The point of this blog was about software and the right use of the scientific method to serve the objective of being free to change oneself (to fix what is important to the individual and other objectives of compassion) not to be forcibly normalised by doctors ruling over self interests and serving their needs for control and cruelty that far outweighs their needs to be humane to me in life.

https://atormentedsoulscience.wordpress.com/2023/08/01/software-aided-diagnosis-using-unpublished-single-symptom-data-from-existing-research-this-needs-a-lot-of-work-to-write-up-and-edit-this-because-at-the-moment-this-is-a-draft/?preview=true

This piece is conjecture, speculation and guesswork based on trying to understand my personal experiences of consciousness and reality. I think others have these experiences and are diagnosed with things like schizophrenia spectrum disorders but I think these are valid and natural experiences I’m talking about here. 

Your communication with your other consciousnesses – if you have them – is sacrosanct, not to be ruled over by doctors who cannot recognise the difference between a sense of brutality and a sense of care. You can dismiss them as meaningless or you can try to understand them (- that’s really important and movements such as the hearing voices movement are struggling to try to understand these experiences that doctors don’t understand). 

(When you think about the purposes of psychiatric laws such as the Mental Health Act it’s about a sense of nature and severity of mental disorder linked to the concepts of psychiatry which are that brain defects cause phenomena such as hallucinations when awake. They’ve ignored the truth that everyone hallucinates when asleep – that’s the innate capacity of the organic brain. It’s a terrible evil when doctors cannot recognise the difference between brain differences and brain defects and that’s what these psychiatric laws are based on. They’ve never faced the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal so they ignore it. They’ve never faced these experiences I talk about here so they can only understand them as the meaningless product of brain defects just like they ignore the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal. There is a profound darkness that defines the beings who see mental illness because they have no good in them and there’s nothing humane that’s innate to human nature.)

Understanding

There’s so many things to think about when you think about what are perceived as hallucinations and symptoms of madness.

Everyone hallucinates when asleep – dreams and nightmares are hallucinations. The organic senses are shut off when asleep so dreams and nightmares are hallucinations created by the brain.

It’s rare and uncommon to hallucinate when awake but the brain obviously has the natural capacity to hallucinate – I don’t see hallucinations when awake as caused by brain defects and mental illness because it’s so obvious that everyone has dreams and nightmares which are caused by the innate capacity of the brain to hallucinate.

(This experience of hallucinations when awake was prejudiced against before the creation of psychiatry so psychiatrists see it as the product of brain defects and mental illness because they’ve ignored the truth that everyone’s brain hallucinates when asleep. They are blind to natural mental diversity.)

One thing I’m sure of is that my mind and being is made of more than one distinct singular consciousnesses. I definitely have a conversation in mind between two or more singular consciousnesses.

(As I talk about this I should state my certainty and uncertainty. I am certain that either the brain can support more than one distinct singular consciousness or they are multiple consciousnesses created by something beyond the current understanding of science and cause and effect or both – I think it is both but I might be wrong so it’s either the power of the brain as cause and effect or something beyond the current understanding of science and cause and effect such as supernatural forces.)

I went through an awakening process to recognise the truth about my multiple consciousnesses. I have always had a conversation in my mind and in my stream of consciousness (the thoughts in my mind) and I thought nothing of it. I’ve had two awakening processes in my lifetime and the first one would have made me recognise the truth about my multiple consciousnesses but I became a victim of psychiatry so I lost this opportunity to understand my mind and being. The next awakening process was absolutely brutal but I didn’t engage with care and psychiatry so I came to this awakening of my multiple consciousnesses.

(This second awakening process and experience was very much about control over my being, my mind, my thoughts, my voice and to a degree external reality. This was an experience that nothing I knew from science could explain. It was the experience of control of an invisible power or powers, force or forces, an entity or entities. Since my childhood I had been a strong atheist. This brutal awakening process broke my faith in atheism. Parts of these experiences were supernatural and beyond the understanding of science I had. This helped me to recognise things like my multiple consciousnesses that makes up my mind and being. The earlier awakening process was also a magical experience but it was a happy and pleasant and sometimes an amazing experience until I became a victim of psychiatry.)

What I learned is that my mind is like a car with passengers. These other consciousnesses are the passengers and I’m not always the driver of the car of my mind. I’m certain about this.

What I mean is that everyone assumes that their mind is one singular consciousness. In the metaphor of a car this is about one driver completely alone in the car. I had this belief until the second awakening process. Now I see that I have passengers in my car of the mind but I also recognise that I am not always the driver. I experience control by other entities who have non physical beings or non physical power far beyond the current understanding of science and cause and effect.

I think these multiple consciousnesses are involved with those who experience hallucinations when awake and I have not thought about this enough to suggest that the hallucinations of dreams and nightmares also involve these multiple consciousnesses.

(You are mad and crazy when you hallucinate? So what do you do when you sleep and dream? Everyone is mentally ill if the capacity of the brain to hallucinate.)

Hallucinations might be a form of communication. I’m certain that I communicate with other beings in my mind but I’m not certain that external hallucinations when awake are definitely communication with other consciousnesses that are part of one’s being.

Here I’m guessing and speculating about the cause and nature of these multiple consciousnesses.

I think the organic brain can support at least two singular consciousnesses. I saw a video of someone who had alien hand syndrome. This is something that occurs as the side effect of a hemispherectomy. This is where the part that connects together the periphery of the brain is severed. The brain is built upon layers and the corpus callosum connects the two hemispheres together and when this is cut by a hemisphericotomoy sometimes alien hand syndrome happens.

Alien hand syndrome is when the patient loses control over half of their body after a hemisphericotomoy. The video I saw was of a women slapping herself in the face with one hand (never the other hand). I saw this after I went through the second awakening process so I interpreted this video of alien hand syndrome as the brain being able to support at least two singular consciousnesses, one in each hemisphere. (If I remember right the patient in the video her hand slapping her face stopped at some point and the brain doesn’t heal from a hemisphericotomoy so I again assumed the existence of the capacity to support two singular consciousnesses.)

It’s a guess that the brain can support at least two singular consciousnesses, one in each hemisphere. It’s quite possible that some brains can only support one singular consciousness but other brains and perhaps more advanced brains have the power to support at least two singular consciousnesses.

This explains some of the complexities of my being and mind. It explains part of the conversation in my mind I have. It might also explain external hallucinations because the interconnected hemispheres of the brain can transmit visual and auditory and other sensory information which is from the power of the brain to hallucinate when asleep as well as when awake. I’m not a neurologist so this is pure speculation whether sensory information controlled by one half of the brain can then be transmitted to the areas of the other half of the brain that are used to interpret sensory information and feed it into the consciousness. I am quite certain that the brain has the innate capacity to simulate reality indistinguishable from waking reality in dreams and nightmares. (Most of the time when you dream you face a simulated reality indistinguishable from waking reality so you don’t recognise that you are in a dream when you are dreaming or experiencing nightmares. It’s also possible that this is not about the innate capacity of the brain to hallucinate and it’s about these supernatural forces that current science doesn’t understand. It’s certainly clear that when you remember memories they’re not like a simulated reality. What I mean is that remembering is not like watching a video of the experience recalled in memory but the simulated reality of dreams and nightmares is like watching a video and it’s more than this because it is a simulated reality indistinguishable from waking reality. I know it is also possible to be dreaming and recognise it’s a dream – I rarely experience this and perhaps others have a great ability to recognise they’re in a dream when they’re asleep and dreaming. As you read this I think you should recognise that I have to deal with multiple possibilities as well as multiple consciousnesses and multiple possible realities (I do wonder if I died instead of woke up from a coma about a decade ago and I am in hell now) – this makes my life harder.)

(From my understanding it requires far more effort and processing ability to simulate reality. Take vision alone. The optic nerve has a very high data transfer rate that is then combined with information from the optic nerve of the other eye to create 3D vision. This is about data and computation using an organic computer – that’s perhaps not completely accurate but it’s true that there’s collection of data, transmission of data and processing of data done by the brain which is like an organic computer. To simulate reality requires far more computing power. It’s easier to process sensory data from things like the eyes than to simulate the same data to create a reality indistinguishable from waking reality. You can look at the history of television and it is relatively easy to use a video camera just like how the eye works. But to simulate reality came far after the invention of TV technology because it requires computers powerful enough to simulate the visual data. Creating a reality is far harder and requires more processing power. When you are asleep your eyes are closed so the brain is doing this amazing thing of creating data like in computer generated TV and films. In computer generated TV and films they use a technology called ray tracing that creates a simulated light then calculates how the light bounces off objectives in the computer generated scene then calculates which light rays reach the camera – whereas a video camera doesn’t need to do all of this because it’s recording reality.. It’s amazing because when you think about evolution and evolutionary processes and what drives evolution which are environmental factors the brain is designed by evolution to have the minimum requirement to absorb sensory information and rapidly process it into the experience of reality of consciousness. But for evolutionary processes to design for the extra computational abilities necessary to simulate reality in dreams and nightmares is not what evolution works towards – there’s absolutely no environmental factors that would lead to the creation of this significantly greater processing power of the brain necessary to simulate reality indistinguishable from waking reality in dreams and nightmares. This ability to simulate reality and hallucinate would not be caused by the processes of evolution that are understood today. Of course it’s quite possible that factors such as increased nutrition in childhood and maternal/pre natal nutrition leads to the brain development far beyond what evolutionary processes designed for. The evolution of society and civilisation are in short timescales compared to the timescales necessary for evolution to succeed as a design process so evolution designed with the factor of low childhood nutrition in the African savannah when civilisation hadn’t begun but as civilisation was created and advanced then childhood nutrition increased so this additional processing power was created. I’m guessing here. But it’s like a rose plant growing into an oak tree because of increased nutrition this ability to simulate reality and hallucinate created by evolutionary forces and processes as well as the creation of civilisation that achieves this effect of increased nutrition.)

Understanding

As well as this biological possiblity of dual and multiple consciousnesses being related to the organic brain I think there’s other possibilities but this is based on the interpretation of my personal experiences of consciousness and reality and control not something that I prove with a graph or science.

(If there are drugs that slows down the brain and reduces its processing power then they might, perhaps, stop hallucinations when awake and asleep. I’m just guessing here. Conversely more vivid and realistic dreams and nightmares and hallucinations when awake can be created by drugs too.)

There’s supernatural or extra natural elements – I’m not even sure of the right words to communicate what I’m talking about here. There’s things beyond the current understanding of science and cause and effect involved in my experiences of consciousness and reality.

(Others experience similar experiences to what I do and find different explanations of the cause. For example the idea of wearing a metal hat is one cultural stereotype in certain countries. It’s got some logic to it which is trying to block the electromagnetic radiation that causes these experiences of consciousness and reality. This stereotype of the mad is about someone having these experiences I’m trying to explain here and trying to stop them by using a metal hat (an aluminium or tin foil hat) to block the source of these experiences and in the current understanding of science there are things like a Faraday Cage which serves this purpose of blocking electromagnetic radiation. At the same time gods and spirits are what many in history have explained as the cause of the same experience – psychiatry is atheist so doesn’t consider this religious aspect of these experiences that psychiatrists can only understand as the meaningless symptoms of brain defects. Most who believe in the existence of the gods read about them and learn about them but the seed of religions are those who actually experience the power, control and influence of the gods or spirits. – this is a long point I’m won’t make here and now because as I write this a species of monsters born and bred evil is still not done making me want to die. Again, this is because of the great efforts of psychiatrists to misrepresent brain differences as brain defects because ignoring pain is the basis of their profession.)

My two awakening processes and experiences could be described as waking up to the truth about the existence of the gods but equally instead of gods it could be spirits or aliens or a soul or a secret conspiracy and tyranny of telepaths.

I know this is going into the realms of what others call madness but I’ll go ahead and try to explain other possibilities about other consciousnesses that makes up my being beyond my speculation about biological and natural causes of a being and mind of more than two singular consciousnesses.

Firstly, the gods are alien beings and an alien race or races. It’s quite new in history to recognise that aliens exist and it’s obvious that that’s what the gods are. They might not be beings who have a physical being or they might be physical beings who have technology from a civilisation millions and billions older than this civilisation of monsters born and bred evil (a species of monsters whose sense of care wants absolutely nothing to stand in harms way of making a suicidal individual want to die a thousand times and more). The concept of a soul might be because of a non physical being that exists in the minds of beings who have souls or a soul is something created by alien technology and is interpreted by beings who are like ants as a soul.

(You can measure the length of the existence of this civilisation of monsters born and bred evil in tens of thousands of years or a hundred thousand years depending on which technology or advancement defines the beginning of civilisation. In the universe there are civilisations millions and billions of years older than this civilisation of monsters, monsters born and bred evil who are happy forcing someone to live to keep on making them want to die. You are ants in comparison to these old alien races and civilisations.)

The seed of religions are those who experience this supernatural force. It is an invisible force that makes Moses talk to a burning bush and see the truth about the gods and it is an invisible force talking to Abraham that made him want to kill his son. It is a different being and an invisible being that Socrates experienced millennia ago and so does the Dalai Lama experience today. An invisible all powerful being – that’s what a god is because they are aliens. The “all powerful” part is because they are aliens and an alien race or races with civilisations and technologies billions of years advanced from what exists in this civilisation of monsters born and bred evil. The invisible part is that they either have non physical being or technology that projects power instantly across light-years or they’re already here. (The speed of light barrier might be like now the speed of sound barrier was overcome by the advancement of technology so it is possible that an alien race is also here.)

It’s plausible that alien races exist and they have a massively advanced civilisation and technologies that means that they can project power over the monsters who call themselves the human race if they feel like and want to. I think this is part of the truth about the multiple consciousnesses that makes up my mind and being. It’s less plausible but still possible that they have non physical beings.

This might explain the experience of consciousness and reality I face. (The gods really have to dreg a ditch of the innate evil, brutal, inhumane and monstrous nature of human nature to choose to use me.)

It might be gods or souls or spirits – these are the pre existing concepts of the explanation of my experience of multiple consciousnesses and reality (beyond what science understands) that makes up my mind and being. The concept that aliens exist is my understanding of the gods or souls or spirits communicating in a different way to and beyond what the scientific method has come to understand as the methods of communication.

Now let me delve into the depths of thinking differently that is the blessing and curse of the mad.

I’ve touched upon the amazing innate capacity of the brain to simulate reality indistinguishable from waking reality. I think there’s many who have never thought about this amazing capacity of the brain because they just accept what they experience without thinking about it. I’ve also touched upon this communication with other consciousnesses that I used to experience and thought nothing of until I faced these awakening processes.

To communicate this way is a form of telepathy. Think about it like this. Things like the telephone were first technologies about something physical. Today you recognise and understand and use invisible communication technologies. The mobile phone uses invisible communication technologies and things like Bluetooth and WiFi are all about invisible communication technologies. The radio waves are invisible. (This would be like magic to generations centuries and millennia ago an invisible force that allows communication across huge distances instantaneously but today you think nothing about this technology. Electromagnetic waves travel invisibly and are received by computer devices that turn these waves into sight and sound so you can communicate with anyone around the world instantaneously. Could the brain have the same possibility of invisible communication but it’s about communication technologies that don’t exist yet but exists in alien civilisations billions of years older than this civilisation of monsters born and bred evil? Imagine the scope of the possibilities of billions of years of the advancement of technology? What little does the understanding of science understand in this civilisation of monsters born and bred evil compared to a billion years of progress of science and technology?)

