freebalin/james I think its a matter of lesser evil. Sometimes taking a drug is really necessary: eg when having psychosis u need to stablizie sb. thing is, do they really work and should they be considered a good option? i think u should always adress the issue as close as possible to the root cause. getting mercury out takes time, psychosis is here ad now, if we know that theres candida contributing to or causing psychosis DIRECTLY we should address it. No amount of drugs will make the problem of toxins in the brain go away. in fact, druggin will add to it. like the psychosis thing: its both super anxity and cognitive shutdown. tranqulaizers might adress the anxiety, but will they adress the cognitive side? and even if they do adress anxity issues, again, who says they adress them well, since there is still a factor messing with ur limbic system?
not to mention that we are biochemically screwed already and those meds NEVER work selectively on just the brain .

in my experience when i took ssri's it never mad ethe issues of brain fog, cogintion, anxiety go away. i just felt "drunk" or "high on serotonin". thats all. same goes for other meds. even sleeping pills - though they are different category - DIDNT WORK for me (even two , 3 pills) and i wasnt even agitated. thats how my brain was screwed. so why would other work? imho, i always found it surprising andy cutler would believe so much in meds working, esp when u are mercury poisoned. but different things work on everybody.

on a side ntoe - jammes, i and the other posters have been arguing with u a bit heavily, and i just wanted to say I really VALUE AND APPRECIATE your input. people do indeed tend to proscrastiante to a point- myself included - and no one's been pointing that out. Sb should have, and its good you have and we are discussing it. It's just that its all much less black and white imho. So thx anyway:)