Scientism (Part 4): Insanity Clause
Three people fought the New Normal--and saw the depths of its Dark Side.
The tip of the spear of “trust the science” is this:
YOU—are too stupid to grasp the meaning of the graphs, the waste-water data, the ingredients in the vials. WE—The Science—will EXPLAIN to you their meanings. However. If you refuse to TRUST US, we have a problem. That problem—is YOU.
If you are familiar with my other writings here on The Fringe Mystic (Time is An Illusion, for example), you have likely already gathered that I… let’s just say, have had some experience with psychiatry. In fact, should the stars one day align in my favor, I may write volumes about my experience (perhaps even a book).
But for now, let’s stick to the public record:
Psychiatry has been on shaky ground for quite some time.
Ten years ago, when the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (psychiatry’s bible of illnesses) was published, it was criticized for being heavily influenced by big pharma. The DSM-5 was attacked for its vast expansion of clinical classifications, what seemed to be a brash attempt to catalog almost every human experience, short of a hurt feeling, as an abnormal mind state.
Last year, a bombshell news story broke surrounding the chemical imbalance theory of depression. A damning umbrella study examining DECADES of research was published:
The serotonin theory of depression has been one of the most influential and extensively researched biological theories of the origins of depression. Our study shows that this view is not supported by scientific evidence. It also calls into question the basis for the use of antidepressants.
-The Conversation, July 20, 2022
When the foundational basis for your entire treatment model of a disease turns out to be “unscientific,” you’re in big trouble (or at least you should be). What about the millions who’ve been taking SSRI antidepressants for decades? What kind of long-term collateral damage might they be facing?
Psychiatry and the COVID/World-Health-Organization medical model have much in common.
The biggest lie underpinning all COVID-19 policies and mandates was that people who are healthy—are actually sick. It is the asymptomatic theory of transmission, the tracks for which were laid down by Anthony Fauci and crew during AIDS.
[Jon Rappoport has written extensively about the AIDS scandal; and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has covered much of it in his book, The Real Anthony Fauci.]
The idea that a person can be Olympic-athlete healthy yet somehow be a silent spreader of a deadly disease is a very dangerous concept. Especially if it’s a whopper of a lie. It gives all the power to the EXPERT (or to an “expert test”)—and forfeits all the rights of the patient.
Aside from descending into a prescription-based treatment model, psychiatry has always suffered from a pathological “Expert Complex.”
The psychiatrist is the ultimate expert.
Without the ability to prove his diagnostic determinations through hard evidence (for example, brain-chemistry tests), the psychiatrist is uniquely positioned to determine a patient’s health status based solely on a list of symptoms. Sound familiar?
Psychiatry’s involvement in COVID is a quiet but dark story.
In April 2020, German lawyer Beate Bahner made headlines after she was arrested by police for giving a “very confused impression”—before being admitted to a psychiatric facility in Heidelberg, Germany.
Turns out, lawyer Bahner had called for protests and had published a press release criticizing the German government’s COVID lockdown measures for being unconstitutional:
“These measures are not justified by the Infection Protection Act, which was quickly revised just a few days ago. Week-long restrictions on going out and bans on contact based on the darkest model scenarios (without taking factual-critical expert opinions into account) as well as the complete closure of companies and businesses without any evidence of infection risk by these businesses and companies are grossly unconstitutional.”
- German lawyer Beate Bahner
Bahner’s experience was the shocking first instance of psychiatry being weaponized against a respected public figure to shut her down and silence any debate surrounding constitutional rights versus irrational health measures.
In Vancouver, Canada, on December 8, 2021, the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) arrested retired BC family physician Dr. Mel Bruchet.
A month previous, Dr. Bruchet had broken the story of an unusual spike in stillbirths at a Vancouver woman’s hospital (related to growing concerns surrounding COVID-19 vaccines and pregnancy).
Over what essentially amounted to a tenant complaint (a renter in Bruchet’s house calling the police after an argument based on the tenant’s playing of loud music)—the RCMP arrived, put handcuffs on the 81-year-old Bruchet, and marched him out of his home and into the psych ward at Lions Gate Hospital, Vancouver.
Bruchet was involuntarily held in the psychiatric ward for 28 days based, initially, on a working diagnosis of “frontotemporal dementia.” When he was given the option of orally taking the antipsychotic Abilify or of having it injected against his will, Bruchet asked to read the pharmaceutical company’s drug insert.
