+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 3 7 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 140

Thread: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

  1. Link to Post #41
    New Zealand Avalon Member witchy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th September 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Age
    59
    Posts
    1,863
    Thanks
    3,230
    Thanked 5,448 times in 1,156 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    "There's a tremendous push where if the kid's behavior is thought to be quote-unquote abnormal -- if they're not sitting quietly at their desk -- that's pathological, instead of just childhood." -- Dr. Jerome Groopman, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School
    According to a recent report by the Centers for Disease Control, a staggering 6.4 million American children between the ages of 4 and 17 have been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), whose key symptoms are inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity -- characteristics that most would consider typically childish behavior. High school boys, an age group particularly prone to childish antics and drifting attention spans, are particularly prone to being labeled as ADHD, with one out of every five high school boys diagnosed with the disorder.

    Presently, we're at an all-time high of eleven percent of all school-aged children in America who have been classified as mentally ill. Why? Because they "suffer" from several of the following symptoms: they are distracted, fidget, lose things, daydream, talk nonstop, touch everything in sight, have trouble sitting still during dinner, are constantly in motion, are impatient, interrupt conversations, show their emotions without restraint, act without regard for consequences, and have difficulty waiting their turn.

    The list reads like a description of me as a child. In fact, it sounds like just about every child I've ever known, none of whom are mentally ill. Unfortunately, society today is far less tolerant of childish behavior -- hence, the growing popularity of the ADHD label, which has become the "go-to diagnosis" for children that don't fit the psycho-therapeutic public school mold of quiet, docile and conformist.

    Mind you, there is no clinical test for ADHD. Rather, this so-called mental illness falls into the "I'll know it if I see it" category, where doctors are left to make highly subjective determinations based on their own observation, as well as interviews and questionnaires with a child's teachers and parents. Particular emphasis is reportedly given to what school officials have to say about the child's behavior.

    Yet while being branded mentally ill at a young age can lead to all manner of complications later in life, the larger problem is the routine drugging that goes hand in hand with these diagnoses. Of those currently diagnosed with ADHD, a 16 percent increase since 2007, and a 41 percent increase over the past decade, two-thirds are being treated with mind-altering, psychotropic drugs such as Ritalin and Adderall.

    Diagnoses of ADHD have been increasing at an alarming rate of 5.5 percent each year. Yet those numbers are bound to skyrocket once the American Psychiatric Association releases its more expansive definition of ADHD. Combined with the public schools' growing intolerance (a.k.a., zero tolerance) for childish behavior, the psychiatric community's pathologizing of childhood, and the Obama administration's new mental health initiative aimed at identifying and treating mental illness in young people, the outlook is decidedly grim for any young person in this country who dares to act like a child.

    As part of his administration's sweeping response to the Newtown school shootings, President Obama is calling on Congress to fund a number of programs aimed at detecting and responding to mental illness among young people. A multipronged effort, Obama's proposal includes $50 million to train 5,000 mental health professionals to work with young people in communities and schools; $55 million for Project AWARE (Advancing Wellness and Resilience in Education), which would empower school districts, teachers and other adults to detect and respond to mental illness in 750,000 young people; and $25 million for state efforts to identify and treat adolescents and young adults.

    One of the key components of Obama's plan, mental health first-aid training for adults and students, is starting to gain traction across the country. Incredibly, after taking a mere 12-hour course comprised of PowerPoint presentations, videos, discussions, role playing and other interactive activities, for instance, a participant can be certified "to identify, understand and respond to the signs of mental illness, substance use and eating disorders."

    While commendable in its stated goals, there's a whiff of something not quite right about a program whose supporting data claims that "26.2 percent of people in the U.S. -- roughly one in four -- have a mental health disorder in any given year." This is especially so at a time when government agencies seem to be increasingly inclined to view outspoken critics of government policies as mentally ill and in need of psychiatric help and possible civil commitment. But I digress. That's a whole other topic.

    Getting back to young people, Dr. Thomas Friedan, director of the CDC, has characterized the nation's current fixation on ADHD as an over diagnosis and a "misuse [of ADHD medications that] appears to be growing at an alarming rate."

    Indeed, not that long ago, the very qualities we now identify as a mental illness and target for drugging were hallmarks of the creative soul. Many of the artists, musicians, poets, politicians and revolutionaries whom we have come to revere in our society were unable to sit still, pay attention, concentrate on their work, and stay within the confines which had been set out for them in the classroom.

    Visionaries as varied as Mahatma Gandhi, Richard Feynman, John Lennon, Pablo Picasso, Jackson Pollock, Thomas Edison, Susan B. Anthony, Albert Einstein, and Winston Churchill might have all been labeled ADHD had they been students in the public schools today. Legendary filmmaker Woody Allen claims to have "paid attention to everything but the teachers" while in school. Despite being put in an accelerated learning program due to his high IQ, he felt constrained, so he often played hooky and failed to complete his assignments. Of his school days, Gandhi said, "They were the most miserable of his life" and "that he had no aptitude for lessons and rarely appreciated his teachers." In fact, Gandhi opined that it "might have been better if he had never been to school."

    One can only imagine what the world would have been like had these visionaries of Western civilization instead been diagnosed with ADHD and drugged accordingly. Writing for the New York Times, Bronwen Hruska documents what it was like as a parent being pressured by school officials to medicate her child who, at age 8, seemed to have "normal 8-year-old boy energy."

    Will was in third grade, and his school wanted him to settle down in order to focus on math worksheets and geography lessons and social studies. The children were expected to line up quietly and "transition" between classes without goofing around... And so it began. Like the teachers, we didn't want Will to "fall through the cracks." But what I've found is that once you start looking for a problem, someone's going to find one, and attention deficit has become the go-to diagnosis... A few weeks later we heard back. Will had been given a diagnosis of inattentive-type A.D.H.D....The doctor prescribed methylphenidate, a generic form of Ritalin. It was not to be taken at home, or on weekends, or vacations. He didn't need to be medicated for regular life. It struck us as strange, wrong, to dose our son for school. All the literature insisted that Ritalin and drugs like it had been proved "safe." Later, I learned that the formidable list of possible side effects included difficulty sleeping, dizziness, vomiting, loss of appetite, diarrhea, headache, numbness, irregular heartbeat, difficulty breathing, fever, hives, seizures, agitation, motor or verbal tics and depression. It can slow a child's growth or weight gain. Most disturbing, it can cause sudden death, especially in children with heart defects or serious heart problems.

    As Hruska relates in painful detail, each time the overall effects of the drugs seemed to stop working, their doctor increased the dosage. Finally, towards the middle of fifth grade, Hruska's son refused to take anymore pills. From then on, things began to change for the better. Will is now a sophomore in high school, 6 feet 3 inches tall, and is on the honor roll.

    The drugs prescribed for Ritalin and Adderall and their generic counterparts are keystones in a multibillion dollar pharmaceutical industry that profits richly from America's growing ADHD fixation. For example, between 2007 and 2012 alone, sales for ADHD drugs went from $4 billion to $9 billion.

    If America could free itself of the stranglehold the pharmaceutical industry has on our medical community, our government and our schools, we may find that our so-called "problems" aren't quite as bad as we've been led to believe. As Hruska concludes:

    For [Will], it was a matter of growing up, settling down and learning how to get organized. Kids learn to speak, lose baby teeth and hit puberty at a variety of ages. We might remind ourselves that the ability to settle into being a focused student is simply a developmental milestone; there's no magical age at which this happens.

    Which brings me to the idea of "normal." The Merriam-Webster definition, which reads in part "of, relating to, or characterized by average intelligence or development," includes a newly dirty word in educational circles. If normal means "average," then schools want no part of it. Exceptional and extraordinary, which are actually antonyms of normal, are what many schools expect from a typical student.

    If "accelerated" has become the new normal, there's no choice but to diagnose the kids developing at a normal rate with a disorder. Instead of leveling the playing field for kids who really do suffer from a deficit, we're ratcheting up the level of competition with performance-enhancing drugs. We're juicing our kids for school.

    We're also ensuring that down the road, when faced with other challenges that high school, college and adult life are sure to bring, our children will use the coping skills we've taught them. They'll reach for a pill.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-whitehead/the-psychotherapeutic-sch_b_3037194.htmlSee More

    Last edited by witchy1; 27th April 2013 at 23:10.

  2. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to witchy1 For This Post:

    Agape (18th April 2014), Daughter of Time (8th May 2013), genevieve (9th May 2013), Hervé (28th April 2013), Michelle Marie (28th April 2013), peterpam (21st May 2014), seko (16th April 2014), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014)

  3. Link to Post #42
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Mass nervous breakdown: Millions of Americans on the brink as stress pandemic ravages society

    Gabriela Segura, MD., Sott.net, Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:57 CDT


    The U.S. population makes up 5% of the world population, yet are prescribed 2/3rds of all psychiatric drugs used worldwide. If this is not a sign of looming mental health collapse, we don't know what is!

    As a doctor, I can tell you that stress has reached pandemic levels, though many still hold back from admitting it to themselves or their peers. Our normalcy bias prevents us from taking notice that tens of millions of people in Western countries are dropping like flies from illness, depression and self-destruction. I came across this article by David Kupelain on Americans' health and agreed with some of the observations made about the dire state of affairs:
    • Fully one-third of U.S. employees suffer chronic debilitating stress, and more than half of all "millennials" (18 to 33 year olds) experience a level of stress that keeps them awake at night, including large numbers diagnosed with depression or anxiety disorder.
    • Shocking new research from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that one in five high-school-aged children in the U.S. has been diagnosed with ADHD, and likewise a large new study of New York City residents shows, sadly, that one in five preteens - children aged six to 12 - have been medically diagnosed with either ADHD, anxiety, depression or bipolar disorder.
    • New research concludes that stress renders people susceptible to serious illness, and a growing number of studies now confirm that chronic stress plays a major role in the progression of cancer, the nation's second-biggest killer. The biggest killer of all, heart disease, which causes one in four deaths in the U.S., is also known to have a huge stress component.
    • Incredibly, 11 percent of all Americans aged 12 and older are currently taking SSRI antidepressants - those highly controversial, mood-altering psychiatric drugs with the FDA's "suicidality" warning label and alarming correlation with school shooters. Women are especially prone to depression, with a stunning 23 percent of all American women in their 40s and 50s - almost one in four - now taking antidepressants, according to a major study by the CDC.
    • Add to that the tens of millions of users of all other types of psychiatric drugs, including (just to pick one) the 6.4 million American children between 4 and 17 diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed Ritalin or similar psycho-stimulants. Throw in the 28 percent of American adults with a drinking problem, that's more than 60 million, plus the 22 million using illegal drugs like marijuana, cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens and inhalants, and pretty soon a picture emerges of a nation of drug-takers, with hundreds of millions dependent on one toxic substance or another - legal or illegal - to "help" them deal with the stresses and problems of life.
    Likewise, the CDC has reported that antidepressant use in the U.S. has increased nearly 400 percent in the last two decades, making antidepressants the most frequently used class of medications by Americans aged 18-44. The U.S. population makes up 5% of the world population, yet are prescribed two-thirds of all psychiatric drugs used worldwide. If this is not a sign of looming mental health collapse, I don't know what is!

    With so many people on meds, I think we can basically say that the U.S. is a 'zombie nation'. People are so out of touch with themselves and with reality that they think they have to use anti-depressants in order to 'go back to normal', not realizing that the reason why reality is ****ty is because it is sending them a strong signal to sit up and take notice. Instead, taking mind-numbing drugs makes them even more ignorant of what is going on around them - the false-flag attacks, the fireballs raining down from the sky and Earth changes.

    The pandemic is by no means confined to the U.S. One major study mentioned by Kupelain concluded almost 40 percent of Europeans are plagued by mental illness.

    Consider this:
    • A cross-border report on suicide shows the rate among young people on the island of Ireland is one of the highest in Europe.
    • The economic downturn that has shaken Europe for the last three years has also swept away the foundations of once-sturdy lives, leading to an alarming spike in suicide rates. Especially in the most fragile nations like Greece, Ireland, Spain and Italy, small-business owners and entrepreneurs are increasingly taking their own lives in a phenomenon some European newspapers have started calling "suicide by economic crisis."
    • Bulgaria's suicide rate is among the highest in Europe. Psychologists named poverty and stress as the main reasons behind the suicide wave that shocked the Balkan country recently.
    • According to official figures, Russia sees 19-20 suicides per 100,000 teenagers a year, which is three times the world average.
    • France has one of the highest suicide rates in western Europe, ranking second behind Finland and more than double the UK or Greece. Workplace suicides have sparked a French outcry over France's elite system where the graduates of an exclusive group of schools are promoted straight into top jobs, denying any possibility of advancement to graduates of lesser schools.
    • Japan has consistently maintained the world's suicide record for years. The number of students who committed suicide in 2011 hit a record figure of 10.9 per cent from the previous year and the total number of suicides across the nation has exceeded 30,000 for 14 consecutive years up to 2011.
    Kupelain asks:
    What on earth is going on? Why isn't medical science - and for that matter all of our incredible scientific and technological innovations in every area of life - reducing our stress and lightening our load? Why doesn't the almost-magical availability of the world's accumulated knowledge, thanks to the Internet, make us more enlightened and happy? Why is it that, instead, more and more of us are so stressed out as to be on a collision course with illness, misery, tragedy and death?
    Most important, what can we do to reverse course?
    Indeed, why hasn't our wonderful advanced technological civilization saved us from ourselves? Maybe it is turning out to not be so wonderful after all...

