Go to 2.1.      HOME                                 2. 2.   The Wrong (Forced) Treatment (continuation)      As noted, my complaint to the medical ethics board was comprised of two points. The first, was that in 1969 I was diagnosed with hyperlipidemia, which I had had for years, while I was continually prescribed psychoactive drugs even though they were not helping. The second was that less than a year later, in 1970, I was involuntarily hospitalized in spite of all of this. P. mentioned nothing in his letter to the Medical Ethics Board about the high levels of fat that were detected in me in 1969 (10 mmol/l for triglycerides, which is  5 to 20 times too high, the normal level being between  045-to 2,0 mmol/l, and for cholesterol  from  8,6 -10,5 mmol/l, normal level < 6,5 ) and which caused opaque serum. (He also mentioned nothing of abnormal glucose tolerance.) At such levels, in my opinion, the hyperlipidemia is hardly a light form. I know from experience that symptoms can occur at much lower levels.      In 1970, the year of the forced treatment about which I complained to the medical ethics board, I had already not been treated correctly for this hyperlipidemia for many years, but I had been treated totally incorrectly by P. (In fact I was not treated for it at all from 1961 to 1969 but P. cannot be blamed for that as I began treatment under his auspices only in 1967, and at that time not so much was known about hyperlipidemia yet in the medical world as far as I know.) As P. continued to administer psychoactive drugs - during the forced treatment even in mad doses - he was never able to determine what effect would have been attained by treating only the hyperlipidemia, without the side effects of the psychoactive drugs. Therefore in no way can he have ruled out this condition as the cause of my symptoms! On the contrary, by continuing to treat me with psychoactive drugs, he only increased the symptoms I had before.     He attached reports which supposedly to his defense showed how bad my situation had been. These reports were from 1972 and 1973, so the period after the damaging forced treatment! So those reports cannot possibly have explained what benefit the forced treatment had had, on the contrary! I never noticed the Medical Ethics Board having any problem with this.     (From 1972 to 1975 I was in the institution voluntarily. In 1972 I agreed to be admitted because the forced treatment had left me such a wreck that at home, also partly for other reasons, I was totally helpless. Without the forced treatment, I surely would not have needed the later hospitalization. So the “voluntary” admission left a bad aftertaste.)    In his defense, P. also mentioned a single incident in which I supposedly demanded a stimulating drug, which supposedly happened in 1974, nearly at the end of my treatment. He presented this as contradictory to my effort to become drug-free. I don't remember exactly why I supposedly demanded that drug, but there must have been a reason for it. What I do remember very well from that period is the threat that after my father's death, I would be locked up in that institution for life(!). P. never gave me any sign that he objected to that. Occasionally, to allay the extreme stress that this caused me, I would ask for medication. In his letter to the Central Medical Ethics Board P. accused me of several other things as well. In no way did he demonstrate what the benefit of forced treatment would have been.    Most of my symptoms, as mentioned in 1, were from 1963 made worse by the psychiatric treatment. The forced treatment, however, was worst of all. The major reason for that is the fact that the various psychoactive drugs that were prescribed to me caused the formation of tough mucous in my lungs, which in turn caused more muscle pains and headaches, more lethargy, and made my body feel even less bearable.    In 1975 I could no longer use my right arm because of all the drugs. When I complained about my muscle pains, P. told me that I don't have a muscle disease, which was not necessary to have pain.    The mucous regularly caused creaking sounds, also in my head. This was soon interpreted as hallucinations. However, I have never had hallucinations or the like. After in 1972 P. himself observed this phenomenon, he wrote a neurologist in the academic hospital in which I was treated in 1970: In addition, there is an objectively observable symptom, namely a creaking sound in his head. This sound is at times clearly discernable. The cause is unclear. Possibly the skull seems are not well-formed. It was P.'s so-manyeth  total misinterpretation! P. never understood anything about the cause of the bodily symptoms which he observed and their consequences for me mentally. The correct therapy for the hyperlipidemia from which I suffered is a special diet and if needed medicine - not psychoactive drugs - and avoiding stress.    