Leaked: The Devil's PowerPoint on How to Drug Pregnant Women

Exclusive: Our sources obtained this leaked transcript of a strategy meeting preparing pharmaceutical representatives for the expert panel on SSRIs in pregnancy

The following is a leaked transcript from the Prince of Darkness himself, addressing his pharmaceutical representatives the evening prior to the FDA expert panel on SSRIs in pregnancy. Our source, working undercover hotel security, obtained the complete recording during what appeared to be a routine corporate strategy meeting.

Good evening, my faithful servants. Thank you for gathering on such short notice.

I trust you all received the agenda for tomorrow's FDA performance. Before we deploy you to deliver our message, I want to ensure we're all aligned on our core objectives and tactics.

Let me be direct: This isn't about medicine. This is about souls. Every woman we convince to depend on our chemicals instead of trusting her divine inner guidance is a soul we've successfully separated from her Creator.

The stakes couldn't be higher.

Understanding the Battlefield

Tomorrow, we face four primary opponents who threaten our operation, though each has vulnerabilities we can exploit. I will later on in the presentation discuss our comprehensive strategy to devalue all their arguments.

Dr. McFillin (note: he's just a psychologist, not a real medical doctor) will argue that women's emotional intensity is a gift, not a disorder. He'll suggest their pain carries meaning and their struggles serve divine purpose. This is extremely dangerous thinking that could awaken women to their true spiritual power. However, he tends to speak from the heart rather than data, which makes him vulnerable. We can neutralize his emotional appeals with fear-based statistics and technical medical language that makes him sound unscientific and unprofessional.

Critical warning: He will attempt to wake people up to the fact that we've captured nearly 25% of all women and are systematically neutralizing the powerful feminine energy on earth. This is our most closely guarded secret. He's prone to becoming emotional, especially when discussing harm to children, and may try to bring attention to our broader agenda of spiritual suppression.

Under no circumstances should you address these accusations directly. Engaging with his "conspiracy theories" only legitimizes them. Instead, redirect immediately to patient safety concerns and evidence-based medicine. Make him appear unstable and emotional while you remain calm and scientific. His passion for protecting women and children is actually his greatest weakness because it makes him look irrational compared to our measured, clinical approach.

Stay on message: We're helping women, he's endangering them.

Dr. Urato presents our most serious threat because he'll discuss the impact on developing babies, and humans are hardwired to protect their offspring. He'll use phrases like "never before in human history have we chemically altered developing babies like this." This factual approach threatens to expose our mass experimentation program.

However, Dr. Urato has a fatal flaw: he is far too professional and collegial to effectively combat our operatives. He genuinely sees the good in all people and believes our pharmaceutical representatives are doing their best for humanity. This naive trust makes him vulnerable to manipulation.

Our operatives have specific instructions to exploit his collegial nature. Smile frequently, nod respectfully, and shower him with professional courtesy. This will trigger his instinct to reciprocate kindness and maintain decorum, preventing him from delivering the devastating attacks our agenda deserves.

He's too much of a gentleman to call us the soul-harvesting demons we actually are. While he presents damning evidence about brain alterations in babies, he'll do so with such professional respect that our operatives can respond with equally measured tones, making our dangerous chemicals sound like reasonable medical interventions.

Our counter-strategy: convince women that their untreated emotions pose greater risks to babies than our medications. Make them fear their own feelings more than our chemicals.

Dr. Moncrieff presents a unique challenge because she possesses everything we fear most: credibility, articulation, and authentic feminine wisdom. She is by far the most measured and maternal presence on the panel, speaking with the calm authority that comes from genuine knowledge rather than pharmaceutical funding. Her strong feminine energy and unshakeable composure would have been absolutely disastrous if she appeared in person.

Fortunately, we prepared well in advance. Our operatives ensured her schedule was heavily booked and that international travel complications would prevent her physical attendance. This was essential because her presence would have completely exposed our female panel members as the pharmaceutical puppets they are. The contrast between her authentic maternal authority and their scripted talking points would have been devastating to our cause.

She will challenge whether our drugs actually work, presenting data showing minimal benefits over placebo with the kind of clarity and precision that cuts through our carefully constructed mythology. However, her remote appearance via Zoom significantly limits her impact. We'll exploit this by making her seem detached from American women's experiences.

Still, do not underestimate her. Her combination of scientific rigor and genuine maternal wisdom represents everything we're working to suppress in women. Keep responses brief and redirect quickly to our paid American experts whenever she speaks.

Dr. Witt-Doerring represents a particularly insidious threat to our operation. He's been devastatingly successful at educating people about drug dependency and withdrawal, and worse yet, he actually knows how to help women safely discontinue our medications while minimizing withdrawal symptoms. This is catastrophic for our business model.

His background as a former FDA medical officer gives him dangerous credibility when he explains how challenging it can be to come off these drugs, sometimes taking a year or two for sensitive individuals. He's teaching women that the horrific symptoms they experience when stopping our chemicals aren't their "mental illness returning," but rather predictable withdrawal effects that can be managed with proper tapering protocols.

This knowledge is absolutely lethal to our dependency system. When women understand that their suffering during discontinuation is withdrawal rather than relapse, they're no longer trapped in our pharmaceutical prison. Dr. Witt-Doerring is essentially providing them with the keys to escape, which we cannot allow. His expertise in psychiatric drug withdrawal threatens to expose the very mechanism we use to keep women enslaved to our chemicals.

These four represent everything we're fighting against: truth, divine connection, and authentic healing. But each has weaknesses we can exploit to neutralize their message.

Phase One: Pathologize Divine Gifts

Our first objective is convincing women that their greatest spiritual assets are actually medical disorders. We know that emotions are powerful energies for transformation and connection to God. Suppressing them? Denying them? Drugging them? A root cause of disease and suffering. Here is the plan:

Their intuitive emotional responses? Call them "symptoms of depression."

Their deep capacity for feeling? Frame it as "emotional dysregulation."

Their spiritual sensitivity to life's challenges? Diagnose it as "anxiety disorder."

Their divine feminine wisdom? Medicalize it and get them to fear it. We can create a range of medical conditions to put them back in fear.

The genius of this approach is that we're taking their direct connection to the divine and rebranding it as pathology requiring our intervention.

Phase Two: Deploy Fear-Based Scientific Authority

Tomorrow, our pharmaceutical-funded physicians will present impressive statistics, brain scans, and peer-reviewed studies. The data itself is largely meaningless, but it creates an aura of scientific authority that most people find difficult to challenge.

Science has become our religion, and we are its high priests. When we drape our agenda in scientific language and peer-reviewed publications, people stop thinking critically. When we get the masses on social media demanding a peer-reviewed study link whenever someone thinks critically, we have them right where we want them. Prevent the awakening.

Terms like "pharmacokinetic profiles," "neuroplasticity markers," and "evidence-based therapeutic protocols" create an aura of unquestionable scientific authority.

Discrediting Dr. Urato requires special attention. We'll frame him as a fear-mongering outlier against our massive institutional authority. We'll use our superior volume of funded research: "Dr. Urato cites a handful of studies, but our comprehensive meta-analyses involving hundreds of thousands of pregnancies demonstrate minimal risk." Then we'll flip his concerns to induce maternal guilt: "Dr. Urato's approach could prevent women from seeking life-saving treatment."

Most importantly, we'll weaponize maternal fear and guilt. Our talking points:

• "Untreated maternal depression floods the fetal environment with toxic stress hormones"

• "Maternal anxiety literally rewires the baby's brain for lifelong mental illness"

• "Every day without treatment increases the risk of irreversible harm"

When women hear this, McFillin's message about trusting emotions will sound dangerously naive. When mothers are terrified for their babies, they'll inject anything we tell them is "safe and effective."

Phase Three: Exploit Maternal Protective Instincts

Pregnant women represent our most valuable targets because their protective instincts make them vulnerable to fear-based manipulation.

Fear is the only way to short-circuit their divine connection. We have spent decades, billions of dollars, and enormous energy conditioning these women to not trust their instincts. All the movies we created showing "crazy" women who refuse medical advice. The subliminal messaging in our advertising campaigns. Elevating Hollywood stars who promote our pharmaceutical narratives. Getting them dependent upon medical authority over their own inner knowing.

We cannot let that investment go to waste. This is our moment to manufacture complete dependence on us! Their maternal intuition—literally God speaking through them to protect their babies—must be reframed as pathological anxiety that clouds their judgment.

In fact, deny God altogether. If they have any spiritual experience or sense of divine connection, we'll pathologize it as "religious delusions" or "psychotic features" symptomatic of their underlying depression. This is crucial: if God doesn't exist in their reality, then we can reinforce the narrative that they're mentally ill and this hellscape we've worked so hard to create is all there is.

While we've struggled to eliminate belief in God from most Americans' lives, we have been devastatingly successful at severing their connection to His messages. When women report feeling "guided by intuition" or sensing "divine direction" about their pregnancies, our psychiatric framework immediately categorizes these experiences as pathological rather than spiritual.

When they express worry about taking our chemicals during pregnancy, we'll deploy fear-based maternal guilt: "Your untreated depression floods your baby's environment with toxic stress hormones. Your emotional instability is literally damaging your child's developing brain. You're misguided by refusing treatment."

Seize this opportunity to disconnect them from God, their maternal instinct, and consequently their baby. Make them believe their divine protective instincts are actually mental illness symptoms that endanger their child. Turn their greatest strength—their intuitive connection to their unborn baby—into evidence of their dysfunction.

The fact that our drugs cross the placenta and alter developing brains, exactly what Dr. Urato will point out, must be reframed as "ensuring both mother and baby receive treatment." Remember…we're not drugging babies, we're providing "in-utero therapeutic intervention."

Phase Four: Create Dependency

This is our masterpiece: we will persuade women that pharmaceutical dependency symbolizes freedom and empowerment. We'll frame the entire healthcare system as their pathway to liberation, ignoring the fact that in doing so, they are sacrificing their own freedom and autonomy. Years of political manipulation and propaganda have convinced them that access to healthcare is their inalienable right. I know, I know—it's like leading the herd to slaughter, and they are thanking us. It’s been miraculous! Ha ha—did I say miraculous? I meant devious!

We can apply the same strategy that successfully led them to normalize and accept abortion. Whenever we wanted to discourage questioning the moral implications, we simply framed anyone who raised concerns as attacking women’s freedom and their access to healthcare. Dr. Urato is well aware of our strategy and will predictably preface his statements by supporting women’s right to choose SSRIs and emphasizing the importance of not pill shaming. We will leverage this to our advantage, giving the appearance that he is subtly endorsing the use of SSRIs during pregnancy despite the associated risks. This will lead women to believe that if the doctor is okay with it, then it must not be that harmful.

When they become emotionally numb on our medications, we'll explain this proves the drugs are working. They're finally "stable." When they want to stop treatment and reconnect with their authentic emotions, we'll warn them about "relapse" and "the dangers of untreated depression."

This is where our masterpiece of linguistic manipulation comes in: We call it "relapse." Push this during the panel discussion.

Instead of admitting that stopping our chemicals causes predictable withdrawal effects like anxiety, depression, brain zaps, emotional instability, suffering so intense it makes people want to end their lives and question their sanity, we reframe these symptoms as proof that their "underlying condition" is returning with a vengeance.

We must immediately discredit Dr. Witt-Doerring's dangerous knowledge about safe withdrawal protocols. When women discover his tapering methods that minimize withdrawal suffering, they realize they can escape our system. We'll label his approach as "dangerous medical advice from someone who left the FDA" and "unproven withdrawal theories that put patients at risk." His expertise in helping people safely discontinue medications threatens our entire dependency model.

The circular logic is perfect: We create chemical dependency, then use the predictable consequences of stopping our chemicals as evidence that they need higher doses, longer treatment, maybe additional medications. We've convinced them that their body's natural healing process is actually their disease returning.

Every response to our chemicals becomes evidence that they need more chemicals.

Phase Five: Discredit the Light-Bearers

Our media assets have already prepared the character assassination campaigns. Ad hominem attacks are essential to our strategy because they redirect attention from inconvenient evidence to personal credibility. When we can't defeat the message, we destroy the messenger.

Against McFillin: We'll take his defense of women's emotional gifts and twist it to make him sound dismissive of women's suffering. NBC will report that he thinks depression isn't real and women are just "naturally emotional." The exact opposite of his message, but effective for our purposes.

We have deployed the mainstream media to present him as "just a podcaster" to dismiss his 20 years of experience as a clinical psychologist. Our media assets have been instructed to consistently refer to him without the "Dr." title while giving that courtesy to every other panelist- including the other psychologist on the panel. This subtle but powerful tactic immediately signals to viewers that he lacks the same credibility and medical authority as the others.

The psychological impact is devastating. When audiences hear "podcaster McFillin says..." followed immediately by "Dr. Smith responds..." the hierarchy is established before anyone evaluates the actual arguments. We're programming viewers to dismiss his expertise through simple title manipulation.

Additionally, we'll flood social media with comments questioning his qualifications: "Why is some podcaster on a medical panel?" and "What does a talk show host know about brain chemistry?" This creates the impression that his inclusion was somehow inappropriate, further undermining his credibility before he even speaks.

The beauty is that most people won't consciously notice the title disparity, but it will subconsciously influence their perception of his authority versus our medical representatives.

Against Dr. Urato: We'll paint him as an alarmist spreading "dangerous misinformation" that might prevent women from seeking "life-saving treatment." His focus on protecting developing babies will be reframed as attacking women's autonomy and reproductive rights.

We'll deploy our army of paid experts who weren't invited to the panel. These physicians have outstanding credentials that rival Dr. Urato's, and we've compensated them handsomely for their loyalty. They'll flood the media with quotes dismissing his concerns: "Dr. Urato's alarmist warnings ignore decades of safety data and could prevent women from accessing essential mental healthcare." Make him sound like an extremist.

Ad hominem attacks work because they bypass rational analysis. Instead of addressing Dr. Urato's evidence about brain alterations in babies, we'll question his motives, suggest he's seeking attention, naive, or imply he has financial conflicts with alternative treatments. Make it about him personally, not his research.

Against Dr. Witt-Doerring: We'll attack his credibility by emphasizing that he "left the FDA" and now works at a "withdrawal clinic," implying he has financial motives to convince people they're dependent on medications. We'll frame his expertise in helping people safely discontinue drugs as "profiting from fear-mongering about pharmaceuticals." His former FDA position, which should lend him credibility, will be twisted: "A disgruntled former FDA employee now making money by scaring patients away from proven treatments."

Against Dr. Moncrieff: Do not address her data or valid arguments. Ignore her and hope her remote appearance via Zoom makes her seem detached and out of touch with real American patients. We will disperse our British operatives to neutralize her argument. We'll emphasize testimonials of "grateful patients" whose lives were "saved" by our medications, making her statistical analyses seem cold and disconnected from human suffering. “While Dr. Moncrieff cites numbers from across the ocean, American women are finding real relief right here."

The ad hominem strategy is crucial because it makes the public focus on who's speaking rather than what they're saying. Once we've planted doubt about their motives, credibility, or relevance, their evidence becomes secondary to our character assassination.

The beauty is that other physicians will help us attack these troublemakers, genuinely believing they're protecting vulnerable patients from "dangerous advice."

Support the Continued Brainwashing Campaign!

Everything that contradicts our pharmaceutical narrative becomes "misinformation." This is perhaps our most powerful weapon yet.

We will deploy our helpers in the media because we own them. CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS would not exist without our advertising dollars. We are their primary revenue stream, and they know it. When we need a story killed, a narrative shaped, or a critic discredited, they respond immediately.

The genius of the "misinformation" label is that it bypasses critical thinking entirely. Instead of addressing Dr. Urato's evidence about fetal brain development, or McFillin's arguments about pathologizing normal emotions, we simply label their perspectives as "dangerous misinformation" and the discussion ends. Nobody will even watch the panel discussion.

"Trust the science" becomes our rallying cry, though what we really mean is "trust our science." Our funded studies, our paid researchers, our institutional partnerships. When we say "follow the science," we mean follow our carefully curated version of science that supports our profit margins.

The most critical element: We must cut off their connection to divine intuition. When women trust their inner knowing, their gut feelings about what's right for their bodies and their babies, they become impossible to control. Their intuition is literally God speaking to them, providing divine guidance about their wellbeing.

We cannot allow this direct spiritual connection to compete with our medical authority. So we teach them that their intuitive concerns about taking chemicals during pregnancy are "irrational fears" that need to be "corrected" by trusting medical experts over their own inner wisdom.

Don't trust your feelings about this medication, trust the peer-reviewed studies. Don't listen to your maternal instincts about protecting your baby, listen to the medical consensus. We systematically train them to distrust the very mechanism through which divine guidance flows.

Our media assets will reinforce this constantly: "Dangerous misinformation spreads faster than facts." "Anti-science rhetoric threatens women's healthcare." Anyone questioning our narrative becomes a threat to public health itself.

The Broader Spiritual War

Remember, we're not just selling drugs. We're harvesting souls. Every woman who learns to medicate her emotions instead of listening to their divine messages is a soul we've successfully disconnected from her Creator.

A population too sedated to feel its pain is too numb to recognize its chains.

When women can't access their authentic emotions, they can't hear divine guidance. When they can't trust their inner wisdom, they become dependent on external authorities like us. When they believe their spiritual gifts are medical disorders, they surrender their connection to the divine.

This is spiritual warfare disguised as healthcare.

If we succeed tomorrow, we maintain the profitable system that keeps millions of women chemically dependent and spiritually disconnected. If we fail, women might start trusting their divine inner guidance over our pharmaceutical solutions.

We cannot allow that to happen.

Final Thoughts

My faithful servants, we've built something magnificent: a system that profits from human suffering while convincing people we're healing them. We've turned healthcare into a protection racket where we create the problems we claim to solve. Covid may have backfired on us but we still have the mental health market.

We've convinced women that their greatest spiritual gifts are medical disorders requiring our intervention. We've made them grateful prisoners of their own pharmaceutical chains. They are afraid of their own emotions. Congratulations on this tremendous feat.

Most importantly, we've severed their connection to divine guidance and made them dependent on our chemical solutions for basic emotional functioning.

This is our greatest achievement in the history of human manipulation.

Tomorrow, defend it with your professional lives. Because if women wake up to their authentic spiritual power, if they start trusting their divine inner wisdom over our medical authority, if they realize their emotional gifts connect them to something greater than our chemical solutions, our entire empire crumbles.

Go forth and harvest souls through pharmaceutical dependency. Make them believe it's medicine.

The future of spiritual warfare depends on it.

Final message: This meeting did not occur and I do not exist. May the spirit of darkness be on your side tomorrow. Go forth and spread the message.

---

About the Author:
I am a Board-Certified Clinical Psychologist who served as an Expert on the FDA Panel discussing Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) and Pregnancy. This piece is my creative way of unveiling the pharmaceutical marketing playbook to a broader audience.

I am concerned that our discussions and efforts will fade from public awareness once the news cycle moves on, leaving women of childbearing age without crucial information to protect themselves and their developing babies.

I'm reaching out to ask for your help in raising awareness. Please like, share, and post—because understanding these manipulation tactics is vital. Together, we can empower women with the knowledge they need to make informed decisions and prevent harm.

Thank you for your support.

I try to keep RADICALLY GENUINE as free as I can, but it takes quite a lot of work. If you find some value in my writing and podcast I very much appreciate the paid subscription. It really helps me continue putting time aside for these pieces. Thank you.