Written with Grok, Grammarly, and Claude. Voiceover by Zoe at Evernote.

Picture this: You're pregnant and struggling with depression. Your doctor prescribes an SSRI, assuring you it's safe. But what if that "safe" medication could fundamentally alter your developing baby's brain?

In a comprehensive Mad in America article, journalist Robert Whitaker exposes the buried science behind SSRIs and SNRIs during pregnancy—dangers that medical organizations continue to minimize or ignore entirely.

What the FDA Panel Revealed

During a crucial FDA panel meeting on July 21, 2025 (the full recording is available on YouTube), accomplished researchers and clinicians presented damning evidence that should give every expectant parent pause. The research reveals that these widely-prescribed antidepressants don't just cross the placental barrier—they actively disrupt the delicate process of fetal brain development.

Here's what the studies actually show:

Brain Development Disruption: Serotonin plays a critical role in early brain wiring. When SSRIs and SNRIs interfere with this process, the consequences can be severe and lasting.

Alarming Physical Changes: Exposed infants show altered brain volumes and heightened amygdala activity—changes that persist long after birth.

Increased Health Risks: The data points to elevated rates of preterm birth, autism spectrum disorders, and other adverse outcomes that go far beyond what untreated depression alone would cause.

Immediate Withdrawal Effects: A staggering 30% of newborns whose mothers took these medications experience neonatal abstinence syndrome, often accompanied by social and developmental deficits.

The Informed Consent Crisis

Perhaps most troubling is what Whitaker identifies as a massive failure of informed consent. Despite these significant risks, the American Psychiatric Association and mainstream media continue to downplay the dangers identified in the scientific literature (and in patient reports).

The uncomfortable truth? There are no randomized controlled trials proving that SSRIs provide clinically meaningful benefit during pregnancy. None.

Meanwhile, non-pharmaceutical approaches to managing depression during pregnancy are routinely dismissed or never discussed, leaving parents without the full picture they need to make truly informed decisions.

What This Means for Psychiatric Survivors

For those of us who have experienced the harm that can come from psychiatric medications, this revelation feels both vindicating and heartbreaking. Once again, we see a pattern of:

* Minimizing serious risks

* Overstating benefits

* Silencing dissenting voices

* Denying patients genuine informed consent

This isn't just about pregnancy—it's about a system that consistently prioritizes pharmaceutical solutions over patient safety and autonomy.

Moving Forward

Every pregnant person deserves to know the full truth about these medications. They deserve to understand both the risks of their mental health condition and the risks of the proposed treatment. Most importantly, they deserve to know about alternative approaches that don't carry these serious risks to their developing child.

The research is clear, even if the medical establishment's messaging isn't. It's time to demand better—for ourselves, for pregnant individuals, and for the next generation whose brains are still forming in the womb.

What are your thoughts on this latest revelation? Have you or someone you know experienced pressure to take psychiatric medications during pregnancy? Share your experiences in the comments below.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com

Article text written with Generative AI by Grok (xAI). Video made with invideo AI. #CommissionsEarned

In a striking development within the mental health research community, the Antidepressant Coalition for Education (ACE) has taken a bold stand against a recent systematic review and meta-analysis published in JAMA Psychiatry by Kalfas et al. (2025). Titled “Incidence and Nature of Antidepressant Discontinuation Symptoms,” the study has sparked controversy for its conclusions that antidepressant withdrawal symptoms are generally mild and brief, based largely on short-term studies. On July 14, 2025, ACE submitted a formal correction request (Stewart et al., 2025a) to the editors of JAMA Psychiatry and an open letter (Stewart et al., 2025b) to the authors and affiliated institutions, including Imperial College London and King’s College London. This blog post explores the core arguments of ACE’s actions, the scientific and ethical implications, and the broader context of antidepressant withdrawal research.

The Core of ACE’s Correction Request

ACE’s formal correction request challenges the review’s reliance on 11 studies, 10 of which involved participants using antidepressants for only 8 to 12 weeks, with one extending to 26 weeks. This timeframe starkly contrasts with real-world data indicating that approximately 24 million Americans have used antidepressants for over two years (Ward et al., 2025). ACE argues that the review’s findings—suggesting withdrawal symptoms are not significant—cannot be extrapolated to long-term users, a population at higher risk for severe and protracted withdrawal symptoms, as supported by emerging anecdotal and research evidence.