    There is in fact a proven, effective way of dealing with stress from coping with the increasing global madness, something I'll get on to later.

    First, let's have a closer look at some of the causes of this stress pandemic...


    Full article: http://www.sott.net/article/261360-M...avages-society
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (28th April 2013), Michelle Marie (28th April 2013), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014), witchy1 (28th April 2013)

  5. Link to Post #43
    United States Avalon Member Michelle Marie's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th June 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,630
    Thanks
    27,304
    Thanked 16,965 times in 2,584 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    This is the reason I am an EX-teacher in the public schools.

    I was teaching at a high school where they began pushing flu shots. They installed a clinic ON CAMPUS! where they prescribe these psychotropic drugs.

    I mentioned this in an earlier post. After I had quit, I went back to substitute. One student came up to me with a pass to the clinic and said to me:
    Ms. E, I'm going to tell them I don't want to be on Prozac.

    AT SCHOOL....mandatory public school. THIS IS NOT OK.

    I don't believe in ADHD or labels, or the prescriptions to "cure/dumb down" them.

    Everyone has GENIUS potential. Everyone has talents and gifts.
    I used to tell all my kids that they are a genius.
    I know psychology/consciousness. They just have to: KNOW themselves, BE themselves (live the authentic truth of their Being), be TRUE TO THEMSELVES (follow your heart), and BELIEVE in themselves.

    I've created "Follow Your Heart" education. I just stepped away completely from the old paradigm and am working diligently to launch my non-profit Visionary Solutions to implement this in the world. THE SOLUTION.

    I'm calling in assistance from every dimension/realm to launch this into the world. I'll receive help in many forms because this is the time for this change to occur.
    I'm really passionate about making this change for education/the conditioning of consciousness.

    Together, we are raising awareness.

    This is the TRUTH that will set us free.

    Lots of love,
    Michelle Marie
    ~*~ "The best way to predict the future is to create it." - Peter Drucker ~*~ “To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children...to leave the world a better place...to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson ~*~ "Creative minds always have been known to survive any kind of bad training." - Anna Freud ~*~

  6. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Michelle Marie For This Post:

    Agape (18th April 2014), Daughter of Time (8th May 2013), Hervé (28th April 2013), Paul (29th April 2013), peterpam (24th April 2014), seko (16th April 2014), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014), witchy1 (29th April 2013)

  7. Link to Post #44
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    The lying liars who lie about psychiatry

    The lying liars who lie about psychiatry
    by Jon Rappoport, May 7, 2013
    www.nomorefakenews.com

    These days, we are witnessing an acceleration in the use of psychiatry to target Americans, to label them as dangerous, to take away guns they own, to blame gun violence in the US on mentally ill people. (see also this story by Dan Roberts).

    It’s a winning strategy, because most Americans don’t have a clue about the way psychiatry actually works or its pose of being a science.

    The public hears techno-speak and nods and surrenders.

    If psychiatrists are experts on the human mind, mice can navigate the Arctic in canoes. But psychiatrists are educated to be able to talk a good game.

    And politicians are more than happy to mouth vagaries, and consign the problems of society to “mental-health professionals.”

    It turns out that the phrase “mental health” was invented by psyops specialists, who needed to create an analogy to physical well-being.

    The needed to, because the mind was (and is) a mystery to psychiatrists.

    An open secret has been slowly bleeding out into public consciousness for the past ten years.

    THERE ARE NO DEFINITIVE LABORATORY TESTS FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDER.

    And along with that:

    ALL SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS ARE CONCOCTED, NAMED, LABELED, DESCRIBED, AND CATEGORIZED by a committee of psychiatrists, from menus of human behaviors.

    Their findings are published in periodically updated editions of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), printed by the American Psychiatric Association.

    For years, even psychiatrists have been blowing the whistle on this hazy crazy process of “research.”

    Of course, pharmaceutical companies, who manufacture highly toxic drugs to treat every one of these “disorders,” are leading the charge to invent more and more mental-health categories, so they can sell more drugs and make more money.

    But we have a mind-boggling twist. Under the radar, one of the great psychiatric stars, who has been out in front inventing mental disorders, went public. He blew the whistle on himself and his colleagues. And for 2 years, almost no one noticed.

    His name is Dr. Allen Frances, and he made VERY interesting statements to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: “Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness.” (Dec.27, 2010).

    Major media never picked up on the interview in any serious way. It never became a scandal.

    Dr. Allen Frances is the man who, in 1994, headed up the project to write the latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the DSM-IV. This tome defines and labels and describes every official mental disorder. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.

    In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, “Scientist At Work,” Daniel Goleman called Frances “Perhaps the most powerful psychiatrist in America at the moment…”

    Well, sure. If you’re sculpting the entire canon of diagnosable mental disorders for your colleagues, for insurers, for the government, for Pharma (who will sell the drugs matched up to the 297 DSM-IV diagnoses), you’re right up there in the pantheon.

    Long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Dr. Frances talked to Wired’s Greenberg and said the following:

    “There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bull****. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

    BANG.

    That’s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, “Well, I knew there would be a problem.”

    After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, “These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.”

    Frances might have been referring to the fact that his baby, the DSM-IV, had rearranged earlier definitions of ADHD and Bipolar to permit many MORE diagnoses, leading to a vast acceleration of drug-dosing with highly powerful and toxic compounds.

    Finally, at the end of the Wired interview, Frances flew off into a bizarre fantasy:

    “Diagnosis [as spelled out in the DSM-IV] is part of the magic…you know those medieval maps? In the places where they didn’t know what was going on, they wrote ‘Dragons live here’…we have a dragon’s world here. But you wouldn’t want to be without the map.”

    Translation: Patients need hope for the healing of their troubles; so even if we psychiatrists are shooting blanks and pretending to know one kind of mental disorder from another, even if we’re inventing these mental-disorder definitions based on no biological or chemical diagnostic tests—it’s a good thing, because patients will then believe and have hope; they’ll believe it because psychiatrists place a name on their problems…

    Needless to say, this has nothing to do with science.

    If I were an editor at one of the big national newspapers, and one of my reporters walked in and told me, “The most powerful psychiatrist in America just said the DSM is sheer b.s. but it’s still important,” I think I’d make room on the front page.

    If the reporter then added, “This shrink was in charge of creating the DSM-IV,” I’d clear more room above the fold.

    If the reporter went on to explain that the whole profession of psychiatry would collapse overnight if the DSM was discredited, I’d call for a special section of the paper to be printed.

    I’d tell the reporter to get ready to pound on this story day after day for months. I’d tell him to track down all the implications of Dr. Frances’ statements.

    I’d open a bottle of champagne to toast the soon-to-be-soaring sales of my newspaper.

    And then, of course, the next day I’d be fired.

    Because there are powerful multi-billion-dollar interests at stake, and those people don’t like their deepest secrets exposed in the press.

    And as I walked out of my job, I’d see a bevy of blank-eyed pharmaceutical executives marching into the office of the paper’s publisher, ready to read the riot act to him.

    Dr. Frances’ work on the DSM-IV allowed for MORE toxic drugs to be prescribed, because the definition of Bipolar was expanded to include more people.


    Adverse effects of Valproate (given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:

    acute, life-threatening, and even fatal liver toxicity;

    life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas;

    brain damage.


    Adverse effects of Lithium (also given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:

    intercranial pressure leading to blindness;

    peripheral circulatory collapse;

    stupor and coma.


    Adverse effects of Risperdal (given for “Bipolar” and “irritability stemming from autism”) include:

    serious impairment of cognitive function;
    fainting;

    restless muscles in neck or face, tremors (may be indicative of motor brain damage).


    Dr. Frances’ label-juggling act also permitted the definition of ADHD to expand, thereby opening the door for greater and greater use of toxic Ritalin (and other similar compounds) as the treatment of choice.

    So what about Ritalin?

    In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

    Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

    For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

    Paranoid delusions
    Paranoid psychosis
    Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
    Activation of psychotic symptoms
    Toxic psychosis
    Visual hallucinations
    Auditory hallucinations
    Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
    Effects pathological thought processes
    Extreme withdrawal
    Terrified affect
    Started screaming
    Aggressiveness
    Insomnia
    Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects
    Psychic dependence
    High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
    Decreased REM sleep
    When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
    Convulsions
    Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

    A recent survey revealed that a high percentage of children diagnosed with bipolar had first received a diagnosis of ADHD. This is informative, because Ritalin and other speed-type drugs are given to kids who are slapped with the ADHD label. Speed, sooner or later, produces a crash. This is easy to call “clinical depression.”

    Then comes Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft. These drugs can produce temporary highs, followed by more crashes. The psychiatrist notices the up and down pattern—and then produces a new diagnosis of Bipolar (manic-depression) and other drugs, including Valproate and Lithium.

    In the US alone, there are at least 300,000 cases of motor brain damage incurred by people who have been prescribed so-called anti-psychotic drugs (aka “major tranquilizers”). Risperdal (mentioned above as a drug given to people diagnosed with Bipolar) is one of those major tranquilizers. (source: Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Peter Breggin, St. Martin’s Press, 1991)

    This psychiatric drug plague is accelerating across the land.

    Where are the mainstream reporters and editors and newspapers and TV anchors who should be breaking this story and mercilessly hammering on it week after week? They are in harness.

    And Dr. Frances is somehow let off the hook. He’s admitted in print that the whole basis of his profession is throwing darts at labels on a wall, and implies the “effort” is rather heroic—when, in fact, the effort leads to more and more poisonous drugs being dispensed to adults and children, to say nothing of the effect of being diagnosed with “a mental disorder.”

    I’m not talking about “the mental-disease stigma,” the removal of which is one of Hillary Clinton’s missions in life. No, I’m talking about MOVING A HUMAN INTO THE SYSTEM, the medical apparatus, where the essence of the game is trapping that person to harvest his money, his time, his energy, and of course his health—as one new diagnosis follows on another, and one new toxic treatment after another is undertaken, from cradle to grave.

    The result is a severely debilitated human being (if he survives), whose major claim to fame is his list of diseases and disorders.

    Thank you, Dr. Frances.

    Here is a smoking-gun statement made by another prominent psychiatrist, on an episode of PBS’ Frontline series. The episode was: “Does ADHD Exist?”

    PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

    BARKLEY (Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center): That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid. [Emphasis added]

    Without intending to, Dr. Barkley blows the whistle on his own profession.

    So let’s take Dr. Barkley to school. Medical science, and disease-research in particular, rests on the notion that you can make a diagnosis backed up by lab tests. If you can’t produce lab tests, you’re spinning fantasies.

    These fantasies might be hopeful, they might be “educated guesses,” they might be launched from traditional centers of learning, they might be backed up by billions of dollars of grant money…but they’re still fantasies.

    If I said the moon was made of green cheese, even if I were a Harvard professor, sooner or later someone would ask me to produce a sample of moon rock to be tested for “cheese qualities.” I might begin to feel nervous, I might want to tap dance around the issue, but I would have to submit the rock to a lab.

    Dr. Barkley employs a version of logical analysis in his statement to the PBS Frontline interviewer. Barkley is essentially saying, “There is no lab test for any mental disorder. But if a test were the standard of proof, we wouldn’t have science at all, and that would mean our whole profession rests on nothing—and that is absurd, so therefore a test doesn’t matter.”

    That logic is no logic at all. Barkley is proving the case against himself. He just doesn’t want to admit it.

    Close to 50 years ago, psychiatry was dying out as a profession. Fewer and fewer people wanted to see a psychiatrist for help, for talk therapy. All sorts of new therapies were popping up. The competition was leaving medical psychiatry in the dust.

    As Dr. Peter Breggin describes it in his landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry, a deal was struck. Drug companies would bankroll psychiatry and rescue it. These companies would pour money into professional conferences, journals, research. In return, they wanted “science” that would promote mental disease as a biological fact, a gateway into the drugs. Everyone would win—except the patient.

    So the studies were rolled out, and the list of mental disorders expanded. The FDA was in on the deal as well, as evidenced by their drug “safety” approvals, in the face of the obvious damage these drugs were doing.

    So this is how we arrived at where we are. This was the plan, and it worked.

    Under the cover story, it was all fraud all the time. Without much of a stretch, you could say psychiatry has been the most widespread profiling operation in the history of the human race. Its goal has been to bring humans everywhere into its system. It hardly matters which label a person is painted with, as long as it adds up to a diagnosis and a prescription of drugs.

