1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP

Psychiatry Makes War on "Bipolar Children"

By Expat98, May 24, 2008 | | |
Rating:
5/5,
  1. Expat98
    An article about the sad state of child psychiatry in America.

    ***************

    Psychiatry Makes War on "Bipolar Children"

    Dr. Peter Breggin
    Posted May 23, 2008 | 05:02 PM (EST)

    The front cover of the May 26, 2008 Newsweek has a banner headline, "Growing Up Bipolar" with a split-face photograph of a ten-year-old boy. The headline should have read, "Victim of Psychiatric Assault."

    In daycare 18-month old Max kicked, bit and spat on his larger peers. Apparently before he was two years old, his overwhelmed parents took him to a famous Boston psychiatrist--having trained in psychiatry at Harvard, I can confirm that famous Boston psychiatrists are among the most arrogantly pro-drug--and within an hour the toddler had been diagnosed as bipolar. Right away he was put on the adult "mood stabilizer," Depakote. Depakote is an anti-seizure drug that is so sedating that it can, however briefly, subdue a child, at least until the effect wears off.

    According to the parents, the doctor told them that the bipolar diagnosis was a "life sentence." It was a life sentence--to being pharmacologically abused by psychiatrists. At the age of ten, Max is now eight years into his sentence, and getting increasingly abused by his physicians.

    The doctor must have put Max on a lot of drugs because a second famous psychiatrist wanted to "streamline" the meds. Reducing anyone's drugs is nowadays a rarity in psychiatry; Max's first psychiatrist must have been over the top.

    A mere ten years old, Max has already been on 38 different psychoactive drugs. "His parents aren't happy about it, but they have made their peace with it." Newsweek concludes, "Max will never truly be OK" because of his "disease." In reality, toxic chemicals are impairing and distorting the growth of Max's brain. Psychiatric drugs commonly drive suicidality in children and Max now leaves suicide notes. Tragically, he has become so afraid of psychiatry that after writing his last suicide note he sobbed, "Please don't send me to the hospital."

    From now on, Max, his family and his doctors will almost certainly have to face an increasingly impossible dilemma common to children who are prescribed multiple psychiatric drugs for a period of years. When trying to withdraw these children from multiple psychiatric medications, they almost certainly go through severe withdrawal problems with extreme emotional instability and the risk of worsening violence and suicidality. But if they are kept on drugs indefinitely, their brain, mind and overall condition will further deteriorate.(1)

    It can be relatively easy and safe to withdraw a child from one or even two psychiatric drugs, especially if the parents are willing to learn improved methods of discipline. But when multiple drugs are involved, when the drugs have been taken for a long time, and when the parents are deeply distressed or cannot agree on how to raise their child, withdrawing the child from psychiatric medication can be difficult and hazardous.

    Newsweek makes clear that Max's parents have serious conflicts over how to raise their son, but they have not pursued therapy, marriage counseling or, apparently, not even parenting classes. In every case of an out-of-control child I have seen in my psychiatric practice, either the parents were unable to reach agreement on a consistent approach to disciplining their child, or a single working mom was trying to raise a young boy without the aid of a male adult in the child's life.

    In glimpses that we are given of this family, Max's father is somewhat like his son; he doesn't deal well with feelings, and he thinks his wife is much too permissive, calling her a "Caspar Milquetoast." Reading between lines, it appears that Mom is left with the lion's share of trying to discipline the desperate child, and perhaps has her hands full with her husband who has a "temper" and is "inflexible." While not have the opportunity to personally evaluate Max and his family, we can speculate that Max might have trouble figuring out how he is supposed to behave. Meanwhile, this family's story sounds like a clarion call for a combination of therapy, marriage counseling and parenting classes.

    Newsweek declares "At least 800,000 children in the United States have been diagnosed as bipolar, no doubt some of them wrongly," but then immediately adopts the extremist psychiatric viewpoint, "The bipolar brain is miswired...." After warning in passing that the drugs inflicted on these children can be useless and even dangerous, Newsweek then justifies them by declaring, "Yet untreated bipolar disorder can be disastrous; 10 percent of sufferers commit suicide."

    Drug companies wrote this script and none of it is true.

    First, all of these preadolescent children are being wrongly diagnosed by conventional psychiatric standards. We have no evidence at all that temper tantrums and other unruly behavior, however extreme, is a precursor to being diagnosed with bipolar disorder as an adult.

