Thursday, December 1, 2011

Merck to Pay $950 Million in Settlement Over Vioxx Health Care Fraud

Vioxx is not an antidepressant, but we wanted to continue to enlighten readers of the unethical actions of Pharmaceutical Companies. Merck will pay $950 million and was forced to plead guilty to a criminal misdemeanor in their illegal promotion of Vioxx and their deception of the government and consumers. This court action is part fine ($320 million) and in part to settle civil penalties ($630 million). This came about from a 2004 study showed that Vioxx increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes. Vioxx was initially approved as a pain killer in 1999. This ruling is based on Merck promoting via marketing and pharmaceutical representatives unauthorized “off label” marketing. According to the Wall Street Journal a Merck spokesman Ronald Rogers indicated that some sales representatives promoted Vioxx as a treatment to rheumatoid arthritis before FDA approval. The government indicated that its representatives didn’t inform medical practitioners regarding Vioxx’s issue with cardiovascular safety.

Other pharmaceutical companies have recently been fined for misrepresentations such as GlaxoSmithKline $3 billion settlement for improper drug marketing. Dey Inc. Dey Pharma L.P. agreed to pay $280 million to settle False Claims Act allegations. The Justice department indicated that the Dey Pharma inflated government payments when they charge the Medicare and Medicaid a higher amount over actual price paid by health care providers. That discovery was related by Ven-A-Care. Elli-Lilly, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca have also been fined heavily in the past few years.

Pharmaceutical companies have shown a pattern in promoting their products for other reasons then FDA approval. This misrepresentation and unethical behavior must be from top management to the sale representatives. Why would a sale rep inform medical practitioners of the uses of drugs unless they were told to indicate so by management? This also brings up another issue as doctors are allowed to prescribe drugs for “off label” uses. Shouldn’t a drug be only allowed to be used for the reason it was approved by all involved in the drugs distribution? It looks like a Congressional law is needed here.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Please Keep Us Afloat and Make a 2011 Donation

We are sure you are aware of the important role we can all play in helping people whose lives are impacted by Antidepressants. Our important work is supported largely by the support of generous donors who contribute to our annual capital campaign. This year’s goal is $20,000 which will allow to continue providing much needed information and assistance to those in around the world who are in need of the real information on pharmacuetical drugs, and to be aware of the deathly effects of psychotropic drugs. Without the continued support of generous donors like you, these needs will likely not be met.
In order to continue making a difference in the lives of individuals affected by the work of Stop Foundation Inc. it is vital for this year's capital campaign to be a success. Can we count on you to make a donation to this important cause? By making a tax deductible donation to our campaign, you'll be directly contributing to helping people struggling to cope with thoughts of suicide, and BigPharma drug induced aggressive behavior.
Stop Foundation Inc. ( is depending on your assistance and generosity. Please visit to pledge your support by using the Paypal Donate button on the contact us donate page, or mail a check to Stop Foundation Inc. 1450 Sutter Street San Francisco, Ca. 94109. Your donation is fully tax deductable in the US as we are a 501(C) 3. We are happy to accept even small donations of $10, $15, $20 and more, which helps our mailing campaigns. Larger donations will help us expand and spread the word about the true effects of antidepressants.

Thank you for your consideration and continued support.
Stop Foundation Inc

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Are Vitamins Really Bad for You? Or Are Their Other Forces at Work?

The recent Archive of Internal Medicine study widely published claims that older women who take dietary supplements die sooner than those who don't. Another Recent Study in the Journal of the American Medical Association claims that men with prostate cancer who take vitamin E supplements are more likely to die than those who don’t.

The Archive of Internal Medicine study collected information from nearly 40,000 women several times over 22 years. They collected more data than supplements, but in their supplement data they indicated several supplements that they say increases mortality, vitamin B6, folic acid, iron, magnesium, zinc, copper, and the innocent multivitamin. The increase in mortality rate ranged from 2.2 percent (multivitamins) to as much as 18 percent (copper).

In a contrarian view, Dr Alan Gaby (Author of a leading nutritional textbook) says “Dietary supplements have been clearly shown to decrease the severity of many diseases in people who are not deficient by any standard laboratory measurement” (PRWeb)
As for the study on vitamin E and prostate cancer, Dr Gaby suggested that both vitamin E supplements, and vitamin E research, are often misunderstood. “There are four types of vitamin E that occur naturally in food. Two of them, alpha- and gamma-tocopherol, have been shown to slow the growth of prostate cancer cells (in a test tube study) and to be associated with lower risk of developing prostate cancer (based on blood levels.) In both cases, gamma-tocopherol was more effective than the alpha form."
There is, however, an important shortcoming in vitamin E studies, as well as in most vitamin E supplements.
“It’s important to understand that isolated alpha-tocopherol is the form present in most vitamin E supplements, and is the form of vitamin E used in almost all clinical research. But we know that large doses of the alpha form deplete the body of the gamma form, and this upsets the natural balance of vitamin E derived from food. Because of this, it appears that large doses of isolated alpha-tocopherol may be harmful. However, natural vitamin E in the form of mixed tocopherols contains all four types of naturally-occurring vitamin E, and may prevent prostate cancer. Alpha-tocopherol may only be protective when it is supplied with gamma-tocopherol in the proper natural balance.” (PRWeb)
Also, Wen-Bin Chiou, Ph.D., a professor at National Sun Yat-Sen University told Men's Health. “Taking dietary supplements increases perceived invulnerability,” In other words: It’s not the vitamins that are harmful; it’s the life choices people make while taking vitamins. Do people take vitamins to substitute bad life choices?

We also looked at the source of the study which is the American Medical Association, which has become and arm of the Pharmaceutical industry.
Archive of Internal Medicine and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) are published by the American Medical Association (AMA) which is heavily influence by the Pharmaceutical industry. BigPharma uses its financial resources to help shape the continuing medical education of physicians in order to server its marketing purposes. Physicians and medical educational institutions aid and abet this influence by accepting, sometimes even soliciting, financial help and other favors from the industry, thus relinquishing what should be their professional responsibility for self-education, and the uninfluenced patient doctor relationship. The medical profession is being educated by BigPharma to sell the drugs physicians prescribe and thus surrenders its ethical commitment to serve as the independent fiduciary for its patients.
In our opinion, a study that diminishes the effect and use of vitamins will in turn increase the use and prescription of pharmaceuticals. We also don’t believe that all vitamins are the same, as many supplements have “fillers” or additives, so you are not taking the full vitamin. Consumers need to research to locate the best vitamin sources, so you ensure you get the full effect of the supplement.