The coalition contends that the study’s limitations are inadequately highlighted, buried in supplementary tables rather than integrated into the title, abstract, results, or discussion sections. This omission, they assert, risks misleading clinicians and policymakers, potentially leading to unsafe tapering practices and misdiagnosis of withdrawal symptoms as relapse. ACE’s request includes four specific demands: (1) a clear statement in the article clarifying that findings apply only to short-term users, (2) correction of public communications, (3) acknowledgment of higher withdrawal risks for long-term users, and (4) a disclaimer against using the findings to guide long-term user care or justify changes to existing clinical recommendations.

The Open Letter: Amplifying Patient Voices

Complementing the correction request, ACE’s open letter amplifies the lived experiences of hundreds of thousands of individuals affected by antidepressant withdrawal. The letter includes harrowing testimonials from patients like Shane O. from Minnesota, who lost his job and family time due to 18 months of severe symptoms, and Claire A.J. from the UK, who endured five years of debilitating withdrawal after a 2.5-year taper. These accounts describe symptoms such as akathisia, brain zaps, suicidal ideation, and chronic pain—far from the “mild and transient” characterization in the JAMA Psychiatry review.

ACE accuses the authors and institutions of scientific dishonesty, arguing that the review’s exclusion of long-term data and coordinated press releases minimize a looming public health crisis. They call for the authors to revise the article to reflect the limitations of short-term studies and for institutions to amend promotional content. This plea is rooted in a desire to protect patients, many of whom have been abandoned by a medical system unprepared to address withdrawal severity.

Broader Context and Supporting Evidence

The ACE initiative aligns with growing concerns about antidepressant withdrawal, as highlighted by recent analyses. The Canary (2025) critiques the JAMA Psychiatry review, noting its failure to address the higher incidence of discontinuation symptoms reported in The Lancet Psychiatry’s meta-analysis, even when accounting for placebo effects. Similarly, Simon Opher, British Labour MP and GP (general practitioner doctor), writing in The London Standard, emphasizes the lack of long-term data, pointing to patient reports of persistent symptoms—issues underexplored in Kalfas et al.’s work. These critiques underscore ACE’s argument that the review’s conclusions are not only incomplete but harmful.

Historically, research into antidepressant withdrawal has been underfunded. This gap has left clinicians reliant on short-term trial data, a point ACE leverages to demand more representative research.

Implications and Next Steps

ACE’s actions signal a pivotal moment in the antidepressant withdrawal debate, bridging patient advocacy with scientific scrutiny. If successful, the correction could help reshape clinical guidelines, ensuring informed consent and safer tapering protocols. However, resistance from academic institutions and journals may persist, given the entrenched narratives around antidepressant safety.

For now, ACE’s commitment to “continue to speak out” reflects a grassroots movement gaining momentum. As the public and scientific community await JAMA Psychiatry’s response, this controversy invites reflection on how research serves—or fails—those it aims to help. The voices of patients, long sidelined, are now demanding a seat at the table.

References

HG. (2025, July 13). Big pharma-funded psychiatrists ‘cosplaying science’ in misleading antidepressant withdrawal study. The Canary. https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-analysis/2025/07/13/antidepressant-withdrawal-study/

Kalfas, M., Tsapekos, D., Butler, M., et al. (2025). Incidence and nature of antidepressant discontinuation symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.1362

Opher, S. (2025, July 15). Don’t believe the lies - antidepressant withdrawal is a very real crisis. The London Standard. https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/antidepressants-withdrawals-ssris-depression-mood-disorder-b1238258.html

Stewart, M., Davis, C., Framer, A., Guy, A., Lewis, S., Lamberson, N., Demers, D., & King, A. (2025a). [Correction request to JAMA Psychiatry]. Antidepressant Coalition for Education. https://antidepressantinfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/JAMA_CorrectionRequest_ACE.pdf

Stewart, M., Davis, C., Framer, A., Guy, A., Lewis, S., Lamberson, N., Demers, D., King, A, & Witczak, K. (2025b). Open Letter to Kalfas et al. and Affiliated Institutions. Antidepressant Coalition for Education. https://www.antidepressantinfo.org/open-letter

Ward, W., Haslam, A., & Prasad, V. (2025). Antidepressant trial duration versus duration of real-world use: A systematic analysis. The American Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2025.04.037

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com

Email template written with Grok (xAI). Video made with invideo AI. #CommissionsEarned

MindFreedom has issued a Renewed Call to Action in its Shield Alert for Jake Howeth, which I summarized in a previous article and video here.