So it’s most likely that the communication of multiple consciousnesses (I experience) is in part because of aliens who have technology billions of years more advanced than the best technologies of invisible communication technologies in this civilisation of monsters born and bred evil – that’s what explains a form of telepathy.

But what if telepathy is something that some of the monsters who call themselves the human race have? I’m speculating wildly. This possibility of alien races explains the telepathic conversation I have or it could simply be about the innate capacity of the brain to support multiple consciousnesses that is why I experience this conversation in my mind that is a form of telepathy – this is what I believe.

But what if this telepathy is what the monsters who call themselves the human race have? I know there are victims of labels like schizophrenia who experience the same thing and see telepathy caused by the monsters who call themselves the human race not aliens and gods and spirits etc.

It’s a guess that it’s also possible that a secret conspiracy and tyranny of telepaths exists that creates this conversation in the mind between two or more singular consciousnesses. The monsters who call themselves the human race are fantastic at lying and betraying me and manipulation – they don’t see the evil in what they are doing well to me in life and in fact they’ve so beyond evil that they think it’s a sense of care I face in life.

(I think this conspiracy is unlikely because good men would rebel against these lies of a conspiracy. On the other hand I know a species of monsters born and bred evil is blind to the clear and present tyranny of evil run by doctors and in fact they see not pure tyranny that forces someone to live to deliberately and knowingly keep on making them want to die but they see care in this because they are all evil and only evil. Good men would fight against psychiatry but good men don’t exist.)

I digress.

Understanding

The expanse of the comprehension of possibilities that explains a mind and being who experiences multiple consciousnesses where others only experience one consciousness can be explained in a variety of ways. Psychiatrists and other monsters who see mental illness can only understand this as the product of brain defects because of the pre existing prejudices against natural mental diversity that doctors have taken up and enforce in the name of the proof of the truth about the evil, brutal, inhumane and monstrous nature of human nature.

(I only live to face the perpetual darkness of what is innate to human nature and the sense of care for suicidal individuals based on ignoring pain – the sense of care for suicidal individuals that sadists dream of. Psychiatry is based on profound darkness and the existence of psychiatry has furthered the innate brutality of human nature.)

Here I’ve touched upon the truth about natural mental diversity that doctors spend their time oppressing by labels such as schizophrenia.

What does the tyranny of evil founded on pre existing prejudices understand?

* everyone’s brain hallucinates when asleep and it’s unusual and uncommon to hallucinate when awake but this doesn’t mean mental illness to be different? Actually that’s fundamental to the existence of psychiatry to be blind to difference so they see disease instead of diversity

* it’s completely rational to believe that alien races exist and guess at their power – but when psychiatry was created there was none of this competency to recognise that alien races exist and they have civilisations billions of years older than this civilisation of monsters born and bred evil and so is their technology far far far advanced from what exists today. It’s completely obvious that the gods are an alien race or races but it’s not in the competency of doctors to even begin to think about why religions exist or understand that the power and influence of the gods is not just to create a few messiahs but the gods continue to communicate with those who are gifted with a soul

* some minds and beings are made of more than one distinct singular consciousness and that’s why there are those who experience a conversation in their minds – the job of psychiatrists is only to oppress natural mental diversity never to recognise natural mental diversity. The first time natural mental diversity is recognised then it’s demedicalised so things like human rights exist to protect the diversity of homosexuals whereas if this diversity remained medicalised then they would be forced to be normal by whatever are the standards of prejudice wielded by psychiatrists and their brutal tyranny – and be clear that it’s never the job or competency of psychiatrists to fight for the recognition of homosexuals as part of natural mental diversity

* how many recognise the conversation in their minds as a true conversation between two distinct singular consciousnesses? Psychiatrists don’t understand themselves or have the capacity to recognise this natural experience of diversity. There’s a mentality “talking to yourself is a sign of madness” – this ability to talk to oneself hs only the externalisation of the conversation in the mind of beings whose brains are sufficiently advanced to be able to support multiple consciousnesses. Psychiatry has absolutely everything in common with apes who see a monkey walking on two hind legs alone instead of walking on all fours and wanting to hold the monkey down and force them to be normal and walk on all fours – oppression of difference is what they’re paid to do by a species of monsters born and bred evil

The proof of the truth about human nature is that you see care in this. You would always be blind to the truth about the evil, brutal, inhumane and monstrous nature of human nature if I never became a suicidal victim of psychiatry. The gods use me and the monsters who call themselves the human race abuse me for this, the truth about what you are that you would never recognise on your own.

Empathy and understanding

(Suicidality = suicidal suffering, feelings and thoughts)

What I face in life because of everyone ignoring my pain is what sadists do as a brutal punishment – but no one recognises this truth because they ignore my pain as long as I live and that’s what defines the acceptable suffering of choices and actions justified as care I always face in life like I have always faced. Torturers prosper because of the existence of psychiatry because they depend on forcing someone to live to keep on making them want to die – the perpetual darkness of what is innate to human nature is furthered by the existence of psychiatry and all who believes that a sense of care forces someone to live to keep on making them want to die.

Not even empathy exists in this world to make the monsters who call themselves the human race make other choices when they have any power over my life and how I feel.

Who makes you make other choices about what you can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual from the choices of the innate brutality of human nature?

There’s entire professions built upon ignoring the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect and of a mental illness.

It’s only in a civilisation of monsters born and bred evil where you bear what the monsters who call themselves the human race do with more opportunities to make me want to die.

It’s certainly better to be crazy than be born and bred evil like the monsters who see mental illness are – the blessing is the curse of the mad to be not like you and the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race and all who see mental illness because psychiatry exists instead of good in them.

The unquenchable need to force someone to live to keep on making them want to die represents the truth about what is innate to human nature – it only furthers the proof of the truth about human nature all of you who believes that I face a sense of care in life. Concepts of compassion for suicidal individuals such as the recognition of when someone has suffered too much already and been brutalised too much already don’t come from or coexist with the existence of psychiatry.

(Torturers prosper because of the existence of psychiatry. Torturers depend on being free to force someone to live to keep on making them want to die and doctors protect and use this innate brutality of human nature more than they have ever wanted to stand in harms way of the innate brutality of human nature for suicidal individuals. Empathy doesn’t coexist with the existence of psychiatry. Empathy creates new humane protections like freedom from torture – psychiatrists and other monsters who see mental illness have no such capacity to feel empathy so they think forcing someone to live to keep on making them want to die is care.)

This is such pure and perfect evil to accept someone to be forced to live to keep on being made to feel suicidal but you can only be part of the proof of the truth about human nature when this is what defines your sense of care.

It’s because you are monsters born and bred evil that’s why you cannot recognise what pure and perfect evil is but you think it is a sense of care I face in life. This proof of the truth about human nature echoes throughout the future.

Accepting the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal is only a sense of brutality but the proof of the truth about human nature is endless because only by doctors misrepresenting the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect, of a sickness, of a mental illness – that’s the only way to make a species of monsters born and bred evil care about suicidal individuals for the first time in history but it is a sense of care that accepts suicidality as acceptable consequences because it’s a sense of brutality based on ignoring pain as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect.

The abuses doctors can bear to do to a suicidal individual and bear the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race to do to a suicidal individual – it’s because you are monsters born and bred evil that’s why you cannot recognise what pure and perfect evil is.

What is a suicidal individual going through but too much suffering already and too many brutalities already? What’s the only way a species of monsters born and bred evil can care about suicidal individuals for the first time in history? It’s not about too much pain and too many brutalities but it’s the product of brain defects and mental illness – that’s the proof of the truth that you are all evil and only evil but you are blind to the truth about human nature because you are too innately evil to recognise what evil is.

Psychiatry is never a profession that recognises evil and brutality and it’s because you are all evil and only evil that you think psychiatry is a sense of care not a brutal tyranny that ignores suffering and brutalities. Psychiatrists have only cared about protecting the innate brutality of human nature and using the innate brutality of human for suicidal individuals – they have never made you become humane in what you can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual because they’ve only succeeded in turning the innate brutality of human nature into a basis for care and laws.

A profound darkness of being born and bred evil that nothing and no one has ever changed is why you want to keep me alive to further the proof of the truth that human nature is evil, brutal, inhumane and monstrous when they have any power over my life and how I feel. Making me want to die a thousand times and more isn’t enough for you who can only further this proof of the truth about human nature.

They could have made other choices and they should have made other choices but the proof of the truth about human nature is why a species of monsters won’t stand in harms way and stop themselves from making a suicidal individual want to die again and again – the gods use me and the monsters who call themselves the human race abuse me for this, the proof of the truth about human nature that you are all too evil to recognise on your own.

It’s not pure and perfect evil that’s possible because of what you can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual in the centuries a species of monsters born and bred evil has tried to care about suicidal individuals? It is but you are too evil by nature to recognise what pure and perfect evil is on your own. Because instead of any good in you and anything humane that’s innate to human nature you have the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness and the great efforts of doctors to misrepresent brain differences as brain defects – so you care about and protect those who are still not done making me want to die. You only accept suicidality as acceptable consequences as a basis for brutality but by the standards of a species of monsters born and bred evil accepting suicidality is a sense of care.

The gods use me and the monsters who call themselves the human race abuse me for this proof of the truth about human nature that monsters born and bred evil would never recognise on their own.

Sadists dream of a sense of care that ignores the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal and monsters want nothing to stand in harms way of this – the proof of the truth about the evil, brutal, inhumane and monstrous nature of human nature you would never recognise but you can only be part of the proof of the truth about human nature that’s going to affect future generations.

(Imagine you are in a burning building and being burned. Do you want to talk about what you are going through or do you want the fire to end and wish it never started? The metaphor is about basic rudimentary compassion for suicidal individuals and you have none when you are the monsters who call themselves the human race by name and by nature. So completely evil that the only way a species of monsters born and bred evil can care about suicidal individuals for the first time in history is by the great efforts of doctors to misrepresent suicidality as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect – so the response of monsters is for someone to talk about what they’re going through when they’re being burned to death instead of anything that resembles the slightest rational compassion. You are all evil and only evil you who believe that I face a sense of care in life – you can only help further the proof of the truth about the evil, brutal, inhumane and monstrous nature of human nature but you have no good in you, you who want me to live to face any amount of suffering and any amount of brutalities for any amount of time.)

(Is it because you only have the competency of monsters that’s why you are blind to the truth that their choices and actions justified as care have made my life worse not better? Because it’s not that bad to make me want to die by the standards of a species of monsters born and bred evil who need doctors to misrepresent suicidality as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect to make them care about suicidal individuals for the first time in history?)

(The medical tyranny wants to preserve and perpetuate their tyranny. It is a tyranny of so much evil.)

This is something I was thinking about that I never finished. It is an approach that uses single symptom data not published in psychiatric research (they use averages of effects on single symptoms in the data in published studies) and software to create a way to do a few important things like give the patient or victim of psychiatry what they want and make for better treatment recommendations after the treatment recommendations in clinical guidelines have failed. 

I’m anti-psychiatry but using the pre existing research this approach works to help patients/victims of psychiatry who choose treatment and want the best application of the scientific method possible using the existing research to solve what is important to them as well as provide better treatment recommendations after treatment failure. (There’s other pieces on this blog that covers a range of topics related to being victims of psychiatry and especially victims of the labels of schizophrenia spectrum disorders. I see the schizophrenic type not the disease of schizophrenia – I think this is so important to recognise natural mental diversity and that’s why I use the term “the schizophrenic type” because I see natural mental diversity.)

It’s here for anyone to take forward. (I do not own my ideas. They are things that someone is going to think about and, of course, there’s the complexities of my multiple consciousnesses to factor in. Take this forward.)

This piece linked to below is about the potential of this approach. 

https://atormentedsoulscience.wordpress.com/2023/01/31/this-approach-and-method-serves-and-solves-a-few-objectives-and-the-question-is-can-you-find-anything-else-that-solves-everything-this-solves/?preview=true

I suggest you read this piece here then read the piece linked to above. This piece in this blog post I wrote a while ago and the piece linked to above I wrote more recently. It has more justifications for this approach as well as a few more thoughts I’ve had that I haven’t put into the piece you are reading.

(This piece was a draft I never published until now. The piece linked to above was written after this draft piece was written.)

Here’s as far as I got with writing a long explanation of the approach. 

Better treatment recommendations using basic technology and collecting data from existing studies + a hope for those who face the terrible effects of failures of care 

 

Summary

 

The first part of the idea is collecting data from researchers about single symptom data. The other aspect is a piece of software to use the data to create better treatment recommendations. I’ve tried to cover the approach and the core of this idea. Experts can take it further but it’s up to the government how far they want to go with this and what they decide to fund.

 

(I use brackets to add additional comments and information and thoughts. You can skip past the bracket portions of text but I feel that it communicates better to a wider audience to use this bracketing style. I’m trying to keep it simple as well explain some of the complexity. Other pieces on this blog will add more information.)

 

(I’m not a doctor or connected with the medical profession except as victim of immense brutalities justified as care. This idea has taken me 10-15 years to develop and in this time doctors might already be doing what I’m talking about. 10-15 years ago the clinical guidelines for schizophrenia didn’t work like these ideas presented here works. This is a different approach to what was being used 10-15 years ago to make the best treatment recommendations in clinical practice using the available science.) (The basis of these ideas actually comes from a victim of the label of schizophrenia telling me about the failures of care to end her hallucinations – this was the most important symptom to fix for her but it is impossible to recommend the best treatment by the use of the scientific method by doctors at the time.)

 

The main piece

 

I worry that others perceive that I don’t know anything about psychiatry or I’m limited in the amount of complexities I can understand. I admit I am somewhat of a cowboy in other areas but I have spent time trying to understand psychiatry and the mental health system and laws based on seeing mental illness. I understand them from a theoretical perspective as well as being victim of those who see mental illness.

 

So let me try to explain something important to patients, care and scientists.

 

To keep things simple I am limiting these ideas solely for victims of the label of schizophrenia and the science using the measure PANSS. It is possible to apply this idea to other diagnoses and measures but I would leave that up to medical expertise. The important thing is to recognise the objectives of the care and compassion you want. For example for things that matter to you and are important to you to be on the agenda of care and the use of science to affect clinical treatment recommendations. Another point is how the scientific method should be used. There’s also an important point about treatment failures and again these ideas could help with the terrible effects of treatment failures. You might not be labelled with schizophrenia but the ideas in this piece are about a few things you want from the medical profession and medical expertise and their use of the scientific method to assign treatment recommendations whatever your diagnosis or diagnoses are.

 

(This idea can be only for the victims of the label of schizophrenia. You should be able to see the worth in this idea and it should be applied to other diagnoses that uses measures similar in nature to PANSS. My limitations are that I have only considered the measurement PANSS but I hope this piece makes you understand the value of this approach so experts can take the idea further to use for other diagnoses.)