    And now, in the wake of the Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings, it matters even less who or how many people are labeled with mental disorders. The more the better, as far as government is concerned.

    Just as in the old USSR, psychiatry becomes an instrument of oppression, a way to discredit any person the State wants to silence and destroy.

    “…in the disputes between the East and West concerning the Russian opponents of the Soviet regime… [m]any dissidents went to lunatic asylums and were treated as mentally sick. Western doctors and the press accused Soviet doctors of being blind instruments of the regime and of having broken the solemn oath of their calling. The Russian doctors thought the West had gone mad in reproaching their behavior. For them, anyone who opposed such an efficient police power must be mentally disturbed. In their view, only those who had what Seneca called Libido morienti (the death wish) would dare to provoke the State. The Russian doctors were convinced that they were undertaking a humanitarian mission by placing the opponents of the regime in asylums and thereby reducing their aggression–the only hope for their survival. To reduce the outstanding to mediocrity was always a medical and human duty in a state where mediocrity had the better chance of survival.”“Man: The Fallen Ape” by Branko Bokun

    Jon Rappoport
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  8. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (8th May 2013), East Sun (7th May 2013), genevieve (9th May 2013), Jean-Marie (4th March 2014), Paul (9th May 2013), seko (16th April 2014), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014)

  9. Link to Post #45
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,155 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Quote Posted by Amzer Zo (here)
    The lying liars who lie about psychiatry

    The lying liars who lie about psychiatry
    by Jon Rappoport, May 7, 2013
    www.nomorefakenews.com
    I was married for twenty years to someone who runs a private practice in this field, and who has other family members who have run such practices. I have looked closely through the DSM-III (the current edition at that time). I have read a significant amount of the lay literature in this area, and glanced at some of the professional literature. I supported my now ex-wife through the years of training and licensing exams it took for her to obtain the credentials she sought.

    As a couple, the two of us also spent many hours in the office of psychiatrists and other mental health therapists, in a failed effort to maintain the marriage.

    The DSM would be a joke, were it not so insidious and such a key element of something so dangerous.

    I agree with Rappoport's views on this.

    From Rappoport's blog for January 28, 2013 The psychiatric wolves attack more innocent children
    To understand even a little bit about real psychiatry, versus the false picture, you have to know that someone running around the streets naked and screaming has nothing to do with a mental disorder.

    If you can’t grasp that, you’ll always have a lingering sense that psychiatry is on the right track. It isn’t, and never was. Not from its earliest days, and not now, when it has the full backing and force of the federal government behind it.

    Psychiatry is the kind of all-out fraud few people grasp.

    In a moment of weakness and exhaustion, Allen Frances, the most famous and honored psychiatrist in America at the time (2000), understood part of it. He told Gary Greenberg of Wired Magazine, “There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bull****. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

    BANG.

    That’s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, “Well, I knew there would be a problem.”

    After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, “These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.”

    This was an admission that the bible of the profession, the DSM, the latest edition of which Frances himself had led in compiling, could not draw separations between the 297 official mental disorders listed in it. It was, in other words, a pretense. The whole bible.

  10. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (9th May 2013), Finefeather (4th June 2013), genevieve (9th May 2013), Hervé (9th May 2013), peterpam (24th April 2014), seko (16th April 2014), spiritwind (9th March 2014), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014)

  11. Link to Post #46
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    From: http://www.henrymakow.com/


    Half of US Foster Care Children are Drugged
    May 10, 2013

    Ciara Jackson

    "The first medication I took was Haldol. I had never been Bipolar in my life and had someone taken the time to listen to me, and answer my questions adequately, I would have been fine. Little did I know my diagnoses would do all the speaking for me. My voice was left unheard."

    There are more than 400,000 children in foster care in the US. More than half [51%] are medicated. Ciara Jackson was one.


    "A Voice Silenced"
    By Ciara Jackson
    (henrymakow.com)

    Child Protective Services in the US is a Federal Agency. Each state has a branch of their own. In Colorado, its called Department of Human Services and pretends to help children, but almost every department has become corrupt.

    Being a child in DHS, I became a ward of the state, once my mother had her rights relinquished. My family didn't fight to get me out. My grandma did.

    When she saw what the system was doing to me, she began to give me money to run away to her house. She rather me run away to her house, then be out somewhere and have no clue where I was. When I got to her house, she would tell my case manager from the Department of Human Services that I was with her. I was not a fugitive. Give me a few days and then come and get me. My case manager did what she could.

    It got so bad where I was. I was in places where they would drug the children. More than half of the children are medicated to control the child. I was personally diagnosed Bipolar/ not otherwise specified. At the time I was diagnosed, I had been abandoned by my parents not once but three times, I was going through puberty and no one wanted me. It's natural for a normal child to act out when becoming a teenager. It happens all the time. Now imagine that plus being giving up by your family. You can understand why I acted out.

    The Department of Human Services put me in a Detention Facility because a foster home said I had ran away. Not that I actually ran away, but that was their way of getting me out of their house because the mother and I didn't get along.

    Truth is, I never ran away. I had just moved to Colorado that summer and lived in literally one area. This was my first experience of being a runaway and was sent to spend a week in The Filmore Detention Facility. From there I was sent to a "treatment facility." A treatment facility is designed to rehabilitate children.

    This is where they stick from 20 to 500 or more children of all different backgrounds. In some places, I lived with children who were labeled as sex offenders; children who have been molested by their parents; children who were already having sex with random men on the streets; children who were in gangs, the list goes on and on. These were things I had never experienced in my life. I was still into playing in the park and riding bikes. The majority of these children grew up fast, way too fast.

    In the places, they have staff members who are put into certain roles in authority. I have seen staff members who would sleep with the girls; staff members who would become emotionally or mentally abusive towards the children. I would see staff who are now homeless or on drugs. I would see staff who would abuse their power. I would see staff who are genuinely good people.

    The treatment facility is often tied to a psychiatrist. These so-called psychiatrists are there to dope the children. By doing this, they need to come up with a diagnoses for the child, but a lot of the time, the false-diagnose the child and put them on drugs. I was a child they could not control. I asked way too many questions and when things did not make sense, I questioned them more. There were times when I would ask to sit in my court proceedings and because I was only 13, the social workers would tell me I am not old enough. I would ask to see my files but according to the social workers I was too young.

    I was a child beyond my time. Too young to ask questions but old enough to have them. I figured my questions should be answered because they pertained to me.

    The more I got told no, and the more these so-called professionals refused to answer my questions, I began to act out. I was taken away from my family, held in a lock down facility like a prisoner. No more going to take a walk to the store, or playing in the creek. No more staying up all night with my cousins, no more being a normal teenager and no one would explain why. In 2003, Denver Health diagnosed me with being Bipolar (Not otherwise Specified).

    MEDICATED JOURNEY
    The first medication I took was Haldol. I had never been Bipolar in my life and had someone taken the time to listen to me, and answer my questions adequately, I would have been fine. Little did I know my diagnoses would do all the speaking for me. My voice was left unheard.

    Years passed with me on all types of medications. I gained weight, lost weight. When people saw me they would say, that with my medication I was doing so well. When really I felt isolated, ignored, and grew angrier with the system as time went by.

    I always believed that there is a way to help children cope with their problems without the use of medication, if they can at least think and do things for themselves. Injecting their bodies with chemicals is not the way to teach someone how to become self-sufficient, because when the drugs run out, then what?

    The entire time I was in the system, I battled and refused to take medication after I realized the symptoms I was having. I was always drooling, I was so slow mentally and physically. I had went from wearing a size 5 in juniors to a size 18. The more I refused the drug, the more defiant social services labeled me and the angrier I became.

    I finally gotten to an age where I could emancipate. I continued to refuse the medication. This is a time when my diagnoses changed. I was no longer Bipolar; I had "a mood disorder." If you had been in my surroundings and seen the things that I witnessed, your moods would change rapidly too.

    From the time I was 13 until 17, I had no choice but to be surrounded by inconsistency and instability.

    When I emancipated, my last caseworker told me to sue the County of Denver because they false diagnosed me with being Bipolar all those years. To me, being emancipated was enough. I would never have to deal with those people again. I stopped taking the medication, and am now a college student, a civilized adult with friends and family who genuinely love me.

    I still have stretch marks on my arms from being given medication, and the battle wounds of all the things I went through in the Department of Human Services, but I was determined to prove to them that their diagnoses of me was wrong, and I have.
    -----

    Related:
    "
    Psychotropic drugs,SSRIs, a frequently prescribed class of medications, generates close to 200 million prescriptions in the United States that approaches a cost of 20 billion dollars a year." - Dan Abshear - former drug rep

    - See more at: http://www.henrymakow.com/#sthash.g64wZoEv.dpuf
    Last edited by Hervé; 11th May 2013 at 05:15.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  12. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (4th June 2013), Jean-Marie (4th March 2014), peterpam (24th April 2014), seko (5th May 2014), Sidney (11th May 2013), spiritwind (9th March 2014), william r sanford72 (22nd June 2014)

  13. Link to Post #47
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Meet the Doctor Big Pharma Can't Shut Up
    AlterNet / By Tamara Straus

    The pharmaceutical industry has compromised the Western medical establishment and hooked America on drugs. One psychiatrist is fighting back.


    May 30, 2013 |

    For the last 33 years, David Healy, an Irish psychiatrist and professor at Cardiff University School of Medicine in Wales, has written heavily researched university press books and academic journal articles on various aspects of psychopharmaceuticals. His output includes 20 books, 150 peer-reviewed papers and 200 other published works. He is not only well-pedigreed, with degrees and fellowships from Dublin, Galway and Cambridge medical schools, he is a widely recognized expert in both the history and the science of neurochemistry and psychopharmacology.

    Yet Healy says his output and reputation have had little to no effect—both on the pharmaceutical industry he argues buries relevant information about prescription drug harms, and on the psychiatric and medical professions he claims are being “eclipsed” by drug companies.

    “It’s been clear to me that writing books or articles banging on the risks and hazards of drugs is just going to increase the sale of drugs,” said Healy, who speaks calmly, dresses mostly in black and looks a bit like Rod Serling.

    Rather than write another university publication, Healy has taken his frustration to the street. In November, he launched a nonprofit website called Rxisk.org with a group of like-minded and highly credentialed international colleagues. The site aggregates FDA data about prescription drug side effects and urges patients to submit a detailed report on their own pharmaceutical drug reactions.

    Healy is not the first psychiatrist to express boiling frustration with the pharmaceutical industry or to pen dire warnings about drug-based healthcare. He is joined by people like American psychiatrist Peter Breggin, who has written several books critical of “biological psychiatry,” and Irving Kirsch, who directs the Program in Placebo Studies at Harvard Medical School/Beth Israel Deaconess Medical School and is best known for The Emperor’s New Drugs: Exploding the Antidepressant Myth. Healy is the author of such dire sounding titles as Pharmageddon and Let Them Eat Prozac: The Unhealthy Relationship Between the Pharmaceutical Industry and Depression.

    For years, it was fairly easy for people in the pharmaceutical and medical industries to label Healy, Kirsch and Breggin as alarmists. But two summers ago, one of the most prominent members of U.S. medical establishment, Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of New England Journal of Medicine, published an article damning the over-prescription of psychoactive drugs. In two essays in the June 23, 2011 and July 14, 2011 New York Review of Books, Angell backed arguments by the university clinician Kirsh, the mental heath journalist Robert Whitaker, and Boston psychiatrist Daniel Carlat that there is something extremely suspicious about the following trends: the number of people treated for depression has tripled since the launch of Prozac in 1987; 10 percent of Americans over age six are taking antidepressants; and 30 antipsychotics like Risperdal, Zyprexa and Seroquel are replacing cholesterol-lowering agents as the top-selling class of drugs in the U.S., largely because they are being prescribed to children.

    Angell’s articles should have been a bomb on the medical establishment. She wrote:
    “The industry-sponsored studies usually cited to support psychoactive drugs—and they are the ones that are selectively published—tend to be short-term, designed to favor the drug, and show benefits so small that they are unlikely to outweigh the long-term harms. … Both the pharmaceutical industry and the psychiatry profession have strong financial interests in convincing the public that drug treatment is safe and the most effective treatment for mental illnesses, and they also have an interest in expanding the definitions of mental illness.”
    But like Healy, Angell’s warnings have fallen on deaf ears. Recent data indicates that U.S. prescription drug use is growing. The September 2012 Consumer Reports National Research Center report found that among the 46 percent of American adults taking prescription drugs, a fourth of those ages 18 to 39 regularly take two prescription drugs, indicating that multiple drug use is no longer confined to older Americans. Congressional testimony in 2012 by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians revealed that Americans consume 80 percent of opiate painkillers produced in the world. And a January 2011 report from Stanford University Medical School warned that antispychotics are now regularly being prescribed to treat conditions for which they have not been approved, including anxiety, attention-deficit disorder, sleep difficulties, behavioral problems in toddlers and dementia.

