Archive for April, 2010

On Earth Day, with Green Causes in the Forefront, Here is a Video about Green Mental Health

Thursday, April 22nd, 2010

Psychiatry’s solution to life’s problems is stigmatizing psychiatric labels and the administration of toxic drugs which international drug regulatory agencies have warned can cause mania, worsening depression, anxiety, delusions, seizures, liver failure, suicide, mania, heart attack, stroke, fatal blood clots, sudden death, diabetes and much more.

(See http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/)

Green Mental Health Care is a non-toxic, non-addictive and non-invasive approach to mental health which focuses on workable medical, not psychiatric, solutions that have better patient outcomes and are not harmful or toxic to those seeking help.  The focus is on finding underlying medical causes that can manifest as psychiatric “symptoms” without  the need for subjective psychiatric labels and deadly drugs.  For more information on medical alternatives to toxic drugs, visit  http://www.cchrint.org/alternatives/

View video on Green Mental Health here.

« Return to news items


Share

BNET – “Kid Overdoses in Antipsychotic Trial Caps a History of Screwups at Pfizer”

Thursday, April 22nd, 2010

BNET
By Jim Edwards
April 21, 2010

The FDA’s letter to Pfizer (PFE) describing overdoses of the antipsychotic Geodon  given to 13 children in clinical trials is merely the latest in a long history of controversies that have dogged the drug at virtually every stage of its existence. Among those controversies: Discredited doctors allegedly prepared research on Geodon for the FDA; Pfizer allegedly promoted the drug for unapproved uses in kids; and the company allegedly paid a non-profit mental health advocacy group to promote Geodon for kids.

Taken together, the string of incidents suggests a lack of management accountability. Like many large companies, Pfizer operates as a series of silos or divisions, with different managers for sales, marketing, R&D, and regulatory compliance. The fact that screwups have occurred across all these divisions illustrates the value of having one manager, or management team, with accountability for the entire product, from soup to nuts.

The FDA warned Pfizer that its trials of Geodon in children were improperly monitored, and that children got too much drug by mistake:

… dosing errors occurred and overdosing extended over several days for all seven pediatric subjects; in one case for as long as 22 days.

…a Pfizer internal document dated October 3, 2007 and entitled “Safety Information on Affected Subjects” refers to the overdosing of an additional six pediatric subjects in study (b)(4) at two different sites…

Read entire article:  http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10007813/kid-overdoses-in-antipsychotic-trial-caps-a-history-of-screwups-at-pfizer/

« Return to news items


Share

Psychology Today: Study shows patient side effects from psychiatric drugs 20 times higher than their psychiatrists report

Wednesday, April 21st, 2010

Psychology Today
By Jonathan Rottenberg
April 21, 2010

A rich scientific study raises more questions than it answers.

This point is exemplified by new work conducted at Rhode Island Hospital and published in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry.

The investigators followed 300 patients who were in ongoing outpatient treatment for depression over six weeks. The authors compared what the patient reported on a standardized scale of 31 different side effects (Toronto Side Effects Scale; TSES) with the information recorded by the treating psychiatrist on each patient’s chart. The main finding: A stunning disconnect between psychiatrists and their patients. The average number of side effects reported by the patients on the TSES was 20 times (!) higher than the number recorded by the psychiatrist. When the investigators concentrated on those side effects that were most troubling to the patient, patients still reported 2 to 3 times more side effects than were recorded by the treating psychiatrist.

The authors summarize their provocative findings in mild language, “The findings of the present study indicate that clinicians do not record in their progress notes most side effects reported on a side effects questionnaire by psychiatric outpatients receiving ongoing pharmacological treatment for depression.”

Whatever the explanation, psychiatrists appear to believe that patients are having fewer problems with medications than they truly are. It is hard to see how psychiatrists can act in the best interest of their patients if they do not know what their patients are experiencing!!!!

Read entire article:  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/charting-the-depths/201004/why-dont-psychiatrists-notice-when-patients-experience-medication-si

« Return to news items


Share

FDA says Pfizer overdosed 13 children in antipsychotic drug trial

Tuesday, April 20th, 2010

Reuters
April 20, 2010

U.S. health regulators have warned Pfizer Inc. over a series of failures that led to the overdosing of at least 13 children in a clinical trial of its antipsychotic drug Geodon, according to a letter made public on Tuesday.

The FDA, in an April 9 warning letter to the world’s largest drugmaker, said Pfizer “failed to ensure proper monitoring of the investigation” for a product.

