I'm not sure what your point here is. I made no claim of 1-to-1 parity with propofol, the various uses of seroquel, it's efficacy for a given purpose, etc. Seroquel is however in the class of drugs "major tranquilizers" and my claim was simply that it can have a similar "time warp" effect. It's a claim based on my experience with it, and it is not an uncommon one. (And I do have experience with propofol through a single surgery to compare)
I will address some of the other details of your comment though. First, the statement that someone on seroquel is "arousable": Compared to propofol, sure. But a vigorous rub of the sternum will absolutely not do it for many people, myself included. My wife can attest to the difficulty. And if aroused before time, the state can be likened to severe drunkenness in terms of ability to function.
Also, your are right, there are arguably better sleep aid options. But it's arguable because individuals react so differently to different medications. Seroquel was not a first choice for the task, or the third. A doctor likely would be negligent in prescribing it for that sole purpose on a first consultation without exploration of other options.
As for it being a shit or "dirty" drug, there aren't particularly good options within this class of drugs. We can argue about whether these are over-prescribed, but for people who truly do need them, it is something of a devil's bargain where the benefits can be suspect relative to the costs. For the fortunate that response to them, newer medicines like latuda offer a much lower side-effect profile for similar benefits. Absent very good insurance though, that is financial hit of roughly $15,000 per year that few can afford out of pocket. This leaves the "dirty" drugs.
I won't put words into your mouth with this next part, but there are some that would then argue that these sorts of drugs are universally unsuited for any use, and that people suffering from their targeted disorders might better control their symptoms with diet, exercise, and supplements. Having seen many people attempt such and fail, I regard this point of view as a sort of survivors bias. The people that argue this point of view tend to be the very rare people for whom it works, but just as with any particular medication, the efficacy of any treatment regime varies greatly with the individual.