Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Feeling Better, Getting Worse: How Psychiatric Drugs Create the Illusion They Cure

An Essay on Short-Term Improvement, Long-Term Dependence, and the Evidence Patients Never See

Lies are Unbekoming | April 9, 2026

Of 18,426 patients enrolled in 71 antidepressant trials — 67,319 pages of clinical data, a stack seven metres high, obtained from drug regulators and read for the first time by Peter Gøtzsche’s research group — 12 percent more dropped out while taking the drug than while taking placebo.¹

The psychiatrists’ position is that these drugs do more good than harm. The patients, through their behaviour, delivered the opposite verdict. They preferred the sugar pill.

Nobody who takes a psychiatric drug and reports feeling better is lying. The experience is real. But what produced it, what it is made of, and what it costs — none of this is what the patient was told. Six mechanisms account for almost everything people attribute to their medication. None of them require the drug to be treating a disease.

The Prescription

A person in distress sits across from a doctor. Fifteen minutes later they leave with a diagnosis and a prescription. They are told they have a chemical imbalance that the drug will correct. They may be told depression runs in families — that there is a genetic predisposition, a biological vulnerability they inherited. They are told to give it a few weeks.

The chemical imbalance theory has been abandoned by every serious researcher in the field.² No gene or set of genes for depression has ever been identified despite decades of searching and billions in funding. As Peter Breggin observed, there is no substantial scientific evidence that depression is genetic in origin — and telling patients otherwise leaves them convinced they are stuck with an innate defect, dependent on experts, and resigned to lifelong medication.⁴⁵ The drug was approved on the basis of trials lasting five to six weeks.³ Long-term effects have never been properly studied.⁴ And the condition being treated has a spontaneous remission rate so high that the head of the NIMH’s depression section once observed that most depressive episodes “will run their course and terminate with virtually complete recovery without specific intervention.”⁵

The patient knows none of this. They go home, swallow the pill, and wait.

The First Weeks: Time Heals What the Pill Takes Credit For

Depression, before pharmacology claimed it, was understood to be self-limiting. NIMH psychopharmacologist Jonathan Cole wrote in 1964: “Depression is, on the whole, one of the psychiatric conditions with the best prognosis for eventual recovery with or without treatment. Most depressions are self-limited.”⁶ His colleague Nathan Kline: “In the treatment of depression, one always has as an ally the fact that most depressions terminate in spontaneous remissions. This means that in many cases regardless of what one does the patient eventually will begin to get better.”⁷

Cole and Kline were not dissidents. They were among the most prominent figures in American psychopharmacology.

A study tracking eighty-four patients through untreated depressive episodes found that 23 percent recovered within one month, 67 percent within six months, and 85 percent within a year.⁸ Mark Posternak, the researcher, noted that his results confirmed Kraepelin’s century-old observation that untreated depression typically clears within six to eight months. Dean Schuyler, who headed the NIMH’s depression section, recognised the problem as early as 1974: spontaneous recovery rates were so high that it was difficult to “judge the efficacy of a drug, a treatment or psychotherapy in depressed patients.”⁹

Antidepressants take four to six weeks to produce their claimed effect. Spontaneous recovery begins immediately and continues at roughly 2 percent per week.¹⁰ A person who starts a drug during a depressive episode is beginning treatment at the moment when natural recovery is already underway. A month later, they feel better. The drug gets the credit. The calendar does not.

The Side Effects That Sell the Cure

In the NIMH’s review of all antidepressant studies, well-controlled trials showed 61 percent of drug-treated patients improved versus 46 percent on placebo — a net benefit of 15 percent.¹¹ Irving Kirsch, reviewing FDA data on Prozac, Effexor, Serzone, and Paxil, found the drug-placebo difference on the Hamilton Rating Scale was 1.8 points. The UK’s National Institute for Clinical Excellence had established 3 points as the minimum for clinical significance.¹² The best Danish meta-analysis found a difference of 2 points, and the smallest effect that can actually be perceived on this scale is 5 to 6 points.¹³

That is the margin on which billions of prescriptions rest.

Breggin identified why even this margin exists. He called it the “enhanced placebo effect.” A patient on a sugar pill senses, consciously or not, that nothing powerful has entered their system. An antidepressant produces noticeable physical effects — dry mouth, nausea, drowsiness, sexual dysfunction, weight change. The patient feels these and concludes, reasonably, that they are taking potent medicine. The side effects convince the patient the drug is real. This conviction amplifies the placebo response.¹⁴

Investigators tested this in at least seven studies comparing tricyclic antidepressants to “active” placebos — chemicals that produce unpleasant side effects like dry mouth but have no antidepressant properties. In six of the seven, there was no difference in outcomes.¹⁵ When both pills cause side effects, neither is superior. A Cochrane review confirmed the finding.¹⁶

The entire marginal advantage of antidepressants over placebo may be an artefact of broken blinding. Patients and clinicians can guess who is on the drug and who is on the sugar pill, because the drug has obvious physical effects. This knowledge contaminates every rating, every assessment, every reported outcome.

The NIH-funded St. John’s wort trial demonstrated this by accident. Because St. John’s wort causes side effects similar to an antidepressant, this trial was genuinely blinded — neither patients nor clinicians could tell who was taking what. Results: 24 percent of the herbal group had a full response, 25 percent of the Zoloft group, 32 percent of the placebo group. Zoloft did not outperform placebo. The investigators concluded that the herb was ineffective and neglected to mention that their own drug had failed the same test.¹⁷

The Flattening

Psychiatric drugs produce their effects the same way in patients, healthy volunteers, and laboratory animals. Gøtzsche, drawing on clinical trial data, lists what these effects actually are: numbing of feelings, emotional blunting, drowsiness, reduced concern about oneself and others, diminished capacity for sexual function and romantic attachment.¹⁸

These are not side effects. They are the effects. The drug does not selectively remove depression while leaving everything else intact. It reduces the brain’s capacity to generate emotional intensity across the board. A person who was in anguish may interpret this flattening as recovery. A clinician observing calmer behaviour will rate the patient as improved. Both are observing something real. Neither is observing the treatment of a disease.

Breggin made the point precisely: antidepressants reduce emotional responsiveness generally, which is why they are prescribed not only for depression but for anxiety, panic attacks, obsessive-compulsive behaviour, bulimia, chronic pain, and aggression. They are not treating different diseases through different mechanisms. They are producing the same blunting effect across all of them.¹⁹

The rating scales used to measure “improvement” cooperate with this illusion. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale — the standard instrument — scores items like sleep quality, appetite, and psychomotor behaviour. A sedated patient who sleeps more and eats more registers as improved. Breggin observed that psychiatric improvement standards are often behavioural (”sleeps better,” “gaining weight”) rather than psychological (”feels better about life,” “actively building a better future”).²⁰ A tranquillised patient and a recovered patient score identically.

Patient self-ratings tell a different story. In Greenberg and Fisher’s meta-analysis of newer antidepressants, patient self-ratings showed virtually no benefit beyond placebo.²¹ The doctors see improvement. The patients, asked directly, do not.

In Denmark, researchers surveyed patients on antidepressants. Half agreed the drugs altered their personality and that they had less control over their thoughts and feelings. The psychiatrists who received these results refused to believe what their own patients told them, called the patients ignorant, and recommended “psychoeducation.”²² The patients’ relatives, independently surveyed, agreed with the patients.

Breggin described a further mechanism operating in some patients: mild organic brain syndrome. Antidepressants, through their general toxicity, can produce a delirium characterised by memory difficulties, confusion, impaired judgment, and mood instability. A patient in this state may experience artificial euphoria or generalised apathy and be evaluated as “improved” — because depression requires a relatively intact brain to sustain itself. Damage the brain sufficiently and the depression lifts, not because the distress has been addressed, but because the capacity to experience it has been impaired.²³ A Yale study found this drug-induced delirium appeared two to four weeks after starting treatment — the exact interval when “therapeutic response” is expected — in more than one-third of patients over age forty.²⁴

The Attempt to Stop

Months pass. Perhaps years. The patient decides to stop. They feel well. They are tired of the side effects. They may have read something that unsettled them.

Within days: headaches, dizziness, nausea, insomnia, agitation, anxiety, confusion, fatigue, flu-like symptoms, electric shock sensations. As many as 50 percent of patients who stop antidepressants experience these withdrawal effects.²⁵

The symptoms vanish when the drug is restarted. The trap closes.

Patient and doctor both conclude that the return of distress proves the drug was treating a real condition. The depression has “come back.” The drug is “needed.” But the symptoms are not relapse. They are withdrawal. The brain, having adapted to the presence of a chemical that altered its neurotransmitter activity, protests the chemical’s removal.

