Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Lou's respnse-their blood Lamdage22

Posted by Lou Pilder on August 27, 2015, at 9:11:25

In reply to Re: Rule of no advocating without telling the risks, posted by Lamdage22 on August 27, 2015, at 8:20:59

> Because right now it looks like there are no risks and everyone thinks its a no brainer that you MUST try everything.
> And thats not really accurate.

You wrote,[ looks like there are no risks (in taking the drugs allowed to be promoted here as "medicines")...].
There are laws regarding what is known as "false advertising". False advertising is when someone is misled or deceived by a sign or advertisement or such. A question here could be if this site is an advertisement for psychiatry that drugs people and if so are the readers being deceived into thinking that these drugs are safe and that they are medicines for illnesses and that they are what they say, such as "antidepressants" or "mood stabalizers".
If you examine the television commercials for these drugs, they portray happy people with music and the voice over gives the potential unhappy consequences. But the music going and the way the words come out are done by masterminds of merchandising, making psychiatry a house of merchandise to those psychiatrists that sell the drugs via prescription and the client paying the psychiatrist by those that are convinced by the advertising that they need the drugs for their depression and such. For the consumer can not obtain the drugs without the partnership existing between the drug manufacturers and the psychiatrist/doctor and others that profit from the drugs such as the pharmacy. Then this site could become an advertisement in and of itself for psychiatric drugs because the owner is a psychiatrist which could constitute a{testimonial}. Now t drug makers escape liability by listing the adverse consequences ahead of time. Here, the psychiatrist does not act on posts where drugs are advocated or suggested by following the FDA rules to list the adverse consequences which could falsely lead readers to believe that the dugs advocated are safer than they really are and take them and become addicted to them or be killed by them or receive a life-ruining condition from them by readers thinking that it is supportive to advocate taking these drugs since support here takes precedence or worse, that what is here, will be good or this community as a whole , so Mr. Hsiung thinks.
I try to warn readers here and those that are killed by these drugs, who will have their blood be upon them?




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Lou Pilder thread:1081776