The agency did not name the drug in the public version of the letter, but Pfizer confirmed it related to the use of Geodon in children with bipolar disorder.

It said the company did not properly monitor the study and, “as a result of inadequate monitoring, widespread overdosing of study subjects at multiple study sites was neither detected nor corrected in a timely manner.”

Several children given overdoses experienced tremors, restless legs and other complications, the letter said.

Pfizer recognizes the issue’s seriousness and is committed to addressing the concerns, it said. Pfizer reported many items cited in the letter as many as four years ago, it said.

Since then it “has instituted several new measures designed to improve monitoring and execution of clinical trials, including our oversight of clinical investigators,” it said.

Read entire article:  http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63J4XQ20100420

« Return to news items


Share

Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers—The U. S. has become the psychiatric drugging capital of the world

Tuesday, April 20th, 2010

CounterCurrents.org
By Evelyn Pringle
April 19, 2010

The United States has become the psychiatric drugging capital of the world for kids with children being medicated at a younger and younger age. Medicaid records in some states show infants less than a year old on drugs for mental disorders.

The use of powerful antipsychotics with privately insured children, aged 2 through 5 in the US, doubled between 1999 and 2007, according to a study of data on more than one million children with private health insurance in the January, 2010, “Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry.”

The number of children in this age group diagnosed with bipolar disorder also doubled over the last decade, Reuters reported.

Of antipsychotic-treated children in the 2007 study sample, the most common diagnoses were pervasive developmental disorder or mental retardation (28.2%), ADHD (23.7%), and disruptive behavior disorder (12.9%).

The study reported that fewer than half of drug treated children received a mental health assessment (40.8%), a psychotherapy visit (41.4%), or a visit with a psychiatrist (42.6%) during the year of antipsychotic use.

“Antipsychotics, which are being widely and irresponsibly prescribed for American children–mostly as chemical restraints–are shown to be causing irreparable harm,” warned Vera Hassner Sharav, president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, in a February 26, 2010 InfoMail.

“These drugs have measurable severe hazardous effects on vital biological systems, including: cardiovascular adverse effects that result in shortening lives; metabolic adverse effects that induce diabetes and the metabolic syndrome,” she wrote. “Long-term use of antipsychotics has been shown to result in metabolic syndrome in 40% to 50% of patients.”

The lead researcher on the study above, Columbia University psychiatry professor Mark Olfson, told Reuters that about 1.5% of all privately insured children between the ages of 2 and 5, or one in 70, received some type of psychiatric drug in 2007, be it an antipsychotic, a mood stabilizer, a stimulant or an antidepressant.

Psychiatric drugs bathe the brains of growing children with agents that threaten the normal development of the brain, according to Dr Peter Breggin, founder of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology (ICSPP), and author of about 20 books, including “Medication Madness.”

Read entire article:  http://www.countercurrents.org/pringle190410.htm

« Return to news items


Share

The Huffington Post: “Pilots Taking Antidepressants? The FAA Is Risking Our Lives”

Monday, April 19th, 2010

The Huffington Post
By Peter Breggin
April 19, 2010

A few years ago I was hired by the FAA to defend the agency against a suit brought by a pilot who wanted to fly while taking a prescription antidepressant. I helped the FAA formulate its defense of the agency’s ban on pilots using antidepressants and, as a result, the ban remained in effect. Pilots remained unable to fly while taking antidepressants, including the newer ones such as Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, Lexapro and Effexor.

How times have changed. Ignoring the scientific data on adverse drug effects that the agency and I generated and evaluated for the earlier case, the FAA is lifting its 70-year-old ban on allowing pilots to take antidepressants. Has the science changed–improving the adverse reaction profile of these drugs? To the contrary, since that time my most dire observations have been confirmed in the FDA-approved label for all antidepressants. Now there is not only a Black Box Warning for suicidality in children, youth and young adults, but also a lengthy Warnings section about a variety of extremely dangerous abnormal behavioral reactions in all ages including aggression, hostility, disinhibition, impulsivity and mania. Even when not severe, these reactions impair judgment and increase the likelihood of accidents and violence.

According to the FDA-approved guidelines, prescribers are supposed to give a special Medication Guide to patients and their families that warns about dangerous drug-induced reactions including suicide, violence and a variety of unexpected negative behaviors. Originally intended for children and youth, the Medication Guide is now expanded to cover all age groups, including adults. The Medication Guide for all ages can be found at the conclusion of each FDA-approved label for antidepressant drugs in the 2010 Physicians’ Desk Reference.