    Second, since there is no known connection between children diagnosed bipolar growing into adults diagnosed bipolar, the data about a 10% risk of suicide is misleading and irrelevant.

    Third, there's no evidence whatsoever that individuals diagnosed "bipolar" have a "miswired brain." There's not even any such evidence for a biological flaw in adults who suffer from full-blown manic-like episodes, let alone children whose parents and teachers cannot control them. (1)

    The concept that children have bipolar disorder and should be treated with highly toxic adult psychiatric drugs is strictly a drug-company marketing ploy. If it's true that 800,000 children have been diagnosed, it has become an enormously successful marketing strategy with tragic results for children and their families.

    There's an even more sinister aspect to all this. There has been a real increase in teenagers and young adults who display episodes of manic-like symptoms such as insomnia, excessive energy, racing thoughts, grandiose ideas about themselves, irrational and outrageous behaviors, extreme irritability, paranoia, and psychosis. However, in my three and one-half years of intensive psychiatric training in the 1960s, I saw only one case of a young person suffering from these symptoms. In the following years through approximately 1990, I saw few other cases. Yet nowadays I evaluate many teens and young adults with manic-like symptoms in my medical and forensic practice. The reason for the change? As I document in detail in Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (2008), antidepressant drugs, so freely given to children and youth, cause a high rate of manic-like behaviors.

    These changes--diagnosing children bipolar and driving other youngsters into states of drug-induced mania--has not occurred by chance. Joseph Biederman, one of those famous Boston psychiatrists, has led the way in pinning the bipolar diagnosis on children who are having temper tantrums and outbursts of rage. Biederman, well situated at Harvard, is a long-time henchman of the drug companies, so much so that even the Wall Street Journal found it necessary to comment on his deep financial connections to his industry patrons. (2)

    The promotion of drugging "bipolar children," has been enormously successful. Before the 1990s, doctors hardly ever diagnosed bipolar disorder in children. In fact, I do not recall hearing the diagnosis given to any children prior to the 1990s. A recent survey in the scientific literature showed that there was a forty-fold increase in diagnosing bipolar children between 1994 and 2003. (3) The survey found that 90.6% were receiving psychiatric medications, including 60.3% on mood stabilizers like Depakote and 47.7% on antipsychotics like Risperdal and Zyprexa, with most on combinations. To compound the tragedy, the study found that more children were being given the most toxic psychiatric drugs, the so-called antipsychotic drugs, than a similar group of adults labeled bipolar. Psychiatry is bombarding children more heavily than adults with similar diagnoses, even though the drugs are not approved for these purposes in children.

    The advantages to the drug companies are obvious. If most "bipolar" children get several drugs at once, several dozen over their childhoods, they transform from being patients into being cash cows from psychiatry and the drug companies. Further administration of multiple psychiatric drugs at once complicates the clinical picture so that it is impossible to pinpoint which drugs may be most responsible for the adverse reactions the child experiences. Because so many doctors and so many drug companies will share the blame for mistreating these children, they will be unable to seek redress against individual perpetrators through the courts when they grow up.

    It will be very difficult, if not impossible, for any child to outgrow his early behavior problems, and become a normal adult, while being pharmacologically overwhelmed with toxic agents for most of his childhood. The growing brain is literally being bathed in substances like antidepressants, stimulants, mood stabilizers, and antipsychotic drugs that cause severe, and potential permanent biochemical imbalances. All of these drugs have been shown to distort the shape of brain cells (neurons) and in some cases to destroy the cells. (1) Some of the drugs, including Risperdal, Zyprexa, Geodon and other so-called 'anti-psychotics' expose the child to permanent and potentially devastating drug induced neurological injury called tardive dyskinesia. They also cause potentially fatal diabetes and pancreatitis, as well as morbid obesity. (1)

    The mass drugging of America's children has become such an outrageous practice with such vast public health and societal implications, it is difficult to know how to conclude my observations. I can understand how parents who feel confused and overwhelmed can be pushed by psychiatrists into trying to control their children's behavior with drugs. But shame, shame, and more shame should be heaped upon a profession that has forsaken its sacred trust to protect and to care for children, and instead has become a major child abuser of epidemic proportions.


    (1) Breggin, P. (2008). Brain-disabling treatments in psychiatry: Drugs, electroshock and the psychopharmaceutical complex. New York: Springer Publishing Company.