Gøtzsche coined a term for this: “abstinence depression.” A depression that occurs in a patient who is not currently depressed but whose drug is stopped too quickly. Its hallmark: symptoms appear rapidly after discontinuation and disappear within hours when the full dose is resumed. A real depressive episode does not respond to a pill within hours. The speed of response is the diagnostic marker that separates withdrawal from genuine relapse.²⁶

He demonstrated this with a cold turkey trial. Stable, well patients were secretly switched to placebo for 5 to 8 days. Twenty-five of 122 patients on sertraline or paroxetine met criteria for depression during that window. Gøtzsche calculated the expected number of genuine relapses in such a short period, based on known relapse rates from an adolescent depression study: 0.03. Effectively zero. Every one of the twenty-five “relapses” was a withdrawal reaction.²⁷

The profession does not call these symptoms “withdrawal.” It calls them “discontinuation syndrome.” Gary Greenberg described this renaming for what it is: in any other context, a malaise that appears when you stop a drug and disappears when you restart it is called dependence with withdrawal. Calling it “discontinuation syndrome” keeps antidepressants at a comfortable distance from alcohol, benzodiazepines, and opioids.²⁸

The clinical consequences are specific. Breggin described the vicious circle: a patient attempts to stop the drug and experiences withdrawal. The treating professionals mistake withdrawal for relapse. The drug is reinstated. The patient — who might have recovered fully without the medication — is now physiologically dependent on a chemical they were told was safe to stop at any time.²⁹ A study of twenty-two children withdrawn from the tricyclic Tofranil documented this pattern: staff attributed the children’s withdrawal symptoms to “mental illness,” to stress, to allergies, even to viral illness. Antidepressants were restarted in children who were “mistakenly diagnosed as relapsing during the withdrawal period.”³⁰

Gøtzsche reviewed the five most-used psychiatry textbooks in Denmark and found that their withdrawal guidance is wrong and frequently dangerous. Doctors taper too quickly and in linear fashion rather than the exponential taper the drugs’ pharmacology demands. None of the textbooks acknowledged that withdrawal symptoms and disease symptoms are often identical.³¹

The Long Decline

European psychiatrists began noticing the pattern in the 1960s. German physician H. P. Hoheisel reported in 1966 that antidepressant exposure appeared to be “shortening the intervals” between depressive episodes. A Yugoslavian doctor observed the drugs were causing “chronification” of the disease. Bulgarian psychiatrist Nikola Schipkowensky agreed: the tricyclics were inducing “a change to a more chronic course.”³²

Dutch physician J. D. Van Scheyen examined ninety-four depressed patients over five years. Long-term antidepressant medication, he found, “exerts a paradoxical effect on the recurrent nature of the vital depression” — the drugs increased the rate of recurrence and shortened the time between episodes.³³

In 1994, Italian psychiatrist Giovanni Fava forced the question into the open. The drugs, he argued, perturb neurotransmitter systems in ways that produce compensatory brain changes. When the drug is stopped, these changes operate unopposed, producing withdrawal and increasing vulnerability to relapse. The longer someone takes the drug, the worse this becomes. Antidepressants, Fava concluded, “may propel the illness to a more malignant and treatment unresponsive course.” He raised the possibility that the drugs cause “irreversible receptor modifications” that “sensitize” the brain to depression.³⁴

Ross Baldessarini of Harvard confirmed it: half of all patients withdrawn from antidepressants relapsed within fourteen months, and the longer a person had been on the drug, the higher the relapse rate upon withdrawal.³⁵

The profession’s response was not investigation. Donald Klein of Columbia University told Psychiatric News: “The industry is not interested, the NIMH is not interested, and the FDA is not interested. Nobody is interested.”³⁶

Instead, the history was rewritten. The pre-drug studies showing that depression was episodic and self-limiting were declared “flawed.” The 1999 APA Textbook of Psychiatry stated that it was previously believed “most patients would eventually recover from a major depressive episode. However, more extensive studies have disproved this assumption.” Depression was now “a highly recurrent and pernicious disorder.”³⁷

The drugs worsen the long-term course of the illness. Rather than withdraw the drugs, the profession rewrote the natural history of the illness to match the drug-damaged outcomes.

The long-term studies are unambiguous. British researchers found that never-medicated depressed patients experienced a 62 percent symptom reduction in six months; drug-treated patients, 33 percent.³⁸ A WHO study found that patients diagnosed and treated with psychiatric drugs fared worse — in both depressive symptoms and general health — over one year than those not exposed to the drugs.³⁹ In a five-year study of 9,508 depressed patients, those on antidepressants were symptomatic nineteen weeks per year, versus eleven weeks for those on no medication.⁴⁰ An NIMH study found the eighteen-month stay-well rate was highest for cognitive therapy (30 percent) and lowest for antidepressants (19 percent).⁴¹

The STAR*D trial — $35 million of NIMH money, over four thousand “real-world” patients — was announced with the claim that about 70 percent of those who stayed in the study “became symptom-free.” Ed Pigott and colleagues spent more than five years analysing the actual data. The real figure: 3 percent of patients who entered the trial remitted, stayed well, and remained in the study during the one-year follow-up. Confronted with the 3 percent number, investigator Maurizio Fava acknowledged it was accurate. The investigators had known all along.⁴²

The Patients Vote

Those 18,426 patients across Gøtzsche’s 71 trials voted with their feet. Twelve percent more chose to stop taking the drug than chose to stop taking placebo.¹ The finding is worse than it appears, because some of the patients randomised to placebo were suffering cold turkey withdrawal from drugs they had been taking before the trial. Even with this handicap, the placebo group was more willing to continue.

Gøtzsche’s team attempted to assess quality of life — the outcome that matters most to patients. The data was virtually non-existent. Out of 131 studies, three had published quality-of-life results. The data was not missing because it was not collected. It was missing because the results were unfavourable.⁴³

A Danish parliamentarian asked the Minister of Health whether it was reliable to conclude that antidepressants improved quality of life when only three of 131 studies had published data on the question. The minister referred the question to the drug agency, which replied that an effect on quality of life had been found in the studies where it was measured. Quality of life was measured in far more studies than those that published their findings.⁴⁴

What Was Not Disclosed

The feeling was real. It was produced by the natural passage of time and the body’s tendency toward spontaneous recovery. By the placebo effect of receiving treatment from an authority figure. By the enhanced placebo effect of a pill that produces noticeable physical sensations. By emotional blunting that reduced the capacity to feel distress along with the capacity to feel everything else. And in some patients, by a mild organic brain dysfunction that made the sustained experience of depression temporarily impossible.

When it came time to stop, the drug produced withdrawal symptoms indistinguishable from the original condition. Patient and doctor both interpreted this as proof that the disease had returned and the medication was needed for life. The dependence was renamed “discontinuation syndrome.”

For those who stayed on, the drug altered brain chemistry in ways that increased vulnerability to future episodes, shortened the intervals between them, and converted an episodic, self-limiting condition into a chronic one. This conversion was attributed not to the treatment but to a revised understanding of the disease. The textbooks were rewritten to match the drug-damaged outcomes.

At no point was the patient given accurate information. Not about the spontaneous remission rate. Not about the drug’s negligible advantage over placebo. Not about the blunting. Not about the withdrawal. Not about the long-term prognosis.

Three percent of STAR*D patients recovered and stayed well. The investigators announced 70 percent. Sixty-seven thousand pages of clinical trial data sat unread until one research group opened them and discovered that patients preferred placebo. Quality of life data was collected and buried. The profession was told the drugs were sensitising the brain to depression and responded that nobody was interested in investigating.

The patient was told they had a chemical imbalance. They were told the drug would correct it. They were told depression ran in their family and that they were genetically predisposed. They were told to give it a few weeks. Every element of that narrative has been contradicted by the profession’s own research.

The feeling was real. What produced it was not what they said.


