Archive for August, 2009

Drugged to Death; Our Kids and Our Troops

Wednesday, August 19th, 2009

By Jim Marrs
Investigative Journalist
New York Times bestselling author
August 19, 2009

Today, one of the biggest problems we have, and one of the things that shocks so many Americans, is the rise of teen suicides and the rise of school shootings. Yet all we hear from the corporate mass media on the shootings is “Well, we need to take the guns away.” Let me tell you something, I went to school in Texas. We took guns to school. Nobody shot anybody. So what’s changed? Drugs. Kids on psychiatric drugs. Nearly every school shooter in this country can be shown to have been involved with psychotropic drugs—either taking them at the time of the shootings, or what can be even worse, coming off of them. And teen suicides? Read the FDA black box warnings, these drugs can cause suicidal ideation. So logically, if kids are being drugged up with antidepressants, and if in fact teen suicides are rising, then it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that we better stop drugging our kids to death.

Psychiatric drugs cause major changes in brain chemistry and in behavior. International drug regulators warn that the drugs we are doling out to kids can cause mania, psychosis, depersonalization, suicidal and even homicidal ideation. If we take a look at the school shooters that were under the influence of these drugs, you have to wonder why there hasn’t been a federal investigation into the correlation between drugs documented to cause violence and suicide and kids taking them who then became violent and suicidal. If even a handful of these school shooters were found to be taking PCP or smoking crack we would have headline news announcing a causal relationship between illicit drug use and acts of violence. But because these kids are taking legal drugs, prescribed by a psychiatrist for an alleged mental disorder, something we use to refer to as “childhood,” the powers that be don’t think it merits an investigation. Well we are all aware of how much Pharma spends on lobbying efforts. Regarding corporate media I would venture a guess that the reason they haven’t taken on the issue is simple: Big Pharma is now one of, if not the largest, advertisers in the United States, with $5 billion a year spent on direct to consumer advertising.

The rise of drug-induced acts of violence and suicide isn’t limited to our schools. In January 2009 it was reported that more of our military died of suicide than of combat deaths. Why is that? Could it be because our military are getting pumped full of psychiatric drugs? What Time Magazine referred to as “America’s Medicated Army?” Well if we are “medicating” our troops with antidepressants and antipsychotics, drugs documented to cause suicidal reactions, let’s put 2 and 2 together and state the obvious—these drugs are minimally a contributing factor.

Many people don’t realize that psychiatry’s love affair with the military dates back more than 90 years; During World War I the biggest problem the German military had was desertions—people leaving the front lines of the War. So the Germans turned to psychiatrists who came up with a solution: Electroshock. Psychiatrists theorized that if the shock soldiers experienced due to the brutalities of war made them desert the front lines, then another kind of shock—electroshock—could get them to be good little soldiers and willingly return to combat. Maybe because electroshock wiped out their memory, or maybe because soldiers chose to face the front lines rather than have another 450 volts of current tear through their brain, it worked. Psychiatry had come up with a winning strategy for the military to deal with reluctant soldiers and since that time the love affair between the two entities has never waned.

Today there are mobile psychiatric units that travel with the troops to ensure they’re drugged up as needed. And though they are not yet employing electroshock, as more Americans are made aware that these psychotropic drugs are killing our troops, don’t be surprised if sometime soon you pick up a newspaper and find psychiatrists promoting a new cure for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; Electroshock.

Jim Marrs is an award-winning journalist and author. After graduating from the University of North Texas with a degree in journalism, Marrs worked for and owned several Texas newspapers before becoming an independent journalist/author. Marrs is the author of the New York Times bestsellers, Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, the basis for the Oliver Stone film JFK, and Rule by Secrecy.

RETURN TO BLOGS PAGE


Share

U.S. Senator charges “scientific” support of drugs often written by Pharma ghost writers

Wednesday, August 19th, 2009

Natasha Singer
The New York Times
August 18, 2009

A growing body of evidence suggests that doctors at some of the nation’s top medical schools have been attaching their names and lending their reputations to scientific papers that were drafted by ghostwriters working for drug companies — articles that were carefully calibrated to help the manufacturers sell more products.

Experts in medical ethics condemn this practice as a breach of the public trust. Yet many universities have been slow to recognize the extent of the problem, to adopt new ethical rules or to hold faculty members to account.

Those universities may not have much longer to get their houses in order before they find themselves in trouble with Washington.

