Sunday, December 31, 2006

A Brit Doubts The Existence Of ADHD

Here's an interesting rant by a Brit who doesn't buy the ADHD fraud. It's from the Sunday Mirror newspaper.

NAUGHTY KIDS NEED DISCIPLINE NOT DRUGS
Paul Routledge

I seem to have stirred up a hornet's nest by doubting the existence of so-called Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

One reader, who claims two children with ADHD, accuses me of "hurtful, unhelpful comments".

Another points out that children today sorely lack discipline.

And I hear from South Wales of a family whose "very modest" demand is for a three bedroom council house because one of their two sons might have the disorder. This is obviously a very divisive issue. It is also a hidden scandal.

Let's look at the facts. ADHD was first described by a Dr Friedrich Hoffman in 1845, in his book of poems about "Fidgety Philip". The symptoms were inattention, fidgeting, restlessness - and noisily tapping pencils.

This sounds like most children in my experience. They can't sit still, and their attention span is shorter than a politician's.

Over a century later, doctors in the US - who get paid in proportion to the treatment they say is necessary - realised this syndrome is a goldmine. ADHD was unknown in my childhood, but like so many Yankee ideas it soon crossed the Atlantic. And if we are to believe the medical profession, there are now 366,000 sufferers under the age of 18 in the UK.

Official figures from the Department of Health show that more than 1,000 prescriptions for powerful drugs are doled out every day to treat behavioural disorders in children. GPs prescribed drugs such as Ritalin, known as the "chemical cosh", on 384,000 occasions last year - a fourfold increase since 1997. An estimated 32,000 children are being drugged every day, at a cost to the NHS of £13.5million a year.

A whole generation is in danger of becoming drug-dependent because parents and doctors want to "medicalise" bad behaviour, rather than control it through diet, discipline and parental devotion. Consultant child psychiatrist Dr Sami Timimi argues that medicalisation of childhood problems is due to a search for "an easy cure that fits in with our fast lifestyles and gives us a quick answer".

Real-life TV programmes also glorify misbehaved children, and pander to the hand-wringing inadequacy of parents. Stroppy Johnny makes good telly, but it also encourages imitative behaviour.

So far, so bad. But I also learn that drug companies secretly fund support groups for parents of kids diagnosed with behavioural problems. In other words, they are fuelling this Ritalin bonanza - despite evidence linking their very profitable drugs to sudden deaths and heart problems.

Even Health minister Andy Burnham accepts that there is "limited information" about the long-term effects of these drugs.

I am not a doctor, and do not pretend to medical knowledge. But my sense of smell is unimpaired, and this business stinks.

Friday, December 29, 2006

Is TeenScreen Controversial?


You be the judge.
See video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY&eurl= (Watch full screen so you don't miss the actual "motivational poster" of a TeenScreen employee who advocates "Drugging America's Children -- One Child At A Time".

Do you want to help?

To augment the national controversy, pick a school in your neck of the woods and raise the dickens with school board members, legislators, newspapers, radio and your local TV news. Any talk radio show, for example, would be interested in what you have to say about the national controversy of the secretive TeenScreen which will not release their financial records (what are they hiding?) and refuse to make their suicide survey public.
Any radio show will go "Huh, what, really??? We can do a show on that!" when you tell them them that school children as young as 9 years old are being asked questions about suicide and then are being referred to dangerous and controversial "treatment" (psychiatric drugs).

Friday, December 22, 2006

Drug Company Lies

Here's a great article from the Austin American-Statesman:
And, for additional information concerning Drug Company illegal acts, lawsuits and funding of Psychiatric Programs, go to www.winhs.org for routine updates.

Leading Pharmaceutical Company, Johnson and Johnson and Several Subsidiaries Misrepresented the Safety and Effectiveness of Anti-Psychotic Drug (Risperdal) – Then Influenced State Officials into Making the Suspect Drug a Standard Treatment in Public Mental Programs.

By Jason Embry, W. Gardner Selby
December 16, 2006

Texas Attorney General, Greg Abbott joined the suit and alleges official State's mental facilities were duped into using the drug. A lawsuit against the pharmaceutical company claims State official pushed the drug and was rewarded with money.

Attorney General Greg Abbott joined the lawsuit filed in Travis County district court by Allen Jones, a former investigator for the state of Pennsylvania, against Johnson & Johnson Inc. and five related companies. Jones says in the lawsuit that he learned of payments to at least one Texas mental health official in interviews he conducted as an investigator. No official is named in the lawsuit.

The lawsuit, which came to light Friday, seeks to recover for the state untallied alleged overcharges to the state's Medicaid program, which pays for health care for low-income people.

Jones' lawsuit alleges that the companies launched a drug named Risperdal in 1994 to treat schizophrenia. About the same time, the state was developing a protocol, or treatment guidelines, for which drugs should be used in public mental health programs. The defendants "provided substantial financial contributions to and improperly influenced the development" of the protocols, the lawsuit said, and Risperdal took precedence in the protocols over cheaper, equally effective medicines.

The drug later received recommendations as the medicine of choice in the state's mental health protocol for treating children and adolescents, even though it lacked a Food and Drug Administration indication for those age groups, the lawsuit says. It says side effects and health risks include increased chance of stroke, renal failure and hyperglycemia.

The companies pushed Risperdal in other states through paid consultants on expert panels, peer-to-peer marketing strategies and "administrative decisions made by a select few public officials," the lawsuit says. The companies sent an unnamed Texas official around the country as a spokesman for the drug, and they hired third-party contractors to conceal their control and funding of medical education programs, speakers' bureaus and clinical research that promoted the benefits and safety of Risperdal, the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit says at least 17 states, including Texas, have implemented the protocol or are doing so.

"We allege it's a scheme whereby they passed off as medical science phony representations and misleading facts about the efficacy and appropriateness of these drugs," said Thomas Melsheimer, a lawyer for Jones.

Abbott's office declined to comment on the lawsuit, as did spokesmen for Johnson & Johnson and the state's Health and Human Services Commission, which oversees the Medicaid program. A commission spokesman did say Texas paid 308,000 claims totaling $73.5 million for Risperdal in 2005.

Melsheimer described Jones as a "classic whistle-blower" who filed the lawsuit in 2004 on behalf of Texas to recover the companies' overcharges. Because of his whistle-blower status, the lawsuit was sealed from public view until Abbott joined it.

Copyright 2001 – 2006 Cox Texas Newspapers, LLC. All Rights Reserved

Wednesday, December 20, 2006

Ouch! Burned my fingers on this one...

This is a letter to the editor from a mother in Fort Madison, Iowa. It is apparently an answer to an attack on a previous letter she wrote, but the content of this letter is self-explanatory.

It is from the Opinion section of the Fort Madison Daily Democrat newspaper.

Fort Madison Daily, Iowa
December 19, 2006
Mission accomplished - My objective was to make parents think twice about TeenScreen

I wrote the original letter about the Teen Screen test being given in the schools. Ms. Gutman and Ms. Jarvis said "much of the letter was inaccurate and seemingly misinformed." I'm wondering what was inaccurate or misinformed.

The first thing they addressed was that the test was given with the consent of the parents and the students. I never said anything to indicate it wasn't. As a matter of fact, in my letter I said "Central Lee sends home a permission slip, but the permission slip gives the parent no idea of the content of the test or the repercussions." So I wasn't inaccurate or misinformed in that.