Long-term use of psychoactive drugs can disturb all sorts of vital functions such as vision (tryptizol),  breathing, urination, perspiration, sexuality (melleril) and others. I believe it also causes the glassy gaze and over-salivation which I have observed in long-term users. Psychoactive drugs can after a time cause all sorts of symptoms that are difficult to define, from serious physical degeneration to complains like fear. Many drugs are already in the short term worse than the disease. That is why it is likely that in many cases the long-term and unnecessary administration of psychoactive drugs has caused permanent damage.    P.  erroneously opined that I needed a “maintenance dose” of such drugs. He pooh-poohed my contention that my treatment by a previous psychiatrist, which I had also experienced as barbaric, had done me no good. That someone of his profession might be making a mistake was impossible to him. Sometimes I had the impression that he had a personal interest in persuading me that I was mentally ill! That way he could continue treating me, as his profession was also his hobby, he once told me.    In the course of the many intervening years,  I have heard and read the most insane things and ideas about me based on my psychiatric status. Some of those things were plain insulting. The way some people, not only psychiatrists, expressed disorders and attributes which they though I had, or which they sometimes most hurriedly ascribed to me, revealed unlimited arrogance and total exaggeration of their own insights and abilities. Also the patronizing attitude some of them had I found irritating.     The many psychological tests contributed nothing at all to the recovery from what I was suffering. In 1975 doing such a test was considered more important on that ward than finding housing for me for when I would be released. So I also became homeless because I was not granted the time to find a place to live. Supposed talk therapy is often no more than expensive nonsense. The psychiatric treatments cost millions!!!    What did have a positive effect on me in 1975 and also thereafter, were the breathing and relaxations techniques which I was taught. Considering my poor muscle tone and lung disorder, that's not so strange. Using these exercises I was able to completely phase out the psychiatric drugs!    In 1986 x-ray photographs of my lungs revealed disorders which, according to an oral message from the lung specialist, I may have had since I was 21. My symptoms, coughing up mucous, which had led the general physician I had in 1986 to refer me to the lung specialist, were known to his clinic since 1975. Probably because of my psychiatric background I was referred to the specialist many years too late. Most likely for the same reason, this doctor investigated my fat levels many years too late, and I was prescribed the special diet I needed as many years too late.  I informed him that I did not wish to continue using his services because of these incidents of negligence.    The next family doctor didn't suit me long either. He wanted to prescribe me psychoactive drugs again because of my noisiness. Probably my psychiatric past influenced him in this. However, I was not inclined to allow myself to be poisoned again. In retrospect, I have never regretted this decision. I only regret that I was not able to take it much earlier.    In 1994 my current doctor informed me unasked that the forced treatment that I received in 1970 was based on an incorrect diagnosis! (See 3. General Physician's Statement.) P.'s claim at the Medical Ethics Board that throughout my past I have “always somatized my problems” seems even less likely to be true now. I no longer know any sensible person who doubts that P. was wrong. The facts prove he was wrong. Precisely because of my insight that psychoactive drugs were not good for me, he tried to portray me to the whole world as an obstinate fool. According to the latest scientific views, the hyperlipidemia from which I suffer seems to be caused by a deficiency of the enzyme saccharase-isomaltase, which is a biochemical catalyst that assists in regulating blood sugar.    Through the years I have come to the opinion that psychiatry is 95% humbug. And humbug is deception, fraud, and quackery. Mental illnesses do not exist. (See also 6.) And if they don't exist, they don't have to be, no, they can't be treated. On the other hand, organic disorders that cause deviant behavior do exist, and insofar as they can be treated, the psychiatrist is not the person needed for that. In the late nineties, a psychiatrist was quoted in a daily newspaper as saying that he had never healed anybody.    Chapter 9 is a lecture by the psychiatrist Van der Kroef,  which is in part about the harm done by psychoactive drugs.                                                                                                             Go to 2.1.      HOME