With a letter last week, a senator who helps oversee public funding for medical research signaled that he was running out of patience with the practice of ghostwriting. Senator Charles E. Grassley, an Iowa Republican who has led a long-running investigation of conflicts of interest in medicine, is starting to put pressure on the National Institutes of Health to crack down on the practice.

Read entire article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/health/research/19ethics.html?_r=2&ref=health

« Return to news items


Share

“Antidepressant Romance Fuels Premedicated Murder” by Shane Ellison, Masters Degree in Organic Chemistry

Tuesday, August 18th, 2009

Shane Ellison
NewsWithViews.com
August 18, 2009

I wish medicine wasn’t so darn complicated. If it weren’t, people would see how Big Pharma cleverly plays prescription cupid to hook the masses into an antidepressant romance. Fueled by dreamy ads, sexy actors, and medical experts who get paid to give pharmaceutical fellatio, the romance has grown into a full-fledged orgy.

Antidepressants are among the best selling drugs, yet not one single diagnostic test supports their effectiveness. Romance makes for great business. But, are patients getting the love they deserve or are they facing another life threatening disaster akin to the Vioxx fiasco (killing an estimated 30,000 people who could have just used aspirin)? Perhaps the chemical facts behind antidepressants will give way to reality and help Americans sever ties to the deadly affair.

Life can be a bitch at times. Everyone knows it and Big Pharma profits from it. To answer our cries for happiness, they sell us a slew of molecules ripe with supposed happy atoms purported to elicit wanton pleasure. It’s a pipe dream. Like a parent who doesn’t like their daughter dating drug reps or psychiatrists, the FDA started using Black Box Warnings to inform us that, “Antidepressants, compared to placebo, increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in children in short term studies.” Psychiatrists quickly refuted this.

Read entire article: http://www.newswithviews.com/Ellison/shane150.htm

« Return to news items


Share

Orwellian Healthcare Plan to Usher in New Police State in America

Monday, August 17th, 2009

Neil Byrne
PS-inside.com
August 17, 2009

The current Health Bill (House bill H.R. 3200) has mental health parity as part of its Health Plan. This parity is set to provide equal opportunity for non-science psychiatry to be equivalent to a medical doctor’s scientific opinion on health.

San Francisco, CA, August 17, 2009 — Psychiatric patients are traditionally considered “cured” when their insurance benefits run out. In the upcoming bill “Healthy Americans Act, the compensation to psychiatry will not run out. All the psychiatrist has to do is forward their unscientific opinion on whether a patient is cured or not. The legislation is essentially a multi billion dollar taxpayer fund to psychiatrists. Psychiatry’s only remedy is mass psychotropic drugging. It used to be electric shock treatment, lobotomies, and straitjackets, but they found big allies with Pharmaceutical companies, the FDA and now Congress.

The Senate bill includes an early identification of development and behavior problems of children at risk. There are billions allocated for “treatment”, screening, crisis prevention, and counseling for psychiatric care. Most people will not visit a psychiatrist today, but in the future it could be mandatory for Americans starting with your child, who will then be lifetime clients of psychiatry and BigPharma. There is also funding for “interventions” for seniors. The days (1950’s) of the men in the white coats in an unmarked truck picking up your family member have returned. Grandma will return a month later all drugged up and “cured”.

Read entire article: http://www.pr-inside.com/the-orwellian-healthcare-plan-to-usher-r1439297.htm


« Return to news items


Share

No Surprise: Psychiatrist pushing “Depression” testing for 3-yr-olds connected to three drug companies

Monday, August 17th, 2009

Martha Rosenberg
The Epoch Times
August 17, 2009

Try to access the Web site of the Archives of General Psychiatry, and you may have to abide an ad for the antidepressant Pristiq before you can enter. (JAMA and its Archives Journals “do not endorse the advertised product,” you’ll be assured.)

But look for a pharma affiliation for the author of the article “Preschool Depression,” Joan L. Luby, M.D., in the August issue, and you’ll be told no “financial disclosure” was reported. Not that “Dr. Luby has received grant/research support from Janssen, has given occasional talks sponsored by AstraZeneca, and has served as a consultant for Shire Pharmaceutical,” as a 2006 article in Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry says.

Even though the pharmaceutical industry has 27 million Americans—10 percent of the population—on antidepressants, thanks to direct to consumer advertising, it is looking for depression in preschoolers. And guess what? It’s finding it!

Read entire article: http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/21114/

« Return to news items


Share

Advocate Still Mad at Foster Children Being Prescribed Drugs

Saturday, August 15th, 2009

Associated Press
August 14, 2009

Tallahassee, Fla:

An advocate for children in Florida’s foster care system is still critical of the state for it’s use of prescribed drugs to treat foster children, despite new attention being given to the issue.

