Depression is NOT caused by low serotonin levels and most drugs used to treat it are based on a myth, leading psychiatrist claims

As Reported in the Daily Mail

• David Healy is head of psychiatry at the Hergest psychiatry unit in Bangor
• Claims the idea low levels of serotonin causes depression is a fallacy
• Marketing of SSRI drugs like Prozac has been 'based on a myth', he claims
• Experts refute his claims saying 'SSRIs work in the real world of the clinic'

The belief that the most popular antidepressant drugs raise serotonin levels in the brain is nothing more than a myth, a leading professor of psychiatry has claimed.

David Healy, head of psychiatry at the Hergest psychiatric unit in Bangor, North Wales, said the misconception that low levels of serotonin were responsible for depression had become established fact.

He suggested that the success of so-called SSRI drugs – which include Prozac and Seroxat – was based on the ‘marketing of a myth’.

The emergence of these serotonin reuptake inhibiting (SSRI) drugs in the late 1980s came after concerns about tranquilliser use to treat depression.

Even though they were weaker than old-style tricyclic antidepressants, they took off because of the idea that SSRIs restored serotonin levels to normal, ‘a notion that later transmuted into the idea that they remedied a chemical imbalance’.

In an editorial in the BMJ, Professor Healy said that in the 1990s, no one knew if SSRIs raised or lowered serotonin levels but there was no evidence that treatment corrected anything.

[...]

The full BMJ editorial "Serotonin and Depression" is available in PDF format here

Much of the article was taken up by people trying to refute the attack on their paychecks.

British Psychiatrist Adam Osborne is suspended AGAIN... over 'serious misconduct' with female patient

From this Report in the Daily Mail

Adam Osborne, 38, who has a private practice in Central London, last week had his licence suspended by the General Medical Council (GMC) after being accused of having a two-year sexual affair with a highly vulnerable woman patient who has psychiatric issues, is married and has two children. The news comes five years after he was suspended by the GMC for ‘dishonest and misleading’ behaviour in prescribing drugs to his cocaine-addicted prostitute lover. The latest blow means he cannot practise in any capacity as a doctor until an investigation into the new allegations has been concluded. The suspension will prove highly embarrassing for (his brother) the Chancellor (George Osborne), coming as he prepares for Wednesday’s crucial Budget, the last before May’s General Election. If the investigation results in a Fitness To Practise hearing, which is held in public, Dr Osborne could face further sensitive personal information being revealed. And if the allegations are upheld, he could be struck off. In the wake of the hearing, Dr Osborne’s personal website was taken down. His Linkedin page states that he has a special interest in adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, personality disorders, depression and anxiety. Dr Osborne currently runs Devonport Psychiatry, which is based in Marylebone, Central London, but is officially registered to his home address in Shepherd’s Bush, West London, which he shares with his wife Rahala Noor, a plastic surgeon. His suspension in 2010 stemmed from a series of allegations surrounding his use of prescription drugs, which centred on allegations of a relationship with a prostitute. The GMC said that his ‘relationship’ with the woman had ‘clouded his judgment’ and led him to prescribe powerful anti-psychotic drugs, dishonestly use a false name and fail to inform her GP. Dr Osborne was also disciplined for prescribing contraceptive pills to his then girlfriend, Rahala, a strict Muslim who would become his wife, and an anti-smoking drug to an unnamed family member. The GMC hearing was told that Dr Osborne had been in a relationship with the prostitute, referred to as Miss B, from 2007 to 2008 while he was separated from his girlfriend and he was a trainee psychiatrist in Manchester.

More Details and Photos at the Daily Mail

The Myth of the Chemical Cure: The Politics of Psychiatric Drug Treatment

Video presentation by UNE Center for Global Humanities and its founding director, Anouar Majid, host Joanna Moncrieff on "The Myth of the Chemical Cure: The Politics of Psychiatric Drug Treatment." Just under 1.5 hours

Big Pharma backed the Affordable Care Act, but it has bankrolled a think tank mounting the legal assault on the law

An investigative report: Big Pharma backed the Affordable Care Act, but it has bankrolled a think tank mounting the legal assault on the law, for more profits

Worth the read

Here are a couple of snippets

During the contentious battle to pass the Affordable Care Act, the pharmaceutical industry was a crucial partner of President Barack Obama. Big Pharma sank $150 million into an ad blitz promoting the Obamacare bill and spent millions lobbying for its passage. Backing health care reform was a no-brainer for the drug manufacturers; they stood to reap billions in revenues as a result of expanded health care coverage. Yet all of this makes one of Big Pharma's alliances highly curious: It has bankrolled the libertarian think tank trying to demolish Obamacare.

[...]

This was the deal Big Pharma cut during the legislative battle over Obamacare: The pharmaceutical companies agreed to support the law and accept about $80 billion in cost-cutting measures over the next decade, and the White House granted the industry lucrative concessions to protect its profit margins. These industry-favoring measures include provisions preventing the government from negotiating lower drug prices for Medicare and Medicaid and blocking Americans from importing cheaper prescription drugs from abroad. Those concessions were costly to taxpayers and consumers, but they were part of the grand bargain hammered out between the White House and Big Pharma. This accord ensured the industry would use its formidable lobbying clout to pass Obamacare—not destroy it.

