Archive for January, 2011

« Older Entries

FDA Advisory Panel Recommends Electroshock Machine Too Risky For Reclassification to Less Dangerous Device

Monday, January 31st, 2011
A panel of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended Friday that devices used to deliver ECT, or psychiatric shock treatment, remain in the most high-risk category (Class III), reserved for the most dangerous medical devices.

January 31, 2011

by CCHR International— The Neurological Devices Advisory Panel of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (F.D.A.), recommended Friday that devices used to deliver shock treatment, also known as electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) remain in the most high-risk category (Class III), reserved for the most dangerous medical devices and not be downgraded to a lower risk category.  In so doing, it recommended that the companies which manufacture ECT devices be required to prove that ECT is both effective and safe in order to remain in use.

ECT has long been known to cause serious harm to patients, including extremely severe and permanent memory loss, inability to learn and remember new events, depression, suicide, cardiovascular complications, prolonged and dangerous seizures and even death.

Patients who have undergone ECT felt vindicated by the decision, saying the ECT device is dangerous and causes irreparable harm.  The chairman of the advisory panel, Dr. Thomas G. Brott, a Professor of Neurosciences, at the Mayo Clinic expressed concern about 100,000 people being given ECT each year in the U.S., yet psychiatrists had not bothered to conduct MRI scans before and after the procedure to monitor potential brain damage.

Ms. Jan Eastgate, President of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), a psychiatric watchdog, spoke at the Hearing and was critical of the ECT device manufacturers, Mecta and Somatics, Inc. for their failure to conduct safety studies and submit a Pre-Marketing Application (PMA), while making more than $30 million from sales of the machine over the past 3 decades.  She said psychiatrists claiming that a PMA would be “too expensive” had put profit above patient safety— With ECT costing between $1,000 and $2,500 a treatment, psychiatrists had made more than $28 billion during the same period.

The hearings were prompted by a GAO investigation in January 2009 resulting in a report stating the FDA must examine all devices which had remained for a substantial time in Class III without critical evaluation of safety and effectiveness. The GAO said the FDA should take steps to ensure that high-risk device types are approved through the most stringent review process reserved for new machines coming on to the market which may be potentially dangerous.

The FDA Office of Medical Device Evaluation thereafter called for hearings before a panel of experts to advise the FDA whether shock devices could be downgraded to Class II – and therefore require little review – or remain in the highest risk category with a mandated approval process with stringent clinical trials. The FDA Advisory Panel agreed that this device was sufficiently dangerous to require that it remain in Class III.  It is up to the FDA whether to act on the recommendations of the panel.

Ms. Eastgate said the decision is the first step towards getting needed greater protections for patients but said there were still considerable concerns about the F.D.A.’s handling of the safety and efficacy issues concerning ECT.  She said there are potential conflicts of interest with psychiatrists helping write the F.D.A.’s Executive Summary on ECT and advising the agency about the procedure.

Watch video: Electroshock—It’s Not Treament, It’s Torture

here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDR3cD8_kck

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

West Hollywood psychiatrist, states second largest prescriber of Schedule ll drugs, pleads guilty to illegal distribution of prescription drugs

Friday, January 28th, 2011

Los Angeles Daily News – Jan 27, 2011

LOS ANGELES – A West Hollywood psychiatrist who operated a “pill mill,” in which thousands of prescriptions for addictive drugs were written for cash, pleaded guilty Thursday to a single charge of distribution of a controlled substance.

Upon entering his plea, Dr. Nathan Kuemmerle, 38, of Hollywood, told U.S. District Judge Dolly M. Gee that he had recently completed treatment for drug addiction.

Gee set an April 18 sentencing date for Kuemmerle, who faces a potential penalty of up to five years in federal prison, a fine of $250,000 and three years of supervised release, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Kuemmerle was arrested last April at his home by U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agents and Redondo Beach police.

Kuemmerle’s office manager, Antonie “Tony” Phillips, 29, of Koreatown, was arrested the same day at the doctor’s clinic on Santa Monica Boulevard, and has since pleaded guilty to a conspiracy charge, according to Thom Mrozek of the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

The investigation began in 2009, when Redondo Beach police arrested an individual who offered Adderall for sale on the Craigslist website, Mrozek said.

That person fingered Kuemmerle as the source of the Adderall, claiming the psychiatrist wrote prescriptions on numerous occasions without any medical examination, and that he would write prescriptions for various names during a single visit, according to Mrozek.

After analyzing Kuemmerle’s prescribing history and reviewing secret tapes made at the clinic, San Diego-based psychiatrist Dr. Steven Ornish concluded there was “overwhelming evidence that Dr. Kuemmerle is running a quintessential `pill mill,”‘ according to an affidavit filed in support of the criminal complaint.

The affidavit in which Ornish’s report is summarized states that during 2009, Kuemmerle wrote more prescriptions for the largest available dosage of amphetamine salts — the generic name for Adderall — than any other doctor in California, and that he wrote 3 1/2 times more amphetamine salts prescriptions than the No. 2 two prescriber of the drug.

According to the affidavit, Kuemmerle was found to be the state’s second- largest prescriber of all Schedule II drugs, which also include oxycodone (OxyContin), hydrocodone (Vicodin and Norco) and alprazolam (Xanax).

http://www.dailynews.com/crime/ci_17220333

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Posted in News | No Comments »

Not the Only Psychiatrist Who Opposes ECT

Wednesday, January 26th, 2011

The Huffington Post – January 26, 2011

by Dr. Peter Breggin

Peter R. Breggin, MD is a psychiatrist in private practice in Ithaca, New York, and the author of dozens of scientific articles and more than twenty books. His first medical book was about ECT: Electroshock: Its Brain-Disabling Effects (1979).

Duff Wilson provided a service by presenting both sides of the controversy when he wrote his report “F.D.A. Is Studying the Risk of Electroshock Devices” in the January 24, 2011 New York Times. The FDA is proposing to move ECT from the high risk category to the medium risk category to avoid the necessity of any testing for safety or efficacy. As a result, ECT would be grandfathered into continued use without ever being tested. This would place ECT in the same category as syringes which no longer need proof of safety or efficacy. The FDA hearings will be held January 27-28, 2011, and I hope some of my more courageous colleagues will attend and testify against approving ECT without testing.

Mr. Wilson quotes me correctly in the article: “It’s a big money-maker,” he [Breggin] said. “I would say if anything it’s been on the increase because there’s a market that’s been exploited, that is the elderly depressed women on Medicare. The reason for that is they’re covered, and there’s no one to protect them. What commonly stops shock treatment is a family member saying ‘over my dead body.’ ”

However, Mr. Wilson misunderstood what I meant to say when, without quoting me, he wrote in the original published edition that Breggin “says he is the only American psychiatrist he knows who opposes the treatment.” He and I have chatted since the publication of his article in the NYT and he has generously edited the current on-line copy of the article and posted a correction indicating that I actually said that I am the only psychiatrist I know of who publicly opposes the treatment. I don’t know anyone else who has taken a very visible public stand–publishing anti-ECT views in the scientific literature, and presenting them in the media and the courts. Similarly, I am the only psychiatrist to have testified in a successful ECT malpractice suit.

The same was true when I conducted my successful campaign to stop the resurgence of lobotomy and other forms of psychosurgery in the 1970s. At that time, most psychiatrists probably opposed lobotomy, but I was the first and still only one to oppose it publically in the scientific literature, the media, and the courts, as well as in Congressional testimony. The success of my campaign required putting outside pressure on facilities, psychiatrists and neurosurgeons who were involved in this barbaric “treatment” and cutting off federal funding for some of their projects. I’m also the only psychiatrist to testify in a successful psychosurgery malpractice trial. My reform efforts against ECT and lobotomy are described Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (2008, p. 230-232), ECT is especially harmful to the more fragile brains of the elderly.

ECT causes closed head injury by means of electrically-induced seizures. There can be no doubt that the treatment causes trauma to the brain. The patient is comatose for several minutes in the recovery room and after a few treatments becomes confused and disoriented. A recent study confirms long-term memory loss and other cognitive deficits, which by definition is dementia. As I review in Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (2008, pp. 237-241), large animal studies have shown brain cell death using ECT dosages less than those routinely inflicted today. My website has a very extensive ECT bibliography that can be downloaded for free. It includes a variety of the original large animal ECT research projects.

After John Read and Richard Bentall published their recent scientific review, Professor Bentall declared, “The very short- term benefit gained by a small minority cannot justify the risks to which all ECT recipients are exposed. The use of ECT therefore represents a failure to introduce the ideals of evidence-based medicine into psychiatry. It seems there is resistance to the research data in the ECT community, and perhaps in psychiatry in general.”

In a sane society, ECT would be abandoned as a treatment. In an insane society, a government agency would approve it without requiring testing for safety and efficacy. That may be about to happen.

Peter R. Breggin, MD is a psychiatrist in private practice in Ithaca, New York, and the author of dozens of scientific articles and more than twenty books. His first medical book was about ECT: Electroshock: Its Brain-Disabling Effects (Springer Publishing Company, New York, 1979). His most recent medical book dealing with ECT is Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry: Drugs, Electroshock and the Psychopharmaceutical Complex, Second Edition (2008). Dr. Breggin’s professional website is www.breggin.com.

You can meet and hear presentations by Dr. Breggin and some of his closest colleagues at the annual Empathic Therapy Conference to be held April 8-10, 2011 in Syracuse, New York. Click here to learn more about the conference and to register. Professionals and non-professionals alike are welcome.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-peter-breggin/not-the-only-psychiatrist_b_813863.html

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | 2 Comments »

Drugs cloud US troops judgment

Wednesday, January 26th, 2011
Press TV
Experts believe the growing variety of antipsychotic drugs prescribed for the US combat forces impair the troops’ ability to make correct judgments.

The United States Central Command allows troops struggling with sleep deprivation to receive a 6-month supply of Seroquel — a drug first developed to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, mania and depression, according to a report published by AllGov on Sunday.

At least two US troops have died while asleep after having taken large amounts of the medication.

A June 2010 report released by the Defense Department’s Pharmacoeconomic Center at Fort Sam Houston revealed that some 20% of the troops on active-duty are taking psychotropic drugs, ranging from antidepressants to antipsychotics to sedative hypnotics.

The consumption of these drugs by active troops can cause “loss of judgment and self-control and lead to increased violence and suicidal impulses” while on the field, experts say.

US troops have carried out acts of extreme violence on several occasions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Last September at least twelve US soldiers were arrested for forming a secret “kill team” that shot and blew up civilians at random.

At least one of the soldiers collected the fingers of the victims as souvenirs and that some of them posed for photographs with the bodies.

Also in December Staff Sergeant Robert Stevens, 25, an Army medic from the State of Oregon, was sentenced to nine months in prison for killing Afghan civilians.

He confessed to opening fire on two Afghan farmers in March 2010 for no apparent reason.

MSD/PKH

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Posted in News | No Comments »

Psychiatric diagnostic manual editor reveals emperor has no clothes, “There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bull__.”

Monday, January 24th, 2011

Natural News — January 24, 2011

by Monica G. Young

"There is no definition of a mental disorder. It's bull___. I mean, you just can't define it." —Allen Frances, MD, lead editor for the Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM-IV).

“There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bull___. I mean, you just can’t define it,” states Allen Frances, MD, lead editor for the Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM-IV). As DSM-IV is the imperial doctrine used by psychiatrists in diagnosing mental disorders, prescribing powerful psychotropics to the masses, and commanding health care dollars, this is quite a confession. “We made mistakes that had terrible consequences,” Frances concedes.

Gary Greenberg who interviewed Frances and wrote an in-depth article for Wired Magazine, describes how Frances’ conscience has been hitting him in the gut. “Diagnoses of autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and bipolar disorder skyrocketed, and Frances thinks his manual inadvertently facilitated these epidemics — and, in the bargain, fostered an increasing tendency to chalk up life’s difficulties to mental illness and then treat them with psychiatric drugs,” writes Greenberg.

DSM-IV led to a 40X increase in child bipolar diagnoses and an epidemic of dangerous antipsychotic prescriptions for children, even as young as 3.

Senior editor of DSM-III (the prior version), Robert Spitzer MD, had his own rude awakening. He is the one who spurred Frances to join him in battling against the creators of DSM-5 — the next edition in progress. Spitzer publicly censured the APA for mandating that psychiatrists involved in DSM-5 sign a written promise to never talk about what they were doing, except when necessary for their jobs. “The intent seemed to be not to let anyone know what…was going on,” says Spitzer.

Spitzer and Frances warn that including a proposed “pre-psychotic” disorder could lead to a new diagnosis explosion and drug company marketing onslaught. Frances says an emphasis on early intervention would encourage the “wholesale imperial medicalization of normality,” producing “a bonanza for the pharmaceutical industry” while imposing on patients the “high price [of] adverse effects, dollars, and stigma.”

There are many other dissenters in the field. Greenberg says “they are becoming increasingly restive, and some are beginning to agree with Frances that public pressure may be the only way to derail a train that he fears will ‘take psychiatry off a cliff.’”

Greenberg, himself a psychotherapist, points out that scientific certainty eludes psychiatry. He reports, “every fight over nomenclature threatens to undermine the legitimacy of the profession by revealing its dirty secret: that for all their confident pronouncements, psychiatrists can’t rigorously differentiate illness from everyday suffering.”

With 25% more mental disorders than DSM-III, DSM-IV has been a goldmine for drug companies. According to a 2006 study by Tufts University, more than half of the DSM-IV authors had financial links to the pharmaceutical industry.

Lacking medical research, the DSM-5 website is riddled with “deliberating”, “discussing”, and “heavy discussions” to describe how these professed experts attempt to decree new disorders. New proposals for DSM-5 include “Hoarding Disorder”, “Skin Picking Disorder” and worse, new labels for babies: “Temper Dysregulation Disorder” and “Feeding Disorder”. This would open the door to an infant drugging marketing campaign!

Like the tale of the pompous emperor who pretends his clothes are so magnificent they can only be seen by wise people, the psychiatric and drug industries peddle their fabricated labels and drug remedies to the world. And like the little boy who shouts the obvious “the emperor has no clothes”, it’s up to public pressure to stop this.

For more information see  Psychiatric Disorders: The Facts Behind the Billion Dollar Marketing Campaign, by CCHR International http://www.cchrint.org/psychiatric-disorders/

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | 3 Comments »

Seroquel’s Toll—Controversial Antipsychotic Drug Now Marketed for Depression

Monday, January 24th, 2011

Counter Punch—January 24, 2011

by Martha Rosenberg

Even though AstraZeneca’s antipsychotic Seroquel is the fifth best-selling medication in the US according to drugs.com, exceeded only by Lipitor, Nexium, Plavix and Advair diskus, its safety, effectiveness, clinical trial and promotion records are highly checkered.

An original backer, psychiatrist Richard Borison, was sentenced to a 15-year prison sentence in 1998 for a pay-to-play Seroquel research scheme.

Its US medical director Wayne MacFadden had sexual affairs with two different women involved with Seroquel research, say published reports.

Chicago psychiatrist Michael Reinstein received $500,000 from AstraZenenca and wrote 41,000 prescriptions for Seroquel reports the Chicago Tribune and ProPublica.

Psychiatrist Charles Nemeroff who left Emory University in disgrace after a Congressional investigation for unreported pharma income, promoted Seroquel in continuing medical education courses according to the web site of psychiatrist Daniel Carlat.

Florida child psychiatrist Jorge Armenteros was chairman of the FDA committee responsible for recommending Seroquel approvals while a paid AstraZeneca speaker himself, said the Philadelphia Inquirer in 2009.

Psychiatrist Charles Schulz’ high profile pro-Seroquel presentations are suspected of being colored by his AstraZeneca income says the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

And unexplained Iraq and Afghanistan troop deaths are linked to Seroquel reported the Associated Press in August.

Originally approved for schizophrenia in 1997, Seroquel has subsequently been approved for bipolar disorder, for some groups of kids and as an add-drug for depression. This “indications creep” has mostly flown below the public’s radar. Seroquel expansion to treat children in late 2009, for example, was noted as a mere “label change” on the FDA web site. Hello?

Even without its depression indication, Seroquel is big business for AstraZeneca, earning $4.9 billion in sales in 2009. It is the drug that North Carolina’s Medicaid spends the most on: $29.4 million per year, reports the Charlotte News and Observer.

But now, as AstraZeneca rolls out its “Still Trying to Get Ahead of Your Depression” campaign, there are new questions about Seroquel’s safety and effectiveness.

According to an FDA warning letter, an AstraZeneca sales representative during an unsolicited sales call on January 3, 2008 sold Seroquel as a treatment for major depressive disorder to a physician before it was approved for MDD, an infraction which is illegal.

Once Seroquel was approved for depression (as an add-on treatment to an antidepressant for patients with major depressive disorder who not have an adequate response to antidepressant therapy), its leave-behind sheets drew another FDA warning letter.

AstraZeneca implied patients would achieve “remission” from depression with Seroquel XR (extended release) as opposed to with an antidepressant alone, says FDA — a claim not backed up by clinical experience.

Seroquel’s effect on depression has only been demonstrated in two, six-week trials FDA further said and six weeks is “not a long enough time period to adequately assess remission.” (It was approved…why?)

Also the case study of “Catherine F.” depicted in leave-behind sheets is inaccurate says FDA because it suggests Seroquel alleviates “symptoms of sadness and loss of interest when this has not been demonstrated by substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience.” (It was approved…why?)

Even AstraZeneca’s own briefing to the FDA committee in 2009 admits a “failed study” in which both Seroquel and Lexapro “failed to differentiate from placebo” which is Clinical Trial for “didn’t work.”

Nor did AstraZeneca adequately disclose Seroquel risks says FDA which include increased mortality in elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis, suicidality, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, hyperglycemia and diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, weight gain and other serious side effects.

In fact, in addition to risks like cataracts, seizures and increases in blood pressure in children and adolescents, already on the Seroquel label, FDA asked AstraZeneca to add the “risk of EPS and withdrawal syndrome in neonates” a few months ago: movement disorders which can affect mothers’ babies if the mothers are taking Seroquel and stop.

But the FDA might also look at what the government’s other hand is doing. In May the Office of the Army Surgeon General’s final report on the findings of its Pain Management Task Force unabashedly hawks Seroquel for an unapproved use.

“Physicians should consider these medications for sleep disorders,” says the 163-page report,” listing Ambien and Seroquel (quetiapine) “for nightmares” even though Seroquel has never been approved for insomnia, sleep disorders or “nightmares.”

Maybe the government will send itself a warning letter.

http://www.counterpunch.org/rosenberg01242011.html

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

River fish loaded with Prozac: study

Friday, January 21st, 2011

Note from CCHR:   While the authors of this study are concerned about the effects of antidepressant drugs on fish, we would like to point out another concern— If the chemical structure of antidepressants makes them “extremely difficult to remove from sewage, even with the most sophisticate systems available,” one can only imagine how difficult it is for the human body to rid itself of them.    Just a thought.

The Gazette – January 21, 2011

by William Marsden

Researchers at the Université de Montréal and Environment Canada have discovered large quantities of antidepressants in the liver, muscle and brain tissues of brook trout exposed to effluent from Montreal’s sewage treatment plant. Photograph by: Nick Brancaccio, POSTMEDIA NEWS FILE PHOTO

MONTREAL – St. Lawrence River fish are loaded with Prozac and other antidepressant drugs, leading scientists to wonder if the “happy hormone” is altering the lifestyle of the chronically grumpy-looking marine animals.

Researchers at the Université de Montréal and Environment Canada have discovered large quantities of antidepressants in the liver, muscle and brain tissues of brook trout exposed to three months of various levels of treated effluent from Montreal’s sewage treatment plant.

According to the peer-reviewed study, published this week in the journal Chemosphere, most of the drug was found in liver tissue. Slightly less was found in the brain. The least amount was found in muscle, which is the filet eaten by humans.

U de M professor Sébastien Sauvé, a co-author of the study, said that because relatively small amounts are found in meat tissue, he is not worried that these fish pose a danger to humans.

Research during the last two decades has revealed that pharmaceutical drugs and personal care products are a major source of pollution in the marine environment. Even in very low concentrations, they have altered the ecosystems.

Sauvé said such drugs as chemotherapy medicines, hormones and antibiotics have been found in fish and pose a greater danger to human health than antidepressants.

“My real concern is the effects on the fish,” he said, adding they “could be quite serious.”

He said the study shows that fish exposed to the effluent have changes in their brains’s nerve activity. “We don’t know if these are positive or not.”

The problem is how to measure behavioural changes in fish.

“It’s very hard,” Sauvé said. “The question itself is quite interesting. You can’t ask a fish whether it is happier or not.

“One of things they can do is use cameras to look at the male behaviour. Will it have the same behaviour in mating or feeding? Then you have to go back and look at its normal behaviour. It’s quite tedious work and difficult.”

Quebecers purchase about 555 million anti-depressants a year from pharmacies. That works out to about one in four Quebecers taking one pill a day. That does not include the amount prescribed by psychiatric hospitals.

Residue from antidepressants leaves the body and ends up in our waterways. Sauvé said his study indicates the problem of antidepressants contaminating marine animals is probably global.

Most treatment plants are not equipped to deal with pharmaceuticals. Montreal’s sewage treatment plant treats only solids and does not remove chemicals.

“The chemical structure of antidepressants makes them extremely difficult to remove from sewage, even with the most sophisticate systems available,” Sauvé said.

Montreal is experimenting with ozone treatment, which, according to the study, reduces the level of antidepressants in the effluent leaving the plant, but does not eliminate them.

The research team found eight kinds of anti-depressants in the fish. The highest concentrations came from Prozac.

The study is a result of a controlled experiment. How much antidepressant medication is in fish in the river will vary greatly, depending on the kind of fish and its habitat.

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Tags: , , ,
Posted in News | 1 Comment »

Children given ‘chemical cosh’ drugs for shyness

Friday, January 21st, 2011

The Daily Telegraph – January 21, 2011

by Graeme Paton

Children are being prescribed mind-altering “chemical cosh” drugs for conditions such as shyness and mild social anxiety, behaviour experts have warned.

Child use of 'chemical cosh' drugs have increased seven-fold since 1997 - Photo: CORBIS

Young people are routinely being given medication to treat normal childhood conditions, it was claimed, despite fears over their long-term health.

The disclosure came as it emerged that the number of eight- to 13-year-olds on drugs such as Ritalin has soared seven-fold since 1997.

In many cases, pupils are being put on medication in an attempt to manage serious behaviour problems.

But Dave Traxson, a senior educational psychologist who works in schools in the West Midlands, warned that children were increasingly prescribed drugs for “normal” conditions.

“I feel very strongly that the time is right to challenge the growing practice of medicating our children for displaying behaviours and thought processes that until recently would have fallen within the normal range,” he said.

“In my region, there has been a huge growth of children being diagnosed with bipolar disorders, and a growth in the numbers given strong drugs.

“Doctors seem to be trying to shift more and more children into clinical treatment and this is very dangerous.”

Speaking to the Times Educational Supplement, Mr Traxson there was growing use of drugs to treat conditions such as shyness.

According to latest figures from the NHS, some 650,000 children aged eight to 13 are now on drugs such as Ritalin, which is used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

It represents a seven-fold increase on the 92,700 pupils put on drugs in 1997 and it compared with just 9,000 children given prescriptions in 1990.

Read the rest of the article here:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/8274050/Children-given-chemical-cosh-drugs-for-shyness.html

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Posted in News | No Comments »

Concerns Raised About Combat Troops Using Psychotropic Drugs

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

FOX News – Jan 19, 2011

AP — U.S. Marines and Afghan Army soldiers run with a wounded Afghan man to a waiting medevac helicopter near Marjah in southern Afghanistan Jan. 18

As U.S. military leaders gathered Wednesday to give their latest update on the rash of Army suicides, new questions are being raised about a U.S. Central Command policy that allows troops to go to Iraq and Afghanistan with up to a six-month supply of psychotropic drugs.

Prescription drugs have already been linked to some military suicides, and a top Army official warned last year about the danger of soldiers abusing that medication. Psychiatrists are now coming down hard on the military for continuing to sanction certain psychotropic drugs for combat troops, saying the risk from side effects is too great.

“There’s no way on earth that these boys and girls are getting monitored on the field,” said Dr. Peter Breggin, a New York-based psychiatrist who has extensively studied the side effects of psychiatric drugs. “The drugs simply shouldn’t be given to soldiers.”

Anxiety, violent behavior and “impulsivity” are all side effects of some of these medications, he said, the latter symptom being particularly dangerous in a war zone. Breggin said that if patients were given these medications in the civilian world and not monitored, it would amount to “malpractice.”

But Nextgov.com reported that Army leaders and doctors are increasingly concerned that the policy continues to allow combat troops to use everything from antidepressants to antipsychotics to hypnotics, medications they say could impair a soldier’s judgment. The swath of active-duty troops on these kinds of medications, according to a June 2010 Defense Department report, was about 20 percent.

The article highlighted one particular drug — the antipsychotic Seroquel — which the Army has sanctioned as a sleep aid, even though it can’t be used to treat troops for the mental disorders it was originally designed to address. A May 2010 military report recommended 25-50 milligram doses of the drug for “sleep disorders” including nightmares. It happens to be the same drug that two Marines back from Iraq were taking before they died in their sleep.

Military officials have pledged to rein in the use of prescription drugs. An Army Suicide Prevention Task Force report last year warned about the dangers posed by prolonged and open-ended use of these prescription medications. Following that, Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli suggested the duration of prescriptions be limited or at least reviewed periodically to avoid abuse.

He reiterated that concern Wednesday during a press conference on Army suicides. He said the Army is working to educate soldiers and members of the public “about the overuse and abuse of prescription drugs.”

Chiarelli credited military intervention with helping to reduce the number of suicides among the Army’s active-duty soldiers in 2010. That number dropped from 162 to 156 last year. He said, though, that suicides among those not on active duty went up significantly. Officials attributed the suicides to a combination of factors, not necessarily stemming from the stress of deploying. In a July report, the military said prescription drugs were involved in one-third of all active-duty suicides.

“It’s the relationship issues. It may be an individual who comes back and relies on alcohol to a level that he had not or she had not relied on it before. And maybe the person who has — has a rough time handling the prescription drugs that in some instances are all we know to prescribe for some of these things,” Chiarelli said Wednesday. He said the military is doing its “best” to “lower the incidence of prescribing a lot of drugs.”

The U.S. Army Medical Department and U.S. Central Command could not be reached for comment. Central Command told Nextgov.com that the reason the military allows up to a six-month supply of certain medications is to make sure troops have an “adequate supply.” Troops are deploying to regions where well-stocked pharmacies may be in short supply.

But Breggin said that when these troops are being prescribed psychotropic drugs, they should either have to deploy without them or stay home. He said the practice only started during the Iraq war and could still be stopped, adding that the suicides are clearly linked.