Saturday, October 22, 2011

CBS News Interview-$760 million Paid to Doctors By Pharma Past Two Years

A dozen pharmaceutical companies have given doctors and other healthcare providers more than $760 million over the past two years - and those companies' sales comprise 40 percent of the U.S. market.
The numbers come from the non-profit journalism organization Pro Publica, which assembled and continues to update a database on the payments.
The payments, says Pro Publica, are for consulting, speaking, research and expenses on the part of the providers.
Drug companies have traditionally been very tight-lipped about those payments, Pro Publica notes, but, "Over the past two years, companies have begun posting this information on their websites, some as the result of legal settlements with the federal government."
What's more, Pro Publica points out, "Federal law requires that all companies publicly report this data beginning in 2013. That information will be posted on a government website."
With bucks that big flying around, is the quality of care offered by providers accepting them compromised? "Absolutely," said Dr. John Santa, head of the Consumer Reports Health Ratings Center.
"Money works," Santa told "Early Show on Saturday Morning" co-anchor Russ Mitchell. "Doctors are human. Doctors who take money from drug companies are more likely to give you an expensive drug or more likely to give you a drug you may not need."
A recent Consumer Reports survey had 72 percent of respondents saying they believe pharmaceutical companies have too much influence on the drugs that doctors prescribe; 85 percent saying they were concerned about drug companies rewarding doctors who write a lot of prescriptions for their drugs; and 76 percent saying they were concerned about doctors providing testimonials or serving as a spokesperson for a drug.
Santa says he'd be reluctant to advise someone to go to a doctor who has that sort of relationship: "The issue is, who are you working for? Me, as the patient? Or the drug company you're taking money from?"
Do the payments result in doctors not giving patients the least expensive drugs in some cases?
"Absolutely," Santa replied. "We know from our studies and others that there are still many opportunities for doctors to prescribe generic drugs and they're not doing it, and one of the reasons is these financial relationships."
Santa pointed to three signs that could tip off patients that their doctor is getting drug company money.
First off - seeing drug company salespeople in a doctor's office. "The last time I was in a medical office," Santa says, "there were three drug representatives in the waiting room. I haven't been back."
Another sign? Free drug samples. "People think a free sample is a good thing," Santa observes. "Well, the expensive prescription that follows it, if it works, is not a good thing. It can be, again, a much more expensive drug than you may need."
Also: Marketing materials in the physician's office. "Doctors who have relationships with drug companies will often have promotional materials, will have information that they give patients that come from the drug company. You should be wary of that," Santa cautioned.
And what if you spot any of those signs?
"First of all," Santa suggested, "you shouldn't hesitate to ask, 'Do you have a relationship with a drug company? Is it your policy and your practice to take money from drug companies?' More and more, I think, it's good for consumers to ask those kinds of questions.
"What you should especially ask, though, is, 'What are my other options?'"

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

US Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Pharma on Vaccines, Data Mining and Generics. Who is Looking Out for You?

United States: Supreme Court Rules In IMS Data Mining Case
by Maria Buckley

On June 23, 2011, the Supreme Court in Sorrell, Attorney General of Vermont, et al. v. IMS Health Inc. et al1, struck down a Vermont law2 that bans the sale of physicians' prescribing information to pharmaceutical companies and further bans pharmaceutical companies from using such data to market their products. The Supreme Court's 6-3 opinion by Justice Kennedy found that the Vermont law unconstitutionally restricted the pharmaceutical companies' right to free speech.
Vermont's Prescription Confidentiality Law provides that absent the prescriber's consent, pharmacies and other related entities are prohibited from selling prescriber identifiable information for marketing purposes and that such information cannot be used by pharmaceutical manufacturers to market their products. The statue permits other uses of the data, e.g., healthcare research.
The Court found that speech in the process of pharmaceutical marketing is a form of expression protected by the free speech clause of the first amendment. Therefore, the Vermont statue must be subjected to heightened judicial scrutiny of the reasons for the restrictions on speech.
Vermont's justification was that the law was necessary to protect medical privacy, avoid physician harassment by drug company representatives, and to preserve the integrity of the doctor-patient relationship. Vermont further argued that the statute is integral to its efforts to control healthcare costs and improve public health.

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Vaccine Manufacturers
SCOTUS makes it more difficult to sue manufacturers in autism cases.
By Meghan McCarthy
The Supreme Court Feb 22, 2011 ruled that vaccine companies cannot be sued for design defects, handing the pharmaceutical industry a victory and making it more difficult to bring cases against vaccine manufacturers for allegedly causing autism.
A 1986 law established a federal system for compensating patients injured by "unavoidable" side effects after being given a vaccine. The law aimed to make collecting damages for children injured by vaccines easier and faster by giving the Health and Human Services Department the authority to hear the cases and hand out compensation, funded by an excise tax on pharmaceutical companies making vaccines. President Obama’s fiscal 2012 budget estimated the vaccine fund would have $3 billion. The fund has paid out over $2.5 billion since its inception.
A ruling that allowed suits against the vaccine producers for a "design defect" might have opened up the pharmaceutical industry to thousands of cases alleging that vaccines caused autism in children.
The case heard by the Supreme Court, brought by Russell and Robalee Bruesewitz, alleged that their daughter Hannah was disabled by a diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine she received as an infant in 1992 manufactured by Lederle Laboratories, now owned by Pfizer Inc.’s Wyeth unit. After the family was denied compensation in the federal vaccine court in 1995, they filed the suit that ultimately reached the Supreme Court, charging that the defective design of the vaccine caused their daughter’s disabilities and that the company could be held liable for negligent design under Pennsylvania law.

Supreme Court Rejects Generic Drug Labeling Suits
Reuters by James Vicini June 23, 2011
(Reuters) - The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that generic drug companies cannot be sued under state law over allegations that they failed to provide adequate label warnings about potential side effects.
By a 5-4 vote, the justices gave a victory to Israel's Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd, Mylan Inc's UDL Laboratories and Iceland-based Actavis Inc by overturning U.S. appeals court rulings that allowed such lawsuits.
The companies argued that federal law barred such lawsuits because the drug had been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Federal law requires generic drugs to have the same labels as their brand name equivalents.
Justice Clarence Thomas in the court's majority opinion agreed. He said federal drug regulations applicable to generic drug manufacturers directly conflicted with and thus pre-empted state lawsuits.
The Supreme Court decided a related issue in 2009 when it ruled FDA drug regulations do not protect pharmaceutical companies from being sued under state law over drug labeling, a case involving Pfizer Inc's Wyeth unit and its antinausea drug Phenergan.
But in the generic drug cases, the justices reversed separate U.S. appeals court rulings that the lawsuits against the companies could go forward.
The high court agreed with the arguments of the generic drug makers that they had no choice but to use the same drug labels as the brand manufacturer.
Teva, Actavis and the Generic Pharmaceutical Association hailed the ruling.

The court ruled 6-2 to uphold the ruling of the 3rd Circuit appellate court, finding that the federal law preempts all “design-defect claims” made against vaccine manufacturers. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, said the statute only holds manufacturers liable for proper manufacturing and labeling, not for the actual design of the drug.