    (2) Abboud, L. (2005, May 25). Treating children for bipolar disorder? Doctors try powerful drugs on kids as young as 4. Wall Street Journal, p. D1.

    (3) Moreno, C., et al. (2007). National trends in the outpatient diagnosis and treatment of bipolar disorder in youth. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64, 1032-1039.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-peter-breggin/psychiatry-makes-war-on-b_b_103337.html

Comments

  1. RaverHippie
    wow...That got more reaction out of me than hearing of a rape+murder of a child. And even more shame for my country...
  2. Panthers007
    Ditto^^^. I've seen this go down so many times that it could have a soundtrack. That kid (and millions of others) wasn't given a "life sentence" - that is a death sentence. I have done a lot of outreach work with parents facing similar situations. Given the facts on what these drugs will do, they prevent it. But far to many never hear anything other than what Dr. Mengle spouts. It's a damn mess - and we need many more articles like the above to educate people with.

    Thanks for posting this. Good job!
  3. Lobsang
    Well SWIM can tell you what it feels like to be abused by the psychiatrists. I mean they do not even friggen think. SWIM was waked out on drugs and admitted to the psych ward. Within 10 minutes he was diagnosed with an entire host of problems that had nothing to do with the drugs he took. He was immediately put on medications and told to stay on them. How Pray tell would the good doctor know if SWIM was getting better on his own if he was on medications? In fact SWIM has learned much about the mental health system from his experience. What happened to SWIM was in Alaska. The state is one of the biggest abusers of the mental health system. It is built in corruption. The state pays for all mental health care if you do not have insurance and are commited. So the drug shrinks very freely put people in the hospital. I mean the ward is packed with people that do not need to be there. The drug shrink comes in in the morning and sees a ton of people. He spends about 10 minutes with each. If that. I think SWIM met like 1 or 2 people out of many that really needed to be in the hospital. These people were totally delusional. But the rest were just cash cows for the hospital and the shrinks. It is a very corrupt system. The interesting thing is that NONE of these patients got any care from a psychologist to work things out. One of the primary flaws in psychiatry is that once ppppeople are "diagnosed" they are essentially screwed. No attempt is made to test the waters by taking them off of meds. Looking back on all of it SWIM feels RAPED and abused.

    What is just as disturbing is that SWIM has talked to some psychologists and many of them are buying into the same model. Right now Psychologist (some of them) are wanting to give drugs. They are fighting with the MDs SWIM read. I fear that if this happens the profession will simply become like psychiatry. SWIM thinks maybe the psychologists should be allowed to give LSD and other mind EXPANDERS. Not that they would not be qualified to give other drugs but SWIM questions the global impact on the profession.

    SWIM cannot tell you how much anger and bitterness he has toward psychiatry. He does not trust then and has no respect. He was held down by them and repeatedly raped. There is nothing that SWIM could do as the medical board mandated that he see one to keep his license after being caught taking drugs. He was trapped. SWIM still suffers from much embarrasment and humilation in his own mind from being branded like an animal and treated like one. SWIM cannot tell you how horrible psychiatry is. SWIM realizes that there are people who suffer from true mental disease and need molecular help for life. But this does in no way justify the actions of the Psychiatric community

    One would question how an intelligent person could go to medical school and then waste their time and intellect in such a "profession". I mean they just look at you for a couple of seconds and drug you. They do not spend time with you like a real mind doctor who is a psychologist (Or a psychiatrist that does their job right). It must be very boring. But I guess the money makes up for the boredom as well as THE POWER. And after a while they probably BELIEVE in what they are doing. They just want to pump through as many people as possible. And also I have met few psychiatrists that I would say qualify as well adjusted people. But that is a whole other dissertation. :eek:
  4. lulz
    Literally as soon as I read the thread title, I clicked on it to see if it'd be talking about antipsychotics. Bingo, second paragraph!

    I've been reading a bit about this over the last year, apparently there is a rising trend among the (mainly American) medical establishment in prescribing antipsychotics for a wide range of psychological disorders. Depakote may be an old antipsychotic, but atypical antipsychotics are coming into fashion for everything from depression to anxiety.

