Archive for July, 2011

“The Madness of Normality” – On why the DMS-5 is fundamentally wrong

Thursday, July 14th, 2011

Note from CCHR:  No psychiatric disorder can be proven as a medical abnormality, physical illness or disease.  Not one.  Despite decades of “research,”  billions in government funding,  billions spent on lobbying and marketing, the fact remains the same:  lists of behaviors (which is all the DSM consists of)  are not diseases.  That’s not what diseases are.    If there is a disease, then there is some medical test to prove the abnormality exists.   No psychiatric disorder has ever been proven to be a medical disease/illness or abnormality.  Period.   What this article is focusing on, however, is the even greater danger psychiatry currently poses to society with the upcoming DSM V— the inclusion of “preventative” psychiatry.  Translated, that means diagnosing people with mental disorders  “before” they develop mental disorders— that cannot be medically proven to exist.

For more information watch CCHR Co-founder, Professor of Psychiatry Emeritus, Thomas Szasz http://goo.gl/syKzS

Practical Ethics, University of Oxford

July 14, 2011  – by Oliver Matthes

The DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is the world widely recognized classificatory system of psychiatric disorders, published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA). It is currently under major revision; the release version DSM-5 is expected in May 2013. The “psychiatrist´s bible“ has overwhelming impact: Inclusion in the DSM carries weight far beyond the psychiatrist’s office. It has major influence on whether insurers will cover therapy for a condition, whether research will be pursued for a specific disease or whether the health technology assessment agencies will approve medications that can be marketed for it.

Many interesting issues in DSM-5 could be discussed: the prevailing categories “substance abuse” and “dependence” will be substituted by “addiction and related disorders”, gender and ethnicity specific distinctions will we introduced and instead of distinguishing different entities like “Autistic disorder” or “Asperger´s disorder”, the manual introduces the term “Autism spectrum disorder”.

In this blog post, I want to focus on one particular innovation: The introduction of so-called risk syndromes. This is a collective term for all those conditions, which do not “yet” meet the “full” clinical diagnostic criteria, e.g. for schizophrenia: In this case, you would suffer from the “attenuated psychotic syndrome”. The aim is obvious: “Young people at risk for later manifestation of a psychotic disorder can be identified“. (http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevision/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=412#). This is a clear paradigm shift towards early diagnosis and prediction in psychiatry. Is this shift ethically justified?


Read the rest of the article here: http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2011/07/%E2%80%9Cthe-madness-of-normality%E2%80%9D-on-why-the-dms-5-is-fundamentally-wrong/

« Return to news items


Share

Harvard Medical School Professor Among Five Psychiatrists Accused of Ghostwriting

Wednesday, July 13th, 2011

The Harvard Crimson – July 12, 2011

—Staff writer Naveen N. Srivatsa

Photo: Keri D Mabry

A complaint filed with the federal Office of Research Integrity alleged that a group of psychiatrists, including an associate professor at the Harvard Medical School, signed their names to an academic paper written by a communications firm hired by a major pharmaceutical company.

Gary Sachs, a researcher affiliated with Massachusetts General Hospital, is one of five doctors identified in the formal accusation filed July 8 by University of Pennsylvania professor Jay D. Amsterdam.

The psychiatrists allowed the medical communications company Scientific Therapeutics Information, hired by SmithKline Beecham, to draft a paper using their names, according to the complaint. The paper, according to Amsterdam, suggested that the antidepressant Paxil can help treat some cases of bipolar disorder.

SmithKline Beecham, which has since merged into the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, manufactured Paxil.

The practice known as ghostwriting is widely condemned by scientific journals. The World Association of Medical Editors calls ghostwriting “dishonest and unacceptable.”

The complaint includes messages sent between those affiliated with the study, as well as their supervisors. The attached messages include professors saying that Scientific Therapeutics Information and SmithKline Beecham selected the first author of the paper and failed to provide the paper to all investigators before submission.

But the messages also seem to portray a feud between Amsterdam and University of Pennsylvania Associate Professor Laszlo Gyulai, one of the accused researchers. In one message, Amsterdam accuses him of stealing his research.

“As per your investigation there is little doubt that these data were misappropriated from me and used and published without my knowledge and without regard to the significant contribution that I made to this study,” Amsterdam wrote in an email to Gyulai’s supervisor.

The paper was published in June 2001, and the research was funded by grants from GlaxoSmithKline and the National Institute of Mental Health.