The head of the state’s child welfare agency is recommending stricter rules for prescribing powerful antidepressants and other medication to foster children after a 7-year-old in state care committed suicide.

George Sheldon suggested the changes Thursday, the same day a 55-page preliminary report on Gabriel Myers’ death was released. The reports states that Florida officials have not “clearly articulated” the psychiatric care that children in the state’s care should receive.

The new report found a lack of accountability and inadequate supervision in every step of Gabriel’s case.

Myers hung himself with a retractable showerhead at a foster home in April. He was on powerful pyschotropic drugs at the time of his death. DCF officials have said that caseworkers didn’t communicate with Myers’ foster parents, teachers and doctors.

An attorney who has been an advocate for foster children remains critical of the state. Karen Gievers says while the agnecy’s secretary has suggested changes, the children in state care are still being administered the drugs.

Read entire article:  http://www.panhandleparade.com/index.php/mbb/article/advocate_still_mad_at_foster_children_being_prescribed_drugs/mbb7718311/

« Return to news items


Share

Normal rambunctious kids are being labeled mentally ill at alarming rates

Friday, August 14th, 2009

Frank Furedi
The Australian
August 15, 2009

WHY am I not surprised to discover the number of Australian schoolchildren diagnosed with psychological or emotional disorders is increasing at a dramatic rate?

Because in Australia, as in every Anglo-American society, it is normal to treat the routine troubles of childhood as a mental health issue.

Since the 1980s the manufacture of child-related mental health pathologies has turned into a growth industry. Children’s behaviour is constantly portrayed through a psychological label. These days confused and insecure children are likely to be diagnosed as depressed or traumatised.

Virtually any energetic or disruptive youngster can acquire the label of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. If you give your teachers a hard time or argue with adults it is likely you are suffering from oppositional defiant disorder.

If you are a little bit shy you are afflicted with social phobia. And if for some reason you don’t like school it is only a matter of time before a mental health professional comes up with the diagnosis of school phobia. The rising number of referrals for school phobia in Britain indicates it is only a matter of time before a mental health professional invents aversion to getting out of bed syndrome. The medicalisation of childhood and of education has assumed alarming dimensions.

Read entire article:

« Return to news items


Share

FDA misleads again: Admits SSRI/suicide link for 25 & under but not adults

Thursday, August 13th, 2009

Julie Steenhuysen
Reuters
August 11, 2009

* Antidepressants raise suicide risks in young adults

* Older adults not affected, US FDA regulators find

CHICAGO, Aug 11 (Reuters) – People under age 25 who take antidepressants have a higher risk of suicide, but adults older than that do not, an analysis by U.S. Food and Drug Administration researchers released on Tuesday showed.

The report by the FDA scientists confirms earlier studies and supports the agency’s age-related warnings on the drugs’ labeling.

U.S. and European regulators have been sounding alarms on the use of antidepressant drugs since 2003 after clinical trials showed they increased the risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviors in those under age 18.

In February 2005, the FDA added a so-called black box warning — the agency’s strongest warning — on the use of all antidepressants in young children and teens to draw attention to the possible risks of these medications. In May 2007, it extended the warnings to young adults aged 18 to 24.

Read entire article: http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN11535486

« Return to news items


Share

The Prozac Calamity by award winning Scientist Shane Ellison

Wednesday, August 12th, 2009

By Shane Ellison, Award winning Scientist, Masters Degree in Organic Chemistry
August 12, 2009

I love Big Pharma. After getting a masters degree in drug design, I was fortunate enough to work within their stinky labs and learn the inner workings of corporate drug making (and dealing). My most important lesson: Not all drugs are bad. Some are really bad. Take the so-called antidepressant Prozac as an example.

In 1990, Prozac appeared on the cover of the pharmaceutically compliant, Newsweek magazine with the headline “Prozac: A Breakthrough Drug for Depression.” It was designed almost twenty years prior. And during that time, some ghastly findings were made which proved the drug to be the antithesis of what popular media touted it as. Such findings were kept hidden. Patients are learning the hard way.

Thirteen days after taking the SSRI Prozac, on April 28, 2003, Jordan’s wife of 56 years, Kathy, found his lifeless body hanging from a beam in a back room of their shop. Not depressed at the time of his appointment, Jordan was given a free sample of Prozac for “chest pains!” Apparently, a pretty drug rep convinced Jordan’s doctor that Prozac could be used for these types of “off-label” purposes. By FDA standards, this is totally illegal. But those standards are never enforced by the consumer watch dog turned Big Pharma lap dog. Regardless of what they are prescribed for, Prozac is a real and present danger to SSRI users.

