Is It Ever Ok to Tranquilize Someone?

Salvation in Christ Alone and the Coming Judgment

Warning, the following message may be offensive to some audiences. These audiences may include, but are not limited to, professing Christians who never read their Bible, sissies, sodomites, men with man buns, those who approve of men with man buns, man bun enablers, white knights for men with man buns, homemakers who have finished Netflix but don't know how to meal plan, and people who refer to their pets as fur babies.

Viewer discretion is advised. People are tired of hearing nothing but doom and despair on the radio.

The message of Christianity is that salvation is found in Christ alone, and any who reject Christ therefore forfeit any hope of salvation, any hope of heaven.

The issue is that humanity is in sin, and the wrath of almighty God is hanging over our heads.

They will hear his words, they will not act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment, when the fires of wrath come, they will be consumed and they will perish. God wrapped himself in flesh, condescended and became a man, died on the cross for sin, was resurrected on the third day, has ascended to the right hand of the Father, where he sits now to make intercession for us.

Jesus is saying there is a group of people who will hear his words, they will act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment come in that final day, their house will stand.

Why We Revisited the Tranquilizer Discussion

Welcome to Bible Bash, where we aim to equip the saints for the works of ministry by answering the questions you're not allowed to ask. We're your hosts Harrison Kerrig and Pastor Tim Mullett, and today we seek to answer the age-old question, is it ever okay to tranquilize someone?

Now this is going to be a continuation of the episode that we put out last Monday, and the reason that we decided to do this was because, as we were interacting with people online who were listening to the episode and sort of seeing some of the content that we put out last week, a lot of people gave us what I will call gentle and friendly pushback.

It really wasn't. Unsurprisingly, when you talk about something like this, it's very much like a sort of golden calf type of situation, where you're really kind of treading all over something that a lot of people have built up to be something that it was never meant to be in the first place, and it's sort of like an untouchable, don't go there kind of topic.

But obviously, with the podcast, we go there all the time, and so this is no different. But we wanted to do a second episode and just sort of fill in some of the blanks that we felt like we didn't touch on maybe as much as we could have or we just didn't have enough time or whatever, but we wanted to dedicate some more time to this discussion because it really is something that I think a lot of people really don't understand because we sort of live in what I would call a materialistic society, which is basically just meaning we try to find, as a society, a physical explanation for everything, right?

And so we really don't make categories as a society for the spiritual, for example. Now, obviously, the church tries to do that in general, but then as a society, we try to address everything through the physical.

Now, it's funny, too, because we actually recorded a different episode earlier this last week that was going to be coming out on the day that you're listening to this episode, but we just got so much pushback that we decided we needed to call an audible and talk about this again and just fill in some of the blanks that maybe we didn't discuss before.

And so, Tim, we're back at it again. Sounds good, man. Talking about depression and anxiety. Before we really dive into talking about is it okay to tranquilize someone, what were some of your thoughts in general on some of the pushback we got online?

Why the Chemical Imbalance Theory Lost Credibility

Yeah, well, I mean, I know that we had a significant amount of pushback online, but then I also was engaging in plenty of discussions with individuals in terms of my own life with a variety of individuals along those lines, and not all of it was crazy in terms of the active discussions that I've been having with individuals along these lines.

I mean, I've engaged in a significant number of good faith kind of discussions, but it's one of those things where this is a topic that has been so obscured as it relates to just the drugs in general, do you ever take them, the effectiveness of psychology, what are you talking about, and it really is one of those things which is somewhat amazing just to think about a lot of the things that people hear you to be saying in an episode like that, and part of it is because there's so many shared, there's so many assumptions that just simply aren't shared in a discussion like this, and it is a discussion that has broad ranging implications, and so a lot of the discussions I've been having have been discussions that make you realize that there really are a lot of different truths that you have to believe in order to wear you, pieces that you put into the puzzle, so to speak, to where you come to a position one way or another, and I think most people feel like the safer kind of option in a discussion like this is just to essentially register what I would describe as a kind of mild concern about the fact that these drugs in general and what they're doing, and so you have a lot of people who are willing to register a mild, even to a serious kind of concern, but then because of I think a lot of factors, they're unable to commit to a position with any kind of clarity as far as that goes because there's a sense in which a lot of this discussion is wrapped in a lot of very technical kind of language and related to your position on a lot of different issues, and so most people are just kind of a little bit nervous to wade into it with I think the level of urgency that we really need to wade into this kind of discussion, considering the fact that we've literally created a generation of drug addicts, and that is disturbing.