    It's no coincidence that this is happening when the patents for most SSRIs are expiring.
  5. RaverHippie
    I remember my brother being put on depakote when he was 14-16 for anger, depression type issues. I was eleven at the time so I didn't notice any effects, if the drug was successful, or turned him into a zombie etc.
  6. Lobsang
    This thread is generating much anger and resentment in SWIM. Surfacing many bad memories and feelings. Making him feel very very bad. When SWIM was misdiagnosed and forced to take lithium to keep his medical license he had such motor dysfunction from the drug that he could not even go shopping in the store because he could not take any item off the shelf without dropping it. He would have to take him handbasket and put it next to the shelf and knock the item off the shelf and let it fall in the basket. It was pathetic. He was put on Zyprexia and would cry weird noises in his sleep. Like some deep brain tremor. And also put on massive amounts of weight. SWIM remembers running out of Seroquel and not being able to get the doctor for his samples. SWIM could not sleep for four nights. He was addicted. Deep deep anger. :(
  7. RaverHippie
    Here's the original article to which the blogger responded. It's pretty long, and an emotional appeal, still I thought it would be interesting to see what prompted the article above.

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/137517?GT1=43002

  8. Expat98
    Here's an article that helps explain why there has been a 40-fold increase in the last few years in the diagnosis of pediatric bipolar disorder, leading to so many children being dosed with powerful drugs. Some of the influential psychiatrists who helped fuel this explosion have received a lot of money from drug companies.

    ***

    Researchers Fail to Reveal Full Drug Pay

    By GARDINER HARRIS and BENEDICT CAREY
    Published: June 8, 2008

    A world-renowned Harvard child psychiatrist whose work has helped fuel an explosion in the use of powerful antipsychotic medicines in children earned at least $1.6 million in consulting fees from drug makers from 2000 to 2007 but for years did not report much of this income to university officials, according to information given Congressional investigators.

    By failing to report income, the psychiatrist, Dr. Joseph Biederman, and a colleague in the psychiatry department at Harvard Medical School, Dr. Timothy E. Wilens, may have violated federal and university research rules designed to police potential conflicts of interest, according to Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa. Some of their research is financed by government grants.

    Like Dr. Biederman, Dr. Wilens belatedly reported earning at least $1.6 million from 2000 to 2007, and another Harvard colleague, Dr. Thomas Spencer, reported earning at least $1 million after being pressed by Mr. Grassley’s investigators. But even these amended disclosures may understate the researchers’ outside income because some entries contradict payment information from drug makers, Mr. Grassley found.

    In one example, Dr. Biederman reported no income from Johnson & Johnson for 2001 in a disclosure report filed with the university. When asked to check again, he said he received $3,500. But Johnson & Johnson told Mr. Grassley that it paid him $58,169 in 2001, Mr. Grassley found.

    The Harvard group’s consulting arrangements with drug makers were already controversial because of the researchers’ advocacy of unapproved uses of psychiatric medicines in children.

    In an e-mailed statement, Dr. Biederman said, “My interests are solely in the advancement of medical treatment through rigorous and objective study,” and he said he took conflict-of-interest policies “very seriously.” Drs. Wilens and Spencer said in e-mailed statements that they thought they had complied with conflict-of-interest rules.

    John Burklow, a spokesman for the National Institutes of Health, said: “If there have been violations of N.I.H. policy — and if research integrity has been compromised — we will take all the appropriate action within our power to hold those responsible accountable. This would be completely unacceptable behavior, and N.I.H. will not tolerate it.”

    The federal grants received by Drs. Biederman and Wilens were administered by Massachusetts General Hospital, which in 2005 won $287 million in such grants. The health institutes could place restrictions on the hospital’s grants or even suspend them altogether.

    Alyssa Kneller, a Harvard spokeswoman, said in an e-mailed statement: “The information released by Senator Grassley suggests that, in certain instances, each doctor may have failed to disclose outside income from pharmaceutical companies and other entities that should have been disclosed.”

    Ms. Kneller said the doctors had been referred to a university conflict committee for review.

    Mr. Grassley sent letters on Wednesday to Harvard and the health institutes outlining his investigators’ findings, and he placed the letters along with his comments in The Congressional Record.

    Dr. Biederman is one of the most influential researchers in child psychiatry and is widely admired for focusing the field’s attention on its most troubled young patients. Although many of his studies are small and often financed by drug makers, his work helped to fuel a controversial 40-fold increase from 1994 to 2003 in the diagnosis of pediatric bipolar disorder, which is characterized by severe mood swings, and a rapid rise in the use of antipsychotic medicines in children. The Grassley investigation did not address research quality.