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Carson City IHOP Shooter Kills Four and Wounds Eight. He had Mental Issues and Most likely was taking Antidepressants

The IHOP gunman Eduardo Sencion was wielding an AK-47 opened fire at an IHOP restaurant on Tuesday Sept 6, 2011 in an outburst of violence that killed four people, wounded eight others and put Nevada's capital city on high alert.
He was on disability income of approximately $923/month according to the Las Vegas Sun. The Sun reported information on a bankruptcy filing; Sencion listed more than $42,000 in outstanding debts for a car, several credit cards and some medical expenses. At the time, Sencion reported having $200 spread over three bank accounts the $923 in disability income, mostly from Social Security.
In order to get disability payments from the government you have to have a physical or mental disability. He didn’t demonstrate a physical disability, but in order to get mental disability approval you have to see a psychiatrist. Psychiatry has only one solution and that is antidepressants. You see a psychiatrist and fifteen minutes later you will be prescribed a psychotropic drug. It is still unclear exactly what disability Sencion had, but based on the initial evidence, a psychiatrist once again failed to assist Sencion and the four innocent people and the eight wounded.
The antidepressants most likely did their job as the side effects are similar for all antidepressants (mania, aggressive behavior, suicide, hysteria, paranoid reaction, and hostility) and unfortunately many more.
Who will be held responsible for all the innocent loss of life here? The media and the government will not target psychiatry, or the pharmaceutical companies who produce these killer drugs. Senator Reid D-NV was quick to offer condolences, but like many of these similar incidents nobody pays the price for killing. The media doesn’t even investigate it any further than 24 hours. If it bleeds it leads until it bleeds no more.

Thursday, September 1, 2011

Chill E.B. Rapper Define Better youtube Video on BigPharma and Psychotropic Drugs

We Found this link via

You may have to copy and paste the link below to Youtube if it doesn't show above

Friday, August 12, 2011

Has America Become a Nation of Psychotics on Psychotics?


An article reprint by James Ridgeway who writes for The Guardian newspaper, and is the senior Washington correspondent for Mother Jones magazine.

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 Pharmed Out 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 suggest 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 was over $1.8 billion.

Making patients worse

As it turns out, the atypical antipsychotics may not even be the best choice for people with genuine, undisputed psychosis.
A growing number of health professionals have come to think these drugs are not really as effective as older, less expensive medicines which they have replaced, that they themselves produce side effects that cause other sorts of diseases such as diabetes and plunge the patient deeper into the gloomy world of serious mental disorder. Along with stories of success come reports of people turned into virtual zombies.
Elliott reports in Mother Jones: "After another large analysis in The Lancet found that most atypicals actually performed worse than older drugs, two senior British psychiatrists penned a damning editorial that ran in the same issue. Dr. Peter Tyrer, the editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry, and Dr. Tim Kendall of the Royal College of Psychiatrists wrote: "The spurious invention of the atypicals can now be regarded as invention only, cleverly manipulated by the drug industry for marketing purposes and only now being exposed."
Bottom line: Stop Big Pharma and the parasitic shrink community from wantonly pushing these pills across the population.

Monday, August 1, 2011

German Association of Psychiatrists Acknowledge Murdering the Mentally Ill during the Nazi Third Reich Nazi

(The following interview article is a translation of a November 26, 2010 article from the German online magazine The original article can be seen in Focus Magazin)

65 years after the end of the Third Reich, the German association of psychiatrists faces up to its dark history—at last. Only today it offers an apology for its crimes committed during the period of the National Socialism.
Only now the German association of psychiatrists officially faces up to its gruesome crimes during the period of the Third Reich. In a commemoration for the victims and the expelled Jewish doctors, president Frank Schneider offers an apology for the atrocities committed.
FOCUS: In this commemoration at the congress of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie und Nervenheilkunde (German Association of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Neurology) you are about to offer an apology for the crimes committed by psychiatry during the period of the National Socialism. Why hasn’t this long been done?
Frank Schneider: I don’t know why we talk about this only now. We are at a loss of words why an event like this one can take place only now. It’s almost impossible to explain, there is no justification for it.
In our association DGPPN we refer to 160 years of tradition, and it existed even in the Third Reich. The president at that time was doing research on racial hygiene and propagated it externally. Inconceivable crimes were being done. And still, after 1945, we didn’t support the victims but we had a part in their renewed discrimination and disadvantage. This darkest part of our history has been shunned and repressed much too long. The persistent silence is also a debasement for the victims. We are ashamed of that.
Today we are going to apologize and ask for reconciliation. A lot of the victims are dead by now, and insofar our solicitation is too late. But maybe it isn’t too late for the people still alive and their descendants – and for all mentally ill people today, for today’s psychiatrists and for the association itself.
FOCUS: How exactly does your association face up to the crimes?
Schneider: To begin with, we decided to change the articles of association. Paragraph 1 now firmly states that the association commemorates the victims and is responsible for what happed back then. And that we are responsible that something like this will never ever happen again.
Furthermore an independent international commission of four outstanding science historians is engaged to research our association’s history in the Third Reich. We provided 150,000 Euros (about 200,000 USD) to accomplish that, and we stipulated to announce the results of the study no matter what comes out of it.
Subsequently we plan to do another study in order to clear up the postwar years, i. e. the period of the cover-up and the repression which went on until the 1980s.
FOCUS: What kind of victims do you commemorate?
Schneider: First of all the approximately 2,000 Jewish psychiatrists who were forced to emigrate and therefore lost their home and their belongings. Then also the people who suffered enforced sterilization and those who were killed.
We also commemorate the victims who bared misery due to psychiatric research, who were maimed or murdered.
FOCUS: You, as president, have made the subject of the National Socialism period to the core theme of this congress and your term in office. Why did you do that?
Schneider: The subject of psychiatry’s Nazi history is very important to me personally. I have always been aghast and wondered: How can psychiatrists kill their patients? And this has been done very extensively either by themselves or they have had other people do it.
Including the East European countries there were all in all about 300,000 mentally ill people whose psychiatrists caused their deaths. That’s incredible.
FOCUS: What kind of reactions did you encounter inside your association?
Schneider: I thought nobody liked the subject but the responses have been positive uniformely. I was surprised and happy about that. I just watered the seed. It was long overdue.
FOCUS: Weren’t there admonishers earlier that fought for a clearing-up and a confession?
Schneider: There was Professor Gerhardt Schmidt, head of psychiatry in Lübeck, Germany, who directly after 1945 came to a clinic where patients starved to death, meaning they were killed. He wrote a very outright book about these conditions. I read it as a student and I was highly impressed at the time. This man named Schmidt was not able to publish his book for 20 years because he was facing a Mafia of psychiatrists who didn’t want anybody to foul their nest. In the 1980s it was a moment of glory in our association to award him with a medal for it.
FOCUS: How come psychiatry’s atrocities have been ignored for so long?
Schneider: It was hushed up and repressed. After the war, three renowned psychiatrists, who made medical estimates for enforced sterilizations and who decided upon life or death, became presidents of our association and even honorary members. One of these former presidents, professor Ehrhardt from Marburg, Germany, was also the leading secretary. He wrote a booklet about the history of German psychiatry and its associations. It isn’t thick. It says that psychiatrists of the Third Reich had no knowledge of what was going on and they didn’t have anything to do with it and they found it all really terrible. This is an official document of the association.
What’s even worse: In the 1960s, when the question arose whether people who suffered forced sterilization should get any indemnity, Ehrhardt and also other psychiatrists appeared as an authority on the subject in the Bundestag (Lower House of German Parliament). In an advisory committee they declared that forced sterilization was compliant to the rules at that time and it was all done within the then current scope of science and nothing was to take back. This is once again a debasement for the victims. There was nobody to say anything against that.
FOCUS: How were the conditions in psychiatry after the war was over?
Schneider: It was awful how the mentally ill were kept back then, in the years after the war. People were locked up in big “loony bins” in the countryside. Especially chronically schizophrenic patients lived in these mental institutions for years.
The revolution in psychiatry in Germany emerged later than in other European countries. For one, there were too little psychiatrists due to the enforced emigration, and those who were here continued with the back then normal lock-up psychiatry for the time being. In other countries the social psychiatric movement started earlier. There the chains were opened more quickly.