    According to a Feb. 7, 2013 report from Drugs.com, the No. 1 best-selling U.S. drug (in dollar volume) is an atypical antipsychotic for schizophrenia treatment called Abilify. Sales for the last quarter of 2012 soared to $1.5 billion, because Abilify is widely prescribed off-label—i.e., not for schizophrenia in adults, but, for example, for irritability in children. Although Bristol-Myers Squibb, the maker of Abilify, was fined $515 million in September 2007 for recommending off-label uses of Abilify, doctors are still doling out the drug. Why?

    “The reason for the increase in prescription drug use is that the entire Western medical complex is run by pharmaceutical companies,” said a Stanford University professor of medicine who preferred to remain anonymous (and who was not involved in the 2011 report on antipsychotics). “The medical training you get in Western medical schools is largely about learning which drugs to treat which diseases.” She added: “You would think that recent studies, such as the one that said antidepressants are no more helpful than a placebo, would have an effect. But they haven’t.”

    Other university psychiatrists and medical doctors I contacted for this article either wouldn’t talk on the record or didn’t want to be interviewed, confirming an atmosphere Healy describes as “McCarthyist.” “There is a climate of fear,” he said during our interview. “You find that they are very nervous about saying anything about drug treatments or adverse effects of drugs at all. Doctors keep patients on lots of drugs, even if they are uncomfortable with it. And if you ask them why they’re doing so, the answer you’ll get is: ‘Well, this is the standard of care, and if I don’t take care of it this way, I’m going to be in awful trouble.’”

    This standard of care is why Rxisk is directed at patients, not doctors, whose financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry are well documented. Rxisk allows users to enter into its search engine the name of a prescription drug and to see the side effects that have been reported to the FDA’s MedWatch website since 2004 as well as from Rxisk’s international data base, for more than 35,000 drug names from 103 countries, totaling 4.5 million adverse drug event reports. The site has information “zones for sex, violence, hair, skin, and withdrawal, designed to increase awareness of seldom-publicized drug effects. Rxisk.org also allows users to add their own reports of adverse drug reactions, creating their own “Rxisk report” to share with their doctor or pharmacist. Since November 2012, the website has collected 1,500 reports.

    One could argue that Rxisk is doing the same thing as MedWatch, the FDA’s online gateway for “reporting serious problems with human medical products.” But Kalman Applbaum, a Rxisk founder and professor of medical anthropology and global studies at the University of Wisconsin, argues that MedWatch isn’t for patients—especially those “trying to sort out whether it’s the drug or the illness that’s causing the suffering.”

    “We felt there were a number of things that were lacking on most or all of the FDA sites that collect information about drug side-effects,” said Applbaum. “First, there’s a reliance on doctor reporting, and doctors report very little, very infrequently—and this is true all over the world for a variety of reasons. And what they report is extremely slim. Very common is a single word to describe a side effect, such as hypertension, ataxia, etc.” Meanwhile, said Applbaum, research shows that patients are much more motivated to report than doctors. And more importantly, “their reported data is very high quality data, because they spend a lot of time,” said Applbaum.

    Since the November 2012 launch, Rxisk has received only 10,000 visitors per month. But Healy, Applbaum and the other founders, like Nancy Olivieri, a senior scientist at Toronto General Hospital and University of Toronto Professor of Pediatrics, Medicine, and Public Health Sciences, are not particularly concerned and plan to ramp up and market their efforts slowly. “We’re doing something that’s new and it’s probably going to take awhile for people to cotton on to what’s new about it,” said Healy.

    **

    David Healy does not consider himself a radical. He prescribes antidepressants and other prescription drugs to his patients. He runs a national university school of psychological medicine. “I’m fairly conservative. I’m a very mainstream doctor, really,” he said. But as New York Times reporter Benedict Carey pointed out in a 2005 story, the Irishman living on an island off the coast of Wales “has achieved a rare kind of scientific celebrity: he is internationally known as a scholar and pariah.”
    Healy’s status as an outcast arises from his grave concern that blockbuster drugs like Prozac and other antidepressants can lead to suicide, murder and unforeseen mental health problems. In the 1990s, he began to publish academic journal papers providing evidence that antidepressants could increase the risk of suicide. Although many colleagues denied the link, by 2004 American and British drug regulators issued strong warnings supporting Healy’s and other’s claims.

    This was vindication for Healy. But it did not prevent him from losing in 2001 a job offer to direct the Center for Addiction and Mental Health in the University of Toronto’s Department of Psychiatry. There is an entire website devoted to Healy’s travail, what’s known as the “Toronto Affair.” The assembled documents—a lecture by Healy, email exchanges, and Healy’s legal claim against the university (which he won out of court)—form a parable on the limits of academic freedom. They also show how radical Healy’s beliefs are when set against the standards of privately supported research universities.

    In a brief, sweeping and somewhat rambling history of psychopharmacology, Healy hit a lot of fly balls. He said that drugs “have played or threaten to play a part in a changing of the social order.” He intimated that psychiatric drugs, unlike illegal drugs, are a form of institutional control. In the Nov. 30, 2000 lecture, titled “Psychopharmacology and the Government of the Self,” he also made the following statements:
    1. “…The era of Depression that we have lived through in the 1990s in the West has arguably been a politically and economically constructed era that bears little relationship to any clinical facts. An era that has changed popular culture by replacing a psychobabble of Freudian terms with a new biobabble about low serotonin levels and the like.”
    2. “…Both psychiatry and anti-psychiatry were swept away and replaced by a new corporate psychiatry. [John Kenneth] Galbraith has argued we no longer have free markets; corporations work out what they have to sell and then prepare the market so that we will want those products. It works for cars, oil, and everything else, why would it not work for psychiatry? Prescription-only status makes the psychiatric market easier than almost any other market—a comparatively few hearts and minds need to be won.”
    3. “…The best-selling drugs in modern medicine do something similar—they don’t treat disease. They manage risks. This is clearly true of the anti-hypertensives, the lipid-lowering agents and other drugs. It is true also of antidepressants, which have been sold on the back of efforts to reduce risks of suicide. We are in an era, which is popularly portrayed as an “Evidence Based Medicine” era. What can go wrong if we have clinical trial evidence to demonstrate what works and what doesn’t work, if we but adhere to this evidence. What more can we do than that?”
    What’s amazing about Healy’s lecture is that he thought he could deliver it and still work at a university psychiatry department. According to the UK Guardian, the Center for Addiction and Mental Health has received more than $1.5 million in recent years from Eli Lilly, the manufacturers of Prozac. On the other hand, nothing that Healy said in Toronto, he hadn’t said before.

    In the most comprehensive news article on the Toronto Affair, the Guardian’s Sarah Boseley reported that Lilly and Healy had previously “crossed swords” in the U.S. courts: “Dr. Healy has been an expert witness against [Lilly], backing the claims of families who say the drugs have caused people to kill and commit suicide. In June 2001, just six months after his Toronto job was rescinded, a US jury agreed with him that Paxil (Seroxat in the UK), an SSRI manufactured by the British giant GlaxoSmithKline, caused Donald Schell to kill his wife, daughter, granddaughter and himself and awarded the remaining family members £4.2m compensation.”

    More recently, Healy has tried to draw attention to the connection between the increasing use of antidepressants and antispychotics and the increasing number of school shootings. On a Jan. 30, 2013 blog and video on Rxisk.org, he claimed that 90 percent of school shooters in North America and Europe were on or withdrawing from meds at the time of the incident. In our interview he pointed to a list on SSIRStories.com, a patient anecdote website that is being integrated into Rxisk, that documents which perpetrators were on which drugs for violent acts in schools between 1988 and 2011.

    The only semi-mainstream figure to have paid attention to this claim is filmmaker Michael Moore, who created a video on the subject in 2012, calling for an investigation. Unsurprisingly, there has been no move to look at the correlation, since one could argue that the school shooters are psychologically disturbed and should be on more meds. Indeed, across the country, there is a drive to keep a lookout for students with possible mental health problems and to report those who seem odd.

    “The problem is,” says Healy, “that it’s really going to lead to a greater use of pills. The key thing is to make sure that people who get put on them are really going to be helped by them. Once you identify the problem, the pill will be the answer, because it’s the answer for the person who has identified the problem. It may not be the answer for the person who is having to take the pill.”

    One of Healy’s main problems these days is that few people listen to him. “I published a list of 98 drugs that can cause you to commit suicide or homicide. I was waiting for the world to come to an end, but nothing happened.” He continued, “If I make a claim and I don’t have scientific proof to back it up, pharmaceuticals are going to sue me.” There have been no lawsuits, which makes Healy think that silence is part of pharmaceutical companies’ tactics. “They’ve learned that the worst thing they can do is argue. If they jump up and down and say, ‘Listen to the foolish things Healy is saying,’ that would be a good way to hear about Healy. So they’re very good at not responding, maintaining their cool.”

    All of this sounds rather paranoid, but then again none of the dozen university psychiatrists or drug company scientists I reached out to wanted to talk about Healy or his claims. Neither Eli Lilly nor GlaxoSmithKline could "find time” to respond to my inquiries about Healy and Rxisk. I was permitted, however, to send questions by email to MedWatch, the website that culls adverse reactions to pharmaceuticals run by the FDA. Dr. Lisa Kubaska of the FDA’s press arm, CDER Trade Press, wrote, “Rxisk.org’s efforts to increase awareness of drug/medication associated risk, harm and best practices, along with their message about the value of voluntary reporting may also serve to advance this patient safety goal in parallel with FDA’s work.” But when I emailed her back, to ask how the FDA works with a pharmaceutical company if it gets multiple reports from patients or doctors about an adverse effect to a drug, I received no answer.

    ***

    Among David Healy’s many concerns about the state of modern medicine is the marginalization of doctors. Doctors, he’s said, are like cogs in a machine, spending a minimum of time with patients, doling out drugs pushed by pharmaceutical companies, and wrangling with insurance companies over costs. He argues that one rectification to the sad state of his profession is to abandon “evidence-based medicine” for “data-based medicine.” The difference between the two goes to the root of why Healy founded Rxisk.org.

    Evidence-based medicine categorizes different types of clinical evidence—such as randomized, triple-blind, and placebo-based control trials—and rates or grades them. Because evidence-based medicine relies on scientific methods that can have wide acceptance among medical practitioners, it has become the standard approach to health services and public health—and is one of the ways nations can arrive at universal healthcare systems.

    But Healy and his colleagues at Rxisk argue that evidence-based medicine is flawed because important information ends up being systematically buried or corrupted. In his 2012 book Pharmageddon, Healy argues (and provides evidence) that close to 30 percent of the clinical drug trials that have been undertaken remain unreported; and of the 50 percent that have been reported, almost all are ghostwritten by scientists for pharmaceutical companies.

    Perhaps more frighteningly, Healy reports that roughly 25 percent of published clinical drug trials are statistically altered, to provide evidence that a drug works well and is safe. And in 100 percent of the cases, the data from the trials remain inaccessible to scrutiny. Yet, he writes, 80 percent of the reports on adverse consequences of drug treatment, dismissed as anecdotes, have turned out to be correct. “Given these facts,” Healy writes, “it is not reasonable to suggest that the observations of doctors and patients are less reliable than clinical trial evidence.”

    Healy’s push to abandon evidence-based medicine is not at attempt to get rid of randomized, triple-blind and placebo-based control trials, but to show the degree to which these trials are controlled by the pharmaceutical industry. So Rxisk’s preference for “data-based medicine” is simply a euphemism. It’s a push to expand evidence-based medicine to include full clinical trial transparency and to put anecdotes, specifically from patients, into the wider scientific analysis of drug efficacy.

    It seems reasonable. But can it be done?

    ***

    Tanya Jensen is a fairly typical middle-aged woman. She is 37 years old, has two little kids, and occasional bouts of mild depression. (To protect her identity, her name has been changed.) When her husband lost his job in 2008 and had trouble finding work, Tanya took on a full-time job with a long commute and a part-time job. Within a few months, she felt frazzled. She began to notice that some of her mom friends, who had their own reasons for feeling frazzled, were taking antidepressants, especially Celexa. So at a checkup with her general practitioner, she inquired whether she could try the drug. Her physician agreed and wrote her a prescription for the generic version of Celexa, citalopram, at 10 mg a day, the lowest dosage, asking Jensen to check in if anything went wrong.

    Jensen liked the drug. It made her feel less anxious. But a year later, the Jensens’ situation improved and Tanya decided it was time to wean herself from the pills. Jensen said she worried “about being on the drug for the rest of her life, when it was unclear how it could affect her brain or behavior long-term.” As recommended by her physician, Jensen cut the dosage to 5 mg a day for 10 days and then to 5 mg a day every other day for the next 10 days. But at the end of the 20-day period, she had withdrawal symptoms: night sweats, emotional volatility, anger, aggression, suicidal impulses. Her husband begged her to go back on citalopram and she did.