Why did the FAA lift the ban on pilots using antidepressants? According to FAA statements to the media, depressed pilots sometimes kept on flying while secretly taking antidepressants. “Our concern is that they haven’t necessarily been candid,” FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt reportedly told the press on a conference call. They were flying below the radar of drug testing, so to speak. The new policy not only allows pilots to use antidepressants, it grants a degree of amnesty to those who have been using them illegally in the past.

The FAA feels it’s safer to allow the use of antidepressants because it will make it easier for pilots to obtain needed treatment for depression. It supposedly will also make it easier to monitor their use of these dangerous drugs. If we accept this argument, why not legalize stimulants such as amphetamine as well? They would help keep the overworked pilots awake. And while the FAA is at it, why not let them use marijuana, since they may be doing it illegally on their own without anyone monitoring them.

Unfortunately, monitoring pilots on antidepressants won’t work nearly as well as might be hoped. Many severe emotional and behavioral reactions occur in the first one to three days of antidepressant dosing, or shortly after dose changes, either up or down–long before the next scheduled appointment. Although close monitoring and informing the family to be on the alert can be helpful, and should be done, it won’t prevent many of the drug reactions that occur abruptly and without warning. In addition, doctors too often fail to warn the patient and the family about the risks. As a medical expert, I’ve learned how cavalier some prescribers are in regard to warning patients about the adverse effects of any psychiatric drugs.

Read entire article:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-peter-breggin/antidepressants-pilots-ta_b_542240.html

« Return to news items


Share

From Psychobabble to Biobabble: How drug money has come to dominate psychiatry

Thursday, April 15th, 2010

MinnPost.com
By Susan Perry
April 15, 2010

This month’s Lancet contains a short, romping, and highly readable essay on the history of psychiatry. It’s written by Andrew Scull, professor of sociology at the University of California, San Diego, who has steeped himself in the topic for four decades.

Scull talks about how psychiatry has revolutionized itself during the span of his career. The Freudian movement dominated the field through the 1960s — a period, he notes, when mental illnesses like schizophrenia were often attributed to such now discredited causes as the “refrigerator mother.”

Then, “more swiftly and silently than the Cheshire cat, psychoanalytic hegemony vanished,” writes Scull. Its replacement: drugs, the “new Holy Grail of the profession.”

But has this Holy Grail turned out to be yet another false icon? Here’s Scull’s scathing conclusion:

The US National Institute of Mental Health proclaimed the 1990s “the decade of the brain.” A simplistic biological reductionism increasingly ruled the psychiatric roost. Patients and their families learned to attribute mental illness to faulty brain biochemistry, defects of dopamine, or a shortage of seratonin. It was biobabble as deeply misleading and unscientific as the psychobabble it replaced, but as marketing copy it was priceless. Meantime, the psychiatric profession was seduced and bought off with boatloads of research funding. Where once shrinks had been the most marginal of medical men, existing in a twilight zone on the margins of professional respectability, now they were the darlings of medical school deans, the millions upon millions of their grants and indirect cost recoveries helping to finance the expansion of the medical-industrial complex.

And so to scandal. He who pays the piper calls the tune, and to a quite extraordinary extent, drug money has come to dominate psychiatry. It underwrites psychiatric journals and psychiatric conferences (where the omnipresence of pharmaceutical loot startles the naive outsider). It makes psychiatric careers, and many of those whose careers it fosters become shills for their paymasters, zealously promoting lucrative off-label uses for drugs whose initial approval for prescription was awarded on quite other grounds.

Read entire article:  http://www.minnpost.com/healthblog/2010/04/15/17392/from_psychobabble_to_biobabble_how_drug_money_has_come_to_dominate_psychiatry

« Return to news items


Share

Killing You with Drugs: Legally—Pharma’s attempts to bury increasing # of studies linking psychiatric drugs to suicide

Thursday, April 15th, 2010

The Market Oracle
By Michael Stathis
April 15, 2010

Is there any reason why Pfizer shares are down today?

Just yesterday, shares were trading at ~ $17.30. Today, with the DJIA up by 0.7%, Pfizer is down by nearly 1%.

A clue to this sell-off MIGHT be due to the anticipation by investors of increasing pressure to change the way drugs are prescribed. This could also trigger several lawsuits down the road.

Recently, another study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association discussing elevated suicide risks associated with the use of anticonvulsant drugs. Anticonvulsants have been approved by the FDA for people diagnosed with epilepsy.

Of course, this is not the first study showing anticonvulsants raised the risk of suicide.

In 2008, the FDA required all anticonvulsant drugs to have a warning label that disclosed a two-fold increased risk of suicide. However, warning labels are rarely effective. They simply enable drug companies to continue to sell what many experts feel to be dangerous drugs, while having the safeguard of a disclaimer.

When patients receive a prescription for a drug to address a medical condition, they assume it’s a safe drug; otherwise, it wouldn’t be approved for use. And their doctor certainly wouldn’t prescribe it if it weren’t safe, would he?

According to DEA and FDA regulations, physicians are free to prescribe any drug for any condition they see fit, known as off-label use. As a result of off-label usage, anticonvulsants are prescribed for many different medical conditions like bipolar disorder, pain and migraine headaches. As you might imagine, in some cases, off-label use has accounted for a big chunk of drug sales.

The class of drugs prescribed most by physicians for off-label uses are the antipsychotics (Prozac, Xanax, Zyprexa, etc). The FDA has approved these drugs to treat a variety of neurologic conditions such as depression and bipolar disease. However, drug companies have used many methods to get physicians to prescribe them for a wide range of off-label uses.

Read entire article:  http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article18652.html

« Return to news items


Share

Does psychiatry make us mad? Anatomy of an Epidemic

Wednesday, April 14th, 2010

New Scientist
By Druin Burch
April 14, 2010

PSYCHIATRY is widely considered to be a success, able to treat mental illness using drugs to correct chemical imbalances in the brain. Yet, since the advent of psychiatric drugs, rates of mental illness have shot up and the supposed imbalances, thought to be the cause of mental illness, have been shown not to exist.

Whitaker wants us to believe psychiatry itself is to blame, and that scientific incompetence and corrupting self-interest have prevented reliable assessments of mental disorders and treatments alike. The author’s belief that we could have got it so wrong seems far-fetched.

Up close, however, his arguments are worryingly sane and consistently based on evidence. They amount to a provocative yet reasonable thesis, one whose astonishing intellectual punch is delivered with the gripping vitality of a novel.

Read entire article:  http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/culturelab/2010/04/does-psychiatry-make-us-mad.php

« Return to news items


Share

The Huffington Post — MKULTRA: the Perversion of Ethics

Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

Huffington Post
By Michael Kaplan
April 13, 2010

When you are going mad, you first notice new, shocking things about the world; you had not previously realized that the pigeon on the windowsill is always the same pigeon, nor that the rhythm of its coos is the rhythm of human speech. Only later does the fear begin, as you sense that even the most intimate and familiar parts of life are infested and undermined by secret forces. In the last phase, everything makes sense again. Your world is not that of other people, but you know what you have to do – whatever the consequences.

This, essentially, was what happened to parts of the US intelligence establishment in the years between 1945 and 1964. America had come late to covert war; victory had arrived before the fledgling OSS had progressed much further than learning how easy it is to be fooled by a clever enemy, when its largest network in Nazi Germany was shown to be irredeemably compromised. The discovery soon after the war that Soviet agents and sympathizers had been working in positions of importance in the US government added the push of fear to the sense of disorientation. When, during the Korean War, American prisoners started coming back from Chinese captivity expressing communist convictions, the CIA (and, to a lesser degree, the Navy and Army) decided that our new enemies had hold of something – a brainwashing technique, a truth drug – that could reshape the human mind. We had to have it, too.

On this date in 1953, the Director of Central Intelligence, Allen Dulles, authorized Project MKULTRA. Its purpose was to find “avenues to the control of human behavior… including radiation, electro-shock, harassment substances, and paramilitary devices.” Its scope extended from finding “substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be discredited in public” to devising “physical methods of producing shock and confusion over extended periods of time.”

Almost all papers relating to the project were destroyed in 1973 on the orders of one of its prime movers, then CIA director Richard Helms. What little we know with certainty comes from limited congressional investigations and a report of the Inspector General – but even these outline sketches are enough to reveal events both horrible and shameful. Unwitting people were slipped high doses of hallucinogens in public places and left to believe themselves in the grip of psychosis. Others, often unidentified foreign prisoners, were interrogated for months under combinations of drugs that left them permanently damaged. Patients going to reputable clinics to be helped for mild depression received instead electroshock treatment far beyond the medical guidelines, often combined with drug-induced coma and ceaseless suggestion tapes. There were deaths, conveniently ascribed to suicide. Hundred of lives were ruined. The profession of psychiatry was deeply undermined. And nothing substantive came out of it except, perhaps, the KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation manual: the CIA’s first and most influential handbook for torturers.

Read entire article:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-kaplan/mkultra-the-perversion-of_b_535231.html

« Return to news items


Share