Friday, July 8, 2011

Antidepressant Linked to Cause Autism When Used by Pregnant Women

A recent article from and other news sources indicates that a recent study published in Archives of General Psychiatry, looked at the possible role of maternal antidepressant use before and during pregnancy. Prenatal Children whose mothers take Prozac, Zolft, or similar SSRI antidepressants during pregnancy are twice as likely as other children to have a diagnosis of autism or similar disorder. The study of 298 autistic children in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California system found a two fold increase in risk of the disorder when mothers took antidepressants at some point in the year before giving birth.
The study doesn't prove that the antidepressants actually caused autism, but it shows that genetics is not the sole reason for autism. Environmental issue can cause autism and antidepressants appear to be a common cause. We hope and expect there will be more studies, but we are not surprised of the results.

"The problem with our 'treatment procedures' is that, unlike standard medical practices, we have no way to verify the true cause of the problem or the effectiveness of our 'solutions'. We have gone from hot/cold baths, to lobotomies, to electric shocks, to psychotropic drugs - with no proof of any kind. If other MDs treated a broken arm the way we treat the human brain they would be in court. And so, more and more, that is where we find ourselves." Dr. Thomas Szasz MD, chair of psychiatry, Syracuse University.

Antidepressants Do Not Work to Treat Autism Either

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved any medications to specifically treat autism, but they have approved three SSRIs sertraline (Zoloft), fluoxetine (Prozac) and fluvoxamine (Luvox) to alleviate certain symptoms of the illness. But research indicated that these antidepressants also provide no benefits.
Another study found that the antidepressant citalopram (Celexa) is not any better than a placebo at alleviating autism symptoms. Additionally researchers concluded that studies of other antidepressants revealed the same results.

Besides not working, these antidepressants often cause major side effects, especially in young people. In the citalopram study, one child participant developed severe seizures from taking the drug. Even after being taken off it, the child continued to have seizures. Other children taking it had a hard time sleeping and concentrating. Hard time concentrating is a symptom of autism, so the study shows the so called alleviate is causing the problem.

It must be devasting for a mother to have an autistic child, but what is worse is the potential prescription of an antidepressant is actually causing the life long problem for the child. The responsibility lies heavily on the pharmaceutical companies that produced these drugs Eli Lilly(prozac), Pfizer(zolft), Solvay(Luvox), GlaxoSmithkline(Paxil), Forest Labs(Celexa). There are class action lawsuit currently by, and others

Saturday, July 2, 2011

Psychiatrist Pleads Guilty Role in $200 Million Medicare Fraud Scheme

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
Thursday, 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.

Monday, June 20, 2011

Psychiatry and BigPharma The Two Headed Failed Monster

Unfortunately, too many people use psychiatry, yet psychiatry has destroyed virtually everything it claims to attempt to cure. Psychiatry is responsible for the revolving door of non-rehabilitated prisoners worldwide, also just listen to BigPharma’s ads “we don’t know what causes depression, but we think this antidepressant can help” That should tell you everything about psychiatry and BigPharma that you need to know. Psychiatry today specializes in prescribing psychotropic drugs, and their past history involves the use of lobotomies, electro-shock treatment and strait jackets. Psychiatry has quite a failed and grotesque history. Psychiatrists claim over 1 billion of the humans are mentally ill. If you smoke too much your ill, feel down your ill, too thin your ill. Their plan is to drug everyone, without any evidence to back up any of their claims. They even admit they don’t know the causes of their claimed illness, and they don’t know the solutions. It’s all billing and money with no results. Go to for more details on psychiatry fraud.

Side Effects of Antidepressants
Antidepressants can cause several surprising side effects, such as restlessness, anxiety, sexual dysfunction, feeling of grief, anxiety, guilt, despair, sense of numbness or hollowness, loss of interest and pleasure in activities, dullness, decreased energy, difficulty concentrating, disrupted sleep, overeating, weight gain, loss of appetite and weight loss.
Outside of the short-term side effects, antidepressants can alter the biochemistry of the brain, and can be very difficult to discontinue. Many patients have attempted to get off their antidepressants but experienced neurological symptoms like tics, tingling, and “zapping” sensations in their brains every time they tried tapering off the drugs.

Long term Effects of Antidepressants
Studies have shown long term effects of SSRI’s are weight gain, and sexual dysfunction, lethargy and fatigue. Reports also show that these antidepressants may induce induced Tardive Dyskinesia/Dystonia (severe body movement disorder, mostly permanent), Parkinsonism (a sign of future Parkinson's disease) and Akathisia (a neurological driven severe mania/agitation that can lead to suicide attempts, and self-harm.

Friday, June 3, 2011

Dianetics as an Alternative to Anti-Depressants and Psychiatry

We located the following information on Dianetics via their website. Dianetics was released in 1950 and the author L. Ron Hubbard via his extensive research found techniques to handle the single source of one’s fears, anxieties and stresses. Through Dianetics he found the solution in overcoming personal problems that are often met in today’s society with a prescription pills or street drugs. Psychotropic Drugs just cover up ones underlying situation, and destroys lives with horrific side effects. While the very viable alternative Dianetics can uncover the single source of psychosomatic ills, depression, stress, self-doubt and instability. People who have read and practice Dianetics have indicated that they increased their natural abilities rather than destroying them, and relieved themselves of depression, and have full control of their life. There are no side effects with Dianetics as you begin by reading the book and get personal knowledge and awareness. The practice and use of Dianetics is by going to a Dianetic or Scientology Mission or Org. You can learn how to know more about yourself and your true natural capabilities. According to Dianetics website you can also get information via a DVD.