My letter said that it's being billed as a "suicide prevention test." Their letter called it a "suicide risk screening program." Very little difference there. Their letter said "TeenScreen is a screening program only and does not involve diagnosis or treatment as the letter insinuates." I believe Teresa Rhoades of Indiana would have to disagree with that. She has filed a lawsuit because her daughter was diagnosed and labeled at school without the benefit of her parents' presence. By the time her daughter came home from school at the end of the day, she was very distraught because she didn't understand the meaning of obsessive compulsive disorder and social anxiety disorder. I have used her name with permission and she also gave me permission to include her e-mail address. You may check the facts with her directly at mason101459@comcast.net or Google Teen Screen Lawsuits.

Their letter goes on to explain how this test is not "affiliated with or funded by any pharmaceutical companies." I find it very interesting that you should suggest that, as I never suggested any such thing in my letter. I suggested that the desire was to put the teen on psychotropic drugs. A doctor doesn't have to have any affiliation with a pharmaceutical company to prescribe a medication for a patient. The quote "me thinks thee doth protest too much" comes to mind.

You then said that teen suicide is the second leading cause of death for teens. And while any number is unacceptable, it only stands to reason that it would be second only to trauma. After all, most teens don't die of heart attacks or strokes. You made it sound as if we're in the midst of an epidemic of teen suicides. As anyone who's been following these letters can see, that's hardly the case. Teen suicide is actually very rare.

As the last letter said, do we really need a test putting ideas in the minds of emotionally healthy young people when it's highly likely that a teen who's considering suicide will show signs that family, teachers, friends or clergy will already have picked up on and be working with? I also listed some of the questions on the test. I can assure you those were neither inaccurate nor misinformed. My daughter took the test and stated unequivocally those questions were on the test. My goal was to get parents to think about what is going on with their children at school and check it out. So I very much appreciate your letter in that if people have been reading the Letters to the Editor, I have very likely achieved that goal.

Jeannie Hetzer

Ft. Madison

Saturday, December 16, 2006

TeenScreen's Evil Sister Sued by Texas Attorney General

TMAP is the Texas Medication Algorithm Project -- a TeenScreen-style program concocted by drug companies to influence government officials to push the newest most expensive antipsychotic drugs. This program and TeenScreen were "recommended" by the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Both are tools of Big Pharma -- the pharmaceutical industry.

But a whistleblower has initiated a huge lawsuit by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott against Johnson & Johnson and five related companies, claiming that an official was paid under the table to recommend a certain drug with no superiority over other drugs available for the same purpose except for it's greater price tag.

Read about the case by clicking here. It's a fascinating story, and another crack in the Big Pharma phacade.

Friday, December 15, 2006

Federal Government Lends A Helping Hand To Robber Baron Pharmaceutical Companies

A fascinating article in the Online Journal has exposed an egregious government shenanigan designed to provide a free marketing campaign for the multi-billion dollar per year Big Pharma pharmaceutical industry.

"Under the guise of combating the stigma of mental illness, the U.S. government will soon begin a massive campaign of psychiatric indoctrination, designed to increase the acceptance of psychiatric chemical imbalance theories and labeling, and to pave the way for national psychiatric screening, driving more Americans into seeking psychiatric drug treatment," according to the article.
It's always amazing to see what lengths these insanely rich mega-corporations will go to in their attempt to covertly promote their dangerous and controversial psychiatric mood drugs and antidepressants -- especially in view of the increasing resistance to forthright promotion of the products as the public becomes more aware and informed of the fact that these "antidepressants" actually promote suicide and homicide.

Thursday, December 14, 2006

Evidence Mounts on Antidepressant-Suicide Link

The current debate isn't really on whether antidepressants cause suicide, but rather which antidepressants cause it more often! In a recent article in Medscape medical news, that issue was seen as an important part of a Finnish study, which was originally published in the Archives of General Psychiatry.

"Among suicidal subjects who had ever used antidepressants, the current use of any antidepressant was associated with a markedly increased risk of attempted suicide..." according to the article.

This study and most others still ignore the obvious link between antidepressants and homicide/violence. But it's a step in the right direction.

The effect is being felt, too. Yesterday the FDA stated that they are expanding the "black-box" warning label on antidepressants to include young adults as potential victims of suicide or suicidal thinking. This is a BIG step in the right direction. There has been a black box warning (so called because it must be in a black box on the product) warning about this reaction to the drug in children and young adults for several years already.

Monday, December 11, 2006

Xanax-Crazed Boys Become Violent

KHOU.com, a Houston television station, carries this story about a group of young boys that became unspeakably violent with a Hispanic boy they captured. One has already been sentenced to life in prison. The other just got a sentence of 90 years, and will be eligible for parole in 30. But the real story is hidden in the copy. We've pasted the first part of the KHOU article, down to where the truth is revealed. And guess what? It's exactly what this whole blog is about. If you want to read the rest of the article, click here.


A 17-year-old suburban teen was sentenced Monday to 90 years in prison in the brutal attack of a Hispanic boy who was beaten, kicked, stomped, burned and sodomized with the plastic pole of a patio umbrella.

Keith Turner was the second teen convicted of aggravated sexual assault in the April attack at a house in Spring, north of Houston. David Henry Tuck, 18, was convicted and sentenced to life in prison on Nov. 16.

Turner was convicted late Friday after about 90 minutes of deliberations. The jury took about five hours over two days to reach the sentence of 90 years.

Turner will have to serve at least 30 years before becoming eligible for parole.

Although Turner was the younger of the assailants and didn’t have the history of racial attacks that colored Tuck’s past, it was his idea to use the patio umbrella pole in the attack.

Turner, Tuck, the victim and two other teens were partying at a house in Spring, drinking and taking cocaine and Xanax...

Wednesday, December 06, 2006

From The Atlanta Journal Constitution

The Atlanta Journal Constitution
Drugs for preschoolers? Hit alarm

The controversy over using medications to tame easily distracted and hyperactive schoolchildren hasn't stopped millions of parents from asking doctors to prescribe the powerful stimulants for their children.

The benefits of the medication — better school performance and a calmer child — outweigh the risks, many parents believe.

However, the most recent trend of prescribing Ritalin, Adderall, Concerta and other controlled medications for preschoolers ought to alarm federal regulators, especially now that some studies are suggesting low doses of the drugs could be helpful in very young children with moderate to severe forms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD.

Such "off-label" use of stimulants for children younger than age 6 is prohibited by the Food and Drug Administration. Yet a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2000 estimated at least 200,000 preschoolers were getting prescriptions for the drugs. Most experts believe the number has since doubled.

Caution is all the more important because researchers are finally starting to compile data on the use of the drugs in children 3 to 6 years old.

In one study, 40 percent of the children who took Ritalin developed side effects. About 11 percent of the children were withdrawn from the 70-week study because of severe problems, including irritability, weight loss, insomnia and slowed growth. Those are rates well above what happens to school-age children who experience similar side effects.

Still, Dr. Scott Kollins, a Duke University psychologist, believes limited use of Ritalin and other stimulants should not be ruled out in very young patients with extreme cases of hyperactivity. Small doses of the drug significantly improved behavior in about half the children in the study. "It's very clear there is a set of kids for whom this will be very important," Kollins told the Scripps Howard News Service.

That echoes the justification pediatricians and child psychiatrists used decades ago when Ritalin first came on the market. The drug was supposed to be prescribed only in the most extreme cases and for only a few years, until children outgrew the brain chemistry problem thought to cause the disorder. Researchers estimate 3 percent to 5 percent of children have ADHD.

But over the last 20 years, use of the stimulants became commonplace, with many elementary and middle school teachers reporting at least a third of their male students taking Ritalin or one of the other drugs daily. Previous studies have indicated that metro Atlanta is a hotbed for prescriptions in school-age children.

