Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Why Mental Health Education & Prevention is Harmful

The paradoxical effect of screening and prevention programs

BY DR. ROGER MCFILLIN | RADICALLY GENUINE | NOVEMBER 23, 2023

There is a concerted effort to drive a growing number of individuals, particularly the younger demographic, toward mental health screenings and interventions.

Schools across the United States are implementing mental health programs to tackle the ongoing mental health crisis. The underlying concept is well-intentioned, drawing parallels between mental health prevention and physical health education. This entails raising awareness of behaviors promoting mental well-being and encouraging active engagement in such behaviors.

However, what if the notion of “prioritizing mental health” is inadvertently causing harm? In a New York Times opinion essay titled “This is Not the Way to Help Depressed Teenagers,” Darby Saxbe, a clinical psychologist and professor at the University of Southern California, argued that certain programs aimed at addressing mental health issues in young people not only fell short in providing help but actually exacerbated their problems.

Enter WISE Teens, a school program focused on “social-emotional skills training,” spearheaded by clinical psychologists in training. This innovative initiative comprises eight weekly hour-long classroom sessions designed to equip students with tools and principles derived from both cognitive behavior therapy and Zen Buddhism. The goal? To empower students in managing their emotions effectively.

In a recent study published in the journal Behavior Research and Therapy (read here), researchers examined the experiences of 1,071 Australian teenagers over the span of 2017 to 2018. The participants were divided into two groups: one engaged in the WISE Teens program, while the other followed a standard health-class curriculum. Surprisingly, the findings revealed that compared to those receiving standard education, students in WISE Teens reported higher levels of depression, increased anxiety, greater difficulty managing their emotions, and strained relationships with their parents. Astonishingly, one out of every eight participants in WISE Teens showed signs of clinical depression post-program, as opposed to one out of every 13 participants in the regular health classes.

This was an educational program and NOT Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), despite some academic enthusiasts wrongly claiming that DBT for Adolescents is ineffective. DBT for Adolescents is a comprehensive psychotherapy involving specialized individual therapy, skills coaching for both parents and children, and coaching consultations. It’s specifically designed to help teenagers facing severe emotion dysregulation, including issues like suicidality and self-injury. What we’re discussing here, however, is not that. It’s an attempt to build skills in a non-clinical population.

The question arises: should our school personnel be getting involved in mental health matters? How about pediatricians and primary care doctors? Could this be contributing to the problem rather than solving it?

The irony is hard to ignore: school decisions made during the pandemic played a direct role in the rise of mental health issues among children. It’s widely known that kids flourish through social interaction, in-person learning, and engaging activities that aid their development. Yet, what actually unfolded was the opposite – they were pulled out of schools, exposed to prolonged screen time, and had their extracurriculars taken away. Not surprisingly, the increase in screen time and social media usage went hand in hand with a decline in mental health. Indeed, there’s a paradox in expecting the same authorities to screen, oversee, and intervene in mental health problems. So what happens when these concepts are taught to impressionable kids?

Psychiatric Ideology is Harmful

When kids are doing well, they’re focused outward – active, engaged, and fully living life. But turning that focus inward and exposing them to psychiatric labels and ideas? That’s just plain foolish. Kids are at a stage where they’re figuring out who they are, and throwing around these labels is confusing. It’s risky business, especially when these labels start defining their inner world and capabilities.

When introducing concepts around mental health problems kids are prone to speaking about normal life struggles in terms of symptoms and diagnoses. This approach instills a sense of pathology or abnormality in children’s everyday struggles, potentially leading to heightened anxiety or self-stigmatization.

The psychiatric industry suggests that DSM diagnoses are legitimate disease constructs, akin to physical illnesses. However, they’re merely crude labels slapped onto a spectrum of emotional and behavioral manifestations. Major Depressive Disorder isn’t a tangible ailment like strep throat or a tumor. ADHD isn’t an innate disease. These labels lack explanatory value.

One’s struggle with depression may stem from valid reasons such as life setbacks, loss, loneliness, financial woes, or other health issues – not because you have Major Depressive Disorder. Kids often miss this nuance, making them susceptible to labeling themselves: “I can’t do this due to my anxiety,” or “My ADHD is hindering my homework.” Such labels, instead of clarifying, can breed a sense of hopelessness about the future.

Chemical Imbalance Lies have Harmed Generations

During the 1990s and 2000s, the pharmaceutical industry teamed up with academic psychiatry to brand mental health conditions as brain disorders. The government poured billions into hunting for some biological or genetic root, presenting psychiatry with the chance to solidify its standing as legitimate doctors. By attributing depression, anxiety, ADHD, and other “mood disorders” to a biological origin, they could conveniently fit them into the allopathic model—essentially, the solution became prescribing a drug. This alliance shaped not just the narrative around mental health but also the lucrative industry that emerged from it.