    Doctors have known for years that antipsychotic drugs, sometimes called major tranquilizers, can quickly subdue children. But youngsters appear to be especially susceptible to the weight gain and metabolic problems caused by the drugs, and it is far from clear that the medications improve children’s lives over time, experts say.

    In the last 25 years, drug and device makers have displaced the federal government as the primary source of research financing, and industry support is vital to many university research programs. But as corporate research executives recruit the brightest scientists, their brethren in marketing departments have discovered that some of these same scientists can be terrific pitchmen.

    To protect research integrity, the National Institutes of Health require researchers to report to universities earnings of $10,000 or more per year, for instance, in consulting money from makers of drugs also studied by the researchers in federally financed trials. Universities manage financial conflicts by requiring that the money be disclosed to research subjects, among other measures.

    The health institutes last year awarded more than $23 billion in grants to more than 325,000 researchers at over 3,000 universities, and auditing the potential conflicts of each grantee would be impossible, health institutes officials have long insisted. So the government relies on universities.

    Universities ask professors to report their conflicts but do almost nothing to verify the accuracy of these voluntary disclosures.

    “It’s really been an honor system thing,” said Dr. Robert Alpern, dean of Yale School of Medicine. “If somebody tells us that a pharmaceutical company pays them $80,000 a year, I don’t even know how to check on that.”

    Some states have laws requiring drug makers to disclose payments made to doctors, and Mr. Grassley and others have sponsored legislation to create a national registry.

    Lawmakers have been concerned in recent years about the use of unapproved medications in children and the influence of industry money.

    Mr. Grassley asked Harvard for the three researchers’ financial disclosure reports from 2000 through 2007 and asked some drug makers to list payments made to them.

    “Basically, these forms were a mess,” Mr. Grassley said in comments he entered into The Congressional Record on Wednesday. “Over the last seven years, it looked like they had taken a couple hundred thousand dollars.”

    Prompted by Mr. Grassley’s interest, Harvard asked the researchers to re-examine their disclosure reports.

    In the new disclosures, the trio’s outside consulting income jumped but was still contradicted by reports sent to Mr. Grassley from some of the companies. In some cases, the income seems to have put the researchers in violation of university and federal rules.

    In 2000, for instance, Dr. Biederman received a grant from the National Institutes of Health to study in children Strattera, an Eli Lilly drug for attention deficit disorder. Dr. Biederman reported to Harvard that he received less than $10,000 from Lilly that year, but the company told Mr. Grassley that it paid Dr. Biederman more than $14,000 in 2000, Mr. Grassley’s letter stated.

    At the time, Harvard forbade professors from conducting clinical trials if they received payments over $10,000 from the company whose product was being studied, and federal rules required such conflicts to be managed.

    Mr. Grassley said these discrepancies demonstrated profound flaws in the oversight of researchers’ financial conflicts and the need for a national registry. But the disclosures may also cloud the work of one of the most prominent group of child psychiatrists in the world.

    In the past decade, Dr. Biederman and his colleagues have promoted the aggressive diagnosis and drug treatment of childhood bipolar disorder, a mood problem once thought confined to adults. They have maintained that the disorder was underdiagnosed in children and could be treated with antipsychotic drugs, medications invented to treat schizophrenia.

    Other researchers have made similar assertions. As a result, pediatric bipolar diagnoses and antipsychotic drug use in children have soared. Some 500,000 children and teenagers were given at least one prescription for an antipsychotic in 2007, including 20,500 under 6 years of age, according to Medco Health Solutions, a pharmacy benefit manager.

    Few psychiatrists today doubt that bipolar disorder can strike in the early teenage years, or that many of the children being given the diagnosis are deeply distressed.

    “I consider Dr. Biederman a true visionary in recognizing this illness in children,” said Susan Resko, director of the Child and Adolescent Bipolar Foundation, “and he’s not only saved many lives but restored hope to thousands of families across the country.”

    Longtime critics of the group see its influence differently. “They have given the Harvard imprimatur to this commercial experimentation on children,” said Vera Sharav, president and founder of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, a patient advocacy group.

    Many researchers strongly disagree over what bipolar looks like in youngsters, and some now fear the definition has been expanded unnecessarily, due in part to the Harvard group.

    The group published the results of a string of drug trials from 2001 to 2006, but the studies were so small and loosely designed that they were largely inconclusive, experts say. In some studies testing antipsychotic drugs, the group defined improvement as a decline of 30 percent or more on a scale called the Young Mania Rating Scale — well below the 50 percent change that most researchers now use as the standard.