    A year passed, and Jensen decided she was ready to go off citalopram again. She proceeded with the same reduced dosage regimen and by the end of the 20-day period was, she said, “as close to manic as I hope I’ll ever come: full of rage, prone to tantrums, sweating buckets at night, and feeling suicidal, especially while driving.” Again her husband begged her to go back on citalopram and she did so.

    That’s when Jensen started doing Internet research on citalopram and found Rxisk.org. There, she said, she found the best available information on citalopram and other people’s withdrawal symptoms, including a long list of adverse side-effects and the percentage of people who had reported them. When Jensen filled out a Rxisk Report, she received a 9+ score, indicating that she had become drug dependent. “This was alarming, but not really surprising,” she said.

    Per RxISK’s recommendation, Jensen made an appointment with her doctor to discuss her problem. Jensen had switched health insurance providers, so she had a new general practitioner, a female MD with a degree from the University of Bombay, whom she chose, “hoping that she would be a less typical American doctor.” But Jensen was disappointed. The doctor said, “But you feel less anxious, and your dose is so low. When I fill out a prescription for 10 mg of citalopram, the computer prompts me to up the dose. It actually recommends I prescribe 20 mg, not 10 mg.” Jensen asked if she had other recourse, but her doctor waved off her concern. Before leaving the examination room, she handed Jensen a six-month prescription of citalopram. Jensen did get her doctor’s permission to review her Rxisk Report. But Jensen said that since emailing the report on May 10, 2013, she has heard nothing from her doctor.

    “What upsets me most,” Jensen said, “is that my original doctor never told me about citalopram’s very well-documented withdrawal problems. This was just never part of the discussion, either because she didn’t have the time or didn’t know that stopping citalopram can be very tricky for some people. And what’s scary is that when I tried to communicate my problem with the second doctor, I was patted on the head like a child and handed 900 more pills.”

    Healy is aware that changing doctor’s views on pharmaceuticals is a David and Goliath battle. That’s why he and his colleagues have another potential audience for Rxisk data: investors and insurance companies. “The shrewd investor in pharma companies wants to know what the adverse effects of a drug are,” said Healy. Rxisk is therefore positioning itself to provide data from the trials the companies are most keen to hide. In addition, Rxisk hopes to find clients in HMOs and insurance companies, which are looking for ways to cut drug costs.

    “Many of drugs advertised are rigged to look better than previous generations of drugs and are costed sometimes 10, 20, 30, or 40 times higher than the generic drug,” Rxisk co-founder Applbaum said. “A bit of research through the data will show that the claims of improvement are false.”

    Applbaum and Healy also point out that the cost of adverse side-effects to prescription drugs in the U.S. is huge—estimated to be $100 million in hospital costs alone. The same 1998 University of Toronto study they cite found that pharmaceuticals are the country’s fourth leading cause of death. Healy and Applbaum point to other galling statistics: the U.S. spends twice as much on healthcare as anyone else in the world, consuming a total of 45 percent of the world’s pharmaceuticals. Meanwhile, the World Health Organization ranks the country 37th in the quality of our care.

    “So it’s killing the economy overall, and the recognition is seeping in that we’re doing something wrong,” said Applbaum. “We believe that our little piece of it—the over-prescription of drugs, the polypharmacy, the prescribing of drugs when none are needed—can help healthcare costs come down.”

    Both Applbaum and Healy believe the FDA won’t or can’t be a force for change. Since the Drug Efficacy Amendments were passed in 1962, requiring drug manufacturers to prove to FDA the effectiveness of their products before marketing them, Healy says drug makers must show, first, that a drug works, and second, that it is safe. “The result has been that the effectiveness profile has taken over and safety has been lost sight of,” said Healy. “At Rxisk, we’re trying to restore safety to its due place.”
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (4th June 2013), Elixir (5th March 2014), Finefeather (4th June 2013), seko (5th May 2014), Sophocles (3rd June 2013)

  15. Link to Post #48
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    NEJM editor: “No longer possible to believe much of clinical research published”

    Posted on November 9, 2009 by Carolyn Thomas

    Harvard Medical School’s Dr. Marcia Angell is the author of The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It. But more to the point, she’s also the former Editor-in-Chief at the New England Journal of Medicine, arguably one of the most respected medical journals on earth. But after reading her article in the New York Review of Books called Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption, one wonders if any medical journal on earth is worth anybody’s respect anymore.

    “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

    Dr. Angell cites the case of Dr. Joseph L. Biederman, professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and chief of pediatric psychopharmacology at Harvard’s Massachusetts General Hospital. She explains:

    “Thanks largely to him, children as young as two years old are now being diagnosed with bipolar disorder and treated with a cocktail of powerful drugs, many of which were not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for that purpose, and none of which were approved for children below ten years of age.”

    Biederman’s own studies of the drugs he advocates to treat childhood bipolar disorder were, as The New York Times summarized the opinions of its expert sources, “so small and loosely designed that they were largely inconclusive.”

    In June 2009, an American senate investigation revealed that drug companies, including those that make drugs he advocates for childhood bipolar disorder, had paid Biederman $1.6 million in “consulting” and “speaking” fees between 2000 and 2007.

    “Two of Biederman’s colleagues received similar amounts. After the revelation, the president of the Massachusetts General Hospital and the chairman of its physician organization sent a letter to the hospital’s physicians expressing not shock over the enormity of the conflicts of interest, but sympathy for the beneficiaries: “We know this is an incredibly painful time for these doctors and their families, and our hearts go out to them.”

    Biederman’s failure to disclose his Big Pharma payments to his employers ar Harvard (as is required for all Harvard employees) has been under investigation* for the past two years by Harvard Medical School, in as journalist Alison Bass describes this: “what must be the longest investigation in that school’s history”).

    Dr. Angell’s article contains bombshell after bombshell, all gleaned during her tenure as NEJM editor. For example, on the subject of doctors who are bought and paid for by Big Pharma, she writes:

    “No one knows the total amount provided by drug companies to physicians, but I estimate from the annual reports of the top 9 U.S.-based drug companies that it comes to tens of billions of dollars a year in North America alone.By such means, the pharmaceutical industry has gained enormous control over how doctors evaluate and use its own products. Its extensive ties to physicians, particularly senior faculty at prestigious medical schools, affect the results of research, the way medicine is practiced, and even the definition of what constitutes a disease.”

    Revelations like this from medical profession insiders cast serious doubt on more than what’s printed on the pages of these medical journals.

    Your physician reads these journals, treatment decisions are changed, care is affected, drugs are prescribed – all based on Big Pharma-funded medical ghostwriter-prepared journal articles from physicians who fraudulently claim to be the study authors. Then you walk out of your doctor’s office with a prescription for a drug that may or may not kill you, based on treatment protocols written by doctors like Biederman who are on the take from Big Pharma.

    A very recent example of the sad reality over at the once-prestigious New England Journal of Medicine is their decision to publish a drug company-funded review article. This review attempts to discredit emerging research suggesting that many years of using Merck’s Fosamax or Procter & Gamble’s Actonel (both osteoporosis drugs in a class called bisphosphonates) could actually result in more leg bone fractures.

    Not surprisingly, drug manufacturers of bisphosphonates are fighting back ferociously against this emerging (independent) research. A Merck-funded review paper published in the NEJM on March 24, 2010 concludes:

    “The occurrence of fracture of the subtrochantericor diaphyseal femur was very rare, even among women who had been treated with bisphosphonates for as long as 10 years.”

    Sounds promising for Big Pharma. But if you look very, very closely, the article’s fine print confesses:

    “The study was underpowered for definitive conclusions.”

    You might justifiably ask yourself why a medical journal would stoop to publishing a meaningless scientific paper that the paper’s own authors admit lacks any conclusion. Even more troubling than a journal article that was itself bought and paid for by Merck, is the conflict of interest disclosure list at the bottom of this NEJM article. It reads like a Who’s Who of Big Pharma.

    Of the 12 study authors listed in the NEJM article, at least three are full-time employees of Merck or Novartis. Each one of the other nine admit owning equity interests in or receiving cash, travel expenses, or “consulting and lecture fees” from companies including Merck, Novartis, Amgen, Roche Nycomed, Procter & Gamble, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronics, Nastech, Nestle, Fonterra Brands, OnoPharma, Osteologix, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Sanofi-Aventis, Tethys, Unilever,Unipath, Inverness Medical, Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, OSIProsidion, or Takeda.

    Why is the New England Journal of Medicine or any other credible medical journal accepting for publication articles submitted by paid employees of pharmaceutical companies?

    As a cardiac patient, I’m gobsmacked by what appears to be this systemic corruption of not only medical journals who continue to publish what they clearly know is tainted research linked to drug marketing, but of the very doctors whom patients trust to look out for us.

    Since my heart attack in 2008, I take a fistful of cardiac meds every day, and I have no clue which of them were prescribed for me based on flawed research or tainted medical journal articles funded by the very companies that make my drugs.

    And worse, neither do my doctors.

    Happily, there are other decent physicians out there who, like Dr. Angell, are just as outraged as she is. Her targets are not just guilty of unethical conflict of interest – they are criminals who should be charged with endangering our health while padding their wallets.
    .
    Read Dr. Angell’s article from the New York Review of Books, called Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption.

    * NEWS UPDATE: “Massachusetts General Hospital Discloses Sanctions against Three Psychiatrists for Violating Ethics Guidelines”, July 1, 2011: The Boston Business Journal said today that three psychiatrists have been sanctioned for failing to adequately report seven-figure payments they received from drug companies.

    Drs. Joseph Biederman, Thomas Spencer and Timothy Wilens disclosed the disciplinary actions against them in a note to colleagues. According to a copy of the note made public upon request by the hospital, the three doctors:

    • must refrain from all industry-sponsored outside activities” for one year
    • for two years after the ban ends, must obtain permission from Mass. General and Harvard Medical School before engaging in any industry-sponsored, paid outside activities and then must report back afterward
    • must undergo certain training
    • face delays before being considered for “promotion or advancement.”

    The three doctors have been under the political microscope since June 2008 when Senator Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, began investigating conflicts of interest involving clinicians. Biederman and Wilens have since admitted to accepting $1.6 million from drug companies whose drugs they were promoting; Spencer took $1 million.

    Senator Grassley said, according to an online version of the Congressional record:

    “These three Harvard doctors are some of the top psychiatrists in the country, and their research is some of the most important in the field. They have also taken millions of dollars from the drug companies.”




    See also:
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), Elixir (5th March 2014), seko (5th May 2014), wegge (22nd December 2013), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014)

  17. Link to Post #49
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Exposed: the Nazi roots of the European Union

    Mar3 by Jon Rappoport March 3, 2014
    www.nomorefakenews.com

    Once upon a time, there was an industrial combine in Nazi Germany called IG Farben. It was the largest chemical/pharmaceutical octopus in the world. It owned companies, and it had favorable business agreements with companies from England to Central America to Japan.

    As I mentioned in a recent article, the author of The Devil’s Chemists, Josiah DuBois, traveled to Guatemala in the early days of World War 2, and returned with the comment that, as far as he could tell, Guatemala was “a wholly owned subsidiary of Farben.”

    The pharmaceutical empire was and is one of the major forces behind the European Union (EU). It is no accident that these drug corporations wield such power. They aren’t only involved in controlling the medical cartel; they are political planners.

    This is how and why Big Pharma fits so closely with what is loosely referred to as the New World Order. The aim of enrolling every human in a cradle-to-grave system of disease diagnosis and toxic drug treatment has a larger purpose: to debilitate, to weaken populations.

    This is a political goal. It facilitates control.

    IG Farben’s component companies, at the outbreak of World War 2, were Bayer, BASF, and Hoechst. They were chemical and drug companies. Farben put Hitler over the top in Germany, and the war was designed to lead to a united Europe that would be dominated by the Farben nexus.

    The loss of the war didn’t derail that plan. It was shifted into an economic blueprint, which became, eventually, the European Union.

    The European Commission’s first president was Walter Hallstein, the Nazi lawyer who, during the war, had been in charge of post-war legal planning for the new Europe.

    As the Rath Foundation reports: In 1939, on the brink of the war, Hallstein had stated, “The creation of the New Law [of the Nazis] is ONLY the task of the law-makers!”

    In 1957, with his reputation sanitized, Hallstein spoke the words in this manner: “The European Commission has full and unlimited power for all decisions related to the architecture of this European community.”

    Post-war, IG Farben was broken up into separate companies, but those companies were following a common agenda. If, for example, you want to know why the endless debate over labeling GMO food rivals the real issue—banning GMO crops altogether—you can look to these Farben allies: Bayer, BASF, and Sanofi, among others.

    They are among the leaders in GMO research and production. BASF cooperates with Monsanto on research projects. Sanofi is a leader in GM vaccine research.

    The original IG Farben had a dream. Its executives and scientists believed they could eventually produce, synthetically, any compound in a laboratory. They could dominate world industry in this fashion.

    The dream never died. Today, they see gene-manipulation as the route to that goal.