As reported in the June 26 update:

Jake Howeth is free, but the fight for his autonomy continues. While Jake has been released from psychiatric incarceration, he still faces the threat of forced psychiatric injections,

His next scheduled injection [is] on June 30, 2025.

We need your urgent help to advocate for Jake’s right to make decisions regarding his treatment.

Below is an email template that people can use to email Dr. Erick Turner at Cascadia Garlington Health Center. Or call Dr. Turner at (503) 283-3763.

#

Email To: [email protected]

Subject: 🚨 Urgent: Support Jake Howeth's Right to Autonomy and Safe Withdrawal from Forced Injections 🛡️💉

Dear Dr. Turner,

I am writing to express my deep concern for Jake Howeth’s well-being and to advocate for his right to informed consent regarding his medical treatment. I understand that Jake is currently facing forced monthly psychiatric injections, despite not being under a court order for this treatment. I respectfully urge you to assist Jake in safely withdrawing from these injections and to support a medically supervised, gradual withdrawal plan to minimize potential adverse effects.

Jake’s autonomy and capacity to make his own decisions should be respected and re-evaluated. I believe he deserves the opportunity to explore non-drug alternatives and therapeutic approaches, such as peer support and personal choice-based recovery methods, that prioritize his well-being and self-determination.

Please consider the following actions:

* Support Jake in developing a slow, medically supervised taper from his current medication.

* Explore non-drug therapeutic options that align with Jake’s preferences and recovery goals.

* Reassess Jake’s capacity to make his own treatment decisions, ensuring his voice is heard.

Your role at Cascadia Garlington Health Center is critical in ensuring Jake’s rights are upheld. I kindly ask you to take these concerns seriously and work toward a healthcare approach that prioritizes Jake’s autonomy and well-being.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

[Your Full Name]

[Your Position or Background][Your Contact Information, if desired]

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com

Note: This short story is an AI-generated retelling of the parable known as “The old man lost his horse,” from the ancient Chinese text the Huainanzi. I first came across the story when it was read to me in a Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) program. The story helps to cultivate skills in mindfulness and critical thinking.

#

In a wind-swept hamlet among the rolling green hills of Han‐era China lived an old woodcutter named Sāi Wēng. His tunic was threadbare, his hands knobby and scarred, and his crooked hut leaned into every breeze. Yet despite his poverty, the villagers’ eyes burned with envy—Sāi Wēng owned a snow‐white stallion whose coat shone like frost at dawn. Muscles rippled beneath its ivory flanks, its proud neck arched with noble grace, and its dark eyes held a calm, knowing light. Even the king, draped in velvet and jewels, coveted so rare a creature. Rich merchants and titled nobles pressed gold and gifts into the woodcutter’s hands, begging to purchase the steed, but he always refused. “He is no mere beast,” he said, voice soft as moss, “but a friend of my spirit. How can one sell a friend?”

One mist‐cloaked morning, the stable stood empty: the white horse had vanished. By midday the whole village had gathered in Sāi Wēng’s yard, voices crackling with accusation.

“Fool!” they jeered. “We told you someone would steal your treasure. You could have sold him for more gold than you’ll ever see. Look now—robbed and ruined!”

The old man stood beneath a gnarled oak, sunlight flickering across his weathered face. “All I know,” he said quietly, “is that my horse is gone. Whether this is misfortune or blessing, who can say? I do not judge.”

The villagers snorted derision. “It’s misfortune, of course,” they declared.

Sāi Wēng lowered his eyes. “Perhaps,” he murmured. “But we see only an empty stall. Time alone will reveal the whole story.”

Fifteen days later, at dusk, thunderous hoofbeats shook the lane. The white stallion returned, sleek and unshorn, at his side a dozen wild fillies and colts, their coats as dark as midnight.

