Can you answer my question, however, as to the percentages of what you meant by when you said:
It’s true for SOME PATIENTS. Not all. Not NEARLY all.
As I pointed out, the writer argued that: Before we go on, let's state the obvious: There are genuine, organic brain diseases that may benefit from drug therapy – but these are relatively rare. And there are also instances where an individual is so psychotic as to pose a direct danger to him/herself and others, where sedation might be appropriate. But what I'm writing about here is the overwhelming majority of cases where psychiatric drugs are unwisely relied on to fix Americans' mental-emotional-spiritual problems.
Can you refute this? I am not talking about your specific case.
Refute what? It's his premise, let him offer proof first.
It's not true simply because he says so.
Are you connected in any way to Scientology? Is the author?