More recently, advertising campaigns by the drug manufacturers have emphasized that older children and adults could improve their performance in college or on the job by taking the medication.

There is little question that drugs are effective at helping regulate brain activity. But they are powerful compounds, even when prescribed in low doses, and their long-term effects are still largely unknown. Using stimulants instead of teaching children with mild forms of the disorder how to modify behavior remains controversial.

The FDA should post stronger warning labels and notices to reinforce to parents and physicians alike that widespread use of these stimulants in preschoolers is not encouraged.

— Mike King, for the editorial board

From The Atlanta Journal Constitution

The Atlanta Journal Constitution
Drugs for preschoolers? Hit alarm

The controversy over using medications to tame easily distracted and hyperactive schoolchildren hasn't stopped millions of parents from asking doctors to prescribe the powerful stimulants for their children.

The benefits of the medication — better school performance and a calmer child — outweigh the risks, many parents believe.

However, the most recent trend of prescribing Ritalin, Adderall, Concerta and other controlled medications for preschoolers ought to alarm federal regulators, especially now that some studies are suggesting low doses of the drugs could be helpful in very young children with moderate to severe forms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD.

Such "off-label" use of stimulants for children younger than age 6 is prohibited by the Food and Drug Administration. Yet a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2000 estimated at least 200,000 preschoolers were getting prescriptions for the drugs. Most experts believe the number has since doubled.

Caution is all the more important because researchers are finally starting to compile data on the use of the drugs in children 3 to 6 years old.

In one study, 40 percent of the children who took Ritalin developed side effects. About 11 percent of the children were withdrawn from the 70-week study because of severe problems, including irritability, weight loss, insomnia and slowed growth. Those are rates well above what happens to school-age children who experience similar side effects.

Still, Dr. Scott Kollins, a Duke University psychologist, believes limited use of Ritalin and other stimulants should not be ruled out in very young patients with extreme cases of hyperactivity. Small doses of the drug significantly improved behavior in about half the children in the study. "It's very clear there is a set of kids for whom this will be very important," Kollins told the Scripps Howard News Service.

That echoes the justification pediatricians and child psychiatrists used decades ago when Ritalin first came on the market. The drug was supposed to be prescribed only in the most extreme cases and for only a few years, until children outgrew the brain chemistry problem thought to cause the disorder. Researchers estimate 3 percent to 5 percent of children have ADHD.

But over the last 20 years, use of the stimulants became commonplace, with many elementary and middle school teachers reporting at least a third of their male students taking Ritalin or one of the other drugs daily. Previous studies have indicated that metro Atlanta is a hotbed for prescriptions in school-age children.

More recently, advertising campaigns by the drug manufacturers have emphasized that older children and adults could improve their performance in college or on the job by taking the medication.

There is little question that drugs are effective at helping regulate brain activity. But they are powerful compounds, even when prescribed in low doses, and their long-term effects are still largely unknown. Using stimulants instead of teaching children with mild forms of the disorder how to modify behavior remains controversial.

The FDA should post stronger warning labels and notices to reinforce to parents and physicians alike that widespread use of these stimulants in preschoolers is not encouraged.

— Mike King, for the editorial board

Saturday, December 02, 2006

Throwing The Ship In Reverse

Quote from below article: "Instead of dealing with the overprescription of drug cocktails for children, our government is telling us we have a mental health crisis, and the remedy is universal mental health screening. A major government campaign is now under way, sweetened with federal grants, to subject all children to mental health screening."
Copley News Service - Home Page

Copley News Service
December 1, 2006
Parents worry about prescription drugs, too
By: Phyllis Schlafly

Methamphetamine and marijuana aren't the only drugs parents worry about. The problems caused by prescription combinations called "drug cocktails" have finally broken into the national news stream.

A recent Page 1 of the New York Times described Stephen, age 15, who takes antidepressants Zoloft and Desyrel, plus anticonvulsant Lamictal to moderate his moods, plus the stimulant Focalin XR to improve concentration. His brother Jacob, age 14, takes Focalin XR for concentration, plus the anticonvulsant Depakote to moderate his moods, plus the antipsychotic Risperdal to reduce anger, plus Catapres to induce sleep.

Over the last three years, each boy has been prescribed 28 different psychiatric drugs and has seen 11 psychiatrists. Gone are the days when a visit to a psychiatrist meant lying on a couch to recite your troubles. Treatment today means taking prescription drugs, lots of them.

More than 3 million children are using the most commonly prescribed drug, Ritalin, and it is routinely combined with other drugs. Last year, 1.6 million children and teenagers were given at least two psychiatric drugs in combination, and 500,000 were given at least three.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires manufacturers to prove the safety of each drug. But hardly any studies have examined the safety or effectiveness of drugs used in combination.

The American Journal of Psychiatry in 2003 found only six controlled trials of two-drug combinations, four of which failed to show any benefit, and a fifth showed bad side effects. Scientific studies of combinations of three or more drugs are nonexistent.

There are no studies showing long-term safety of psychiatric drugs used on children or the effect on children's developing brains and bodies. The vast majority of these drugs are not FDA-approved for use in children, but they are prescribed for children nevertheless.

Two of the three classes of these drugs are under the FDA's stringent warnings for suicide and violence. They also interfere with learning, causing violence, neurological problems, diabetes and heart attacks.

Ritalin is prescribed to address what is called attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, a disorder first defined in 1980. The pediatric guidelines for diagnosing ADHD are subjective, such as, child often has difficulty awaiting his turn, occasionally may do things compulsively, easily distracted from tasks, fails to give close attention to details, and makes careless mistakes.

A few years later, ADHD was classified as a disability and a federal cash incentive program was initiated for low-income families with children who are said to have ADHD. A family could get $450 a month for each child diagnosed with ADHD, with the cost of treatment and medication for low-income children covered by Medicaid.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, passed in 1990, mandates that "eligible children receive access to special education and related services." The school is required to craft an Individualized Education Plan to accommodate each child, which may include drugs prescribed by a medical doctor.

The U.S. Department of Education classified ADHD as a handicap, and in 1991 schools began receiving education grants of $400 a year for each ADHD child.

Since labeling kids ADHD brings more money to the schools, it's not surprising that schools often pressure parents to get an ADHD diagnosis and put their child on Ritalin. School have also found it useful to deal with behavioral and discipline problems by giving boys a drug to get them to sit down, shut up, and do what they're told.

The FDA reported on Feb. 8 that 25 people (including 19 children) died and 54 suffered serious cardiovascular problems after taking drugs prescribed to treat ADHD between 1999 and 2003. An FDA advisory panel finally voted in favor of requiring the famous "black box" warning on these drugs.

Instead of dealing with the overprescription of drug cocktails for children, our government is telling us we have a mental health crisis, and the remedy is universal mental health screening. A major government campaign is now under way, sweetened with federal grants, to subject all children to mental health screening.

The screening usually means having the child fill out a survey about his own behavior. If his answers don't comport with what the so-called experts want, the kid can be referred for treatment, and treatment usually includes medication.

It's up to parents to stop this unscientific, ineffective, and dangerous government intrusion into the minds and values of our children. State laws should require parental consent for all mental health screening, and Congress should pass the Child Medication Safety Act, to prohibit schools from denying entry to a child whose parents choose not to put him on drugs.

Phyllis Schlafly is a lawyer, conservative political analyst and the author of the newly revised and expanded "Supremacists." She can be contacted by e-mail at phyllis@eagleforum.org.


What can a person DO about it right now using the keyboard their fingers are on?
For starters, get this petition into the hands of everyone possible: http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html
Not enough Americans know about this grand psychiatric / pharmaceutical / government plan. But watch out when they do!

