasn't qualified about Mental Health, since she hadn't written 50 research papers!
Pushing labels, compliance and fear!@@janedoe6704
Brilliant lecture! Thanks so much for the upload :)
pseudoscience
@@rebelandseektoprosper8268 it is a documented fact that psychiatry is pseudo-science. It is smoke and mirrors. Clever wording to confuse the ignorant. In fact the so call imbalance in the brain function that they say causes mental illness was debunked in 1950 the only way you can cause the type of imbalance thry talk about is by using their drugs. If you take them long enough your brain stops trying to balance itself and shuts down giving you permanent brain damage they ever gave a name for it, excuse my spelling, tartive dystopia. When you end up here they say sorry but you have permanent brain damage. No psychiatric drug works any other way. No psychiatric diagnosis is a real disease. The dsm was constructed when a group of psychiatrists got together over a wine or two throwing out all behavioural symptoms they have and simply by raising their hands votes on what they called a set of behavioural acts that could be put together and when together is a behavioural problem. To fix the behaviours they dislike thry will lie, bully, torment, set up and drug in order to make people behave the way thry think normal behaviour should be. It is another firm of dictatorship.
@@wendyhamilton1318 100% I've got personal experience with that, happened to me but also neuro plasticity and expressing genes in a positive way reverses the disease they created
@@rebelandseektoprosper8268 Chris there is no mental illness as described in the dsm 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5. This is proven fact. If you have taken drugs to fix a personality problem you have been deceived. Your personality is on the energy level not in the physical. To damage the physical to fix something that does not exist in its realm is quackery. Which , from the beginning ,is what psychiatry is. Man is body , soul and spirit . We are triune. Our personality love, hate, etc are in our spirit. Hard to explain. But psychiatry has always denied that we are more than bones, muscle and nerve ending with no soul, no spirit. Get a better source of help one that will help you without harming your body. Personality problem ,unless violent, are usually gauged by the environment. If you are different they will find fault in you, report you, dislike you, make up stories to fit their ideas and false memories of you in order to justify themselves and demonise you. The mental health department loves this feeds on this and enables all abusers. This is how they operate.
@@wendyhamilton1318 You don't understand what I'm trying to say, I'll be more clear, I'm 100% on board with what you are saying when it comes to psychiatry, I don't think mental illness exists before treatment in how they say it does, I've been down the rabbit hole of the DSM and found out the in efficacy and lies in psychiatry and big Pharma.
Someone messaged me saying that they are criminals. I have studied every mental health act in Australia, the discipline of psychiatry from its beginning, psychology not from the beginning as it branched out from psychiatry. This is what I have found, my personal findings. Thry act outside the act above their authority, target all those , even psychiatrists who are whistle blowers, if you dare to point out what they have stated is not even close to the truth, dely complaints to cover their breaches, bully the weak and vunerable, stand over those they consider weaker than they are. In fact every psychiatrist must first become a doctor before they continue their studies to become a psychiatrist . When you become a doctor you are ethically bound to do no harm and to work for the good of the patient. As no person is ever healed by psychiatry and those on drugs or have had extreme therapy like brain surgery or electric shock are permanently brain damaged some so badly that they can never recover, some are pushed to suicide by the treatment to get away from the abuse. It is not a science, it is not a medical procedure it is simply a power game over those who society rejects or are so fragile society frightens them or so vunerable due to societies abuses in order to have social prestige, power and money.
@Targetta that is so true they operate outside the law and without ethics. Thry monitor people in their homes, evaluate their private conversations without being in them, set people up to be tested by sets of questions or have relatives send them reports on how you look or what you talk about. They operate behind the backs of the fragile and vunerable. The worst of it is that not only are they operating unlawfully but they place people under extreme duress , divide families, start up gossip, spread their opinion everywhere. All this is gaslighting. Thry operate with narcissistic tendencies and then say they are looking out for , helping, assisting their victim. That is insane.