 

(It’s up to the government to fund this. The government represents individuals and the people in a democracy.)

 

 

* Here’s the ideas – collecting data and using software to make better treatment recommendations *

 

This is a summary of something I was working on as the monsters who call themselves the human race force me to live to keep on making me want to die.

 

The ideas are about better treatment recommendations using the available data in studies using measures such as PANSS. The two elements are collecting data from researchers about the single symptom data that’s not published and the use of quite basic technology – software – to try to make better treatment recommendations.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_and_Negative_Syndrome_Scale

 

PANSS is a psychiatric measurement used in research on the victims of the label of schizophrenia (I talk about victims because I am victim of the torments that are happily inflicted on victims of psychiatry). It is a measurement that uses multiple single symptom measures that are averaged together to show the effects of treatments. Typically it’s the average of multiple single symptom measures that’s important to psychiatrists and is published in research studies and is used to create clinical guidelines that inform doctors of the best treatment recommendations – this approach I’m talking about is a different approach to this.)

 

(There’s a lot of finesse and nuances to these ideas. For example to limit the efforts necessary to collect single symptom data the data collection could be limited to the last hundred studies or research done in the last decade. I’m trying to make the points as simple as I can to make you understand the potential in these ideas to create better treatment recommendations.)

 

1) The first idea is to provide treatment recommendations based on a single most important thing to the patient.

 

I’ll try to give you an example of how this PANSS measurement works. Let’s say that there’s a measurement of cakes. The measurement is like PANSS. It averages together multiple single traits (symptoms). 

 

A doctor chooses the best cake for you based on this measurement of the average of multiple single traits. This is how doctors use the scientific method to assign treatment recommendations in the way national clinical guidelines are designed to work for those labelled with schizophrenia (and other diagnoses).

 

Let’s say there are five single trait measures of cakes: sweetness, chocolatey quality, size (diameter), softness and roundness. All are measures scored on a 1-10 scale. 

 

They choose the highest scoring cake for you based on averaging together multiple single traits and symptoms. Let’s say the best scoring cake scores 9 for sweetness and 10 for size, softness and roundness but 1 for chocolatey quality. It scores 40 out of 50 – the average score from these multiple single traits is 0.8. But let’s say that what is most important to you is the chocolatey quality of the cake. They’ll give you the wrong cake when they depend on the average of multiple single traits of cakes.

 

In the way psychiatrists use the PANSS measure they pick the highest scoring cake, the one that has the highest average score. This is how national clinical guidelines for schizophrenia use the scientific method to assign the best treatment recommendations using the available science. The way psychiatry works is to choose the highest scoring cake for you and if you don’t like it or you refuse it then they’ll force this cake down your throat. Then when this makes you suffer because they’re forcing things on you that you refuse (forced treatment) then they blame you for suffering and feeling suicidal and your defective brain for why you are suffering. 

 

(Forced treatment causes suicidal suffering feelings and thoughts as well as non suicidal pain. There’s terrible truths about psychiatric and mental health care you are blind to. For example psychiatric hospitals are where they do force suicidal individuals to live to keep on making the victim want to die – I’m not alone in facing massive brutalities justified as care. If they cannot get from me by my consent then they’ll force me to live to keep on making me want to die to get it – this is beyond cruel brutalities. How can you see care in this?)

 

What you want is a chocolate cake and this is what is going to make you happy so they don’t need to force this cake down your throat. But the most important thing to you is lost in the average of multiple single traits. 

 

The best thing to give you that is what is important to you is not by a measurement that averages together multiple traits of cakes. You want them to make a choice by factoring the one trait of cakes most important to you but this is not important to psychiatrists and their use of the scientific method and how research is used to create clinical guidelines.

 

(I’m sure that certain psychiatrists will argue that it’s not important what is important to the patient especially when the individual is a victim of the label of schizophrenia. It’s possible to use this idea to factor in what is important to the individual as well as the doctor – I’ll touch upon this later on.)

 

So to do the right thing it’s important to get the single symptom or trait measures but typically these are not reported in published psychiatric research studies. 

 

The first part of the idea is to go back through the existing research (by contacting the researchers) to get the single symptom scores that aren’t usually published in research studies. By getting these single symptom scores then it’s possible to give treatment recommendations based on what is the most important thing to the individual. This data about the effect on single symptoms from many studies can all be collected together. In the example a lower scoring cake that has high chocolatey quality is the best thing for you. It’s the same with symptoms.

 

Efforts are necessary to collect all the data from researchers but this is not unreasonable efforts. Meta analysis can use published data from hundreds of studies and clinical guidelines involve a substantial review of studies – so it’s not an unreasonable amount of effort to achieve this idea. The idea requires collecting single symptom data from existing studies but once the single symptom data is collected together there’s so many possibilities to create better treatment recommendations – no doubt far more possibilities than I’ve thought about or stated here.

 

At the same time as the simplicity of data collection required to make better treatment recommendations the way doctors work requires that the information about the best treatment for a single symptom has to be easily used in clinical practice.

 

This information about the best treatment for the most important thing to the individual has to be easily and quickly accessed to be practically used in clinical practice. A function of clinical guidelines is for it to be easy and quick to use the recommendations in clinical practice. (The time doctors have with their patients is limited so clinical guidelines as they are currently used requires the information to be accessed quickly.)

 

Using paper or an electronic document (as is how clinical guidelines are currently used) to do this idea of the right treatment for the thing most important to the individual makes it practically impossible to use in clinical practice. It would take too much time if a paper or electronic document is used to disseminate the information about the best treatment recommendations for a single symptom.

 

This is where software helps. A piece of software can use the data collected from researchers about the single symptom scores to allow doctors to rapidly access the information about the best treatment. In fact even in terms of how doctors are currently using clinical guidelines to guide their treatment recommendations a piece of software allows them to quickly access the information about the best treatment (many diagnoses have a variety of treatment recommendations that are unlikely to all be remembered by human value and memory and it’s even harder for GPs who deal with so many diagnoses). Software makes it easy to recommend treatments based on the one most important thing to the individual – it makes it quick to get the information versus reading through a document.

 

You can imagine a search box or drop down menu for the diagnosis then a second search box or drop down menu to select the symptom that’s most important to the individual. This takes minutes to do so it is practically possible to use in clinical practice.

 

(Lots of data about single symptoms from multiple studies can be entered into a database or spreadsheet. This then makes it easy to use the information about single symptoms in clinical practice. Basic software technology makes this easy to use the information in clinical practice.)

 

There’s subtlety and nuances to this idea. For example the choice of the doctor might be to first use the recommendation of the best treatment based on using the averaged scores then if this isn’t suitable then the second treatment recommendation is based on the most important thing to the individual or vice versa. Once the single symptom data is collected there’s many possibilities. (This idea creates more possibilities for psychiatrists and their clinical treatment recommendations. But the possibility is giving what the patient what they most want and need to be fixed/solved/treated – the use of averaging together multiple single symptoms cannot do this. When the application of research to guide treatment recommendations uses averages of multiple single symptoms then doctors have to rely on trial and error to give their patients what they want.)

 

The simplicity of the idea is to get the data from existing research and design software to make it easy and practical to use quickly in clinical practice – this is the purpose of clinical guidelines to use the available science to allow quick decisions in clinical practice. It requires no new research and the main work apart from the software is to collect data from researchers.

 

The benefit is that the individual gets what they want. This benefit cannot be understated. What cannot be understood by using averages is how to care about what is important to the individual. As I’ve touched upon this is even more important for the victims of psychiatry because psychiatry and the mental health system and laws are coercive and tyrannical – doctors rule over the victims of psychiatry and time and again this has ruined lives and failed to achieve anything that resembles humane care. This idea embeds voluntary choices in care, clinical practice and treatment recommendations using the available science. Psychiatrists care about averages and there’s nothing inherently wrong with this but they’re not caring about what is important to the patient. This idea is one attempt to care about what is important to the individual.

 

This idea was borne of a victim of the label of schizophrenia talking to me about her treatment. She withdrew from engagement with care. There are reasons why patients stop engaging with care like previous failures of care and treatment. For her it’s the brutality of mental health professionals that’s why she didn’t want to engage with care. But she couldn’t bear her hallucinations so she engaged with care. Her doctor tried and failed to resolve her hallucinations and she told me this and that’s from where this idea is borne. The effect on hallucinations is one measure among many single symptom measures in PANSS and to give her the best treatment recommendation for hallucinations is impossible to get from the average of multiple single traits and symptoms – because psychiatrists aren’t using the scientific method properly. (Psychiatrists had the information contained in research to give her the solution/treatment recommendations that would solve what is important to her but they don’t think about what is important to the individual/patient/victim to guide their use of the scientific method like I’m talking about it being used. How can you see care in this?)

 

The core of this idea is something that is at the core of those who love democracy and the democratic method. This idea uses the available science to give the individual what is most important to them. This one of the things that is why I see the democratic method as beautiful but it’s ruined when it’s in the hands of the monsters who call themselves the human race. (The freedom to choose is fundamental to liberty so being able to choose one most important symptom to treat then being able to get the best treatment recommendation is something democratic in nature.)

 

There’s a movement that by any other name is called the user involvement movement. It’s individuals, patients and victims fighting for what is important. It’s such a tragedy that this movement has to exist because it’s a movement necessary to fight against a sense of care and compassion of tyrants. User involvement is in part a movement against the medical tyranny – when once it’s only what is important to doctors and other health professionals the user involvement movement fights for the powerless patients to have what’s important to the individual on the agenda of care. It is victims fighting against the prevailing sense of care to create a humane system of care. (All I’m doing in this idea is to harness the scientific method and technology for the goals and objectives of the user involvement movement. I’m trying to put the individual and what is important to the individual on the agenda of care and that’s never possible when using averages of multiple single symptoms.)

 

This idea I’ve summarised here is about one voluntary choice of the individual about the most important thing to the individual (to end her hallucinations) – this ideology is fundamental to any sense of care. 

 

(The data collection is easy. The software is easy. It’s practical to use in clinical practice. The mass effect is priceless – this idea doesn’t just work in this country but in so many others. There’s so much finesse and sophistication to this idea beyond what I have comprehended but once the data is collected then others can deal with the challenges of the finesse and sophistication. Statistical analysis techniques, for example, will be involved but this finesse and sophistication is easy and not time consuming once the efforts to collect single symptom measures is done.)

 

(I criticise the use of averages but the use of single symptom data in this approach involves averaging together single symptom data from many studies.)

 

(I’ve not spoken here about the understanding of individuals labelled with schizophrenia as part of natural mental diversity – to be perfectly honest these ideas presented here pale in comparison to the care (and laws) yet to be achieved and is going to be created once natural mental diversity and mental suffering are no longer seen as mental illnesses. I see diversity and pain not mental illness but I have also spent time understanding what comes from seeing mental illness and the science of psychiatry.)

 

Now let me go further.

 

There’s horrific consequences of the failures of doctors to care and I don’t think the government truly comprehends this horrific beyond awfulness. This idea and the next idea is part of trying to conquer this problem of the failures of care and failed treatment recommendations. When you face the effects of the failures of care then I hope that these ideas give you hope that there are possibilities to give you the right solution, albeit what you really want is the right solution/treatment on the first attempt.

 

2) the best treatment recommendations for a specific presentation of multiple symptoms

 

(This second part is about understanding the scientific method and mathematics not software – but all of these things are tools to use for the objectives of the approach I talk about here.)

 

This second idea is more complex and time consuming. This idea fails in being easy for doctors to use in clinical practice for one reason: the amount of effort required to score multiple single symptoms in clinical practice. 

 

On the other hand this second idea does as much as I can see is the possibility of the scientific method to assign the very best treatment to the specific presentation and diversity of presentation of multiple single symptoms. In my understanding of the scientific method this second idea is the best way to give the right treatment recommendation on the first attempt but it’s too time consuming to make it work in clinical practice for giving everyone the best treatment recommendation on the first attempt. (It’s quick to understand the thing most important to the individual but it’s not quick to score multiple symptoms and the severity of multiple symptoms.)

 

There’s so many possibilities from this second idea that all comes from using the data collected to make the first idea possible.

 

At its worst this second idea uses the same data from single symptom measures to combine both what is the most important thing to the individual as well as the doctor. From the data it’s quite simple to use the software to not only recommend treatments based on the one thing most important to the individual but add in the most important thing to solve of the doctor. 

 

It’s possible to rank lists of the best treatments once the single symptom data is collected together. One list uses averages and each treatment would be ranked based on using averages of multiple single symptoms. Then there’s the list of treatments that works best for a single symptom and each treatment is ranked and there are many of these lists.

 

Two selections in the software are achievable from the same set of data used in the first idea to give the individual the most important thing to them. It can be factored in what is important to the individual as well as the doctor using the same data collected to make the first idea possible – the compromise is possible because software makes it easy to see what scores highly in terms of what is important to the individual as well as to the doctor. I imagine that the software would use the average measurements that psychiatrists care about to create a ranking of the best treatment recommendations based on averages as well as provide the best treatment recommendations for one single symptom so there’s a choice about averages in the ranking and the single symptom treatment recommendations are also ranked – both these rankings in the software can give the opportunity to combine the averages important to psychiatrists and the single symptom most important to the individual. This worst case implementation of the second idea is easy to use in clinical practice using software and the data collected to make the first idea possible.

 

Let’s say the best treatment based on averages only ranks 7th for a single symptom. Let’s say that the best treatment for a single symptom also ranks 7th in the list of best treatments that is based on averages. The third best treatment based on averages might be the third best treatment for a single symptom. This is very easy and quick to do using software to use these two rankings of treatments. So it’s practical to use in clinical practice. Once the single symptom data for the first idea is collected together then there’s many possibilities.

 

But at best? Treatment recommendations can be (using software) made by comprehending all the symptoms and extent/severity of symptoms. The most precise treatment recommendation for the individuality of multiple symptoms is only possible by scoring all of the symptoms then knowing which treatment works for the specific presentation of multiple single symptoms and software allows for this. This is in my understanding of the scientific method the best way to provide the best treatment using measurements such as PANSS.

 

In the cake analogy this second idea makes it possible to discriminate between a small, round chocolate tea cake and a big vanilla square cake – by using every single trait this is possible. This is about the precision of the scientific method that makes it so great in other endeavours than in psychiatry. (I see the scientific method ruined and corrupted and broken by how psychiatrists use the scientific method.)

 

(An intermediary solution is that the doctor and the patient agrees on the most important symptoms to treat rather than scoring each symptom and severity of symptoms. Once the data about single symptom effects for the first idea is collected together then there’s many possibilities – possibilities impossible when relying on averages. The software makes it easy to enter the select symptoms then calculate the best treatment from the single symptom data. A few symptoms can be selected without having to score multiple symptoms and severity of symptoms.)

 

This second idea is much about understanding diversity and individuality (of single symptoms and traits) to then offer better solutions. 

 

Different treatments have different effects on different symptoms and different individuals. There are different presentations of multiple single symptoms. If this diversity of treatment effects and presentation of multiple single symptoms isn’t comprehended then the recommended best treatments in clinical guidelines will fail some patients. 

