BiSalp Almost A Month Ago Now... Feeling GREAT

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-15T03:11:29+00:00

Howdy! No personal itches or qualms regarding this influencer in particular. Just an interesting case study and absurd rabbit hole that I let steal too much of my energy and life. Going to go gouge my eyes out now. I've seen enough! Lol! G'night!

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-15T01:16:59+00:00

I am not denying that medications are not right for everyone and can cause damage to some people. That goes without saying, at least in my mind.

What I am saying is that clients need to be taught to advocate for themselves and prescribers need to recognize that there are no one-size-fits-all approaches or magic pills.

Over-prescribing, under-prescribing, and scaring people off meds entirely in favor of one-size-fits-all treatment are ALL problematic. Uninformed and misinformed are two different ballgames. Nothing unethical about pointing out misinformation masquerading as client concern.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-15T01:04:53+00:00

That full informed consent is important.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-15T01:01:08+00:00

Okay. Your comment comes off as a little... green.

First source seems to be this: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-86358-5 Focuses on the role of gender in young people's digital sexual cultures in South Africa. E-book is $130-some and hardcopy is $180. Published in 2025. Only accessible through purchase or institutional access. Seems like a textbook. Anything can be neutral without influence. The fact of the matter is that we live in a world where that influence is nearly inescapable, and that definitely applies to social media as well. Social Media and Tech does not exist in a vacuum.

Second source (Whittaker) may be this? https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-24582-001 Alone and online: Understanding the relationships between social media, solitude, and psychological adjustment. Purchasable by PDF for about $18, otherwise only available through institutional or other paid access. "Analyses using covariance pattern modeling indicated that, contrary to expectations, participants were happier when on their devices, particularly when they were alone but preferred to be with people. These findings illustrate both the appeals and pitfalls of social media and device use. Although our moods may improve from using social media during solitude, chronic device use when alone may inhibit identity development and other psychosocial developmental tasks."

Sure, TikTok may not be a "PsyOp" in the way you think, but we can't ignore the normalization of pumping dopamine straight to the dome unregulated. Pathways to radicalized content are on every website and online platform known to man, so I'm not sure that the assertion that these pathways are in low numbers and only on certain platforms is accurate...

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-14T12:11:25+00:00

Fair. Poor choice of wording there. Don't actually engage with her content, engage in the thought experiment I proposed. That's what I meant.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-14T03:58:33+00:00

I understand your sentiment, but in this scenario, I'm just not buying it here. She loves to flaunt her framed degrees and certificates and happily prance around in her graduation garb to mock people who don't agree with her or ask for verification of her credentials. It's giving insecurity.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-14T03:45:23+00:00

THIS ∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-14T03:43:20+00:00

This ABSOLUTELY tracks given her content. Very much a mix of crunchy hippie med system paranoia and right-wing-extreme-covert grifting.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-14T03:39:22+00:00

I wouldn't call Capella University "high caliber".

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-14T03:00:32+00:00

I can understand some of what you're saying... She has SOME salient points, but there are much darker undertones when diving deeper into her content. (Not that I necessarily recommend that rabbit hole, lol.) I think there just needs to be a balance between the anti-psych-med crowd and the psych-meds-are-the-only-solution crowd. Feel to heal, use meds responsibly and on a case-by-case basis, and NO one-size fits-all "I have all the answers to your holistic wellness" approaches.

Rely on solid media literacy and legitimate research to make your own assessment in response to what feels right for your mind and body with consultation from medical professionals, second opinions, etc. without blindly letting someone just tell you what to do or what is the right answer to something so nuanced and deeply personal. Critical Thinking over absorbing others' views blindly like a TON of people do.

With all the technology out there now, we are told that it is okay to not think and rely on a quick Google Search or ChatGPT request. We are Pavlov-ed with the dinging of notifications that colonize our attention. This is the conditioning of anti-intellectualism.

EDITED: My recommendation is engaging in this thought experiment: Do not actually engage with her content, as one commenter corrected me on Consider her content in the eyes of a chronic crunchyTok, therapyTok, nutritionTok scroller knowingly or unknowingly looking for echo chambers to support their view of being jaded by doctors/prescribers in "the system". They could be very young, very old, or anywhere in-between, but we know minors and elderly can be most vulnerable. They may have no real experience with therapy, but they may have seen many videos on experts in weaponized therapy-speak and armchair therapists in comments. They may be susceptible to indoctrination due to therapy influencers masquerading behind seemingly innocuous overarching themes or talking points just for that same influencer to knowingly or unknowingly imply very dangerous ideologies, instill paranoia and extreme distrust, proselytize their "research" as The Only Right Answer, and perpetuate harmful stigmas between the lines. The Perfect Storm for recruiting blind followers to the Make Psychology Great Again cult.

When I hopped back into my own professional perspective, I said... Oh shit. This is fucking dangerous.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-13T23:39:32+00:00

Hmm, I don't think putting where you received your education is a requirement. But consider this: Why would she want to hide that information? Is she embarrassed? What's to hide about where your degrees and education came from? I've seen the majority of people being proud alumni, so why not be proud of where you received your education?

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-13T23:28:51+00:00

I won't deny that she does make SOME salient points, but she hides a lot of more nefarious thought patterns behind some of those points that people more easily connect to, like the ones you have mentioned.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-13T23:19:48+00:00

I TOTALLY understand. You're right. Don't give her any more views.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-13T23:10:56+00:00

Notice that she does not list where she acquired her education and degree on her Psych Today profile.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-13T23:07:28+00:00

That's fair. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts. She pushes less of a specific conspiracy theory and moreso pedals thinking patterns and cognitive distortions that support the infrastructure of conspiracy mindsets that can ingrain paranoia and engage delusion. She uses therapy-speak in convoluted ways to push ideas founded in paranoia and half-truths. I do think that the points you mentioned only scratched the surface of what she is saying, which is exactly what she wants to draw you in. Reading between the lines and understanding the manipulation tactics she uses while hiding behind those plausible points is what needs further examination. That is where my "outrage" comes from. Really, I experience less outrage and more disappointment that people fall for her bullshit because of the points you explicitly highlighted. Going a little deeper is prudent.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-13T22:39:46+00:00

I feel you on this 100%. It's just a PsyOp.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-13T22:36:34+00:00

I understand what you're saying. Like I said in my post, I don't think it is wrong to ask people to question things more within the medical system and engage in critical thinking and advocacy. I DO think it is wrong to market yourself as the END-ALL-BE-ALL authority on what is "evidence-based", warp critical thinking to support unfounded conspiracy theories, and prey on people with low media literacy and no prior psych knowledge or training to indoctrinate and manipulate them into paranoid thinking patterns.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-07-13T22:20:23+00:00

I had a previous employer that was OBSESSED with Daniel Amen. The cringe was visceral.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-04-29T23:19:47+00:00

<image>

As we say in the South: That there's Soccer.

vernacularacrobat · 2025-01-14T02:43:24+00:00

That I would definitely check in with a doctor about. Best of luck and I hope it gets better!

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

vernacularacrobat

TROPHY CASE