People News
American Psychiatric Association criticizes Tom Cruise
By Cindy Locke Jun 28, 2005, 16:01 GMT
On the Web
Tom Cruise - View Tom Cruise Pictures - Tom Cruise News
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Headlines in People
- 1. Whitney Houston earns half staff flag order from Gov. Christie (VIDEO)
- 2. 2012 MAGIC Fashion and Apparel Trade Show Pictures
- 3. Matt Groening Honored with a Star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame Pictures
- 4. Megadeth frontman Dave Mustaine clarifies Rick Santorum remark
- 5. Sienna Miller Is Pregnant
Older Talkback
page: 1
Give cruise a break. The man isn't any more a doctor than kidman, brook shields or speilberg. He's sprouting propaganda of the scientology crew who really feel treatened by psyciatry since maybe all of its attendants probably could benefit from a couple of hours with a head doctor.
Tom cuise seems to think that he is a doctor cause he goes to some scientology church. Well news for him ,my husband had to go to medical school to become a pediatrician so I guess he wasted his time and should of gone to the church that tom cruise goes to. Good for the psychiatry association for critizing that Mr I know it all I am god attitude that tom cruise has.
Tom Cruise is a closeted homosexual incapable of reproducing with a female, and hides behind every stunt in the book in order to camoflauge the world from who he really is. This new marriage will end in divorce as well. And you can be rest assured that he will have Katie kept silent about anything that goes on in the marriage just as he did with Mimi Rogers. What a loser, he is indeed in need of a good psycho-therapist. I think the medical community should shun his upcoming movie just to show that freak that he isn't all that he use to be.
If you look at how psychological research is structured, you will see that people involved in other sciences consider it *different*. I have two friends who are NOT NOT Scientologists who would tend to agree with Tom Cruise that psychiatry is psuedo science. I think it's sad, because psychiatry can help some people greatly. However, the downside is that some people aren't able to be helped, and some who have been hurt by the meds. This is the group of people who speaks out against psychiatry. But instead of blaming the docs for trying, shouldn't they just be glad that someone is trying to help them? For every crackpot socio psychiatrist out there, there are many more professional reliable caring individuals. And some of the fault here lies directly at the doorstep of the drug companies, who are evidently using the current patient groups as their testing grounds, instead of researching a med thoroughly before it's released.
HAVING BEEN A VICTIM OF DEPRESSION MOST OF MY LIFE, I KNOW FIRST HAND THE IMPORTANCE OF TAKING MEDICATION TO SAVE YOUR LIFE. TOM CRUISE INSULTED ALL OF US WHO, WITHOUT THE MEDICATIONS WOULD LONG AGO BEEN LAID TO REST. HE SOUNDED LIKE HE KNOWS EVERYTHING ABOUT EVERYTHING, 'YOU DON'T KNOW, WELL, I KNOW' SOUNDS LIKE HE MAY THINK HE IS THE ALMIGHTY....KNOWING ALL THINGS. HE CERTAINLY TURNED ME OFF TO SCIENTOLOGY, I PLEDGE NOT TO SEE ANY MOVIES STARRING ANY OF THE STARS WHO PRACTICE SCIENTOLOGY....JOHN TRAVOLTA FOR ONE
Howdy folks. I'm a Scientologist, and thought I'd respond to a few things. Before I get to the main issues at hand, though the APA release was provided above, I didn't see anyone providing the opposing Scientologist-backed release -- for those interested, it's at cchr.org.
So, first, I don't know Tom Cruise and I wasn't sitting at the kitchen table when he had the epiphany to go out and become as vocal in his opposition to psychiatry as he's become. But I do suspect that he's sincerely passionate about this issue and is doing what he feels is right in trying to get people to look and think for themselves -- and then letting the cards land where they may.
Now to my views, and I promise to keep them brief. I think it's the height of desperation to try to solve an individual's emotional or mental problems (no matter how severe, excluding actual brain damage) with psycho-active drugs. Why? Because no one in their right mind wants their mind to be controlled by drugs. It is done out of desperation and hope -- by both the individual and the doctor. And frankly, it takes advantage of a person's and his/her family's vulnerable state. It does not get to the root of the problem, and only masks it (to paraphrase Mr. Cruise).
Does it make people 'feel better' or 'improve their concentration'? Sure, as can speed and cocaine. And using psycho-active drugs to make someone 'feel better' is the same philosophy.
I know, I know. The standard response is -- 'but it's brain chemistry which needs to be balanced, you doltz!'
Severe depression or mental agitation, it's said, is caused by faulty brain chemistry. Or perhaps, as others argue, depression et al cause the brain chemistry to go out of balance. This actually doesn't sound like too bad a theory (particularly the latter version), but my next question then is: which chemicals are out of balance? Last I checked, there is no naturally occurring supply of fluoxetine (Prozac) in a healthy brain. Let alone Ritalin, Thorazine or 300 volts of electricity.
In short, the 'chemical balance' theory is a smoke screen for controlling a person's mind and behavior with drugs (or worse). And that of course is what Mr. Cruise, I believe, was trying to get across.
With that said, if someone were to be given necessary nutrition, or sopoforics (to induce sleep in severe cases), or really any other agent which brings the body and brain back to its normal, healthy condition, then sure, I'd be all for it. But mind-altering 'medication' whose real purpose is to artificially make one 'happy'? Come on, that's not medication or biochemical balancing -- that's legitimization of a 'controlled high'. Let's call a spade a spade.
Brian, I've heard 'get to the root of the problem' from Scientologists before. Please explain.
