Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Cesar Tort and Ombudsman vs others/Workshop

message: Neurologist Fred Baughman’s (FB) interview excerpts about the 2006 book DAGGERS OF THE MIND: PSYCHIATRY AND THE MYTH OF MENTAL DISEASE by Gordon Warmé, M.D.:
FB: More and more are awakening to the totality of the fraud and oxymoron that is “biological” psychiatry.  Dr. Warme, a psychiatrist who has not gone along, not jettisoned the science that made him, first, a physician, is to be applauded—and read.  A total awakening, however, requires that “biological” psychiatry be seen, not as misguided, poor, science, but a complete, knowing, willful fraud which has just as completely, knowingly, willfully, made patients out of normals (including infants, toddlers, children and declining elders) by the millions and then poisoned them, adding to the “disease” lie, coercion where necessary, including conscription of government and the courts to achieve this.  What’s more this crime is very much in full swing today and it must be spoken of as such.  Charges, indictments and sentences must be part of any full awakening where it concerns psychiatric “diseases” and their “treatment” especially, their “involuntary” treatment for the “good” of the patient [...].
FB: In the 50’s psych drugs were beginning to be synthesized, marketed, it was here that psychiatry and the pharmaceutical industry married and gave birth to the disease/chemical imbalance lie—a market strategy, not science at all and they know it but cling to it for the millions it allows them to make into “patients” to drug [...].
FB: What they have done is to assassinate the human character, claiming all emotional and behavioral problems are due to diseases—genetic and biochemical when not an iota of such proof has been demonstrated since the fraud began in the 50’s.  It is all based on the big lie—the incessant repetition with others who profit from this making patients of normals—neurology, pediatrics, family physicians joining in.  Every bit of it about profit motive, there is no science at all [...].
FB: Yes, psychiatrists are physicians, they have a background in science and specifically in what is normal, what is abnormal (disease/pathology) and how to tell the difference.  When they embrace the pseudoscience of “biological” psychiatry, a belief system, they jettison all of the science they ever knew and are legally responsible [...].
Other summary reviews of Dr. Gordon Warmé’s DAGGERS OF THE MIND: PSYCHIATRY AND THE MYTH OF MENTAL DISEASE can be seen here . —Cesar Tort 17:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you trying to do here, Cesar?  Show that you are capable of original research or do you just want to post opinion and make appeals to authority?  OR is not appropriate for WP and appeals to authority are not legitimate or convincing as arguments. You're sounding like a broken record (though I admit anyone born after the era of vinyl may not grasp the analogy). Ande B. 17:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Neurologist Baughman’s comments on biopsych are not OR (nor the psychiatrist’s 2006 book).  Baughman has been publishing and debunking the field for many years. —Cesar Tort 18:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You do understand that I was saying it was you, not Baughman, that was providing original research for our perusal?  And I would expect you to understand that by doing so you are appealing to authority, which is not a legitimate form of argument.  Your further description of Baughman makes it sound as if he is an activist or advocate who meets with your approval.  These quotes make you appear to be more biased and POV than ever.  Ande B. 18:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather that appealing to authority I was trying to show that there are many professionals in the mental health field who repudiate biopsych for the very reasons I posted my first tag in article. —Cesar Tort 20:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cesar, it doesn't matter how many people you quote, it does not remove your position from the small minority.  I don't know why you continue to make these quotes.  We are all aware of a divergence of opinion.  That does not mean that the article, as written, misrepresents the nature of biopsychiatry or that there is inadequate coverage of minority views.  Minority critcs are well represented, I would suggest, even over-represented in the current article.  Ande B. 23:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: My suggestion cannot violate any policy since it is not, in fact, a policy suggestion.  Set asides do violate standard policy. Ande B. 00:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neurologist Fred Baughman