    Controlling for bias is especially important in such work, given that the scale is subjective, and raters often depend on reports from parents and children, several top psychiatrists said.

    More broadly, they said, revelations of undisclosed payments from drug makers to leading researchers are especially damaging for psychiatry.

    “The price we pay for these kinds of revelations is credibility, and we just can’t afford to lose any more of that in this field,” said Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, executive director of the Stanley Medical Research Institute, which finances psychiatric studies. “In the area of child psychiatry in particular, we know much less than we should, and we desperately need research that is not influenced by industry money.”


    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/08/us/08conflict.html?em&ex=1213070400&en=9971013dfd33290a&ei=5087
  9. Handle
    I'll tell you what I hate, these ASSHOLES just turning tricks with prescription pads, every new script is cash to these bastards, the kids are just victims, the way they all got diagnosed with AD

    D, then some guy just decides, "I know! I'll just think up another random mental health issue, bend a few of the criteria so they all fit, and then just suddenly diagnose a whole generation with bipolar as well!"

    They just tick all the boxes, yes for this, yes for that, sorta yes for this if you fudge it a bit. OK now, lithium for everybody! And not just lithium, this is the most fucked up bit of the whole story, they don't just stop at bipolar drugs, they start giving kids high dose risperdone, TOGETHER with ritalin, and even benzos to sleep.

    They then pretend the sickening results are actually a pathology on the part of the child, and not the result of their shameless, unethical, spiking of poor innocent children's neurology.

    The kids get obesity, depression, ataxia and twitches, insomnia, aggression, oversedation, heart and cardiovascular conditions, the list is endless.

    And instead of stopping once to check the ever increasing regimen of pills, instead of once stepping back and scaling back, they just go "No, up the dosage, and maybe we will again next month"

    I saw it, and these are not fringe dwelling practitioners, these are the so called "Experts", they are truly some of the worst, seriously, calling themselves world leaders in the field, they are world leaders at only one thing, mindless, zombie inducing doping of ever higher dosages.
    That's all these bastards are good for.
    Nothing made me as disgusted in the present crooked con job of modern psychiatry than the keenness of these unscrupulous operators [who, as I said, are the NORM, not the exception] to dole out shocking drugs to children, to counteract, not a disease of the child, but to counteract the obvious results of their own sickening over prescribing.

    Even clonidine because the excessive ritalin and then dexamphetamine was giving the child an enlarged heart.
    These poor children are left as twitching sheels of human beings. They come out as disgusting, seemingly zombiefied blobs of matter, totally destroyed by the "treatment" they receive [or should I say, that is inflicted upon them].

    This is abuse. Equal to physical, emotional, psychological, even in my opinion as bad as sexual abuse. Why would I make an extreme statement like that? Because they are being literally destroyed they are not children anymore, they are just destroyed specimens.

    Truly scary, what I have seen of this matter. Especially as I said, this is not the action of rogue operators, according to the industry such conduct is perfectly acceptable.

    I saw several cases where "leading" university shrinks were just saying to kids "I think we'll up the dosage", as the only response to parents detailing a very long list of horrible side effects that the children already were suffering. "Up the meds" was the only response they got back. I'm telling you, the way those children are being abused, those pills were no mor "meds" than a Jonestown Kool aid. The result was the same. Destruction of a human being. Worse. Destruction of a child.

  10. kr8tom
    This is all very disturbing. I have heard of kids as young as 4 being put on powerful stimulants like Adderall, but I didn't realize the real extent of this problem with child psychiatry.

    I've had my own negative experiences with psychiatrists and doctors as well. I was first prescribed an SSRI, a tricyclic antidepressant (Elavil) and a benzo (Klonopin) by regular family doctor at age 15. This doctor never once told me that anyof these drugs were addictive. In fact, I specifically remember him saying that they were NOT addictive.

    Well as you probably well know benzos can be very addictive. I loved Klonopin and soon I was taking enough of it to knock out an elephant. My doctor would increase my dose every time I saw him. He never mentioned that he thought I might be taking too much of it and then all of a sudden he just decided to stop "treating" me. He didn't safely decrease my dosage and taper me off of the medication either. He just refused to see me anymore or give me any refills. This is after he had been prescribing me with very high doses of addictive drugs to take on a daily basis for months. He never once warned me that I would experience severe withdrawal from these drugs.

    Our entire medical system is very corrupt, but I don't think it can last for much longer. Several years ago this would never have been news, but today it's on the front page of Newsweek. So we're obviously making some progress. We just need to continue to talk about these issues and keep them in the media.

    P.S. Have you noticed how all of the giant TV news networks are constantly playing pharmaceutical commercials? That's why they keep quiet about this issue so that people won't know what's going on. But unfortunately for them people are not going let this continue for much longer. Things are changing now at pretty rapid pace. In 2009, our television system is going from analog to digital TV. At first I'm sure it will be controlled by the big networks, but this can't last forever. Thanks to the internet, Web 2.0, and soon, television, these giant corporations are not going to be able to continue to profit from their sick operations.
  11. Panthers007
    One must also understand that a great many doctors get all their information on the drugs they prescribe from the PDR (USA - Physician;s Desk Reference). This is a compilation written by the drug companies themselves. Rather like leaving the rats to watch the cheese.

    Many doctors hate being questioned regards what they know about "Drug X" and where they got their information. This should be a red lightbulb there and then. Walk out the door. Do not pay the bill. Offer to sue them. Get out of there!
  12. UNIBLACK810
    Funny thing how psychiatrist seem to diagnose every adult nowadays that comes into the office with the most miniscule amount of anti-social behavior traits with bi polar disorder. SWIM is convinced that anyone and I mean ANYONE can walk into an office answer a few dumb ass quetions that generally describe everyone in the human society and walk out with a bi-polar diagnoses. Same way as it seemed a few years back they where diagnosing every child with childhood behavioral problems with ADD. SWIM also agrees that it seems to be a marketing ploy for pharmaceutical companies but SWIM also sees it as away physicians make up diagnostics for things they just don't understand instead of just saying " I don't know. Nowadays it seems like there is a syndrome and medication for every single type of problem one can generally find wrong with oneself. Common sense tells one that this is'nt possible. If resesrch has'nt found a cure for cancer hiv herpes even the simple common cold( so they say.) Where do they possibly find all the time money and research hours to constantly diagnose all these diffrent disorders and syndromes.


    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Burn't bagels are good in the dessert when eaten with camels, Osama and two large ants high on LSD.
  13. Handle

    Yeah, the point about "making up diagnostics" is the one that worries me most. I think it is a very, very dangerous precedent that some guy, just sat down and said "ADD [still a very disputed field anyway] and bipolar have this this and this in common. Therefore, I now pronounce that everyone with ADD also must have bipolar. Instantly double the meds!"
    And he was believed and agreed with!
    That is what happened. That is a worry.
  14. stoneinfocus
    AFOAF was hit by a car, while walking over zebra, the car was speeding with 30 miles/h, he got nearly every bone smashed, including his shin being cut in two and nailed together again, his spinal column/neck smashed at 2 loci , his shoulder/-blade totally smashed, rips, jaw, teeth, dislocated / broken, smashed out, arthrosis pains and constantly having water in his knees, scars everywhere, since then.

    he was diagnosed 100% okay by the wellfares´ office dock, after 17 min. of testing his eyes and reflexes and not wasting one look to his patient´s history or the 3kg of x-ray images which he brought to see.
    Since this accident, he had hard times (for years -and still has) getting the meds he needed and had feared of being cut-off of his wellfare, because according to the dock, he were just "pretending" not being able to work, which means sanctions.

    So he seeked help from the institutions; the only way to object to the conclusion of the wellfare´s office dock, so the dock told him, was doing an psychiatric evaluation (this procedure is also indicated on each letter including your wellfare money anyone monthly gets, clarifiying your rights and duties...),no biggie, he thought, "I´ve been let down and set off to the point of going to a psych. for being hit by a car, asking for wellfare, because the insurance wouldn´t pay and being cut off of wellfare is endagering my existenz", so he talked to the psych about the pain, and that he needed to be set free from duties and monthly justifying his pain and arguing with the offices and getting med. certificates, as his live is as hard as it can get, already and always repeating his accident story nearly weekly the last 6 years, was worsening his financial situation and state of mind big time.

    They said, the only way was that he' d get a conseiling (a ward, so to say), who will be appointed by a judge, so this guy'd be able to take care of his office stuff.No word on psychiatric disorders or such things even being mentioned in his presence.

