3dmindsolutions.com

I’m not here to write an inflammatory article decrying the conspiracy of the profession against innocent consumers. I think that while psychologists and psychiatrists don’t really have a firm grasp on producing personal change, but I don’t think they intend to hurt anybody either. Really, the biggest problem is that, in a way, they’re just as ignorant as the patients they treat.

Let me explain why.

Modern psychology began with Sigmund Freud. There were quite a few psychologists before him, but Freud carried himself with absolute certainty, secure in the knowledge that his theories were absolutely correct and perfect in every way. In hindsight, we know that he was a cocaine-addicted neurotic mess, but back then people thought his irrational certainty was well-deserved confidence. They were very impressionable–and keep in mind that many were doctors and medical students. They attached themselves to a well-sold idea from a man who wouldn’t tolerate anyone to argue with his ideas and from there began to choose the direction psychology would move in.

You see, Freud was a horrible hypnotist, but his studies of hypnosis gave him the idea of an unconscious mind. However, being a lousy hypnotist, he moved in another direction. A patient of his mentor, called Anna O. (not her real name) showed many bizarre psychosomatic symptoms (such as paralysis on one side of the body, lapses of consciousness, and hallucinations), but when talking to Freud’s mentor she’d unload her fantasies and worries to him, and then she’d feel better and the symptoms would disappear for a time. She called it the talking cure. Freud and his mentor believed that this caused an emotional catharsis (release) that cleaned out the negativity that was causing the problems. Freud adopted it in his own practice.

Years later, psychoanalysis and the talking cure became a common practice. Many psychologists since have tried different variations, but the same rules all applied: talk until the problem is gone. Of course, this doesn’t work very well. Since it takes years, what’s to prove the problem wouldn’t have worked itself out in some way as long as they were trying something? Regardless, no one could come up with anything better, it seemed, so the “talking cure” remained in fashion.

In 1949, a drug that treated the symptoms of schizophrenia was discovered, and a mad rush to discover new psychopharmaceuticals - drugs that change the mind – began. With psychoanalysis and its offshoots largely ineffective, drugs became the silver bullet since they seemed to be the most effective means of controlling symptoms. Later, when drugs like Prozac and Ritalin were invented and hit the mainstream, people, doctors and general public alike, jumped on them as the solution to the problem.

Think about it. Let’s say someone hires you to build a house. You have all the material necessary to build it, but no tools. You need to start building the frame of the house and you have wood and nails, but nothing to hammer them together with. Then, let’s say that the people who hired you have no home until you finish building it. It’s a lot of responsibility and you’ve committed yourself to it, but you’re completely helpless without the tools you need. That can’t possibly feel good.

But let’s say you find a big rock. It’s heavy and imprecise, but you can use it to get those nails in. Compared to the helplessness of having no tools at all, a rock is like a godsend!

That is the situation psychologists are in. They don’t have the tools, so they feel helpless. Because human beings create rationalizations to make sense of the things we don’t understand, when psychologists don’t seem able to generate changes for their clients with talk therapy, but drugs that work on a biochemical level do the trick, it seems reasonable to assume that the reason that psychologists can’t help people make permanent changes is that many of the problems people have are solely biological in nature. If it’s really not something they have control over, then they don’t have to feel helpless because they can pass the buck.

There’s a high incidence of the recurrence of depression in people who are treated for it, and it is considered a life-long imbalance of the brain. It couldn’t be because the psychologist didn’t know what they were doing and they talked around the problem instead of changing the emotions at the core of it because they don’t even know that it’s possible to change those emotions directly. Instead, they decide that depression has an entirely biological basis. They even found that it’s transmitted in families, so it might even be genetic! Of course, behaviors and attitudes can be learned from family members, but dwelling on that too long makes one wonder how they can be unlearned and no one (supposedly) can answer that.

Now, I’m not trying to throw blame on therapists. I’m trying to point out that for all their good intentions-and they DO have them-they just don’t know what they’re doing. From that mindset, it’s easy to see how they’d have a mistaken idea of what is and is not possible.

Now when you add to it the seeming effectiveness of drugs, their medical doctor counterparts, psychiatrists, get all the credit. Psychiatrists are medical doctors who prescribe drugs foremost, and have some training in psychotherapy as an afterthought. Obviously since what they do has a (temporary) effect, these problems must be biological and in the nature vs. nurture debate nature must be the ultimate winner!

Now, my perspective is completely different. Using a technique that is NOT mainstream called 3D Mind, I CAN change people’s beliefs and solve problems. Psychologists give people an 8 month course of progressive desensitization to overcome phobias, while psychiatrists prescribe antianxiety drugs for the long term. I have taken care of a few phobias in as little as ten minutes. Because I, quite simply, have a tool that works.

So from my perspective, I’m NOT helpless. Take that helplessness away, and I just can’t convince myself that problems are entirely physical because I just don’t see any proof. Just because the “experts” aren’t aware of another way to go about things doesn’t mean there isn’t one. As far as I’m concerned, there’s no reason why someone is stuck with recurring depression the rest of their life. There’s no reason people with anxiety disorders have to learn how to live with it. Eating disorders don’t have to be lifelong, chronic “diseases.”

There’s even no such thing as ADHD.

Seriously. Think about it. Go here first:

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/symptom.htm

These are the criteria that American psychologists use to diagnose ADHD. Notice how there are 9 symptoms of the attention deficit part and 9 symptoms of the hyperactivity / impulsiveness part. To qualify, you only have to meet 6 of the criteria for either one. If you meet 6 of the criteria for both, then you have full blown ADHD. Oh, you did note that there were 3 kinds of ADHD, right?

This is really just a shotgun approach. Fidgeting and being easily distracted are also symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) as well as depression. Depression has irritability and problems sleeping too. So what if ADHD is really just a conglomeration of symptoms? Maybe all you have to do is treat it on a symptom-by-symptom basis as you find the emotional drives and beliefs that cause the various behaviors instead of lumping them into the category of “biological” disorder where you can cover them up all at once with drugs. assuming for a moment that depression or GAD can be cured easily without drugs, who says ADHD can’t be cured either?

Psychiatrists and Psychologists do because they don’t even seem to have an understanding of what the problem really is.

Does that make sense? Well, it could be that I’m wrong and there is no technique to change people’s minds without drugs or years of therapy. But here’s the thing: if you take out the argument that nothing helps these problems, then you have no real evidence that a problem is entirely biological. You just can’t make declarations about some mental problem being biologically-based with any real certainty. That’s my real point here.

The thing is that our brains and biochemistry dictate how we think. But every time we learn something, a new neural connection is created. Learning changes our brain. So how do you know with one hundred percent certainty that, for instance, depression is solely biological in nature or if it’s the product of limiting beliefs that were learned and integrated? If people have the ability to change beliefs with a technique as well as changing brain chemistry with drugs, then the playing field is leveled and biology doesn’t have an advantage anymore.

Now, I’m not telling you that you shouldn’t trust mental health care professionals. Just keep in mind that they’re very limited in their outlook. If you understand the limitations they’re under, then you can avoid getting sucked into the same helplessness they’re stuck in. It’s not just ADHD, depression, GAD, or many of the other disorders that are popular. It’s EVERY problem that requires either permanent drugs or years of therapy to overcome as well as every problem that you must supposedly live with. So be wary of the diagnosis, because they might just be operating on a lack of information. If you fall for it and accept the label they hand you, you might just be stuck with it like they think you should be.

It’s your choice. Personally, I’d urge you to not accept the diagnosis at face value because there’s no reason you should be stuck in someone else’s ignorance.

Leave a Comment