++

Thursday, November 30, 2006

The Shoe Drops

This quote is from a news article on CNN, regarding the death of Anna Nicole Smith's son:

A private pathologist concluded that Daniel Smith died from a lethal combination of methadone and two antidepressants. Official toxicology results have not been publicly released.

So we know he is another victim of psych drugs. Prozac does more than cause depression. It kills.

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Letter To The Editor In Fort Madison, Iowa

Daily Democrat
Fort Madison, Iowa
November 10, 2006
Parents need to check out this TeenScreen program

To the parents of students at Ft. Madison & Central Lee Schools:

I discovered recently that both of these schools participate in the TeenScreen program. It's a psychological evaluation given to middle school and high school students. Central Lee sends home a permission slip, but the permission slip gives the parent no idea of the content of the test or the repercussions. Below is an idea of some of the questions on the test.

Has there been a time when nothing was fun for you and you just weren't interested in anything?

Has there been a time when you felt you couldn't do anything well or that you weren't as good-looking or as smart as other people?

How often did your parents get annoyed or upset with you because of the way you were feeling or acting?

Have you often felt very nervous when you've had to do things in front of people?

Have you often worried a lot before you were going to play a sport or game or do some other activity?

Have you tried to kill yourself in the last year?

Are you still thinking of killing yourself?

Have you thought seriously about killing yourself?

I can't imagine any normal teenager that hasn't experienced the first five of these questions. This test is billed as a suicide prevention test. However, it goes much further than that. From the results of this test students are labeled with:

Social Phobia

Panic Disorder

Anxiety

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder

Active Suicide Ideation

Passive Suicide Ideation

Along with these so-called disorders goes the desire to put the teen on psychotropic drugs. According to the web sites I checked there is a 84-94% misdiagnosis rate with this test. I suggest all parents go to Google and type in ‘Teen Screen' and read through the various web sites. By typing in this web site, you can read the test in its entirety:
http://www.psychsearch.net/teenscreen_lawsuit/31_4.pdf As you can see, you have to have Adobe Acrobat Reader to view this site. If I had known what was in these tests I would never have allowed my children to take them.

I am blessed with children who have a lot of common sense and a healthy sense of self-esteem. My daughter said a teacher stopped her in the hall and wanted to discuss the results of her test. My daughter told her the test was stupid and she wasn't interested in discussing it: end of discussion. Her comment to me was that “the guy who designed this test must have been high.” My son said the test was ridiculously long and he didn't read it, just randomly answered the questions. His was kicked out by the computer as unreliable. He was quite pleased with himself.
In the interests of your children, please check it out.

Jeannie Hetzer

Ft. Madison

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Mom Wallops Teenscreen Right Between The Eyes

Now Playing: Teresa Rhoades, a mother from Indiana, wallops TeenScreen right between the eyes. Teresa and her husband, Michael, sued in federal court because their daughter Chelsea was screened by TeenScreen and diagnosed with two mental disorders - all without her parent's knowledge.
You can see the video here: www.psychsearch.net/teenscreen.html
We should give thanks to Teresa and others like her who have stood up against TeenScreen from the start - initially as lone voices that have grown into a giant rebellious chorus!
Teresa has one Thanksgiving request to ask of you:
From: IndianaPatMom@comcast.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 11:31 AM
To: IndianaPatMom@comcast.net
Subject: Thanksgiving Request

Dear Friends,
While you're visiting friends and family Thursday, please sit everyone down at a computer and show them the online TeenScreen petition and have them sign it and forward it to everyone they know: http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html The only way to win this war is to inform enough people fast enough. Please do this as you are giving thank s for your freedom, your family, your friends but remember the children need us to stand up and protect their rights.
Please do this before you eat all the turkey and take a nap!
With much love,
Teresa Rhoades
Indiana Parents Against TeenScreen Mom

Monday, November 20, 2006

Indiana Politician on TeenScreen

Check out the video here. Just click on start to hear Eric Miller, the founder of Advance America, the largest pro-family organization in Indiana, talk about why we need to deep six TeenScreen.

Saturday, November 18, 2006

Texas Hate-Crimer Was On Xanax

Texas teenager David Henry Tuck was sentenced to life in prison after an assault on a Hispanic teenager during which he sodomized the boy with an umbrella, yelling "White Power". The event occurred at a drug party where the main course included Xanax, a Prozac-style "anti-depression" drug.

Tuck has a history of this kind of behavior and was considered by the judge to be beyond rehabilitation. That's fine, but what about the Xanax? We've seen WAY too many violent crimes under the influence of this family of drugs to simply dismiss it. Would he have gone so crazy without the drug? His home town of Houston is where the mother drowned her four kids in a bathtub while she was on Prozac.

These drugs kill and should be outlawed.

Read the story at this link.

Friday, November 17, 2006

TeenScreen Hit Again

Enraged parents' groups around the country are continuing to explode in the face of the TeenScreen program. Seen as an attempt to hijack the school system as a feeder source for down-trending psychiatric funding and drug sales, TeenScreen is a sham program that asks a few questions of school children, then on the basis of these few answers pretends to predict whether these children are prone to suicide or exhibiting other signs of psychosis.

The answers to inane questions like, "
Has there been a time when nothing was fun for you and you just weren't interested in anything?" and "Has there been a time when nothing was fun for you and you just weren't interested in anything?" children are being hung with psychiatric labels and encouraged or even coerced into taking drugs.

The latest shot across the bow is in Kenosha, Wisconsin. In an article in the Kenosha News (requires subscription) reporter Chris Barncard describes the outraged reaction of the Kenosha Parents Union which has "
spoken out against school boundary changes and Columbia University TeenScreen, a suicide risk screening program being considered for Unified eighth-graders."

This is a reaction that is occuring across the United States, as TeenScreen continues to try to circumvent federal law that requires parental permission for children to participate in the program. TeenScreen spokesmen complain that requests for permission from parents have a low return rate, so they try to use "opt out" forms or give prizes to students who can bring back a signed form. But trickery like this only outrages parents' groups more. It's hard to tell Big Pharma and the psychiatry industry they have to go away, but they do. They have no place nosing around our children in the school system.



Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Looks Like TeenScreen's Out In Kenosha

In Kenosha, Wisconsin, the school board took a look at Teenscreen and isn't buying it. Citing the fact that it is funded by big pharmaceutical companies that benefit from the sharp increase of kids on psychiatric drugs. Another factor is the ridiculous idea that answering a few questions can tell you a kid is "suicidal". Especially since it identifies a large percentage of the people who answer the quiz as suicidal -- a much larger percentage than actually commit suicide or even try.

Read this story. It's "fair and balanced", quotes people who are in favor of the program, but points up the objections and concludes it's never going to happen.

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Why Ritalin is a Scam

Now, how are you going to tell your kid not to take a class 2 drug from his friends when you are giving a class 2 drug made out of the same things to his kid sister? If you don’t make sense to your kids they’re not going to listen. Your kids have also checked out the web to see who is paying the school districts to put kids on drugs. In 1985 Congress passed the Individual Development Education Assistance Act (I.D.E.A.), giving funds in the billions to subsidize schools with kids who have learning disabilities.

Here’s the way it works: the US Government will give up to $450 and the state will give up to $160 to a school for each student who is labeled with a learning disability. Let’s do some math. At my old high school we had 2000 kids. The school figures about 10% have ADD, which is about 200 kids. You multiply 200 x $600 and that school gets over $120,000 per year for putting kids on drugs that are in the same FDA schedule classification as cocaine. Now how are you going to tell them not to take drugs?

-From an article by Steve Plog of the Results Project

Monday, November 13, 2006

Ritalin stunts growth of preschoolers; 40 percent develop side effects

A newstarget.com article cites a 70-week government study published in the November edition of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, which states that stunted growth and other side effects can follow treatment with Ritalin.

"The side effects reported on Ritalin's label include stomachaches, headaches and hallucinations, but reports have suggested it also causes more severe reactions such as liver problems and even death," says the article.

Children given the drugs grew about a half inch less than expected during the period of the study, and gained about 2 lbs. less than expected.

Another side effect? Aberrated behavior. "Some children even reacted with severe behaviors including hanging from ceiling fans and playing with fire," says the study.

How long before everyone realizes the emperor has no clothes?

Sunday, November 12, 2006

Mental Health "200 to 300 years behind other branches of medicine"

A recent article in the NY Times illustrates the confusion in mental health. A Duke University professor of psychiatry says, "...the system of diagnosis is still 200 to 300 years behind other branches of medicine".

The article appears to be written by someone who is not really anti-psychiatry, but who is trying to make sense of the field. The result is journalistic anguish. One wants to take the writer by the shoulders, shake him and say, "Open your eyes! The field is completely destructive and insane!"

Psychiatry and psychology have been so ineffective for so long that people in the field have "adjusted" to it (to use their own term) and like the murderer who laughingly confesses to his crimes, they now freely admit their impotence, not realizing that such admissions are tantamount to a confession of guilt, in a field where innocence was lost long ago. If a family can find some combination of treatments that help a child improve, “then the diagnosis may not matter much at all," says one psychiatrist, apparently blind to the real implication of such a statement.

The article also exposes the lack of technology in the field, anecdotally relating the story of a family who tried to solve their child's so-called "mental problem" by going from psych to psych and getting different diagnoses and different treatments each time. Psychiatric terms like "ADHD" and "bipolar" are bandied about as if they meant something specific, but the article admits "Children can develop so fast that what looks like attention deficit disorder in the fall may look like anxiety or nothing at all in the summer."

Read the article at this link.

Sunday, November 05, 2006

Psychsearch.net/Teenscreen

We've often recommended the Psychsearch.net site, but if you haven't been there recently, check it out again -- especially the Teenscreen page. It's hard to find another central repository of data that more exhaustively and accurately chronicles the ongoing fight against psychiatry as it tries to create a Big Brother atmosphere that is above the law.

In this world where a man can go to prison without committing a crime, and without a trial, ONLY because some "expert" can get a judge to agree that the man is insane, it is important to follow the progress of this fight and keep informed.

Read the quotes from newspapers in the right-hand column on the Teenscreen page.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Ritalin is Poison

"What’s wrong with the children? Basically the children have started to show signs of insanity because the system that is raising them is nuts," says Tom DeWeese. He then proceeds to surgically take apart the current system of diagnosing "ADHD" then prescribing drugs as a solution.

"Schools need answers. Parents need answers. Psychologists need to prove their credentials. So, in the dark, blind as bats, action has been taken." DeWeese discusses the origin of so-called "ADHD" and the way it came out of nowhere to create a multi-billion dollar industry for Big Pharma.

DeWeese says it like it is: "
To date, there has never been issued a single peer-reviewed scientific paper officially claiming to prove ADD/ADHD exists. Nor has there ever been a single bit of physical evidence to confirm the disease exists. So-called experts on the subject have refused to answer the simple question, “is ADD/ADHD a real disease?” Medical researchers charge that ADHD does not meet the medical definition of a disease or syndrome or anything organic or biologic."

But delighted with the sales of Ritalin and other drugs, Big Pharma has been laying awake night trying to figure out ways to justify the existence of ADHD and pushing their poisons.

Read the entire article here.

Monday, October 30, 2006

Tell Them The Truth

This great article is from the L.A. Times. Read it in its entirety here. The Times requires a log-in but you can get one for free and it's easy to do.

Truth is, it's best if they know
Depression is less likely in children who are hip to what peers think of them -- good or bad.
By Melissa Healy, Times Staff Writer

Some politicians, public health officials, mental health activists and pharmaceutical companies have worked to establish mental-health screening programs in schools and the community. Those initiatives, including a model program designed at Columbia University called TeenScreen, aim to steer kids who are more likely to develop depression toward help before their emotional difficulties lead them to risky behaviors, academic failure or suicide attempts. In recent years, six states — Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Iowa and New Mexico — have moved to adopt programs that screen schoolchildren for warning signs of mental illness, including depression. Elsewhere, individual school districts have followed suit.

Those efforts have proven controversial. Many parents fear their children will be labeled as mentally ill and marked for special attention because they have expressed sentiments typical of adolescents. Others caution that there are few services and scant psychiatric help available for the millions of children that could be identified. And many suspect such screens are drug company-sponsored efforts to build the market for antidepressants.

Researchers and clinicians, meanwhile, say they are far from having developed accurate predictors of a child developing depression. The younger the child, the murkier the crystal ball.

Monday, October 23, 2006

An Editorial Re Teenscreen From Indiana

The Indiana legislature passed a draconian (severe) law requiring screening of all children from birth to 22 years of age for mental health. Now that this has occurred many legislators are on the warpath. It appears that many of them didn't really read the small print and now see the law as an attack on children. The developments are going to be interesting. Is it any coincidence this law was passed in the home state of Eli Lilly, one of the largest Big Pharma drug companies in the world, and the maker of Prozac?

Here is the content of an editorial in the Fort Wayne Daily News:

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Our View

Yet another study warns of risks of behavior drugs

The first long-term government study on Ritalin and its effect on preschoolers shows that preschoolers are more likely than older children to develop side effects.

The soaring number of preschoolers with severe behaviors being given psychiatric drugs prompted the research.

The study in the November edition of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry said the benefits of low-dose treatment for preschoolers outweigh the risks.

However, about 40 percent of the preschoolers developed side effects such as irritability, weight loss, insomnia and slowed growth.

We believe there needs to be more research to see if there are links between pollutants, diet and troubled home environments and the surge in childhood depression and behavior problems.

Our children deserve to grow up - if at all possible - without the possible side-effects of short-term and long-term psychiatric drug use. A “drugged up” generation is more likely to end up in a lifelong cycle of prescription drug taking.

We need more information about why attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) seems to be spiraling and how best to meet children's physical and emotional needs.

That about spells it out, doesn't it?

Thursday, October 19, 2006

Foster Kids In Chemical Straitjackets

Historically, the handling of underprivileged children, such as orphans and foster children who have been taken away from their natural parents for some reason, has been abysmal. But today people point to the fact that we feed them and clothe them and house them and no longer force them to work long hours for no pay in factories, and say that we now treat them humanely. Think again.

Read this story from CBS on the use of drugs as a control mechanism for foster kids. The bottom line is that if you are taken away from your parents you're destined to be forced to take heavy mind-altering psychiatric drugs on a daily basis. There's just no alternative. You don't get to say, "No today thank you, I feel fine." If I were in that position, I think I might prefer the 12-hour per day job on the factory assembly line, a bowl of gruel for supper, and a clear head. It is criminal to use these drugs as a form of chemical incarceration.

Monday, October 16, 2006

A Rush To Medicate Young Minds

A psychiatrist speaks on the subject of using medication as a solution to supposed "mental illnesses" such as ADHD, bi-polar, etc., with the result of doing serious damage, sometimes even causing death to the patient. This is an illuminating article. Read the original by clicking here.

More and more, concerned and ethical people in the psychiatry and psychology communities are coming forward in objection to Big Pharma's drug-pushing agenda.

Friday, October 13, 2006

Antipsychotics not good for Alzheimer's

Big Pharma (the pharmaceutical industry) is always trying to figure out ways to sell their most expensive drugs, whether they work or not. One of their scams has been the idea of using antipsychotics for Alzheimer's victims. Does that sound crazy? It is. Here's what the Washington Post has to say about it. Read the full article at this link.

Antipsychotic drugs that are widely used to calm agitated patients with Alzheimer's disease help very few of them, and those modest benefits are canceled out by the frequent side effects, a comprehensive government-funded study has found.

The surprising finding is expected to trigger a broad reevaluation of the widespread use of the drugs in patients with Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia. As many as a quarter of the Alzheimer's patients in nursing homes are prescribed the powerful drugs, even though they have never been formally approved for this purpose.

"I wish I could say the odds are better," said Thomas R. Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health, which funded the $17 million study. "This paper says most people are not going to be any different on these drugs than they would on placebo."

The researchers did not conclude that the drugs should never be used, and a minority of patients do benefit. But the study suggests that doctors would be well advised to prescribe the drugs sparingly and as a last resort, experts said.

The study is the latest to produce sobering data on the newer, expensive antipsychotics such as Zyprexa, Risperdal and Seroquel, which are among the most widely prescribed drugs in the United States at an annual cost of about $10 billion. Another government-funded study recently showed that the drugs were no better than an older and much cheaper drug called perphenazine in the treatment of schizophrenia.

Taken together, the government-sponsored clinical trials have highlighted two troublesome issues in the regulation and use of psychiatric medications in the United States.

The schizophrenia study showed that the short-term trials that pharmaceutical companies sponsor to gain Food and Drug Administration approval have limited value in telling doctors how patients will fare overall, or whether newer drugs are worth their higher cost.

The Alzheimer's study has revealed a different problem -- the extent to which physicians are prescribing and using medications in the absence of empirical data to guide them. None of the antipsychotic drugs is currently approved for Alzheimer's disease, and several short-term industry-sponsored clinical trials have failed to show a benefit. The FDA has required prominent "black box" warnings on the drugs' labels about side effects in elderly people following cases where the drugs were associated with strokes and death.

The article continues debunking this area. How much longer before the world realizes that the antidepressant emperor has not clothes?

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

In an article in Britains The Independent, a clinical psychologist seriously questions the role of drugs and big pharma in solving brain "chemical imbalances" and handling depression. Dr. Rufus May has a different view. Note that when he refers to Arsenal and Tottenham, he is referring to British soccer teams. From the article:

I work as a clinical psychologist in Bradford. Depression, or should I say pain and sadness, are part of life. Yesterday I counselled Celine, an asylum seeker who has been refused asylum despite strong evidence that she is a survivor of political torture. She is demoralised and her spirit is broken. She has no family here and no contact with her family in the Congo. Her problems are not due to a faulty brain, but oppression and isolation. Celine needs both individual support and to find a sense of community and belonging for as long as she is here. After seeing Celine, I felt tremendous shame at what human beings are capable of doing to each other for money and power. But I recovered quickly because I, unlike Celine, have a family and extended network of friends and colleagues who care about me.

I believe it's a myth that there is a worldwide epidemic of clinical depression that needs identifying and treating. The pharmaceutical companies have systematically promoted this myth. In the 10 years up to 2002 the use of antidepressants increased by 234 per cent. Yet still we are told we are more depressed than ever before. The World Health Organisation has a tendency to talk about the widespread and undiagnosed levels of depression internationally, but it also has close links with the pharmaceutical industry.

Yes, it's true that there's a lot of unhappiness in our society, but convincing people it is a medical condition does not help. I meet people who've bought into the idea that their sadness is caused by a chemical imbalance. Many of them have resigned themselves to one cocktail of medication after another. They have given up on their own ability to find a solution. After all, what can they do about their faulty brain-wiring? In fact, the chemical-imbalance theory is extremely dodgy. Joanna Moncrieff, from University College London, is a consultant psychiatrist who has taken a close look at the scientific evidence. She has argued that there is more evidence for psychiatric medication creating a chemical imbalance rather than correcting one. For example, despite it being commonly believed that depression is caused by a serotonin shortage, this relationship is unproven. Research on the serotonin theory is inconclusive, but such is the power of drug company propaganda that most of us accept it as fact.

We also need to question the idea that chemical changes are the main cause of emotional changes. If Arsenal lose to Tottenham I will experience a deep sinking feeling. This will probably be reflected by chemical changes in my brain but they did not cause this; football players did, combined with my attachment to Arsenal. Yet this logic is neatly overlooked by the "blame the brain" explanation for sadness. What we are distracted from is the fact that unhappiness is a social condition. It tells us about our relationships to others, both in the here and now and in the past.

Mother Teresa once observed that in the developing world there is an epidemic of poverty, while in the West there is an epidemic of loneliness. Similarly, the exiled Brazilian drama teacher Augustus Boal was surprised when he discovered that affluent Westerners were considerably unhappier than the deprived and disenfranchised Brazilian peasants he had worked with. His opinion was that the Brazilian peasants were happier because they knew who the enemy was and they had a collective sense of togetherness. In the West people seemed more isolated and unaware of who was oppressing them. He theorised that what had happened to Westerners was that they had internalised the bully - they had developed an inner critic, which he called a "cop in the head".

If you seek psychological help for inner critical thoughts you may well be offered cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). CBT tries to address the negative thoughts by training people to argue in their mind with their inner critic and substitute it with a rational, calm, optimistic personality. However, I, and many colleagues, have found that deep-seated emotional pain does not often respond to such tinkering. Perhaps, rather than trying to magic away pain with pills or positive thinking strategies, we should accept it, understand it and thereby start to transform it. For example, a friend of mine experiences periods of low mood episodically. Her mother died when she was young. Her problem is grief; fighting it won't make it go away. Some sadness will always be with her but understanding it and learning ways to not fear it will help.

Many psychologists want more resources so they can build an army of cognitive behaviour therapists to battle the beast of depression. In Bradford we are trying a different approach: community development through supporting the growth of self-help groups. I first became aware of the power of self-help groups eight years ago in east London. Dawn was adopted as a child. Now, in her thirties, she was low in mood and had episodes of self-destructiveness. Antidepressants had not helped and my psychological support was limited. Meeting her for limited periods every fortnight, I felt like a poor substitute for a friend. We decided to set up a self-help group called Helping Hands. At the group Dawn met Jean, an older woman who remembered Dawn as a baby. The stories she told Dawn about her early childhood encouraged Dawn to seek out her biological mother. This she did successfully, which led to a significant breakthrough in her sense of who she was.

In Bradford we have about 12 self-help groups, many of which are now jointly staffed by mental health workers and volunteers from the groups. Group members are gaining the confidence to go on to vocational training. We have also set up a network of public meetings that explore different approaches to mental well-being. What we have discovered is that people find a vast range of things helpful in dealing with distress, from diet and herbal medicine, through meditation and spiritual healing, to dance and artistic expression. As a result we have tried to make the mental health service more holistic, introducing t'ai chi and spiritual healing into the local psychiatric hospital.

But we also need to think about prevention. In the 1950s, '60s and '70s it was recognised both here and in the US that the root causes of mental illness were in social conditions. Initiatives focused on narrowing the gap between rich and poor and creating opportunities through education and community groups for self-expression and community regeneration. But with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher came the denial of society and funding for these projects was pulled. Distress and confusion was due to faulty brains and the market opened up for the drug companies. We now need to reverse this trend. Numbing our minds is not the answer.

Are we more depressed than before? Its difficult to say - there is clearly a lot of loneliness, grief, despair and feelings of inadequacy out there. Modern lifestyles encourage levels of competitiveness that can make us feel very lonely. Advertisers aim to make us dissatisfied with our lives. I would argue that medicalising and numbing our pain does not help; it mystifies its meaning in our lives and ignores the social and psychological avenues to making our lives more fulfilling.

Friday, October 06, 2006

Pro-Drugging Principal Arrested For Assault

"An alert Montana citizen notified us that the high school principal who allowed TeenScreen into his school has been arrested for 'partner or family member assault'. The citizen asked: 'Do you think Principal Kloppel was screened? TeenScreen.com responded: 'Given the FDA warnings of violence associated with psychotropic drugs your speculation may be valid one.' "

New Trial For Zoloft User Pittman?

Christopher Pittman was only 12 years old when he killed his grandparents, set their house on fire and drove away in their stolen car. Today at the age of 17, he is asking for a new trial.

The first kneejerk reaction is to say, "This is one crazy kid." But when all the facts are in, one wonders whether in fact he might deserve a new trial.

There doesn't seem to be any disagreement regarding the facts of the situation. But one fact that was overlooked or insufficiently investigated was the fact that Pittman was on Zoloft. This SSRI anti-depressant is in the same family with Prozac, Paxil and other similar anti-depressants that have been proven to actually cause suicidal and homicidal impulses in children AND adults.

In 2004, years after Pittman's crime, The FDA required Zoloft and other anti-depressants in this family to carry a black box warning (so-called because the warning goes in a black box on the packaging) of an increased suicidal risk in children. More recently they have recommended expanding the warning to include homicidal risk as well. A high percentage of the "school shooters" in the last decade have been on anti-depressants in this class.

The black box warning is the last gradient below banning the drug.

Read the story here.

Friday, September 29, 2006

Try Limiting Sugar Before Using Prozac

Oslo teens who drank the most sugary soft drinks also had more mental health problems such as hyperactivity and distress, Norwegian researchers reported on Thursday.

Their study of more than 5,000 Norwegian 15- and 16-year-olds showed a clear and direct association between soft drink intake and hyperactivity, and a more complex link with other mental and behavioral disorders.

This story is from a Reuters article.

It's remarkable that at this late date, some researchers finally publish what most mothers know: If you give Junior a lot of sugar you're going to be scraping him off the ceiling with a spatula. I remember my own son's reaction to donuts when he was six years old. We traditionally had donuts for breakfast on Saturdays and after several weeks of complete Saturday insanity we finally realized what it was. We dumped the donuts, and the problem went away.

But apparently many are still not acting on this data. So Junior, who regularly ingests several tablespoons of sugar in soft drinks, is acting up in school. Give him a psych drug. Right?


Friday, September 22, 2006

Suicide-risk Screening Effort Blasted

The Fresno Bee
Suicide-risk screening effort blasted
By Anne Dudley Ellis
Thursday, September 21, 2006

Critics, including a Fresno doctor, blasted the Fresno Unified School District on Wednesday for a suicide-risk screening program the district tried out at Hoover High School the past two years.

Concerns were raised during the public comment period at a meeting of the governing board.

The district is not using the TeenScreen Program currently but is working with Fresno County officials and other agencies on possible implementation at high schools, said Pete Summers, executive director of prevention and intervention for the district.

The program includes a 10-minute computer survey that asks students a variety of questions, including whether the teens have considered suicide.

About 400 10th-graders at Hoover High took the survey last year and the year before as part of a pilot program, Summers said.
Critics said students who answered "yes" to many of the questions could be unfairly categorized as suicidal and the program could lead students to take unnecessary psychiatric drugs.

Fresno physician Larry Scortt called TeenScreen "bogus." One of his criticisms was that the program seemed slanted toward psychiatric treatment, when some emotional troubles could be caused by allergies or poor nutrition.

Retired teacher Sharon Kientz said the questionnaire was "loaded for positive responses."

"How many [students] have been sucked into the psychiatric drug market?" Kientz asked the governing board.

Critics' harsh comments prompted alarmed murmuring through the board-meeting audience.

Board President Luisa Medina said Summers and John Marinovich, in charge of high schools for the district, would examine the concerns.

In responding to questions from the media outside the board room, Summers disputed the characterization of TeenScreen as a dangerous program that usurped parents' authority over their children. Summers said students must have their parents' permission to complete the survey, and subsequent counseling sessions with mental health professionals also required permission.

Summers said teen suicide is a significant problem and the questionnaire could help students in distress get help. He did not have statistics on students who have been helped because of the questionnaire.

The TeenScreen Web site says the program is overseen by the Carmel Hill Center at Columbia University in New York.
Media accounts indicate the program has attracted controversy nationwide.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Anna Nicole Smith's Son Killed By Antidepressants?

Anna Nicole Smith's Son on Prescribed Psychiatric Drugs at Time of Death
Antidepressants suspected as possible cause
Forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht, who performed the second autopsy on Daniel Smith, has announced that Daniel had been on antidepressants at the time of his death. Answers are being avidly sought by the media and the public for the unexpected death of the 20-year-old son of model/actress, Anna Nicole Smith. The recent revelation of his antidepressant use could likely lead to the answer.
Newer antidepressants, called Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) have been connected with a life-threatening condition called "serotonin syndrome," caused by an excess of serotonin in the brain due to the drugs. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned on July 19, 2006, that SSRIs, when combined with certain migraine drugs, can cause "serotonin syndrome," which may result in headaches, dizziness, vomiting, coma and death. The New York Post and other papers report that Daniel Smith was vomiting uncontrollably before his death.
Antidepressants can also cause cardiac complications, including heart attack and stroke, as well as headaches, nausea, internal bleeding and seizures. Read the Report on the Escalating International Warnings on Psychiatric Drugs, published by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, to find out other dangers of psychiatric drugs.

Friday, July 21, 2006

INHUMAN BEINGS - The Chemicalized Personality

A mother murders her five children. High school students massacre their classmates. An Iraq vet stabs his wife 71 times. How can this happen?

A common thread in these occurrences is the fact that the killers have been taking psychiatric medications.

But that is too simple. So we hear about “post-partum depression” and “combat stress.” In the case of the teens, it's “the breakdown of the family" or it’s the music, the movies, the video games.

The real answer is the dehumanizing effect of drugs.

A human being has more than one aspect. There is a definite electro-chemical component. The body physically functions via electro-chemical processes.

Then there is that aspect which perceives and reasons and creates. This is not electro-chemical. When people communicate with each other, it is not chemical molecules that are exchanging ideas. This is the spiritual aspect; the conscious, aware individual.

There is also a mental component—a mind—which is an interactive link between the reasoning factor and the physical.

A healthy mind (motivated by the spirit) is analytical.

A less healthy mind is less analytical and more and more reactive. It operates on a stimulus/response basis, motivated by random factors. A troubled, unhealthy mind doesn't reason. It doesn't perceive well. It reacts to stimuli.

For a long time now, the mental health establishment has been telling us that we are chemical in nature. They would have us believe that they can solve our problems with mood-altering drugs—a little dash of this and a little dash of that.

That approach may work at the purely physical level, as in taking antibiotics to handle infection, but it is not the physical component that gives us our rationality, our humanity. It is not the molecules in the brain that are thinking and perceiving, loving and caring, creating great music and poetry.

No, the physical component is comprised of cells and electrical impulses, which are as reasoning and creative as an avocado or the electric current that powers your toaster.

When a person is troubled, he is already sliding in the direction of the reactive, unthinking, physical impulse side of his nature. To then give him chemical, mood-altering drugs, pushes him further in that direction. While the sedative effect may appear to calm him down, he is becoming, more and more chemicalized.