The villagers poured into the yard, eyes wide with wonder—and regret. “Old man, forgive us,” they cried. “Your loss has returned a hundredfold!”

Sāi Wēng stroked the gray muzzle of his friend and said simply, “My horse is back, with twelve beside him. But blessing or curse—who can know? This remains but one fragment of the tale.”

Their laughter turned to eager planning as the old man’s only son, a hopeful youth, set to breaking in the new herd. On the third dawn, a fiery colt reared and sent him crashing onto the stones. Bones snapped beneath him.

Villagers rushed to the hut, wailing, “See now! Your great herd was a curse—they have robbed your son of his legs!”

Sāi Wēng knelt beside the youth, brushing damp hair from his forehead. “All I know,” he whispered to the crowd, “is that my son’s legs are broken. Whether this is tragedy or boon—only time will tell.”

Weeks passed, and the kingdom’s drums rolled through the valley: war had erupted beyond the border, and every able‐bodied youth was conscripted. Mothers wept as iron‐clad officers read names from their lists—every boy in the village marched off to possible death, except Sāi Wēng’s son, still bound by splintered bones. Once more the villagers flocked to the hut, grief and envy mingling in their voices. “Your curse has turned to blessing!” they cried.

The old man gazed past them toward the silent hills. “Your sons have gone to war, mine remain at home,” he said softly. “But whether this spares them or condemns them—who can know? Only the gods hold the whole truth.”

And with that, the villagers fell silent, remembering at last that life unfolds in fragments too many for any mortal mind to judge.

END

#

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com

🛡️ Shield alert for Jake Howeth

MindFreedom International (MFI) recently put out a Shield alert for Jake Howeth, a young man with mental health issues in Portland, Oregon. Jake voluntarily admitted himself to inpatient psychiatric facilities and is now being coerced to undergo involuntary injections of the antipsychotic risperidone (Risperdal) in order to be discharged from Multnomah Crisis and Treatment Center (CATC).

MFI reports that Jake hasn’t committed any crime, isn’t violent, isn’t a danger to himself or others, and had been living peaceably in his community for years before this. With his next injection scheduled for June 5th, MFI urgently requests that people contact Jake’s outpatient psychiatrist Erick Turner and inpatient psychiatrist Lyle Jobe. MFI requests that people ask for Jake’s release to a less restrictive setting, to stop the forced injections, and to allow Jake a voluntary treatment plan (not AOT).

Below is a copy of an email message I sent to doctors Turner and Jobe.

Subject: Urgent Request to Reconsider Forced Injections for Jake Howeth at Multnomah CATC

CC: local reporters, MindFreedom, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law

Dear Drs. Erick Turner and Lyle Jobe:

I am writing to express deep concern regarding the planned forced administration of psychiatric medications to Jake Howeth at Multnomah CATC, as highlighted by MindFreedom’s recent alert [1]. I respectfully urge you to reconsider this approach, prioritizing Jake’s autonomy, dignity, and well-being by exploring voluntary, evidence-based alternatives that align with trauma-informed care and civil rights principles.

Forced psychiatric interventions, such as involuntary injections, lack robust evidence of superior efficacy compared to voluntary, community-based treatments. Research indicates that involuntary commitment can increase suicide risk post-discharge [2] and deter individuals, particularly youth, from disclosing mental health concerns [3]. These interventions may also exacerbate trauma, especially for individuals like Jake, who may have experienced prior coercion or institutional harm. The Center for Court Innovation emphasizes that therapeutic outcomes depend more on empathetic engagement, goal consensus, and alliance than on coercive measures like legal leverage [4].

Instead of forced injections, I urge you to consider voluntary, community-based services that have proven effective in reducing hospitalization and incarceration while promoting recovery. Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) has been shown to significantly reduce jail days and new convictions in a forensic ACT study [5]. Supported housing stabilizes individuals, reducing incarceration rates by up to 50% in some studies [6]. Peer support services, delivered by individuals with lived experience, enhance care for individuals struggling with severe mental and substance use disorders, diverting 24% of participants from hospitalization and 37% from jail in one program [7]. These approaches respect individual autonomy and align with the Supreme Court’s Olmstead v. L.C. decision, which deems unnecessary institutionalization discriminatory under the Americans with Disabilities Act [8].