I posted something on Twitter along these lines, and essentially I pointed out that psychologists gave us lobotomies for instance, and when we look back on lobotomies as a therapy for depression or anxiety or other mental disorders, we look back on that and we think largely that was monstrous to remove individual's prefrontal lobes in order to remove the bad thoughts, right?

And then we also participated in electroshock therapy, and most people kind of instinctively recoil at the thought of shocking people in order to shock them. Now, they're still doing it. They're still doing that one now, but now they apply anesthesia and lower the voltage or whatever, but they're still doing that kind of thing, but most people have this intrinsic...

Got to do it humane, right? Most people have intrinsic kind of recoiling at the thought of dealing with the unpleasant thoughts in that way. The step we're on right now is we're largely tranquilizing a lot of people, so you have different types of psychotropic drugs.

You have uppers and downers, but your vast majority of predominantly anti-anxiety meds are going to be tranquilizers essentially, and so we've tranquilized a whole entire generation, treating them like you would treat a rampaging elephant or something like that, and most society hasn't quite registered the horror at the thought of what we're doing yet like they did with the lobotomies, but I assume in 20, 30 years we'll look back with great shame at what we've done here, but then the next step is going to be human 2 .0 and transhumanism, and the thing is we're not ready to approach that subject matter.

If you could literally put a chip in someone's brain and regulate their emotions to a precise degree through a computer chip, we're not ready to respond to that in moral terms and moral categories as demonstrated by the fact that we can't even respond to a lesser kind of thing with the tranquilizers, but we really do have to think through these things, and the problem is that we don't have a doctrine of sanctification that's robust enough to even know how to approach any of it, so with each new thing that psychology brings along in order to seek to manage the basic human condition, as long as the doctors are telling us it's okay, then we buy it.

As long as people are saying it's safe, we just buy it uncritically. We don't have a robust enough doctrine of sanctification essentially to know what to do, but we better figure it out because we might be pretty quickly facing the new tranquilizers with the brain chips, and I don't know that we have answers to what you'd even do there.

What Psychotropic Drugs Are Actually Doing

Yeah, and so when you're talking about tranquilizers, just so everyone's clear, what exactly are you meaning by that word tranquilizers?

Well, everyone knows what a tranquilizer is, but the issue is what most people are not aware of is the fact that most of your anti-anxiety meds like Xanax in particular or your benzos are essentially tranquilizers, so they're mild tranquilizers and that's what you're looking at, and these are kind of the go-to drug for a vast majority or a broad array of unpleasant symptoms that a person might experience is that we essentially tranquilize them is what we do, and so a lot of your anti-anxiety meds are basically that, they're mild tranquilizers, and it's kind of like chemo essentially, so if you think about the way chemo actually works, chemo is not really the best kind of treatment for cancer, so if you have a group of cells in the body that are growing out of control, creating a tumor, growing out of control of bad cells, you give it an individual chemo, and that's essentially going to destroy the good cells along with the bad cells, and it's somewhat of a gamble, so to speak, you're hoping that with all the good cells you destroy, you also get the bad ones, and that's essentially what tranquilizers are doing to the thoughts, if that makes sense, and so if you have an individual who's unable to manage the worried, anxious kind of thoughts, or even the depressed thoughts depending on who is prescribing that, what you're going to do is you're going to numb the thoughts, right, and so you have an entire generation of people who are essentially being drugged and tranquilized in an attempt to stop the bad thoughts, but then you're creating kind of a generation of zombies in a lot of ways, and that's what's happening in a lot of cases, and there's whole movies that are devoted to that basic premise of the kid having the dad who was a psychologist who thought that the answer to life was essentially to drug them to the point where they can barely think, and that's what we do to a lot of elderly people too, once they start exhibiting crazy sorts of symptoms, we'll tranquilize them, and that's why they look like zombies, that's what you're doing, if that makes sense, you have the uppers, and a lot of your antidepressant kind of drugs are typically uppers, and then your anti-anxiety stuff, traditionally anti-anxiety stuff are downers, and so you're managing it all that way, if you have a kid who basically is struggling with attention deficit disorder, you're going to put them on a stimulant in order to essentially help their brain focus, but then you're not addressing anything wrong with them, you're just putting them on a stimulant, and we all know what stimulants do, if you wake up in the morning and you're sluggish, you drink some caffeine, it will give you clarity of thought, but it may be that you might not want to sleep for three or four hours too, and so it may be that you want to address the problem in a different way, and so you can't just look at the presence of uppers and downers, and say they're accomplishing necessarily any sort of medical function, if that makes sense.

Depression, the DSM-5, and the Failed Chemical Imbalance Story

Yeah, yeah, and you know, so this wasn't really like a planned thing, when we put out the first episode, we were initially responding to the situation with J .D. Hall, because he obviously got in a lot of trouble, disqualified from ministry for some of the stuff that he was doing, and I think some more stuff has come out, at least in the form of accusations, I don't really know where all that's gone, so I don't necessarily want to comment on all of that, but we were initially responding to that, but then, you know, I guess in God's sovereignty, a few days before we put out the episode, we had already recorded it, a few days before we put out the episode, I don't know who exactly it was that put out the study, but a study came out that basically sort of undid, like, I guess what would be one of the biggest claims in terms of where depression comes from, or one of the biggest, like a hypothesis for where it's coming from, and so we actually got a lot of this pushback, which was to say, hey, look, depression, it's a chemical imbalance in the brain, and that's why these antidepressants are effective, is because they're sort of working to balance out what's happening chemically in the brain, and then you have this study come out, and can you tell us a little bit about that study?

Yeah, the University College of London essentially put out an analysis of 17 different systematic reviews and studies, which basically came to the conclusion that there may be no link between serotonin levels in the brain and depression, and so the idea has always been, here's the thing, so when you're talking about depression, we're talking about anxiety, when you're talking about really any of the psychological diagnosis that you're going to find in the DSM -5, I mean, the vast majority of them are essentially labels that are put on individuals after all medical tests have been exhausted at that point, so if you look up depression in the DSM -5, or general anxiety disorder, you have your two major diagnoses that are being used to explain depression and anxiety, so depression or general anxiety disorder, when you look at these things, one of the things you're going to find is that these diagnoses, they're not medical diagnosis, is what they're not, so they're not that, like the depression diagnosis is like if you have sudden unexplained depression for two week period, that is distinguished from bereavement, other psychological disorders, and medical conditions that might cause a depressed mood, like thyroid problems and that kind of thing, right?

So these labels, they're just descriptions of a person who is depressed or who has repeated anxiety for a period of time that are not explained by a medical problem, does that make sense? So but then the prevailing kind of theory that undergird what the possible biological explanation that could be explaining it was the chemical imbalance theory, does that make sense?

So as that relates to depression, most people kind of assume that anytime you get one of these labels, it must be because there's a chemical imbalance in your brain, that's what most people have assumed for many years because this has been like the prevalent theory, right?

So there's not another medical cause, but because you're, you know, like for instance with an antidepressant, you're going to put serotonin, give individual serotonin and all that, and that's a chemical in the brain, it must be that there's an imbalance of that.

There's a study that came out recently that did an umbrella analysis of, you know, 17 different reviews and studies and they determined that this is not real, right? Or that there's no conclusive evidence that there's any kind of chemical imbalance in the brain that's causing depression, for instance.

But then this isn't really anything new, everyone, like this is where the research has been going for many years now, right? So for many years, like when this theory was put out, it was put out with very little, you know, scientific evidence that would show even remotely the effectiveness of antidepressants in general.

And so, like in the academy, they've been moving away from this for many years, but it's never been kind of, it's not been just popular knowledge at this point because it's like drug money is, you know, big business and all that and no one wants to face the obvious.

But then, so there's a study that came out essentially that's showing the obvious. I mean, and it should be obvious because like we obviously don't know how, you know, what the appropriate level of chemical, you know, chemicals there are in an individual's brain.

No one wants to volunteer to have all their brain chemicals drained and measured, right?

Right, yeah, I'm not lining up for that. You're not lining up for that.

So this is not new, like this isn't news, you know, and I think if you listen to our old, you know, Is Depression Real podcast, we talk about some of that at various points that like the science has been pointing away from that for a long time.

But then we put that out there, you know, and some memes along those lines about, what was the one with Anakin that you put out?

Oh, yeah, that was this last week. I think it said something along the lines of when you find out that depression isn't caused by a chemical imbalance and then it's Anakin and he's saying, how many other lies has the council told me or something like that?

Well, then you have a lot of people who are essentially like emoting and responding to that. You know, like you ignorant plebs, you know, don't know the science behind this. And then you have even people on their side coming along and essentially saying, hey, you're not aware of the article that just came out.

I will say that was an encouraging thing to see. There were people who initially were very aggressive towards us, you know, because of the claims. And then you send them the articles about it or, you know, someone else would send them the articles about it.

And there were several people who were like, oh, okay, I think I was mistaken on this one. So, that was encouraging to see.

Yeah, well, that study came out, you know, and that was news, you know, to many people. But it's, you know, it doesn't have to, you don't really have to think. Like, it's not a complicated kind of issue in general.

It's one of those issues that, you know, many people just haven't thought about that taken along with blind faith. And not only that, like, almost every psychological disorder is treated that way. Like, in the minds of, you know, the vast majority of people, they think every, you know, psychological label essentially has some kind of chemical imbalance involved.

Because you're taking, they think you're, they don't realize that, like, the anti-anxiety meds are tranquilizers, right? And that kind of stuff. And so, they think across the board that everything is a chemical imbalance.

But then, that just shows how pervasive and wide this theory has spread to where it's not even understood to be a theory in the minds of many. It's like an immutable law of physics or something like that.

Right. Yeah, that you can't transgress. Right. But, and I think ultimately, you know, a big part of that is, I think for a lot of Christians and probably non-believers as well, it gives you an out for sure when it comes to depression and anxiety.

You know, to be able to say, hey, look, it's, you know, it's not anything because of me. It's, you know, just the chemicals in my brain, man. What do you want me to start managing the chemicals in my brain manually or something?

You know, it gives people an out. And we talked about that a lot in the Is Depression Real episode, I think. But I think it is worth repeating again because there are very many people, I have learned that.

If I have learned nothing else this last week, I have learned that there are very, very, very many people who do not believe that depression and anxiety are spiritual problems. At all. At all, at all.

Or if they do, they are very willing to excuse anyone who is dealing with it and not, like, hold them accountable. And I don't think, I don't think, I think a lot of people are, you know, they're not sitting there thinking to themselves, hey, I want to make sure this person is, like, depressed and suffering as long as possible.

And so I'm not going to tell them, you know, what God has told us in order to deal with these types of things. I don't think people are approaching it from that standpoint. I genuinely do think a lot of people are just convinced that bringing it up at all in, like, a sin category is going to do more harm than good to the individual, right?

Right. And so at that point, you just say, well, you know, I'm not going to bring that up. Yeah, let them take the antidepressants. Let them, you know, go see a psychologist or something and get it.

Maybe they can figure it out for them. Well, part of that is, part of what's happening there is that psychology is kind of like a parasite discipline, essentially. And it's attached itself to the medical community in such a way that, in a pretty pervasive way when you think about it.

And so for many people, there's, it's very difficult for them to, you know, weigh in on that kind of issue. And the only way I know how to describe it is kind of to describe it like COVID or something like that.

So, you know, when you think about, like, what has happened with the COVID stuff, you know, part of, you know, part of our reaction in general, my reaction in general to, like, the COVID phenomenon was that, you know, I'm being told that something is a pandemic.

And I'm looking around my eyes and my eyes are telling me that I don't know anyone who's died of this thing. And so, you know, every single, like, I still don't know anyone who's died of COVID. But then we were told it was kind of this massive emergency that you had to shut down the entire country for years about and no one could go to work because of the possibility that someone could die or something like that, right?

And then, you know, the vast majority of stories about people who actually died at that level were, like, individuals who had multiple comorbidities and significant, you know, problems and were one step away from death anyways.

And so, like, then the issue becomes, it's like, well, maybe this is a threat. I mean, like, if you have a nation of over 300 million people, I'm sure that you can show stories of perfectly healthy people who get taken out by it.

But is this problem reaching to a level where you want to shut down the entire world over, right? Like, particularly when it, you know, all the statistics coming in, even with the exaggerated numbers towards the end are like 99 .95 survival rate, maybe this isn't what you think it is.

And so, like, the issue is people do have to use their brains. And then, like, when you look at a problem like anxiety and depression, there are a variety of, like, medical things that could happen to an individual that might produce anxious feelings or depressed moods.

Like, you know, like, for example, like, hypothyroidism, even though the thyroid stuff is kind of being way over diagnosed, those can produce, like, things like anxious feelings or depressed feelings or something like that.

Or, you know, vitamin deficiencies or cancer or, I mean, there's a variety of medical conditions that can make a person feel sluggish and lethargic and, you know, on edge. But then, what's happening, though, in the main, and this is what people just, like, you just, it's hard to interact with people in the main, is like, you know, the vast majority of individuals in America.

Yeah, let's just talk about American Christians, for instance. Like, your vast majority of American Christians are listening to prosperity stuff on the radio. They're listening to Hillsong, they're listening to Bethel, they're listening to songs about Jesus being their boyfriend or girlfriend, you know.

Right. You know, and then singing about their victory, their prosperity victory and facing their giants and all that. So, they're listening to a bunch of prosperity stuff, and that's what they're listening to on a regular basis.

They're going to, you know, churches that are not doing church, this one, they're not challenging them in any way or expecting them to do anything. You know, in our neighborhood group, we, you know, there's a lady who visited Church of the Highlands in Birmingham here and was asking for recommendations of other nonjudgmental churches, right?

But that's American Christianity. So, American Christianity is you're listening to all these milquetoast kind of songs and these milquetoast kind of pastors and, you know, it's all, I'm broken and I'm wounded and I'm damaged and Jesus is my girlfriend and everything else.

And then, you know, you go from that and then they're also, you know, watching eight hours of entertainment a day, like the standard American Christian. Like their house is a mess, instead of getting married, you know, they're addicted to entertainment.

You know, they're young people living in their mom's house, you know, addicted to entertainment. Instead of getting kids, they buy pets who are going to destroy their house and get pet hair all over the place and make their house smell like a kennel.

And then they're, you know, remarkably overweight, have horrible diet and exercise plans, their muscles are atrophy, they don't move very much, they just sit around and they're entertained. And then they never read their Bible.

So, the vast majority of American Christians are like in name are never reading their Bible, never praying, their life is a mess. They're characterized by sloth, you know, like they're not, they're never actively sharing their faith.

Like, I mean, I know, I mean, the vast majority of professing Christians in America probably never share their faith even once a year. Right. And so, you look at that and you look at that kind of situation and it's like, what do you think is going to be the result of this?

Like, what do you think is going to be the result? The result is obviously that you're going to be weighed down by guilt and shame and condemnation in the main. And if you go to a doctor or a psychologist, they're going to give you general, you know, anxiety disorder or clinical depression as an explanation for why you feel bad all the time, right?

And so, I'm comparing that to the COVID kind of thing. If you just look around with your eyes, you know that that's what's happening 99 of the time. But then, because there are some cases, you know, somewhere along the line where someone might conceivably, you know, actually have something medical wrong with them, then the vast majority of people are just gun-shy and basically just say, Well, we don't want to talk about, like, the obvious problem, like, the obvious elephant in the room, you know, because we don't want to be guilty of, you know, jumping the gun when there might be some, you know, one in a 10 ,000 kind of situation where someone might have actually something wrong with them.

But in most cases, even when there is, like, you know, something like that, like, if they would just, like, fix their diet and exercise a little bit more, most of it would go away anyways. And so, you know, and so, we're in a situation where, you know, then you have to demand an entire ceasefire on the discussion of anxiety and depression because of the possibility that there might be one person who might, one in 10 ,000 who might have a legitimate something wrong with them.

But then the problem is you look at the Bible and the Bible says, Be anxious for nothing. That's actually a command, right? And then, you know, you put out a verse, Psalm 94, 19, When my anxious thoughts multiply within me.

It says, Well, you know, essentially, go to the doctor and, you know, get put on a tranquilizer or something. Take Xanax. Yeah, take Xanax. Or, you know, don't be judgmental because, you know, who knows, maybe in 100 years, I'll figure out what the medical cause is for it, you know.

So, you have, like, verses in the Bible that just have no meaning because we're just, like, there's ceasefire on the topic in general.

It doesn't say that, by the way. Hopefully, that's obvious for everyone, but it doesn't say that.

When my anxious thoughts multiply within me, thy consolations delight my soul, you know.

Why the Environment Matters More Than the Chemical Story

Yeah, and so, you know, I found it interesting. I was reading about that report, and I thought it was a I think I was reading out of, like, Psychiatry Today. I don't think I ever saw the Hill version of it, but I think I was reading it.

Yeah, a lot of people are reporting on it. Yeah, I think I read Psychiatry Today's article on it. I can't remember who it was that wrote the article, but, you know, it was kind of funny when I was reading it because towards the end of it, you know, he makes a he tries to qualify the author of this article did.

I think he tried to qualify his review of the report that came out by saying, Hey, you know, look he did strongly say, like, anyone who's telling you that depression is from a chemical imbalance is either ignorant or is lying to you.

So, he took a really strong stance on that, but then he was still trying to qualify the article by saying antidepressants may or may not work. But what I thought was really interesting was and sort of really like an obvious

I thought it was obvious, kind of, like, that you don't even need a report to know. But he obviously felt like this needed to be said. Towards the end of the article, he basically was he wrote, you know, that essentially it seems like depression, like, the majority of the time is caused by external factors, right?

And now he says it's caused by I don't know that we would say it's caused by Like, I don't know that we would communicate that way. But he was at least acknowledging, like, alright, if it's not a chemical imbalance, it does legitimately seem like the explanation for why people are depressed are their circumstances, right?

And I thought that was sort of like a, well, yeah, obviously. I mean, that feels silly to be reading from a doctor. Now, I understand, like you were saying, there can be exceptions to it, and it can be a complicated issue to try and figure out where things are coming from specifically, but I thought it was

That is the best they can do, you know, at that point. So, you know, part of it is, like, when you have a materialistic view of man, like, you don't have a category for, like, a sinful heart that's in rebellion against the Lord.

And so then, you know, the explanation's reduced to, it must be something biological, meaning it must be a chemical imbalance. Like, that's the only internal category they have is some sort of, like, you know, coming from Athena, it either is genetic or it must be some sort of chemical imbalance or it must be something like that.

But then when you've ruled that out, like, it's not a chemical imbalance, then you're left with environment, you know, for the secular psychologist. And I would say that the environment, like, plays a I mean, it obviously is a factor.

It's just not the only factor, right? Like, meaning but that's all you have if you're an atheist, really, is just all you have left is, well, your background, your upbringing, you know, trauma in your life, you know, stress in your life, or, you know, that kind of stuff.

And so they only have an external explanation, but then biblically we have, like, you are an embodied soul, right? You know, you have, like, you have a sinful heart that's in rebellion against the Lord.

And the issue is, like, you can put like, you can literally, you know, take a Christian, you can put him in a Japanese concentration camp or something like that, and they don't have to be depressed.

Despite the fact that they're being beat, you know, with, you know, bamboo sticks or whatever, having their fingernails pulled out. And so, like, they still can't account for, like, the fact that we have a sinful nature that doesn't have to respond, you know, to whatever external environmental stimulus that comes our way.

You know, but that's what they have left. But, I mean, of the two explanations, like, it being some sort of chemical imbalance in your brain or it being, you know, your environment, I think your point is obviously, like, we should probably lean like, it makes more sense to lean towards, yeah, you're just responding to different situations that are happening in your life with, you know, sorrow or worry, right?

I mean, that's kind of Yeah, I mean, it just feels like, kind of like, well, yeah, duh.

Well, but the only reason you can't go there is because there's a lot of money in drugs that have clouded the discussion, you know, so.

Yeah, I think even the article I read, I think even, you know, he was I don't know that he directly was accusing, you know, pharmaceutical companies, but I think he was sort of implying, like, there's a lot of money here.

So, yeah, when antidepressants were being approved initially, there was five studies, I believe, that were done on antidepressants, and, you know, three of them, I think, if I'm remembering correctly, they showed that they didn't perform better than a placebo or a sugar pill or something along those lines.

But in order to approve them, they needed some studies. So, five were done. Two showed that they, you know, performed slightly better on the scale than a placebo, which is a sugar pill. And so, they obviously went with those two studies in order to approve.

But then performing slightly better, like, there's like a point scale or whatever, and essentially, from what I remember, you know, a cup of coffee will move, like, the individual six points up on the scale, and these were only moving it up two points, if that makes sense.

So, like, over and against a sugar pill. So, it's not, like, it was scraping at the bottom of the barrel, and then, you know, there's a big discussion within psychology in general as to whether or not they should allow the drug companies to perform the studies.

And so, but, you know, there's a 2002 article, as it relates to this point, you know, in the Washington Post, against depression, a sugar pill is hard to beat. This isn't new, man. Like, this stuff isn't new.

I mean, people have known for years that, like, these antidepressants aren't performing statistically better than sugar pills. And people have known for years, I mean, there's been, you know, articles, you know, 15 years old that are saying the same thing that's coming out now.

What's different that's happening right now is that we just got done being deceived so thoroughly with the COVID stuff. And because we've been deceived so thoroughly with the COVID stuff, people have had their confidence shook by the medical community and what they're telling us.

Because if you could, you know, like, I think you have these pharmaceutical companies that have essentially committed genocide against our country, and a lot of people feel about it like that, and I do too.

And so, when you're, you know, when you see people, like, healthy people dropping dead, you know, in tennis games and everything else, and, you know, sports stars and all that, and UPS guys, you know, falling over in the sun, and, you know, you know it's from this vaccine, but then you're being told it's climate change now.

I think there's, like, a lot of people who have lost faith in the medical community, and now this kind of article is like, I think there's been a lot of people who are now questioning a lot of things like that, you know?

And this article has gotten a lot of traction from the kind of individuals who have been disillusioned by what's going on in other areas.

Pete. That's right. Yeah, and so, in light of the recent studies that have come out, you know, a lot of people would say, hey, you know, you are harming a lot of people when you say, like, people need to be held accountable for their depression or their anxiety, right?

So, I guess that sort of begs the question. I mean, like, what would your response be to that? Should we Or should we say, like, hey, you know, maybe there's still some value in them, or is it just like a, well, hey, look, you know, I don't think it's actually helping them, but then they're going to respond really negatively if I tell them, you know, that they need to get off the drugs because it's not going to help them.

I mean, there's a bunch of different ways you could go here.

Why Calling Them Tranquilizers Changes the Moral Question

Yeah, there's two kind of questions there. One is, should we tell people to get off the drugs? And then two, like, you know, are we harming people by trying to raise a warning call against the antidepressants in general?

Let me start there, and then we'll go to the should you tell people to get off the drugs kind of thing. So, if you take something like because there's different types of drugs doing different kinds of things, I'll just try to talk about specific types.