Posts Tagged ‘Fred Baughman’

Is ADHD a Fictional Disease?

Saturday, May 21st, 2011

Some psychiatrists argue that ADHD is little more than a marketing gimmick

The Mark
By Fred Baughman
May 18, 2011

Dr. Fred Baughman, Child neurologist; opponent of ADHD diagnosis

Some 5.4 million children in the United States have been diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, with two-thirds of them taking psychiatric drugs. Sales of ADHD drugs reached $1.2 billion in 2010, a demand level so high that the U.S. is experiencing an ADHD drug shortage. But an increasingly vocal contingent of psychiatric experts is speaking up against diagnosing children with ADHD, arguing it is a non-existent condition drummed up by pharmaceutical companies to increase sales.

What makes you convinced that ADHD is not a real disease?

During my time in practice, I’ve authored papers and discovered real diseases and so on. Psychiatry in 1948 was distinguished from neurology. Neurology is the specialty dealing with physical and organic diseases of the brain and nervous system. Psychiatry is the specialty dealing with emotional and behavioural things which are not actual, physical diseases – things like depression, anxiety, panic, and so on.

Insofar as ADHD is concerned, it seems clear that in the ’50s, as the first psychiatric drugs came to market, that psychiatry – in cahoots with the pharmaceutical industry – came upon the market strategy of, “Well, we’ll call these things ‘diseases.’” And the prototypical invented disease was called ADHD.

It was initially in a 1970 congressional hearing in the U.S. that psychiatrists appeared and testified that, what was then called hyper kinetic disorder or minimal brain dysfunction, was a disease that needed diagnosing by a physician, and as a disease it justified the use of drugs to treat it. So that was the official beginning of ADHD in particular and of psychiatric diagnoses in general as being due to a disease of the brain. In every case, they say there’s a subtle chemical imbalance in the brain, which of course they never have a means of diagnosing in life and have never in scientific literature authored proof that there is in fact a disease. And yet they are allowed by [the U.S.] Food and Drug Administration to say that there is a chemical imbalance and that the drugs balance the imbalance.

So it’s been a market strategy. This lie has been allowed to be published by the drug industry and by psychiatry, by our regulatory agencies, specifically the Food and Drug Administration. So that’s where we are today.

All physicians learn in medical school that a disease is a physical abnormality. When you go to your physician, they may see a rash or they may find something microscopically abnormal, such as cancer cells. Then there are a lot of chemical diseases – diabetes being the best known. There are about a hundred examples of inborn errors of metabolism or body chemistry. These can all be tested for, they’ve all been proven, and they exist in the scientific literature – whereas there is not a single psychiatric diagnosis that exists in scientific literature of the world.

In 2008, I was counselling a young father from Kingston, Ont., who was in a divorce situation, and the mother insisted the children be seen by psychiatrists and the psychiatrist had made a number of diagnoses and had this one boy on large amounts of about five or six different types of medication. I helped the father author a letter to Health Canada asking where – in the case of ADHD or any psychiatric diagnosis – there is proof of a gross or microscopic abnormality.

This gentleman got a letter back from the director-general of Health Canada saying there is no gross, microscopic, or chemical abnormality in any psychiatric diagnosis; there is no objective way of verifying a psychiatric diagnosis as a disease.

That’s why psychiatry’s claims that their diagnoses are chemical imbalances is nothing but a lie and a deception. And yet, because of their financial might on the world scene, no one will challenge them. They have friends bought and paid for in government and in all of the governmental health-care agencies.

Here in the States, as of 2007, the Centers for Disease Control announced that 5.4 million U.S. schoolchildren five to 17 years old had ADHD. And you can be sure that they have all been on ADHD drugs, which are, for the most part, amphetamines, which are known to be addictive, dangerous, deadly.

I’ve heard estimates of 20 per cent of schoolchildren in the U.S. with a psych diagnosis and who were on psych drugs. It’s exploding, it’s increasing all the time.

Is the issue that we’re overmedicating ourselves, or that ADHD is not real?

When it’s a total fraud, you don’t call it overmedicating. There is no such thing as ADHD as a disease, so there is never justification for it. It’s a total fraud.