Moreover, forced interventions disproportionately harm marginalized communities, including Black and Brown individuals, who face overrepresentation in coercive mental health settings [9]. While Jake’s demographic details are not specified, the broader pattern underscores the need for equitable, non-coercive care. Programs like CAHOOTS in Eugene demonstrate that unarmed mental health teams, including peers, can de-escalate crises without law enforcement, saving millions in public safety costs [10].

I respectfully request that you halt plans for forced injections and engage Jake in a collaborative treatment plan, emphasizing voluntary services, peer support, and trauma-informed care. Such an approach not only respects Jake’s rights but also aligns with evidence showing better long-term outcomes through empathy and alliance [4]. Please feel free to contact MindFreedom to discuss this further or to connect with resources on evidence-based alternatives.

Thank you for your attention to this critical matter.

Sincerely,

Chris

Christopher James Dubey

Newington, CT

psychiatric survivor, writer, activist, independent scholar

Written with AI assistance by Grok.

References

1. Smith S. Protect Jake Howeth from Forced Injections at CATC in Portland Oregon! [Internet]. MindFreedom International (MFI). 2025 [cited 2025 May 28]. Available from: https://mindfreedom.org/front-page/protect-jake-howeth-from-forced-injections-at-catc-in-portland-oregon/

2. Jordan JT, McNiel DE. Perceived Coercion During Admission Into Psychiatric Hospitalization Increases Risk of Suicide Attempts After Discharge. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2020 Feb 4;50(1):180–8. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/sltb.12560

3. Jones N, Gius BK, Shields M, Collings S, Rosen C, Munson M. Investigating the impact of involuntary psychiatric hospitalization on youth and young adult trust and help-seeking in pathways to care. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2021 Nov 1;56(11):2017–27. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00127-021-02048-2

4. Adler J, Barrett J, Rempel M. The Myth of Legal Leverage? Toward a Relational Framework for Court-Based Treatment [Internet]. Center for Court Innovation; 2020 Apr p. 3. (Mental Health Issues & the New York State Courts 2020: Part 1: Bail Reform; Part 2: Neurodevelopmental Disorders). Available from: https://www.innovatingjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/report_the_myth_of_legal_leverage_04232020.pdf

5. Lamberti JS, Weisman RL, Cerulli C, Williams GC, Jacobowitz DB, Mueser KT, et al. A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Rochester Forensic Assertive Community Treatment Model. Psychiatr Serv. 2017 Oct;68(10):1016–24. Available from: https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ps.201600329

6. Fairmount Ventures, Inc. Evaluation of Pathways to Housing PA [Internet]. Philadelphia, PA; 2011 Jan p. 47. Available from: https://pathwaystohousingpa.org/sites/default/files/attachments/2022-04/Fairmount%20Ventures%20evaluation%202011.pdf

7. National Association of Counties. Supporting people with mental illnesses in the community [Internet]. Louisville/Jefferson County Metro, KY; 2018 p. 2. Available from: https://www.naco.org/sites/default/files/documents/SAMHSA%20Case%20Study%20Louisville-Jefferson%20Final.pdf

8. Olmstead v. L. C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999) [Internet]. 1999 [cited 2025 May 29]. Available from: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep527/usrep527581/usrep527581.pdf

9. Legal Defense Fund, Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law. Advancing An Alternative to Police: Community-Based Services for Black People with Mental Illness [Internet]. 2022 Jul p. 27. Available from: https://d252ac.a2cdn1.secureserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2022.07.06-LDF-Bazelon-Brief-re-Alternative-to-Policing-Black-People-with-Mental-Illness.pdf

10. Andrew S. This town of 170,000 replaced some cops with medics and mental health workers. It’s worked for over 30 years [Internet]. CNN. 2020 [cited 2025 May 29]. Available from: https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/05/us/cahoots-replace-police-mental-health-trnd

Affiliate links

invideo AI: Make your own videos with AI

vidIQ: Boost your YouTube videos

Paperpal: AI academic writing tool. Get 20% off all plans with code PAP20

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com

Article text written with Generative AI by Grok (xAI). Video made with invideo AI.

