Outcome could impact drug's use with youths
NICHOLE MONROE BELL
Staff Writer
The boy stood over the bed, lifted the shotgun and squeezed. Once. Twice.
With two blasts, Joe Pittman, 66, and Joy Pittman, 62, were dead. They were killed as they slept, police say, by their 12-year-old grandson.
What leads a child to kill two of the people he loves the most -- an antidepressant drug or a malicious mind?
That is the question at the core of the Christopher Pittman murder trial, which begins Monday in Charleston. Pittman, now 15, is charged as an adult in the November 2001 Chester County, S.C., slayings and could face a maximum sentence of life in prison if convicted.
Pittman's lawyers and family will argue that the boy was depressed and had a reaction to the antidepressant Zoloft. But prosecutors describe the boy as a troubled child with a violent past.
The trial, which will be covered by CNN, Court TV and other news outlets, comes at the height of an international debate about the safety of antidepressant use in children and adolescents.
Experts say the case is one of the first times the antidepressant defense has been used for a child defendant. The defense has rarely succeeded when used for adults.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration ordered in October that Zoloft and similar antidepressants carry boldface warnings saying the drugs increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in some children.
Critics of the drugs, and Pittman's lawyers, say the drugs can also turn a child into a killer.
James Cohen, a professor at New York's Fordham Law School who teaches about psychology in criminal law, said a not-guilty verdict in the Pittman case would likely have major implications for drugmakers who could take a blow to sales and become the target of more civil liability lawsuits. Two of Pittman's lawyers are civil attorneys who have sued New York-based Pfizer, the maker of Zoloft.
"I think this is a perfect parallel to what's going on with the public debate on whether these drugs are safe," Cohen said. "If you get a jury saying the kid wasn't responsible because of the drug, that's going to have a devastating effect. ... It's going to be a magnet for legal work."
Zoloft is the No. 1 prescribed antidepressant in the U.S. market, and the drug's worldwide revenues in the fourth quarter of 2004 were $959 million, according to Pfizer. Physicians have written about 250 million Zoloft prescriptions since the drug hit the market in 1992 for a variety of psychiatric disorders, according to Pfizer.
Pfizer officials say they are watching the Pittman case closely.
"We're concerned it may get people who've really benefited to become hesitant to take the drug," Pfizer spokesman Bryant Haskins said. "Our biggest concern is our patients. ... We're certain (Zoloft) didn't cause this kid to kill his grandparents."
Pittman was prescribed Zoloft to manage mild depression after he moved from Florida in 2001 to stay with his grandparents. The boy's mother had abandoned him, and he was having trouble getting along with his father, doctors have testified. A week before the killings, a doctor doubled the boy's dosage to 200 milligrams a day. The day of the killings, he got into a fight with a younger child on the school bus and his grandparents disciplined him, according to testimony at pretrial hearings.
The maximum recommended dosage for Zoloft in depressed adults is 200 mg. The drug has not been been FDA approved to treat depression in children, but many doctors prescribe it for that purpose.
The defense team is arguing that Pittman suffered from "involuntary intoxication" of Zoloft, meaning the drug put him in a mental state in which he was unable to distinguish between right and wrong.
After the shootings, Pittman wrote a letter to the FDA, saying a voice in his head drove him to kill.
"I snapped. I took everything out on my grandparents who I loved so much," the boy wrote in the letter, which his father read at a February 2004 hearing in Washington. "Through the whole thing, it was like watching your favorite TV show. You know what is going to happen, but you can't do anything to stop it. All you can do is just watch it in fright."
Such defenses have rarely succeeded in the past because the research was unavailable and there weren't enough experts willing to testify for the defense, said Richard Southard, a former New York prosecutor who works in private practice as a defense lawyer. He thinks the failure rate will change, however.
"I think it's a viable defense," said Southard, who has appeared as a guest analyst on Fox News Live and Court TV for the Scott Peterson murder trial. "It's going to be used more and more frequently because of the media attention and the increased number of people being put on the drugs."
In April, a Santa Cruz, Calif., jury acquitted a 28-year-old man of attempted murder and assault after his lawyers argued that an adverse reaction to Zoloft caused him to hit a longtime friend in the head with a weapon in 2002, according to an article in the Santa Cruz Sentinel. Prosecutors argued that the drug wasn't in the man's system when he was arrested, the newspaper reported.
The prosecutors in the Pittman trial will make a similar argument. They say Pittman knew what he was doing and tried to conceal the crime by setting the house on fire, then fled in the family car with his dog. When deputies found him, he told them a man had killed his grandparents and kidnapped him.
Experts say the jury's willingness to accept Pittman's defense will hang, in part, on his behavior before and after the slayings.
Prosecutors say that before the slayings, Pittman was a runaway who once stabbed a bull with a dart and fired a BB gun into a house. Defense lawyers say the boy was nonviolent despite his difficult family life and bouts with mild depression.
To succeed, Pittman's lawyers will also need to bridge the gap between the clinical studies on Zoloft and Pittman's actions, experts said. Although a growing body of research questions whether the drugs can increase the risk of suicide in adolescents, experts say there is no research showing the drug puts children at risk of committing a homicide.
"Before when you first started hearing this (defense), juries dismissed this without a thought," Southard said. "Now, they're more open to the defense. They've heard some of the negative publicity about these drugs."
Nichole Monroe Bell: (803) 327-8511; nbell@charlotteobserver.com.
Therapists' Sexual Misconduct CloakedFRONT PAGE TAMPA TRIBUNE By LENNY SAVINO Published: Jan 28, 2005 She was depressed and needed help, so she went to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist, Jose Anibal Cruz, flirted with her from the woman's first visit, a state Department of Health report states. She returned for another appointment and began seeing Cruz regularly. Soon Cruz was hugging her. Next he asked for pictures of her in a bathing suit or nude, the report states. She complied. Before long, they began having an affair. Both were adults. The woman was 31; Cruz was 52. State law presumes that patients being treated for mental or emotional difficulties are vulnerable and specifically forbids psychotherapists such as Cruz from having affairs with them. Doing so is a felony, with a first offense punishable by up to five years in prison, and a second by up to 15 years. Cruz has not been charged with violating this law, however, and neither have more than 100 other therapists suspected of having similar relationships with patients, Health Department records show. The reason: A Health Department office responsible for policing the therapists has been failing to notify prosecutors of such cases even though another state law, passed in 1992, requires it to, according to a newly released report from the department's inspector general. That notification law extends far beyond therapists and applies to every health care provider in Florida requiring a state license: chiropractors, physical therapists - even nursing home administrators, hearing aid specialists and masseuses. Each of these professions is state regulated. In some cases, the overseer is a board; in others, it is an office within the Health Department. The law requires each of these bodies to do two things when an impropriety is alleged. First, an administrative investigation must be initiated. If this leads to a finding that the allegation is true, the regulating authority then metes out a punishment. This can range from a fine or a period of occupational supervision to license revocation. Second, the law says any allegation that might be criminal - sex-related or not - must be reported to prosecutors. The question now is how many of these regulatory bodies have been complying - and, if any others have not been, how many more criminal referrals have been missed. To find out, Health Secretary John O. Agwunobi has ordered a sweeping paper chase. Department investigators are combing through the files on every disciplinary case the agency or one of its satellite regulatory bodies has investigated since 1992. There are 24,000 of these, the department says. The files on them are in a state warehouse. The department won't say how many files have been examined so far or how many remain. Nor will it say how many investigators are involved in the review. The files can be thick. Each typically contains legal documents describing the complaint and containing statements from witnesses, an administrative judge's finding of facts in the case and a final order. Depending on how many investigators the department uses, the review could take several months. Statute Of Limitations As the investigators work, other embarrassments have emerged. For example, not only is the criminal referral requirement spelled out in Florida law, it is detailed in a written Health Department policy adopted in 2002. In addition, another statute requires that a criminal case be prosecuted within a certain time frame - three years in the case of most felonies - a period often called the statute of limitations. If the deadline is missed, the accused is relieved of criminal responsibility and no longer can be tried. In the vast majority of cases found so far involving sexual activity by psychotherapists, this deadline has passed, meaning the therapists involved are exempt from being criminally charged and tried. Cruz's case was one of these. Health Department investigators launched an administrative inquiry that ultimately led to the revocation of his medical license, but they failed to refer the matter for criminal prosecution. The breakdown was discovered last summer when a private citizen sent a public records request to the department. Nobody knows yet how many such therapists - psychiatrists, psychologists, licensed social workers and family counselors such as ministers - have escaped prosecution. In the report released last week, the department's inspector general suggested there are scores of them. The Health Department office that is supposed to have been making the criminal referrals in the cases involving the therapists is the Medical Quality Assurance Consumer Services Unit, the report says. The report does not find fault with any individual in this office. Supporting documents suggest the referral failures were a consequence of poor management and supervision, perhaps combined with the fact that the unit has been attached to three Cabinet-level departments since the late 1990s. Agwunobi is so appalled