A testimonial on Dianetics and Scientology
“I just feel like the anger that was stored in my mind toward other people is gone. I feel very relieved. I can express myself without being scared of anyone. I feel more powerful than my past. I want to be more successful and to see other people doing good as well. I love to be around people with positive energy because that is the key to success.” – C.A
We found this testimonial at and more testimonials can be found via

Do you want to live with psychotropic side effects or do you want to be cured.

Friday, May 27, 2011

BigPharma Killed Jeff Conaway

Jeff Conaway, died at age 60. He was an actor who played in the Broadway version of and also the movie version of “Grease” and had a long stint in the 70’s and early 80’s in “Taxi”. He was recently on “Celebrity Rehab With Dr. Drew,” where he was confronting his sobriety, and overuse of pharmaceutical drugs. He died today May 27 at a hospital in Encino, California from complications from pneumonia according to the Washington Post and news reports. The Washington Post quoted his sister Carla Shreve as saying, He was taken off life support after arriving unconscious at Encino Hospital Medical Center on May 10, the result of “just too many prescribed drugs,” said his sister Carla Shreve. He had been in a medically induced coma.
He did have issues with recreational drugs since high school and alcohol, so reports indicate he had an addictive personality. This is something his doctor and the pharmaceutical companies should be held accountable for. He died from too many pharmaceutical drugs. It is consistent with how pharmaceutical company’s, psychiatrists and doctors operate. If one drug doesn’t work then they prescribe another until the drugs consume you.
Trusting your doctor is a thing of the past. There is too much money to be made prescribing drugs to truly care for the patient.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

My Biggest Mistake was Seeing a Psychiatrist: Stevie Nicks

May 1, 2011. This is an article by Stevie Nicks in Newsweek
The biggest mistake I ever made was giving in to my friends and going to see a psychiatrist. It was in the mid-1980s, and I had just gotten out of Betty Ford. I was feeling buoyant and saved and fantastic. But everyone said, “We’re sure you’re going to start using again. You should go to a psychiatrist.” Finally, I said, “All right!” and went. What this man said was: “In order to keep you off cocaine we should put you on the drug that we’re using a lot these days called Klonopin.” Stupidly, I said, “All right.” And the next eight years of my life were destroyed.

Klonopin is in the Valium family, but Valium is fuzzy and Klonopin is insidious because it’s so subtle that you can hardly tell you took it. I got through 1986 and 1987. Thank God I’d already written the words for my record The Other Side of the Mirror. But what started happening was that if I didn’t take it, my hands started to shake. I felt like I had a neurological disease or Parkinson’s. I started not being able to get to Lindsey Buckingham’s house on time, and I would get there and everybody was drinking, so I’d have a glass of wine. Don’t mix tranquilizers and wine. Then I’d sing horrific parts on his songs, and he would take the parts off. I was hardly on Tango of the Night, which I happen to love.

The next six years were terrible. Looking back on it, I think this therapist was basically a groupie. He had no science, no facts, no provable research - none. That "profession" isn't comparable to MDs. It is all guess work, and they admit that in their ads and drug labels. But they are guessing with our lives. We are so desperate that we think we have nowhere else to turn. He loved hearing stories of rock and roll and he started upping my dose. He watched me go from a beautiful, 125-pound, newly sober woman who had the world at her feet to a 170-pound woman who had the lights go out in her eyes.

Finally, in 1993, I’d had enough. I said, “Take me to a hospital.” I went in for 47 days, and it made Betty Ford look like a cakewalk. My hair turned gray and my skin molted. I could hardly walk. You can detox off heroin in 12 days. Coke is just a mental detox. But tranquilizers—they are dangerous. I was terrified to leave, and I came away knowing that that would never happen to me again.

I learned so much in that hospital. I wrote the whole time I was there, stuff that I consider to be some of my best writing ever. I learned that I could have fun and laugh and cry with amazing people and not be on drugs. I learned that I could live my life and still be beautiful and fun and still go to parties and not even have to have a glass of wine. I never went to therapy again after that—why would I?

Monday, May 9, 2011

South Korea Psychiatrists Now Claiming Autism is 1 in 38 Children, Even more than 1 in 110 as US Claims? Sounds like More Drugging for All Kids

In a recent article by Shari Roan of the LA Times on May 9, 2011
A new study found a rate of autism spectrum disorder of one in 38 children in South Korea, included highly functioning children who appear to have a milder disorder usually called Asperger's syndrome. Whether Asperger's syndrome is a distinct disorder or a variation of autism is a question under debate by psychiatrists.

The current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual the text book of mental disorders lists Asperger's syndrome as distinct from autism. But a proposal for a new DSM (DSM-5), which will be published in 2013, is to delete the Asperger's diagnosis and lump these cases in with the larger group of autism. That is what the authors of the South Korean study did, which resulted in a much higher rate of autism than the one in 110 normally quoted in the United States. End of excerpt of LA Times Article.

In stoprx’s view this simple provides cover for more psychiatrists to prescribe Autism symptom drugs mainly antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs which are primarily used to treat severe behavioral problems. An especially popular medication for autistic kids is the antidepressant citalopram, sold under the brand name Celexa, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI).

If you believe these statistics with so many children getting this prognosis of autism and or depressed thoughts in their childhood there will be nobody remaining who is not on BigPharma’s psychotropic drugs. This doesn’t count the existing population that didn’t get drugged when they grew up. The world population is approximately 7 billion. So if this absurd 1 in 38 figure were to be correct just on autism alone there are approximately 40 thousand autistic people per million. If psychiatry and BigPharma had their way virtually all humans would be on some kind of pharmaceutical drug from cradle to grave, and the human species will be doomed out of existence. It is up to parents to contest and fight for the health of their children and free kids from this pharmaceutical engulfing madness.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Catherine-Zeta Jones Diagnosed with Bi-Polar Disorder. Would Omega 3 Fish Oil be a better solution?

The following is from earlier this month.
Stress can indeed be a trigger for bipolar episodes, Dr. Nancy Snyderman, NBC’s chief medical editor, told TODAY. And a brief stay in a hospital would not be uncommon, either to bring a manic episode under control, or to tune-up medications for more effective treatment, Snyderman and Saltz noted. Bipolar disorder can usually be controlled with a combination of medication and therapy. Lithium is one of the most common treatments.

Here is the part of the article that should be of most interest to people
Researchers aren’t quite sure what causes bipolar disorder a combination of genetic and environmental factors seem to come into play. They do know the disorder is associated with an imbalance in the brain chemicals called neurotransmitters.
Bipolar disorder affects about 2.5 percent of the U.S. population, around 6 million people. End MSNBC article

The reality is that these doctors don’t know what causes Bi-polar disorder which doesn’t matter to them. It is all about pushing another drug on society.

The Alternative Solution is Omega 3 Fatty Acids

A diet low in omega 3 fatty acids has been found to cause significantly more mental problems, depression and bipolar mood swings. Manic Depression (Bipolar) has been characterized with mood swings or euphoria and then depression.