    I refer you to the explosive book, The Nazi Roots of the Brussels EU, by Paul Anthony Taylor, Aleksandra Niedzwiecki, Dr. Matthias Rath, and August Kowalczyk. You can read it at relay-of-life.com. It is a dagger in the heart of the EU.

    At the Rath Foundation, you can also read Joseph Borkin’s classic, “The Crime and Punishment of IG Farben.”

    In 1992, I was deeply engaged in researching the specific devastating effects of medical drugs. Eventually, I concluded that, at the highest levels of power, these drugs weren’t destructive by accident. They were intended to cause harm. This was covert chemical warfare against the population of the planet. The Rockefeller-Standard Oil-Farben connection was a primary piece of the puzzle.

    It was, of course, Rockefeller (and Carnegie) power that forced the birth of pharmaceutical medicine in America, with the publication of the 1910 Flexner Report. The Report was used to excoriate and marginalize Chiropractic, Homeopathy, Naturopathy, and other forms of traditional natural practice, in favor of what would become the modern juggernaut of drug-based treatment.

    In an article about the FDA, “Medical Murder in the Matrix,” I point out the fact that this federal agency has permitted at least 100,000 deaths of Americans, per year, from the direct effects of drugs it, the FDA, has certified as safe.

    The FDA knows these death figures. “Unintended” and “accidental” can no longer be applied to this ongoing holocaust.

    The same can be held true for the pharmaceutical industry itself.

    People are exceedingly reluctant to come to this obvious conclusion. They prefer to hem and haw and invent excuses or deny the facts.

    To understand the dimensions and history of the ongoing chemical warfare against the population, in the form of medical drugs (and of course pesticides), one must factor in the original octopus, IG Farben.

    World War 2 never ended. It simply shifted its strategies.

    And just as one can trace extensive collaboration between major American corporations and the Nazi war machine, during the military phase of the war, today you see American corporations wreaking destructive havoc on the American people, as Dow, DuPont, Monsanto and others “work their magic for a better life.”

    In any fascist system, the bulk of the people working inside the system, including scientists, refuse to believe the evidence of what is happening before their own eyes. They insist they are doing good. They believe they are on the right side. They see greater top-down control as necessary and correct. They adduce reasonable explanations for inflicted harm and death.

    This is how and why conspiracies can exist. Only a few people, at the very top, need to know the true motives.

    Everyone else tells themselves fairy tales. This deep-seated obsession is an integral part of mind control, and ultimately it is self-inflicted.

    The self-created victim calculates: “I would rather stay in my dream than wake up to a nightmare.”

    Yes, but acknowledging the nightmare is a step on the road to liberation.

    In centuries past, empires conquered foreign lands and made colonies out of them. When that era ended, a less overt style of military and economic conquest was initiated. But there is something most people don’t realize.

    When richer nations now go into poorer nations, the so-called incidental goal of bringing “life-saving” medical care with them is a front and a pose.

    One of the chief goals of the conquerors is, in fact, pharmaceutical. Changing the habits of populations, so they come to rely on these drugs is high on the to-do list. It rings up profit, of course, for the pharmaceutical empire, and it also poisons the poor into even greater desolation than they are already experiencing. They become even easier to control.

    On top of that, the actual untreated causes of the routine desolation—starvation, generation-to-generation malnutrition, contaminated water supplies, lack of general sanitation, overcrowding, and previously stolen agricultural land—are shoved on the back burner of the global media.

    Suddenly, we learn that various germ-caused diseases are the real scourges of these countries, and help is coming (slowly), in the form of drugs that kill the germs, along with the medical heroes who will deliver these drugs.

    This is a cover story. It’s a preposterous lie. In the conditions of desolation mentioned above, it doesn’t matter what germs are present, and trying to attack them is futile and absurd.

    The general desolation weakens and destroys immune systems. At that point, what would normally be completely harmless germs, any germs, can sweep through an area and cause death and severe illness, because the routine processes of the immune system, which would immediately neutralize the germs, are disabled.

    The “medical intervention” is meant to defer, for yet another day, the remedying of the actual problems that keep causing disease—and the medical drugs create new and lethal toxicity, leading to more deaths.

    This is the standard op of the modern pharmaceutical empire. To know it is proceeding apace, all you have to do is see foreign doctors getting off planes in Third World countries, or read about some drug giant that is undertaking a humanitarian program of supplying medicines and vaccines to “people in desperate need of them.”

    Jon Rappoport
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  18. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), Elixir (5th March 2014), seko (5th May 2014), wegge (4th March 2014), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014)

  19. Link to Post #50
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    RIP, psychiatry: the “chemical-imbalance” theory is dead

    Mar7 2014, by Jon Rappoport
    www.nomorefakenews.com

    This one is big.

    Dr. Ronald Pies, the editor-in-chief emeritus of the Psychiatric Times, laid the theory to rest in the July 11, 2011, issue of the Times with this staggering admission:

    “In truth, the ‘chemical imbalance’ notion was always a kind of urban legend — never a theory seriously propounded by well-informed psychiatrists.”

    Boom.

    Dead.

    The point is, for decades the whole basis of psychiatric drug research, drug prescription, and drug sales has been: “we’re correcting a chemical imbalance in the brain.”

    The problem was, researchers had never established a normal baseline for chemical balance. So they were shooting in the dark. Worse, they were faking a theory. Pretending they knew something when they didn’t.

    In his 2011 piece in Psychiatric Times, Dr. Pies tries to cover his colleagues in the psychiatric profession with this fatuous remark:

    “In the past 30 years, I don’t believe I have ever heard a knowledgeable, well-trained psychiatrist make such a preposterous claim [about chemical imbalance in the brain], except perhaps to mock it…the ‘chemical imbalance’ image has been vigorously promoted by some pharmaceutical companies, often to the detriment of our patients’ understanding.”

    Absurd. First of all, many psychiatrists have explained and do explain to their patients that the drugs are there to correct a chemical imbalance.

    And second, if all well-trained psychiatrists have known, all along, that the chemical-imbalance theory is a fraud…

    …then why on earth have they been prescribing tons of drugs to their patients…

    …since those drugs are developed on the false premise that they correct an imbalance?

    Here’s what’s happening. The honchos of psychiatry are seeing the handwriting on the wall. Their game has been exposed. They’re taking heavy flack on many fronts.

    The chemical imbalance theory is a fake. There are no defining physical tests for any of the 300 so-called mental disorders. All diagnoses are based on arbitrary clusters or menus of human behavior. The drugs are harmful, dangerous, toxic. Some of them induce violence. Suicide, homicide. Some of the drugs cause brain damage.

    Psychiatry is a pseudo-pseudo science.

    So the shrinks have to move into another model, another con, another fraud. And they’re looking for one.

    For example, genes plus “psycho-social factors.” A mish-mash of more unproven science.

    “New breakthrough research on the functioning of the brain is paying dividends and holds great promise…” Professional gibberish.

    Meanwhile, the business model demands drugs for sale.

    So even though the chemical-imbalance nonsense has been discredited, it will continue on as a dead man walking, a zombie.

    Big Pharma isn’t going to back off. Trillions of dollars are at stake.

    And in the wake of Aurora, Colorado, and Sandy Hook, and the Naval Yard, the hype is expanding: “we must have new community mental-health centers all over America.”

    More fake diagnosis of mental disorders, more devastating drug prescriptions.

    As Dr. Peter Breggin explains in his classic, Toxic Psychiatry, half a century ago the psychiatric profession and the drug companies began to shape a deal.

    Psychiatry was dying out. Patients didn’t want to talk about their problems to MD shrinks.

    So the deal was this: psychiatry would go along with and promote chemical-imbalance propaganda. In turn, the drug companies would turn out the pharmaceuticals, and they would bankroll psychiatry, sponsoring conferences, taking out massive numbers of ads in journals, offering grants to universities.

    The deal paid off.

    Psychiatry experienced a resurgence. “Talk therapy is useless. Mental problems are all about the brain, and the brain must be drugged.”

    But now, the charade is exposed.

    You can be sure major Pharma players are meeting behind closed doors with leaders of the American Psychiatric Association (APA). The mafia is making a house call.

    They are reminding the APA that they have a deal. No cancellation allowed.

    “You guys promoted the chemical-imbalance theory. That was the arrangement. So keep promoting it. We don’t care how many lies you have to tell. Don’t try to develop a conscience all of a sudden. This is business.”

    The mafia doesn’t like it when people try to interrupt business.

    Jon Rappoport
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), seko (5th May 2014), spiritwind (9th March 2014), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014)

  21. Link to Post #51
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    The Drug That Can Make You Kill

    AlterNet / By Martha Rosenberg

    A common malaria drug has been linked to murders and suicides.






    March 26, 2014 |

    Lariam (mefloquine) is one of the most widely used malaria drugs in America. Yet it has been linked to grisly crimes, like Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales' 2012 murder of 16 Afghan civilians, the murders of four wives of Fort Bragg soldiers in 2002 and other extreme violence.

    While the FDA beefed up warnings for Lariam last summer, especially about the drug's neurotoxic effects, and users are now given a medication guide and wallet card, Lariam and its generic versions are still the third most prescribed malaria medication. Last year there were 119,000 prescriptions between January and June. Though Lariam is banned among Air Force pilots, until 2011, Lariam was on the increase in the Navy and Marine Corps.

    The negative neurotoxic side effects of Lariam can last for "weeks, months, and even years," after someone stops using it, warns the VA. Medical and military authorities say the drug "should not be given to anyone with symptoms of a brain injury, depression or anxiety disorder," reported Army Times—which is, of course, the demographic that encompasses "many troops who have deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan." In addition to Lariam's wide use in the military, the civilian population taking malaria drugs includes Peace Corps and aid workers, business travelers, news media, students, NGO workers, industrial contractors, missionaries and families visiting relatives, often bringing children.

    What makes Lariam so deadly? It has the same features that made the street drug PCP/angel dust such an urban legend in the 1970s and 1980s. It can produce extreme panic, paranoia and rage in the user along with out-of-body " dissociative" and dream-like sensations so that a person performing a criminal act often believes someone else is doing it. An example of such dissociative effects was seen in Staff Sgt. Robert Bales' rampage; according to prosecutors at his trial, Bales slipped away from his remote Afghanistan post, Camp Belambay, in a T-shirt, cape and night-vision goggles and no body armor to attack his first victims. He then returned to the base and "woke a fellow soldier, reported what he'd done, and said he was headed out to kill more."

    In addition to Bales' 2012 attacks and the 2002 Fort Bragg attacks, Lariam was linked in news reports to extreme side effects in an army staff sergeant in Iraq in 2005 and to the suicide of an Army Reservist in 2008.

    Former Army psychiatrist Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, former U.S. Army Major and Preventive Medicine Officer Remington Nevin and Jerald Block with the Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center agree in a recent paper that Lariam may be behind "seemingly spectacular and impulsive suicides." It can produce "derealization and depersonalization, compulsions toward dangerous objects, and morbid curiosity about death," they write, describing frequent hallucinations "involving religious or morbid themes" and "a sense of the presence of a nearby nondescript figure." The researchers refer to two reports of people jumping out of windows on Lariam under the false belief that their rooms were on fire.

    Lariam is one of five malaria drugs listed by the CDC for people who will be exposed to malaria. Other drugs include Malarone, a combination of the drugs atovaquone and Proguanil, Aralen (chloroquine,) primaquine and the antibiotic doxycycline marketed as Vibramycin. None of the drugs are ideal—Malarone can have renal effects and Aralen can have liver, blood and skin effects. Some do not work right away or are ineffective against resistant malaria strains. But the main reason for Lariam's historic popularity is that it is taken weekly, unlike all the other drugs (except chloroquine) which are taken daily. Some travelers also report that Lariam is cheaper than other malaria drugs and say they only experience symptoms like memory loss and vivid nightmares. Still, since awareness of Lariam's dangers, many users are now required to read and sign an informed consent form.


    Early Example of Public Funding of Pharma Profits
    Lariam was an early example of "technology-transfer" between publicly funded and academic research and Big Pharma, driven by the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. The Bayh-Dole Act dangled the riches of “industry” before medical institutions just as the former were floundering and the latter was booming, observes Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine. Turning universities into think tanks for Big Pharma has been so profitable, Northwestern University made $700 million when it sold Lyrica, discovered by one of its chemists, to Pfizer enabling it to build a new research building.

    Lariam was developed by the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) in the 1960s and '70s after a drug-resistant strain of malaria did not respond to medications and sickened troops during the Vietnam War. Though Lariam was developed with our tax dollars, all phase I and phase II clinical trial data were given to Hoffman LaRoche and Smith Kline free of charge in what was the first private public partnership between the U.S. Department of Defense and Big Pharma . You're welcome! It was approved by the FDA in 1989.

    Roche, which retained the patent, did well with the government largesse. In 2009, it spent $46.8 billion to buy Genentech (for comparison the entire yearly budget of the National Institutes of Health is $60 billion a year) and its cancer drug, Avastin, makes up to $100,000 per patient per year, despite reports of its limited effectiveness for some cancers for which it is used.

