Showing posts with label Violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Violence. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Dr. David Healy: Psychotropic Drugs Cause Violent Behavior

via WND:
Top Psychiatrist: Meds Behind school Massacres
Society conducting 'vast social experiment' without knowing its end


by JEROME R. CORSI 

If lawmakers and authorities are truly concerned about stopping gun violence in schools, they need to take a close look at the prescription of psychotropic drugs for children and young people, says a leading psychiatrist.

In an exclusive in-person interview in New York City with WND, London-based Dr. David Healy criticized pharmaceutical companies that have made billions of dollars marketing Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, known as SSRIs.

Psychotropic drugs “prescribed for school children cause violent behavior,” Healy stated.

The drugs are widely used in the U.S. as antidepressants by doctors working in the mental health field and increasingly by primary care doctors, he noted.

Healy insisted the problem today is that doctors working with schools to control the behavior of children are inclined to prescribe SSRI drugs without serious consideration of adverse consequences.

“The pharmaceutical companies made these drugs with the idea of making money,” he said. “There’s a wide range of problems when it comes to looking at these drugs for children. Very few children have serious problems that warrant treatment with pills that have the risks SSRI drugs have.”

The drugs can make children “aggressive and hostile,” he noted.

“Children taking SSRI drugs are more likely to harm or to injure other children at school,” said Healy. “The child may be made suicidal.

“We are giving drugs to children who are passing through critical development stages, and as a society we are really conducting a vast experiment and no one really knows what the outcome of that will be.”

Healy cautioned that there is a very high correlation between mass shootings and use of the drugs.

“When roughly nine out of every 10 cases in these school shootings and mass shootings involve these drugs being prescribed, then at least a significant proportion of these cases were either caused by the drugs or the drugs made a significant contribution to the problem,” he said.

President Obama, in a series of 23 presidential memoranda and proclamations signed last week, called for the Centers for Disease control to undertake research to examine gun violence and to explore medical means to control the problem.

WND contended that putting more mental illness screening into schools would actually increase the incidence of school shootings, not reduce the violence.

“You can draw a line between the number of child psychiatrists in the United States and the number of school shootings, and you will find that both have gone up in the same direction at the same time,” he said.

He sees a “propaganda campaign” being conducted in the U.S. in the wake of the Aurora, Colo., cinema shooting and the Newtown, Conn., school shooting asserting gun violence is being caused by mental illness and could be stopped by additional school programs that screen for it.

“If school children are screened for mental illness problems, this presumably will lead more medical doctors to put more students on more pills,” he said. “I would predict then the outcome of more school screenings for mental illness will be more mass killings, even if the guns are taken away and the mass killings are not done with guns.”



He cautioned shareholders of pharmaceutical companies to realize share prices can be adversely affected should judges and juries determine the companies bear legal liabilities. Law enforcement investigators could conclude one of the company’s medications was prescribed to a child who ended up perpetrating a school shooting.

Healy cautioned that medical doctors who prescribe pills do not necessarily cure mental illness problems.

Dr. David Healy
He argued that today medical doctors are inclined to solve a wide range of health problems by prescribing drugs. In previous generations, however, extended families were capable of providing a context of family history to understand behavioral problems and to identify a wide range of problem-solving treatments. The families understood the issue as a developmental problem better treated by family intervention than by medicine.
Read more at WND.com


Wednesday, November 2, 2011

SSRI Antidepressants: Marketing Mayhem and Madness


The story of the SSRI antidepressants is one of fraud, corruption and greed.  It is not a unique or uncommon story; it is enormously tragic, nonetheless.

If depression is due to a 'chemical' or neurotransmitter imbalance; it is an imbalance that has yet to be identified.  The claim that antidepressants are fixing an identified imbalance was developed as a marketing strategy.  The strategy is based not on an identified or defined imbalance; it is a hypothesis based on what is understood about the biological mechanism of action of the SSRI antidepressant drugs.  While researchers may one day discover a biological mechanism causing depression, they have not yet actually done so.  This being the case, it is not honest to imply that a 'chemical imbalance' causes depression--it is unethical to use what is essentially a false claim as a marketing tool; in truth using a false claim to encourage "treatment compliance" or to convince a person that they have a disease the must be treated with psychotropic drugs it not ethical, it is criminal fraud. It is morally reprehensible for a professional or trusted patient advocacy organization to imply a hypothesis is a fact.  To claim that depression is caused by an imbalance that psychiatric drugs "safely and effectively" treat without warning patients and parents of children about the well known, inherent risks of taking teratogenic drugs that can cause an episodic condition to become chronic; physical dependency; aggressive, violent behavior; and suicidal and/or homicidal behavior is unethical and morally reprehensible.  How could any medical professional believe that a patient has given Informed Consent for a recommended treatment if serious inherent risks are not disclosed and understood prior to taking a prescribed SSRI antidepressant?   How could any advocacy group fail to warn patients about well-documented risks and the corporate dishonesty which allowed pharmaceutical companies to bury the evidence along with the bodies of those who died due to an adverse reaction to a drug?

The Consumer Protection Act does not apply to the direct-to-consumer marketing of drugs, and the FDA is failing to protect consumers.  Indeed, the FDA consistently protects the pharmaceutical industry, not the American people.  It is FDA policy to consider known negative effects discovered in clinical trials before FDA approval of a drug, including death; 'trade secrets.'  Prescribers are not even legally required to report adverse events for drugs they prescribe to the Adverse Event Reporting System; not even death.  I have spent hours researching on this database, and what is  striking is that most of the deaths are reported by someone other that a doctor, or medical professional with prescribing privileges.

Glaxo Smith Kline the makers of Seroxat, known as Paxil here in the United States, covered up the fact that their drug causes violence, aggression, suicidal and homicidal behavior.   Covered up that it causes birth defects, some so severe the babies die shortly after being born.  Paxil has caused people to have horrific extended withdrawal symptoms, and some people can not in fact seem to stop taking it; no matter how badly they want to. The professionals call it 'discontinuation syndrome,' instead of withdrawal; this is a ploy to disassociate the withdrawal from the fact the drug causes dependency; i.e. addiction.

In England, SSRIs have been restricted; and are rarely prescribed to people under eighteen years old due to the negative effects; the negative effects are known to be more severe for adolescents and children. 
 
Watch Seroxat in News  |  View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com 

via BBC ONE: Secrets of the drug trials a few excerpts:

"GSK's biggest clinical trial of Seroxat on children was held in the US in the 1990s and called Study 329.

"Child psychiatrist Dr Neal Ryan of the University of Pittsburgh was paid by GSK as a co-author of Study 329."

"In 2002 he also gave a talk on childhood depression at a medical conference sponsored by GSK."

"He said that Seroxat could be a suitable treatment for children and later told Panorama reporter Shelley Jofre that it probably lowered rather than raised suicide rates."

"In amongst the archive of emails in Malibu, Shelley was surprised to find that her own emails to Dr Ryan from 2002 asking questions about the safety of Seroxat had been forwarded to GSK asking for advice on how to respond to her.
She also found an email from a public relations executive working for GSK which said: "Originally we had planned to do extensive media relations surrounding this study until we actually viewed the results."

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...