References

  1. Sharma, T., et al. “Drop-out rates in placebo-controlled trials of antidepressant drugs.” Int J Risk Saf Med 30 (2019): 217–232. Discussed in Gøtzsche, P.C. “Is psychiatry a crime?” (2024), p. 21.
  2. Moncrieff, J., et al. “The serotonin theory of depression: a systematic umbrella review of the evidence.” Molecular Psychiatry (2022). See also Lacasse, J.R., Leo, J. “Serotonin and Depression: A Disconnect between the Advertisements and the Scientific Literature.” PLoS Med (2005).
  3. Breggin, P.R. Toxic Psychiatry. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1991, pp. 160–163.
  4. Deshauer, D., et al. “Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for unipolar depression.” Canadian Medical Association Journal 178 (2008): 1293–1301.
  5. Schuyler, D. The Depressive Spectrum. New York: Jason Aronson, 1974. Cited in Whitaker, R. Anatomy of an Epidemic. New York: Broadway Paperbacks, 2010, p. 150.
  6. Cole, J. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 150.
  7. Kline, N. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 150.
  8. Posternak, M.A., et al. “The naturalistic course of unipolar major depression in the absence of somatic therapy.” J Nerv Ment Dis 194 (2006): 324–329. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, pp. 163–164.
  9. Schuyler, D. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 150.
  10. Posternak, J Nerv Ment Dis (2006).
  11. NIMH review of antidepressant studies. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 151.
  12. Kirsch, I., et al. “Initial severity and antidepressant benefits.” PLoS Medicine 5 (2008): e45. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, pp. 152–153.
  13. Jakobsen, J.C., et al. “Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors versus placebo.” BMC Psychiatry 17 (2017): 58. Leucht, S., et al. “What does the HAMD mean?” J Affect Disord 148 (2013): 243–248. Cited in Gøtzsche, “Is psychiatry a crime?” p. 19.
  14. Breggin, P.R. Toxic Psychiatry, pp. 159–160.
  15. Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 151.
  16. Moncrieff, J., Wessely, S., Hardy, R. “Active placebos versus antidepressants for depression.” Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2004): CD003012.
  17. Hypericum Depression Trial Study Group. “Effect of Hypericum perforatum in major depressive disorder.” JAMA 287 (2002): 1807–1814. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 153.
  18. Gøtzsche, P.C. “Is psychiatry a crime?” (2024), p. 9.
  19. Breggin, P.R. Toxic Psychiatry, pp. 163–164.
  20. Ibid., pp. 160–161. Fisher, S. and Greenberg, R. The Limits of Biological Treatments for Psychological Distress. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1989.
  21. Greenberg, R., et al. Meta-analysis of newer antidepressant drugs. Cited in Breggin, P.R. Talking Back to Prozac. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994, pp. 89–92.
  22. Kessing, L., et al. “Depressive and bipolar disorders: patients’ attitudes and beliefs towards depression and antidepressants.” Psychological Medicine 35 (2005): 1205–1213. Cited in Gøtzsche, “Is psychiatry a crime?” p. 21.
  23. Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry, pp. 164–166.
  24. Davies, R., et al. “Confusional Episodes and Antidepressant Medication.” American Journal of Psychiatry (July 1971). Cited in Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry, pp. 165–166.
  25. Greenberg, G. Manufacturing Depression. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010, pp. 281–282.
  26. Gøtzsche, “Is psychiatry a crime?” pp. 104–105.
  27. Rosenbaum, J.F., et al. “Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor discontinuation syndrome.” Biol Psychiatry 44 (1998): 77–87. Analysis in Gøtzsche, “Is psychiatry a crime?” pp. 104–105. Expected relapse rate calculated from Lewinsohn, P.M., et al. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatr 33 (1994): 809–818.
  28. Greenberg, Manufacturing Depression, pp. 281–282.
  29. Breggin, P.R. Toxic Psychiatry, pp. 169–171.
  30. Law, W., III, et al. American Journal of Psychiatry (May 1981). Cited in Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry, pp. 169–170.
  31. Gøtzsche, “Is psychiatry a crime?” pp. 104–105. See also Gøtzsche, P.C. Mental Health Survival Kit and Withdrawal from Psychiatric Drugs. Ann Arbor: L H Press, 2022.
  32. Hoheisel, Schipkowensky, and others cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, pp. 155–156.
  33. Van Scheyen, J.D. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 156.
  34. Fava, G. “Do antidepressant and antianxiety drugs increase chronicity in affective disorders?” Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 61 (1994): 125–131. Fava, G. “Holding on: depression, sensitization by antidepressant drugs, and the prodigal experts.” Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 64 (1995): 57–61. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, pp. 157–159.
  35. Viguera, A. “Discontinuing antidepressant treatment in major depression.” Harvard Review of Psychiatry 5 (1998): 293–305. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 156.
  36. “Editorial sparks debate on effects of psychoactive drugs.” Psychiatric News, May 20, 1994. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 159.
  37. Hales, R., ed. Textbook of Psychiatry. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, 1999, p. 525. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, pp. 159–160.
  38. Ronalds, C., et al. “Outcome of anxiety and depressive disorders in primary care.” British Journal of Psychiatry 171 (1997): 427–433. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 162.
  39. Goldberg, D., et al. “The effect of detection and treatment on the outcome of major depression in primary care.” British Journal of General Practice 48 (1998): 1840–1844. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 168.
  40. Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, pp. 168–169.
  41. Shea, M.T., et al. “Course of depressive symptoms over follow-up.” Archives of General Psychiatry 49 (1992): 782–787. Cited in Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic, p. 156.
  42. Pigott, H.E., et al. “Efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants.” Psychother Psychosom 79 (2010): 267–279. Gøtzsche, “Is psychiatry a crime?” pp. 27–28.
  43. Paludan-Müller, A.S., et al. “Extensive selective reporting of quality of life in clinical study reports and publications of placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants.” Int J Risk Saf Med 32 (2021): 87–99. Discussed in Gøtzsche, “Is psychiatry a crime?” pp. 21–22.
  44. Gøtzsche, “Is psychiatry a crime?” p. 22.
  45. Breggin, P.R. Talking Back to Prozac. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994, pp. 73–74. See also Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry, pp. 109–141 (chapter on genetics of psychiatric disorders).

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Comments Off on Feeling Better, Getting Worse: How Psychiatric Drugs Create the Illusion They Cure

‘Nobody Told Me’: Former Mental Health Patient Calls Out Dangerous Side Effects of Psychiatric Drugs

By Jill Erzen | The Defender | April 1, 2026

The mental health system is failing children by treating everyday struggles as “chronic illness requiring lifelong pharmaceutical treatment,” former psychiatric patient Laura Delano told lawmakers this week.

“What we are calling a mental health crisis is, in large part, a crisis of overmedicalization,” she said at a March 26 roundtable held by the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform’s Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services.

Delano said many challenges people face are “rooted in nutrition, sleep, stress, trauma, substance use, relationships, vocation, environment, economics, meaning, faith and purpose.” Yet the system often reduces those issues to medical diagnoses, she said.

Drawing on her own 14 years in the mental health system, Delano told lawmakers her experience reflects a broader trend.

Now the founder of Inner Compass Initiative and author of “Unshrunk: A Story of Psychiatric Treatment Resistance,” Delano said more Americans are seeking mental healthcare than ever, but outcomes — including suicide rates among young people — continue to worsen.

‘Two meds became three, four, five. My life unraveled’

Delano said she began treatment at 13. She was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and told she would need medication for life.

“You’re told this is an incurable illness. You’ll have this for the rest of your life. It’s manageable with medications, but you will never not have it,” she said. “And that’s the story that many, many people are being told about these conditions, which is simply not true.”

Over time, her diagnoses expanded and her prescriptions multiplied.

“Two meds became three, four, five,” she said. “My life unraveled.”

She said she gained weight, developed chronic health issues and became “increasingly anxious and suicidal.”

“Eventually, I couldn’t work or take care of myself,” she said.

Delano told lawmakers her experience points to a lack of informed consent.

“Nobody told me” that many psychiatric drugs were approved based on trials lasting “on average 6 to 12 weeks,” or that the long-term effects of taking multiple drugs together have “never been properly established.”

She said she wasn’t warned that medications could cause “serious physical health problems,” impair sexual function or, in some cases, increase suicidal thoughts.

When she tried to stop taking the drugs, she said she experienced withdrawal symptoms, but was told it was a relapse.

“Nobody told me that what I experienced … was withdrawal,” she said. “Instead, I was told that my worsening state meant my illness was so severe that it was now resistant to any treatment.”

At 25, Delano said she believed there was no hope. She attempted suicide.

‘This is the next opiate crisis, and I think it’s bigger’

Delano’s testimony comes as mental health outcomes worsen, even as diagnoses and prescriptions keep rising.

From 2007 to 2021, the suicide rate among people ages 10-24 increased by 62%. In 2023, over 49,000 Americans died by suicide — the highest number on record, and about 20,000 more than in 2000.

Among adolescents in 2024, 2.6 million reported serious suicidal thoughts, 1.2 million made a plan, and 700,000 attempted suicide.

At the same time, diagnoses have surged. Today, about 23.4% of U.S. adults — roughly 61.5 million people — experienced mental illness. This includes more than 36% of young adults.

Medication use has climbed alongside those numbers.