Affiliate links

invideo AI: Make your own videos with AI

vidIQ: Boost your YouTube videos

Paperpal: AI academic writing tool. Get 20% off all plans with code PAP20

Transcript:

The “Make Our Children Healthy Again Assessment,” aka The MAHA Report, released on May 22 by the Presidential Commission to Make America Healthy Again (MAHA), delivers a sobering analysis of the childhood chronic disease crisis in the United States. With over 40% of American children suffering from at least one chronic condition, such as obesity, diabetes, or mental health disorders, the report identifies four primary drivers: poor diet, environmental chemical exposure, lack of physical activity coupled with chronic psychosocial stress, and the overmedicalization of children (p. 9). This blog post delves into Section 4, "The Overmedicalization of Our Kids," and the pervasive influence of corporate capture, while also summarizing the report’s actionable "Next Steps" to combat this crisis.

Section 4 paints a stark picture of overmedicalization, highlighting how American children are increasingly subjected to excessive medical interventions, often driven by profit rather than necessity. The report notes a staggering 600% increase in type 2 diabetes among youth since the 1980s, with over 350,000 children now diagnosed (p. 11). This trend coincides with a significant expansion of the childhood vaccine schedule, raising concerns about potential links to chronic diseases—concerns that remain understudied due to systemic barriers (pp. 63-65). The report also critiques the overprescription of medications, such as antipsychotics and stimulants, noting a 40-fold increase in ADHD and bipolar disorder diagnoses between 1994 and 2003, often driven by loosened diagnostic criteria influenced by industry ties (p. 70). These practices are exacerbated by "corporate capture," where pharmaceutical companies dominate medical systems, from research to clinical practice. For instance, since 1999, 97% of the most frequently cited clinical trials have been industry-funded, often skewing results to favor corporate products while downplaying risks (p. 67). This influence extends to regulatory bodies like the FDA, with 70% of FDA medical examiners eventually working for the pharmaceutical industry, creating significant conflicts of interest (p. 69). The report also exposes how media, fueled by $5 billion in drug advertising in 2023, amplifies these issues by promoting vague symptom lists for conditions like ADHD, leading to inappropriate parental requests for medications (p. 71).

The final section, "Next Steps - Supporting Gold-Standard Scientific Research and Developing a Comprehensive Strategy," offers a roadmap to address these systemic failures. The MAHA Commission proposes ten research initiatives, including an NIH-led effort to tackle the replication crisis in medical research, ensuring greater reliability in scientific findings. It also calls for AI-powered surveillance to analyze federal health and nutrition datasets, enabling early detection of harmful trends in childhood chronic diseases (p. 72). Additionally, the report advocates for long-term nutrition trials comparing whole-food, reduced carb, and low-ultra-processed-food diets to assess their impact on obesity and insulin resistance. To reform regulatory oversight, it suggests independent studies on self-affirmed GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) food ingredients, prioritizing children’s health. The Commission is already working on a "Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy," due in August 2025, and invites collaboration from academia and the private sector to prioritize evidence-based solutions over corporate profits.

This report is a clarion call for transparency and action, urging a shift toward prevention and systemic reform to safeguard the health of future generations.

In a post on social media platform X, Laura Delano called the report “revolutionary.” Delano is Founder of the Inner Compass Initiative and author of a recent memoir about her journey through and away from harmful psychiatric treatment. She proclaimed that “history was made today,” further stating, “So many doors of possibility are now opened for us to help struggling American children reclaim themselves from medicalization and pharmaceuticalization. LET'S GO.”

References

The Presidential Commission to Make America Healthy Again (MAHA). (2025). Make Our Children Healthy Again Assessment. https://www.whitehouse.gov/maha/

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com

Article text written with Generative AI by Grok (xAI) and Claude (Anthropic). Video made with invideo AI.

Affiliate links

invideo AI: Make your own videos with AI

vidIQ: Boost your YouTube videos

Paperpal: AI academic writing tool. Get 20% off all plans with code PAP20

Content note: Mentions suicide.