Brian, Explain to me than why 2 children born in the same family fed the same food and get the same amount of exercise are different? How you say ?Well 1 has bipolar the other has no problems.Or how about twins seperated at birth both have the same problem, or how about sibblings all adopted by different families, but all have ,hmmm lets say schizophrenia shall we? So it has nothing to do with diet. If it had anything to do with diet then how come only 1 child might get a problem but the other children won't in the same family? Or why do twins both have the same problem but grew up in 2 different homes?Leave the medical stuff to doctors and the crap to you guys.Believing that aliens put us here millions of years ago is what you scientologist believe? Now that is a problem.Religion is not what you guys are. Religion is catholics, muslims, christians, not you guys.
Tom Cruise seems to be an unhappy person going through a midlife crisis who would probably benefit greatly from some Paxil.
Kristine wrote:
>Brian, I've heard 'get to the root of
>the problem' from Scientologists before.
>Please explain.
>
It's really what it sounds like -- 'find the real problem'.
We could get into a conversation about all the various solutions for various things, but I guess what I'm saying is ... if it's really a healthy brain that we're concerned about, then I agree. Let's make sure the brain is healthy.
But let's don't fool ourselves by using psycho-active drugs to give kids a 'mini high', and then spin it with the name 'balancing chemicals in the brain'.
Brian, '
I noticed you did not answer my question. Could it be that you know that vitamins and exercise and whatever other stuff scientology spits at you guys is just a bunch of gibberish?
You people are all pathetic and really need something better to do with your lives than sit around and baitch about what Tom said,get the hell over it ,he's allowed to say what he likes and no one can do anything about it .
To flipside,
You are bitching alsoc ,complaining about people's posts ,you get over it.
I really think it is irrisponsible for tom to be saying that there is no such thing as a chemical imbalance. If not given medicine, people with for example, bipolar, could keep having relapses and could commit suiside. I think he should take a walk in someones shoes who does have a mental illness.
i think tom is uneducated on this subject and shouldn't be making comments about it from his lack of expericience.
Leia i agree with you my sister and mother suffer from bipolar and i don't kno where they would be w/out medication. I really hope Katie doesn't suffer from postpartum depression.
I think people who can't bring a person who is mentally ill, back to actual physical health, but only drug them into a false high - as Brian rightfully indicated - have no business being touted as authorities. They are, in fact, false authorities.
As psychiatry has placed itself in a medical field, it is bound by the strict disciplines of scientific proof - however wrongfully. It should not be afforded the luxury of making medical diagnosis based on research which is strewn with language such as 'may be' and 'we believe' and 'inconclusive'. To claim a disease based on research with such language is PSEUDO-SCIENCE! A researcher's or medical professional's BEST GUESS simply is not acceptable as a scientific standard. Best guesses can too easily be bought by pharmaceutical drug money. Even the APA admits there is no conclusive test with which to diagnose a chemical imbalance. I think it was Duke Universities chief of the psychiatry department that said that most of psychiatry is guess work, and if one theory doesn't work, you simply try another. That is why psychiatry is *different* than actual medicine.
To illustrate the problem, let's take a look at what happens to the human body when a person thinks, perceives and emotes. When you experience a loss you often get sad and cry. At that moment, a 'chemical' reaction occurs in your body which results in tears. In normal life, When you are sad, you can often resolve it by getting your attention redirected toward happier things and times. At that point, the chemical 'imbalance' cures itself - you stop crying. Another example of this is when you are scared, the adrenal glands go into overtime to direct you away from the perceived danger or when you are angry, again they go into high production, aka fight or flight mode. One can decide to control their emotions and do so, or decide not to and look like a terrorized chimpanzee. It is easy to see that at least part of your emotional system is controlled by YOU voluntarily, your thoughts, your decisions. There are times when one feels they cannot control their own emotions. The question then becomes, are these chemicals controlled BY YOU, or do THEY control you?? It comes down to the chicken and the egg theory and psychiatry has never, ever resolved this question. Drugs can only alter a person's physical perceptions, which causes them to change their decisions and thereby alter their behavior and emotions. But drugs often does so in a wildly unpredictable way, which is why they are dangerous.
The chemical imbalance theory can logically extend to ANY of one's actions, and eventually abdicate responsibility for all of them. This theory, as postulated, is a downward spiral which leads to attempts to control one's behavior by chemicals and genetic manipulation toward more 'acceptable' behaviors. This is how the idea of 'genetic inferiority' got its start.
To state that it's your brain and nervous system making all of the decisions relinquishes personal responsibility, and degrades your own status from human being to human animal.
It can be argued that the basic problem with psychiatry is that it is in the WRONG FIELD. They try to make spiritual and mental problems over into medical problems constantly without scientific, medical proof of physical disease, disorder or abnormality. All they can point to is the chemical RESULT of emotion and thought. Observing a person's behavior is not valid scientific proof as there can be an infinity of causes for behavior.
Now, originally in Dianetics, L. Ron Hubbard discusses his discovery of the engram - a recording of pain imprinted deeply into the cellular structure itself and manifesting in compulsions, and unwanted emotions. This then lead to a drugless therapy which actively resolved these things, without giving up any responsibility for one's actions. However, when he began to ask the question of 'who or what was looking at these mental images', he discovered that mental healing belonged in the field of religion - not medicine. You will find no effort in Dianetics to create hundreds of labels, and classifications of behavior because there is literally a million different ways in which the involuntary portion of a person's mind can impose itself. However, there is a basic cause and a remedy for all of them, which leads right back to the spiritual being coming into full control of himself and his own actions.
L. Ron Hubbard also had the utmost respect for pregnant women, and has an entire section of the book devoted to pregnancy and pre-natal experience.
www.dianetics.org.
page: 1
Your Talkback on this Story