Since 2006, the use of SSRIs in children has more than doubled. A December 2025 report found that 6.1 million U.S. children ages 17 and under are taking at least one psychiatric drug.

“This is the next opiate crisis, and I think it’s bigger,” Delano said.

Doctors are increasingly medicalizing ‘normal human unhappiness’

Other experts at the roundtable raised similar concerns about diagnosis and treatment.

Dr. Sally Satel, a psychiatrist and senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said clinicians often blur the line between clinical depression and life challenges.

“I can’t tell you how many people … once got a diagnosis [of depression], but their diagnosis is really demoralization,” she said.

“Do we need medications for that?” Satel asked. In some cases, what patients need to hear is, “Your life is difficult. You’re actually having a rational response to a difficult life,” she said.

Satel also said psychiatrists do not prescribe most psychiatric medications.

Primary care providers and midlevel practitioners write many of the prescriptions, she said. “That’s definitely … a problem.”

“We are overdiagnosing,” she added. “We’re turning … normal human unhappiness into … diagnoses that we then prescribe medications for that probably won’t work.”

‘Doubling down on what we’re doing … is not going to get us anywhere’

Dr. David Hyman, a physician and legal scholar, drew a similar distinction.

“Sadness and depression are two different things,” he said. Treatment — and not necessarily with medication — should focus on the latter, he added.

He also warned against a system that increasingly defaults to prescribing. “Doubling down on what we’re doing, which isn’t working, is not going to get us anywhere better than where we are,” he said.

Hyman challenged how psychiatric drugs are evaluated over time.

While medications must show safety and efficacy to gain approval, he said, there is no consistent system to study the long-term effects or what happens when patients stop taking them.

“There’s not a mechanism or systematic reevaluation of things after they’ve been approved,” he said.

Tapering can take ‘not just months, but years’

Delano said that gap is especially clear when patients try to taper off medications.

Asked how often patients receive full information about their diagnosis and medications, she said: “From what I’ve seen, never.”

“It took 13 years to realize I needed to get out,” Delano said. But getting off the drugs is “incredibly difficult.”

“We have a system set up that makes it incredibly easy to start these drugs that were really only ever studied for … short-term use,” she said. “Yet, most people stay on them long term for years and have zero safe off-ramps.”

Without clear guidance, people often stop too quickly, feel worse and assume they need the drugs indefinitely, she said.

Delano called for updated drug labels, public education and clinical guidelines for gradual tapering.

She stressed that these medications can create physical dependence. “Not addiction, it’s different than addiction,” she said. It’s a biological effect that can make stopping difficult.

“It sounds so unfathomable that a capsule … might require chipping away … over not just months, but years,” she said. Yet for some patients, that level of gradual tapering is necessary, she added.

Now 16 years off psychiatric medications, Delano said her experience drives her work.

“It’s urgent that we better understand what is happening in people’s brains and bodies from using these medications long term and from trying to get off them,” she said.

Watch an excerpt from the subcommittee hearing here:


This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Comments Off on ‘Nobody Told Me’: Former Mental Health Patient Calls Out Dangerous Side Effects of Psychiatric Drugs

Dr. Abu-Sitta: Beirut ‘felt like a day in Shifa Hospital’

By Janna Kadri | Al Mayadeen | April 11, 2026

A wave of Israeli bombardments that killed hundreds of civilians across Lebanon within minutes was deliberately designed to overwhelm the country’s healthcare system and maximize deaths, Dr. Ghassan Abu-Sitta told Al Mayadeen.

“Basically, in a period of 10 minutes, over 1,400 people were wounded and 340 were killed,” he said. “The aim is to flood the system… to overwhelm it… and to ensure that as many of the wounded die.”

According to Abu-Sitta, the scale and speed of the strikes collapsed emergency response capacity from the outset, leaving ambulance services and hospitals unable to cope with the volume of casualties.

“At AUB, we received around 70 critical cases within 10 minutes,” he said. “The aim is for you not to be able to treat them… to force you into triage, deciding who you can save and who you cannot.”

Hospitals rapidly exhausted intensive care capacity, including pediatric units, while smaller facilities were forced to transfer patients under life-threatening delays.

“We ran out of intensive care beds. We ran out of pediatric intensive care capacity,” he said. “The smaller hospitals were overwhelmed… and the delays in transferring patients cost lives.”

Abu-Sitta described the scenes inside emergency departments as a “tsunami” of casualties.

“You are overwhelmed by a wave of wounded beyond your capacity to deal with.”

‘A day in Gaza’

Drawing on his experience treating victims under Israeli bombardment in Gaza, Abu-Sitta said the Beirut attacks replicated the same patterns of destruction.

“That day was the first day that felt like a day in Shifa Hospital,” he said. “Children came in with no names, no surviving families… nobody knew who anybody was.”

The scenes, he added, triggered immediate psychological recall. “You find yourself thinking, ‘Not this again.’”

‘The aim is to kill’

Abu-Sitta rejected claims that the strikes targeted military infrastructure, pointing instead to the systematic destruction of civilian areas.

“The aim is to kill,” he said. “The aim on Tuesday was to kill. The aim on Wednesday was to kill.”

He cited the bombing of residential buildings, including one in a middle-class neighborhood inhabited by elderly residents.

“The missile hit the base of the building to ensure total collapse… maximum damage,” he said. “They said they were targeting Hezbollah assets, but the residents were elderly couples.”

Humanitarian language ‘collusive’

Abu-Sitta also condemned the response of international health organizations, describing their language as detached from the reality of mass civilian killing.

“That language has proven how sterile humanitarian discourse is, and, in fact, how collusive it is,” he said.

“These children were not wounded in a ‘conflict.’ They were killed by Israel. Their families were killed by Israel.”

He argued that the strikes were intended not only to kill but to cripple the healthcare system itself.

“The aim… is to destroy the health system by flooding it, by drowning it in its own blood,” he said.

The failure to hold “Israel” accountable, he added, “violates the very principles these institutions stand for.”

Message of ‘exceptionality and impunity’

According to Abu-Sitta, the scale and timing of the attacks, particularly following a ceasefire, send a clear political message.

Exceptionality and impunity,” he said. “Israel places itself above international law… above any ceasefire.”

He described the attacks as “performative, ritualistic slaughter” meant to demonstrate that such actions can be repeated without consequence.

“They effectively recreated a day in Gaza,” he said. “The message is: we can do this again.”

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , | Comments Off on Dr. Abu-Sitta: Beirut ‘felt like a day in Shifa Hospital’

Iran Has Won the War, It Will Be Up to the US to Secure the Peace: Mohammad Marandi

Sputnik – 11.04.2026

Whether or not Iran-US peace negotiations succeed depends entirely on the American side, renowned international affairs commentator Dr. Mohammad Marandi told Sputnik, commenting on Saturday’s unprecedented face-to-face talks in Islamabad, Pakistan.

Iran didn’t start the war, it wasn’t the one to escalate it, and it wasn’t the one to call for a halt in hostilities. Accordingly, the crisis can be resolved in one of only two ways, Marandi says.

“Either the Americans are sincere or they’re forced to be sincere, and they implement what they said they will do, or not. If they are unwilling to do so, the Iranian delegation will go back to Tehran,” the Gulf crisis will continue and the global economic picture will continue to deteriorate.

Iran Cares About Facts on the Ground, Not Signals or Signatures

“For the Iranians, what is important is that the facts on the ground change. The signature of the US vice president or president has no value for Iranians,” Marandi stressed.

Iran remembers that twice in less than a year, the US engaged in negotiations while conspiring to attack. Accordingly, whether talks succeed or not, “Iran is prepared” for what comes next, including a continuation of the war if necessary.

Marandi emphasized that the strength and resilience shown by Iran and the Axis of Resistance over the past weeks are the only reasons the US is at the negotiating table today.

US Must Choose: ‘Israel First’ or ‘America First’

Significant progress in negotiations with Iran can be achieved if the Trump administration pursues a genuinely America First policy, the academic believes.

“If they continue to be under the influence of Israeli Firsters, then I think the Iranians will be prepared to go back to Tehran without any agreement whatsoever. For Iran, both scenarios are acceptable. We are not concerned either way,” Marandi said.

US in No Position to Dictate Terms

The US “has not succeeded on the battlefield” and “there’s no reason for them to believe that they will win at the negotiating table,” the observer noted.

“What the Iranians are demanding is justice, and Iran is not making any excessive demands,” Marandi said, referencing Tehran’s 10-point ceasefire plan.

One of these demands is war reparations.