 

(Doctors will argue that they’re trying to treat the cause not the symptoms. But in psychiatry they don’t know the cause so they’re treating symptoms. Their methods of diagnosis are flawed but so is their basis for understanding the causes of what they’re treating. I don’t think they know the causes of why suicidal individuals feel suicidal. For example they believe that pain is meant to be treated by pain killers not by preventing the brutalities that causes pain – I know this truth from extensive personal experience of a tormented (and I experience abuses worse than torment) soul endlessly tormented by choices and actions justified as care.)

 

The existing research already contains the information about the different effects of different treatments. The time it takes to score and measure single symptoms is the hard part. But software makes it easy to use all this information to use the scientific method to assign treatment that works best not just for one symptom but for many single symptoms.

 

In psychiatry it’s possible for two patients who are given the same diagnosis to have few symptoms in common. This diversity leads to a diversity in the presentation of multiple single symptoms. Also, treatments have different effects on different symptoms and traits. So it makes sense to me to use the scientific method to assign the best treatment as I’ve described here. The best application of the scientific method is to assign treatment recommendations based on specific presentations of single symptoms.

 

(There’s a big diversity of victims of the schizophrenia label. In the diversity labelled with schizophrenia spectrum disorders there’s those who experience hallucinations. Carl Jung considered victims of the schizophrenia label as having a more internally focused mind. I see victims like me who have minds and beings made of more than one singular consciousness. I also see victims of this label in terrible states of pain. The concept of schizophrenia has much in common with the label of madness. But there’s a massive amount of diversity all lumped together in the diagnosis of schizophrenia.)

 

Some treatments are better than others when considering the average of multiple single symptoms but other treatments are better for a specific presentation of multiple single symptoms. 

 

A piece of software can take in the multiple single symptoms data then assign the best treatment for the specific diversity of the presentation of multiple symptoms. Once the single symptom data is collected then software makes this possibility of assigning treatment based on the specific presentation of multiple symptoms easy.

 

The challenge is the time and effort it takes to score multiple symptoms. What I mean is that it’s quick and easy to use a diagnosis (I’m ignoring the efforts to make a diagnosis) to recommend treatments based on how clinical guidelines are currently designed to be used. It requires more time and effort to measure the specific presentation of multiple symptoms to feed into the software.

 

It takes time to assess the individual to go through all the symptoms measured in measurements such as PANSS. This assessment takes a lot of effort and the time of doctors is expensive so it’s an expensive method of care. (The current way clinical guidelines are used is cheap, quick and easy in comparison.)

 

To solve the problem one way is to use cheaper labour than the value of doctors. It doesn’t require the level of learning in medical education and training to be able to score multiple symptoms. It requires less education and training to have the skills to measure single symptoms.

 

Those who have less education and training than doctors can do the work to score and measure multiple symptoms – less education, training and value than doctors means they are paid less but they are trained to be experts in measuring multiple single symptoms. It’s just like how nurses are paid less than doctors so I’m factoring in the economic limitations of care. Specialists trained to do the work to score multiple symptoms could make this second idea a practical, feasible (economic) reality.

 

(To conduct the pre existing research the researchers need to be trained to score multiple symptoms. No new education and training needs to be created to train specialists to score multiple single symptoms. The education and training that researchers get that is how they measure multiple single symptoms already exists.) 

 

In addition I think this idea helps most those who have already been failed too much already by the care that exists. Treatment doesn’t always succeed and when it fails then doctors have to rely on trial and error. But this second idea provides a scientific way to recommend the best treatment for those who have been failed by previous treatments. Again, this second idea is a high cost solution compared to using averages of multiple single symptoms as their basis for treatment recommendations. But the personal cost of failures of care and of failed treatment I believe outweighs the financial cost of this approach (and this approach I see as having so many benefits and so much potential).

 

(For the victim of the label of schizophrenia that led me to begin this thought process to come up with this approach it is invaluable. It’s a terrible thing when it’s a choice between a rock and a hard place that defines the choice to engage with and accept care. Without this approach then she was failed and there are many others who are failed by the use of the scientific method by doctors to guide their treatment recommendations that existed 10-15 years ago. As I touched upon earlier, this approach and these ideas are about the objectives of care – the scientific method, mathematics and software are tools to harness to achieve the objectives. You don’t need to be a doctor to see how important are the objectives of care I touch upon in this piece.)

 

Of course I would want this precision of the scientific method in the second idea to be available for all. The right solution on the first attempt is the objective. In psychiatry I cannot see any other solution but the second idea to use the existing science and research to achieve the objective. Being blind to the underlying cause means that they have to rely on treating symptoms.

 

But ultimately it’s up to the government to achieve this precision of the scientific method to be available to all or as many as they want to. The economic costs are why this second idea is limited because it requires not only expertise of trained specialists but more time and effort to score multiple single symptoms.

 

These two ideas save more – that’s the benefits of these two ideas. In the first idea there’s what lovers of democracy do – to seek to put free will and voluntary choices on the agenda of care. In the second idea there’s what lovers of the scientific method do – to use the scientific method how it’s meant to used to create the precision in comprehending the individuality and diversity of single symptoms as well as comprehending the diversity of treatment effects on multiple single symptoms.

 

There’s a greater cost. The government makes the choice to fund this. It’s up to politicians.

 

But the personal cost of failures of care and of treatment is a far more unbearable cost. If this approach works then it can give genuine hope to the hopeless. When you yourself face the extremity of hopelessness and despair that is possible to feel – when you have empathy for mental pain such as hopelessness and despair – then you will recognise that the personal cost far far outweighs the financial cost of this approach.

 

(There’s rightfully the question that will this theory behind these ideas work in reality? There needs to be experiments done to answer this question. This approach can be tried out for victims of the label of schizophrenia and a few other diagnoses.)

 

(My understanding of the scientific method is grounded in true sciences like physics and chemistry not psychiatry. Averages of multiple symptoms and traits – if this is how physicists and chemists used the scientific method then the level of advancement of science today would be no better than in Roman times millennia ago. I might be overstating this but when you look at the periodic table of elements and all the scientific progess necessary to come up with the periodic table of elements if physicists and chemists relied on averages like psychiatrists do in their use of the scientific method then there would be no periodic table of elements. One function of the pursuit of science that leads to the understanding of all matter in this world (there’s over a hundred elements in the periodic table and combining them causes the existence of the tens of thousands of materials and substances in this world) is to understand the diversity of elements and that’s never possible by relying on averages of multiple traits of elements. The amazing power of the scientific method is to understand the diversity of tens of thousands of substances that react differently – but the scientific method (and technology and other things) is a tool to be harnessed to achieve objectives.)

 

(There are other possibilities. For example seeing symptoms that are lacking good treatments. This can lead to new targets for research.)

 

(As I mentioned earlier there’s finesse to this idea but I’m explaining the core of the ideas to make you see why this approach should be funded. There’s a lot of studies. An inclusion criteria limits the amount of effort to collect data. For example limiting to randomised controlled trials and recent studies reduces the amount of work done to collect the single symptom data. I think some might argue that this inclusion criteria is too restrictive – there’s no limitation to using more studies but the efforts to collect data are greater with a wider inclusion criteria. I imagine that there’s also a limitation in the types of measurements suitable for this technique to work – my focus in this discourse is on measurement PANSS.)

 

(This idea can work with the different diagnostic systems eg DSM and ICD. It can work around the world. It can work with the different ways of diagnosing schizophrenia in clinical practice. I limit the idea to schizophrenia because I have looked into this.)

 

(There are problems and challenges to this approach of course and of course I don’t know enough about the complexities to see the problems and challenges I cannot see. Some might see the challenges of the “apples and oranges” problem with meta analysis – the metaphor is the question about measurement and whether like is being compared with like when, for example, researchers use different methods and techniques to score multiple symptoms of PANSS. Or different measurements are used other than PANSS. I have not solved the apples and oranges problem but neither have doctors in how they use averages and meta analysis to guide the national clinical guidelines for diagnoses such as schizophrenia. The approach I’m talking about here fails in changing the apples and oranges problem as much as the application of the scientific method by psychiatrists currently fails. Certainly in terms of different measurements and what one doctor might believe is the best measurement the software makes it easy to select only one measurement used in research or to use the average of the different measurements that psychiatrists use in research – in the way the pre existing research is used to create national clinical guidelines doctors don’t have the choice about the treatment recommendations being based on their preference for the best measurement. This approach and software allows for many possibilities once the efforts to collect data from researchers about single symptom effects is collected together. I admit that this approach is founded upon what is important to the individual, the patient or the victim – I think this is the strength of this approach not the weakness.)

 

(There’s an emotional aspect to the value of this approach. Failures of care and treatment causes pain like hopelessness and despair. This is not innate to human nature to feel empathy for the victims of psychiatry – for mental pain. If this approach works then it gives genuine hope to the hopeless – when you know the terrible torments of despair and hopelessness because of failures to care then I hope you understand why you want this approach to be there for you. It is more expensive than what currently exists in the way they use scientific method to guide treatment recommendations in clinical practice. But on so many levels and in so many different ways this approach I’m talking about creates better care – I hope I have not failed to make this point as clearly as is in my power and ability.)

 

(British innovation can make these ideas a reality but there’s no profit in it. There’s altruism in these ideas from putting what’s important to the victims of psychiatry on the agenda of care to using the available science by applying the scientific method the best way to guide treatment recommendations that are ordinarily made by using averages of psychiatric measures such as PANSS. If this approach is successful then it can be used in other countries.)

The fight for diversity is also a fight to recognise pain and the consequences of pain – it’s the true tragedy when there is no competency to have empathy and understanding for my being.

The more I suffer the more I know I need to die for safety from monsters born and bred evil like you. Your empathy defines your competency to care, protect and be humane to me in life – blame your mental incompetency for once in the gods forsaken lives of the monsters who see mental illness.

It’s not just in the last decade that they’ve ignored my pain. I spend over half of the days in the last quarter century feeling suicidal because they always ignore my pain. To this day it’s ignoring my pain that defines their choices and actions and laws justified as care. This is why the best the monsters who call themselves the human race can do is perfect the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal.

Today is another day like thousands of other days that I feel and face things worse than death. They’ve ignored this truth that there are things worse than death because they never stopped ignoring my pain. The existence of psychiatry doesn’t teach you about pain and what you need, what you choose, when you suffer too much.

Ignoring pain defines their attitude to brutalities that causes the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal. You really do need to see clearly that psychiatric and mental health care and laws has no sense of too many brutalities whatsoever – this is how they care about this suicidal individual and every other. They ignore brutalities done to a suicidal individual because they ignore pain. The monsters who call themselves the human race simply don’t blame themselves and their brutal nature for causing the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal.

So they’ve made a choice to perfect the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal. It’s the beauty of the minds of monsters to believe that to do this is care. This is the care in the criminalisation of the protection of assisted suicide. When care fails the objective is to perfect the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal – only the protection of assisted suicide protects me from this and limits the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and stops the brutalities that perfects the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal so it’s essential to deny me this necessary and humane protection against unlimited suffering and unlimited brutalities to make certain that I feel suicidal for five thousand days and more.

They’re so uncaring and brutal by nature to suicidal individuals that they cannot recognise the true consequences and purposes of completely denying anyone the protection of assisted suicide for as long as I have been. It limits the pain no one should ever face in life if they cannot care and be humane. When they cannot solve my pain they want to make me suffer and force me to suffer and endure against my will things worse than death without mercy or limit. They want to perfect the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal – that’s why they deny the protection of assisted suicide.

It is brutal to be forced to suffer and endure against one’s will until I become suicidal. They are so brutal by nature to suicidal individuals that they ignore this truth because they ignore the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal. They don’t comprehend it as worse than death and they really don’t care about suicidal individuals without this comprehension. They want to have no limit to the brutalities they want to do to a suicidal individual. They’ve been forcing suicidal individuals to make a suicidal individual want to die again and again throughout history and throughout the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals and to this day. They just don’t care about suicidal individuals because they want no limit to the brutalities they can do to a suicidal individual in life so they want to make as unlimited as possible the brutalities in being forced to suffer and endure against one’s will things worse than death – that’s the care in the criminalisation of assisted suicide and the purposes of the rest of the laws that affects suicidal individuals.

It’s no doubt hard to accept death by consent but when you understand why suicidal individuals choose to use one’s own death you know that there are harms worse than death. You’ll best understand the truth that death by consent is not the worst thing possible when you become suicidal because no one taught you how to have empathy and understanding for the suicidal mind. You have to know what has to be limited and that’s the amount of time you spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal but no one taught you to understand why suicidal individuals choose to use one’s own death so you have to be made to feel suicidal then you’ll understand the truth that death by consent is not the worst thing possible.

But the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot do to you what they’re doing to me so I can only rely on my words to fix your mental incompetency. You have to get the competency to have empathy and understanding for the suicidal mind from somewhere because without neither you nor the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race can be humane. Again, psychiatric and mental health care and laws have no limit to the brutalities that can be done to a suicidal individual – this is so far the complete opposite of a basis for care and being humane but it defines the best the monsters who call themselves the human race can do in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals. The pain doesn’t matter so the brutalities that causes the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal doesn’t matter so they want nothing to limit the brutalities they can do to a suicidal individual – this is the complete opposite of care, compassion and being humane but it defines the best the monsters who call themselves the human race can do in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals and when they have any power over my life and how I feel.

It’s important to recognise that they cannot want to do anything else but perfect the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal. What they do to perfect the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal would be the true crimes in a civilisation of humane beings who never accept someone to be made to feel suicidal but this is a civilisation of monsters born and bred evil who have never stopped ignoring the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal so they want no limit to the brutalities they can do to a suicidal individual. What you can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual affects my life and pain so much.

A short summary of why you refuse suicidality as acceptable consequences so you refuse unlimited suicidality and the unlimited brutalities necessary to achieve my unlimited suicidality

Suicidality = suicidal suffering, feelings and thoughts

Assisted suicide = intentionally killing by consent and includes self administered suicide if this is the preference of the suicidal individual

Assisted dying = assisted suicide solely for the terminally ill

What I have to say might be difficult to understand if you see mental illness as the cause of suicidality and you’ve never met anyone who is on the side of suicidal individuals. I am trying to be on the side of suicidal individuals as a suicidal individual. I’ve spent time understanding psychiatry but what I have to say here is not based on concepts of misrepresenting suicidality as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect.

This is what the care and laws should be founded upon. I may not speak for every single suicidal individual but I speak for many when I state:

* feeling suicidal and suicidality is the worst state of conscious existence

* suicidality is the worst form of mental pain

* suicidality is feeling and facing things worse than death

* feeling suicidal is the pain no one should ever face in life

* it is pain and despair and hopelessness too horrifically beyond awful to exist

* the weak, fragile and sensitive cannot survive any conditions and circumstances of life. At some point life stops being worth living. At some point the conditions and circumstances of life becomes worse than death

* life is not meant to be about facing any amount of suffering and any amount of brutalities for any amount of time. At some point the weak, fragile and sensitive are beyond the limit to suffering beyond which death becomes a welcomed solution

* suicidality is very near if not the top of the list of things that anyone who has the capacity to feel universally and completely refuse to feel, be made to feel and be forced to suffer and endure against one’s will

* becoming suicidal is the pain I should never face in life and you should never bear me to face in life

* it is a profoundly pitch black darkness of existence that no one should ever face in life

These statements are things that don’t matter to you only until you find out what pain and brutalities makes death a welcomed solution.

