Dr. Peter Breggin: Thanks Tom Cruise

[Guest guest]

SSRI-Research@

Mon, 18 Jul 2005 23:46:30 -0000

[sSRI-Research] Dr. Peter Breggin: Thanks Tom Cruise

HuffingtonPost.com via News, Sun, 17 Jul 2005 10:27 AM PDT

 

 

 

 

Dr. Peter Breggin: Thanks Tom Cruise

 

http://news./news?

tmpl=story & u=/huffpost/20050717/cm_huffpost/004284_200507171327

 

 

On June 25, July 2005 Tom Cruise did the unthinkable on TV. Actually,

he did several " unthinkables " in a filmed interview with NBC's Matt

Lauer for the Today Show.

 

First, Tom stopped smiling. He deprived us of that multi-million

dollar grin and got serious. For a star to do this to the American

public was unthinkable.

 

Second, Tom pointed out that Matt Lauer actually was very " glib "

(shallow) and didn't know what he was talking about. He also urged

Matt to be " more responsible " and to learn something about psychiatry

before touting it. For a star to do this to a media personality was

unthinkable. Since nearly all of them are shallow, this was a threat

of potentially epidemic proportions. Suppose other guests began

pointing out that media hosts don't know what they are talking about

and are shallow?

 

Third, he got serious about one of the most important issues in our

personal lives, in this case our widespread use of psychiatric drugs

to solve our personal distress and anguish. Tom concluded, " I'm

passionate about life. " For anyone to speak this way on television,

except perhaps on the Catholic channel, is truly beyond the TV pale;

and even the Catholic channel doesn't criticize psychiatry.

 

Fourth, he criticized psychiatry and drew attention to its genuine

flaws and failings. I suspect he's actually read my book, Toxic

Psychiatry. Tom said that psychiatry had a long history of abusing

people, including electroshock. He said, " There is no such thing as a

chemical imbalance. " He said that antidepressants can only " mask the

problem " and that " these drugs are very dangerous. " He called

psychiatry a " pseudoscience " and suggested that there are better

approaches. He was right about all of this.

 

A few days later NBC invited me to New York City as a psychiatric

expert to discuss the Tom Cruise affair on the Today Show, and when I

began by saying it sounded like Tom had been doing some serious

reading about psychiatry, I got cut off, again and again, throughout

the show.

 

Why was the media both drawn into the story and shocked by it? It was

too good a story to simply ignore: " Tom Cruise Gone Wild " was the

theme. It should have been, " Tom Cruise gets serious. "

 

The media would have liked to attack Tom on the grounds that he's a

Scientologist. Scientologists seem to share a number of views about

psychiatry with me, including everything Tom said. In fact, I'd go

further. Modern biological psychiatry is a materialistic religion

masquerading as a science.

 

How can I say that my profession of psychiatry is a materialistic

religion? Because modern psychiatry makes believe that psychological

and spiritual problems, such as anxiety and depression, are caused by

mechanical failures in the physical brain, and because psychiatry then

attempts to correct these psychological and spiritual problems with

physical interventions such as drugs and electroshock. Modern

biological psychiatry takes these views and implements these

interventions on faith and it has won a lot of converts with the help

of billion-dollar marketing campaigns. If you want more detailed

analyses of the faith and fake science behind the claims of modern

psychiatry, you'll find them in my books such as Toxic Psychiatry

(1991), Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (1997), Talking Back

to Ritalin (Revised, 2001), the Antidepressant Fact Book (2001) and

the Ritalin Fact Book (2002). You can find my scientific papers on my

website, www.breggin.com. In my books and on the website you'll also

find discussions of the many drug-free alternatives that are available

for helping people with problems such as anxiety and depression.

 

The media kept hinting that the problem was Tom's Scientology beliefs

but they didn't want to say it. To some extent it's not politically

correct to criticize someone's religion, especially when people like

Tom and John Travolta are members. But that was really not the issue.

The media is afraid of Scientology because the religion has been

extremely aggressive toward media critics, often charging them or

threatening to charge them with libel and slander.

 

I was also invited on to CNBC's the Donny Deutche talk show. This time

I remained in Ithaca, New York only a few blocks from my office in a

high tech TV studio. I was kept waiting in front of the live camera

for almost an hour and a half to get a word in as I watched Tom get

excoriated. Although I could see the show on the uplink for this

entire time as I sat waiting at any moment to be called upon, they

decided not to link me into the show at all and I never got to say a

thing in Tom's defense or in criticism of biological psychiatry, drugs

and electroshock. Sitting upright that long without twitching in

anticipation of momentarily appearing on millions of televisions was

hard enough, but listening to Donny was worse.

 

While I sat listening to the CNBC show that I was never brought onto,

I felt a mixture of outrage and sadness. Outrage that the show host

Donny Deutche bragged up his work in advertising where he helped to

produce the Zoloft TV ads with their clever little bouncing faces that

made the antidepressant so much more " accessible, " in his words, to

millions of Americans. Donny was bragging about an actual fraud—ads

that falsely suggest that Zoloft corrects biochemical imbalances and

that leave out the warning that the drug causes mania, not to mention

psychosis, violence and suicide.

 

What was tragic? Donny's guest was Jane Pauley who was flogging her

new book, Out of the Blue. Jane is the epitome of a media personality,

having anchored the Today Show with Tom Brokaw and Bryant Gumbel, and

having earned many broadcast awards. Jane is also a promoter of

psychiatry. She admitted to having developed " hypomanic " (milder than

full-blown mania) symptoms on an antidepressant. At the time, she

explained, her mind and thoughts were racing and she couldn't control

them. But then she added that of course the drug didn't make her

become manic; the drug just " brought out " her underlying or

pre-existing bipolar disorder.

 

Of course, I don't know anything about Jane Pauley except what she's

told us and she's not really the issue. Celebrities are actively

recruited by marketing departments to promote medical and psychiatric

treatments. I do know that psychiatrists often lie to patients to

protect themselves and their drugs. My colleagues lie by saying the

antidepressant merely " brought out " their mania, psychosis, violence

or depression, rather than the drug caused it in the otherwise

innocent victim. Jane Pauley thinks she is a victim of bipolar

disorder when she sounds to me like a victim of psychiatry.

It's no small matter to falsely inform a person that their

drug-induced mania shows they have bipolar disorder. It results in a

false diagnosis and a stigmatizing label (bipolar or manic-depressive

disorder) that follows people for the rest of their lives. It leads to

additional medications, often including antipsychotic drugs like

Zyprexa and Risperdal that can cause lethal diabetes and pancreatitis,

and tardive dyskinesia, a potentially disfiguring and disabling

neurological disorder characterized by bizarre-looking abnormal movements.

 

So the media personalities had a feast promoting their religion,

psychiatry, while Tom Cruise got hammered for criticizing psychiatry,

and indirectly promoting his religion, Scientology.

 

No, I'm not a Scientologist. Except when they occasionally say hello

to me at conferences, I have hardly spoken to a Scientologist in more

than thirty years. But when I saw Tom's bravery come out from behind

his marvelous smile, I wanted to help, and I made clear I wanted to

defend him.

 

Well, Tom, you said on TV things I've been saying in the media and in

my books and scientific articles for three decades—but boy did you

generate a lot more attention to the issues. Thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

2005 HuffingtonPost.com. All rights reserved. The

information contained in Huffington Post commentary may not be

published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without prior written

authority of huffingtonpost.com.

 

 

2005 Inc. All rights reserved.

Questions or Comments

Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback