The only "in my experience" i can find is one followed by generalizations about medication and therapy (or maybe it just reads that way to me.)

  "In my experience mood stabilizers and therapists are a band-aid that is mostly
  about getting you hooked and dependent and compliant."

The sentence reads as if you're inferring what mood stabilizers and therapists ARE (in general) from your personal experience.

If you were talking about either:

a) your experience; e.g. "I think they were trying to get me dependent (for reason X)" or "During my treatment, I found that medication didn't help me to overcome my problem. Diet, exercise and focus, however, did (and here's how I attempt to prove the causal relationship)"

OR

b) general knowledge; e.g. "Research shows [citation needed] that diet and exercise shows curative properties with regard to some disease" or "Medication and therapy is all about fostering dependence [citation needed]."

I'd have no problem.

You also state that

  "I really believe that the recommendations I made are
  better for most people than therapists and mood enhancers."

Which I can agree with, if you mean most people in general, as they have no need for treatment. Therapy and psychiatric drugs have, however, been demonstrated time and again to yield better treatment outcomes for most people with mental illness (i.e. diagnosed disorder.)

So I guess what I don't get is how you think your claims and allegations and are justified.

As far as I can tell, no one is denying your experience. We are, however, saying that your experience is probably not generalizable, given what is known. The way I see it, lexicalscope is obviously saying that while it is true that "most people don't have hard-core mental illness", we should avoid inadvertently instilling the "it's probably nothing"-attitude because this leads to people ignoring warning signs/not getting help, especially given that it is already happening with the current lack of knowledge and stigma surrounding mental illness. Were the situation different, this would not be such a big deal.

In short, their issue is with the likely result of what you suggest.

Expertly put and exactly what I'm trying to say - thank you.

"maybe it just reads that way to me"

Bingo. WRT your speech coaching: give it a rest. IMHO tone policing and silencing is harmful and help give rise to stigmas.

Well, help me understand what you mean then.

I'm not sure how "stabilizers and therapists are a band-aid that is mostly about getting you hooked and dependent and compliant" can be construed as something specific to your situation.

You claim to speak specifically about your experience first, but then state that you think what apparently worked for you is "better for most people". You really can't have it both ways.

Also, no one is tone policing (nor commenting on your tone at all), but suggesting there might be repercussions from a specific way of framing the issue for people; This criticism can hardly be called silencing.

I'm glad what you've described previously have worked for you, but you are plainly incorrect in claiming that it is the best approach for most of those affected by mental disorders - which is what people are taking offense with in this thread.