These statements are the most rudimentary competency to have empathy and understanding for the suicidal mind. These are why suicidality is meant to be prevented, protected against and limited. These statements are about a basis of compassion that inevitably destroys the acceptability of suicidality as acceptable consequences and the freedom to inflict, prolong and worsen suicidality indefinitely (not an explicit freedom like freedom from torture but it’s a freedom innate to human nature to want to brutalise suicidal individuals). Irrespective of the reason or reasons to die these are the consequences suicidal individuals face that often leads to the decision to use one’s own death to stand in harms way of these unbearable consequences in the statements above. These statements when seen as statements of natural pain, weakness and diversity refer to things that can be associated with brain differences – this is one of the most important things to recognise because it creates the better future for suicidal individuals and anyone else who has the capacity to feel. These statements and this basis for compassion and morality are what defines what you can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual – it is different from the morality that comes from seeing mental illness and exists today. The laws are cruel and brutal because they’re based on seeing mental illness. They will always be cruel when they’re based on seeing mental illness.

You cannot expect me to suffer more. You cannot expect me to be forced to suffer and endure against my will anymore. This is about the pain I should never face in life. The necessity of assisted suicide is this. I get to limit my suicidality and suffering. I do understand that there are risks involved but the necessity of assisted suicide is overwhelming. The tragedies of my existence are so extreme that I also see another purpose of assisted suicide and that’s safety from the evil, brutal and inhumane nature of human nature. This is another overwhelming necessity of assisted suicide that you never want to face. Human nature is so brutal and unlimited in their brutalities – this is what is responsible for me feeling suicidal for thousands of days. This is because I am too alone in knowing the pain I should never face in life. When you know this pain like I do then you’ll see why death by consent is not the worst thing possible. The curse of my existence is to be so much better off having never been born than live to face this. The curse of my existence is because of why the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot make any other choices but those that leads to my unlimited suicidality. Whenever and wherever they accept suicidality as acceptable consequences I am cursed to be born – only when you are devoid of the competency to have empathy and understanding for the suicidal mind do you not recognise that we have this in common. (This competency refuses suicidality as acceptable consequences and if you are so desperate to make certain that suicidal individuals don’t die then you have to find methods to stand in harms way of the brutalities that causes suicidality, inflicts, prolongs and worsens suicidality indefinitely. Your greatest blessings you can give suicidal individuals is what makes the necessity of assisted suicide unnecessary. “He’s suffered too much already and been brutalised too much already” – for any suicidal individual and any amount of suicidality this is meant to be your mentality and instinctive compassion. You can hate my morality for accepting death by consent as acceptable consequences but your morality, your mentality, your ideology of compassion and your basis for care brutalises suicidal individuals to death by accepting suicidality as acceptable consequences. You don’t seek to find empathy and understanding for the mentally ill – that’s the damnation of every single suicidal individual.

My unlimited suicidality would be completely impossible and wholly unbearable and completely unacceptable to all if human nature is not so constantly and consistently monstrous and brutal to suicidal individuals throughout history and to this day. My unlimited suicidality is only possible because the monsters who call themselves the human race want nothing to limit the brutalities they can do to a suicidal individual. The protection of assisted suicide is a necessary and humane protection without equal because it always prevents and limits the unlimited suffering and unlimited brutalities that comes naturally to human nature to want to achieve and achieve in the name of a brutal sense of care that’s so far the complete opposite of being humane.

(What you can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual affects my life and pain so much and too much and that’s why my safety in death matters so much to me.)

No life is meant to be lived to face any amount of suffering and any amount of brutalities for any amount of time – there are things worse than death by consent and there are things worth using one’s own death to stand in harms way of. Psychiatric and mental health care and laws have no limit to the brutalities that can be done to a suicidal individual so the protection of assisted suicide is only more invaluable to stand in harms way of such a brutal sense of care and the evil, brutal and inhumane nature of human nature that defines all who accepts suicidality as acceptable consequences and believes that making suicidality as unlimited as possible is care.

(The monsters who call themselves the human race could have made other choices but psychiatric and mental health care and laws want nothing to limit the brutalities that can be done to a suicidal individual. They really do need to brutalise me as much as possible in life and need to make certain that nothing stops them from doing the brutalities that comes naturally to human nature to want to do – that’s how they perfect the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal by the true purpose of denying me the only protection that stands in harms way.)

There’s worlds of difference between humane care and laws versus what comes from the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness.

Why do I see the harms so clearly? This piece and these points might have a sense of irony because I am fighting for the legalisation of the protection of assisted suicide and my death – but there’s no irony because it’s all about my competency to recognise the truth the harms too great to do to me in life and in the name of care that none of the monsters who call themselves the human race have the competency to do.

(Suicidality = suicidal suffering, feelings and thoughts)

The difference is knowing why suffering against consent is meant to be prevented and limited versus the unfettered and unlimited brutalities that comes naturally to human nature – the former defines care, compassion and humane laws whereas the latter defines the sense of care I face as long as I live. The difference is knowing when to stop making me want to die. There’s no competency to recognise the harms so elsewhere I have to try to explain why a species of monsters born and bred evil should stop themselves from making a suicidal individual want to die again and again because the care they have created is psychiatric and mental health care and in psychiatric and mental health care they inflict and worsen suicidality without qualms or hesitation and without mercy or limit. No one sees the harms too great because they see mental illness.

The term and underlying concepts of the term “mental illness” are neither a metaphor nor the use of figurative language. An illness is caused by biological defects and doctors are experts in biological defects and biological forces so they rule over the mentally ill.

What are the harms of doctors who cannot recognise the difference between a disease and a difference?

You’re all completely and utterly blinded by the evil brutal and inhumane nature of human nature to harms, harms too great, unacceptable consequences and wholly unacceptable consequences. I see truly unbearable harms and consequences of care that are in no way care – I am radically different from you in being able to see harms and consequences of care that are never acceptable. (I cannot hate each and every one of you enough for your blindness that defines your sense of care that is completely blind to the harms too great to do me in life and what are wholly unacceptable consequences to any humane beings – if you are and the rest of monsterkind are not so completely cruel and evil then I would never need to use the protection of assisted suicide to give me the safety I deserved in life from what monsters born and bred evil do with more opportunities to make me want to die.)

I was not born to be normal but clearly I am alive to be brutalised without mercy or limit. I have a different sense of care, of right and wrong. I have a completely different sense of unbearable suffering, unbearable brutalities and unacceptable consequences. I have a completely different sense of harm and harms too great. I have different standards. I was born to be different and the monsters who call themselves the human race have never stopped wanting to brutalise me without mercy or limit because of my difference and because of their sense of care and because they are the monsters who call themselves the human race by name and by nature. So I recognise the harms too great of what you actually think is care.

No one seeks to find empathy and understanding for pain, minds and diversity that are the meaningless products/symptoms of defective brains – that’s a monumental harm. Psychiatrists have killed in the name of forced treatment because they think they’re treating a disease so they take the same risks of death as real doctors do but psychiatrists are not treating illnesses – this is a massive harm. They abuse, torment and torture victims of psychiatry without mercy or limit because they see mental illness so they ignore pain and what they make their victims feel as well as ignore the inherent brutality in their methods – this is a gigantic harm. When their brutalities makes victims of psychiatry angry psychiatrists dismiss this anger as part of the disease and try to drug away the anger but the brutalities never stop – this is a brutal harm. The effects of brutalities and forced treatment causes suicidality but they talk about suicidality as part of the disease and they talk about the comorbidity of depression because they ignore the truth that brutalities causes suicidality – this is extraordinarily brutal harm. With every further generation of psychiatrists and the existence of psychiatry more and more natural mental diversity has been seen as mentally ill (with every new or updated psychiatric diagnostic manual and criteria more and more diversity is misrepresented as the meaningless product of a brain defect so are deemed to be sub human so undeserving of the protection of human rights and the champions of the weak, diversity and victims) – this is an immense harm. Care is normalisation and forced normalisation based on being devoid of the competency to recognise natural mental diversity so psychiatry and psychiatric methods and acceptable consequences are like bashing a square peg into a round hole – the harms of this as a basis for care is amazingly brutal harm. The innocent imprisoned for life in psychiatric facilities for the crime of being too different and suffering too much – these are the harms acceptable to a species of monsters born and bred evil in the past and this is care by the standards of monsters. No one sees the reasons for the prevention of cruelty to suicidal individuals, for the protection of the weak by humane legal protections to protect suicidal individuals and to stand in harms way of the brutalities that comes naturally to human nature to want to do in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals- this is a gigantic harm.

Who works for equality? Doctors do not because doctors are only experts in biology and biological forces not diversity. They treat illnesses but have no competency to recognise natural mental diversity and mental pain – that’s someone else’s job to recognise natural mental diversity and mental pain for what it is. Doctors in the medical speciality of psychiatry cannot even recognise the difference between a brain defect and a brain defect – so all hope of the monsters who call themselves the human race becoming humane is lost because of the existence of psychiatry.

Those who were undefended and unprotected before the creation of psychiatry remain undefended and unprotected and neither deserving of equality nor the protection of the champions of the weak and victims and diversity because of the harms of the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness – so I see with absolute clarity the harms too great of a sense of care that should never have started because it is only a sense of brutality not a sense of care.

I was not born to be normal so I see the harms of this sense of care with absolute clarity.

(You see the harms victims of psychiatry can only be saved and protected from only when the protection of assisted suicide exists? When no one sees the harms because they’re blinded by the evil, brutal and inhumane nature of human nature to the truth – that’s why the protection of assisted suicide is too invaluable in its role as a necessary and humane protection always guaranteed to stand in harms way to be illegal.)

It’s not a basis for care and being humane.

How many brutalities that causes pain happens to those who are in physical pain and have physical injuries in a real hospital? When they see a broken bone real doctors put a cast on it to protect and support it so it can heal instead of bending and twisting the broken bone. Why are such purposes and logic rational and reason nowhere in the purposes, functions and sense of unacceptable consequences in psychiatric hospitals? (In psychiatric facilities they inflict and worsen suicidality and non suicidal mental pain without qualms or hesitation and without mercy or limit.)

When your being is defined by being 99% evil and barely 1% humane then the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness defines the totality of your compassion. When you are so completely evil then you actually think that the monsters who call themselves the human race cares about me.

The only difference monsters born and bred evil can make to my existence and suicidality? The only difference monsters born and bred evil can make is because when you are born evil you cannot recognise the difference between cruelty and care but it’s your cruelty that’s absolutely flawless. The truth about your being and your brutal sense of care is that you cannot recognise all the massive harms of the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness – because you are all blinded by the evil, brutal and inhumane nature of human nature.

The difference is knowing why suffering against consent is meant to be prevented and limited versus the unfettered and unlimited brutalities that comes naturally to human nature – the former defines care, compassion and humane laws whereas the latter defines the sense of care I face as long as I live.

The difference is knowing when to stop making me want to die. The difference is knowing why you stop yourself and the rest of monsterkind from making me want to die.

Don’t you dare tell me that you care about me. Don’t you dare tell me that there’s care in the criminalisation of assisted suicide and everything else that comes from seeing mental illness that only exists when you are all evil and only evil.

I know the harms worse than death because of the sense of care of a species of monsters born and bred evil. What the monsters who call themselves the human race think is care is actually the will to do the most harm, evil and brutality possible for sadists and monsters born and bred evil to want to do to one’s fellow being.

Assisted suicide is death but why do suicidal individuals choose it? Because there are things worse than death and I know too much about this truth because of what you and the rest of monsterkind are born to be. I know it has to be legal because it always stands in harms way – and clearly the proof of the truth about human nature is that you are all blinded by the evil, brutal and inhumane nature of all who see mental illness to harm and harms too great to do to anyone in life.

The most evil you can do is only possible by denying the protection of assisted suicide. Apart from death against consent the protection of assisted suicide always stands in harms way. When you want to do the most harm possible to your victim you start by the harms that makes life worse than death. Then you do what monsters born and bred evil do with more opportunities to make a suicidal individual want to die (the proof of the truth about human nature is what they want to do to this suicidal individual). When you really need to hurt and harm someone as much as possible then you have to make them completely defenceless against your brutalities and you have to perfect the amount of time your victim spends feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal – that’s when you completely deny the protection of assisted suicide like the monsters who call themselves the human race are doing to me. Assisted suicide always stands in harms way.

When no one who has power over your life and how you feel knows when to stop making you want to die like I face in life then you’ll know that death by consent is not the worst thing possible and you’ll know why the protection of assisted suicide must be legal because it always stands in harms way. I can only hope that you recognise the truth by being forced to suffer and endure against your will things worse than death like you want me to be if you still believe that there’s nothing worse than death and you continue to have the deluded fantasy that you and the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race cares about me in life.

(You don’t have the competency to recognise the harms of the sense of care I face in life and as long as I live. That’s the truth about human nature throughout history and to this day that the evil, brutal and inhumane nature cannot be relied or trusted to recognise harm and harms too great. The suicidal slave who lives when slavery is acceptable and no one sees the harms? They’re only safe and saved from the brutality innate to human nature only when the protection of assisted suicide exists. The suicidal homosexual in the times of the criminalisation and medicalisation of homosexuals? It’s the same. The monsters who call themselves the human race are blinded by the evil, brutal and inhumane nature of human nature to the harms but the suicidal individual is not so only the protection of assisted suicide saves and protects. The suicidal drug addict made to feel suicidal because no one sees harm in the drug tyranny? The suicidal victim of domestic abuse who exists before the creation of domestic abuse laws? The evil consensus morality and the brutal nature of human nature are blind to the harms but the victims recognise the harms so clearly and need the only protection always guaranteed to stand in harms way – that’s yet another reason why assisted suicide must be legal so no one ever again can be brutalised without mercy or limit like this generation of monsters born and bred evil cares so much about doing to me. They’re blind to the extremity and severity of the harms and abuses they want to do to me in life and when they have any power over my life and how I feel because psychiatry only ever exists and they see mental illness in a civilisation of monsters born and bred evil. They actually think accepting me to be made to feel suicidal and perfecting the amount of time I spend feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal is care – when you are all evil and only evil you actually think that the monsters who call themselves the human race cares about me. That’s what they do even in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals. This is why the protection of assisted suicide has to be legal because it’s all there is to stand in harms way of what sadists and monsters born and bred evil can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual. A sense of care blind to the extremity and severity of the abuses, harms and brutalities they want to do to me so their sense of other things is only even more evil, brutal and inhumane – I am obviously on the side of the only protection that stops them and the only question is whether it’s worth dying to escape from? Yes of course it is because they cannot change. The evil, brutal and inhumane nature of human nature that defines their sense of care is immutable, unchangeable and untreatable. They cannot want to do anything else.)

The main purpose of this blog is an approach that collects lots of unpublished data from existence research that uses measurements that combines together and averages multiple single symptoms. It collects together the data about the effects of treatments on single symptoms then uses software to make this data available to available to doctors to guide better treatment recommendations.

I have the tendency to overcomplicate things. Simply, if there’s a psychiatric (or medical) measurement that averages together the effects of treatments on multiple single symptoms then the data on single symptom effects should be collected together into a set of data then a software program makes it possible to make treatment recommendations based on single or specific presentations of multiple single symptoms. This approach has some purposes and possibilities but the simplicity is data collected from pre existing research then simple software makes it easy to use the data for treatment recommendations. It’s so simple and obvious that it’s probably already being done.

(I have only thought about the psychiatric measurement PANSS – https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_and_Negative_Syndrome_Scale – but the theory is about using single symptom data instead of averages to create a set of data from which much can be achieved in the name of care and the spirit of democracy.)

(The main piece has not been published because I want to see if it’s worth carrying on and that is what this is about.)

This approach has many benefits.

1) science and treatment failure

2) care and liberty and free will

3) other things like it can be used around the world irrespective of different diagnostic criteria around the world and different ways doctors diagnose

1) the scientific method and treatment failure

The scientific method is by far the best way to give the right solution (or treatment) on the first attempt.

It’s amazing what science can do. You know that when you flip a coin it lands heads up or tails down 50% of the time. That’s what you know from the use of statistics and averages of the results of many coin tosses but you cannot predict the outcome of the next coin toss without the power of the scientific method. There’s an equation or equations that makes it possible to predict the outcome of every coin toss. With control over the forces involved in a coin toss it’s possible to guarantee that it always lands heads up.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coin_flipping#Physics

Science makes it possible for an artillery gun to fire a round 10,0000m away and know where it lands with accuracy of 10 metres. The gunner hits the right target from a long distance away every time or almost every time because of the power of science and the scientific method used correctly.

Even more amazing than this is that the advances of science have discovered that all the elements, materials, substances and compounds in this world come from single elements or a combination of elements. The periodic table is the most amazing thing because science has advanced to recognise that over a hundred elements are responsible for all the matter in the world (Wikipedia says over 100 million – https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_substance#:~:text=An%20enormous%20number%20of%20chemical,and%20registered%20in%20public%20databases).

Look around you. How many different substances can you see? How many different materials surrounds you? They all come from either single elements or compounds of elements combined together but there are less than two hundred elements responsible for all the substances you see. That’s because of lots of progress achieved when the scientific method is used correctly. All the diversity of substances are explained as either the elements in the periodic table or a combination of these elements.

What is really extraordinary is that the diversity of substances and elements like iodine is understood. When iodine is heated it doesn’t turn into a liquid and it doesn’t burn. It sublimates which means it goes straight from being a solid to being a gas. Not only do scientists recognise this diversity of iodine but they also understand why it and other substances sublimates.

The scientific method used properly characterises the diversity of iodine. A medical diagnosis is like recognising the diversity of the phenomena that doctors label and treat. The look for things that characterises a diagnosis like scientists look for things that characterises a substance. These characteristics are how they know the difference between one diagnosis and another like how scientists the characteristics of substances.

In these terms a treatment is like something that changes a substance. A medication is something that changes the disease. For example recognise an iron deficiency by the characteristics of the diagnosis. Then they try to change it and that’s the what treatment does just like heating a substance turns it into a liquid or burns it or other things. But iodine is different so when it’s heated it turns into a liquid. It is not the oxidation process of burning that makes it turn straight into a gas. It’s like melting butter but instead of turning into a liquid iodine turns into a gas. This is like a treatment. A treatment changes the iron deficiency like heating butter changes it into a liquid. But iodine turns into a gas and not because it burns does it turn into a gas (whereas when you strike a match someone of the substances in a match turn into carbon dioxide gas and if I remember right then gaseous water is also created).

This precision of the scientific method makes it possible to identify that iodine changes by heating in a different way to other substances. The same way treatment changes something.

So the best treatment is found by using the scientific method the best way. That’s one reason why this approach is important. It achieves a higher level of precision by understanding multiple single symptoms and the effects of different treatments on different presentations of single symptoms.

At the moment there are psychiatric measurements that use the average of multiple single symptoms to decide if a treatment is successful. Their patients can have a range of symptoms with different severities. This is imprecise. The imprecision of psychiatry is that two victims (patients) of psychiatry can have only a few symptoms in common but they can have other symptoms that are not in common. This imprecision means that certain treatments work for some but not for others so the patient ends up facing failed treatment after failed treatment because of the poor use of the scientific method in psychiatry. After these failed treatments then psychiatrists end up relying on trial and error.

Clinical guidelines are created to use the available science to give doctors the best treatment recommendations (instead of relying on trial and error). They involve a lot of time, effort, work and expense. In psychiatry and in schizophrenia clinical guidelines the data they use is collected from the published data in clinical trials. These are the average of the effects of treatments on multiple single symptoms. This is imprecise so it leads to treatment failures.

The approach that is the main purpose of this blog is begins with collecting the data on single symptoms. The collection of data is simply by collecting data from researchers from pre existing trials. Then software is used to make the information about single symptoms available for doctors to use quickly and easily in clinical practice.

This creates a higher level of precision when assigning treatment recommendations. It uses the existing science to create something better than relying on averages. Different treatments have different effects on single symptoms and victims of psychiatry have different symptoms of the same diagnosis. So this approach provides the precision that comes from the scientific method used the right way given only the data from pre existing trials. When treatment fails then they have to rely on trial and error instead of the available science but with the approach I’m talking about in the main piece of this blog there’s the hope of the precision of the scientific method to assign treatments based on the specific presentation of multiple single symptoms and specific effects of treatments.

(Specifically in psychiatry I don’t think doctors know the cause of what they’re treating. Doctors would argue that the best thing possible is to treat the cause not just try to treat the symptoms. I’m agree with this but psychiatrists are treating things that are not illnesses. In psychiatry they don’t know the cause if they believe that they’re treating illnesses and the products of defective brains and biology. This is such a hard point to make because it’s about something that cannot be proven by mathematics, graphs and statistics. It’s simply intuitive to recognise natural mental experiences, natural mental diversity, natural types of the weak and natural mental pain. When it’s recognised as natural then any biological and biological brain differences are recognised as differences. The great tragedies of diversity, the weak and victims are when doctors cannot recognise the difference between a brain difference and a brain defect because they are still prejudiced against what is natural and part of natural diversity – when they’re prejudiced against natural mental diversity, the weak and pain they look at brain scans and misrepresent brain differences as brain defects. There are inordinate and massive harms caused by doctors who cannot recognise the difference between a brain difference and a brain defect. The definition of normalcy is something science cannot prove but when there’s pre existing prejudices of the monsters who call themselves the human race then doctors misrepresent brain differences as brain defects – the absolute worst harms justified as care are because doctors spend their time misrepresenting feeling suicidal as the meaningless symptom and product of a brain defect. How brutal are the monsters who call themselves the human race because in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals they’ve never stopped ignoring the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal? I’m fighting for the protection of assisted suicide because I am victim of what brutalities and brutalities justified as care are done to me without remorse, mercy or limit because they care by ignoring my pain and what they make me feel. The care I face has everything in common with giving painkillers to a man being beaten to death but they won’t stop the beating and they’ll join in with all the merciless and unlimited brutalities necessary to make me feel suicidal in over half of the days in the last quarter century – this is only possible because the monsters who call themselves the human race have no capacity to feel empathy and no empathy is created by the efforts of doctors to misrepresent feeling suicidal as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect. If they are not so cruel and self serving in the name of care when they see mental illness then…? The difference is knowing why suffering against consent is meant to be prevented and limited versus the unfettered and unlimited brutalities that comes naturally to human nature – the former defines care, compassion and humane laws whereas the latter defines the sense of care I face as long as I live. The difference is knowing when to stop making me want to die – the proof of the truth about human nature is endless.)

(There are other flaws such as the lack of precision of psychiatric diagnosis and labels. They cannot tell the difference between powdered salt and cocaine – both are white powders. Most of all is they cannot recognise the difference between cruelty and care – I assert this from too many personal experiences.)

On the diagnosis side it’s actually impossibly hard and impractical to score multiple single symptoms of every patient  given the current level of care, science and technology. But it’s certainly the best way to give the right solution on the first attempt when dealing with multiple symptoms. Using the data about every single symptom both in diagnosis and treatment leads the hope of getting the right solution on the first attempt but it is massively time consuming so I expect that only when treatment fails will every single symptom be measured but there are other purposes of this approach.

There’s other potential in this approach. For example collecting the single symptom data can find symptoms that are not yet being solved to then find new areas of research and development of new solutions (aka treatments) for these untreated problems (aka symptoms). Potentially treatments that have been dismissed as useless because on average they don’t work might be found to work on specific problems that current methods and treatments are failing to resolve. These failed treatments fail to reach statistically significant effects because their measure of success is based on the average of multiple effects but by looking at the single symptom effects then it’s possible that these methods and treatments are working to solve things that successful treatments (whose success is based on using averages) fail to solve. This then leads to the understanding of why these failed treatments do work for specific problems and symptoms.

(This software can also record the wishes of patients and individuals for the things they want treated and solved but are not comprehended in the current measurements used in psychiatric and mental health research. In the next part I talk a bit about free will and volition, choices of the individual and respect for what the individual refuses as an ethic not just of care but of democracy and human rights. In this approach there is a reach towards what makes democracy so much better than any other form of government and an effort to strive towards furthering the application of the fundamentals of human rights. It is so great when the scientific method can be used to serve these higher goals and objectives. What are the harms too great of a sense of care that doesn’t care about consent and what the victim refuses and refuses to be made to feel? I have the competency to answer this question with the truth more than anyone I’ve ever met and more. I cannot refuse their brutalities and brutalities justified as care because…? I know too much about the harms of being owned and not cared about by tyranny. My wishes, wants, needs and self interests have been completely ignored by those who purport to care about me so I am the endless victim of those who cannot recognise the difference between cruelty and care but their cruelty and control justified as care is absolutely flawless cruelty.)

Along the same lines as the point above it also might be possible to use single symptom data from measurements used in research into different diagnoses and treatment effects that have in common specific single symptoms. When you look at the use of anticonvulsant drugs that are now used to suppress the traits of victims of the label of bipolar and normalise this type of natural diversity it requires doctors noticing that a drug has other effects than their intended purpose. There maybe other unknown and undiscovered effects that will only be recognised by the best use of the scientific method.

This is a better way to use the scientific method to create better treatment, methods and solutions.

2) Care and liberty

The inception of this approach was because of someone who needed one thing to be solved most of all. She wanted her hallucinations to stop but those who purport to care about those who are victims of the label of schizophrenia could not give her the right solution/treatment.

(This is another example of treatment failure. This approach is the best way to solve these treatment failures. I cannot see any other way to solve this – can you?)

I believe that liberty and free will are things that doctors should care about – I know that this assertion seems crazy to those who cannot recognise the brutality of psychiatric and mental health care.(Psychiatric and mental health care and laws represents a level of tyranny and brutality that has absolutely nothing in common with a sense of care.)

This approach is for doctors who care about what their patient wants and what is the most important thing or things that needs to be solved. It is an approach for doctors who ask questions like “what is the most important thing to you?” because this should be a fundamental of care. A question like this is certainly in the spirit of democracy and only this approach of collecting single symptom data can harness the scientific method to answer this question (to recommend the best treatment for a single symptom or a few symptoms that are most important to the patient).

Care that functions by asking the questions

* what is important to you

* what is most important to you

* what’s the thing you most need solved and treated

* what can I do for you

* what don’t you want

* what do you refuse and complete refuse

* what do you want to feel

* what do you refuse to feel and be made to feel

(There are things more important than not making a suicidal individual want to die again and again? Only “yes” to this question by the standards of every single sadist and monster born and bred evil throughout history – the innate brutality of human nature for suicidal individuals has never changed throughout the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness. To ignore all of the above as a basis for care it truly only ever serves the self interests in the proof of the truth about the evil, brutal, inhumane and monstrous nature of human nature.)

(The enemies and betrayers of my humanity ignore all of this as their basis for care – the truth about whose being is the most important thing? Who gets whatever they want by forcing someone to live to keep on making them want to die (and by their choices and actions justified as care)? Who is so brutal by nature that they ignore the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal so they accept the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal as their basis for care and laws? All evil and only evil.)

This is the spirit of democracy in these questions and it’s based on fundamentals that should never be ignored – certainly not ignored by doctors. This approach to psychiatric measurements helps serve some of the objectives of doctors who have the competency to care, protect and be humane. Part of the justifications for this approach are the fundamentals of democracy and human rights applied to the medical profession. This approach helps use the scientific method to give the patient what is most important to them and it’s not that expensive to have this democratic sense of care. (The victim of psychiatry who is who founded this line of thinking at the heart of this approach needed most of all for the hallucinations to stop but she would never get the precision of the scientific method used to give her what she needed from the imprecise use of the scientific method by psychiatrists. This approach of using single symptom data to find the best treatment based on what the victim wants and needs most of all is in the spirit of democracy if not medical ethics and compassion.)

These are the questions doctors ask when they are on the side of their patients. Psychiatry creates victims because doctors rule not care.

You can see the transition from brutality and brutality justified as care to care when you think about transgendered individuals. Victims of labels something like gender dysphoria disorder or gender identity disorder would be ruled over and treatment would seek to use the methods of normalisation or forced normalisation, forced treatment to fix the mentally ill. Doctors ruined lives this way and helped to make their victims want to die. (The prejudices of doctors leads to things like homosexuality being medicalised because of all that psychiatrists ignore.)

There’s the medical ethic of do no harm? But they were harming transgendered individuals with this brutality of their sense of care that their victims faced before the recognition of the normalcy and natural mental diversity of those who have – for want of better words – have a different mental gender and psychological gender to their physical gender, the gender they’re born with. They used to rule over transgender individuals and did the enormous harms of tyranny and tyrants and would justify the brutalities of their tyranny as care and in the name of the self interests of their victims.

(If anyone could recognise the difference between cruelty and care my life and how I feel would be completely different and I would never know why I should hate the human race as long as I live. You should know that they’re still not done making me want to die – that’s care?)

I don’t know what force or forces changed them to now have care based on the functions of care in the bullet points above. But now doctors perform sex change operations and treatments.

This approach is to use the information about single symptoms from existing studies so they can give their patient the best solution to their answer to the question that doctors should ask which is “what’s important to you” and the software side of this approach allows multiple choices and decisions about what is most important to the individual.

This is not just a way of thinking that’s fundamental to care. It’s fundamental to liberty, democracy and human rights. The converse of this approach includes helping someone who, for example, doesn’t want to be homosexual to not be homosexual – I completely understand why this is so awful a choice to homosexuals and those who have fought for the liberation of homosexuals and for homosexuality to be recognised as natural mental diversity.

(This is what I mean when I say that psychiatrists don’t know the cause of what they’re treating when they see mental illness.)

(Doctors they care by brutalising suicidal individuals instead of standing in harms way to protect suicidal individuals from brutalities justified as care and the brutalities that comes naturally to human nature to want to do. Have no doubt that this belief of a sense of care exists because of the great efforts of doctors to misrepresent feeling suicidal as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect, of a mental illness. So the best of the monsters who call themselves the human race at caring about suicidal individuals has absolutely no sense of harms too great to do to a suicidal individual so neither does the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race.)