by what the inspector general found that last week he demoted the unit's chief and transferred her to a nonsupervisory job, Health Department spokeswoman Lindsay Hodges said. Remaining unit staff will be ``revising policies and procedures, retraining staff and taking disciplinary action where appropriate,'' Hodges said. Prosecutor Errs The Cruz case occurred in Miami and was remarkable on several counts. For one thing, Cruz's relationship with the patient went undetected for eight years, the Health Department file on the case shows. Cruz went to some lengths to avoid being found out. For example, after office visits, he often took the woman to a motel for sex and registered using a fictitious name, the file states. Not even hospital stays interrupted the trysts, the file alleges. Cruz hospitalized the woman five times. Before seeing her on rounds, he would call ahead and ask her to be in the shower when he arrived. More sexual activity would follow, the file states. The relationship ended only when the woman told a friend about it. The friend urged her to contact authorities and a lawyer. The lawyer had Cruz videotaped as he escorted the woman to the motel. The lawyer, Kevin T. Smith, notified the Health Department, triggering the administrative investigation. This led, three years later, to the revocation of Cruz's license. Not once in all this time did the department alert local prosecutors to the case. Smith told the Miami-Dade County State Attorney's Office about it, however, and another failure occurred. An assistant prosecutor compared the facts of the case with the wrong statute and told Smith to forget it - that under the law, Cruz had not done anything criminal. Cruz maintains his innocence, says Jon Pellett, a Tampa lawyer who represented him during the Health Department's administrative inquiry. "We found evidence that the complainant was not credible or believable,'' Pellett said. ``The administrative judge disagreed.'' For instance, Pellett said, attendants at the hospital checked patients every 15 minutes, making it unlikely Cruz would have observed his client showering. Nevertheless, Cruz agreed to an out-of-court settlement in a civil lawsuit the woman brought, Smith said. He will not discuss details. The Price Patients Pay A patient's attraction to a psychotherapist is not uncommon, experts say, but resulting sexual relationships can be severely damaging. ``The offer by a psychotherapist of an intimate sexual relationship is initially perceived by many ... as the opportunity for an ideal, special relationship,'' wrote psychologist Philip Boswell, of Coral Gables. ``When later, as generally happens, the relationship is lost, the client's reaction is frequently catastrophic and often qualifies ... as a post-traumatic stress disorder.'' Guilt and shame caused by therapist manipulation, Boswell added, frequently can lead to depression and self- disdain for being so gullible. Anger also can result, along with ``massive ... confusion, and enormous distrust of therapy, therapists or even intimate relationships in general.'' The unreferred cases of this type that have come to light so far include several in the Tampa area. Records show that among the accused are: * Mental health counselor Marvin Kassed, of New Port Richey, accused administratively in 2000 of hiring a former patient, having a sexual relationship with her and disclosing confidential information to her about other patients. Kassed took a plea deal under which he did not admit or deny the allegations but agreed to two years' probation, $4,900 in fines and investigative fees, and a weekly review by a Health Department psychotherapist of his cases involving female patients. Kassed was accused in a similar case six years earlier, fined $1,000 and ordered to attend an ethics course. * Family counselor Richard Bernstein, of Tampa, accused administratively in 1998 of using so-called family therapy sessions to draw the mother of a patient into a one-year sexual relationship. Bernstein admitted the allegation and accepted a $1,000 fine, a one- year ban on female patients and five years' probation. * Mental health counselor Richard Fedora, of Dunedin, accused of sharing a hotel room with a female patient at a weekend symposium on hypnosis in Daytona Beach. Although the patient had just been discharged from treatment for alcohol and drug abuse, she got drunk at the hotel's pool bar and was returned to the room by other guests. After telling Health Department investigators that he tried to ``counsel her all weekend,'' Fedora accepted a plea deal under which he did not admit or deny wrongdoing but got three years' probation and a $3,000 fine. Kassed and Bernstein did not return telephone calls seeking comment. Fedora said he agreed to a plea deal just to end the torment of dealing with the investigative process. "After this complaint dragged on for almost 3 1/2 years,'' he said, ``I told my attorney to do whatever it would take to negotiate an end to the nightmare of this complaint. The plea I agreed to is on record, even though it is not true.'' 'A Public Hazard' If Health Secretary Agwunobi is appalled by the scope of the breakdown, so is state Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach. "I think it raises very significant issues,'' Gelber said. "The idea that they're not ... referring what appear to be bona fide allegations for prosecution is deeply troubling. It's a public hazard.''
Gelber, a federal prosecutor for 10 years, has asked the Miami-Dade County State Attorney's Office to look into the Cruz case. A supervising prosecutor with the office, Josh Weintraub, said he had briefed his staff on the right statute to consult if any similar cases surface, but whether anything else can be done is problematic. The statute of limitations likely expired in the Cruz case Aug. 17, 2004, the same day the Consumer Services Unit issued an administrative ruling finding him guilty and revoking his medical license and exactly three years from the day he was videotaped registering for a room at the motel. As they continue sifting through files, Health Department investigators are telling local prosecutors about every case they find, even those that no longer can be prosecuted, Hodges said. Not only does the law still require notification, she said, the information ``may still be of great value in future investigations and prosecutions.'' About a dozen referrals have been received so far by Pinellas-Pasco State Attorney Bernie McCabe. One involved a therapist who had been prosecuted without a Health Department referral and acquitted. The rest involve cases in which the statute of limitations has expired. ``If the statute ... has expired,'' McCabe said, ``there's nothing we can do.'' Six cases have been referred to the Hillsborough County State Attorney's Office, spokeswoman Pam Bondi said. The statute has expired on most of these, too. Crusader Pressed State For List of Possible ViolationsPhoto of Ken Kramer, captioned: Ken Kramer, of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, says there likely are more violations then the state has revealed. Save for the persistence of one person, Ken Kramer, of Clearwater, the Florida Department of Health might not be telling prosecutors about alleged sexual improprieties involving psychotherapists. Kramer is chief researcher for the Citizens Committee on Human Rights, an organizations found by the Clearwater based Church of Scientology in 1969. Kramer says the church no longer finances it. Scientology opposes many of the holdings of modern psychiatry and psychology. The Committee’s primary mission is to monitor misconduct by psychotherapists, Kramer says. It maintains a Web site – http://www.psychsearch.net/public_records.html - with a list of more than 1,100 therapists who have been the subject of disciplinary proceedings in Florida. Kramer, 48, works without pay at the committee’s one-story storefront office in Downtown Clearwater. The organization s has two paid staff members, about 200 volunteers and 500 members statewide, he says. Kramer began wondering last year whether the health department was complying with a 1992 state law requiring it to notify local prosecutors of cases involving alleged sexual contact between therapists and patients and sent the department public records requests on the subject in July. “They couldn’t find anything” at first, Kramer says. He kept at it. Finally, the department sent him evidence of about 100 cases that should have been referred but hadn’t been, Kramer says. He thinks there are more. “The Department of Health is up to their eyeballs in crimes committed by psychotherapists,” Kramer says. He has found evidence in one document suggesting department officials “are fearful that if they report all crimes they would overwhelm state attorneys offices” across Florida, he says. Department spokeswoman Lindsay Hodges says the agency is “grateful to Mr. Kramer for bringing this matter to our attention.”
http://tampatrib.com/News/MGBW7X4SO4E.html State Remiss To Not Report Misbehaving Health Workers
Published: Feb 2, 2005I n 1992 the Legislature passed a law requiring the Florida Department of Health to notify prosecutors of accusations made against health care professionals that could be criminal in nature.Yet it seems that department investigators and supervisors either didn't know about the law or ignored it altogether.
An investigation launched last July revealed that no one had notified prosecutors of more than 100 instances when patients had accused psychiatrists, psychologists, doctors, nurses, massage therapists and others of sexual improprieties. The question now is how many criminal violations were missed in the 24,000 other disciplinary cases investigated in the last 13 years.
The department is guilty of blatant neglect, if not worse, because most of the cases discovered during the initial investigation can no longer be prosecuted. The statute of limitations - the deadline under which criminal charges could have been brought - has run out.
State law makes it a felony punishable by up to five years in prison for psychotherapists to have sex with their patients, yet most of the 100 complained about will escape prosecution because the department dropped the ball.
It's not that health department employees failed to investigate the complaints. But they appear to have focused solely on discipline, even in some cases where criminality seemed obvious. It is inexcusable that they would not turn over the information they obtained to the proper charging authorities.
Last week Florida Department of Health Secretary John O. Agwunobi demoted the woman who led the division that was supposed to notify prosectors, and he ordered a review of all disciplinary cases since 1992.
``As a department charged with regulatory authority and empowered by public trust, we must quickly find ways to assure that these lapses in compliance never happen again,'' he wrote to acting deputy secretary Linda Keen.
That's a start. But Agwunobi should personally take charge of making sure this decade of departmental neglect comes to an end.
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/02/02/State/Health_agency_gives_p.shtml By Associated Press Published February 2, 2005
TALLAHASSEE - State Health Secretary John O. Agwunobi said Tuesday that 24,000 disciplinary cases investigated by the department since 1992 are being sent to prosecutors to determine whether investigation of any crimes should be pursued.