In an interview Wednesday morning, Sachs, an associate clinical professor of psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital, said that while the relationship between Amsterdam and Gyulai was antagonistic, the accusations of research misconduct should be investigated.

“There might be unhappiness between two faculty memebers, and they might escalate this. But the question is whether there is any basis to this assertion, and this is a very serious assertion,” he said. “So apart from whatever motivations there may be, they did raise assertions, and those assertions deserve to be investigated.”

Sachs said that he was involved in designing the study and that he saw the paper before it was submitted to the journal.

While he said he did not interact with anyone from Scientific Therapeutics International, he did come in contact with employees of the pharamceutical company.

“The idea that bipolar depression was important to study has been an essential part of my career. Encouraging studies in this field is obviously, as an academic, something I’d want to do,” he said. “I was very pleased that they were willing to put their drug to the test. I give them credit of actually having the trial for the drug. Interacting with them in the course of the design and execution of the study, that’d all be standard stuff to do.”

In a statement, GlaxoSmithKline said that employees were involved in the draft’s development and that the company financially supported the study. It said that the primary authors of a paper have final approval of the draft and that when its employees provide “substantive assistance” to a paper, it is disclosed.

“This article was written more than 10 years ago and we do not have details about the development of the manuscript,” a spokesperson said in the statement. “GSK is committed to complete transparency regarding clinical and case studies.”

A spokesperson for the hospital said that it is looking into the complaint.

“Massachusetts General Hospital takes allegations of research misconduct very seriously and will handle the matter in compliance with our policy to determine if there’s any validity to the complaint,” spokesperson Kristen Stanton said in an email.

Sachs said that since the filing of the complaint, he has discussed the matter with a hospital representative.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/7/12/complaint-amsterdam-sachs-glaxosmithkline/

« Return to news items


Share

Ex pharma sales rep Gwen Olsen says Big Pharma only interested in profits, not health

Tuesday, July 12th, 2011

Note from CCHR: Both Gwen Olsen, and Mike Adams, founder of NaturalNews.com are CCHR Human Rights Awards recipients.

Natural News – July 12, 2011

Gwen Olsen, an ex-pharmaceutical sales representative, is using her personal experience and insider knowledge to turn the tables on Big Pharma and tell people the disturbing and disheartening truth about the highly corrupt industry: it’s only after the money, not the health of its patients. Gwen, a 2007 Human Rights Award recipient, is a dedicated mental health activist, public speaker, and writer committed to child and mental health advocacy; her specialties include promoting the cessation of America’s over medication of its children and teens. It’s hard to imagine that this same woman was once a successful pharmaceutical sales rep for more than 15 years, working for many of the industry’s big name manufacturers. “We (were) being trained to misinform people,” said Gwen.

Now on a personal, passionate quest to wake up as many people as possible to the deception of the pharmaceutical industry, Gwen’s research emphasizes her concerns about the increasingly prevalent use of prescription drugs and the deadly effects that these drugs can have. “There is no such thing as a safe drug,” said Gwen in a video interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4bY…).

Gwen’s astounding admissions in another video interview on Natural News (http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=29359…) dispels the myth that Big Pharma is in the business of healing or helping cure disease — instead, the industry is out to regulate illness,  manage symptoms, and keep people trapped in a lethal cycle of chemical dependency, says Gwen.

In the video, Gwen explains that drugs — psychiatric drugs in particular — are meant to encourage people to remain customers of the pharmaceutical industry. After all, if Big Pharma intended to help cure disease, they would be putting themselves out of business.

“I don’t want people thinking that I am a conspiracy theorist, because in fact, there is no theory behind what I’m telling you, it’s all provable… what I’m saying is provable is, the pharmaceutical industry doesn’t want to cure people,” said Gwen in the video.

The confessions of a Pharma veteran

The Rx Reformer recently released a book, Confessions of an Rx Drug Pusher(http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-D…), which provides considerable insider knowledge of the serious dangers that lie within the game of the pharmaceutical industry and the disinformation that has jeopardized lives. Her book presents many admissions, some deeply personal, of what she discovered and observed throughout her career with Big Pharma, during which she was encouraged to minimize the side effects of the drugs she was selling when speaking to doctors.

Confessions of an Rx Drug Pusher is a strikingly candid and much-needed wake-up call about the flawed U.S. health care system, which is — with good reason — currently ranked last among 19 industrialized nations worldwide. You can read more about the book on Gwen’s site: http://www.gwenolsen.com

As Gwen’s book reveals to readers, more than 180,000 people die annually from the effects of legal drugs. “By the time a  drug is approved and it hits the general population, we don’t even know 50% of the side effects involved,” said Gwen. In the same interview, Gwen explains that there is no medical evidence required for psychiatrists who wish to prescribe their patients drugs. This broadens the potential patient population considerably, allowing Big Pharma a lucrative advantage over an increasingly diseased and medicated public.

How the Rx Reformer came into existence

Gwen’s self-proclaimed calling as the “Rx Reformer” evolved not only from extensive personal experiences obtained during the years she spent working for major drug companies, but a shocking event that occurred within her own family.

The health of Gwen’s niece, Megan Blanchard, a bright pre-med student, quickly deteriorated through the onset of drug-induced addiction, withdrawal, mental illness, and depression. This painful suffering resulted in Meg’s unfortunate and tragic suicide, and Gwen quickly realized that her niece was not the first to painfully suffer from the consequences of doctor prescribed pharmaceuticals, nor would she be the last. In her book, Gwen writes: “Compassion is what Meg really needed, not more drugs.”

“There are thousands and thousands of people like that out there — and they need a voice,” said Gwen. “I serve as that voice.”

Gwen’s disillusionment with the industry — her anger at the immense deceit and misinformation she witnessed taking place within the profitable alliance between medical doctors and Big Pharma — led her to get out of pharmaceutical sales and pursue a new vocation: spreading truth.

“I had been used in the game, I literally was the one at the front lines, harming people — unintentionally — but I was responsible, and I carry a burden for that now,” said Gwen.

Gwen has now made it her moral obligation, or what she has labeled her “spiritual calling,” to educate others on what she learned the hard way about the abundance of harmful drugs being given to a credulous population.

Watch a recorded interview with Gwen here: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=29359…

« Return to news items


Share

Mass psychosis in the US—How Big Pharma got Americans hooked on anti-psychotic drugs

Tuesday, July 12th, 2011

ALJAZEERA – July 12, 2011

by James Ridgeway

Drug companies like Pfizer are accused of pressuring doctors into over-prescribing medications to patients in order to increase profits - GALLO/GETTY

Has America become a nation of psychotics? You would certainly think so, based on the explosion in the use of antipsychotic medications. In 2008, with over $14 billion in sales, antipsychotics became the single top-selling therapeutic class of prescription drugs in the United States, surpassing drugs used to treat high cholesterol and acid reflux.

Once upon a time, antipsychotics were reserved for a relatively small number of patients with hard-core psychiatric diagnoses – primarily schizophrenia and bipolar disorder – to treat such symptoms as delusions, hallucinations, or formal thought disorder. Today, it seems, everyone is taking antipsychotics. Parents are told that their unruly kids are in fact bipolar, and in need of anti-psychotics, while old people with dementia are dosed, in large numbers, with drugs once reserved largely for schizophrenics. Americans with symptoms ranging from chronic depression to anxiety to insomnia are now being prescribed anti-psychotics at rates that seem to indicate a national mass psychosis.

It is anything but a coincidence that the explosion in antipsychotic use coincides with the pharmaceutical industry’s development of a new class of medications known as “atypical antipsychotics.” Beginning with Zyprexa, Risperdal, and Seroquel in the 1990s, followed by Abilify in the early 2000s, these drugs were touted as being more effective than older antipsychotics like Haldol and Thorazine. More importantly, they lacked the most noxious side effects of the older drugs – in particular, the tremors and other motor control problems.

The atypical anti-psychotics were the bright new stars in the pharmaceutical industry’s roster of psychotropic drugs – costly, patented medications that made people feel and behave better without any shaking or drooling. Sales grew steadily, until by 2009 Seroquel and Abilify numbered fifth and sixth in annual drug sales, and prescriptions written for the top three atypical antipsychotics totaled more than 20 million.  Suddenly, antipsychotics weren’t just for psychotics any more.

Not just for psychotics anymore

By now, just about everyone knows how the drug industry works to influence the minds of American doctors, plying them with gifts, junkets, ego-tripping awards, and research funding in exchange for endorsing or prescribing the latest and most lucrative drugs. “Psychiatrists are particularly targeted by Big Pharma because psychiatric diagnoses are very subjective,” says Dr. Adriane Fugh-Berman, whose PharmedOut project tracks the industry’s influence on American medicine, and who last month hosted a conference on the subject at Georgetown. A shrink can’t give you a blood test or an MRI to figure out precisely what’s wrong with you. So it’s often a case of diagnosis by prescription. (If you feel better after you take an anti-depressant, it’s assumed that you were depressed.) As the researchers in one study of the drug industry’s influence put it, “the lack of biological tests for mental disorders renders psychiatry especially vulnerable to industry influence.” For this reason, they argue, it’s particularly important that the guidelines for diagnosing and treating mental illness be compiled “on the basis of an objective review of the scientific evidence” – and not on whether the doctors writing them got a big grant from Merck or own stock in AstraZeneca.

Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and a leading critic of the Big Pharma, puts it more bluntly: “Psychiatrists are in the pocket of industry.” Angell has pointed out that most of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the bible of mental health clinicians, have ties to the drug industry. Likewise, a 2009 study showed that 18 out of 20 of the shrinks who wrote the American Psychiatric Association’s most recent clinical guidelines for treating depression, bipolar disorders, and schizophrenia had financial ties to drug companies.

In a recent article in The New York Review of Books, Angell deconstructs what she calls an apparent “raging epidemic of mental illness” among Americans. The use of psychoactive drugs—including both antidepressants and antipsychotics—has exploded, and if the new drugs are so effective, Angell points out, we should “expect the prevalence of mental illness to be declining, not rising.” Instead, “the tally of those who are so disabled by mental disorders that they qualify for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) increased nearly two and a half times between 1987 and 2007 – from one in 184 Americans to one in seventy-six. For children, the rise is even more startling – a thirty-five-fold increase in the same two decades. Mental illness is now the leading cause of disability in children.” Under the tutelage of Big Pharma, we are “simply expanding the criteria for mental illness so that nearly everyone has one.” Fugh-Berman agrees: In the age of aggressive drug marketing, she says, “Psychiatric diagnoses have expanded to include many perfectly normal people.”

Cost benefit analysis

What’s especially troubling about the over-prescription of the new antipsychotics is its prevalence among the very young and the very old – vulnerable groups who often do not make their own choices when it comes to what medications they take. Investigations into antipsychotic use suggests that their purpose, in these cases, may be to subdue and tranquilize rather than to treat any genuine psychosis.

Carl Elliott reports in Mother Jones magazine: “Once bipolar disorder could be treated with atypicals, rates of diagnoses rose dramatically, especially in children. According to a recent Columbia University study, the number of children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder rose 40-fold between 1994 and 2003.” And according to another study, “one in five children who visited a psychiatrist came away with a prescription for an antipsychotic drug.”

A remarkable series published in the Palm Beach Post in May true revealed that the state of  Florida’s juvenile justice department has literally been pouring these drugs into juvenile facilities, “routinely” doling them out “for reasons that never were approved by federal regulators.” The numbers are staggering: “In 2007, for example, the Department of Juvenile Justice bought more than twice as much Seroquel as ibuprofen. Overall, in 24 months, the department bought 326,081 tablets of Seroquel, Abilify, Risperdal and other antipsychotic drugs for use in state-operated jails and homes for children…That’s enough to hand out 446 pills a day, seven days a week, for two years in a row, to kids in jails and programs that can hold no more than 2,300 boys and girls on a given day.” Further, the paper discovered that “One in three of the psychiatrists who have contracted with the state Department of Juvenile Justice in the past five years has taken speaker fees or gifts from companies that make antipsychotic medications.”

In addition to expanding the diagnoses of serious mental illness, drug companies have encouraged doctors to prescribe atypical anti-psychotics for a host of off-label uses. In one particularly notorious episode, the drugmaker Eli Lilly pushed Zyprexa on the caregivers of old people with Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia, as well as agitation, anxiety, and insomnia. In selling to nursing home doctors, sales reps reportedly used the slogan “five at five”—meaning that five milligrams of Zyprexa at 5 pm would sedate their more difficult charges. The practice persisted even after FDA had warned Lilly that the drug was not approved for such uses, and that it could lead to obesity and even diabetes in elderly patients.

In a video interview conducted in 2006, Sharham Ahari, who sold Zyprexa for two years at the beginning of the decade, described to me how the sales people would wangle the doctors into prescribing it. At the time, he recalled, his doctor clients were giving him a lot of grief over patients who were “flipping out” over the weight gain associated with the drug, along with the diabetes. “We were instructed to downplay side effects and focus on the efficacy of drug…to recommend the patient drink a glass a water before taking a pill before the  meal and then after the meal in hopes the stomach would expand” and provide an easy way out of this obstacle to increased sales. When docs complained, he recalled, “I told them, ‘Our drug is state of the art. What’s more important? You want them to get better or do you want them to stay the same–a thin psychotic patient or a fat stable patient.’”

For the drug companies, Shahrman says, the decision to continue pushing the drug despite side effects is matter of cost benefit analysis: Whether you will make more money by continuing to market the drug for off-label use, and perhaps defending against lawsuits, than you would otherwise. In the case of Zyprexa, in January 2009, Lilly settled a lawsuit brought by with the US Justice Department, agreeing to pay $1.4 billion, including “a criminal fine of $515 million, the largest ever in a health care case, and the largest criminal fine for an individual corporation ever imposed in a United States criminal prosecution of any kind,”the Department of Justice said in announcing the settlement.” But Lilly’s sale of Zyprexa in that year alone were over $1.8 billion.

Turning people into zombies

As it turns out, the atypical antipsychotics may not even be the best choice for people with genuine, undisputed psychosis.

Read the rest of the article here: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/07/20117313948379987.html

« Return to news items


Share

Big lies from Big Insurance drown out the proper cure

Sunday, July 10th, 2011

Anchorage Daily News – July 9, 2011

By John Havelock

In Saturday’s column on public health and the pharmaceutical industry, the case was made that a public health policy driven by the profit motive leads to bad health policy and expanded federal budget deficits. Profit is a great driver of the free enterprise system but is a bad match with core public policies.

Reviews published in the two most recent issues of the New York Review of Books (NYRB), taking the psychiatric profession to task for the shameful influence of the pharmaceutical industry, demonstrate the potentially destructive impulse of the profit motive.

Psychiatry has almost dropped its original reliance on therapy in favor of pills, despite evidence that therapy or, surprisingly, exercise are usually just as effective for depression as the new prescription drugs. There is more money in prescribing pills. Diagnosis of mental illness has expanded dramatically so that, as the review author ironically reports, “It looks though it will be harder and harder to be normal.”

Particularly damaging is her report that diagnoses of children’s disorders have doubled multiple times in the last decade, so that half a million children now take antipsychotic drugs with potentially dangerous and sometimes lethal side effects.

As the author points out, the problem with “troubled children” is often troubled families in troubled circumstances. Careful exploration of their environment makes more sense as a starter. Many psychiatrists are also prescribing drugs “off-label” which allows them to speculate (with industry encouragement) in the prescription of drugs not approved by the FDA for the diagnoses being treated.

« Return to news items


Share

International human rights group protest as public distrust of psychiatry mounts

Friday, July 8th, 2011

by CCHR UK

Hundreds of protesters opposing the junk science and dangerous drugs that make up psychiatry marched through Brighton last week.

The protest coincided with the opening of the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ Annual Conference at the Metropole Hotel on Kings Road. The march started in Victoria Gardens and finished outside the hotel to highlight the use of dangerous psychiatric drugs that have resulted in multiple deaths of teenagers who had been labelled with so-called ‘disorders’.

The protest was organized by psychiatric watchdog the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR).

Following the protest, a traveling exhibition was opened on the seafront opposite the hotel, exposing the hidden agendas and dangers of the psychiatric industry.

Called “How to Protect and Preserve Your Mental Health”, the exhibition presented information not being made known by the psychiatric industry, information which CCHR says prevents patients making an informed choice about so-called treatment.

It also exposed the lack of transparency in the field of mental health, where only selective data is being made available to patients, and where the effects of psychiatric treatments including violence, aggression and suicide, are being washed over or even withheld.

CCHR says a series of needless young deaths could have been avoided if parents had been fully informed about psychiatric drugs and their effects, citing the recent suicide of 10-year-old Harry Hucknall, who hanged himself while on Ritalin and Prozac. The fact parents are not being told about the dangers of psychiatric drugs prescribed to children and adolescents has added to the mounting public distrust of the psychiatric profession, which has been worsened by problems within the profession itself.

Ahead of the Conference, Dinesh Bhugra, President of the RCP, came out saying mental health was in crisis due to staff shortages. His comments have come despite mental health receiving the largest portion of the NHS budget. According to Department of Health figures, mental health received £11.2 billion in 2010, an amount far in excess of what was invested in other areas such as cancer or heart problems.

Brian Daniels, spokesman for CCHR in the UK, says psychiatry is the only profession that has to continually advertise its failures as well as promoting how bad it is to get more government funding. He says any other profession would be in administration by now.

He also points to the fact that most doctors like to treat patients humanely, giving them a choice when it comes to treatment. He said, “Choices don’t exist in psychiatry. It’s no wonder doctors don’t want to go towards a profession where forced treatment is the order of the day, and where you are a jailer if the person doesn’t comply. Further, psychiatry has no scientific or medical basis and young doctors are recognizing this.”

« Return to news items


Share

Put away the Prozac: Feeling sad ISN’T an illness

Thursday, July 7th, 2011

The Daily Mail – July 7 2011

by Bel Mooney

Back in 1966, the Rolling Stones recorded Mother’s Little Helper — a bitter satire on the barbiturates women had taken to popping just like sweeties.

‘Mother needs something today to calm her down.
And though she’s not really ill, there’s a little yellow pill.
She goes running for the shelter of a mother’s little helper.
And it helps her on her way, gets her through her busy day.’

It’s 45 years since those lyrics were written and the situation today is even worse.

A new study reveals one in three women has taken anti-depressants at some point in her life (compared to one in ten men) and nearly half of women using the drugs have been on them for at least five years.

But are all those women taking drugs for depression actually depressed? Those who genuinely suffer the crippling condition Churchill called the Black Dog would probably shake their heads.

That is not to diminish the real pain of those who feel permanently anxious, exhausted or gloomy – all common mental disorders.

But such people (men as well as women) may not need drugs. The trouble is that Platform 51′s research found 57 per cent of those prescribed anti-depressants were not offered any alternatives.

Many women write to my Saturday advice column in the Mail telling me life is just not delivering the happiness they want. Of course, they don’t put it that way.

Discontentment and boredom in marriage, the stress of juggling home and work, caring for children/sick relatives/elderly parents, feeling lonely and left out, nursing a broken heart, worrying about teenage children . . . and also suffering from the dread expressed by the Rolling Stones as ‘what a drag it is getting old’.

All these (often ill-defined) woes pour into letters I file under the single word ‘angst’.

That German word means fear or anxiety and is used to describe an intense feeling of apprehension, anxiety or inner turmoil. My point is that to feel that way — for any of the reasons above or others — does not mean you should necessarily describe yourself as depressed.

It could just mean you are experiencing the troughs that are part of the human condition. You do not need to be treated as ill and medicated.

Let me be personal. At the end of 1975, I was deeply unhappy after the stillbirth of my second son after a long and complicated labour. My doctor prescribed a tricyclic anti-depressant that made me stumble about like a zombie, even though I had to care for a two-year-old.

One day a man came to the door offering to clean the windows and, in my spaced-out state, I thought nothing of the fact he insisted on tackling the inside first.

I left him to it, was surprised when he made a quick exit — and then discovered he had taken the valuable antique ring my mother-in-law had given me as a wedding present.

Oddly enough, that little disaster acted as a wake-up call. I looked in the mirror and said: ‘You’re not depressed, you’re grieving.’

I can still vividly recall the moment of release when I tipped the contents of the brown bottle of pills into the loo and pulled the chain.

Have hope: Yes, we all get miserable - but it will pass (picture posed by model)

Twenty-two years later, I had another small crisis. My daughter was leaving home and my son (absorbed in his new relationship and living in London) was emotionally distant.

Their father seemed permanently away working, so not only was I suffering empty-nest syndrome, I was terribly lonely, too.

So off I went to the GP, said I felt down, explained why — and was immediately prescribed Lustral, one of a group of anti-depressants that includes Prozac.

A couple of weeks later, I felt fine. Was that due to the Lustral or because I was working through my feelings? Were things just getting better for me because (unless you are clinically depressed) that is the natural order of things?

Whatever the answer, I have no doubt drugs were not the answer to my problems and should never have been prescribed.

Mind you, despite the lessons I learned, when my marriage broke down in 2003, I took amitriptyline (another anti-depressant) for a short time to help me sleep.

‘We spend billions trying to get happy, but if we stopped expecting it as a right, we might be pleasantly surprised by an unexpected acceptance of how things are’

Unlike the previous occasions, it felt like the right decisions. Nevertheless, I would say to a woman in a similar situation: ‘Expect to be miserable, understand that it will pass — and don’t run the risk of getting hooked on a drug.’

What I really needed in each of those three situations (all of which will be recognised by many women) was someone qualified to talk me through it all and restore my self-esteem and hope.

I often cheerfully warn younger women friends who are mothers to expect bad times.

Yes, you will worry about your children, be hurt when they turn into dreadful teenagers, feel sad and old when they leave home, and then worry about their love lives, their families . . . and so on.

It’s all a part of motherhood — the downside to the joy.

Children aside, life can seem tough and overwhelming at times for all women. You get so tired, work is demanding, friends let you down, there are so many things to worry about — and the wrinkles on your face will do nothing to cheer you.

When the menopause arrives, you feel grim. Next up, you start dreading the old age that is snapping at your heels.

But these are the normal stages of life that you can arm yourself against by being aware and prepared. It helps to realise that your worries, fears and longings are universal.

Sometimes we all need extra help from outside, which is why I would like to see qualified therapists in every NHS surgery to offer an alternative to the happy pills that may seem to relieve a problem, but do nothing to tackle what caused it in the first place.

The cost would fall far short of our current spending on unhappiness. After all, the huge drug companies are all too pleased we have commercialised depression, medicalised sadness and turned normal melancholy into an illness.

We spend billions trying to get happy, but if we stopped expecting it as a right, we might be pleasantly surprised by an unexpected acceptance of how things are.

« Return to news items


Share

Governor Patrick moves to curtail shock therapy on disabled

Thursday, July 7th, 2011

Milford Daily News – July 5 2011

By Kyle Cheney

Lawmakers may have scrapped a plan to heavily restrict the use of skin shock therapy in Massachusetts for severely disabled residents, but the Patrick administration is moving ahead with a proposal that would eliminate the practice for all future patients and require annual reviews for patients already receiving the controversial treatment.

In new regulations proposed by the Department of Developmental Services, treatments that cause physical pain – such as “spanking, slapping, hitting or contingent skin shock,” also known as aversive therapy – would no longer be a permissible treatment option for residents with developmental disabilities.

Only those with court-ordered treatment plans in effect by Sept. 1, 2011 that include aversive therapy would be able to continue receiving it.

The department’s proposal is nearly identical to one that passed the Senate unanimously in May but was dropped in budget negotiations with the House that ended last week.

The issue has lingered for years on Beacon Hill without resolution. Proponents of aversive therapy hail it as a lifesaving treatment and last resort for self-injurious children who would otherwise be subjected to mind-altering psychotropic drugs and daily physical restraints. Critics have ripped it as a form of torture being applied to innocent children, often unnecessarily.

« Return to news items


Share

ADHD review as US expert faces inquiry

Tuesday, July 5th, 2011

The Australian – July 5, 2011

AUSTRALIA’S ADHD guidelines are being redeveloped as a US psychiatrist whose work is heavily cited in existing draft guidelines has been sanctioned by Harvard University for violating conflict-of-interest rules.

Professor Joseph Biederman and two colleagues, Thomas Spencer and Timothy Wilens, were investigated by Harvard after allegedly failing to report to the university millions of dollars they received from drug firms.

Australia’s National Health and Medical Council held off approving the draft guidelines for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder issued in 2009 as it awaited the outcome of the US conflict-of-interest investigation.

The Boston Globe reported that, in a letter to their colleagues, Professor Biederman, Dr Spencer and Dr Wilens apologised for their “honest” mistakes and said they had been sanctioned.

The National Health and Medical Research Council said yesterday it could not yet assess the impact of the outcome of the Harvard investigation on the scientific literature and said the draft guidelines citing Professor Biederman would remain on its website.

Independently of the Harvard review, the council had appointed a multi-disciplinary panel to develop new clinical practice points to provide clear advice to clinicians and health professionals for the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD, the council said.

The review will be completed in September, but the council was last night unable to provide The Australian with names of the experts involved.

In 2007, Daryl Effron, who chaired the committee that drew up Australia’s draft ADHD guidelines, resigned as chairperson after his ties with pharmaceutical companies that produce ADHD drugs were exposed. He remains on the committee.

About 350,000 Australian children and adolescents are estimated to have ADHD and controversy has been raging about the use of medications such as Ritalin.

Child psychiatrist Professor Jon Jureidini, who argues against the long-term use of stimulant drugs in treating behavioural problems tagged as ADHD, says that the current guidelines rely heavily on Professor Biederman’s work.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/adhd-review-as-us-expert-faces-inquiry/story-e6frg6nf-1226087514583

« Return to news items


Share

Miami-Area Psychiatrist Pleads Guilty for Role in $200 Million Medicare Fraud Scheme

Friday, July 1st, 2011

U.S. Department of Justice

June 30,  2011

WASHINGTON – A Miami-area psychiatrist pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in Miami for his part in a fraud scheme that resulted in the submission of more than $200 million in fraudulent claims to Medicare, the Department of Justice, FBI and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced.

Dr. Alan Gumer, 64, of Tamarac, Fla., pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud.   Gumer was charged on Feb. 15, 2011, with one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and four counts of health care fraud.

According to court documents, Gumer was a psychiatrist at American Therapeutic Corporation (ATC), a Florida corporation headquartered in Miami.   ATC purported to operate partial hospitalization programs (PHPs) in seven different locations throughout South Florida and Orlando.  A PHP is a form of intensive treatment for severe mental illness.

Gumer admitted that he signed evaluations, notes and other documents in medical files for patients who did not need the treatment for which ATC billed Medicare.   Specifically, as a psychiatrist, Gumer knew that the patients attending ATC did not need intensive mental health treatment, and that the treatments offered by ATC were not the type of intensive treatments a PHP should provide.   Gumer admitted that he signed these files without examining the patients, or writing and reading the statements he was signing.   Gumer also admitted to writing prescriptions for psychiatric medications for patients who did not need them in order to make it appear to Medicare that the patients qualified for PHP treatment.   According to court documents, Gumer also referred hundreds of ATC patients to a related company, the American Sleep Institute (ASI), for unnecessary diagnostic sleep disorder testing.

According to court filings, Gumer’s co-defendants and ATC’s owners and operators paid kickbacks to owners and operators of assisted living facilities (ALFs) and halfway houses and to patient brokers in exchange for delivering ineligible patients to ATC and ASI.  In some cases, the patients received a portion of those kickbacks.  Throughout the course of the ATC and ASI conspiracy, millions of dollars in kickbacks were paid in exchange for Medicare beneficiaries, who did not qualify for PHP services, to attend treatment programs that were not legitimate PHP programs so that ATC and ASI could bill Medicare for more than $200 million in medically unnecessary services.

According to the plea agreement, Gumer’s participation in the fraud resulted in $19.3 million in fraudulent billing to the Medicare program.   Sentencing for Gumer is scheduled for Jan 19, 2012.  Gumer faces a maximum of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

ATC, its management company Medlink Professional Management Group Inc., and the owners and lead manager of ATC, Medlink and ASI, were charged with various health care fraud, money laundering and other offenses in a separate superseding indictment unsealed on Feb. 15, 2011.   Two of the three owners and the lead manager, as well as both ATC and Medlink, have pleaded guilty and have admitted to the fraudulent scheme and that more than $200 million in billings were submitted to the Medicare program as a part of the scheme.   They are scheduled for sentencing on Sept. 14, 2011, by U.S. District Court Judge James Lawrence King.   The trial of the third owner charged in the separate superseding indictment is scheduled to begin on Aug. 15, 2011.

The remaining 17 co-defendants named in the indictment in which Gumer was charged are scheduled to stand trial on Nov. 7, 2011, before U.S. District Judge Patricia A. Seitz.

An indictment is merely an accusation and defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.

Today’s guilty plea was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney Wifredo A. Ferrer of the Southern District of Florida; John V. Gillies, Special Agent-in-Charge of the FBI’s Miami field office; and Special Agent-in-Charge Christopher Dennis of the HHS Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG), Office of Investigations Miami office.

The criminal case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Jennifer L. Saulino of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section.  The case was investigated by the FBI and HHS-OIG and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, supervised by the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida.

Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force operations in nine locations have charged more than 1,000 defendants that collectively have billed the Medicare program for more than $2.3 billion.  In addition, HHS’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with the HHS-OIG are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/June/11-crm-871.html

To learn more about the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), go to:  www.stopmedicarefraud.gov .

« Return to news items


Share