“It’s that new, so it isn’t necessary,” he said. Breggin testified last year before the House Veterans Affairs Committee about the risks associated with the use of antidepressants in the military. His latest book is “Medication Madness: The Role of Psychiatric Drugs in Cases of Violence, Suicide and Crime.”

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

Say no to drug advertisement

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

The Duquesne – Jan 20, 2011

by Rebekah Coleman

We’re taught from an early age that drugs, apart from being bad for you, are illegal. But what constitutes illegal these days?

Imagine walking into a pharmacy in which crack, heroine or ecstasy line the back shelves. Such a place is unheard of, and yet “legal” drugs like Vicodin and OxyContin, which may be just as addictive and dangerous, fill drugstores across the country.

Last Thursday, the government announced it would restrict some of the most popular painkillers because of a growing number of poisoning and overdose cases. The strength of the pills will be reduced, decreasing potency by more than half in some cases.

But how is this going to stop someone from consuming an entire bottles of pills? Prescription drug abuse can be easy and alluring, especially when these pills are advertised daily.

Can you imagine having advertisements for cocaine? Cut to a shot of people walking through a sunlit park, smiling. An abnormally happy voice says, “A line or two perks you up and improves those pesky daily chores. Try cocaine. Side effects include paranoia, likely addiction and possible death.”

This seems like an outlandish joke, but here’s a quote of a real-life ad for Requip: A woman anxiously explains, over shots of her rolling around in bed unhappily, that her legs just can’t keep still. Luckily, though, her doctor tells her the problem can be solved by Requip. After taking the drug, she talks of its restorative power while the pictures on the screen show her sleeping peacefully. Lesson learned: taking pills can solve problems.

How did drug advertisements come to be like this?

In 1906, the Federal Food and Drug Act regulated drug advertising, which in part helped to regulate false advertising claims about products. More than 30 years later, in 1938, President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which replaced the previous act and regulated medication. This eventually led to the prescription drug industry.

Nowadays, the international legal pharmaceutical business is a nearly trillion-dollar industry. According to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, in the United States alone, the pharmaceutical industry rakes in $291 billion a year. And the companies behind the counter spend $4.8 billion on advertisements annually.

These advertisements are shown on television to anyone who happens to be watching, including children, which increases awareness of different types of drugs and clearly aims to encourage people to take them.

According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), one out of five U.S. residents has used prescription pills for nonmedical purposes, including narcotics, sedatives and stimulants.

The growth of prescription drug addiction strongly affects the most vulnerable of our population: the young and the old. The elderly are more likely to abuse pills than in the past due to an increase in medication distribution. More kids are trying pharmaceutical drugs on top of experimenting with alcohol and illegal drugs. A 2010 NIDA survey showed that 9.3 percent of 12th graders admitted to taking Vicodin without a prescription within the past year. Additionally, five percent admitted taking OxyContin.

You might wonder where they’re coming across these drugs: the street corner, or the medicine cabinet at home? It’s likely a mix between the two. Another source for pharmaceuticals is a bizarre new trend: online pharmacies. Online pharmacies claim to dispense medications legally, but some do not require prescriptions or even verification of identity.

Aside from being dangerous, this push toward overmedication is unnecessary. While increasing public knowledge is important, these advertisements can turn people into hypochondriacs.

Have you ever noticed how the side effects portion of the commercials takes longer to explain the main function of the pills? Requip, while it may decrease restless legs syndrome, can lead to nausea, drowsiness, vomiting, dizziness or changes in sexual urges.

Sometimes a headache is still a headache. Pills don’t always need to be popped. Obviously, those experiencing chronic pain or serious medical issues should not stop taking medication, but we have become accustomed to reaching behind the counter whenever we feel “abnormal.”

Drug abuse is nothing new, but if prescription drug abuse isn’t recognized as equally important, the issue will only grow to more dangerous proportions.

http://media.www.theduquesneduke.com/media/storage/paper1278/news/2011/01/20/Opinions/Say-No.To.Drug.Advertisement-3969397.shtml

« Return to news items

RSS News Feed

Share

Posted in News | No Comments »

« Older Entries