The Benzodiazepine Information Coalition (BIC) has raised the alarm about draft clinical deprescribing guidelines for benzodiazepines (BZDs) and other classes of prescription drugs, written by the University of Western Australia’s Centre for Health and Ageing and Centre for Optimisation of Medicines. The guideline proposes a rapid BZD tapering rate of 25% to 50% every 1–4 weeks, which BIC warns is dangerously fast, risking severe withdrawal, especially for older adults. The same rate is suggested for antidepressants, antipsychotics, hypnotics, and sedatives. The guideline ignores physical dependence, encourages forced discontinuation without full informed consent, and lacks discussion of long-term risks. Here’s why this matters and how you can help by May 30.

The Evidence Against Rapid Tapering

BIC’s concerns are grounded in research. As noted on their website, BZD withdrawal symptoms can persist for months or years in some people, with the FDA noting a median duration of 9.5 months. In 2020, the FDA finally announced a new BZD boxed warning describing risks of abuse, addiction, physical dependence, and withdrawal reactions, after years of denying or ignoring these risks. The Maudsley Deprescribing Guidelines, available on Amazon, recommend slow 5–10% reductions every 2–4 weeks. The American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM)’s Joint Clinical Practice Guideline on Benzodiazepine Tapering warns that BZD use increases risks like falls, motor vehicle accidents, cognitive impairment, delirium, overdose, and death, particularly when BZDs are used in combination with CNS depressants such as alcohol or opioids (pp. 7, 12–13).

Patients unable to tolerate rapid tapering are only identified after harm occurs, making the University of Western Australia’s drafted approach especially risky. BIC accurately refers to the draft’s 25–50% rate as oversized and dangerous.

Why Older Adults Are at Risk

Older adults, often long-term BZD users, face higher risks of adverse events. They’re more prone to falls and cognitive issues, as ASAM notes in its clinical practice guideline (pp. 13, 82). Forced discontinuation without full informed consent increases risks of severe withdrawal and suicide.

Take Action by May 30

Your feedback can protect vulnerable patients by aligning guidelines with the evidence about withdrawal effects.

How to Help

* Use BIC’s resources here.

* Submit feedback via the survey.

* Share this post to amplify the call.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com

Written with Generative AI by Grok (xAI), invideo, and Claude (Anthropic). Video/audio generated by invideo AI.

Affiliate links

invideo AI: Make your own videos with AI

vidIQ: Boost your YouTube videos

Paperpal: AI academic writing tool. Get 20% off all plans with code PAP20

A recent article by Jon Jacobsen on Mad In America details a two-year community-led research effort into Post-SSRI Sexual Dysfunction, or PSSD. This is a really debilitating condition that involves sexual, emotional, and cognitive impairments that can persist long after someone stops using antidepressants. The research, which was conducted with more than 100 PSSD patients, suggests that neuroimmune processes might actually play a key role here. Out of 56 tested patients , 70% showed small fiber neuropathy and an incredible 97% tested positive for autoantibodies that are linked to autonomic dysfunction. Jacobsen also shares his own nearly 20-year struggle with PSSD, pointing out symptoms like anhedonia and emotional blunting, and he calls for more research into immune-mediated mechanisms to validate and treat this condition, which is often-dismissed. This work, which is supported by the Iatrogenic Neuroimmune Disease Association, aims to spark more scientific inquiry and raise awareness.

Reference

Jacobsen, J. (2025, May 10). Two decades of PSSD: A life stolen by antidepressants. Mad In America. https://www.madinamerica.com/2025/05/two-decades-of-pssd-a-life-stolen-by-antidepressants/)

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com

This is an AI voiceover reading of my first Substack blog article. Made with invideo AI.

Affiliate links

invideo AI: Make your own videos with AI

vidIQ: Boost your YouTube videos

Paperpal: AI academic writing tool. Get 20% off all plans with code PAP20

Content note: Discusses suicide attempts, forced psychiatric treatment

I'm a former psychiatric patient sharing my journey through harmful treatments, advocacy work, and future projects to reform mental healthcare and reduce medical harm.

If you are in the USA and in mental health crisis or just seeking emotional support by phone or text, and you don’t wish to take the risks of calling 988, check out this list of noncoercive Support Lines Worth Knowing About, courtesy of the Wildflower Alliance.

#PsychiatricSurvivor #PsychiatricSurvivors #MadPride #antipsychiatry #CriticalPsychiatry #PrescribedHarm #IatrogenicHarm

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chrisjamesdubey.substack.com