Pharmacology Lies

Introduction

    Recently, I've become aware that Christians have been spreading lies about pharmacology and drugs in general.  Given how shallow many of these arguments are, I felt compelled to write a response.
    The problem is, as Christians, we should not teach people something the Bible doesn't support.  To do so is to risk being a false teacher, and the Bible has many stern warnings against this (Ezekiel 13:9; 2 Timothy 4:3-4; 2 Peter 3:15-17; 1 John 4:1; Matthew 7:15-20; 1 Peter 2).  The one who would teach anyone that God says something (or doesn't say something) should thoroughly research everything they say, to prevent falsehood.  And the believer who hears what is said should research to ensure it is the truth.

Reliance Upon Holistic Medicine

    I think one of the most blatant points of hypocrisy is when I see pastors and Christians who say they are against phamacology visiting holistic practitioners.  One such Christian described how one of these practitioners helped a family member by unblocking their "chi".  That's a belief system within Chinese folk religions.  Yet they insist all the while that using pharmaceuticals is Satan's work but visiting someone who teaches a pagan religion isn't.
    I'm not against holistic medicine.  It just has limits.  Holistic medicine cannot fix everything.  It can't fix bipolar, but it can help.  It can't sedate you enough for major surgery, but it can help you heal.  I'm against teaching that somehow holistic medicine is ok with God but pharmaceuticals aren't.

The Lost Oils of the Bible

    This one pertains to CBD oil.  While I am not against the use of CBD oil, there are no scriptures describing "lost oils."  But those who believe this will continue to claim "there is a scripture" about it but never find it for you.

Burden of Proof

    Often, those who espouse anti-pharmaceutical claims state it's the listener's job, not theirs, to find this in scripture.  That's not how life works, but this is their subtle way of shifting the burden of proof to their audience, in an attempt to duck responsibility.  In fact, the Bible instructs us to ask for proof for any prophet (Deuteronomy 13; 18:22).  If no proof comes, they're a false prophet.  It also instructs us that if they say something the Bible doesn't back up, like using a demonic sign to "prove" that it's ok to do something expressly forbidden in scripture, we're not to go along with them.

Greek "Pharmakia" Means Drugs

    Actually, no, almost every Bible translator has translated this as "witchcraft" in the Bible.
    Now to be fair, sure, plant-based drugs (almost exclusively hallucinogens) were often used in ancient witchcraft and other pagan spiritual belief systems.  But it was to contact the gods or spirits, not to relieve pain or cure cancer.  As such, the material (plant product versus refined chemicals) and the reason (contacting the gods versus curing or treating physical ailments) are completely different.
    In fact, it's noteworthy that there are almost no drugs within the hallucinogen category that are used in modern medicine.  The only one even being considered is cannabis (specifically, though, CBD, the component with medicinal value, not THC, the component that gets you high).
    So saying that drugs were used in ancient witchcraft is only partially true.  Comparing it to modern pharmacology is like saying both a tricycle and a Ford F-150 are both vehicles.  But would you say "that guy got ran over by a vehicle" if you were referring to a tricycle?  Probably not.

God is the Only Healer

    Those who espouse this belief system often say "but God is the only healer."  To a point, this is true, as no one can stop God's hand. If He decides that you will not be healed for some reason, no doctor can help you.
    However, as they're saying this, they're using CBD oil.  This only underlines their hypocrisy, as they're using something not in the Bible to heal or treat something, even though they claimed only God can heal.
    It also begs the question: why would God grant a miracle for something you can simply do yourself?  I do not say God cannot do this, but I find it odd that some of these zealots even claim that you shouldn't have surgery done or take pain medicine because that somehow "prevents" God from healing you.  I don't recall the God of the Bible being so small that He can't heal anything.  In addition, they ignore the possibility that it may have been God's will for someone to develop certain medicines in order to save lives, and in order to take the gospel to lost people (as some medical missionaries already do).

The FDA Approves Poisons

    This one is a classic misunderstanding of the purpose of the FDA and of how chemicals and "poisons" work.
    First, water can be poisonous to you.  You can drink too much water too quickly and die.  It's called water intoxication.
    Second, chemicals are molecules are substances are drugs.  They're all synonyms.  Often, someone holding this viewpoint will use the word "chemical" when referring to something potentially bad but "substance" or "molecule" or "element" when referring to something good.  The problem is they're synonyms.  Being an organic chemical doesn't make it good for you, either.  Cocaine is an organic chemical found in the leaves of the  Erythroxylon coca.  The problem really isn't the chemical, it's the amount you take in (just like water).  Neurotransmitters in your brain are chemicals, and can be turned into drugs to help those with imbalances.
    Third, even over the counter medications like Tylenol are poisonous if you take too much.  Cars are dangerous if you aren't paying attention while driving.  Just because something can be dangerous doesn't mean it is always dangerous.
    But they'll insist that these are "part of the enemy's plan."  All except their favorite ones, however.  In the same sentence, they'll claim CBD is good for you but Tylenol is bad for you, and that drugs are a lack of reliance upon God.  CBD is a drug.

Pharmacology is Only Making a Profit

    Well, first, the love of money, not money itself, is the root of all evil.
    Second, businesses are expected to make money.  If a business is evil simply because it makes money, then all businesses are evil.  The Ford dealership is evil.  Chick-Fil-A is evil.  Your cable provider is evil.  Your bank is evil.  In fact, do you pay your pastor?   Your music minister?  They must be evil, too.
    You can see how this reason breaks down quickly.

Pharmacology Sells Mind-Altering Drugs

    The first part of this problem is the belief that anything that is mind-altering is bad.  In that case, then sleep is bad (it gives you clarity of mind), food is bad (it elevates your mood), and your relationships are bad (they usually lift your mood).
    The second part of this problem is that people usually cite drugs that combat imbalances in the brain, such as ADHD (Adderall, Straterra), depression, anxiety, and bipolar disorder.  The problem lies in the fact that these drugs aren't for modifying the minds of normal people: it's meant to correct imbalances in abnormal people.  This is noted in the fact that (for example) someone with ADHD can't get high on Adderall (methamphetamine).  It corrects their imbalance: it returns them to calm and normal.

Pharmacology Makes People Dependent Upon Drugs

    Not always, but it depends.
    For permanent brain chemistry imbalances, like bipolar, drugs like Lithium balance out a permanent problem.  This is normal.  If you have a permanent disability, you take drugs permanently to correct it.  If someone has permanently high cholesterol that doesn't respond to exercise and diet, should they refuse to take drugs and die 15 years early due to stroke and heart attack?  Or should they take the drugs that treat the problem and live 15 years longer?
    Most psychiatric drugs aren't meant for permanent use.  Usually, they're used to give the person a brief break from their symptoms so they can then learn some coping skills to use the rest of their life, then the drugs are removed.  Beats living with a life-long mental disorder simply because you don't like drugs.
    Would you rather have your bipolar relative who loves you one day and hates you the next?  Would you rather live with a relative who is constantly irritable due to anxiety?  Would you prefer your relative with depression continue to try to kill themselves?
    Why are drugs even necessary?  Because of the fall.  Our DNA is accumulating copy errors over time.
    I say this as a concession: I would rather none of my relatives be on any drug the rest of their life.  I'd rather teach people natural coping skills for all their problems.  Indeed, Christ-centered coping skills are superior to all others, at least in my opinion.

What About All the Horror Stories About Pharmacology?

    The person espousing this belief system often cites deaths due to prescription drugs and other indistinct sources of contention.  The problem with accepting everything people say as true is as follows
    First, you assume the person is telling the truth.  People who have been through bad experiences often exaggerate or lie.
    Second, none of medicine, or for that matter pole vaulting or car maintenance, is perfect.  If a client is lying to their psychiatrist, how can we blame the psychiatrist for the outcome?  The same thing goes for car maintenance: if you lie about the problem, can you blame the mechanic if he fixes the wrong thing?  Some people don't intend to lie, but often can misinterpret events or unknowingly exaggerate problems, etc, or willfully hide other problems they're too ashamed to discuss.
    Third, sometimes psychological symptoms overlap.  Drug abuse, as well as other addictions, can cause problems to look like something that isn't present in the person's life.
    Fourth, sometimes doctors and psychiatrists make mistakes.  Human error will always be present.
     Who you get your information from absolutely matters.  If you hang around with people who hate the IRS, you will probably begin to hate the IRS, too.
    Taking limited examples of wrongs within the industry and projecting them out to be the problem with everything is exaggeration.  Exaggerations and lies are cousins.

The Example of ADHD Children and Drugs

    The problem with children being over-zealously diagnosed with ADHD and being prescribed medicine for it is a problem, to be sure.  But it's not the majority.
    Regardless, doctors cannot forcefully prescribe anyone medicine.  So parents had to agree to it.  The blame cannot fall solely on the shoulders of doctors.

Medicating Away the Holy Spirit

    Some people claim that using drugs to alter mood blocks the person from hearing from the Holy Spirit.  While this can in a sense be true of some addicts, that's irrelevant to this problem.  People do sometimes engage in substance abuse to block out the voice of God, but this isn't the same as prescribed medication.  And I've met plenty of people who were on psychotropics who heard the Holy Spirit just fine (and it was congruent with the Bible).
    First, this line of argument assumes God can be ignored if we try hard enough.  I would submit that the all-powerful Creator of the universe can't be shut out so easily.  I've met people who came under conviction while drunk.  Old evangelists would tell stories they collected of God cutting through a drunken stupor to reach someone.
    Second, it assumes that all depression is the Holy Spirit.  For example, is the Holy Spirit really the one making the mother of a stillborn child feel bad or depressed?  I doubt it.
    Third, sometimes helping someone not be depressed or anxious to the point where they aren't thinking clearly can actually be facilitating the Holy Spirit's attempts to reach them.  How do we know which is which?  We can't because we cannot see into a person's soul.

Drugs Prevent People from Mourning Over Sin

    This may be so, but not always.  The APA doesn't tell people that guilt is always wrong.  Indeed, one of the symptoms of being a psychopath is having no guilt over wrongs.  It's an identified problem: normal people experience guilt over wrong actions.
    The last person I spoke with about this said that you can be diagnosed as having low self esteem and prescribed drugs for it.  I don't recall "low self esteem" being a diagnosis and/or requiring drugs.

True Christians Always Have a Sound Mind

    That's laughable.  The Holy Spirit's work in our lives does result in a sound mind, but at the same time, this doesn't account for chemical imbalances in the brain.  It also doesn't take into account that sanctification is a gradual, not instant, process.  Otherwise Pharisees need to explain why they weren't instantly cured of being Pharisees when they got saved.  Indeed, if we were given a sound mind upon salvation, we'd have no need for dependence upon God after salvation, which would be counterproductive to sanctification.

All the Mass Shootings Came From Psychiatric Drugs

    This is not completely correct.  See this list.
  1. The Orlando night club shooter (2016), Omar Mateen, exhibited a preoccupation with violence and delusions even as a child.  In fact, his father slapped him in the face once at school (parental violence).  He also used cannabis as a teenager.  He was fired from his job for saying he would being a gun to class.  No evidence of psychiatric drugs.  He exhibited conspiracy theory beliefs.
  2. The Virginia Tech shooter (2007), Seung-Hui Cho, was prescribed Prozac prior to his rampage, but it is unknown whether he was taking the medicine or not, so it is unknown if Prozac contributed to his behavior.  But the other warning signs of his behavior existed far before his rampage, indicating that it wasn't the medication.  It also indicates that the problem may not have been depression.
  3. Columbine shooters (1999): Harris had low therapeutic to normal levels of Luvox (fluvoxamine; for OCD, depression, and anxiety) in his blood upon autopsy, which means he may have been taking it recently, or may have gotten off his medicine within days of the event.  Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were repeatedly bullied at school, and Harris's journal lists bullying and social exclusion as their motive.  Harris's journal reveals narcissism, with borderline, antisocial, paranoid and aggressive traits. Also, Harris spent time in juvenile detention for breaking and entering.  Harris is clearly a psychopath with a record.  Psychopaths are rational and aware.  There is no cure or medication for psychopathy.  Medication cannot be blamed for the Columbine shooters, as only one of them was taking any.  The journal, in fact, proves it all.
  4. Charles Joseph Whitman (1966), the Texas tower shooter, had a brain tumor, which was pushing down on his amygdala, triggering anxiety and fight-or-flight type aggression.  He was prescribed Valium in the past, and Dexedrine at the time, but whether he was actually taking them or not could not be confirmed.  No amount of medication could've helped Whitman: he needed surgery.
  5. Adam Lanza (2012), the Sandy Hook shooter, had psychiatric issues with a long history.  His mother actually took him off of medication that seemed to be helping him and left her guns where Adam could gain access to them.  Psychiatric medications, when taken correctly, do not permanently alter the brain.  This is clearly not related to psychiatric drugs.
  6. George Hennard, who shot up a Luby's (1991), was kicked out of the Merchant Marines for possession of marijuana.  There is no record or evidence of psychiatric medicine being involved.
  7. James Oliver Huberty, the McDonald's murderer (1984), told his wife 3 days before the incident that he was having mental problems.  He rapidly deteriorated.  He had a history of domestic abuse, and had started stockpiling guns and emergency rations for the end of the world.  His body had high levels of lead and cadmium, which could in theory be the cause of his descent into madness.  The autopsy showed no alcohol or drugs in his system.
  8. Patrick Henry Sherrill, the Edmond Post Office shooter (1986), had no known prior history of mental instability and no psychiatric or psychological history.
  9. Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik (2015) conducted a terrorism attack on the Inland Regional Center.  Both had no psychiatric or psychological history to speak of: it was terrorism.
  10. Jiverly Wong, the American Civil Association immigrant center shooter (2009), had no prescriptions or psychological history to speak of.  He mailed a letter to the center in which are many paranoid ramblings.
  11. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter (2009), was a psychiatrist.  He wasn't on any known medications.  Indeed, to be able to do this job, he had to pass many psychological interviews.
  12. Aaron Alexis, the Washington Navy Yard shooting (2013), was prescribed Trazodone twice before the shooting, but upon being asked by doctors, said he was not thinking of hurting anyone or himself, just that he had problems sleeping.  However, he was having paranoid delusions leading up to the event as well.  No autopsy report showing drug use or brain tumors can be found.  The amount of Trazodone given on August 28th (10 tablets) would've been exhausted by the shooting (September 16).  The Navy's investigation cited improper response to health care and security clearance workers that should've identified his descent into madness.
  13. Stephen Paddock, the Las Vegas massacre shooter (2017), was the son of a psychopath on the FBI's most wanted list (Benjamin Paddock).  It is known that mental illnesses often run in families.  Stephen Paddock was prescribed Valium in 2013, 2016, and 2017.  The effects of Valium can become addictive, and can be amplified by alcohol.  It seems that leading up to the event, he had become an alcoholic.  However, his last filling of Valium was 50 tablets in June of 2017, so he would have exhausted his supply of the drug well prior to the shooting.  As Valium does not permanently alter the brain, but alcohol does, a possible drug-and-alcohol addiction could have resulted, but there is no evidence that he was finding non-prescription ways to continue using Valium.  There was no preliminary evidence of any brain abnormalities.  Stanford University is still examining Stephen Paddock's brain.

In summary, there is no evidence that drugs were directly at fault in any of these incidents.  The only remaining unknown, Stephen Paddock, is being investigated currently.
    Valium (benzodiazepine) is a calming medicine for anxiety and sleeping.  In 1985, Valium was found to make people with low amounts of anxiety slightly more aggressive and depressed.  In 2002, it was found that Valium can increase a subject's aggression, so it was recommended that aggression be assessed before someone is prescribed Valium.  In 2005, it was found that Valium can also make people more self-aggressive.  But note that Valium is contraindicated for those with psychosis (a loss of contact with reality).  So far, there is not enough evidence to pull it off the market.  Also, note that only one in the 13 historic mass shootings I have listed has even the possibility of implicating Valium.
    Note that cannabis (marijuana) is implicated in 2 of the 13 incidents.
    Luvox (Fluvoxamine) is a potent serontonin reuptake inhibitor for OCD, depression, and anxiety.  There are no known aggression problems with it.  Also, keep in mind that a psychiatrist cannot read minds: the Colombine shooter Harris was a psychopath.  It is probable that the psychiatrist saw the depression or anxiety aspects, but psychopaths are very good at deceiving others.  However, fluvoxamine does carry a black label warning that it may increase suicidal thoughts and behaviors in young adults and children.  In addition, a 2001 study from Japan showed that in some rare cases, it can lead to aggressive behavior.