Iran “will get those reparations from the Strait of Hormuz, whether the Americans like it or not. But if the Americans want to prevent the collapse of the global economy they will discontinue obeying the Zionist Lobby and make decisions based on their interests,” Marandi stressed.

Whatever happens, “Iran is not going to give up its sovereignty… and the Axis of Resistance is unwilling to submit to the Empire,” he summed up.

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Iran Has Won the War, It Will Be Up to the US to Secure the Peace: Mohammad Marandi

Iran condemns assassination threats against Iranian negotiators amid US talks

Press TV – April 11, 2026

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei has called for public condemnation of the assassination threats leveled against Iranian negotiators amid ongoing talks with the United States that are aimed at permanently ending the US-Israeli aggression against the country.

In a post on his X account on Saturday, Baghaei said threats in the US government and media space for assassinating the Iranian negotiators, in case the current talks fail, are part of a discourse that seeks to normalize extortion through violence.

“Is this not, in effect, a policy discourse that normalizes extortion through the threat or public incitement of terror, violence, and manslaughter?” he said in the post.

The spokesman, who is himself accompanying the Iranian delegation in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad for the negotiations with the US, said the threats have come amid claims by the US government accusing Iran of lacking good faith and engaging in extortion amid the talks.

“This express public incitement for state terrorism must be denounced by all,” said Baghaei.

Experts believe the far-right political camp in the US is obviously dismayed by the outcome of the US-Israeli aggression on Iran, which began in late February and ended in a Pakistani-mediated two-week ceasefire last week.

The aggression started and continued with the assassination of senior Iranian political and military leaders, aimed at bringing about a regime change in Iran.

However, the US government finally accepted Iran’s conditions as a baseline for launching the current negotiations in Pakistan.

Iranian authorities have indicated that they would seek compensation for all assassinations committed by the US and the Israeli regime in Iran.

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Iran condemns assassination threats against Iranian negotiators amid US talks

Brussels cannot say where its own pipeline inspectors are as Hungary’s oil lifeline remains shut

Will they magically reappear after the election?

By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | April 10, 2026

With just days until Hungary’s parliamentary election, questions are mounting over whether the European Union’s apparent inaction on a stalled oil pipeline investigation is politically motivated to avoid strengthening Viktor Orbán.

The controversy centers on the Druzhba, or “Friendship,” pipeline, which has not delivered Russian oil to Hungary since the end of January. Ukrainian authorities insisted that the halt was caused by Russian attacks damaging the infrastructure, but initially refused to grant access to inspection teams from both Hungary and the European Union.

The European Commission eventually announced its intention to deploy a team to the region to inspect the pipeline, in part due to Hungary’s refusal to sign off on any further financial assistance to Kyiv until the matter was resolved. However, no updates on the inspection have been forthcoming, and Brussels itself now appears unable to account for the status — or even the whereabouts — of its own delegation.

Speaking at a press conference on Tuesday, European Commission spokesperson Anna-Kaisa Itkonen confirmed that a small EU expert team had been deployed to Ukraine following correspondence between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. However, she admitted she could provide no update on the mission’s progress.

“I cannot provide any new information on developments since that exchange of letters,” Itkonen said, adding that she had no details about the team’s itinerary or current location.

“At the time of sending the letter, they were in Ukraine. At that time, we indicated to Volodymyr Zelensky that we were ready and willing to launch such a fact-finding mission, but at present, I have no information about the team’s whereabouts or where exactly they might be,” she added.

The lack of clarity has persisted for weeks. The European Commission first announced on March 12 that it was ready to dispatch a fact-finding mission to assess damage to the pipeline and determine repair timelines and costs. Yet, according to sources in Brussels and Kyiv, EU experts have still not been granted permission to inspect the affected section.

Reports from Ukrainian media at the end of March suggested the team was prepared to travel but remained blocked by authorities who had yet to approve access.

The episode has drawn criticism from Hungarian officials, who say the situation is wholly unacceptable. Máté Kocsis, leader of the Fidesz parliamentary group, mocked the situation, saying it was “absurd” that the EU could not say where its own delegation was, adding sarcastically, “A delegation simply disappeared. This happens to anyone in Ukraine,” as cited by Magyar Nemzet.

The pipeline dispute has become a central issue in Hungary’s election campaign. Orbán’s government argues that Kyiv is deliberately withholding oil supplies to damage Hungary’s economy ahead of the vote, while also accusing Brussels of failing to intervene.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó has gone further, describing the shutdown as “a purely political decision,” and accusing Ukraine of refusing to engage in talks to resolve the situation. A planned trilateral meeting with Slovak and Ukrainian officials collapsed after Kyiv declined to attend, despite Hungarian efforts to organize negotiations in recent weeks.

The Hungarian government has also alleged broader coordination between European and Ukrainian actors aimed at harming the current administration’s chances in Sunday’s election. Viktor Orbán has accused Brussels of seeking to install its own “puppet” in the shape of opposition leader Péter Magyar. Governing Fidesz claims that Magyar will be subservient to Brussels on major issues, including further military and financial assistance to Kyiv and the controversial EU Migration Pact.

As the election approaches, the unresolved pipeline issue — and the EU’s lack of visible progress in investigating it — has intensified scrutiny of Brussels’ intentions. Whether the radio silence is bureaucratic inertia or a calculated effort to depose the government, the impact it is having on the election is undeniable.

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Economics | , , | Comments Off on Brussels cannot say where its own pipeline inspectors are as Hungary’s oil lifeline remains shut

Israel’s Iran War: Myth and Reality

Israel’s press paints a very different picture than that circulated by its flunkies and apologists

By Mouin Rabbani | April 11, 2026

According to the Hasbara Symphony Orchestra, Israel’s latest war against Iran was an astounding triumph and the country remains dizzy with success.

More precisely, we should speak of Israel’s invaluable contribution to an enormous US strategic victory, because the suggestion that the war primarily served Israeli rather than US interests, or that Israel played a central role in Washington’s decision to launch this war is an anti-Semitic blood libel.

Yet the Israeli press tells a very different story. Its views are of course not uniform, but across the political spectrum a fairly consistent assessment emerges:

1. Israel’s greatest success was Netanyahu’s ability to persuade Trump to launch this war. In Trump, Netanyahu finally found his mark.

2. This achievement is also a very sharp double-edged sword. It was from the outset an unpopular war in the US, dividing even the MAGA right. If responsibility for this war is placed at the feet of Israel, and particularly if it is seen in the US as a failed adventure that weakens the US position regionally and globally, the negative ramifications for Israel could have strategic consequences. Not so much because of reduced US power, but rather on account of the fallout this could have on the US-Israeli relationship.

3. Israel scored many tactical successes but failed to achieve its war objectives. If the war ends, and the Islamic Republic is not overthrown, it will have been a costly failure. Debate continues over whether Israel’s objectives were realistic and attainable, and whether Israel’s leadership raised false expectations among the Israeli public.

4. Despite the damage inflicted on Iran it has thus far emerged strengthened from this war. The Islamic Republic did not collapse, it demonstrated an ability to retaliate and inflict damage of its own throughout the war, and most importantly was able to establish its control over the Strait of Hormuz with all this entails for the global economy. In other words, Israel’s war objectives will not be extracted from Iran by the US around the negotiating table, because Tehran has no reason to capitulate.

5. If Israel is compelled to end its war against Lebanon before defeating Hizballah, this will be a political catastrophe.

6. The main losers of this war are the Arab states, particularly those of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). The good news for Israel is the sharp deterioration in their relations with Iran. But Arab governments are unlikely to respond by strengthening relations with Israel, and perhaps also not with the US, because they see Washington and particularly Israel as responsible for their misfortune. And when push came to shove they proved to be exorbitantly expensive yet unreliable allies. (On this point commentary is more divided, and some anticipate closer relations).

As far as Israeli media is concerned this is not a final verdict, because the war is not necessarily over and even when it is it will take time for its full impact to be revealed. But thus far, at least, it is painting a very different picture than that served up by its flunkies and apologists abroad.

Between the lines, the conclusion is clear: in Iran, Israel’s new national security doctrine of eliminating any challenge to its regional hegemony, and of ensuring that any threat is nipped in the bud before it emerges, has been overtaken by reality.

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Israel’s Iran War: Myth and Reality

Between war and industrial breakdown: The US-Israeli attrition crisis

The Cradle | April 10, 2026

The US–Israeli war on Iran has laid bare a structural crisis at the heart of Washington’s war machine – one that calls into question its ability to sustain prolonged conflict, let alone replenish what it expends.

In the opening weeks alone, vast stockpiles of missiles, aircraft, and precision-guided munitions – from Tomahawk and ATACMS to Patriot, THAAD, and Arrow interceptors – were burned through at a staggering pace.

Battlefield attrition is rapidly translating into an industrial reckoning, exposing the limits of US and Israeli capacity to reproduce high-end weaponry at the pace modern war demands.

Firepower without endurance

According to a report issued by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) on 24 March, the first 16 days of the war saw the use of 11,294 munitions at a direct cost of $26 billion. Reparations could push that figure beyond $50 billion. But the financial toll only tells part of the story.

In the first 96 hours alone, coalition forces launched 5,197 munitions across 35 categories – one of the most intense air campaigns in modern warfare. The scale of consumption quickly overwhelmed the logic of industrial replenishment.

Air defense systems bore the brunt. US and Gulf batteries fired 943 Patriot interceptors in just four days – roughly equivalent to 18 months of production. THAAD systems followed a similar trajectory, with 145 missiles expended, consuming more than a third of the estimated stockpiles.

On the Israeli side, the pressure was even sharper. Arrow interceptor reserves dropped by more than half within the same period. Rebuilding that stockpile could take nearly 32 months. What initially appeared as heavy usage rapidly revealed itself as a structural imbalance.

The cost of those first four days alone ranged between $10bn and $16bn, rising to $20bn when factoring in aircraft and system losses. Worse still, degradation of radar and satellite infrastructure reduced interception efficiency, forcing operators to fire multiple missiles at single targets – in some cases up to 11 interceptors for one incoming threat.

Strategic weapons, empty warehouses

Offensive systems followed the same pattern. In the opening phase, 225 ATACMS and PrSM missiles were fired – core assets designed for deep precision strikes. Alongside them, more than 500 Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched over 16 days.

Replenishing those Tomahawks alone could take up to 53 months – more than four years of uninterrupted production. In practical terms, this means the US cannot replicate the same level of sustained bombardment in any near-term confrontation.

JASSM-ER missiles (precision-guided air-to-ground missiles), each costing over $1 million, were used in large numbers against Iranian radar and communications nodes. Their production cycles depend on advanced electronic components already under strain from global supply bottlenecks. HARM anti-radiation missiles were also heavily deployed, eating into stockpiles originally intended for the European theater.

Precision came at a strategic cost. Every successful strike depleted assets that cannot be quickly replaced.

The use of eight GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators in the first 96 hours – nearly a quarter of available inventory – underscored the intensity of the opening assault on hardened Iranian facilities. Thousands of JDAM kits followed, draining stocks of the guidance systems that convert conventional bombs into precision weapons.

Small-diameter bombs were used in what the report described as near “suicidal” quantities, particularly against mobile launchers. Meanwhile, bunker-busting BLU-109 bombs were expended continuously, pushing global inventories toward depletion within two weeks.

When air superiority breaks

The downing of an F-15E Strike Eagle inside Iranian territory on 3 April marked a turning point. It shattered the assumption of uncontested air dominance and revealed the cascading costs of even a single tactical loss.

The incident triggered a complex rescue operation that quickly spiraled. Alongside the destroyed fighter jet, an A-10 Thunderbolt II was lost, helicopters were hit, and additional assets were damaged or abandoned.

At the peak of the operation, US forces destroyed two MC-130 transport aircraft and four special operations helicopters to prevent their capture. MQ-9 drones were also shot down, adding to the tally.

Direct losses from this single incident exceeded $500 million. But the real cost lies elsewhere.

The rescue mission involved 155 aircraft, hundreds of personnel, and stretched over two days inside hostile territory. To recover a single crew, Washington expended vast operational resources, exposing a deeper vulnerability: high-value platforms can trigger disproportionate losses when confronted with layered defenses.

Iranian air defenses also reportedly struck an F-35 and downed multiple drones, while friendly fire incidents added further strain. Superiority, once assumed, is now conditional.

Supply chains as the new battlefield

US war spending surpassed $45 billion within just over a month, according to tracking data based on Pentagon reporting to Congress. Daily costs eventually reached $1 billion.

Yet the more consequential crisis lies not in expenditure, but in production.

Rebuilding munitions used in the first four days alone requires 92 tons of copper, 137 kilograms of neodymium, 18 kilograms of gallium, 37 kilograms of tantalum, seven kilograms of dysprosium, and 600 tons of ammonium perchlorate – a critical component for solid-fuel rockets.

The US depends on a single domestic source for ammonium perchlorate. At the same time, China dominates global supply chains, controlling 98 percent of gallium production, 90 percent of neodymium processing, and 99 percent of dysprosium.

Rebuilding just the first four days of munitions expenditure alone would require tens of tons of critical minerals and hundreds of tons of rocket propellant inputs, tying any recovery effort directly to these constrained supply chains.

Military power is now tethered to geoeconomic realities beyond Washington’s control, turning industrial recovery into a strategic vulnerability. Replenishment runs up against supply chains shaped by global resource flows that sit firmly outside the Atlanticist sphere.

In practical terms, this means that even unlimited funding cannot accelerate production without access to these materials, placing a hard ceiling on how quickly stockpiles can be rebuilt.

The cost imbalance trap

Beyond sheer consumption, the war exposes a deeper flaw in how interception works.

Air defense systems rely on expensive interceptors to neutralize low-cost threats. Iranian drones and missiles, often built at a fraction of the cost, have pushed the US and its allies into an unsustainable exchange ratio.

Even as Iranian attack rates dropped by 80 to 90 percent after the opening phase, pressure did not ease. Daily barrages of roughly 33 missiles and 94 drones continued to drain defensive stockpiles.

Close-in systems like C-RAM fired over 509,500 rounds at a cost of just $25 million, while interceptor missiles consumed at least $19 billion. This imbalance forces advanced militaries to burn through their most sophisticated systems far faster than their adversaries can replace losses, unless viable “cheap defeat” options are developed.

An industrial base that cannot surge

The structure of the US defense industry compounds the problem. Despite rising demand, production has not meaningfully increased.

Defense contractors remain hesitant to expand capacity without guaranteed long-term contracts. Repeated cycles of political promises followed by funding reversals have left industry wary of overcommitting.

Key facilities, such as the Holston Army Ammunition Plant – the backbone of US ammonium perchlorate production – operate under fixed capacity, exposing a critical bottleneck at the heart of the US missile supply chain.

The consequences extend far beyond the Iran theater. Every missile fired here reduces Washington’s ability to project power elsewhere.

The depletion of more than 500 Tomahawks, alongside dwindling interceptor reserves, weakens US deterrence across multiple fronts – from East Asia to Eastern Europe. The war imposes a “second front tax,” forcing the US to choose between sustaining current operations and preserving its broader deterrence posture.

A myth unraveling

The war on Iran strips away the illusion of limitless western military superiority. Technological advantage remains, but it no longer guarantees endurance.

Missiles can hit their targets. Aircraft can penetrate defenses. But without the industrial capacity to sustain operations, every strike draws down future capability.

This war exposes the limits of US-Israeli power and points to a new strategic equation, where industrial resilience outweighs firepower. The ability to sustain production, rather than deliver precision strikes, increasingly defines military power in a prolonged conflict.

In that equation, Washington is no longer dominant.

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | | Comments Off on Between war and industrial breakdown: The US-Israeli attrition crisis

Pressure builds on Iran to ‘drop’ Lebanon ceasefire demand as Islamabad talks hang in balance

The Cradle | April 11, 2026

Pakistani officials are pressuring the Iranian delegation in Islamabad to enter talks with their US counterparts by “dropping” demands for a ceasefire in Lebanon, according to information obtained by Lebanese journalist and The Cradle columnist Dr. Mohamad Hassan Sweidan.

“The authorities in Lebanon have agreed to postpone the ceasefire and to discuss it directly with Tel Aviv; therefore, you cannot exert pressure in a direction that contradicts what the Lebanese themselves have accepted,” the Iranian delegation was informed on 11 April, according to Sweidan’s sources.

Nevertheless, Iranian officials have expressed that their position on a region-wide ceasefire remains firm, revealing that a final resolution to halt the attacks is a “condition for the success of the negotiations — not merely a request.”

“If the Iranian delegation reaches the conviction that the US side is not serious and that the negotiations will not lead to the desired results, it will withdraw and return to Tehran,” Sweidan stressed.

According to his sources, coordination exists between the Iranian delegation and the leadership of Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Officials from Iran and the US arrived in the Pakistani capital on Saturday for the first round of indirect negotiations toward a possible ceasefire.

The Iranian delegation is led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.

US Vice President JD Vance is leading the delegation for his country. He is accompanied by Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.

According to reports on Iranian TV, Tehran has set clear red lines for Saturday’s talks: control of the Strait of Hormuz, war reparations, the release of frozen assets, and a permanent ceasefire on all fronts in the region.

Soon after Iran and the US agreed to a brittle ceasefire earlier this week, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam demanded his country not be included in the process.

Since then, the Lebanese government has agreed to hold direct talks with Israeli officials in Washington, which many in the country view as an attempt to normalize relations with Israel and “weaken” the Lebanese resistance by prolonging the war.

The push to be excluded from the regional ceasefire came despite a wave of Israeli terror attacks across Lebanon this week that killed over 300 Lebanese and injured over 1,000, including several members of the state security forces.

According to Lebanese journalist Hassan Illaik, in recent days, Arab and European diplomats were told by a close adviser to Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, “The war must continue until Hezbollah is eliminated.”

Senior Hezbollah official and member of Lebanese parliament, Hassan Fadlallah, on Saturday condemned the push by Beirut as a “blatant violation of the national pact, constitution, and laws.”

“The move by those controlling the government deepens internal divisions at a time Lebanon needs unity to face ongoing Israeli attacks, preserve civil peace, and protect coexistence,” Fadlallah said, adding that authorities “should have prioritized national interests” by benefiting from the international opportunity created by Iran’s support for Lebanon.

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Pressure builds on Iran to ‘drop’ Lebanon ceasefire demand as Islamabad talks hang in balance

In another clash report, US denies agreement to release Iran’s assets

Al Mayadeen | April 11, 2026

The United States has denied reports stating it agreed to release Iran’s frozen assets in Qatar and other foreign banks, one of Tehran’s prerequisite for negotiations in Islamabad, Pakistan.

A senior Iranian source had stated that the United States in fact agreed, describing the move as a sign of “seriousness” ahead of potential negotiations in Islamabad, according to a report by Reuters.

According to the source, the unfreezing of assets is “directly linked” to ensuring safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz.

This is not a first for Washington. Reports previously indicated that the US agreed to a ceasefire that would include Lebanon and other regional fronts. While Trump and Netanyahu denied, US media asserted that the inclusion of Iran’s regional allies in the ceasefire was always in agreement.

Moreover, among the Iranian demands was its right to enrich uranium, another provision the US agreed to. However, only hours after the agreement was declared, Donald Trump claimed Iran would not be allowed to enrich uranium, further exposing Washington’s unreliable positions.

Iran ties ceasefire to Lebanon, ‘Israel’ sabotages agreement

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf previously conditioned talks with the US with a ceasefire in Lebanon and the release of Iran’s blocked assets. He emphasized that both conditions are essential before any diplomatic process can move forward. “These two matters must be fulfilled before negotiations begin,” he added.

Tehran’s 10‑point proposal, accepted by Washington as the framework for talks during the two-week ceasefire, includes ending all US and Israeli military operations against Iran and its allies, as well as halting Israeli attacks on Lebanon and other countries in the region. Iran’s negotiators stress that without a permanent stop to aggression on all fronts, any ceasefire would be meaningless and allow enemy forces to regroup.

Netanyahu, however, made it clear that “Israel” has no intention of halting its campaign, explicitly excluding Lebanon from any ceasefire arrangement. “I insisted that the temporary ceasefire with Iran not include Hezbollah, and we continue to strike them forcefully,” he said, reaffirming the occupation’s commitment to continued aggression.

European officials have warned that excluding Lebanon risks collapsing any broader agreement, as the war increasingly takes on a regional character linking Gaza, Iran, and Lebanon into a single confrontation.

April 11, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on In another clash report, US denies agreement to release Iran’s assets

What is fueling unrest across the EU?

RT | April 10, 2026

The EU is sliding into a fuel crisis driven by a global supply shock caused by the US-Israeli attack on Iran. It has already triggered protests, early signs of shortages, and warnings of the wider economic impact.

This has resulted from the disruption of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for global energy shipments. Oil prices surged above $120 per barrel during the escalation, and while crude fell below the $100 mark after a two-week US-Iran ceasefire was announced on April 7, it remains well above the $70 level before the war. Prices have remained volatile amid uncertainty over the truce and continued disruption to shipping through the strait.

Diesel and kerosene have emerged as the central pressure points in the crisis. Europe’s benchmark diesel and jet fuel prices have risen above $200 per barrel equivalent from below $100 in January, according to Bloomberg. Jet fuel prices have also surged since the start of the conflict in late February, according to industry data cited by multiple outlets.

Why has diesel become more expensive than gasoline?

The European market has shifted toward higher diesel consumption following decades of tax policies that lowered diesel taxes compared to gasoline.

The EU’s refining system produces a different mix of fuels than the market consumes. A barrel of crude oil typically yields about 40-50% gasoline, but only around 30–40% diesel and jet fuel combined, with the rest made up of heavier products.

This mismatch has left the bloc structurally short of diesel. The region is a major net exporter of gasoline but relies on imports for a significant share of its diesel and jet fuel.

Diesel has traded above gasoline prices at the pump in several EU countries.

Rising wholesale costs have fed through to consumers. Diesel prices at the pump have exceeded €2 per liter in multiple countries, according to national data and media reports — equivalent to roughly $8.80–$10.50 per US gallon, compared with about $5.60 per gallon in the US. Governments in Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Hungary, Spain, Poland, and Ireland have introduced tax cuts and other measures to limit the impact of rising fuel costs.

Why are farmers and truckers protesting?

Rising diesel prices are hitting sectors most dependent on the fuel, particularly agriculture and road freight. The EU’s transport sector is facing a “fast-moving diesel shock,” according to logistics platform Logifie.

Ireland has become the most visible flashpoint of the crisis. Fuel protests have spread nationwide since this past Tuesday, led by farmers, truckers and transport workers, disrupting supply chains and transport networks, according to local media.

Blockades have strained fuel distribution, with queues forming at petrol stations with some running dry amid panic buying. On Thursday, the government called in the army to clear the blockades.

During a protest march in Dublin on Friday, demonstrators carried a coffin with “RIP Ireland” written on it.

What do jet fuel shortages mean for summer travel?

Airports across Europe could face “systemic” jet fuel shortages within three weeks if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, according to a letter sent by an airport industry group to the European Commission, as cited by the Independent.

According to Corriere della Sera, “some airports on the continent have been experiencing shortages in jet fuel quantities for days without officially reporting it.” The outlet cited its sources on Friday as saying that “it’s such a sensitive issue that official talk remains tight-lipped,” adding that Brussels is hoping the truce between the US and Iran will hold.

Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline by passenger numbers, has started reducing flights to popular destinations, with chief executive, Michael O’Leary warning that the airline will not be able to run its full summer schedule if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed.

April 10, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , | Comments Off on What is fueling unrest across the EU?

Why no power can undermine Iran’s eternal dominance over the Strait of Hormuz

By Mohammad Molaei | Press TV | April 10, 2026

The Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway nestled between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, is not merely a geographical passageway or a shipping lane on the world map to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

It is a strategically vital waterway that forms the pulse of the global energy economy and, simultaneously, a potent asset for the Islamic Republic to fundamentally reshape the balance of power in the Persian Gulf and around the world.

Iran seeks not merely to protect or monitor this strait but to exercise absolute, intelligent and legitimate control that, in the short term, applies economic pressure on any adversary to force it into retreat, negotiation, or acceptance of Iranian terms, and in the long term, to convert this control into permanent and inexhaustible strategic advantage.

This unchallenged authority on the strategic chokepoint, which carries around a quarter of global seaborne oil trade, includes regulating maritime traffic, collecting passage tolls, influencing global supply chains, and reconfiguring power dynamics in the region in alignment with the Axis of Resistance.

Backed by immutable geographical realities, international legal frameworks, precise economic data, and Iran’s asymmetric military capabilities, we examine how no military threats nor diplomatic pressure can alter this fundamental and unalterable reality.

Geographically, the narrowest point of the Strait of Hormuz measures just 21 nautical miles — roughly 39 kilometers — in width. This extremely narrow gap places all key shipping routes, including two two-mile-wide carriageways and a two-mile buffer strip, entirely within Iranian and Omani exclusive territorial economic waters.

Iran is uniquely positioned to exert absolute control over the northern and most critical part of the strait, with its coastline stretching more than 1,600 kilometers along the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman. This extensive coastline includes not only mainland shores but also numerous strategic islands that serve as natural strongpoints.

Unlike the Suez Canal or Panama Canal — artificial waterways that can be circumnavigated — the Strait of Hormuz is the only natural, mandatory route for crude oil, liquefied natural gas, and chemical products exiting the Persian Gulf en route to the Indian Ocean and global markets.

No viable alternative to bypass Iran’s control

There is no economically viable or practically feasible alternative to bypass it.

The geography is also immutable: the mountains, rocky coasts, and shallow water depths in key formations make it impossible or prohibitively expensive to open parallel routes or construct new canals. No power on earth, irrespective of its military prowess, can overcome this geographical reality through insignificant actions, the occupation of tiny islands, or even the deployment of naval forces.

Iran’s long and impenetrable coastline is a natural wall that would require manpower and logistical support far beyond the capacity of the world’s largest armies to capture or hold.

Legally, the Strait of Hormuz falls under the purview of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), though its interpretation has consistently and appropriately followed the line advanced by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Because the strait’s width is less than 24 nautical miles, the entire waterway is not considered part of international waters or an international shipping route. The governing legal regime is not free and compulsory transit passage, but rather innocent passage.

Iran, having signed but not fully ratified the 1982 Convention, has always maintained that vessel passage must not prejudice the sovereignty of coastal states in any way, and that any passage threatening Iran’s national security is invalid.

This unique legal status grants Tehran the option of selective and conditional control over vessel traffic without necessarily infringing upon international law as interpreted by Western powers.

This is why the Strait of Hormuz is Iran’s real unsinkable aircraft carrier: an inseparable asset that costs virtually nothing to maintain daily, yet offers strategic and deterrent value inestimable to the global economy.

This legal position, combined with its geographical reality, has placed Iran in a situation where it can exercise practical dominance and unquestionable authority over the waterway without maintaining a permanent surface force presence.

Economically, the Strait of Hormuz is rightly called the true chokepoint of the world economy.

According to the most recent data from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) and the International Energy Agency (IEA), approximately 20.9 million barrels of crude oil and petroleum products transit through the strait daily — equivalent to 20 percent of all oil consumed worldwide and 25 to 27 percent of global oil imports and exports.

Moreover, over 20 percent of global liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade — roughly 11.4 billion cubic feet per day, mostly from Qatari fields — also passes through this route.

Influence of the Strait of Hormuz beyond oil

But the waterway’s influence extends far beyond the oil industry. Iran is the world’s largest source of urea — a nitrogen fertilizer vital to agriculture — and the broader Persian Gulf region dominates this trade.

Iran alone ranks among the top five urea exporters globally, and any disruption in transit automatically drives international urea prices up by 25 to 30 percent.

This price surge directly disrupts fertilizer supply chains for major importing countries such as India, Brazil, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and most African countries. The consequence is a large-scale food crisis: soaring wheat, rice, and other agricultural commodity prices, worldwide food inflation, and a direct threat to the food security of billions of people.

Thus, the Strait of Hormuz is the chokepoint of the global food supply — a weapon Iran can use to influence the currents of the global economy and generate unprecedented pressure by seizing control of food and energy chains without launching a single missile or drone.

For the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Strait of Hormuz serves as an asymmetric weapon or economic nuclear. It can hold the world economy at ransom by the implementation of selective but intelligent control of the waterway, without the requirement that involves direct war, without incurring huge costs of armaments and even the use of advanced nuclear weapons.

This strategy can be used to impose colossal and rapid economic strain that compels the opposing side to either flee in haste, bargain, or accept Iran’s terms, with no other options.

The long-term goal could be to transform this temporary control into a structural and permanent arrangement: collecting passage tolls from vessels, selectively regulating traffic (free passage for friendly ships in the Persian Gulf, restrictions and bans on hostile ones), and completely redefining the rules of engagement in the Persian Gulf in alignment with the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Axis of Resistance.

During periods of tension, Iran implements a calculated approach by raising the threat to the point of execution without necessarily ever closing the waterway completely, as was seen in operations True Promise 1, True Promise 2, and True Promise 3.

This strategy imposes continuous economic costs on the enemy without inflicting any harm on Iran. Even though Iranian oil exports and its own products are indirectly affected in the short term, selective transit management and toll collection create new revenue streams, ultimately swinging the economic war in Tehran’s favor.

Iran’s balance of action closely mirrors that of Gamal Abdel Nasser when he nationalized the Suez Canal in 1956. Nasser dared to seize the canal, scuttled ships at its entrance, and effectively closed the oil lifeline to Europe.

That action brought the British and French empires to their knees, triggered the Suez Crisis, and symbolized the fall of British colonial rule in the West Asia region.

Just as Nasser, with a single strategic stroke, turned a major energy canal into an instrument of influence and power shift, Iran has now moved to nationalize the Strait of Hormuz through actual action, asymmetric military strength, and unyielding political determination.

This nationalization of the Strait of Hormuz can be seen as the beginning of the de facto demise of American power in the Persian Gulf region, just as the nationalization of Suez heralded the end of the British Empire. The only difference is that Iran employs less advanced, less costly, and more efficient means to enforce this power and authority.

Iran’s efforts to implement a passage toll system in the operational and executive spheres have been intelligent and multifaceted. Enemies or vessels lacking the required permission face direct threats, while friendly vessels — particularly those from Eastern countries and key allies like China, Russia or Pakistan — pay tolls in Chinese yuan, Russian rubles, or cryptocurrencies such as USDT or Bitcoin, securing safe and uninterrupted passage.

This policy not only provides a direct and permanent revenue stream for the Iranian economy but also significantly reduces Iran’s reliance on the US dollar, which is dying a slow death.

Through the comprehensive use of China’s international payment system (CIPS), other banking networks, and digital payment systems, Tehran has successfully moved to eliminate the dollar from the commercial equations of the Strait of Hormuz and is working toward currency multipolarity and the dismantling of Western financial supremacy.

Iran’s legitimate control over Strait of Hormuz

This initiative is part of a broader economic warfare strategy that renders further struggle or pressure on Iran far more expensive and burdensome for the opponent than capitulating to Tehran’s demands. Iran’s intelligent and legitimate control over the Strait of Hormuz is thus absolute and enduring, resting on three unchangeable foundations.

First is the irrevocable nature of geography and the impossible cost of seizing it by force. Iran is literally impregnable with its 1,600-kilometer coastline. Any invading force attempting to assert control over a 100-kilometer front and fully reopen the strait would require over one million men, a vast naval fleet, and unparalleled logistical support — a force that even the world’s strongest military would struggle to assemble.

Moreover, Iran’s control over the strait does not depend on fixed ground positions surrounding the waterway; complete control can be exercised through anti-ship missiles, long-range drones with a range of nearly 2,000 kilometers, and integrated radar command systems.

The second justification is Iran’s absolute superiority in both low-intensity and high-intensity asymmetric warfare. Large-scale mining of the Strait — not using surface ships but rather Fajr-5 rockets fired from a range of 70 kilometers — is entirely within Iran’s capabilities.

These rockets can deploy magnetic, intelligent, and advanced mines along the entire length of the strait, rendering shipping traffic completely uneconomical. Clearing such mines from this waterway would require no less than six months, during which the global economy would be crippled in terms of energy supply and food security.

The ancillary cost of such warfare to Iran is minimal — thousands of dollars per mine — while the enemy suffers billions of dollars in daily losses, not to mention the devastating disruption to global supply chains.

The third foundation is Iran’s long history and precise strategic calculus. Iran has on many occasions in the past spoken of shutting down the Strait but has not acted on it, as demonstrated during the crises of the 1980s, in 2011-2012, and the last few years.

The threat itself is an effective deterrent. Any force that attempts to respond to Iran’s language of direct threat with its own language of direct threat instantly faces the prospect of a global energy shock, extreme inflation, economic downturn, and domestic opposition.

Records in the contemporary world have revealed that Iran will push the threat to the final stage of execution and will ultimately compel the opponent to withdraw and accept new realities, and it has been clearly and unquestionably demonstrated in the past 40 days.

Finally, Iran does not insist on a permanent and destructive closure of the Strait of Hormuz, but rather on intelligent and selective control. This domination includes non-dollar toll collection, selective passage management of vessels, and the transformation of all external threats into opportunities to reformulate the rules of engagement in the Persian Gulf.

Iran soars above this waterway because its permanence — rooted in immutable natural geography, low-cost and effective asymmetric technology, and most importantly, its unshakable determination — has secured it forever.

This fact cannot be altered by any power on earth, regardless of massive military pressure or international coercion. Any attempt to counter Iran in the Strait of Hormuz would simply cost the global economy far more and ultimately force adversaries to accept the new reality in the Persian Gulf: this waterway will no longer be anyone’s backyard, but rather the territory of the established, solid, and indestructible deterrent power of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

April 10, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , | Comments Off on Why no power can undermine Iran’s eternal dominance over the Strait of Hormuz