What is there to gain from diagnosing children with ADHD?

Ritalin has passed $1 billion a year in sales. Ritalin is no longer the top ADHD drug in the U.S. I think Adderall, which is made up of amphetamines, passed Ritalin a few years ago in market share.

It’s a complete fraud, they’ve invented diseases for which their drugs are a cure. The rate of diagnosing ADHD has been going up by a million a year in the U.S. This is a market strategy.

The book Selling Sickness: How the World’s Biggest Pharmaceutical Companies Are Turning Us All Into Patients [by Ray Moynihan and Alan Cassels] talks generally about inventing diseases for which to sell drugs. In the foreword of that book, the authors quote the former president of Merck Pharmaceutical Co., Henry Gadsden, who once said he was anxious to find ways to market his products to normal people, just like the Wrigley chewing gum people did. This was kind of an after-the-fact confession they were trying to market drugs to normal people, and calling all psychological dilemmas diseases for which they needed a pill. This was the strategy.

It’s almost unimaginable, it’s almost unthinkable that this has been going on, but that’s exactly what’s been going on.

How would you diagnose a child that was considered to have ADHD?

Look at the criteria that are used to call a child ADHD. They talk out of turn, they don’t sit still, they wiggle around too much in their seats, they are impulsive, disorderly, and so on. It’s a bunch of behaviours that are seen in just about every child at some stage of their life. This is by design; they have taken kind of irritating, bothersome, disruptive behaviours in children and have kind of cobbled them together and called it a disease.

They get a lot of parents to buy it because a lot of parents are now busy with their job in the workforce and there’s no longer a full-time parent in the home, and so, “Here’s why Johnny or Janey is such an irritant to me, they’ve got ADHD.” It takes the pressure entirely off the parent for not being a presence and for not being there full-time to mould the behaviour of the child, and they’re calling these behaviours a disease and saying we’ve got a pill for it. That’s very seductive. That’s a far more appealing analysis than, “Gee, you’re divorced, there’s no one in the home to discipline the child real time,” and so on.

These are not diseases, they are behaviours. Today, you hang a psychiatric label on a child, you surely stigmatize the child and these drugs are exceedingly dangerous. In 2005, there were several deaths in Canada of young children from Adderall. It was temporarily taken off the market, but then the power of the industry won out and Adderall’s back on the market. Pure amphetamines.

Read article here:  http://www.themarknews.com/articles/5193-is-adhd-a-fictional-disease?page=1

« Return to news items


Share

Memorial Day 2010: Psychiatric drugs triggering deaths of U.S. soldiers treated for PTSD

Wednesday, May 26th, 2010

Examiner.com
By Jed Shlackman
May 26, 2010

Andrew Tighman, writing in the Marine Corps Times, recently described the investigation of Fred A. Baughman Jr., M.D. into the deaths of military personnel taking multiple psychotropic medications. Baughman was alerted to a series of soldier deaths upon reading a May 2008 article in the Charleston [WV] Gazette titled “Vets Taking Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Drugs Die in Sleep.” Baughman, a retired neurologist known previously for his criticism of medication treatments of ADHD and other mental health disorders, suspected that the reported cases could be part of a much larger problem. In the cases of four West Virginia veterans who died in their sleep in 2008 Baughman found that the deaths were not due to overdoses. The veterans were apparently normal upon going to bed, yet all died in their sleep after taking a combination of prescribed medications that included Paxil, Seroquel, and Klonopin. Each case involved a sudden cardiac incident and resulting death.  This adds to growing concern about serious adverse effects of psychiatric medications commonly prescribed to emotionally disturbed or traumatized soldiers.

Research reported by Ray, et. al in the January 2009 New England Journal of Medicine noted that antipsychotic drugs doubled the risk of sudden cardiac death, while another study disclosed in March 2009 by Whang, et. al. found that antidepressant drugs also increase the rate of sudden cardiac death. A literature review of studies from 2000-2007 titled “Sudden Cardiac Death Secondary to Antidepressant and Antipsychotic Drugs” published in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety; 2008, No. 2, March 2008, pp. 181-191(14), found that “Antipsychotics can increase cardiac risk even at low doses, whereas antidepressants do it generally at high doses or in the setting of drug combinations.” In an Army Times article by Gina Cavallaro in February 2009 it was reported that more than 70 soldiers assigned to the Army’s warrior transition units had died, with at least 50% of the deaths attributed to natural causes that included a high number of cardiac deaths.

In one case investigated by Baughman an Army private was found dead in his barracks at Ft. Carson, Colorado, with sudden cardiac death reported by EMTs on the scene followed later by the death being re-classified as a suicide. Baughman suspects that there is an attempt to cover up the dangers of these psychiatric drugs, as the U.S. military, doctors, and drug manufacturers could be held accountable if it became apparent that these dangerous drug combinations are being used despite published evidence of the hazards.

Read entire article:  http://www.examiner.com/x-12517-Miami-Holistic-Health-Examiner~y2010m5d26-Memorial-Day-2010-Psychiatric-drugs-triggering-deaths-of-US-soldiers-treated-for-PTSD

« Return to news items


Share

Earth Times: Neurologist Fred Baughman—Vets Sudden Deaths Due to Antidepressant & Antipsychotic Drugs

Monday, May 24th, 2010

EarthTimes.org
By Fred A. Baughman, Jr.
May 24, 2010

Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD today announced the results of his research into the “series” of veterans’ deaths acknowledged by the Surgeon General of the Army.

Upon reading the May 24, 2008, Charleston (WV) Gazette article “Vets Taking Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Drugs Die in Sleep,” Baughman began to investigate why these reported deaths were “different.”  And, why they were likely, the “tip of an iceberg.”

Andrew White, Eric Layne, Nicholas Endicott and Derek Johnson were four West Virginia veterans who died in their sleep in early 2008. Baughman’s research suggests that they did not commit suicide and did not “overdose” leading to coma as suggested by the military.  All were diagnosed with PTSD.  All seemed “normal” when they went to bed.  And, all were on Seroquel (an antipsychotic) Paxil (an antidepressant) and Klonopin (a benzodiazepine).

They were not comatose and unarousable ? with pulse and respirations or pulse intact, responsive to CPR, surviving transport to a hospital, frequently surviving.  These were sudden cardiac deaths.

At the time, Stan White, father of Andrew White knew of eight such cases in Kentucky, Ohio and West Virginia.

In a February 7, 2008 interview with the Chicago Tribune, Lt. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker, the Army’s surgeon general, said there has been “a series, a sequence of deaths” in the new “warrior transition units.”

In April 2005, the FDA warned that Seroquel put elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis at increased risk of death.

On January 15, 2009, Ray et al, reported that antipsychotics double the risk of sudden cardiac death.  On March 17, 2009, Whang et al reported that antidepressants, as well, increase the rate of sudden cardiac deaths.

And yet, in an August 14, 2008 analysis of two of the four Charleston-area deaths, the Inspector General for Veterans Affairs concluded (Report No. 08-01377-185): “Although antipsychotic medications have been identified as possible causes of cardiac rhythm disturbances, a 2001 review…found no association with olanzapine (Zyprexa), quetiapine (Seroquel), or risperidone (Risperdal) and Torsades de Pointes (a fatal heart rhythm) or sudden death… we are unaware of any clinical practice guidelines recommending baseline or periodic electrocardiogram monitoring in young, healthy patients on quetiapine (Seroquel).”

However, in a literature review covering the years 2000-2007, entitled Sudden Cardiac Death Secondary to Antidepressant and Antipsychotic Drugs: [Expert Opinion on Drug Safety; 2008, Number 2, March 2008 , pp. 181-194(14)] Sicouri and Antzelevitch conclude: (1) “A number of antipsychotic and antidepressant drugs can increase the risk of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death?” (2) “Antipsychotics can increase cardiac risk even at low doses whereas antidepressants do it generally at high doses or in the setting of drug combinations,” and (3) “These observations call for?an ECG at baseline and after drug administration.”

Read entire article:  http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/fred-a-baughman-jr-md,1312839.shtml

« Return to news items


Share