    Nor was the testing of Lariam kosher. It was first tested on prisoners and soldiers who are not necessarily able or willing to refuse participation in clinical trials and it was also widely given to Guantanamo detainees. Phase III trials, supposed to be conducted on larger patient groups of up to 3,000 people, were not conducted at all, wrote the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine in 2007 and "there was no serious attempt prior to licensing to explore the potential drug-drug interactions." In fact, all users "have been involved in a natural experiment to determine the true safety margin," says the journal, because "Consumers have been unwitting recruits to this longitudinal study, rather than informed partners." No wonder Lariam causes adverse effects in as many as 67 percent of users.

    As seen with other drugs that have neuropsychiatric effects, like the antidepressant Cymbalta and seizure drug Neurontin, the military, government and Big Pharma blamed the effects on the patients not the drugs. When the wives of four Fort Bragg soldiers were murdered during the summer of 2002—one was stabbed 50 times and set on fire—military investigators blamed "existing marital problems and the stress of separation while soldiers are away on duty," instead of Lariam. Right. Three of the four soldiers also took their own lives.

    The military, government and Big Pharma similarly blame the current suicide epidemic among military personnel on factors others than the ubiquitous psychiatric drugs in use—even though 30 percent of the victims never deployed and 60 percent never saw combat. A recent five-year study by Pharma-funded academic, government and military researchers about military suicides does not even consider the drugs given to an estimated fourth of soldiers—almost all of which carry warnings about suicide.

    It is also worth noting that the alarming side-effects linked to Lariam which patients, doctors and public health officials reported for at least a decade, were not acknowledged until profits ran out and Lariam became a generic, as has happened with other risky drugs. When sentiment turned against Lariam in 2008, its manufacturer, Hoffmann–La Roche ceased marketing it in the US and now the words "Lariam" and "malaria" draw no search results on its US website. Who, us?

    One group that has tried to raise awareness of the dangers of Lariam is Mefloquine (Lariam) Action, created in 1996 when founder, Susan Rose, noticed Peace Corps workers given Lariam were falling ill. Rose soon enlarged the scope of Mefloquine (Lariam) Action to include travelers and military personnel.

    "This black box [the strongest FDA warning on drug packaging] officially establishes that mefloquine can cause permanent, brain damage and more. It validates what we have been saying since the beginning," Jeanne Lese, director of Mefloquine (Lariam) Action told me. The problem is far from solved by the black box, says Lese. "The drug continues to be given out at travel clinics all over the U.S. and elsewhere every single day. What's more, it is often prescribed with no hint to the patient about the black box, and no screening for contraindications such as history of previous depression or other neuropsych problems."


    Lariam's Checkered Past
    The case of the four Fort Bragg soldiers charged with killing their wives during the summer of 2002 is not the only time Lariam has been in the news. There was also the case of Staff Sergeant Andrew Pogany who volunteered to serve in Iraq in 2003 and experienced such panic and PTSD symptoms in the war theater, he was sent back to Fort Carson and charged with “cowardly conduct as a result of fear.” Pogany and his attorney were able to prove that his reaction probably stemmed from Lariam and he received an honorable discharge. But Pogany, understandably, became a vehement advocate for the rights of soldiers with PTSD, especially those who have been given psychoactive drugs that make them worse.

    The wife of a 17-year marine veteran I interviewed in 2011 reported a similar story. After being deployed twice to Iraq and once to Afghanistan, her husband developed extreme PTSD. "He went from being loving on the phone, to saying he never wanted to see me and our daughter again," the wife said. "He said not to even bother coming to the airport to meet him, because he would walk right past us." When the couple did reunite, the husband was frail and thin, and "the whites of his eyes were brown," says the wife. The formerly competent drill instructor became increasingly and inexplicably unpredictable, suicidal and violent and was incarcerated in the brig at Camp Lejeune for assault in 2011. I asked the wife to ask him during her visits if he had been given Lariam and she said he said yes.

    In the nonfiction book, Murder in Baker Company: How Four American Soldiers Killed One of Their Own, Lariam is also raised as a possible factor in the brutal death of Army Specialist Richard Davis. When asked about Lariam in the crime in an interview, the author Cilla McCain said, "Although it was never mentioned in court, I think if this same case were to happen today, it would definitely be considered as a defense. These soldiers were overdosing on Lariam in massive amounts because there wasn’t proper oversight. In reality, proper oversight is impossible in a war zone but steps could have been taken to make sure that overdosing didn’t occur. Even without over-dosage the Lariam issue is a volatile one at best and I’m positive we will be hearing more about the damage it has caused for years to come. Some scientists are linking Lariam directly to the historical rise of suicides in the United States."

    As a dark cloud grows over Lariam, there is both good and bad news. The good news is in 2013, the Surgeon General's Office of the Army Special Operations Command told commanders and medical workers that soldiers thought to be suffering from PTSD or other psychological problems or even faking mental impairment may actually be Lariam victims. The bad news is a new malaria drug developed at Reed during the same time period as Lariam called tafenoquine is now fast-tracking toward FDA approval. Jeanne Lese and Remington Nevin worry that the new drug has not been adequately tested for the same types of neurotoxic effects seen with Lariam and that it will become Lariam 2.0.

    Martha Rosenberg is an investigative health reporter and the author of "Born With a Junk Food Deficiency: How Flaks, Quacks and Hacks Pimp The Public Health (Random House)."
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  22. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Agape (18th April 2014), Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), Rocky_Shorz (18th April 2014), seko (5th May 2014), william r sanford72 (22nd June 2014)

  23. Link to Post #52
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction




    Sleep aids are a more than $2 billion per year industry. Forecasts predict that global prescriptions for anti-anxiety medicines will reach $5.9 billion per year by 2017. But are these drugs safe? Studies show how easy it is to get hooked and a new study just published in the British Medical Journal shows that anti-anxiety and sleep drugs can kill you.

    Using data from the prescription records of primary care doctors, the study compared 34,727 patients prescribed anxiolytic (anti-anxiety) or hypnotic (sleep) drugs to 69,418 people not prescribed these drugs. Over 90 percent of the prescribed drugs were benzodiazepines or Z-drugs, which you might know by brand names like Xanax, Valium, Lunesta, Ambien and many more.

    The study found that over the average 7.6-year follow-up period, for every 100 people followed there were about 4 more deaths in the prescription drug group than in the control group.

    As you can imagine, the big challenge in this study was pulling out the influence of all the other things that might matter. For example, was the prescription drug group more likely to have other challenges that increased their chance of death?

    Researchers did their best, controlling for factors like “sex, age at study entry, sleep disorders, anxiety disorders, other psychiatric disorders, medical morbidity, and prescriptions for non-study drugs.” They also controlled for socioeconomic status, alcohol and smoking.

    The results remained: The 4-per-100 death increase doubled the chance of death in the prescription drug group compared to controls. And the more prescription drugs a person took during the study, the greater their chance of death increased – the more drugs, the more morbidity.

    The thing is, this study is just one in a long line of research showing the dangers of psychotropic medicines prescribed for anxiety, sleep, depression and a host of other mental health challenges. For example, even though you’re told not to drive, people prescribed these medicines have more than six times the risk of hospitalization due to traffic accident in the two weeks after the prescription is first filled. And, “Even at modest doses…treatment with benzodiazepines appears to increase the risk of hip fracture,” writes an article in the American Journal of Psychiatry. The list of unintended risks of psychotropic medications goes on to include seizure, birth defects, heart rate variability, suicide, and even cancer.

    Not to mention addiction. Absolutely every day at my center, we treat addictions to prescription anti-anxiety and sleep medications. In addition to the health consequences of these drugs, if left untreated, dependence has the potential to rob people of relationships, careers and their sense of self. Addiction is a heartbreaking consequence of these drugs and is largely overlooked by the medical model that is designed to treat symptoms instead of diseases – have a fever? Take a Tylenol.

    Have trouble sleeping? Take an Ambien.

    The fact is that at best psychotropic medications mask the symptoms of an underlying illness. Then when a person stops taking these dangerous drugs to steer clear of the health or mental health consequences, the symptoms often return.

    Instead, this most recent article in the British Medical Journal and the hundreds of others add weight to a scale that is already tipped far in favor of a better way:

    psychotherapeutic techniques that heal the root causes of anxiety or sleep issues and not drugs that mask their symptoms are the best way to treat addiction and mental health challenges. In the great an ongoing debate of prescriptions versus holistic therapies, this study adds yet more support to the essential truth of drug-free treatment.


    Richard Taite is founder and CEO of Cliffside Malibu, offering evidence-based, individualized addiction treatment based on the Stages of Change model. He is also coauthor with Constance Scharff of the book Ending Addiction for Good.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  24. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), jbins (19th April 2014), Rocky_Shorz (18th April 2014), seko (5th May 2014), william r sanford72 (22nd June 2014)

  25. Link to Post #53
    United States Avalon Member raregem's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st November 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    521
    Thanks
    8,098
    Thanked 2,239 times in 468 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    I was prescribed Amitriptyline for depression during my trials before the disability judges.
    I took it two nights in a row then put the rest in the trash. (I usually do not ask for or get pain meds etc... Pharmaceuticals are scary for me in general. )
    My experience was so scary and thoughts I had were horrid. Beyond horrid. I had never had these kind of thoughts or images before. I do not watch horror movies and the like. I kept my psyche away from the subtle influence. It was so frightful that I could not see screwing up my mind until the pills "stabilized". HAR. Stabilized my foot.
    Needless to say the doctor was just cruel anyway. He was willing to give me mind altering (real mind altering) drugs but not a pain relief pill in the 3 years I saw him. I asked a lot of his patients their stories on the small town bus during our rides. So many disheartening stories re: this doc. Small town- one doc choice -when poor. Poor when cannot work. lol and on and on we go
    Last edited by raregem; 18th April 2014 at 14:42.

  26. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to raregem For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), Hervé (18th April 2014), Rocky_Shorz (18th April 2014), seko (5th May 2014), william r sanford72 (22nd June 2014)

  27. Link to Post #54
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    SSRI Stories

    Antidepressant Nightmares

    Our Stories
    SSRI Stories is a collection of over 5,000 stories that have appeared in the media (newspapers, TV, scientific journals) in which prescription drugs were mentioned and in which the drugs may be linked to a variety of adverse outcomes including violence.

    This updated site includes the stories from the previous site and new ones from 2011 to date. We have used a new “category” classification system on the new stories.

    We are working back through previous SSRI Stories to bring them into the new classification system. In the meantime use the search box in the upper right column to search through both the old and the new stories.

    Also, all of the stories from the original site are available under the Archives tab. These are presented in the traditional site format. Once we have finished the posting of new stories and applying the expanded classification we will make all of this available in this traditional format.

    SSRI Stories focuses on the Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs), of which Prozac (fluoxetine) was the first. For more see About SSRIs.

    Popular Categories
    Warning
    Adverse reactions are most likely to occur when starting or discontinuing the drug, increasing or lowering the dose or when switching from one SSRI to another. Adverse reactions are often diagnosed as bipolar disorder when the symptoms may be entirely iatrogenic (treatment induced). Withdrawal, especially abrupt withdrawal, from any of these medications can cause severe neuropsychiatric and physical symptoms. It is important to withdraw extremely slowly from these drugs, often over a period of a year or more, under the supervision of a qualified and experienced specialist. Withdrawal is sometimes more severe than the original symptoms or problems.
    The following RxISK.org research papers and guides deal with dependence and withdrawal and may be helpful:
    1. Dependence and Withdrawal
    2. Guide to Stopping Antidepressants
    3. Medicine Induced Stress Syndromes
    Click here to view these and other RxISK.org research papers.



    (click on picture to search for a specific drug or record your own side effect story)
    Last edited by Hervé; 18th April 2014 at 23:25.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), raregem (20th April 2014), william r sanford72 (22nd June 2014)

  29. Link to Post #55
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Drugs: Psychiatry's modus operandi - The hidden enemy documentary
    CCHR Documentaries
    Mon, 07 Apr 2014 05:50 CDT



    Published on Apr 7, 2014
    It used to be that no one could take psychiatric drugs while in the military. All that has changed in recent years. Today, psychiatric drugging has gone rampant. From 2005 to 2011, the U.S. Department of Defense and the Veterans Administration increased their prescriptions of psychiatric drugs by nearly seven times. That's over thirty times faster than the civilian rate, even though the American military has been steadily reducing troop levels since 2008.

    Officially, one in six American service members is on at least one psychiatric drug. That's probably a very low estimate. Psychiatric drugs are handed out not just by psychiatrists, but also by physician's assistants, nurses, medics--they're even passed around from soldier to soldier. And the U.S. government acknowledges they have no way of knowing how many drugs are handed out on the front lines. This rampant drug dispensing has turned very dangerous, especially when so many "qualify" for psychiatry's biggest diagnosis/drugging combo of all.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), seko (5th May 2014), william r sanford72 (22nd June 2014)

  31. Link to Post #56
    Europe Avalon Member
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Age
    48
    Posts
    88
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 358 times in 75 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Hi Daughter of Time,
    As you mentioned - simple homeopathic remedy could not help you in this, but Holographic Kinetics may very well do help you with the insomnia because it has the understanding and knowledge what is involved in it and how to deal with it. You could probably solve your problem in just one session with a good HK practitioner.