So is it any wonder that these killers seem less than human? They ARE less than human. Though they can appear bright and calculating at times, real judgment is gone. They are completely reactive; alienated.

Their minds bubble and boil like the mass of chemicals they have become. The analytical capacity is gone. The spirit is gone. Their humanity is gone. They respond randomly and literally to stimuli (enter music, movies and video games).

Then, in the extreme, they lash out with violence at the imagined demons and enemies in their own unreal world. They have been mentally short-circuited by the drugs that are supposed to be helping them. It is the ultimate betrayal.

And when their bizarre, chemically induced, nightmare world collides with the world of OUR reality—which consists of living people, loving families, children, teachers, learning, accomplishment—a slaughter ensues and we are left to wonder "WHY?" "WHAT HAPPENED?"

The answer: psychiatry happened. And why would anyone perpetrate such a crime as to drug children and adults, driving them insane, all in the name of help? It's too horribly simple. It’s a multi-billion dollar business. They do it for money.

The good news is that when society wakes up to these facts, we will cease to allow these evils to occur.

It's time.

Tom Solari
tom@tomsolari.com

Tom Solari is a professional writer and video producer, living and working in Los Angeles. He is concerned about a culture that promotes chemical dependency as a solution to problems, when logic and the evidence shows that this approach deepens the problem by numbing the brain, muddling the mind and undermining the human spirit.

Thursday, July 20, 2006

FDA Puts New Warning On Prozac And Other SSRIs

According to an article in Web MD, the FDA is warning us that taking certain migraine drugs with some types of antidepressants may create a life-threatening condition. The FDA's warning focuses on migraine medications called triptans when taken together with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), or with serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs).

SSRIs and SNRIs are used to treat depression and mood disorders. SSRIs include Zoloft, Paxil, Celexa, and Prozac. SNRIs include Cymbalta and Effexor.

"A life-threatening condition called serotonin syndrome may occur when triptans are used together with an SSRI or a SNRI," states an FDA news release.

An interesting side-issue here is that the triptan drugs are related to the natural remedy once available at health food stores, tryptophan. The FDA seized upon a contaminated batch of tryptophan to ban it from the market. But the back story seems to be that tryptophan was hysterically opposed by Big Pharma, because of its reaction when used with Prozac and the other SSRIs. It is more than interesting to note that the cheap health food product was simply banned, while the proven incompatibility with the profitable triptan drugs was solved with warning labels. In the meantime, there have been many more deaths from suicide attributable to SSRIs than ever occurred from sickness caused by the batch of contaminated tryptophan.

The question I've always pondered is; why did they ban the trytophan instead of banning the SSRIs? That question is more-or-less rhetorical, but the injustice is nevertheless manifest. I support the free market economy and I don't like bashing big corporations just because they are successful and doing well. But in the case of the Big Pharma drug companies, there is a constant undertow of amoral and corrupt manipulation, as well as distribution of drugs that cause harm rather than help. Without batting an eye, Big Pharma seems to be focused primarily on its profits, and the welfare of the public be damned.

Serotonin syndrome occurs when the body has too much serotonin, a chemical found in the nervous system. Triptans, SSRIs, and SNRIs all raise serotonin levels. As with tryptophan, the higher seratonin levels caused by triptans are an aid to helping with migraine headaches, as well as insomnia.

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Big Pharma (Drug Companies) Control Psychiatry

Ever wonder how much control the drug industry exerts on psychiatry? Here's a good one:

As reported in the San Jose Mercury News, Juy 10, 2006:

Dr. Alan F. Schatzberg, Stanford's long-time chair of the department of psychiatry, has reported financial interests with a number of companies that make psychiatric pills and devices, including:

Abbott Laboratories Inc.: consultant or scientific advisory board
Bristol-Myers Squibb: consultant or scientific advisory board; grant support
Corcept Therapeutics: scientific advisory board chairman; board of directors; stock
Elan Pharmaceuticals: stock or options
Eli Lilly and Co.: consultant or scientific advisory board; grant support
Forest Laboratories: consultant or scientific advisory board
GlaxoSmithKline: consultant or scientific advisory board; grant support
Janssen Pharmaceutica Products: consultant or scientific advisory board
Merck: stock or options
Neuronetics: consultant or scientific advisory board
Organon Pharmaceuticals: consultant or scientific advisory board
Pathway Diagnostics: stock or options
Pfizer: consultant or scientific advisory board; stock or options
Sanofi-Aventis: consultant or scientific advisory board
Somaxon Pharmaceuticals: consultant or scientific advisory board; stock or options
Somerset Pharmaceuticals: consultant or scientific advisory board; grant support
Wyeth Pharmaceuticals: consultant or scientific advisory board; grant support

Source: American Psychiatric Association; Corcept Therapeutics

Monday, July 17, 2006

Ethics Are Put In On Another Psych School Counselor

This article is from the Patriot Ledger, a Boston area newspaper:

Read it at http://ledger.southofboston.com/articles/2006/07/08/news/news10.txt

State reprimands counselor; School worker pressured parent, allowed ADHD evaluation of student without parental consent

By JACK ENCARNACAO
The Patriot Ledger

WEYMOUTH - A state department of education investigation concluded that a veteran adjustment counselor at the Thomas Hamilton Primary School violated federal law when she allowed a special education evaluation of a student without parental consent.

The mother pulled her children out of the school over the incident, said Andre Afonso, deputy director of the Massachusetts Citizens Commission on Human Rights, where the mother initially brought her complaints.

The commission on Human Rights was established in 1969 by the Church of Scientology to investigate psychiatric violations of human rights.

‘‘This is a big issue right now with us,’’ Afonoso said. ‘‘Bypassing the written consent law ... it can lead to (unnecessary) drugging in the schools.’’

Under a law enacted in 1998 called the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, a student can not be required to submit to an evaluation of mental or psychological problems without prior written consent of a parent.

The state board of education also has a similar regulation about parental consent.

The state’s investigation followed complaints from the student’s mother that for three years the adjustment counselor pressured her to medicate her daughter for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

The student’s mother, who was not named in documents about the case and did not respond to a call for comment, did not give verbal or written permission for a mental evaluation, only for an academic evaluation.

‘‘The district acknowledged parental consent was not obtained for the administration of this test,’’ reads a letter from the department of education to the Weymouth school district.

In an affidavit filed with the commission, the mother said the counselor, Cora Hall, acted ‘‘outside of the scope of her job description and her unrelenting harassment over these past three years (have been) outside the legal barrier.’’

The mother was studying to become a nurse, and sensed something was wrong with the way her daughter was evaluated.

‘‘She knew her rights,’’ Afonso said of the mother.

The state investigation concluded that Hall, a 30-year veteran of school counseling, administered a test called the Connors’ Teacher Rating Scale in April 2005 to detect signs of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in the student, a first grader who was enrolled in a special education class due to a speech delay.

‘‘I do think I rushed,’’ Hall said. ‘‘I regret that because we don’t want to alienate parents, we don't want to upset anybody.’’

Hall said a teacher, not her, conducted the evaluation with her direction.

The state concluded that no punishment is necessary. But officials did require the school district to hold review and training sessions on the issue, which were held in March.

‘‘The penalty is more corrective action to address whatever violations were in place,’’ said Nate Mackinnon, a spokesman for the state Department of Education. ‘‘If a district were to decide not to comply (with corrective action), then we'd take additional steps. But typically with situations like this, the law tends to be rather complex, and it’s more about ensuring that it doesn't happen in the future.’’

Copyright 2006 The Patriot Ledger