Feeling Depressed?
Another aspect of predictive programming
Poor bear… He is feeling sad… Is he depressed?
In an experiment taught even in introductory college psych courses, five-year-olds were carefully selected by making sure there had never been a fire in their homes, and asked the following question once a week:
“Did you have fire in your home?”
At first, all of them said no, but after a few weeks, they started saying yes. By the sixth week, most of them said yes, and some of them even described how dad ran back into the burning house and saved the cat.
Every lawyer knows that eye-witness accounts are flimsy at best. Already Plato observed the veiled nature of perception, although he didn’t elaborate further to delve into the domain of cognitive processing.
In plain English, people overwhelmingly focus on what they consider important at the time of an event. They tend to ignore parts that do not affect them. Later, they retain mostly only what they deem worth remembering. If they were involved in the event, they also tend to re-formulate the memory until they appear to play a positive role in it.
I have worked with MDs for several years, so I am extremely familiar with their routine, which strikes the surface like a poorly-written car repair manual. One of the intake questions all patients are asked is, whether they feel depressed.
Considering the hypochondriac nature of humans (men are taking the lead in this trend), in a way that resembles the way people “recognize” themselves in astrological projections, even the tiniest symptoms can lead to a self-diagnosis with devastating effects.
It is part of the human condition not to feel all daisies and roses all the time, especially after the loss of a beloved one or losing a job and being unable to pay the rent or provide for the family. However, even mourning can be now diagnosed as a psychiatric “disorder” that is rewarded with toxic chemicals called “medications” that can actually turn people truly depressed, suicidal, or even homicidal. Not-so-surprisingly, “medical” intake questions also include whether the patient has any suicidal or homicidal ideations.
Is it possible that, like the five-year-olds, people, if asked enough times, develop the conviction that they suffer from depression or worse?
Suicide is an extremely nasty topic, because all it needs is a little encouragement. I remember an anecdote about rhetors on the Forum in ancient Rome, who started propagating suicide, “Go into your warm pool, cut up your wrists, and fall into slumber without pain; you will wake up in Elysium, the place of eternal bliss!” People started committing suicide by the thousands. It took an imperial decree to forbid such speeches until the suicides stopped.
Opportunity and analogy can also assist. A few decades ago, in a nursing home, elderly people started committing suicide at a rate of at least one a week by hanging themselves on a hook in the basement. The director hired a psychologist who, after a few minutes of thinking, said, “Take out the hook.” They did. The suicides stopped.
The number of suicides has increased during the plandemic1, which can be attributed to people losing their livelihoods, their businesses, their families (due to the divide between the sane and the Covidians), the isolation of the elderly, and being sequestered. As for homicide, among “mass shooters,” a history of being on psych meds is just about omnipresent (although I suspect that some graphene/5G remote control experiments were also involved).
Considering the amount of false “cancer diagnoses” by “doctors,” it is somewhat surprising how easy assisted suicide is becoming to achieve. In Canada, apparently, you can get it done now even by saying you are hard of hearing and want to die. It happened a few months ago to an otherwise healthy man (about 60 years old), whose relatives objected to the procedure in vain. Bad relatives, of course, can use some maneuvering and get an elderly person killed only for the inheritance…
This Evil Santa’s Little Helpers are not only “medical” staff; there are plenty of toxins out there that also elevate the likelihood of depression, suicide, or homicide. Here are a few:
electronic pollution (cell phones, cell towers, cordless phone chargers, microwave cookers, Wi-Fi, EMF/ELF, HAARP, portable military radars, and “smart meters,” and probably even the GPS in the car;
thyroid malfunction (most commonly caused by fluoride and by iodine imbalance);
fluoride and residues of psychiatric meds and contraceptives in drinking water;
metabolism upset by any or most of the following: artificial sweeteners, pesticides, antibiotics (as meds or in food), GMO in food/drinks, non-stick utensils, microwave and induction cookers, processed food, preservatives, additives, flame retardants (in furniture, carpets, clothing etc.), microplastics (from food packaging, shopping bags, bottled water, cosmetic products, wood varnishes, and only Goodness knows what else, but please, contribute to the list in the comment section.
It’s all part of the democidal psyop:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/the-monsters-do-not-want-to-kill
Remember (you may not) when they were talking up the benefits of the statin drugs so much there was actually talk of researching a project to consider the addition of it to the community drinking water! Now I had been in pharmacy for long enough to know they were full of crackpot ideas for a buck and I suggested "Why not Valium, since everybody is so frantic anymore, and it is bound to get worse." How prophetic I was on that one!
Good morning Ray,
Catherine Austin Fitts has recently been warning of the weaponization of mental health - it doesn’t take much it seems to institutionalize a perfectly sane person.
From the Solari website This comment from a gal :
You’ve touched on something I’ve been dealing with lately, which is the impossibility of removing embedded but inaccurate diagnoses.
I noticed, on a computer screen in a doctor’s office, that I had a diagnosis of “BRCA Gene” (breast cancer gene). I asked where that diagnosis came from and they couldn’t say.
I called the health information department of my local health system and asked, “who gave me that diagnosis and when?” The rep either couldn’t or wouldn’t say. Shouldn’t this be something I’d know about, if I have such a gene? The rep said I must’ve had genetics testing at some point and I should call the genetics department. I called, and no, I never had any genetics testing. So, it’s a phony diagnosis, and I want it removed. The health information people told me they can’t remove it. Why not? Who is controlling this information so that you can’t remove it. The rep wouldn’t say.
I know from experience that at some point some doctor’s office used that BRCA diagnosis in a claim for reimbursement, and to remove the diagnosis would be an admission of lying in their billing a claim for reimbursement. I wanted to know what doctor did this, and so I started digging.
Back in 2010, I was briefly uninsured. Somehow, my local health system knew this and got word to me that they were offering free mammograms to uninsured people like me. At that time, I still believed that mammograms were a good thing and I was pretty naïve still. I accepted the free mammogram and of course they “saw something”. I let them do a biopsy, which was negative but they told me I had stage 0 breast cancer (what the hell?), that I was at risk for full blown breast cancer, and they offered me free double mastectomy with free new fake breasts and told me I should now take this drug, Tamoxifen, because of my risk, which would also be free. There was a lot of breast cancer grant money flowing at the time and seems they planned to bill all of my “free” surgery and drugs to some grant, probably funded with pink ribbon sales. It was they who gave me the BRCA diagnosis and they did so based on me saying my mother’s great aunt might have had breast cancer in like 1930. That was enough, at the time, for the BRCA diagnosis which would’ve unlocked their access to all the pink ribbon grant money available to them, had I agreed to the surgery and drugs, which I did not agree to. Why would I do all this when I don’t have breast cancer? All the “free” care I’d had to date, including the biopsy, was no longer free once I said “no” to the Tamoxifen, and they billed me $1000’s that I had to pay out of pocket for this manipulation and scare tactics. I understood later, when I was less naïve, that it was only free if I’d taken the Tamoxifen. I never got another mammogram again, and so far am completely healthy. The doctor, like some sort of huckster snake oil salesman, is long gone and I can’t find her to confront her about removing that phony diagnosis. So, I’m stuck with it because it’s out there with the big data now, and embedded in so many systems, most of whom protect my “privacy” from me by refusing to tell me anything about my own data, so that I’ll never get to fighting all of it successfully.
My point in this very long story is that Catherine is right. Whereas 10 years ago the money was in the breast cancer diagnosis, its looking like today the money is in the mental health diagnosis and, in my experience, once you’ve been manipulated into giving the information for a diagnosis that they need to unlock the money, there’s no getting rid of that diagnosis (as happened to me when I gave up information that a great great aunt might’ve maybe had breast cancer in 1930). Doctors are financially incentivized and required to do these current mental health screenings, with patient responses and diagnoses pinging around who knows where out there. Because I’ve told such a long story already, I’ll save this part of the story, for another time, of a doctor recently using my admission of grief over the death of parent to level weird diagnoses to jack up my bill from a level 2 E&M to a level 5 E&M, bringing in a much higher reimbursement payment for himself plus demand a massive out of pocket payment from me, with my high deductible plan. If I didn’t have a high deductible plan, I’d have never known it happened. I’m fighting this, the costs and the phony diagnoses, through the PA attorney general at present, and will update.