The move follows a report released last week by the Department of Health's inspector general that found the department apparently failed to formally refer to prosecutors cases in which doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other health practitioners may have committed criminal acts.
Agwunobi said police and prosecutors likely were already aware of many of the cases, because the allegations were reported first to them.
Under state law, when the agency is notified about questionable behavior by a health care professional it licenses, it is supposed to determine whether there is probable cause to proceed with discipline. Then, if there is reason to believe a crime may have been committed, it is supposed to notify prosecutors.
The department couldn't show it did that in many cases, the inspector general found. The law has required reporting of potential criminal violations by health care practitioners since 1992, but the responsibility was in other agencies until 2002, when it was given to the Health Department.
Agwunobi said in an interview that his agency had a "clear obligation" to do it and didn't. He said he was "embarrassed, not a little angry, and very disappointed" about the failure to do so.
Agwunobi said department officials decided to refer to prosecutors all 24,000 cases in which officials had found probable cause of some sort of misconduct since 1992. He said prosecutors are best able to determine whether a crime may have been committed and if so, whether the statute of limitations has run out.
From now on, any case where there's probable misconduct will be referred to prosecutors, Agwunobi said.
The inspector general's investigation was prompted by a member of the public who requested information about psychologists accused of sexual misconduct and asked for documentation about referrals to prosecutors. That documentation couldn't be produced by the Health Department in many cases.
The Tampa Tribune last week identified the person who sought the records as Ken Kramer, a researcher for the Citizens Committee on Human Rights, an organization founded by the Church of Scientology in Clearwater, which opposes many tenets of modern psychiatry and psychology.
Kramer told the Tribune the committee's primary mission is to monitor misconduct by psychotherapists.
Saturday, February 05, 2005
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
Murderer on Zoloft
Here's a decent CBS video on the South Carolina murder case in progress where a 12-year-old boy, who was given Zoloft (a Prozac wannabe drug by a different manufacturer) lost control, murdering his grandparents and burning down their house.
Zoloft is the drug that was being taken by one of the two schoolboys who shot their friends and teachers with machine guns in the Columbine High School in Colorado.
Zoloft is the drug that was being taken by one of the two schoolboys who shot their friends and teachers with machine guns in the Columbine High School in Colorado.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Ritalin Causes Depression -- Wall Street Journal
"New research is raising questions about the long-term effects of Ritalin and other drugs widely used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder." says the Wall Street Journal (subscription required).
The article goes on to say, "Now, new studies in rats suggest that methylphenidate, the generic name for Ritalin , may permanently alter the brain and may lead to depression in adulthood."
The article then begins to question how psychiatrists diagnose ADHD -- the so-called "mental illness" for which Ritalin is sold. "...the criteria for the disorder -- such as whether a child is easily distracted, doesn't seem to listen or can't sit still -- are highly subjective and could easily describe many healthy children. Some psychiatrists believe that as many as 15% of kids diagnosed with ADHD actually suffer from some other problem that wouldn't be helped by drugs -- such as a learning disability, a sleep disorder or even a difficult relationship with a teacher."
Elsewhere in the Wall Street Journal, Eli Lilly reports a 4th quarter loss.
The handwriting is on the wall.
The article goes on to say, "Now, new studies in rats suggest that methylphenidate, the generic name for Ritalin , may permanently alter the brain and may lead to depression in adulthood."
The article then begins to question how psychiatrists diagnose ADHD -- the so-called "mental illness" for which Ritalin is sold. "...the criteria for the disorder -- such as whether a child is easily distracted, doesn't seem to listen or can't sit still -- are highly subjective and could easily describe many healthy children. Some psychiatrists believe that as many as 15% of kids diagnosed with ADHD actually suffer from some other problem that wouldn't be helped by drugs -- such as a learning disability, a sleep disorder or even a difficult relationship with a teacher."
Elsewhere in the Wall Street Journal, Eli Lilly reports a 4th quarter loss.
The handwriting is on the wall.
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Zyprexa = Prozac = Bad News
"NEW YORK (Reuters) - Eli Lilly and Co. on Wednesday reported a fourth-quarter net loss on charges for restructuring and taxes related to the return of overseas profits, as sales of prescription drugs rose only slightly.
Global sales of schizophrenia treatment Zyprexa, Lilly's biggest product that has been hurt in the United States by concerns over side effects, fell further in the quarter..."
In case you were wondering, Zyprexa is repackaged Prozac. The patent ran out on Prozac, so they decided the same poison should be promoted differently as a solution for different "illnesses" and off they went with a newly patented drug, which was really a makeover of the old drug. But it's not working!
Global sales of schizophrenia treatment Zyprexa, Lilly's biggest product that has been hurt in the United States by concerns over side effects, fell further in the quarter..."
In case you were wondering, Zyprexa is repackaged Prozac. The patent ran out on Prozac, so they decided the same poison should be promoted differently as a solution for different "illnesses" and off they went with a newly patented drug, which was really a makeover of the old drug. But it's not working!
Monday, January 17, 2005
Prozac Canada Lawsuit
This comes from Ann Tracy, of the International Coalition For Drug Awareness. Data about Dr. Tracy's group is available at the end of the excerpt:
Today the first Prozac class action lawsuit was filed in Montreal, Canada. The following quote from the press release on this suit explains the basis for the suit that was filed:
"Yesterday, the Indianapolis based drug maker completely vindicated the British Medical Journal, which it had charged earlier this week with misleading its readers, when it posted a document on its website called Annotations. Eli Lilly had been invited on numerous occasions to answer whether a document called "Summary of a preliminary analysis of clusters of adverse events based on pooling data from multiple studies" was authentic and whether it had been released to health authorities around the world.
"Eli Lilly confirmed the authenticity of the document and implicitly admitted that it had never been released to health authorities, including the FDA, or anyone else."
Of course few of us who are in on the truth about SSRI-type drugs like Prozac would be surprised to learn that this information about Lilly is true. When someone is knowingly putting a drug out that causes suicide, homicide and the host of other horrors it produces, why would we expect them to be honest and upright? Now I use the term "knowingly" because there is no way that anyone who read the previous research on serotonin could not have known that impairing the metabolism of serotonin with any chemical would produce the adverse effects we just listed.
The only thing that does worry me about this press release is this statement:
"The lead plaintiff is seeking $10,000 in punitive damages and $5 000 for herself and each member of the group from Eli Lilly for misrepresenting the safety of its drug."
Considering how little is gained for victims in class action suits such as this where they are only being sued for misrepresenting the safety of Prozac, it would almost make me wonder if Eli Lilly is the one who initiated this suit.
Why? Because it is yet to be determined that if someone joins a suit like this, when they actually have cause to file a more serious damage suit, such as death, mania/psychosis, diabetes, cancer, serious debilitating withdrawal, etc., and they sign off on the suit, will they be able to file against the company again for the more serious damages? Most likely not. So, those of you with more serious damage PLEASE keep this in mind and do not allow this to happen in your case. Doing so could save Eli Lilly millions in damage claims. And since lawsuits are the only recourse we have against the pharmaceutical industry when they kill us with a pill instead of a bullet, we need to make sure that process works with the utmost efficiency.
Ann Blake Tracy, Ph.D.,
Executive Director, International Coalition For Drug Awareness
Website: www.drugawareness.org
Author of "the Bible" on SSRI antidepressants: "Prozac:
Panacea or Pandora? - Our Serotonin Nightmare"
& audio tape on safe withdrawal: "Help! I Can't Get
Off My Antidepressant!"
Order Number: 800-280-0730
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/14/c3130.html
Attention News Editors:
Prozac: A class action lawsuit is filed in Montreal
MONTREAL, Jan. 14 /CNW Telbec/ - A class action lawsuit was filed before the Superior Court in Montreal this morning. Giant drug maker Eli Lilly is alleged to have withheld vital information on the safety of Prozac, its flagship drug for years. Yesterday, the Indianapolis based drug maker completely vindicated the British Medical Journal, which it had charged earlier this week with misleading its readers, when it posted a document on its website called Annotations. Eli Lilly had been invited on numerous occasions to answer whether a document called Summary of a preliminary analysis of clusters of adverse events based on pooling data from multiple studies was authentic and whether it had been released to health authorities around the world.
Eli Lilly confirmed the authenticity of the document and implicitly admitted that it had never been released to health authorities, including the FDA, or anyone else. The document consisted of data stemming from numerous studies conducted by Eli Lilly and that showed that Prozac caused activation in 38% of its users compared with 19% with placebo and 4% for Tricyclic, a then well known drug in the treatment of depression.
When Eli Lilly representatives attended the FDA hearings on the safety of Prozac in 1991, they had known the existence of the study for years but failed to disclose it to the FDA, in the word of the lead plaintiff's attorney, "lest it should warrant a much stringent warning on the label of the drug with regard to its safety, thereby seriously hampering Eli Lilly's efforts to market its new drug as effective and safe." In the words of Serge Petit of the law firm Petit Desjardins based in Montreal, Canada, that represents the lead plaintiff "such a likelihood was looming large since Eli Lilly knew that if doctors had been made aware that Prozac, back then being introduced as the new kid on the block, caused activation in 38% of its users compared with 19% of patients taking a placebo and 4% of those taking a drug then well known to doctors, Tricyclic, they would certainly have hesitated before prescribing Prozac. It was nearly a ten folds increase in activation compared with the other drug they could prescribe."
The lead plaintiff contends that the reason why Eli Lilly failed to disclose the document to Health authorities was that it would have placed another study, that consisted of a pooling of what is called spontaneous reports and showed alarming increases in suicide attempts and other violent acts in patient using Prozac as compared with four other drugs, in a totally new perspective and prevent it from being dismissed by FDA and Eli Lilly as inconclusive. To Serge Petit "had the study on activation and the one on spontaneous reports been put side by side before the FDA, Eli Lilly would have faced an uphill battle as to the safety of its drug".
The class action contends that Eli Lilly misled health authorities around the world and therefore the millions of users of its drug Prozac around the world as to the safety of its drug by failing to disclose the said document. To Serge Petit, "the passage of time cannot condone Eli Lilly's behavior and it must be held accountable for circumventing the safeguards that have been put in place to protect the public health." The lead plaintiff is seeking $10,000 in punitive damages and $5 000 for herself and each member of the group from Eli Lilly for misrepresenting the safety of its drug.
Today the first Prozac class action lawsuit was filed in Montreal, Canada. The following quote from the press release on this suit explains the basis for the suit that was filed:
"Yesterday, the Indianapolis based drug maker completely vindicated the British Medical Journal, which it had charged earlier this week with misleading its readers, when it posted a document on its website called Annotations. Eli Lilly had been invited on numerous occasions to answer whether a document called "Summary of a preliminary analysis of clusters of adverse events based on pooling data from multiple studies" was authentic and whether it had been released to health authorities around the world.
"Eli Lilly confirmed the authenticity of the document and implicitly admitted that it had never been released to health authorities, including the FDA, or anyone else."
Of course few of us who are in on the truth about SSRI-type drugs like Prozac would be surprised to learn that this information about Lilly is true. When someone is knowingly putting a drug out that causes suicide, homicide and the host of other horrors it produces, why would we expect them to be honest and upright? Now I use the term "knowingly" because there is no way that anyone who read the previous research on serotonin could not have known that impairing the metabolism of serotonin with any chemical would produce the adverse effects we just listed.
The only thing that does worry me about this press release is this statement:
"The lead plaintiff is seeking $10,000 in punitive damages and $5 000 for herself and each member of the group from Eli Lilly for misrepresenting the safety of its drug."
Considering how little is gained for victims in class action suits such as this where they are only being sued for misrepresenting the safety of Prozac, it would almost make me wonder if Eli Lilly is the one who initiated this suit.
Why? Because it is yet to be determined that if someone joins a suit like this, when they actually have cause to file a more serious damage suit, such as death, mania/psychosis, diabetes, cancer, serious debilitating withdrawal, etc., and they sign off on the suit, will they be able to file against the company again for the more serious damages? Most likely not. So, those of you with more serious damage PLEASE keep this in mind and do not allow this to happen in your case. Doing so could save Eli Lilly millions in damage claims. And since lawsuits are the only recourse we have against the pharmaceutical industry when they kill us with a pill instead of a bullet, we need to make sure that process works with the utmost efficiency.
Ann Blake Tracy, Ph.D.,
Executive Director, International Coalition For Drug Awareness
Website: www.drugawareness.org
Author of "the Bible" on SSRI antidepressants: "Prozac:
Panacea or Pandora? - Our Serotonin Nightmare"
& audio tape on safe withdrawal: "Help! I Can't Get
Off My Antidepressant!"
Order Number: 800-280-0730
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/14/c3130.html
Attention News Editors:
Prozac: A class action lawsuit is filed in Montreal
MONTREAL, Jan. 14 /CNW Telbec/ - A class action lawsuit was filed before the Superior Court in Montreal this morning. Giant drug maker Eli Lilly is alleged to have withheld vital information on the safety of Prozac, its flagship drug for years. Yesterday, the Indianapolis based drug maker completely vindicated the British Medical Journal, which it had charged earlier this week with misleading its readers, when it posted a document on its website called Annotations. Eli Lilly had been invited on numerous occasions to answer whether a document called Summary of a preliminary analysis of clusters of adverse events based on pooling data from multiple studies was authentic and whether it had been released to health authorities around the world.
Eli Lilly confirmed the authenticity of the document and implicitly admitted that it had never been released to health authorities, including the FDA, or anyone else. The document consisted of data stemming from numerous studies conducted by Eli Lilly and that showed that Prozac caused activation in 38% of its users compared with 19% with placebo and 4% for Tricyclic, a then well known drug in the treatment of depression.
When Eli Lilly representatives attended the FDA hearings on the safety of Prozac in 1991, they had known the existence of the study for years but failed to disclose it to the FDA, in the word of the lead plaintiff's attorney, "lest it should warrant a much stringent warning on the label of the drug with regard to its safety, thereby seriously hampering Eli Lilly's efforts to market its new drug as effective and safe." In the words of Serge Petit of the law firm Petit Desjardins based in Montreal, Canada, that represents the lead plaintiff "such a likelihood was looming large since Eli Lilly knew that if doctors had been made aware that Prozac, back then being introduced as the new kid on the block, caused activation in 38% of its users compared with 19% of patients taking a placebo and 4% of those taking a drug then well known to doctors, Tricyclic, they would certainly have hesitated before prescribing Prozac. It was nearly a ten folds increase in activation compared with the other drug they could prescribe."
The lead plaintiff contends that the reason why Eli Lilly failed to disclose the document to Health authorities was that it would have placed another study, that consisted of a pooling of what is called spontaneous reports and showed alarming increases in suicide attempts and other violent acts in patient using Prozac as compared with four other drugs, in a totally new perspective and prevent it from being dismissed by FDA and Eli Lilly as inconclusive. To Serge Petit "had the study on activation and the one on spontaneous reports been put side by side before the FDA, Eli Lilly would have faced an uphill battle as to the safety of its drug".
The class action contends that Eli Lilly misled health authorities around the world and therefore the millions of users of its drug Prozac around the world as to the safety of its drug by failing to disclose the said document. To Serge Petit, "the passage of time cannot condone Eli Lilly's behavior and it must be held accountable for circumventing the safeguards that have been put in place to protect the public health." The lead plaintiff is seeking $10,000 in punitive damages and $5 000 for herself and each member of the group from Eli Lilly for misrepresenting the safety of its drug.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Florida Nut Is Psych Victim
Floridian Steven Ekberg allegedly picked up a vial and told an anonymous FBI source that "If I put this on your food, this would kill you immediately." He then picked up another vial and said, "This one would make you really sick." A third vial would "kill you, but not right away."
The poison that worried authorities the most was the deadly biotoxin ricin found in Ekberg's home. That plus the AK-47 and the Uzi machine guns were enough to move the FBI to arrest him.
How did Ekberg get like this?
According to his mother, "...he has been treated for depression." So Mr. Ekberg is another testimonial to the wonderful therapeutic results from today's psychiatric/psychological system -- which produces a remarkable number of nuts. We will be watching for evidence that Ekberg was put on Prozac or some other psychosis-producing psychiatric drug. We expect to find that he was.
Remember, most people who go crazy and start killing themselves and others do it after they go to the psychiatrists and start taking psychiatric drugs -- not before. In this case society was too slow to help him before the psychs got to him. But thankfully, maybe he was arrested before he could dramatize his psych-osis (hyphen intended) by killing others.
The poison that worried authorities the most was the deadly biotoxin ricin found in Ekberg's home. That plus the AK-47 and the Uzi machine guns were enough to move the FBI to arrest him.
How did Ekberg get like this?
According to his mother, "...he has been treated for depression." So Mr. Ekberg is another testimonial to the wonderful therapeutic results from today's psychiatric/psychological system -- which produces a remarkable number of nuts. We will be watching for evidence that Ekberg was put on Prozac or some other psychosis-producing psychiatric drug. We expect to find that he was.
Remember, most people who go crazy and start killing themselves and others do it after they go to the psychiatrists and start taking psychiatric drugs -- not before. In this case society was too slow to help him before the psychs got to him. But thankfully, maybe he was arrested before he could dramatize his psych-osis (hyphen intended) by killing others.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Landmark Decision - Stop Doing Electroshock
A Santa Barbara court has issued a landmark decision; telling the Santa Barbara College Hospital and resident psychiatrist Joseph Johnson to stop using electroshock therapy!
In the case, the plaintiff lost most of his memory. From the article: "Atze Akkerman was a devoted husband, father and professional musician who after receiving electroshock (shock treatment) could no longer remember his wife of 20 years, his children, or how to play music. In the five years since receiving the brutal treatment, his memory has not returned."
Akkerman said, "I know I'm not the only one." He's right about that. Electroshock therapy is famous for erasing huge chunks of memory, sometimes never to return.
Akkerman and his wife filed suit against the hospital and psych Johnson, who performed the shock, claiming they were negligent and had deceived Mr. Akkerman by withholding from him the dangers of the treatment and misrepresenting that it was "safe and effective."
In the trial, Johnson admitted nobody knows how electroshock therapy works.
Akkerman's attorney, Kendrick Moxon, said, "Psychiatrists pretend shock treatment is no longer like the violent bone breaking practice of the past, as portrayed in enduring images of "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest." They are lying. There is no difference in what happens to the brain during shock treatment in 1954 or 2004. The violence exerted on the brain is exactly the same."
I guess the psychs will have to fall back to their old standby remedy; prescription of Prozac or other psychotropic drugs. These leave much of the memory intact and although they make many people suicidal and homicidal, they do it much more quietly.
Actually that wouldn't be a good idea either, would it?
In the case, the plaintiff lost most of his memory. From the article: "Atze Akkerman was a devoted husband, father and professional musician who after receiving electroshock (shock treatment) could no longer remember his wife of 20 years, his children, or how to play music. In the five years since receiving the brutal treatment, his memory has not returned."
Akkerman said, "I know I'm not the only one." He's right about that. Electroshock therapy is famous for erasing huge chunks of memory, sometimes never to return.
Akkerman and his wife filed suit against the hospital and psych Johnson, who performed the shock, claiming they were negligent and had deceived Mr. Akkerman by withholding from him the dangers of the treatment and misrepresenting that it was "safe and effective."
In the trial, Johnson admitted nobody knows how electroshock therapy works.
Akkerman's attorney, Kendrick Moxon, said, "Psychiatrists pretend shock treatment is no longer like the violent bone breaking practice of the past, as portrayed in enduring images of "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest." They are lying. There is no difference in what happens to the brain during shock treatment in 1954 or 2004. The violence exerted on the brain is exactly the same."
I guess the psychs will have to fall back to their old standby remedy; prescription of Prozac or other psychotropic drugs. These leave much of the memory intact and although they make many people suicidal and homicidal, they do it much more quietly.
Actually that wouldn't be a good idea either, would it?
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
Petition: Get Prozac Off The Market
This is a petition on line demanding full investigation of Eli Lilly and their coverup of the side effects of Prozac.
Go to this site, and sign the petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/lilpro/petition.html
Go to this site, and sign the petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/lilpro/petition.html
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Chemical Straitjacket
I'd like to write it my own way, but I can't beat the intro paragraph from an article in the San Diego Union-Tribune:
"Soon after taking over as chief psychiatrist at San Diego County's Juvenile Hall in 2000, Dr. Marjorie Shuer said she discovered many of the children were being given such heavy doses of psychotropic drugs that they couldn't function in school and didn't want to leave their cells.
Shuer reported the problem to her superiors at the County Department of Health and Human Services. A few months later she was fired."
Shuer didn't stop there. She took the department to court for wrongful termination.
More from the Union-Tribune, "When she tried to persuade her bosses to overhaul policies governing the use of drugs, the lawsuit said, she was told to "buy into the current system" and "turn a blind eye" to the conduct. "
What Ms. Shuer discovered is that today's psychiatric environment is a hotbed for knocking people out with heavy psychotropic drugs and calling it "therapy" when in fact it is simply the application of a chemical straitjacket. If you give a guy enough of these drugs he is no trouble at all. He will no longer argue with you and question what you say. In fact he will no longer care about anything at all. In fact he will no longer think. In fact if you give him enough, he will die.
The article tentatively offers a cautious silver lining with intimations from managers of the department that say things have changed since the Shuer incident. But in the opinion of this writer, those statements are probably PR, but not fact. As long as facilities like this are being run by people who think that sanity vs. insanity is controlled by "brain chemicals" (which has never been proven and coincidentally isn't true) we will have people forcing kids to take Ritalin or Prozac or other psycho drugs that make people crazy, in the name of "therapy". This kind of stuff gives "therapy" a bad name. Don't you already recoil a bit when you find out somebody has been in "therapy"? You immediately begin to wonder whether this guy has been handled in such a way he has now become a killer or a suicide risk, or at least some kind of basket case that can't manage his own life.
It's not hard to imagine the gestapo-style police coming to your home with their dark glasses on, announcing that you have been ordered to "therapy". That happened in Russia, over and over, for 50 years. It was their way of handling political dissidents. Their version of "therapy" was not dissimilar to the kind that Ms. Shuer found in the San Diego County Juvenile Hall.
"Soon after taking over as chief psychiatrist at San Diego County's Juvenile Hall in 2000, Dr. Marjorie Shuer said she discovered many of the children were being given such heavy doses of psychotropic drugs that they couldn't function in school and didn't want to leave their cells.
Shuer reported the problem to her superiors at the County Department of Health and Human Services. A few months later she was fired."
Shuer didn't stop there. She took the department to court for wrongful termination.
More from the Union-Tribune, "When she tried to persuade her bosses to overhaul policies governing the use of drugs, the lawsuit said, she was told to "buy into the current system" and "turn a blind eye" to the conduct. "
What Ms. Shuer discovered is that today's psychiatric environment is a hotbed for knocking people out with heavy psychotropic drugs and calling it "therapy" when in fact it is simply the application of a chemical straitjacket. If you give a guy enough of these drugs he is no trouble at all. He will no longer argue with you and question what you say. In fact he will no longer care about anything at all. In fact he will no longer think. In fact if you give him enough, he will die.
The article tentatively offers a cautious silver lining with intimations from managers of the department that say things have changed since the Shuer incident. But in the opinion of this writer, those statements are probably PR, but not fact. As long as facilities like this are being run by people who think that sanity vs. insanity is controlled by "brain chemicals" (which has never been proven and coincidentally isn't true) we will have people forcing kids to take Ritalin or Prozac or other psycho drugs that make people crazy, in the name of "therapy". This kind of stuff gives "therapy" a bad name. Don't you already recoil a bit when you find out somebody has been in "therapy"? You immediately begin to wonder whether this guy has been handled in such a way he has now become a killer or a suicide risk, or at least some kind of basket case that can't manage his own life.
It's not hard to imagine the gestapo-style police coming to your home with their dark glasses on, announcing that you have been ordered to "therapy". That happened in Russia, over and over, for 50 years. It was their way of handling political dissidents. Their version of "therapy" was not dissimilar to the kind that Ms. Shuer found in the San Diego County Juvenile Hall.
Friday, January 07, 2005
What Psychiatrists Set Asunder, Psychiatrists Can Make Worse Yet
One of the more well-known tragedies caused by psychiatrists and psychiatric drugs is the very sad story of Texas mother and psychiatric victim Andrea Yates, who drowned her four young children, one at a time in a bathtub, under the influence of Prozac and several other psychiatric drugs that were being administered to her for depression.
That alone is a stark illustration of what we have been learning: People go crazy after seeing their psychiatrist and after getting on psychiatric drugs.
But now the story gets worse. Ms. Yates has been set free. Her conviction has been overturned because of blatant false testimony from a witness for the prosecution. And who do you think lied on the stand? A psychiatrist, of course. Never mind that this psychiatrist was paid fees by the government totaling somewhere between 75,000 and 100,000 dollars. He just couldn't tell the truth. His lie was bizarre! He claimed that he had been a consultant on an episode of TV show Law and Order in a similar case, and that the jury had found against the defendant. Upon investigation, it was discovered that such an episode of Law and Order never existed! He made it up! I guess you have to come up with something for 100,000 dollars, whether it's the truth or not.
But the judge now asks if this crazy psychiatrist (that is a considered phrase -- I'm not tossing it off) would not have come up with that cock and bull story, would the jury have decided differently?
So Ms. Yates is off the hook for now. They'll have to try her again.
And if it wouldn't have been for a prevaricating (lying) psychiatrist, all that time and expense at trial wouldn't have been wasted.
Of course if it wouldn't have been for psychiatrists and psychiatric drugs, the poor woman probably wouldn't have lost her mind and killed her four children.
That alone is a stark illustration of what we have been learning: People go crazy after seeing their psychiatrist and after getting on psychiatric drugs.
But now the story gets worse. Ms. Yates has been set free. Her conviction has been overturned because of blatant false testimony from a witness for the prosecution. And who do you think lied on the stand? A psychiatrist, of course. Never mind that this psychiatrist was paid fees by the government totaling somewhere between 75,000 and 100,000 dollars. He just couldn't tell the truth. His lie was bizarre! He claimed that he had been a consultant on an episode of TV show Law and Order in a similar case, and that the jury had found against the defendant. Upon investigation, it was discovered that such an episode of Law and Order never existed! He made it up! I guess you have to come up with something for 100,000 dollars, whether it's the truth or not.
But the judge now asks if this crazy psychiatrist (that is a considered phrase -- I'm not tossing it off) would not have come up with that cock and bull story, would the jury have decided differently?
So Ms. Yates is off the hook for now. They'll have to try her again.
And if it wouldn't have been for a prevaricating (lying) psychiatrist, all that time and expense at trial wouldn't have been wasted.