“I spent 13 years at NIMH really pushing on the neuroscience and genetics of mental disorders, and when I look back on that I realize that while I think I succeeded at getting lots of really cool papers published by cool scientists at fairly large costs—I think $20 billion—I don’t think we moved the needle in reducing suicide, reducing hospitalizations, improving recovery for the tens of millions of people who have mental illness.” – Thomas Insel, MD

Despite the lack of an identified biological basis for these conditions, the pharmaceutical industry and academic psychiatry propagated the myth of chemical imbalances, resulting in the emergence of a multi-billion dollar psychiatric drug industry. During this period, psychiatric diagnoses skyrocketed, with near 25% adults relying on at least one psychiatric drug. Astonishingly, all available statistics point to a deterioration in mental health. This should come as no surprise. When individuals are taught that their emotions are beyond their control and framed as symptoms of a physical illness, they are effectively conditioned to seek relief through medication rather than understanding their emotions in context and leveraging them to confront challenges and solve problems.

It’s important to notice that many teachers and school staff are exposed to the same ideologies that contribute to the issues affecting our culture. Schools can become breeding grounds for the perpetuation of concepts like chemical imbalances, victimization culture, and other fringe ideologies. The cycle continues as those who have been influenced by these ideas become the educators, passing on harmful ideas.

Public Schools are a Breeding Ground for Indoctrination

Teachers, school counselors, administrators, and school psychologists often lack the comprehensive knowledge, training, and expertise required to navigate the complexities of emotional and behavioral issues. Their roles were not originally designed to involve the identification or intervention of emotional problems, nor should they be.

Regrettably, public schools have become battlegrounds for fringe ideologies and cultural Marxism, transforming the educational system into an extension of an expanding nanny state that encroaches on the individual rights of families.

Initiatives such as social and emotional learning, gender ideology, and mental health screening have positioned school personnel as gatekeepers for broader societal movements. Non-experts in the field may incorrectly inform parents that their children have conditions like “ADHD” and discuss fringe ideas without scientific legitimacy, significantly influencing how parents perceive their children’s development.

In this climate, normal developmental challenges are pathologized within a culture fueled by fear. Teachers, conditioned to identify early signs of potential academic or emotional issues, become hyper-vigilant to any cues that might suggest a child is at risk of becoming a school shooter, facing suicide, or dropping out of high school.

Tragically, educators have been misled into thinking they can pinpoint these so-called “disorders,” often oversimplifying complex issues and resorting to problematic “early interventions”, at times pushing drugs. This unintended consequence creates a system where educators feel compelled to categorize and refer for medication. Paradoxically, assigning labels to children and administering mind & mood-altering drugs significantly heighten the risk of the very feared consequences they sought to prevent.

Don’t Accept “Depression Screening” Measures

Mental Health Screening* is based on the subjective and unscientific diagnostic system developed by mental health professionals, many with financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has brazenly recommended an audacious strategy: subjecting adolescents aged 12 years and older to annual screenings for depression, using formal self-report tools on paper or electronically. These guidelines, undoubtedly, serve one sinister purpose: to inflate the number of children diagnosed with depression. It is a well-known fact that screening measures are notorious for producing false positives. This means that a substantial percentage of individuals identified through these screenings do not actually suffer from the supposed problem being screened.

According to psychologist Chuck Ruby, as stated in his book “Smoke and Mirrors,” with approximately 74 million children under the age of 18 residing in the United States, subjecting them all to an 80% accurate screening tool would result in millions being falsely labeled. These guidelines not only perpetuate a dangerous cycle of overdiagnosis but also push countless innocent young individuals into unnecessary treatment-psychiatric drugs.

Dr. David Shaffer of Columbia University, the psychiatrist who invented one screening program, “TeenScreen,” admits it has a potential 84 percent chance of wrongly identifying teens to be at risk of suicide. He has long-term ties to drug companies and is a consultant for Hoffman La Roche, Wyeth and GlaxoSmithKline.

The ease with which normal developmental behaviors can be misdiagnosed as symptoms of clinical depression is a concerning issue. The primary screening measure utilized for assessing adolescent depression is the PHQ-9 for Adolescents, a self-report questionnaire comprising of nine questions that focus on supposed “depressive symptoms”. What is particularly noteworthy is the origin of this questionnaire—it was developed by none other than… Pfizer!

This phenomenon isn’t exclusive to a particular psychiatric disorder; it’s a pervasive issue across various mental health conditions. A widely recognized pharmaceutical marketing strategy involves expanding the diagnostic criteria for a disorder, essentially broadening the definition to encompass aspects within the spectrum of normal human experiences. By doing so, the pharmaceutical industry can effectively create a market for their products, as more individuals are diagnosed and deemed potential consumers.