@@wendyhamilton1318 yup
Prestige, power, money and menticide!
Awesome
I wonder what his thoughts might be on "effective" therapy by which the prison system treats prisoners according to "Enneagrams" about their personality and behaviorisms. It seems not a far fetch to believe these convicted people are being conned into believing they are getting better in just the same way they believe reading scripture would actually benefit them. This reminds me of the Purple Hat Therapy in a way.
Sedation!
Your "Scientific" analysis of the fat reducing device proves to me how much Scientist often mistake Rationality for Empiricim
Brilliant!
Mental health is when life gets hard but you want a legitimate excuse to give up without feeling shameful. A diagnosis/label takes away the blame from you to external circumstances.
Gets properly interesting with the '9 ways' at 31:20
.. My only reservation being that his first example is, in my view, a fictional cure for a fictional problem!
Agreed, even if it is derivative. During the Nurenburg trials, Gestapo X was asked abut his construction of the third Reich? His reply was the 1929 book ' Propaganda" by Edward Bernays (the father of PR) step one...pick an enemy. Lawson di Ransom Canyon
Were psychiatrists put on trial at Nuremberg? For their Tiergarten 4 Program - much like the current MAID Act in Canada!@@MarkLawsonY3K
my psychiatrist insists that i was raped by my father. and he wanted to hypnotize me to help me with the repressed memory. he is very creative!!!
Um, can you get another psychiatrist? Because that session of hypnotism could easily inject a false memory, which would be a really bad thing.
Patrick Marsolek, CHT has a Self-Hypnosis Manual - Transform Yourself.
Meditation can work!@@Tina06019
Pseudo Therapy can cure Aurism?
Magnum Opus.
Coz the masters don't like this title, algorithms know their duties!
New depths of metaphysics! :(
Where can I buy one of those nifty purple hats though?
43:39 i cannot find this cicero quote, does somebody know when did Cicero said this ?
Astrology *has* changed. Vedic or Indian astrology as it's called. It actually even 'keeps up' with the 1 degree per 72 year change due to the precession of the equinoxes. It's just that scientific. Good talk!
Where can I go to get shoe bashing therapy?
none of his approaches are supported scientifically. bullying is very good only it's illegal. verbal abuse is used but it's illegal.
Excellent example of word salad in the first few minutes.
This man didn’t get nearly enough credit for his jokes!
This guy is arrogant. If psychotropic drugs worked all would be well. All psychiatry pushes drugs. Only 25% of psychiatrists do therapy. They write scripts. Get back in treating patients with therapy and maybe folks wouldn’t be seeking alternative treatments.
Build cathexis!
Explains the antivaxers point of view.
Or just pro choice regarding such!
Imagine blindly trusting pharmaceutical companies when they regularly get fined billions of dollars for lying to doctors and patients lol
My guess the proximity of money and people with urgent and ill defined problems which are largely self reported and self described, a well educated class of practitioners but lacking discipline due to the difficulty in diagnosis or pricing efficacy or malpractice. This can lead to a lot of people doing their best and reporting anecdotal evidence. But it creates the environment for pseudoscience to thrive.
Psychiatry is iatrogenic!
The chemistry is there, hyperforin and st johns wart,
In what
@@l21n18 the plant. You know, something called phytochemistry. Is paragoric, which led to the use of morphine pseudoscience? I think this type of thing is backpedaling so the pharma industry can monopolize what's left of naturally derived drugs leading to new synthetics and drugs. Just like they fear Benson compounds in the Oriental poppy plant being synthesized by cartels. You know, because fentanyl isn't already an issue.
It's still not an excuse, what they've done with the private citizens rights.
Schools should licence people to treat and prescribe themselves different compounds safely, every American citizen deserves that birthright, the model we have today give the rights of the individual to a representative of the state, taking the I from medicine. Which is why our current model is failing people and creating a bunch of either damaged and sick people or drug addicts.