Of course if it wouldn't have been for psychiatrists and psychiatric drugs, the poor woman probably wouldn't have lost her mind and killed her four children.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
Prozac Maker's Sleazy Fake Trial
The maker of Prozac, Eli Lilly, was sued ten years ago in a trial that many saw as an important test case for the principle that Prozac causes violence, in connection with a murder-suicide.
The lawsuit involved the victims of Joseph Wesbecker, a printing press operator who had killed eight people at his Louisville, Kentucky, workplace five years before, while taking Prozac. He then shot and killed himself. The trial was going poorly for Lilly, then suddenly the group of victims stopped testifying, and gave up mysteriously, and Lilly "won". This set a precedent that people who sue on this basis would lose in the future, discouraging additional suits of the type.
But it was later found out that Lilly secretly settled with the plaintiffs, but didn't reveal the settlement to the court. The judge was livid when he later found out. But the case has nevertheless had the desired effect, at least until now.
The thing that broke it open again was the discovery of evidence from that trial that had been "missing". The evidence was data about tests done by Lilly that prove Prozac makes many people homicidal and suicidal. Lilly did not publicly reveal the tests, but they were part of this lawsuit. Then they disappeared.
Now they have reappeared. Somebody sent them to a British Medical Journal, and it's once again front page news.
The lawsuit involved the victims of Joseph Wesbecker, a printing press operator who had killed eight people at his Louisville, Kentucky, workplace five years before, while taking Prozac. He then shot and killed himself. The trial was going poorly for Lilly, then suddenly the group of victims stopped testifying, and gave up mysteriously, and Lilly "won". This set a precedent that people who sue on this basis would lose in the future, discouraging additional suits of the type.
But it was later found out that Lilly secretly settled with the plaintiffs, but didn't reveal the settlement to the court. The judge was livid when he later found out. But the case has nevertheless had the desired effect, at least until now.
The thing that broke it open again was the discovery of evidence from that trial that had been "missing". The evidence was data about tests done by Lilly that prove Prozac makes many people homicidal and suicidal. Lilly did not publicly reveal the tests, but they were part of this lawsuit. Then they disappeared.
Now they have reappeared. Somebody sent them to a British Medical Journal, and it's once again front page news.
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Don't Make The Mistake Of Thinking They're On Your Side
I received the following in a newsletter from William Campbell Douglass MD, II. I haven't asked him for permission to reprint, but I expect he would like to get this message out to as many people as possible, as would I:
Daily Dose
Tuesday January 04, 2005
Intentional slip of the mind
Memories are powerful things. In many ways, they make us who we are. Without them, we'd have no frame of reference, no context. And we'd have no sense of our own history and place in the world. Without our memories — even the bad ones (especially the bad ones) — we'd be doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over again, or we'd all just be sailing blithely through life simply converting oxygen into carbon dioxide instead of learning, growing, and working toward things our life's experiences have shown us we desire.
In other words, memories are what drive us. Without them, we aren't human.
And until now, we've assumed that our strongest memories are unassailable — that they're locked up tight inside the fortresses of our minds. I say "until now" because according to a recent Washington Post online article, scientists have developed a pill that's the first step toward SELECTIVE ERASURE OF MEMORIES.
That's right, tinkering with our memories is no longer the sole province of science fiction (as in The Manchurian Candidate). If a certain branch of science has its way, we'll soon be able to pick and choose our memories. Early research on laboratory animals shows that injections of certain drugs into the brain can completely eliminate the response to certain targeted stimuli by blocking some key proteins necessary for memory storage.
These experiments haven't been limited to lab rats, either.
Both U.S. and French researchers have tested a pill on human "guinea pigs" that blocks stress hormones in the amygdala — the center of the brain that forms and processes exceptionally strong memories. These studies show that people who take the pill — a variation of an existing drug called propranolol — after a traumatic experience exhibited fewer symptoms of what psychiatrists call Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
Some of us call this NRTF (Normal Reaction To Fear)...
The bottom line is this: Whether we CAN manipulate memories is no longer the issue. Clearly, we can, and we'll no doubt be able to do so more completely in the near future.
The question is: Should we? And if we decide that we should, how do we keep the technology under control — and away from the drug makers, who'd undoubtedly market it as a "bad day" pill?
Proponents of this research argue that controlled memory erasure (or modification) would help people recover from traumatic experiences like accidents, crimes, or combat. They make a compelling argument. After all, who wouldn't want to take a pill to help them forget something terrible, like a rape, for instance...
But where do we draw the line as to what constitutes a "traumatic" experience? And WHO will make that decision?
Psychiatrists? That's more than a little scary. These are questions that will definitely need to be answered before this technology proliferates.
Is a bad date or lousy day at work cause for popping a memory erasure pill? It's easy to scoff and say "of course not" now — but once this technology becomes more effective, well known, safer, and more affordable, you know darn well people are going to want to take if for less and less severe instances of "trauma."
And what about the ethical dilemmas: In the case of true trauma, like rape, do we kill the painful memory of it right away, or must we let the victim relive their terror until after the trial (assuming the accused is identified)? After all, the accuser has to have a sharp memory of the events to perform as a witness...
Look, not to wax philosophical here, but all of this simply shouldn't happen, in my opinion. We NEED our memories — good and bad — to maintain our very humanity, to learn, grow, teach, and contribute the fruits of our experiences to the human condition.
And if this technology becomes an unchecked mainstream reality (along the lines of, say, antidepressant drugs), it's conceivable that soon, we'll be nothing more than a race of smiling, euphoric zombies who's heads are filled with only pleasant memories and who know nothing of strife or struggle. Characterless, clownish clones of each other, with no frame of reference of experience to differentiate us one
from another...
And that's something I'd prefer stay the stuff of Orwell novels, thank you very much.
Always remembering to separate the science from the fiction,
William Campbell Douglass MD, II
(You can subscribe to Dr. Campbell's newsletter at: http://www.realhealthnews.com/dailydose/freecopya.html)
Daily Dose
Tuesday January 04, 2005
Intentional slip of the mind
Memories are powerful things. In many ways, they make us who we are. Without them, we'd have no frame of reference, no context. And we'd have no sense of our own history and place in the world. Without our memories — even the bad ones (especially the bad ones) — we'd be doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over again, or we'd all just be sailing blithely through life simply converting oxygen into carbon dioxide instead of learning, growing, and working toward things our life's experiences have shown us we desire.
In other words, memories are what drive us. Without them, we aren't human.
And until now, we've assumed that our strongest memories are unassailable — that they're locked up tight inside the fortresses of our minds. I say "until now" because according to a recent Washington Post online article, scientists have developed a pill that's the first step toward SELECTIVE ERASURE OF MEMORIES.
That's right, tinkering with our memories is no longer the sole province of science fiction (as in The Manchurian Candidate). If a certain branch of science has its way, we'll soon be able to pick and choose our memories. Early research on laboratory animals shows that injections of certain drugs into the brain can completely eliminate the response to certain targeted stimuli by blocking some key proteins necessary for memory storage.
These experiments haven't been limited to lab rats, either.
Both U.S. and French researchers have tested a pill on human "guinea pigs" that blocks stress hormones in the amygdala — the center of the brain that forms and processes exceptionally strong memories. These studies show that people who take the pill — a variation of an existing drug called propranolol — after a traumatic experience exhibited fewer symptoms of what psychiatrists call Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
Some of us call this NRTF (Normal Reaction To Fear)...
The bottom line is this: Whether we CAN manipulate memories is no longer the issue. Clearly, we can, and we'll no doubt be able to do so more completely in the near future.
The question is: Should we? And if we decide that we should, how do we keep the technology under control — and away from the drug makers, who'd undoubtedly market it as a "bad day" pill?
Proponents of this research argue that controlled memory erasure (or modification) would help people recover from traumatic experiences like accidents, crimes, or combat. They make a compelling argument. After all, who wouldn't want to take a pill to help them forget something terrible, like a rape, for instance...
But where do we draw the line as to what constitutes a "traumatic" experience? And WHO will make that decision?
Psychiatrists? That's more than a little scary. These are questions that will definitely need to be answered before this technology proliferates.
Is a bad date or lousy day at work cause for popping a memory erasure pill? It's easy to scoff and say "of course not" now — but once this technology becomes more effective, well known, safer, and more affordable, you know darn well people are going to want to take if for less and less severe instances of "trauma."
And what about the ethical dilemmas: In the case of true trauma, like rape, do we kill the painful memory of it right away, or must we let the victim relive their terror until after the trial (assuming the accused is identified)? After all, the accuser has to have a sharp memory of the events to perform as a witness...
Look, not to wax philosophical here, but all of this simply shouldn't happen, in my opinion. We NEED our memories — good and bad — to maintain our very humanity, to learn, grow, teach, and contribute the fruits of our experiences to the human condition.
And if this technology becomes an unchecked mainstream reality (along the lines of, say, antidepressant drugs), it's conceivable that soon, we'll be nothing more than a race of smiling, euphoric zombies who's heads are filled with only pleasant memories and who know nothing of strife or struggle. Characterless, clownish clones of each other, with no frame of reference of experience to differentiate us one
from another...