SSRI’s strive to increase the levels of a “coping” molecule known as serotonin in the brain. It helps us FIND happiness when it’s covered in an avalanche of nastiness. SSRI’s attempt to boost serotonin by “selectively” stopping the “reuptake” of it among brain cells. This is where the whole SSRI acronym came from – “selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.” It’s a slick name that seems to hypnotize medical doctors into prescribing submission, but it’s a really stupid idea.

Nothing is selective in the body. While trying to block the reuptake of serotonin, SSRI’s can also prevent its release. The areas of the brain responsible for release and reuptake are so damn similar (after all, they work on the same molecule) that an SSRI isn’t smart enough to understand which one it is supposed to work on. So it does what any dumb drug would do, it blocks both. The end result: no coping molecules in the brain. Deep sadness, fear or anger can set in. Early studies proved this.

The first testing of Prozac was performed on dogs and cats. Every trial showed that Prozac use caused aggression amongst these normally calm and friendly animals, as could be seen by increased hissing and growling. When the animals were taken off of the drug, they returned to their usual friendly behavior. Researchers concluded that Prozac use causes aggressive behavior.

By mid 1978, Prozac testing moved to humans in controlled clinical trials involving more than 4000 patients. In an attempt to hide its aggressive tendencies, the study allowed for voluntary dropout of those who experienced the most severe side effects. Additionally, clinical investigators were allowed to administer concurrent sedatives to patients to further mask Prozac’s side effects that would most likely lead to violence/suicide. This is a common loophole used by drug company-funded drug trials and is known as “checkbook science.” Despite the lack of scientific methodology, this study concluded that Prozac works well to a “statistically significant” degree in a population of depressed patients.

Since its approval, the potential for Prozac calamity has become frighteningly clear amongst both professionals and the public. Reports of Prozac-associated suicide, written by James D. Hagerty and distributed by the Drugs and Devices Information Line at the Harvard School of Public Health, dominated the “Letters to the Editor” section of the American Journal of Psychiatry during the fall of 1990.

Under the FDA’s own analysis, there have been more than 20,000 Prozac-related suicides since 1987.

Clinical studies performed on Prozac show 191 negative side effects per 100 people. This equates to almost two negative side effects for every user of the drug.

The FDA continues to ignore the Prozac body count (they approved Prozac’s use for children in 2003). To make matters worse, the FDA granted its manufacturer, Eli Lilly, extended patent protection. In order to procure thirty additional months of earning power, Eli Lilly changed the name of Prozac to Sarafem, while at the same time labeling common personality and biological shifts as a disease among women; this “disease” being premenstrual irritability. As a result, thousands of unsuspecting women were given Prozac for premenstrual irritability while at the same time increasing their chances of suffering from the aforementioned negative side effects such as aggression, and suicide.

Such lessons got me out of corporate drug making. Thankfully, they taught me how not to be healthy: Take prescription drugs. You can do the same, just say no to Prozac.

About the Author

Ellison’s entire career has been dedicated to the study of molecules; how they give life and how they take from it. He was a two-time recipient of the prestigious Howard Hughes Medical Institute Research Grant for his research in biochemistry and physiology. He is a best selling author, holds a master’s degree in organic chemistry and has first-hand experience in drug design. Use his knowledge and insight to look and feel your best with his Secret Cures monthly report. Get it free at www.thepeopleschemist.com

RETURN TO BLOGS PAGE


Share

U.S. Senator says Military’s use of antidepressants on troops merits serious investigation

Monday, August 10th, 2009

To The Editor:
Cumberland Times-News
August 9, 2009

There has been an alarming increase in suicides and attempted suicides among our combat troops in recent years.

There is no denying that soldiers in the field are under great stress, and one of the ways the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has dealt with that stress is to dispense strong anti-depressant medications to soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I want a close examination of how these anti-depressants are prescribed and managed in-theater and what impact they may be having on our soldiers.

A particular concern involves the latency period for the effectiveness of such drugs. In an ideal situation, patients are closely monitored for two to six weeks.

However, the demands of combat are not conducive to such close monitoring.

To that end, I am pleased that the Senate has adopted my amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, which would mandate a study of the increased use of anti-depressants among combat troops and the impact of these drugs on the mental health of our soldiers.

Read entire article: http://www.times-news.com/opinion/local_story_221211323.html

« Return to news items


Share