Philip, McMan once sent me to Furious Seasons, saying I that here would find a sympathetic audience for my anti-drug, pro vitamin views. :)

I'm sorry but I have to say it:
This is low. These people that cannot discuss or criticise without attacking are not trustworthy and not dignified.
I wonder why Philip was not called scientologist as well by this person.

Once an ass, always an ass. That's not Philip I'm talking about.

Go read the October 2007 link(in this article) where McMan attacked me, a mother of a misdiagnosed "bipolar child".

Keep up the good work here Philip!

And ---McMan discusses booty calls so much it appears it's part of recovery or expert patient advice! Not to mention when he dissected friends and ex loved ones to make "cases" out of them for "borderliners". These are just a few reasons why I couldn't figure out what the hell health central was thinking paying him to write like an "expert patient"; sounds like they smartened up.

Why not sue for defamation of character? Hollywood celebs sue the National Enquirer type rags for that crap all of the time, hell-- take the guy to court.

I tried posting this response at John's site, but don't know if he will post it:

John said, "Yes, big pharma would love a customer for life, but to make a case for a drug industry conspiracy one would have to bend time a hundred years. Kraepelin wrote his classic text, "Manic-Depressive Insanity and Paranoia," decades before drug manufactures came up with the first psychiatric meds, and psychiatrists have been arguing ever since where best to carve nature at its joints."

I know right. That would be like saying the mortgage companies would give out bad mortgages, companies like Enron would cheat people out of their entire incomes, the government would let lobbyists from major corporations actually influence policy and major pharmas would lose billions of dollars in court due to ethical lapses that did major harm like cause diabetes...oh wait a tic...

Come on John your world can't be that grey when you are labeling who is smart and who is dumb. Your post here is as rigid as those you are criticizing. Sites like Furious Seasons aren't anti-psych they are against the worst practices of the industry. There are too many Pdocs who act more like pimps then healers these days and you feel comfortable defending drug pushers, especially those pushing on children, whose main interest is in the color green?

I suggest reading a little Krishnamurti and finding out how necessary knowledge really is.

We all have public and private agendas that we get stuck on. I don't see McManamy as an evil person -- I've met him personally and I know he does some good things -- though clearly he's done some highly reprehensible things as well (e.g., the leaving-his-wife-who-was-supporting-him-due-to-midlife-crisis bit is about the worst of all bad male behaviors).

It's the fact he has a forum to publicize those agendas that makes it a problem. From what you say, though, he's going to have fewer and fewer forums to do so in the future.

Rumor has it the man does not take meds...it's a pretty reliable rumor given how I found out about it...so I wonder WTF is that about?? He apparently doesn't listen to his own bullshit.

Well, as I've written, before: when a person finds the need to defend their position by throwing around brickbats and other unsubstantiated labels, then they're on pretty shaky ground. Perhaps McManamy could define "dumb anti-psychiatry," for us? Because it's obviously a bad thing to be, if only from his perspective.

In that way, we'll be able to avoid being "dumb anti-psychiatrists," as we wouldn't want to be that, now, would we? Particularly not as psychiatrists have cured all those people, such as... erm. And... err.

Matt

Peace be with you Philip

You had to have known you would become a "target" as soon as you posted the Zyprexa papers. You can tell a lot about a person by his enemies.

It really seems the difference between people like McManamy and you is that McManamy uses theoretical proofs, and you use the reality approach. Maybe theory says anti-psychotics will help some broken people, but the reality shows it cripples way more. I saw a friend the other day I hadn't seen in a while. She had transformed from a petite 100 lb woman into a swollen caricature of her former self. That's reality, and that's what McManamy's greed obscures from himself.

love eternal
tad

I did visit the blog of this man.
Demagogy is in the air!
Philip, I don't think you should care about it. Mr. Bill Lichtenstein was there and both McMan? and he were talking to each other about how wonderful Goodwin is.
He has a video at the sidebar... lol
I'm sorry but it's funny!

"Hy! I'm John MacManamy Welcome to MacManamy.com...
I go to same conferences psychiatrists go to. I read their journals. Equally important: I learn from the real experts: you, the patients and loved ones."
LOL

I believe he would love to be an M.D.!
It's not too late! He would surely be welcome to Harvard.

Defamation cases are notoriously difficult to prove in the U.S. In this case, speaking as someone who has been sued for defamation during my journalism days and someone who has a background in communications law, I don't see anything defamatory. Bitchy trash talk, yes. Defamation? Not even close.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
- Mahatma Gandhi

Puckett wrote:
"Defamation cases are notoriously difficult to prove in the U.S..."

Yeah, that's why all the celebs are coming to the UK to sue! Anyway, he hasn't really libelled you. The test is that anything written must be untrue and must lower one in the estimation of the public (not the reasonable public, mark you, just the public!). Anybody who is willing to allow accusations of anti-psychiatry bias colour their thinking of you is very likely to have interests in the other camp to support.

The long and short is that it's not worth spending time defending one's reputation against people with no recognizable arguments, anyway - McManamy would be completely out of his depth, if he weren't hiding behind his blog, writing one-sided pieces, I suspect.

Matt

After watching his video I almost feel sorry for him. He might want to delete that video if he's hoping for a date.

oh Lisa! LOL

Lilly NC wrote:
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
- Mahatma Gandhi"

Even Gandhi was fixated on winning, was he? What a curious obsession that is. Assassinated, wasn't he? I don't see any great victory in that, when one can't outlast the violence!

Matt

I could just cry crocodile tears learning that Johnny Boy got canned from Health Central as that renowned expert patient. Oh well, I guess he can get Medicare and some more meds as bait for his bald look babe magnet appeal.

At least then he'll have something to post and brag about with his latest self serving blog effort. I guess trashing his friends and ex-porking partners wasn't exactly what NAMI and like types had in mind when they hired him?

That McPimp mobile must be running pretty low on Hot Air and Gas about now. Oh the horrible sorrow that must be felt at this time across our great land from sea to shining Bipolar Child sea.

McManboobs.

His video's made me kind of feel bad for him. In one there's a shot of him banging his head against a steering wheel which cuts to him holding up a cat and then it shows a bottle of Zyprexa. Does anything else really need to be said?

Philip,

If people are attacking you or criticising you, that means that what you are saying is important, even if they don't acknowledge it, or don't want to.

Don't give up. Your readers support you.

Ghandi never actually said that although it is usually attributed to him. I once researched it for a reason I forget and it was actually first said by some Madison Avenue type in the U.S.

Schadenfreude here about his losing the HealthCentral gig, makes me a bad person but you know? :)

John McManamy's book and online productions clearly indicate that he found his personal salvation in modern psychiatry and psychopharmacology. Since his conversion, he's devoted himself with impressive energy to the study and evangelism of this arcane discipline. He's gained a measure of renown for his efforts on its behalf and he has been publically commended by some of its highest practitioners. Given his alignment and loyalties, his comments are understandable even if they are unwarranted and illogical.

Personally, I found his book utterly infuriating and gave up before half way. His interpretations of medical texts, data and research are often iffy and sometimes potentially misleading.

I look forward to the day where both John and Philip both live completely into the idea of 'love for all, hatred for none.'

Not saying that either one has hate for the other in their heart, but can't we just all... think differently and still... be... civil? i.e. get along?

Philip - you've been a major inspiration in my 'coming out' as a fellow 'creative.' Just as Spikol has.

I'd like to make this offer to you publicly:

Regarding these words of yours:

"What I am TRYING TO DO is get Americans of every stripe to think about mental illness in a different way. I am also HOPING TO GET the mentally-ill to think about their own plight in more expansive ways that they will ever hear from their doctor or therapist."

I used to be a consultant/executive coach for Gap International, Inc. Example of my work: 'coaching' Michelle Snyder back in 2006 (a Presidential appointee of HRSA within HHS) how to help 28 million underprivileged Americans versus 14 million with the identical budget.

One day with me and a partner consultant would cost $8K back when I worked for Gap International.

Basically we're $500/hr executive coaches.

I have highlighted your 'problems' in thinking and language with CAPS.

It's the same problem, I believe, you have pretty much everywhere, as far as I can see. Being upset about the smoking thing, being upset about the Google Ads thing, etc. etc.