Occasional feelings of depression are natural in our stressful world, but if it is longer term then our view is an alternative solution should be your first choice. Mind altering Pharma Drugs can have extremely negative side effects, and lead to more drugs to combat the side effects. Omega 3 Fatty acids (fish oil) has shown consistent positive results in bi-polar research. They can get taken in a pill form or simply eat more fish like salmon an trout.

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Do Video Games or Do Psychotropic Drugs Cause Violence and Rape?

Some legislators and the media have attacked the gaming industry and have blamed massed murder shootings at Columbine and Virginia Tech on violent videogames. One of the most known accusers is psychiatrist Carole Lieberman who claims that video games trigger rapes. She was quoted on FoxNews recently that “The increase in rapes can be attributed in large part to the playing out of sexual scenes in videogames,” Lieberman told Fox News for an article.
In a recent article by Jason Schreier at who asked Carole Leiberman a number of times to clarify how video games incite rape. Lieberman later cited to a 2010 study titled “Violent Video Games Effects on Aggression by Craig Anderson, but the study doesn’t site the relationship of video games with sexual aggression and rape.
From what we can locate there doesn’t appear to be any clear studies between video games and aggressive behavior, so at this point the connection is professional conjecture.
We have found however a direct connections between psychotropic drugs and aggressive behavior. The FDA latently sites them on blackbox warnings.
Heightened suicide risk is a possible result of any psychotropic drug, according to MedlinePlus. Young people under age 24 taking antidepressants are especially susceptible to this serious side effect according to the FDA. Columbine and Virginia Tech killers were clearly on a suicide mission. Prozac, Wellbrutin and other (SSRI’s) antidepressants have aggressive side effects such as abnormal dreams, anxiety, panic attacks, aggressiveness, impulsiveness, irritability, hostility, exaggerated feeling of well-being, restlessness, insomnia, and changes in sex drive.

In January of 2002, Psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin M.D. testified regarding the adverse mental and behavioral effects of SSRI antidepressants. Both judges reduced the sentences for violent crimes because of the influence of antidepressants. In these 2002 cases the drugs were Prozac and Paxil.

Also from In South Carolina in November 2001 Dr. Breggin testified at a sentencing hearing. A 27-year-old man with no prior history of violence pleaded guilty to charges of rape. Dr. Breggin presented evidence that Paxil can cause mania with disinhibition and aggressive sexuality, and that a Paxil induced Mood Disorder caused or contributed to the defendant's actions. The judge gave him a more limited 21 year sentence with actual release in 19 years.

There are no proven studies that video games cause aggression, but court cases and blackbox warnings clearly show a connection with psychotropic drugs and violent behavior including rape.

Friday, April 1, 2011

More Data Regarding Suicide and Chantix

The Food and Drug Administration has received information about numerous serious problems with Chantix, including suicidal thoughts and ideation, homicidal ideations, and hallucinations. The FDA received reports of 37 suicides and 491 cases in which people had suicidal thoughts. If history is any guide, the actual incidences are often more than 10 times what the FDA reports. In other words, these numbers are probably just the tip of the iceberg. Still, there is no indication from Pfizer that there will be a recall of Chantix.
Pfizer released the drug without any warning regarding these potential side effects. By January of 2008, the reports of psychological side effects, most notably suicidal actions and ideations, reached a critical mass and Pfizer added a warning to the label of Chantix about the potential risks of suicidal behavior and depression. This warning followed a November 2007 update to Chantix's "post-marketing experience" section which stated that there had been reports of depression, agitation, and suicidal behavior and ideation in patients on Chantix. The FDA now says it is "increasingly likely" that there is an association between Chantix and suicidal thoughts, actual suicide, depression and other psychiatric symptoms.

Monday, March 14, 2011

Diet's role in treating ADHD debated

This is a reprint of the recent LA Times article reiterating what we have been saying.
By Jill U. Adams Los Angeles Times

A new study appears to lend credence to the belief that restricting certain foods could ease kids' symptoms. But question are raised about the validity of the research and the ability to follow a draconian diet.

Kids with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, are normally treated with behavioral therapy and stimulant medications. A new study suggests that a highly restricted diet can be just as effective at reducing symptoms in a majority of children with ADHD.

Diet is not a routine consideration in diagnosing and treating ADHD in the U.S. or in Europe, where the study was done. Many doctors are open to the idea that certain foods might trigger ADHD symptoms in some kids, though they believe it's a relatively minor factor in most cases.

"There's no question that foods have effects on people's mood, sleep and energy," says Dr. David Schab, a psychiatrist at Columbia University in New York. However, he adds, the current state of knowledge about what foods are problematic and which kids are susceptible is still too limited to be of much use for doctors or their patients.

The CDC (Center for Disease Control) estimates that 9.5% of school-age children in the U.S. have ADHD. That adds up to more than 5 million kids who could potentially benefit from a symptom-reducing diet.

Here's a closer look at how dietary changes may — or may not — help kids with ADHD.

Children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder exhibit a range of symptoms. Many have trouble staying focused on a single task and become bored or distracted quite easily. Others are unable to sit still, stay quiet or be patient. Some kids have a combination of these symptoms, plus others, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.

In the study, published last month in the Lancet, 100 children with ADHD symptoms who were 4 to 8 years old were divided into two groups. Half were allowed to eat only a small number of foods for five weeks; their diets were customized from a short list of ingredients that included water, rice, turkey, lamb, lettuce, carrots, pears and other hypoallergenic foods. The rest of the kids were counseled (along with their parents) about healthful eating but allowed to eat whatever they wanted.

At the end of the study, 64% of the kids on the limited diet showed significant improvement on a variety of standard rating scales. Though the initial scores for all of the kids in this group put their ADHD symptoms in the moderate-to-severe range, after the diet intervention their symptoms were classified as either mild or nonclinical.

"It's shocking to most people," says psychologist Lidy Pelsser of the ADHD Research Center in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. "The parents were shocked. The children said they felt so different, as if some mad thing in their head wasn't there anymore."

Previous studies have found similar effects, but, like this one, they all had fundamental problems that made it easy for doctors to dismiss them.

For example, it's impossible to implement such a radical diet without kids and their parents realizing they're in the treatment group. That can affect the results because parents who know their child is receiving treatment may look harder for improvements. Their heightened expectations, in turn, may affect their kids' behavior. Children with the disorder often improve with regular, focused attention.

"These are not easy things to tease out," says Dr. Jaswinder Ghuman, a child psychiatrist at the University of Arizona in Tucson who treats ADHD.

Some experts question whether all the children in the Lancet study actually had ADHD. Making a diagnosis in 4- and 5-year-olds is tricky, since the ability to sustain focused attention doesn't usually show up until age 6 or 7, says Robert Myers, a psychologist at UC Irvine who has worked with ADHD patients for 30 years.