    Quote Posted by Daughter of Time (here)
    As someone who suffers from insomnia, I have had to rely on small amounts of medicine at bedtime. A holistically oriented M.D. as well as a naturopath advised me to take natural supplements like GABA, 5HTP, melatonin and the tiniest little piece of clonazepam. This combination actually works and I am told, is not that harmful. My doctor is one of those rare M.D.s who does not like to prescribe drugs unless absolutely necessary and he feels that as long as one of the "pam" drugs is kept at a minimum, then it is safer than not sleeping. The naturopath agrees with this conclusion.

    A couple of years ago, I ran out of the prescription and my doctor was on vacation. I went to a walk-in clinic where I was attended by a very young doctor. She refused to prescribe the pam because she said it's very bad for you. She informed me that the answer to sleep, and most afflictions which are not related to any disease, as in my case, is one of the many different kinds of anti-depressants! So she prescribed some "tradozone" for me, which I refused. She became rather miffed and shoved the prescription in my hands and ordered me to take one every night and my insomnia would go away. I did not fill out the prescription! I find it quite impossible to believe that an anti-depressant every night is less harmful than a sliver of clonazepam.

    Because she was so young, I conclude that medical school is teaching their future doctors that anti-depressants are the panacea we've been looking for and they probably want the whole planet to be on one kind or another.

    I know some people whose young children are on psychiatric drugs and unless they take such medications, they will not be allowed to attend school because they are too belligerent. One such person took her belligerent child to a naturopath who immediately knew the child had worms. A remedy for worms was given to the child who became perfectly calm after two weeks.

    Unfortunately, my case is far more complex than a simple homeopathic remedy because I've tried them all and they haven't worked. But I do look forward to the day when I will be able to remove the "pam" completely from my bedtime routine.

  32. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TheVoyager For This Post:

    Daughter of Time (24th April 2014), Hervé (25th April 2014)

  33. Link to Post #57
    Avalon Member sigma6's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th July 2011
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    3,428
    Thanks
    8,905
    Thanked 12,628 times in 2,893 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    The "math" on this is so simple... If Big Pharma pharmaceutical chemicals were as sophisticated as the Commercial images of white lab coats would suggest, then why are there a dozen side effects, (some lethal!) to all these drugs? Obviously these drugs are pathetic attempts at trying to effect a change in a complex system (the human body) that they DON'T completely understand... All the talk and explanation is just that, a bunch of talk.

    Rogain is a perfect example, originally a heart drug, that turned out to be ineffective as a heart drug, was simply put in a different package and sold as a hair replacement therapy.

    Prozac is the highest profit making drug of all time. A so called "anti-depressant" Which if there were any REAL Doctors, would tell you to take a single drag on cannabis or hash, (btw - Can you imagine, the threat this legalization movement is creating for Crime Syndicate funded Big Pharma? HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!)
    Anyhow... Prozac is considered, by definition to be the most successful drug of all time, (i.e. a measure of it's distribution and profit) It's main ingredient is fluoride. And it is highly addictive. The withdrawal symptoms being violent aggression and suicidal tendencies. Dead simple what is going on here...

    There is a famous chemist who is on the record, that most of these chemicals are toxic, overly concentrated poisons, derivatives of already existing natural substances that occur in nature. By concentrating out only or 2 elements from it's natural source which may have thousands of other "factors" 1) You lose the overall balance of the natural source, and create a toxic and dangerous poison. and 2) The isolated chemical may be artificially manufactured from a different source once some of it's properties are better understood.

    So now you have an artificially created (if that turns out to be cheaper, although that step itself might even introduce more side effects) and toxic poison that can now be "patented" and dumped into the "National Drug Distribution Network" of "Doctors" to make BILLIONS of dollars PROFIT selling a "pill" that cost a penny to manufacture for $1, or today even $5 or $10 (since an ever greater need to make profits is required to cover their huge lawsuits and political campaigns to Congressional Agents, themselves tools of the same Banking Cartels (read Crime Syndicates, who are controlling and funding the Big Pharma in the first place) ...

    It is always about elite powerful individuals who have hijacked the monetary system and leveraged it for their own personal gain, and always at the cost of other human suffering and even loss of life. (soft kill as Alex Jones call it, I think)
    Last edited by sigma6; 27th April 2014 at 00:09.
    We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time
    By faith we understand things which are seen were not made of the things which are visible

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sigma6 For This Post:

    Hervé (27th April 2014), seko (5th May 2014)

  35. Link to Post #58
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    20th November 2012
    Location
    gone
    Age
    36
    Posts
    4,874
    Thanks
    15,814
    Thanked 18,722 times in 4,284 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Thanks again for this thread, it's a winner.
    This issue comes up again and again, because they are still dying...
    it's very sad.

    "...for every one of us who makes it, there will be 10 who do not. for every survivor there were will 10 or more who are not surviving..."

    Letter to the Union Bulletin

  36. Link to Post #59
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Bombshell: 1 in 13 U.S. children take psychiatric drugs

    Sunday, May 04, 2014 by: L.J. Devon, Staff Writer
    Tags: psychiatric drugs, children, overmedication

    (NaturalNews) An increasing number of children in America are being labeled, diagnosed and branded. Unique personalities are being scolded and molded by drugs to adapt childhood behavior into societal norms. Children have become like sculptures, motionless, lifeless, as psychiatric drugs chisel away at their natural state of well-being.

    Living under a controlled paradigm designed by Drug Companies

    The emotional and behavioral differences among children are yoked into compliance, to conformity. A child's struggles aren't listened to, aren't understood. Their differences, behavior and problems are stamped into their mind as if they are a mental illness. Psychiatric drugs are driven down the throats of young people, as pharmaceutical companies expand their controlling influence.

    A shocking new study facilitated by the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics reveals that 1 in 13, or 7.5 percent of US children, are now on some type of psychiatric drug. Taking a step back, it's as if the lives of people today are controlled by a paradigm designed by drug companies. The potential of free thought is a mere speck of what it could be.

    The minds of a generation have been collectively hijacked in the 21st century; an alarming number of parents and medical professionals have become disillusioned in a new age of chemical quick fixes. Mind-altering drugs are pushed onto children with little regard for their natural ability to overcome challenges. The root issues are never dealt with when a drug is issued as the one-size-fits-all band-aid.

    A generation ago, all these mental illnesses and ADHD labels were nonexistent. Children's minds were left unaltered. They were never so psychotically evaluated, labeled and nitpicked like they are today. They were not subjects of a multinational psychiatric drugging machine, which now possesses 1/13 of today's American culture.

    Boys drugged more than girls, belittled in an emasculated culture

    The childhood drug study, based on 6- to 17-year-olds, shows another alarming trend; boys are more likely to be prescribed psychiatric drugs than girls. 9.7 percent of boys are drugged compared to 5.2 percent of girls. It's apparent that these drugs are a way to emasculate boys, as strength is belittled and minds are altered to submit.

    The increasing psychiatric diagnoses on children show that medical professionals have generally strayed away from treating people as human beings and have instead become like drug peddlers and distributors. They've become mindless themselves, submitting to new labels and diagnoses formulated and made into doctrine through the psychiatrists' Bible, the DSM. While the American Psychiatric Association believes that medical professionals are doing a better job today at pinning down psychiatric problems in children earlier and responding to them sooner, this is no excuse to drug children out of their wits, out of their problems, personalities, abnormalities, masculinity and/or behavioral differences.

    Psychiatric drugs condemn personality differences and throw away discipline

    These psychiatric drugs do not teach children how to cope with challenges in life. These drugs replace discipline and perseverance with chemical alterations that harbor physical, emotional, mental and spiritual side effects.

    If a psychiatric drug is credited for helping change a child's behavior or depressive state, then the child is inherently taught to be mentally and spiritually dependent on a substance to cope with life's tough realities. This drug-care illusion could ultimately be cast onto every human being, since behavioral differences, life challenges and brain chemical imbalances are all possible at some point in every person's life.

    Leaning on drugs to deal with life does not allow time for the chemically imbalanced brain to heal naturally. The brain can become dependent on the chemical alteration while fighting side effects and withdrawals. Important bodily functions like metabolism and sleep can also be adversely affected as well as elicit unnatural changes in communication, violent behavior and lack of empathy for mankind.

    Children enrolled in Medicaid drugged more readily

    The study also showed that kids enrolled on Medicaid are more likely to be branded and drugged with psychiatrics. Medicaid boasts 9.9 percent of children taking drugs for behavioral problems, as opposed to 6.7 percent of children covered under private insurance.

    In the CDC report, the researchers wrote, "Over the past two decades, the use of medication to treat mental health problems has increased substantially among all school-aged children and in most subgroups of children."

    Why have medical professionals and parents settled for a method of labeling and drugging so disempowering and so defeated?

    It's definitely time to take a closer look at the overmedication epidemic going on right now in American culture. It's time to question the labels, the diagnoses and the blind servitude of psychiatric medicine.

    Sources for this article include

    http://www.foxnews.com

    http://www.upi.com

    http://science.naturalnews.com
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  37. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    enfoldedblue (5th May 2014), seko (5th May 2014), Tesla_WTC_Solution (5th May 2014), william r sanford72 (22nd June 2014)

  38. Link to Post #60
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,722
    Thanks
    59,843
    Thanked 94,598 times in 15,432 posts

    Default Re: Psych Drugs: The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Drugged Up

    Psychiatry is over-reliant on chemical cures. It’s time to look at the facts, not the fallacies.

    Bob Johnson | Psychiatrist, critic of electroconvulsive therapy. Consultant to James Nayler Foundation



    If ever there were a case for an outside body to let the light in, then it’s here, today, in psychiatry. If today’s psychiatry is working, why are claims for mental disability going up? Why is there accumulating evidence that sufferers do better OFF the medication than on? Why is not more attention paid to the solid Swedish epidemiological evidence that ‘anti-psychotic’ drugs increase the risk of dementia up to 20-fold? All that known drug-induced brain damage has to show up somewhere.Why is increased suicide listed in the side-effects of the ‘anti-depressants’? And worst of all, why are so many drugs being given compulsorily, overriding the patient’s sensibly withheld consent – the iniquitous Community Treatment Orders (CTOs)? Even this has been shown not to work.

    The answer is that it is the psychiatrists who are addicted to hard medications. It’s a case of “I’ve made up my mind, don’t confuse me with facts”. The facts are overwhelming. On 30th April 2014, I attended the launch in the House of Lords of the Council for Evidence-Based Psychiatry – why is such an organisation so urgently needed? Because, in Dr Joanna MonCrieff’s words, in her book aptly titled The Myth Of The Chemical Cure:
    The persistence of the dopamine hypothesis and its recent resurgence in popularity are testimony therefore not to the state of the evidence but more to the need of the psychiatric profession to have medical models of the disorders it is confronted by, particularly ones that provide a medical justification for its treatment.
    Clinical psychologist Richard Bentall knows there’s a clear link between childhood trauma and psychoses. In my work I focus on convincing the individual that this trauma is now over, and they blossom. And we are talking about the most severe forms, the 3% of severe psychoses, severe depressions, severe bi-polar. In every case, if you look for it, you find severe trauma. Contrary to DSM III, IV and V (the standard classification system used by mental health professionals in the US) severe psychiatric disorders are all reactive – they result from overwhelming trauma in susceptible individuals.

    Let me give you a taste. I have a 38 year old whose thought disorder was crippling. She couldn’t finish a sentence straight. Then, out of the blue, she says “mum is alive” – we both knew that mum had died 30 years before. She simply couldn’t say “mum is dead”, even though she knew it was true. Her face contorted, her thinking went down the tubes. The fact that she could say the first proved that all her neurology was intact, but her emotions were not. Gently persuading her that the second was true, and that she would be all right, has evaporated her psychotic symptoms.

    Andy is 45. He writes “mum is dead, but I don’t know this yet”. This is bonkers, and Andy knows it. Gently I’m persuading him, with support, that he too can survive without parents – something that was impossible aged two. This has nothing to do with dopamine, and all to do with a human reaction to overwhelming trauma. How long before my psychiatric colleagues wake up? And how much more damage, especially to human rights, must we endure before they do?

    Dr Bob Johnson is currently working on a book about “Antropy”, a kind of anti-entropy present only in living beings and essential to the biosphere.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There's the crux of the matter: it seems like there's a vested interest in obfuscating the major, widespread cause of traumatic events... the SRA kind of things.
    Last edited by Hervé; 5th May 2014 at 14:43.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  39. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    meeradas (9th May 2014), seko (5th May 2014), Tesla_WTC_Solution (5th May 2014), william r sanford72 (21st May 2014)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 3 7 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts