We don't need to worry about my 'religious' beliefs with you here as the defender of scientific truth. Can I ask you, have you experienced schizophrenia as you seem to present yourself as a scientific authority on the matter and are zealous to perpetuate the failed status quo? Or would you argue that the current peer reviewed scientific paradigm has been a success with $billions spent on the science. A pot of 100 niacin capsules costs less than $10.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Whether I have or not is not really any of your business and it is frankly irrelevant to the argument you are putting forth.
Experiencing schizophrenia has nothing to do with scientific evidence.
I see that you are not interested in any kind of debate but are only looking for confirmation of what you already believe.
To suggest that one must experience an illness in order to make a reasoned or rational discussion of it based on the evidence of the literature is patently ridiculous.
I wonder if you asked the same question of the person who wrote that book?