One way the new study differed from the preceding ones is that it didn't select only kids who had an allergy related condition, such as asthma or eczema, but rather enrolled anyone with an ADHD diagnosis. That suggests food triggers may be important in a broader population of patients than previously thought. Until now, the consensus has been that food sensitivities play a role in only a small subset of ADHD cases.

Whether the Lancet study will change many doctors' minds remains to be seen. In a commentary that accompanied the Lancet study, Ghuman wrote that, while the diet's benefits were impressive, following it for more than five weeks could have detrimental health consequences.

Pelsser is the first to admit that no one can follow such a severe diet for very long. The children in her study have been gradually adding foods back to their diet. "We've followed all these children for about a year, and each child reacts to different foods," she says. For one child, triggers included beets, tomatoes, wheat and bananas; for another, it was fish, pork, eggs and oranges.

The idea of treating ADHD through diet modification goes back to at least the 1970s, when researchers began experimenting with a regimen called the Feingold diet that eliminated food additives and foods containing natural salicylates, such as apples, strawberries, almonds and tomatoes. Though the diet achieved only modest results, it is still used in some circles, Myers says.

Other researchers have charged that food additives — such as artificial colors, flavors and preservatives — are likely triggers for hyperactive behavior. A 2007 Lancet study of 297 children who did not have ADHD found that drinks laced with artificial colors and the preservative sodium benzoate increased activity to levels that were between one-half and two-thirds as high as seen in kids with ADHD who are not on medication. "Relatively modest amounts of food additives caused hyperactive symptoms in kids," says Schab, the Columbia psychiatrist.

To be sure, the prospect of treating ADHD with diet instead of drugs would appeal to many parents, Ghuman says. But parents who want to give it a try should be sure to consult their child's physician first, she warned: "It's not that simple to do appropriately."

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

The Enemy Can’t Kill the US Soldier, but the Enemy within Psychiatry and the Pharmaceutical Industry has Racked Upped Casualties

Excerpt of article by Jennifer Senior-New York Magazine Feb. 6, 2011

“I feel like people with my symptoms are becoming the majority of the Army,” says a major from the New York area who recently started taking Effexor, an antidepressant, and a variety of sleep meds after a second tour in Iraq. “Feeling anxious when you don’t have a reason to, being a little depressed, having low grade anhedonia(inability to experience pleasure), not sleeping well this is the new normal for those of us who’ve been repeatedly deployed.”
The Army’s own research confirms that drug and alcohol abuse, disciplinary infractions, and criminal activity are increasing among active-duty service members. Most ominously, a growing number of soldiers can’t handle the strains of war at all. Until three years ago, the suicide rate of the Army, the branch with by far the most men and women in this war, was actually lower than the American population’s a testament to the hardiness of our troops, given that young men with weapons are, at least as a statistical matter, disproportionately prone to suicide. But in 2008, the Army suicide rate surpassed that of the civilian population’s, and the Marines’ surpassed it shortly thereafter. So grim is the problem that this summer, the Army released a remarkably candid suicide report. “If we include accidental death, which frequently is the result of high-risk behavior (e.g., drinking and driving, drug overdose),” it concluded, “we find that less young men and women die in combat than die by their own actions. Simply stated, we are often more dangerous to ourselves than the enemy.” End article

In other words, nearly as many soldiers are dying at home today as are dying abroad.

What are the drugs the army psychiatrists and doctors are prescribing to our soldiers? Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Wellbutrin, Celexa, Effexor, Valium, Klonopin, Ativan, Restoril, Xanax, Adderall, Ritalin, Haldol, Risperdal, Seroquel, Ambien, Lunesta, Elavil, Trazodone War. The mainstream media will not report this, as it reflects badly on their pharmaceutical sponsors.

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Getting Rich Exposing Pharma Fraud

Eamon Javers of CNBC reported recently that A Florida Company called Ven-A-Care has become a profitable whistle blower against Pharmaceutical fraud.
Javers reported that in one case Ven-A-Care found that there appears to be a pattern of overbilling by some Pharmaceutical companies. These pharma firms are selling drugs to patients (mainly elderly) for a set amount and the pharmaceutical company would bill the US Government via Medicare and Medicaid 500 to 2000% markup.

In Dec. 2010 the US Justice Department announced that Dey Inc. Dey Pharma L.P. and Dey L.P. Inc. had agreed to pay $280 million to settle False Claims Act allegations, the Department of Justice disclosed via their website. The United States alleged that Dey reported false prices for the following drugs Albuterol Sulfate, Albuterol MDI, Cromolyn Sodium and Ipratropium Bromide. The Justice department indicated that the Dey Pharma inflated government payments where they charge the Medicare and Medicaid a higher amount over actual price paid by health care providers. This discovery was related by Ven-A-Care.

The Los Angeles times reports that a Texas jury ordered two subsidiaries of Icelandic pharmaceuticals company Actavis to pay $170 million for overcharging the Texas Medicaid program. This was also relayed by Ven-A-Care and they will be rewarded as a “relator”

Ven-A-Care filed whistleblower suits against drug companies in 18 cases thus far since 2001 with settlements to date according to the Los Angeles Times are at least $2.2 billion for state and federal governments and at least $380 million in whistle blower fees for the four partners involved in Ven-A-Care's litigation. Some other big named pharmaceutical companies have settled or were fined such as Bayer Inc., Abbott Laboratories Inc., B. Braun Medical Inc., Roxane Laboratories Inc.,and GlaxoSmithKline to name a few.

These are the kinds of wiki leaks the government likes as all injured benefit, especially the taxpayer and government. It also shows a pattern of immoral and unethical behavior of the pharmaceutical industry by overbilling, overprescribing, and erroneous positive tests of their drugs against placebos.

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

A Tampa Florida Mother Has Been Charged for Killing Her Son and Daughter

A Tampa Florida Mother Julie Powers Schenecker informed police detectives that she shot her daughter and son twice for "talking back". According to MSNBC news and AP wire.

The teenagers were killed with a .38-caliber pistol, which authorities say Schenecker bought five days earlier. Police found bullets, medication and a Smith & Wesson instruction manual among the items found in the upstairs bed and bath MSNBC news indicated. Police and news reports did not specify what type of medication found.

We have a hunch the type of medication that may have been involved. If and when details are divulged then we will update that information her.