Reclaiming our Communities

The key to effective mental health prevention lies in common sense. It begins with cultivating a nurturing and loving home environment that prioritizes the well-being of children. Provide structure and a sense of predictability. Reduce screen time, provide nutrient-dense meals, avoid processed and chemically laden junk, ensure adequate sleep, and embrace community and faith-based traditions. Throw in some exercise, extra-curricular activities, and social gatherings for good measure. While emphasizing the importance of academic achievement, fostering a love for learning, discipline, and resilience, it may be opportune to empower our school teachers to thrive in their specialties—math, science, English, and history—leaving the framework for mental well-being in the capable hands of families and those they trust.

*In a previous post I wrote about the dangers of screening measures in pediatrics and primary care (Read here)

February 18, 2024 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

A new power could be emerging in Asia

Indonesia, the world’s fourth-most-populous country, is treading carefully between China and the US as it gathers strength

By Timur Fomenko | RT | February 18, 2024

It is tempting to frame global geopolitics as a binary struggle between China and the US, as a competition between two economic giants, each of which has grown to see the other as the fundamental obstacle to its own security and success.

Yet the world is more complicated than that. International affairs are not moving towards a bipolar world in which two superpowers create rival systems and force all other countries to take sides, but is rather moving to a multipolar world, where there are many great powers all competing against each other.

Multipolarity is preceded by the disintegration of unipolarity, whereby one hegemonic power finds itself increasingly declining amid a rise of others. Thus, China is not the only rising power to reshape the global environment, even if it is at this time the largest, and because of this it is unlikely that Beijing will ever be a hegemon in the same sense as America was, for we must take other rising powers into account such as India and Russia, among others.

However, one often-overlooked country is emerging as geopolitically consequential, and that is Indonesia. This massive, diverse, multiethnic archipelago state is home to 273 million people and is the fourth-most-populated country in the world. It is also one of the fastest-growing economies in Southeast Asia whose Gross Domestic Product surpassed $1 trillion in recent years, having increased at a steady pace over time. This makes it one of the world’s most important emerging economies and markets.

The increasing prominence of Indonesia has led the island nation to become subject to a geopolitical tug of war, that is the question of who will win its “allegiance” as part of the macro struggle between the US and China. Stretched out across thousands of islands, the geostrategic location of the country is critical, because it occupies the fundamental passage between the Pacific and Indian oceans known as the Malacca Strait, forming an effective bridge between Asia and Oceania, as well as the South China Sea. The West consequently sees the country as essential in attempting to contain China within its own neighbourhood, while Beijing, on the other hand, sees partnership with Indonesia as equally important for the opposite reason.

But when it comes to geopolitics, Indonesia is the archetype of a non-aligned nation, as well as an important voice of the Global South, hence the famous Bandung Conference of African and Asian states was held on its territory in 1955. Because of this neutrality and because it is a Muslim nation, Indonesia is not pro-West, but neither is it pro-China. Instead, it pursues a “best of both worlds” foreign policy which seeks to simultaneously court both sides to derive benefits. As the largest market and economic benefactor on its doorstep, Jakarta cannot ignore Beijing, thus it makes conscious choices in terms of trade, technology (such as Huawei) as well as other things, to align with Beijing.

On the other hand, Indonesia naturally does not want to be militarily subjugated by the rise of China and therefore seeks other partners to bolster its own autonomy to ensure it does not become a “subordinate” party, and is thus also a strategic partner of the US. However, this is the hallmark of a multipolar world, whereby nations sense that they do not have to be subject to the “hegemony” of a third party and are able to seek multiple options rather than having to follow the orders and preferences of a superior power. Indonesia is thus neither pro-China nor pro-American, it is pro-Indonesia and will use this to become a pivotal power in the future.

Yet, this also inevitably signals the end of Western domination in on a global scale. With the rise of new economies such as Indonesia with its huge population, “older powers” like Britain and France increasingly become smaller and less relevant. It is one thing to look at the rise of China’s economy, but what happens when other economies such as India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Nigeria, et al become larger in scope than Western ones thanks to their large populations and markets? There is an undeniable shift in the balance of power going on here, and this of course also means American dominance cannot last forever. The US, and thus China too, must ultimately win the allegiance and court these new tier economies, thus ending the Euro-Atlantic dominance of global affairs which has lasted for four hundred years. This is precisely why America is now so-focused on what it describes as “The Indo-Pacific” and countries like Indonesia will ultimately serve as kingmakers as they establish their global influence.

February 18, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

    Next Entries »