The approach in this blog involves using the information about multiple single symptoms so potentially it offers a menu of care objectives. By which I mean that every single symptom measured in psychiatric research and psychiatric measurements gives the patient the opportunity to choose what’s important to them then the approach uses the scientific method as it should be used to provide the best treatment and solution for what’s most important to the patient and individual.

This is a function of both care and democracy and human rights – obviously not explicitly but it should be explicit that the fundamentals of democracy and human rights should be fundamental to any sense of care including medical care.

3) other things

This approach of using single symptom data and software to help doctors make treatment recommendations works around the world and with different ways doctors diagnose

The efforts to put this approach into practice doesn’t just benefit the nation that decides to do this.

The approach relies on language to define diagnosis and single symptoms but these are easily translated into different languages. Fundamental to the approach is mathematics and numbers are the only universal language.

There are different diagnostic criteria around the world like ICD and DSM. Doctors also have different ways of making a diagnosis. This approach works with all of these different ways of diagnosing things because it is about single symptoms and the numbers of different single symptoms and treatment effects.

Many studies around the world are done and they’re published in different languages but mathematics is the universal language and this approach is based on mathematics.

There’s so much time, effort, work and expense put into all this research and there’s also a lot of work put into creating clinical guidelines. This approach only requires contacting researchers to get the data on the effects of treatments on multiple single symptoms.

But it’s an approach that works around the world.

The use of software makes this approach also serve the same needs and purposes of the way clinical guidelines are currently used

Without software it takes too long for doctors to use the information about multiple single symptoms in clinical practice.

Speed is one of the necessities of the way clinical guidelines are used to use the existing science. To rely on averages is quick and easy when relying on paper or single document based methods of providing the best treatment recommendations. The time of doctors is expensive and it would take too much time to go through all the information necessary to achieve this approach without the use of software.

The software allows for so many possibilities of rapidly using the information about best treatments based on collecting data from existing studies about single symptoms instead of relying on averages like how clinical guidelines currently work.

When you read the main piece of this blog you see a few possibilities not just for picking one single symptom to fix. The speed of accessing information about single symptoms to serve the objective of solving one thing important to the individual using software outclasses any other method but also the use of software makes other possibilities feasible and practical to use in clinical practice just like are the necessities of the current use of clinical guidelines. Both what is important to the doctor and the patient can be factored in and the software makes it quick and easy to do this. Not just one vitally important thing important to the patient or the doctor can be factored in – multiple selections of what is important can be factored in and the information about the right solution is quickly accessed because of the use of software to do this job better than how the current use of clinical guidelines works.

The primary amount of time and effort spent on this approach creates the data collected from researchers and existing studies about single symptom data. This would seem to be too much effort if the objectives are not recognised. But once this data is collected then it’s useful all around the world. This approach is different from the different diagnostic systems and criteria in different countries and around the world. It speaks the universal language of mathematics and numbers so irrespective of the variety of different (psychiatric) diagnostic systems, criteria and methods anyone around the world can use the data about single symptoms and use the software whatever the software approach is (translation of the terms of diagnosis and symptoms is easy and even easier when it’s web based so Google Translate can overcome the language barrier).

This approach of collecting single symptom data only requires one nation to do the data collection. The current work to create clinical guidelines for the same diagnosis around the world requires a lot of time and effort in every country. But this approach only requires one effort to create the set of data about single symptoms collected from researchers and existing research. Research in other countries can contribute to this set of data because the data from existing studies in other countries is in the language of mathematics and numbers. There will be a difference in the measurements used by which I mean that different psychiatric measurements used in research into the same diagnosis will involve some single symptoms in common but there will be differences. These differences are handled by simple software that allows the option to select either the average of all the different psychiatric measurements or just to select one measurement that a doctor believes is the right measurement.

The efforts to collect all this data pales in comparison to all the efforts to create clinical guidelines for the same diagnosis in different countries. This set of data is useful whether it’s psychiatrists who use the Chinese or British or American systems of diagnosis and measurements. The efforts of collecting data also pales in comparison to all the work done in the clinical trials that exists already. The software makes it viable and practical to use in clinical practice.

The objectives are as important as the solutions of this approach are.

Let me finish with a photo. Is it a fruit or a vegetable? It is part of diversity.

(Throughout the decade I’ve been thinking about this approach I face what a species of monsters born and bred evil wants to do to a suicidal individual because of what monsters born and bred evil who see mental illness can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual. Apathetic and limited when it comes to anything that resembles humane care but unlimited in the brutalities they want to do to a suicidal individual – this is the proof of the truth about the evil, brutal, inhumane and monstrous nature of human nature. The proof of the truth about human nature is a sense of care and laws that wants no limit to the brutalities that can be done to a suicidal individual – I know this from too many personal experiences of what happens because I live among a species of monsters born and bred evil. They accept the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal even in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals and even as a consequence of choices and actions justified as care – that’s the proof of the truth about human nature. It’s the complete opposite of care. It’s a sense of brutality. Too many cannot recognise the difference between cruelty and care because they see mental illness so their care is apathetic but their cruelty is absolutely flawless cruelty.)

(How many suicidal individuals would choose a sense of care that understands why death by consent is not the worst thing possible? How much do suicidal individual want to face a sense of brutality that accepts the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal as acceptable consequences, a sense of brutality that makes it worse than becoming suicidal, a sense of brutality that has no qualms or hesitation when inflicting further suicidal feelings and worsening things? There are things more important than not making a suicidal individual want to die again and again? Only “yes” by the standards of every single monster born and bred evil throughout history – the innate brutality of human nature for suicidal individuals has never changed throughout the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness.)

(I think very little good has come from the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness. The existence of these as a basis for care has done so much harm to me and harms done by enormous brutalities justified as care. It is a system of brutality I face that comes from seeing mental illness not a sense of (humane) care. I was not born to be normal and to this day the monsters who call themselves the human race have never wanted to stop brutalising me for this. They ignore my pain, what they make me feel and brutality – this is a sense of brutality but by the standards of the monsters who call themselves the human race this is a sense of care for suicidal individuals and a basis for laws in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals. The limit to my suffering and the limit to their brutalities they ignore but this is how they care about suicidal individuals in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals – that’s everything wrong with the existence of psychiatry and everything evil in seeing mental illness because it’s a sense of brutality based on ignoring the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal as the meaningless symptoms of brain defects. I’m extremely anti-psychiatry. At the same time I believe in the individual’s choices and this approach tries to serve free will and what is important to the individual by using the scientific method as best as possible using only the pre existing research.)

When assisted suicide exists then it’s completely obvious what is responsible for my death.

The true crimes are the unlimited and merciless brutalities that comes naturally to human nature to want to do to a suicidal individual – and I am clear that this is how monsters born and bred evil serve their self interests by making a suicidal individual want to die again and again when it’s in their power not to make me want to die. This everything wrong with psychiatry because it’s not a basis for care so it is run by tyrants who don’t give a damn about the protection of the weak and victims from the innate brutality of human nature and the brutalities that comes naturally to human nature to want to do.

The protection of assisted suicide exists for many reasons but the compassion that’s where its legalisation comes from does recognise the true crimes done to suicidal individuals that can never be done. The concept of mental illness only protects the brutalities that comes naturally to human nature to want to do to a suicidal individual and these brutalities are far more responsible for the necessity of having to use one’s own death to stand in harms way than the compassion in assisted suicide is responsible for why I need to use my death to stand in harms way.

There’s so many things humane beings can and cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual because humane beings use the common meaning of vulnerability to define care and laws. Humane beings protect the weak but I live in a world with the monsters who call themselves the human race in it so there’s absolutely no concept of when I’ve suffered too much already and been brutalised too much already in the totality of their compassion for suicidal individuals. The most basic compassion depends on recognising that human brutalities causes the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal and that’s what defines humane suicide laws and care based on the true meaning of vulnerability.

The monsters who call themselves the human race are blinded by their evil brutal and inhumane nature to the truth that if they are not so cruel then I would never need to die for safety.

They seek to do endless brutalities to suicidal individuals then blame defective brains and incompetent minds for dying for safety – this is the best basis for care they’ve ever achieved and it defines the purposes of the suicide laws that exists here and can only ever exist in a civilisation of monsters born and bred evil. They’re always so cruel to suicidal individuals throughout history and throughout the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals and to this day so they’re blinded by their evil, brutal and inhumane nature to the true crimes against suicidal individuals. They are so cruel in the name of care and in the centuries they’ve tried to care about suicidal individuals. They cannot recognise the difference between cruelty and care but their cruelty is absolutely flawless and that’s what is obvious to humane beings.

They are so cruel and that’s why I spend thousands of days feeling suicidal. Another year after years and a decade and more of keeping on feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal is all the monsters who call themselves the human race can achieve.

The first day you know “I cannot bear you to feel suicidal ever because I cannot bear to feel suicidal ever” with the full force of empathy is the day you support my death. When you know I suffer too much in life. 

I know that when consent matters to care and when care is based on the competency to recognise the harms – when the competency to care, protect and be humane exists – then assisted suicide becomes unnecessary. But when they are so cruel then they don’t see the harms that leads to the suicidal mind going from contemplating using one’s own death to death because of the great efforts of doctors to misrepresent feeling suicidal and the causes of feeling suicidal as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect – when the protection of assisted suicide exists then it’s completely obvious what and who are truly responsible for the deaths of suicidal individuals. It defines choices and actions justified as care to choose and act with complete disregard for how the victim feels and what they make their victim feel – this is psychiatric and mental health care and laws.

I think it’s hard for others to understand why a suicidal individual does what I do.

Throughout my life I’ve lived when the competency to have empathy and understanding for my being doesn’t exist. In the piece linked to below I talk about having to learn this competency on my own.

https://atormentedsoulscience.wordpress.com/2022/12/11/the-medicalisation-of-homosexuals-and-homosexuality-only-succeeded-in-caring-about-ruining-lives/?preview=true

There are so many factors responsible for why I am cursed to be so much better off having never been born. At the top of the list is the competency to have empathy and understanding for the suicidal mind doesn’t exist. Next on the list is the competency to have empathy and understanding for my being doesn’t exist.

Neither of these competencies exists and prevails because of the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness. The enormous harms of the existence of psychiatry are many but one massive harm is that no one seeks to find and learn to have empathy and understanding for minds and beings that are the meaningless products of defective brains, the minds and beings of the mentally ill and of the victims of psychiatry.

It’s a damnation to live when these competencies do not exist because without such competencies then there’s no competency to even recognise the difference between cruelty and care so the monsters who call themselves the human race are absolutely fantastic at using any brutalities on me with complete disregard for the harm and brutality. This is the damnation of my existence to face unlimited suicidality because they cannot even recognise the difference between cruelty and care when they see mental illness but their cruelty is flawless cruelty and their sense of care is so brutal. They cannot even recognise the difference between the inherent brutality of tyranny and ownership that is why competent minds go to war to fight against tyranny versus care. (They ignore what I completely refuse to feel, refuse to be made to feel and refuse to be forced to suffer and endure against my will like sadists and tyrants do – this is how they care. They ignore what I completely refuse, would never choose or consent to like tyrants do – this is how they care. This is why monsters born and bred evil who sees my unlimited suicidality believes that the monsters who call themselves the human race cares about me. The very evil and brutality of tyranny that is why competent minds go to war against tyranny and ownership – but monsters born and bred evil and only monsters believe that the monsters who call themselves the human race cares about me because they see mental illness.)

There’s another harm of the existence of psychiatry. It’s the assumption that the victims of psychiatry are defective but those who are not victims of psychiatry are essential flawless. This is one of the conations of psychiatric concepts and paradigms. The victims of psychiatry are abnormal and flawed but those who are not victims of psychiatry are flawless. The victims of psychiatry are assumed to lack mental competency and those who are normal so not victims of psychiatry are assumed to have mental competency until they become victims of psychiatry. (Psychiatrists put so much effort into proving this by misrepresenting brain differences as brain defects because misrepresenting brain differences as brain defects is the source of their tyranny and rule over the victims of psychiatry. True doctors do not rule like psychiatrists do.)

If you look at the body, the totality, of psychiatric research you will see clearly that they seek to find and prove everything wrong with the brains, minds and beings of the victims of psychiatry. That’s what comes naturally to those who see mental illness. (There’s a harm in this that I talk about elsewhere that they don’t seek to use the scientific method to prove the good in the victims of psychiatry – so obviously an enormous harm and crime against humanity when you recognise natural mental diversity and mental pain instead of seeing mental illness.)

I remember reading a study titled something like “schizophrenia and the theory of the mind”. It wasn’t about the theory of the understanding of the schizophrenic type and the schizophrenic mind. It was based on a specific meaning of “theory of the mind”. It referred to a defect of the minds and beings of victims of the label of schizophrenia.

“Theory of the mind” in this psychiatric study that typifies the psychiatric approach of their use of the scientific method means not understanding the minds and motivations of others. Psychiatrists would talk about this as “part of the disease” and as a reason why the victims of the label of schizophrenia face and feel feeling suicidal so much more than others and other factors of a worse life psychiatrists talk about in terms of “the prognosis of schizophrenia”.

This approach and meaning of “theory of the mind” means that the victims of the label of schizophrenia have worse lives and feel suicidal more than others because of a defect of being unable to understand the minds of others and motivations of others.

The point of this piece is to ask the question about whether those who are not victims of the label of schizophrenia – do you understand the minds and motivations of victims of the label of schizophrenia and this defect and deficit contributes to the worse lives of victims of the label of schizophrenia?

Are lives only made worse because of the defects and flaws of the minds and beings of those who are victims of the label of schizophrenia? Yes by the standards of psychiatrists and the vast body of psychiatry research.

How is this a basis for care and being humane? Lives are made worse solely because the being is defective and not because of the factors of others who are devoid of the competency to have empathy and understanding for the being, for the victim of psychiatry.

The victims of the label of schizophrenia are defective when understanding other minds and the motivations of others – the faults and flaws of the victims of psychiatry are solely responsible for why lives are made worse than they should be and so worse that death becomes a welcomed solution? Yes by the standards of psychiatrists and their research and use of the scientific method. No fault with the minds of those who are normal by the standards of psychiatrists that’s why the victims of the label of schizophrenia have such awful lives and certainly no fault with the minds and beings of psychiatrists that’s why life is made so much worse? No fault by the standards of psychiatrists and their research and use of the scientific method.

It’s a curse to be better off having never been born to live when the competency to have empathy and understanding for the wide diversity of natural mental diversity, the weak and mental pain doesn’t exist. The victims of psychiatry face this curse more than others do.

There are obviously flaws and faults with everyone – this is not how psychiatry works. (Psychiatry works by assuming that only the mentally ill are flawed, defective and incompetent and seeks to use the scientific method to prove all the faults, flaws and defects of the mentally ill alone.)

Some minds are harder to understand than others and motivations are also harder to understand but no one is perfect at understanding the minds of others. So doesn’t it make sense to try to learn empathy and understanding for one and all?