And that's something I'd prefer stay the stuff of Orwell novels, thank you very much.
Always remembering to separate the science from the fiction,
William Campbell Douglass MD, II
(You can subscribe to Dr. Campbell's newsletter at: http://www.realhealthnews.com/dailydose/freecopya.html)
Friday, December 31, 2004
Manufacturer Knew Prozac Was A Killer Drug!
Now we find more evidence that manufacturer Eli Lilly knew as early as 1980 that Prozac is a killer drug that could cause murder or suicide in users. The British Medical Journal published, and provided to U.S. regulators, confidential documents given to them by an anonymous source showing that Prozac heightened risk of suicide and attempts at violence.
The documents were originally part of a 1994 lawsuit in which victims of a workplace shooting in Kentucky were suing Lilly. Eight people were killed in that incident by a man who had just begun using Prozac a month earlier. (This was about the time of the infamous series of "postal worker" workplace murders following the widespread use of Prozac among postal employees whose insurance covered "mental health" as well as physical health.) Probably sensing that the trial would bring down their empire, Lilly settled with the plaintiffs secretly. Publicly the plaintiffs dropped the suit, making it appear that there was no case. Later, the secret settlement was revealed.
After that, the papers mysteriously disappeared for about a decade, even from court records.
Now we have them back. Not only does Prozac kill, but the people who make it know it kills. How much longer will the world put up with this criminality? It is time to do more than make the drug illegal. It is time to find out who knew this data, who suppressed this report, and indict them for manslaughter. Based on the numbers of suicides and murders that have been precipitated by the use of this drug, the number of manslaughter charges for such individuals could be in the thousands.
The documents were originally part of a 1994 lawsuit in which victims of a workplace shooting in Kentucky were suing Lilly. Eight people were killed in that incident by a man who had just begun using Prozac a month earlier. (This was about the time of the infamous series of "postal worker" workplace murders following the widespread use of Prozac among postal employees whose insurance covered "mental health" as well as physical health.) Probably sensing that the trial would bring down their empire, Lilly settled with the plaintiffs secretly. Publicly the plaintiffs dropped the suit, making it appear that there was no case. Later, the secret settlement was revealed.
After that, the papers mysteriously disappeared for about a decade, even from court records.
Now we have them back. Not only does Prozac kill, but the people who make it know it kills. How much longer will the world put up with this criminality? It is time to do more than make the drug illegal. It is time to find out who knew this data, who suppressed this report, and indict them for manslaughter. Based on the numbers of suicides and murders that have been precipitated by the use of this drug, the number of manslaughter charges for such individuals could be in the thousands.
Thursday, December 30, 2004
The Latest Victim Of Psychiatrically-Caused Violence
The latest victim of psychiatry is... Walmart??
Well, not really. The actual victim is a young woman named Shayla Stewart, in Dallas, Texas. After being on psychiatric lines for some time, labeled by psychiatrists to within an inch of her life (pun not intended) and fed "anti-psychotic medication" (which means Prozac, Xanax, Luvox, Paxil, or one of the other current psychiatric drugs that actually cause insanity) Ms. Stewart killed herself -- at the tender age of 24.
Her mother is suing Walmart for selling her the gun she did it with.
Her mother needs to know that Walmart and the gun are "wrong targets". (Once again, no pun is intended.) The correct target would be the vicious psychiatric establishment people who drove her to this.
This is yet another illustration of the truth that more and more people are starting to see: People go crazy and start killing themselves or others after their psychiatric treatment, not before. Psychiatrists and psychiatric drugs make people insane.
One of the questions is whether people on Prozac should be allowed to purchase a gun, according to the article. Our answer: No, they should not. Once someone has been subjected to abuse by psychiatrists, they shouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun. But an easier solution would be to outlaw the psychiatrists. They are the real source of the problem.
Based on the article, Ms. Stewart must have been in pretty good shape before the psychiatrists got to her. It apparently took a long list of psychiatric abuses, including periods of institutionalization and a long history of forced drugging, before they finally made her suicidal. It doesn't always take them that long to make a killer.
Well, not really. The actual victim is a young woman named Shayla Stewart, in Dallas, Texas. After being on psychiatric lines for some time, labeled by psychiatrists to within an inch of her life (pun not intended) and fed "anti-psychotic medication" (which means Prozac, Xanax, Luvox, Paxil, or one of the other current psychiatric drugs that actually cause insanity) Ms. Stewart killed herself -- at the tender age of 24.
Her mother is suing Walmart for selling her the gun she did it with.
Her mother needs to know that Walmart and the gun are "wrong targets". (Once again, no pun is intended.) The correct target would be the vicious psychiatric establishment people who drove her to this.
This is yet another illustration of the truth that more and more people are starting to see: People go crazy and start killing themselves or others after their psychiatric treatment, not before. Psychiatrists and psychiatric drugs make people insane.
One of the questions is whether people on Prozac should be allowed to purchase a gun, according to the article. Our answer: No, they should not. Once someone has been subjected to abuse by psychiatrists, they shouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun. But an easier solution would be to outlaw the psychiatrists. They are the real source of the problem.
Based on the article, Ms. Stewart must have been in pretty good shape before the psychiatrists got to her. It apparently took a long list of psychiatric abuses, including periods of institutionalization and a long history of forced drugging, before they finally made her suicidal. It doesn't always take them that long to make a killer.
Friday, December 24, 2004
Murder In French Psychiatric Hospital
The sordid situation in the Cuckoo's Nest world of psychiatry spilled over last week when two nurses (both of whom were in their 40s and mothers of children) were murdered in a psychiatric hospital in the lovely provincial French city of Pau.
The murder is still unsolved. According to the CNN article in the link above, violence is commonplace in psychiatric hospitals in France.
It is sad that two young women with children were cut down in their prime. It is sadder that psychiatry, by using medeival techniques like psycho-surgery and Prozac-style drugs that turn people into suicidal/homicidal maniacs, makes mentally unstable inmates into insane killers.
Our motto: People become killers after they get their psychiatric treatment, not before. We will be watching for the rest of the story when they find the people who murdered these nurses.
The murder is still unsolved. According to the CNN article in the link above, violence is commonplace in psychiatric hospitals in France.
It is sad that two young women with children were cut down in their prime. It is sadder that psychiatry, by using medeival techniques like psycho-surgery and Prozac-style drugs that turn people into suicidal/homicidal maniacs, makes mentally unstable inmates into insane killers.
Our motto: People become killers after they get their psychiatric treatment, not before. We will be watching for the rest of the story when they find the people who murdered these nurses.
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
Big Pharma Death Throes
Record levels of television advertisements for psychiatric drugs and wild forays to create pro-drug legislation may only be the thrashing throes of death for Big Pharma. Long able to somehow cloak the less-than-positive test results for many new pharmaceuticals, especially certain pain relievers and psychiatric potions, the lies have now reached a critical mass, and the truth is starting to erupt in waves. In the last two days there have been no less than three major news items chronicling the tailspin of the industry that more than any other seems to care nothing for people and the public.
Following scathing testimony in congress regarding suppressed tests for depression drugs showing they cause suicidal tendencies and many other dangerous side effects, the recent exposure of the pain-reliever Vioxx as a killer drug has been followed by continual bad news for the industry.
The front page news a few days ago was the government survey of the staff of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) -- the group that approves or disapproves drugs for use by the public. Apparently long in bed with Big Pharma, the FDA has been under attack. The survey showed that two thirds of FDA scientists don't trust the FDA to do what is best for the public.
This shocker is followed by the emergence of yet another PR disaster. The National Institute of Health stopped a study on Celebrex and Naproxen, drugs that Big Pharma was trying to foist off as solutions to Alzheimer's disease. It turned out after three years of testing that subjects taking the drugs had a 50% greater incidence of heart attacks and strokes than the control subjects in the same test. At about the same time, officials stopped advertising for Celebrex in it's already-approved capacity as a pain reliever, because of a discovered heart-attack risk. Another pain reliever in the same chemical family, Aleve, is also under attack.
Then, to add insult to injury, or maybe injury to injury, the FDA ordered a warning added to the ADHD drug Strattera. Use of the drug has resulted in liver failure and death in some cases, apparently. So yet another bogus drug for yet another bogus psych-defined disease is on its way to the scrapheap.
The nosedive is spectacular. We can hear the propeller winding up faster and faster as this insane industry speeds to its ultimate crash, propelled by the weight of decades of lies and deception, making billions of dollars on the sale of drugs that cause insanity rather than help it, kill rather than cure.
There is a place for drugs. Many lives have been saved by antibiotics. Diseases that used to ravage the world have been exterminated or reduced to next-to-nothing. But sitting on their laurels, and forgetting their real purpose, which was to help man and make him better, these pharma gorillas have been attacking the lives and sanity of our society for long enough. It's about time we put a stop to it.