    He thought "Okay, then I'll have another argument for getting insurance money, (which paid 20k for all this, also due to a crappy attorney he had -who was his brother)
    as I´m suffering from pain, PTSD and are obviously more disabled than 20% which is the view of the insurance, and all this'll now be proven by another dock and a judge´s verdict."

    So he himslef asked for seeing the judge, expalined his situation at court and everything seemed fine until, last week, a letter arrived in which it said the judge had appointed a ward, for he had been diagnosed with schizophrenia.
    Let´s see what happens; his credit cards are still working... wonder how many millions they had to pay the docks and the judges for saving the money.They´re getting away with it, the docks and the judges, because they´re fucking the weakest and are being paid-off by the administra(i)tors of our taxes´- and insurancies´ moneyfunds.

    So up in dust goes all his future claims to the alliance insurancies.

    I think, just 50 years ago, at least one dock/officer would have been beaten-up by a family member of someone in the same sitution like this FOAF with a basie; and everything else in the future would have been handled far better and more justly for everbody.
    But today, the family is picking on their own members if they´re using cannabis or opiates illegally for treating pain.
    50 years ago, the family would have made sure that their dock woud have prescribed somethimg decent, immediately, or would have shared their own opiates or meds.

    Today, they´re calling the cops on their own family members, so they actually see what their tax money is being spent for and it´s seemingly pretty entertaining for them, too.
    -50 years ago, the cops would have told them; "fuck-off there´s more important things to do," today, they'll arrive in 2 minutes, with 3 high-tech cars and 6 men will cuff and/or imprison you immediately, for your mom´s been calling and them and wining on the phone, that you had placed some weed-seeds in her fridge and were behaving strangely, maybe because of drugs. (thank god, swim, who´s writing this right now is not stoned or on drugs... ups, well ... nearly)
  15. Panthers007
    The laws governing this sort of "treatment" vary greatly state to state in the USA. Some states allow someone on welfare/SSI to be treated as a guinea pig by a doctor assigned. And then treated, by force, with whatever drug Dr. Mengle decides to look for the LD50 of.

    I suggest everyone look into state laws where they live. And get themselves/friends under these circumstances the fuck out of where they are - if the laws allow this sort of treatment. Move somewhere that they can't do this. This can literally be life & death.
  16. Lobsang
    Your damn right it can. These guys are the most unethical people in the world. It is funny but conventional medicine is always claiming to be "evidence based". The tear down practiciners that they say are not "scientific". This is a big trend in all of medicine. But psychitry is about the least evidence based medicine one could think of. They will say that their drugs are scientific. Ok whatever. But the fact is that all diagnosis is based on total subjectivity on the part of the doctor. And then once a person is put on drugs no attempt is made to take them off. You know conventional medicine likes to smurk at alternative medicine by saying that when a practiciner only has a limited number of tools in his tool box then it is like only having a hammer so it turns all problems into nails. But the exact thing is true of psychiatry. When you see a psychiatrist the question in the "doctors" mind is not "How can I help him ?". The question is "What drug can I give him?" So it is they that have the small toolbox.

    You know last night on TV I was watching a story about slavery in the South. There was this one case where this black mother slit the throat of her child and was about to kill her others to avoid them from becomming slaves. That is how I see psychiatry when it checkmates people. I would do anything to avoid being in that situation. Because I have been in the situation. Misdiagnosed and put in the situation where I would comply or lose a license. So I just could not comply when a total misdiagnosis was made and then no attempt was made to take me off. But you know the story. This is pretty good http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHu7Ik36128
  17. Panthers007
  18. Lobsang
    Well your the doctor...Maybe I need help? Yes as a matter of fact now that I think about it I am really screwed up. Should we up the dosage or switch to something else? Something new...Something stronger. I am glad I came for the viist tooday. My insurance is still Ok right doc? Wow doc...That picture of you with the big fiish on your vacation is great. How much did that fish weigh? Did you weigh the chain along with the fish doc? Oh come on doc you can admit it...You weighed the chain.

    Cute commercial..
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcI48arUpPY
  19. Panthers007
    Nicely done! I've been saying that for years now - glad it's getting out there finally. "Here Mrs. Dingbat. Joey needs to express himself and still be quiet at school. So here's some Klevolds 30mg and an AR-15! He'll be a famous student in no time!"
  20. Lobsang
    Yeah...And after he get sicker because of the meds and as a few "episodes" he will have a mental health history and not be able to get into medical school to be a psychiatrist like the doctor he looks up to.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!