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

California State Auditor finds $600,000 Lost to incompetent and Negligent Psychiatrist Over Three Years

From Wyatt Buchanan, San Francisco Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
An incompetent prison psychiatrist was kept on the state payroll at a cost to taxpayers of hundreds of thousands of dollars according to a semi-annual report released by the California State Auditor on Tuesday.
The audit, the result of tips to a state whistle-blower hot line, found eight instances of what Auditor Elaine Howle called substantiated allegations of improper governmental activities. Instances of improper spending and incompetence by workers created costs of just over half a million dollars in the report.
The highest dollar figure cited in the report is that of a psychiatrist overseeing parolees for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The psychiatrist who is not identified by name or location was accused of negligently under prescribing, overprescribing and inappropriately prescribing medications.
Those accusations were made in June 2006, and the psychiatrist was reassigned to an administrative job in October of that year. The internal investigation was not completed until two years later, and the psychiatrist was not terminated until May 2009.
All the while, the psychiatrist received a normal salary, along with two merit-based salary increases, and accrued 226 hours of leave worth more than $29,000 that was paid out when the psychiatrist left, according to the auditor.
"According to our calculations, the amount of salary (the corrections department) paid the psychiatrist during this period exceeded the value of the administrative duties he performed by $366,656," the audit states. During the period, the psychiatrist earned more than $600,000.
Terry Thornton, spokeswoman for the corrections department, said the situation was, "A very complex, resource-intensive situation and we completed it within three years as prescribed by law," adding that, "every investigation is different and I don't think you can just broad-brush them."
The auditor found that the department treated the investigation as a low priority, but Thornton challenged that assertion.

Monday, January 10, 2011

Does the Arizona Shooter Jared Loughner’s Violence Stem from Psychotropic Drugs like the Ft. Hood Shooter?

The Arizona Shooter Jared Loughner killed 6 people and wounded 14 including Congress woman Giffords, but he targeted senior citizens and a juvenile girl in a indiscriminant rampage.
The news media and government officials have talked about hate as the primary reason of this heinous crime. Sheriff Dupnik blames the vitriolic political rhetoric, but is Loughner’s aggressive behavior a result of something else? He was expelled from Pima Community College because his mental state was in question. News reports also indicate classmates and teachers felt he was capable of this type of criminal act. It is publically unknown at this time if Loughner had taken antidepressants, but aggressive behavior is a side effect of many of the psychotropic drugs on the market today. If he sought advice or assistance from a mental health department then the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or psychiatrist handbook prescribes psychotropic drugs as the solution to mental disorders. The DSM is the psychiatrist’s bible and psych drugs are their only solution. Basically a mental disorder equals a drug solution. If Loughner was on psych drugs then that will be found in the ensuing investigation. There are similarities with this mass murder and that of the Ft. Hood shooter.

The Fort Hood shooter sole suspect is Nidal Malik Hasan who was a U.S. Army major serving as a psychiatrist. He actually prescribed himself antidepressants, and is now in custody and paralyzed from the chest down. He killed 13 people and wounded 30 and is charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder. He was shot by Army Civilian officers. Hasan’s act was widely considered an act of hate or terror as Hasan is a Muslim and the Army was apparently aware of Hasan's tendencies toward radical Islam since 2005.

Both of these acts appear to be premeditated and involving inner mental turmoil, so all you need is a weapon and a prescription to act out the rage. The Ft. Hood shooting was the media’s story for weeks upon the event, but has now faded as will this recent crime.
The volatility of psychotropic drugs has not become part of the national debate. Attacking pharmaceutical companies doesn’t appear interesting enough to media outlets or government regulators. They are more interested in the political narrative than the real truth. Maybe they are in each others pockets. The government and the FDA doesn’t want to confront the common denominator to mass murder (Virginia Tech, Columbine) the past 30 years.

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Stanford Doctors On the Take from BigPharma in Violation of University Policy

Artical By Lisa M. Krieger
MercuryNews Dec. 20, 2010 article

A dozen physicians at Stanford University's School of Medicine are under investigation by the school's disciplinary board for their too-cozy relationships with drug companies.
These physicians delivered speeches paid for by drug companies, in violation of school policy, according to a public database reported by the nonprofit online investigative website ProPublica.
"A review is under way," said Stanford School of Medicine Dean Phil Pizzo, who in 2009 created a policy prohibiting such behavior among the university's 1,500 physicians.
"They now recognize what they did was wrong," he said. "If we find someone who continues to violate policy, we will consider disciplinary action."
Violators include Alan Yeung, Stanford's chief of cardiovascular medicine, who was paid $53,000 from Eli Lilly & Co. to speak at a "Healthcare Professional Education Program" in an appearance that included another $1,463 for travel and a $375 consulting fee. He reportedly quit speaking for the company last fall.
Also named in the ProPublica reporting was child psychiatrist Hans Steiner, now retired, who was paid $109,000 by Eli Lilly to talk about Strattera, a drug that treats attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. In a response to the ProPublica report, he said he assumed the policy didn't apply to him once he became an emeritus professor, but he will now comply.
They were among 17,000 doctors nationwide who were paid a total of $257.8
million by seven companies in 2009 and the first two quarters of 2010, according the ProPublica database. In California, about 3,000 doctors received an estimated $28.6 million in payments from pharmaceutical companies for speeches promoting brand-label drugs to fellow doctors, the report said.
"The vast majority (of Stanford faculty) are paying attention to our guidelines," said Pizzo.
The violators have been referred to the senior associate dean for academic affairs at the medical school.
Many Stanford physicians are paid consulting fees by drug companies, which are disclosed to the university and not prohibited, because they improve companies' ability to design and test drugs, ultimately helping human health. For instance, Kiki Chang, director of the Pediatric Bipolar Disorder Program, was paid $5,936 to consult for Eli Lilly; oncologist Robert Carlson was paid $4,665 to consult for Pfizer.
The Mercury News tried to contact some Stanford doctors, but calls were not returned by deadline.
The names of doctors moonlighting for drugmakers were private until last year. So far, seven drugmakers have started disclosing payments. All will be required to disclose the information by 2013 as part of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act.
The practice is legal, but it creates the perception of conflict-of-interest because doctors promote certain drugs to peers and get paid by drug companies to do it.
The drug company representatives say the speaking engagements are designed to supply doctors with the most up-to-date information about new drugs, or new data about older drugs, so doctors have a better sense of their effectiveness, interactions and side effects. They also say the practice is designed to better serve patients by educating doctors about illnesses and the drugs available to combat them.
But there is widespread concern that the payments may induce doctors to advocate for the companies' brand-name drugs, rather than lesser-priced generic alternatives.
Stanford's Pizzo first issued guidelines governing physician behavior in 2006, and clarified them in 2009. These policies have been publicized 17 times in the dean's online newsletter.
When alerted to the ProPublica database, Pizzo conducted a preliminary investigation, which suggested that "some individuals "... had understandable reasons for confusion. Others, though, offered explanations why their activities continued that are difficult if not impossible to reconcile with our policy, and here we have concerns," said Pizzo.
"This is unacceptable, certainly for anyone with a Stanford title," he said.
Stanford's medical community is large and diverse, with 1,500 physicians playing different roles, Pizzo said. There are decade-long relationships with drug companies that "don't unravel with the stroke of a pen. They take time."
Moreover, the school must rely on the honor system for compliance. It does not inspect personal tax returns, for instance.
"At the end of the day, we are involved in a trusting relationship with our faculty. And we expect them to be straight and honest with us in their disclosures," said Pizzo. "We count on an honest interpretation by them of what we do."