If someone gets out of control you revoke their right to treat and you prescribe a physician to guide and work with them along with pull certain licensures or have them work with that physician or go to a treatment program.
@@l21n18 there are many different models of what I just said that can be implemented. As well as easing people with training in schools to implementing this model.
What we have in ways is pseudoscience because it does not respect the potential of every human being in the society and empower their rights to know what they are using and how it works in the body. No person should use a drug unless they know how it works or have weighed all of their options.
Doctors do not properly respect that and just decide what they think is right. Which is why alternative treatments like ketamine, MDMA and psilocybin therapies are just re emerging from the underground onto the mainstream. There is also evidence that the anti nausea drug onadestron can help relieve symptoms with OCD or other conditions.
Many drugs can be used atypically, including stimulants for certain conditions like OCD and benzodiazepines for unrest or OCD related to to high of gaba levels, especially in people adversely affected by small amounts of alcohol or social alcohol consumption. Having it atypically effect their gaba levels.
Drugs like the benzodiazepines, prescribed only when they are not drinking can greatly improve the quality of life for them if they have such issues.
It is commonplace that the person is seen as an alcohol abuser and is diagnosed with something like delerium tremens and given antipsychotics which cause long term chronic health issues.
This is a large part of the problem with today's prescribing and societal model.
It is doing harm regardless of the oath every single doctor makes to do no harm.
It is the greatest lie ever told and it's been told to Evey single American citizen. Since the false advertising act, because we went from one end of the spectrum of anarchy to total control. Instead of teaching Americans to be Americans.
@@l21n18 addiction around the world could be crushed by a revamping Of the model in an instant. The resources would be there to monitor and deal with the problem through community and policing could be used where it need be. Instead of on prosecuting crimes that, if the model was not as it is currently, would not exist.
A very Western, patriarchal presentation. Global perspectives, Eastern cultures, indigenous cultures, etc. are not represented here. He makes a lot of claims and innuendos that suggest that methods of healing around the globe that have shown efficacy for thousands of years are pseudoscience.
Cite a study...
If your green tea from the Kilimanjaro cures headaches, then it will be possible to show that through science. Science is an universal approach. It's not the method of Western society, it's the best method to discover the laws of the universe, including whether your tea cures headaches.
If you can't show through science, you have a hypothetical theory (or a hypothesis), which can be right or wrong, but not a scientific theory.
Well definitions are made by those designing the terms
@@Guizambaldi science is a rather vague term so I don’t know, what’s with Kilimanjaro too
@@l21n18 its not vague, the dude in the video literally said what it is, it's a Method. So to make science all you need to do Is follow the scientific method
I'll give you the dirty list:
Psychiatry
Lol here's to you tapping and emdr
✨🙏👏🙌✨
An incredibly self-important windbag. It's no wonder psychiatry is in such a goddamned mess.
Dr. Tolin is a psychologist, not a psychiatrist. Psychologists are not licensed to prescribe medications.
I think he’s intelligent and brings up interesting topics here, but of course you are free to disagree with me.
8:00
The statement that the field of Astrology has not changed is complete rubbish, new whole systems of Astrology are been added to the Subject all the time & changes to existing Systems also happens
Still a pseudoscience. Try reading some other horoscope and see how right it is.
Purple Hat Therapy... OMG thats so funny
psychiatry falls into the same catogory as dianetics!
empirically supported, he does not read a paper!!!
Psychiatry is as dangerous as chiropractors and acupuncturists
Utter nonsense. Chiropractic and acupuncture are safe and affective treatments. Psychiatry is a very dangerous pseudoscience.
Gonna guess by pseudoscience it means things that don’t fit his views
Maybe you should watch the video.
Psychiatry is pseudoscience: since healing people by helping them to train an emotional + dedicated cathexis - is ignored by Standard of Care psychiatrists!
Lol
#TorturePorn? #AproclivityOfEntitledPersons
your hard to follow