Following scathing testimony in congress regarding suppressed tests for depression drugs showing they cause suicidal tendencies and many other dangerous side effects, the recent exposure of the pain-reliever Vioxx as a killer drug has been followed by continual bad news for the industry.
The front page news a few days ago was the government survey of the staff of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) -- the group that approves or disapproves drugs for use by the public. Apparently long in bed with Big Pharma, the FDA has been under attack. The survey showed that two thirds of FDA scientists don't trust the FDA to do what is best for the public.
This shocker is followed by the emergence of yet another PR disaster. The National Institute of Health stopped a study on Celebrex and Naproxen, drugs that Big Pharma was trying to foist off as solutions to Alzheimer's disease. It turned out after three years of testing that subjects taking the drugs had a 50% greater incidence of heart attacks and strokes than the control subjects in the same test. At about the same time, officials stopped advertising for Celebrex in it's already-approved capacity as a pain reliever, because of a discovered heart-attack risk. Another pain reliever in the same chemical family, Aleve, is also under attack.
Then, to add insult to injury, or maybe injury to injury, the FDA ordered a warning added to the ADHD drug Strattera. Use of the drug has resulted in liver failure and death in some cases, apparently. So yet another bogus drug for yet another bogus psych-defined disease is on its way to the scrapheap.
The nosedive is spectacular. We can hear the propeller winding up faster and faster as this insane industry speeds to its ultimate crash, propelled by the weight of decades of lies and deception, making billions of dollars on the sale of drugs that cause insanity rather than help it, kill rather than cure.
There is a place for drugs. Many lives have been saved by antibiotics. Diseases that used to ravage the world have been exterminated or reduced to next-to-nothing. But sitting on their laurels, and forgetting their real purpose, which was to help man and make him better, these pharma gorillas have been attacking the lives and sanity of our society for long enough. It's about time we put a stop to it.
Saturday, December 18, 2004
Death In The Crystal Cathedral
The latest victim of psychiatry and psychiatric drugs is Johnny Carl, the choir director at Orange County, California's famous Crystal Cathedral. He locked himself in the Crystal Cathedral and killed himself when police tried to go in after him.
"The longtime conductor of the Crystal Cathedral Orchestra had been hospitalized for depression weeks before he shot himself to death at the soaring glass-and-steel church, his wife said," according to FoxNews.com
The article went on to say, "His wife, Linda Carl, said he had stopped taking a drug earlier this year that helped him control manic depression because of concerns it could harm his kidneys."
Let's add to that that it can harm your sanity and make you homicidal or suicidal.
This is yet another example on the front page of the news of someone who became wildly insane after seeking treatment from psychiatrists for mental illness. These guys don't help people. They make them crazy. Their drugs make people crazy too. If we can pick a psychiatry or psych drug victim who kills himself or others off the front page of the papers on a daily basis, that has to be the tip of the iceberg. If this guy wasn't the choir director of the Crystal Cathedral, but instead worked as a check-out clerk at the 7-11 in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, would it have made the front page? How many are really dying?
It's time to identify the ogres that made these drugs legal and arraign them on a few thousand cases of manslaughter. Even the FDA, who is famous for backing drug companies, not the public safety, made them put a warning in a black box on all anti-depressants now warning that the drug could cause suicide. So why didn't they make the drug illegal? Is the risk of suicide negligible for an antidepressant drug? Ask Johnny Carl's wife.
"The longtime conductor of the Crystal Cathedral Orchestra had been hospitalized for depression weeks before he shot himself to death at the soaring glass-and-steel church, his wife said," according to FoxNews.com
The article went on to say, "His wife, Linda Carl, said he had stopped taking a drug earlier this year that helped him control manic depression because of concerns it could harm his kidneys."
Let's add to that that it can harm your sanity and make you homicidal or suicidal.
This is yet another example on the front page of the news of someone who became wildly insane after seeking treatment from psychiatrists for mental illness. These guys don't help people. They make them crazy. Their drugs make people crazy too. If we can pick a psychiatry or psych drug victim who kills himself or others off the front page of the papers on a daily basis, that has to be the tip of the iceberg. If this guy wasn't the choir director of the Crystal Cathedral, but instead worked as a check-out clerk at the 7-11 in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, would it have made the front page? How many are really dying?
It's time to identify the ogres that made these drugs legal and arraign them on a few thousand cases of manslaughter. Even the FDA, who is famous for backing drug companies, not the public safety, made them put a warning in a black box on all anti-depressants now warning that the drug could cause suicide. So why didn't they make the drug illegal? Is the risk of suicide negligible for an antidepressant drug? Ask Johnny Carl's wife.
Thursday, December 16, 2004
The Smoking Gun -- Literally!!!
Mary Clark, the mother of killer Nathan Gale, spilled the beans.
When Nathan Gale jumped up on the stage shooting four people at a rock concert, we knew he was a victim of psychiatry. Only people who have had psychiatric "help" and psychiatric drugs do crazy things like that. But we've been waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Now his mother Ms. Clark tells the tale. From mtv.com:
"Clark, who said she was close to her son, repeatedly apologized to the victims as she revealed to the station's interviewer that he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. The diagnosis led to his medical discharge last year from the Marines after serving less than half of his four-year stint. She said she purchased the gun for him before his diagnosis."And I still didn't understand the whole thing, but he came home with his medications, and I don't know if he took them or not," Clark said. "I don't know if he was afraid to, or ... ashamed to, or ... didn't believe it himself," Clark said."
Yup. We were right. As usual.
When Nathan Gale jumped up on the stage shooting four people at a rock concert, we knew he was a victim of psychiatry. Only people who have had psychiatric "help" and psychiatric drugs do crazy things like that. But we've been waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Now his mother Ms. Clark tells the tale. From mtv.com:
"Clark, who said she was close to her son, repeatedly apologized to the victims as she revealed to the station's interviewer that he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. The diagnosis led to his medical discharge last year from the Marines after serving less than half of his four-year stint. She said she purchased the gun for him before his diagnosis."And I still didn't understand the whole thing, but he came home with his medications, and I don't know if he took them or not," Clark said. "I don't know if he was afraid to, or ... ashamed to, or ... didn't believe it himself," Clark said."
Yup. We were right. As usual.
Sunday, December 12, 2004
There's A New Psycho In Town
Now we have the "fan" who jumped up on the stage and killed a rock star and three others at a concert. One of his victims was heavy-metal rock hero "Dimebag".
We haven't yet located the psych background on the killer, Nathan Gale. Would anyone who knows about it forward the data? We know he had one, because this kind of insane action is almost always done by a victim of psychiatry -- someone who has been on psychiatric medication or has been "treated" by psychs in some way. Psychs don't cure psychos, they create them.
We do have a clue -- Gale was discharged early from the Marines. So his mistreatment by psychiatrists may have occurred while in the military. His untimely discharge is "confidential" -- so it wasn't for a crime. (That's another hallmark of modern society's misunderstanding of psychiatristy and psychiatrists -- courts often detain or imprison someone who is guilty of no crime -- suspending someone's constitutional rights because someone thinks he should be evaluated or treated by psychiatrists without his consent.)
We haven't yet located the psych background on the killer, Nathan Gale. Would anyone who knows about it forward the data? We know he had one, because this kind of insane action is almost always done by a victim of psychiatry -- someone who has been on psychiatric medication or has been "treated" by psychs in some way. Psychs don't cure psychos, they create them.
We do have a clue -- Gale was discharged early from the Marines. So his mistreatment by psychiatrists may have occurred while in the military. His untimely discharge is "confidential" -- so it wasn't for a crime. (That's another hallmark of modern society's misunderstanding of psychiatristy and psychiatrists -- courts often detain or imprison someone who is guilty of no crime -- suspending someone's constitutional rights because someone thinks he should be evaluated or treated by psychiatrists without his consent.)
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
Psychiatry Kills Again
If you read our previous post about Kathy Feaganes Allen, you'll be interested (and possibly upset) to know that our expectation she was a victim of psychiatry was very correct. Allen, who became angry at three boys playing in a parking lot and ran them down with her SUV, is a product of modern psychiatry -- the "science" that is supposed to make people saner but actually makes people crazy and dangerous.
Here's the link to a story that explains that she has been going to a psychiatrist for a long time, and takes at least six psychiatric drugs.
"Allen, whose wife testified about her mental illness in a court appearance on Monday, said she sees a psychiatrist every three months to monitor her chemical balance and also takes at least six medications several times daily to "keep her calm." says the story at Newsday.
Psychiatry is the biggest American tragedy of the 21st Century. Psychiatry and its insane culture of mind altering drugs that cause suicide and homicide in the name of "mental health" must be stopped.
Here's the link to a story that explains that she has been going to a psychiatrist for a long time, and takes at least six psychiatric drugs.
"Allen, whose wife testified about her mental illness in a court appearance on Monday, said she sees a psychiatrist every three months to monitor her chemical balance and also takes at least six medications several times daily to "keep her calm." says the story at Newsday.
Psychiatry is the biggest American tragedy of the 21st Century. Psychiatry and its insane culture of mind altering drugs that cause suicide and homicide in the name of "mental health" must be stopped.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)