Based on the product warnings, Bruchet pointed out to the psychiatrist assigned to him that Abilify is not to be prescribed to anyone over the age of 65 (particularly in cases of potential dementia). In response to Bruchet’s concerns, the psychiatrist labeled the retired doctor “grandiose,” “narcissistic,” “delusional,” “bipolar,” “depressed,” etc.
In the end, six separate medical opinions (no agreement on diagnosis) were used to hold Bruchet involuntarily past Christmas, including phone restrictions and a hospital-canceled visit from a pastor.
Of course, all of this is ridiculous and horrific and reminiscent of the Soviet Union’s use of psychiatry against political dissidents.
But it’s important to point out that this is the prescription model going forward.
When James Roguski is tirelessly reporting on the underhanded machinations of the World Health Organization in its relentless march towards a “One Health” surveillance state—you better realize that psychiatry will play a key role in its One-Health model.
Imagine a world where a diagnosis of COVID-19 specific CT could be used against political opponents.
What is COVID-19 specific CT, you ask? Well…it is associated with high levels of IU, of course. IU?—what’s that?
Listen…
IU and CT are simply coded language:
CT = “conspiratorial thinking”
IU = “intolerance of uncertainty”
—They are acronyms embedded in the abstract of a scientific paper entitled:
—a paper so full of shit, it is virtually unreadable.
Studies that are full of shit and virtually unreadable were and are the World Health Organization’s modus operandi when it comes to anything related to its One-Health gimmick. Studies don’t need to make sense. They just need to be “peer-reviewed” and thrown together by a crew of bullshit artists with some letters behind their names.
It is how you create a “virus.” It is how you whip together a batch of “safe and effective” “vaccines.” It is how you plan to magically manifest an “emergency” in any place at any time. In short, it’s how you conquer the world.
If you think COVID was bad, imagine a world full of wrongthink. But don’t strain your brain because we’re actually already there.
Now imagine wrongthink jacked up on steroids.
The insanity clause will be a convenient weapon in the back pocket of every regional health minister in the New World Normal.
Which brings me to Dr. Francis Christian, former surgeon and former University of Saskatchewan professor of surgery—whose audio recording of being suspended from his university duties by a team of COVID-New-Normal bureaucrats in 2021 still makes my skin crawl.
Dr. Christian was being punished for wrongthink after he advocated for the precautionary principle of informed consent and for drawing attention to the risks of COVID-19 vaccination for children. (What a lunatic!)
If you’ve never heard the entire recording, I highly recommend it. [It’s included at the end of this article.]
But I’ll end here with an excerpt of the recording (and quoted text)—featuring the “expert opinion” of Dr. Susan Shaw, the Chief Medical Officer of the Saskatchewan Health Authority.
Notice the way Shaw frames her assessment of Dr. Christian’s mental state, how she admonishes him for his wrongthink, which seemingly—based on her concerns over the types of people with whom Christian is associating himself—might be the result of a social infection:
Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Susan Shaw, explains to Dr. Francis Christian how he is suffering from wrongthink:
[Transcript of audio clip:]
Saskatchewan’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Susan Shaw (to Dr. Francis Christian):
“So, I think, Francis, this is why we’re so concerned…about you… Because this appears to me to be a change in the way that you see the world…
…I am very concerned about your ability to clearly see what’s happening…and what others may be doing with you and to you to take advantage of your position. You’re a highly intelligent man...but not making intelligent decisions. You’re not interpreting literature, or behaving in a way… that makes me understand that you understand how to navigate a scientific debate.
So this is why it’s important that we reiterate… Please reach out to the SMA health program [a mental health support program for physicians] to ensure that you have supports that you may not realize or think that you need right now but they offer amazing support that’s confidential”
What a chilling example of a health bureaucrat attempting to gaslight a physician (and the public) into thinking that there must be some sort of mental delusion at play should one question the policies and recommended pharmaceutical interventions being dictated by a small group of out-of-touch, manipulative, well-positioned, powerful people.
FULL AUDIO CLIP of Dr. Francis Christian’s recorded meeting with Dr. Brian Ulmer, Dr. Susan Shaw, and Dr. Dean Preston Smith (June 23, 2021)
[Links: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 of this series.]
[Please note: Scientism and The Church of Scientology are not the same thing. Scientism is the pseudo-scientific, faith-based belief that science is the best and only way to render truth about reality. Scientology, on the other hand, is a Hollywood religion/cult (with a well-documented aversion to psychiatry); however, The Church of Scientology has absolutely nothing to do with this article.]