You're brilliant, but you keep stopping yourself and it seems evident to me that you don't see that. That You are keeping you from doing what you say you are TRYING and HOPING to do.
Your fund raising points to this as well.

I started DOING what you're trying and hoping to do on Jan 24 of this year.

I made a phone call this weekend and received a financial pledge of $50K for the Give to Live Foundation. See http://wethinkdifferently.org and http://iamrocky.org It took me less than 90 seconds.

I have already received the first $5K of funds.

One phone call - $5K with a pledge of $45K more over 2 years.

You are my brother, brother.

I will coach/help you for free, if you desire.

You already have my email address.

Best,
Francesco Bellafante
Founder & Executive Director
Give to Live Foundation
http://wethinkdifferently.org
http://iamrocky.org

PS
The second video on my latest post on http://iamrocky.org includes a shout out to your genius and a poking fun at funny John. He's a sweetheart. He just doesn't get it like us, that's all.

Francesco Bellafante wrote:
"...Basically we're $500/hr executive coaches..."

LOL. Does this mean that you coach executives, or that you're a coach that executes? And are you worth it?

Incidentally, Philip's use of language doesn't actually mean anything. That's a myth. Weigh his objectives against his outcomes - don't compare your achievements with his, because that's apples and oranges.

Matt

Francesco Bellafante wrote:
"...I have already received the first $5K of funds..."

Actually, I've just had a great idea... Why don't you pay that $5k over to Philip, in return for Philip's endorsement of your skills - that way you both get what you want? I think the bargain boils down to this: Philip's endorsement, which is presumably worth something to you (unless your offer of coaching/help was entirely altruistic, that is), on the one hand; and on the other, your coaching skills, which may or may not be of interest to Philip.

Anyway, just a thought.

Matt

Looks like you weren't the only one to have taken a hit from McManamy:

http://bipolar-stanscroniclesandnarritive.blogspot.com/2009/03/john-mcpimp-is-reading-my-blog.html

I was once impartial to psychiatry, but I was just not med compliant because of some pretty irrational experiences with psychiatrist. So more or less I lurked a site, occasionally commenting, until someone read my blog, and then declared me bipolar. I wasn't as quick to accept a patient diagnosing me through a computer screen, before my doctor did.

I would be harangued for not taking my meds, although my doctor wouldn't prescribe them. I would be told I would get brain damage and was going to get worse because people decided I was bipolar before my doctors even made it official.

Then they would get on about how I am avoiding treatment and was just willfully non-complaint against doctors orders. Well my doctors never pushed I treat my "bipolar II" and they never officially diagnosed me.

I guess people are pros at diagnosing through a computer screen, more than the doctors.

I decided to leave this site because it was just a bunch of people trying to ram their opinion and their idea of taking pills down my throat. Only I am the expert on me, and any doctor who allows me to tell my history without embellishing or lying to make me appear to be "Bipolar II" is worth seeing.

People would try to assume that through a computer screen that I was running mad and manic like a bandit from my doctor, avoiding my diagnosis when my doctors were actually seeing me each week, and had thoroughly gone through my history.

When I engaged in discussion I avoided asking people to diagnose me or suggest pills. People do that on these sites and to me it's enabling and stupid. Just because a one doctor says "bipolar spectrum" and another doctor disagrees does not mean you are bipolar. It's best to be honest with one's self and decide what is right in heart in that situation. Crazy or not the patient knows thyself best.

If bipolar II is what I truly have, although I don't think I have ever been hypomanic, why are my doctors less likely to medicate me than an idiot patient on a pro psychiatry site? So do I take a pill that could compromise my health for a disease that may never occur again, if it ever truly occurred at all, because some joe blow schmuck on some site says so? I have to say no.

But tell that to a pro psychiatry site.

You can see why I dumped on the idea of ever visiting these sites again.

"Francesco writes "I am also HOPING TO GET the mentally-ill to think about their own plight in more expansive ways that they will ever hear from their doctor or therapist."

Some doctors might view that as manic behavior though...

j/k

I am interested and will look into it.

i thought your readers would like to know McMan is back to impugning you on his blog with others. Don;t know what his problem is, but judging from his last couple pieces the man is certifiable.