i.
The justification for many common medications rests on a trial-based framed-conclusion of "Medication X is believed to... [a listing positive objectives] ". Below I give the context for what the "is believed to" is based on, when it describes a medication.
The designs of prescribed medications for mental stress ailments are such that they locks in a person's ailment, whatever it may be, for as long as possible, while the doctor profits from seeing the patient each time they need a prescription refill, and the drug manufacturer profits from having their drugs purchased. The helpfulness of prescription medications for mental stress ailments rides the very line between potentially beneficial to some, and definitively non-helpful to all. And when a pharmaceutical company develops and markets a new medication, their barometer for a successful medication is that the medication can be, if trial results are considered in a selective, very framed manner, potentially, by surface appearance, more positive than negative for a sizeable number of people. That's not to say that it will be positive for anybody, but that it passes the most meager qualification to be technically definable as not completely negative, and hypothetically better than nothing.
If the array of medications prescribed for treatment of mental stress conditions were any less effective, they would be indisputably harmful for all who take them. The device of restraint in these medications, which makes them of extremely marginal use, when they are useful at all, is their aversion to increasing a person's dopamine availability to any meaningful measurement, if at all. And doctors tell themselves all kinds of crackpot ideas of why they would not want to allow dopamine to be increased, but the truth is that a person only has a mental stress condition because they lack the released dopamine to handle work that their brain is trying to accomplish. And so, if a doctor is not willing to address mental stress ailments like depression, anxiety, psychosis, schizophrenia, PTSD, etc, then they should say that outright, and not waste and liquidate people's lives with phony medications while pretending to be willing to address the issue, when everything they do is to avoid addressing the root cause of these issues. Then, a person can know that they'll have to go elsewhere, if they want accurate and honest treatment for their mental stress condition.
ii.
To characterize the usefulness of various medications being used to treat mental stress issues, if there were a line of usefulness neutrality, and to the right of the line were increments going from a beneficialness of +1 up to a beneficialness of +50, and to the left of the line, increments going from beneficialness of -1 to -50, then the average performance of contemporary prescription medications for metal stress would be characterized as a neutral. And again, this is by design. Pharmaceutical companies are not under a legal obligation to cure anybody, and for the sake of capitalism, they are not seeking to cure anybody. Their immense financial profits come from perpetually treating people, and having people to treat, and not from having cured people. But they, and doctors, should be upfront when people come to them for help, and tell people that they are only willing to provide what is lucrative for them, and if what they provide marginally helps the person, then that can be viewed as a bonus for the person who needs the help.
If Methamphetamine were represented in this manner, used in the best manner, it could maybe achieve a +15 in usefulness for some people, and maybe only a +5 for others.
If cocaine were depicted, used in the right manner, then cocaine can deliver a full +50 performance for the average person.
Also, doctors beliefs are very commonly filled with crackpot presumptions about how a medication is effective:
- Some of them actually believe that when a person's tolerance levels out any experience of a medication is where the medication becomes effective.
- Many think that a person showing interest in the positive effect of a medication is a warning sign that they should not be receiving any more of the beneficial medication, as if the sign of improvement over a state of suffering is to not recognize, acknowledge, or value the improvement. And a lot of people who require dopamine-increasing medications know this, and taper their expressions accordingly (just like how pharmaceutical companies taper the effectiveness of their medications so that they deliver the least-possible performance while still being marketable) - the arrogant stupidity of doctors makes dishonesty with them a necessary policy for many people, and this doesn't help things in the long run.
And there are lots of other examples of backwards thinking in professional doctor views, where they seem to be entertaining a mystical enigma of 'the cure is not the cure', 'the ailment is the answer', 'to rationalize the ailment is to be treated'.
ii.
Generally, a doctor is going to be the last person who can be trusted for informed and objective input when it comes to mental stress treatment, drug use, proper medicine application... their working information is purely ignorant fiction, not really any more relevant than medieval superstition: It's just a modern dogma. The information by which doctors are educated is heavily contrived and artificial, and is merely convention, a conduct to follow, a line of thinking to stick to, but is wholly different than the truth of positive and successful health treatment. Doctors also have no real-world experience to draw from to form opinions on the medications which they so confidently give opinions regarding. Their scholastic success was due entirely to them having a level of dopamine availability within their own brains that it leaves them comprehensively unaware of just how unaware they are when it comes to dopamine deficiency ailments.
If a person's improvement isn't obvious to them, they should seek something better, because all degrees of better exist, and have existed longer than institutional medicine's diversions and harmful myths. And if a person doesn't feel the difference a medication makes very clearly, then it isn't doing anything, and anything a person suspects it may be doing is mostly placebo (which is itself dopamine increase), and less than real. And when a person doesn't properly address a mental stress condition within themselves, they are setting their brain and body up for further issues in life, and well as concessions in their experiences, and successes. Whether aware of it or not, a doctor's role when it comes to mental stress ailments is only as a lobbyist for companies who profit off the liquidation of innocent people's lives.
Shrapnel
No comments:
Post a Comment