There’s two points I’m making in the paragraph above. One is about mental incompetency as something universal not solely a problem with the victims of psychiatry. The other point is that mental competency is earned and learned.

Understanding can be taught.

Knowing that you have a level of incompetency when understanding other minds and the motivations of others – that’s a pretty basic understanding of your own being. Can the power of education fix this universal incompetency? Of course.

To know your own being, your weakness and pain – this can be taught just as it’s possible to teach to understand the wide diversity of natural mental diversity, the weak and mental pain.

Do you understand that the label of madness is about being unable to understand the minds and beings of victims of the label of schizophrenia? It’s madness because it’s not possible to understand it – that’s how psychiatry works to blame the victims of the label of schizophrenia.

The very foundation of psychiatry is based on being devoid of the competency to have empathy and understanding for the wide diversity of natural mental diversity, the weak and mental pain. If it cannot be understood as natural then it must be a mental illness – this is the foundation of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness.

So the victims of the label of schizophrenia are deemed as mad and defective for being unable to understand the minds of others but those who are not victims of psychiatry don’t have this problem – that’s a basis for what? A basis for care? No of course not. It’s the complete opposite of a basis for care.

There’s nothing wrong with being normal and average by the standards of psychiatrists? Yes. But this understanding is not a basis for care and being humane. But this is their basis for the use of the scientific method to blame the victims of psychiatry and hold dear the flawlessness of those who are normal and average so not victims of psychiatry. Their use of the scientific method demonstrates that so much evil defines their sense of care – that’s what comes from seeing mental illness.

Understanding is the opposite of seeing madness. The competency to have empathy and understanding for one’s fellow being is the opposite of seeing mental illness. This can be taught but never by psychiatrists or anyone else so devoid of good in them that they see mental illness.

The competency to recognise the difference between cruelty and care? No one who has any power over my life and how I feel has this competency. Nothing changes the brutality of human nature that defines their choices and actions justified as care.

####

(Why do you justify as care methods that inflicts further suicidal feelings? Because you ignore the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal as the meaningless symptom of a brain defect – that’s what psychiatrists teach you to believe in. It’s not pain it’s mental illness – when you are completely devoid of the competency to have empathy and understanding for the suicidal mind you blame suicidal individuals for being made to feel suicidal and you never blame the evil brutal and inhumane nature of human nature for causing the pain that makes suicidal individuals welcome death. The use of the scientific method by psychiatrists is to prove it’s mental illness not pain so they don’t use the scientific method to demonstrate the brutalities that causes pain and makes death a welcomed solution – they’re the best of you at caring about suicidal individuals. Everything is focused on controlling and ruling over suicidal individuals but nothing is focused on controlling the monsters who call themselves the human race to prevent cruelty to suicidal individuals and stand in harms way of the brutalities that comes naturally to human nature to want to do because the basis for care is so evil as seeing mental illness is evil. The care that exists is based on so much evil. “We get whatever we want from you by making you want to die again and again” – that’s a mentality and motivation to care by the standards of psychiatrists and other types of monsters born and bred evil who sees mental illness. Because to feel suicidal is not caused by brutalities that causes suffering but it’s caused by mental illness – never has so much evil defined a sense of care.)

(So many attempts to care and all they can achieve is me feeling suicidal in over half of the days in the last quarter century because? So much evil defines their choices and actions justified as care. So completely devoid of the competency to care, protect and be humane that I spend thousands of days feeling suicidal because they cannot want to do anything else. You have to be beyond evil to believe that the monsters who call themselves the human race cares about me. But you think making me want to die again and again is care by your standards for the obvious proof of the truth that human nature is evil, brutal and inhumane – seeing mental illness doesn’t change the brutality innate to human nature to want to do to a suicidal individual. That’s what defines the difference you want to make to this suicidal individual and every other. All because doctors cannot recognise the difference between a brain difference and a brain defect – so much evil defines their sense of care and that’s why they cannot make any other choices but what inevitably leads to me feeling suicidal in over half of the days in the last quarter century. So much power to make certain of what? See why my life is always and inevitably going to be this bad?)

(Suicidality = suicidal suffering, feelings and thoughts)

When I read the revised clinical guidelines for schizophrenia published 10-15 years ago I knew they were wrong by which I mean they were based on the best available science but they were extremely inadequate when it comes to bettering the lives and outcomes (the prognosis) of the victims of the label of schizophrenia. The national mental health charity Rethink agreed with these recommendations and that’s how I got involved after they sent me an email to write to my MP to recommend these guidelines were carried out – I have no idea why Rethink agreed with these recommendations. I am victim of the label of schizophrenia spectrum disorders so I know exactly how bad psychiatric and mental health care is but the clinical guidelines are about the best the scientific method can do to recommend the best thing and they were completely inadequate recommendations.

I’d spent a lot of time feeling suicidal on and off before I started on trying to revise the national clinical guidelines for schizophrenia. (To this day it’s so brutal what the monsters who call themselves the human race cares about doing to me instead of killing me by my consent.)

It was a way to try to find a way to survive my suicidality. Many have tried to care about me and they’ve failed to do the most important thing and that’s to save me from keeping on feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal. A major factor in this is that the monsters who call themselves the human race are devoid of the competency to feel empathy for me and have understanding of my being – I didn’t know this truth so clearly a decade ago but I know it without doubt today.

Happiness paled in comparison to suicidality and happiness was fleeting but suicidality is the constant. I didn’t recognise the truth about human brutalities and the evil brutal and inhumane nature of human nature as the cause back then but I see the truth so clearly now.

My suicidality was unfixable and unchangeable but I couldn’t kill myself. Nothing worked to give me a sustained amount of the constancy of wanting to live. My will to live was irreparably broken back then and today.

Then I read something that resonated with me. It was something Edwin Schneidman (a respected pioneer of suicidology who talked about suicide as caused by “psychache” so not caused by mental illness)  said as a quote from the book Moby Dick. I’m going to butcher the original quote here

“When it’s the cold dark winter of my soul I know it’s time to go to sea else it’s the pistol and ball”

The pistol and ball refers to a gun used for suicide. Captain Ahab speaks about suicide in this quote from the book Moby Dick.

In my interpretation of this quote the “sea” is something to fight for. Back then my sea was the betterment of the national clinical guidelines for schizophrenia.

Everyone had failed me so I had to come up with a way to survive this terrible life. My thoughts were that I could find this reason to stay alive to better the clinical guidelines for schizophrenia. It’s not a reason to live that has anything in common with being happy. I’d seen the problems with happiness versus suicidality 10-15 years ago. I suffer far far too much in life – that’s the eternal problem back then and today and no one has succeeded in caring about fixing this so I interpreted this quote as a method that would not solve my suicidality but it would be a reason to keep on surviving.

So I spent a couple of years reading research studies and information to try to better the clinical guidelines to ultimately shift the prognosis of victims of the label of schizophrenia. I kept on feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal – that’s the inevitability of my existence. But I’ve worked (paid employment) while feeling suicidal.

(I didn’t see the truth about human nature back then. I didn’t see that they are the monsters who call themselves the human race by name and by nature. I couldn’t see the truth about why they cannot do anything else and make any other choices but what led me to feel how I felt back then.)

I failed. It was obsessed by trying to use the existing science and the high quality science that would be acceptable to those who create and revise clinical guidelines to better the clinical guidelines but most of all to change the prognosis, to better the lives of the victims of the label of schizophrenia. The most important thing to me was to change the prognosis using the available science but I couldn’t do it. It drove me ‘crazy’ trying to use their science and research to change the prognosis.

I failed. But my mind and other consciousnesses kept on working on this and other things. It might not always be conscious what I do – but even this is a different understanding of my being to concepts of the conscious, unconscious and subconscious by which I mean that my being is made of multiple singular consciousnesses. This understanding of my mind and being has been met with what I can expect from the monsters who call themselves the human race and psychiatric and mental health professionals – they can only conceptualise this in terms of seeing mental illness so one of my frenemies (a psychologist) who I explained my diversity to back then could only conceptualise and understand this complexity of my mind and being as multiple personality disorder. That’s their instinct.

Since then and to now the monsters who call themselves the human race have burned my psyche and done abuses worse than torment to me and my soul because that’s what is acceptable to the medical profession. That’s their instinct and what comes naturally to human nature to do to me as long as I live.

In all of this I’ve seen something so clearly. They cannot do anything else and they cannot make any other choices when they have any power over my life and how I feel but what leads to the horrific beyond awfulness of existence I faced when I set myself this objective of bettering the clinical guidelines for schizophrenia because they are the monsters who call themselves the human race by name and by nature.

They cannot do anything else because they see mental illness and only monsters see mental illness – this defines the best and worst they can do in the name of care. No love for one’s fellow being comes from seeing mental illness but the limitless brutalities innate to human nature are something well served (not defended against) by the existence of psychiatry and the prevail of seeing mental illness – there’s far more truth in this assertion about why so many feel suicidal than in the application of the scientific method by doctors.

(I don’t get to hold my preconceived ideas and notions and beliefs – so many monsters born and bred evil judge me in life and that’s why my suicidality is so extremely unlimited and if you cannot recognise this truth on your own then you will never change from being the monsters you are born to be. My life could have been so different but feeling like this but it cannot be any different because of the truth about human nature.)

(What you should recognise about this project of mine to change the clinical guidelines for schizophrenia is a self sacrifice. I had no reason to live because I face the constancy of suicidality but I made a willing sacrifice in this choice to find a reason to survive the horrific beyond awfulness of feeling suicidal. This willing sacrifice I only made because I was still blind to the truth about human nature but now I see the truth about why the more power over my life and how I feel they have then the more they make me want to die again and again and never stop – you have no problems with this and that’s the proof of the truth about human nature. To be fair, any humane beings would find it completely obvious what is so wrong with the revised clinical guidelines for schizophrenia 10-15 years ago. I am alluding to the concept of a willing sacrifice in terms of keeping on living – here is the truth about human nature in how much you weigh the sacrifice of being forced to suffer and endure against one’s will the very things that makes death worth escaping from feeling and facing. You think it’s nothing to be forced to live against one’s will when you are all evil and only evil and devoid of even the slightest competency to be humane to suicidal individuals – that’s what comes from seeing mental illness.)

The hell of being victim of psychiatry and those who see mental illness

I do of course try to pursue my happiness in all these brutalities they do to me to make my suicidality as unlimited as possible (thousands of days because of the brutalities they want to do to a suicidal individual). A way to understand this is like trying to have happiness while you are being punched in the face again and again.

The unbearable pain was alone enough for me to need to die. Now they’ve inflicted even more reasons to die. What I see so very clearly is that if they are not so cruel then I would never need to die for safety from suicidality, from suffering too much worse than death.

The pain made to want to cease my conscious existence 10-15 years ago but I still had faith in the human race at this point. My faith blinded me. I thought they are humane so they could not be so cruel.

They’ve never stopped demonstrating that they are the monsters who call themselves the human race by name and by nature but I was blind to the truth because of my faith (and love) of the human race.

I see it so clearly now that the best they can ever be is monsters born and bred evil and that’s what defines the best they can do when they have any power over my life and how I feel. I see why they cannot do anything else or make any other choices than what achieves me feeling suicidal in over half of the days in the last quarter century – I truly know what it is to be a victim of psychiatry and the monstrous nature of human nature that defines all who sees mental illness.

I know why they can brutalise a suicidal individual without mercy, remorse or limit – this is what monsters want to do to a suicidal individual and the existence of psychiatry is all about what monsters want to do to a suicidal individual not in any way standing in harms way of the brutalities that causes suicidality. Inevitably my life was always going to be so bad that I face unlimited suicidality because psychiatric and mental health care is unlimited in the brutalities they want to do to a suicidal individual – they are always so brutal even in the name of care because that’s what comes from seeing mental illness.

They justify things as in my self interests but they’re completely blind to what my self interests are to this day. The evil, brutal and inhumane nature of human nature makes them completely blind to the pain I should never face in life. They’re so devoid of even the slightest competency to be humane that they cannot recognise that my self interests are so obviously and fundamentally in never feeling suicidal.

This is something fundamental to the brutalities psychiatrists and others who see mental illness can justify as care by forcing things on the victims of psychiatry the victim refuses, would never choose or consent to that they’re caring about the best interests of the victim – this is how they justify using any method no matter how cruel and evil it is on the victims of psychiatry for the justification of mental incompetency. Best interests is a concept associated with self interests. With this basis for care they have never stopped demonstrating that they only have the competency of monsters to guide them because they are absolutely blind to what my self interests are and they are completely and utterly heartless when they are ignoring what I feel and what they make me feel – that’s a basis for care but only by the standards of sadists and monsters born and bred evil.

Care blind to my self interests that rules over my existence and care blind to what are wholly unacceptable consequences to make me feel rules over how I feel – that’s what defines the best the monsters who call themselves the human race can do because the best they can be is a species of monsters born and bred evil. The competencies of monsters born and bred evil defines why they cannot do anything else when they have any power over my life and how I feel but achieve an extent of unlimited suicidality only bearable to monsters born and bred evil to achieve – and the beauty of the minds of monsters born and bred evil is to believe that they care about me by achieving my unlimited suicidality.

This is what I face in life and as long as I live. Blind to the pain I should never face in life – this defines their choices and actions justified as care. Blind to the truth that my self interests were in never feeling suicidal – this defines their choices and actions justified as care. Completely blind to when I’ve suffered too much already and been brutalised too much already – this defines their choices and actions justified as care. Blinded by their evil, brutal and inhumane nature of human nature to what are wholly, completely and utterly unacceptable consequences me – this defines their choices and actions justified as care.

You have to recognise why my life is always inevitably going to be this bad. Do you even recognise the problems like I do? You cannot fix the problems you cannot recognise on your own.

(The angels have wings and so does the devil. How do you know the difference? One way is about how they force you to suffer and endure against your will. The wings of angels stand in harms way of the brutalities in being forced to suffer and endure against one’s will suicidality. You know the devil’s own when you can only die for safety from being forced to suffer and endure against one’s will suicidality. Suicidality is caused by being forced to suffer and endure against one’s will too much.)

(I am alive and here to be brutalised without mercy or limit – the monsters who call themselves the human race have made this completely obvious by accepting the unlimited brutalities necessary to achieve my unlimited suicidality. You have no problems with this. You have no problems with the brutalities necessary to achieve my unlimited suicidality. You only make my life worse when you believe that the monsters who call themselves the human race cares about me by what they do to me instead of killing me by my consent and by what they do to make my suicidality as unlimited as is possible for sadists and monsters born and bred evil to bear to achieve.)

(You really do need to recognise the truth about what a species of monsters born and bred evil pays monsters to do to a suicidal individual. There are sadists paid to have power over my life and how I feel.)

(You need to know the pain of never looking forward to seeing anyone ever again. You need to know the pain that makes death better than being cared about by the monsters who call themselves the human race. You need to know the pain of having your humanity betrayed by everyone you’ve ever met and more. You need to feel the pain of facing such a brutal sense of care as I do in life that succeeds in ruining my life so completely then follows on by making your suicidality as unlimited as mine is.)

(I define hell on Earth as a place where I can only die for safety. I can only die for safety from suicidality and the monsters who call themselves the human race.)