Regulation needed to curb overprescribing of drugs for children, say advocates

A Report from the LA Daily News

Scrutiny of doctors who prescribe psychotropic drugs to California foster children intensified this week, with growing calls for regulators to consider whether financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies may be driving the excessive use of medication.

The outcry came from a leading consumer advocacy group as lawmakers stepped up their efforts to rein in reckless prescribing and the California Medical Board vowed to widen its investigation in response to this news organization’s ongoing series “Drugging Our Kids.” On Sunday, the news organization reported that prescribers in the foster care system received more than twice as much as the typical California doctor in payments from big drug companies for meals, gifts, travel, speaking and industry-sponsored research. The news organization also found that last year doctors who prescribed the most to California foster youth, on average, accepted almost four times as much as those who fell in a lower-prescribing group.

“We’ve known for years that the problem of drug manufacturer payments to doctors appears to have an outsize influence in their prescribing practices,” said Carmen Balber, executive director of the nonprofit group Consumer Watchdog. “But this investigation was particularly disturbing because of the patients it affects. The conflict of interest is clear in these cases and we think that action is long overdue.”

In a letter to the California Medical Board sent earlier this week, Balber’s Santa Monica-based organization called on the state licensing agency to expand its current investigation of doctors who may be overprescribing to foster youth “to determine if children are inappropriately being prescribed or overprescribed because of drug manufacturer payments to their physicians.” Balber said the prescribing has not only cost taxpayers millions of dollars in payments for possibly unneeded drugs, but has also put the children’s health at risk. The news organization’s report on industry ties, she added, “makes clear that the state has failed to take the steps necessary to protect children.”

Kimberly Kirchmeyer, executive director of the California Medical Board, noted there is no law prohibiting doctors from accepting drug industry promotional funds. The news organization found pharmaceutical companies spent more than $14 million to woo foster care prescribers from 2010 to 2013.

But the payments may constitute “unprofessional conduct,” Kirchmeyer added, and that could warrant additional scrutiny. She said the agency plans to look into whether these doctors “have a reason to prescribe, are they appropriately prescribing, or are they prescribing medication inappropriately to support the pharmaceutical company?”

The medical board has been looking into whether specific doctors are over-prescribing psychotropic medications to foster youth since the news organization published its first installment of “Drugging Our Kids’’ in August, which revealed that almost one in four foster teens are prescribed psych meds. Many of the drugs are being prescribed to control troublesome behavior instead of the severe mental illnesses they are approved to treat. They can have debilitating side effects, such as rapid weight gain, higher risks of diabetes and severe lethargy.

The news organization’s original findings drove state Sen. Jim Beall, chairman of the Senate Human Services Committee, to push for more detailed information from the state Department of Health Care Services on prescribing practices to foster youth.

On Monday, Beall, D-San Jose, met with California’s director of social services, Will Lightbourne, to discuss the request he and Los Angeles Democratic state Sen. Holly Mitchell submitted to health care officials last week.

The two senators have called on Health Care Services Director Toby Douglas to release geographic and demographic information on prescribing patterns, including tallies of foster children on multiple medications and high doses, as well as those being prescribed drugs for conduct “disorders” — more information than the state has been willing to release so far.

Beall said he will use the data to draft legislation aimed at improving the oversight and monitoring of psych medication use in foster care. The bill could require regular reports and analysis of county-level prescribing trends and establish a hotline for lawyers, judges, doctors and other caregivers who need guidance on medication. On Monday, after the news organization’s latest report, Beall said he also wants doctors’ interactions with drug companies to be better monitored.

“The Social Services Agency should take all steps to ensure that there’s no conflict of interest in medical care for any of our foster kids — and if that’s happening right now, we’re going to take action in the Legislature to make sure that doesn’t happen,” Beall said.

State Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Redondo Beach, who in August called for a state investigation into psychotropic drug prescriptions for minors in the wake of the initial series of news reports, echoed the more recent calls by his fellow state legislators to make the additional information public.

“I’m pleased that the California Medical Board had initiated an investigation, but now has expanded it,” said Lieu, who was just elected to Congress. “I believe the investigation by the newspaper has raised some very troubling questions about how psychotropic drugs are being administered to foster youth.”

Marilyn Benoit — the former president of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and current chair of the academy’s task force that proposed guidelines on relations with drug companies — said the news organization’s unique look at foster care prescribers’ link to drug companies is “concerning.”

“This is a capitalistic country — you’re supposed to market and advertise the products you make — there’s nothing wrong with that,” said Benoit, a child psychiatrist who oversees a Pennsylvania-based behavioral health center that treats foster youth. “But as prescribers, we have to be more scrutinizing and understand the difference between marketing and real scientific information about the medication we use.”

Yet Benoit cautioned that although “research clearly shows that doctors can be influenced by gifts,” her organization is advisory only, and has no enforcement capabilities. She said doctors must take personal responsibility to draw the line. “When you’re tied to the pharmaceutical industry,” Benoit said, “then there could be a conflict of interest in your prescribing behavior.”

Psychiatrist and Fox News Channel analyst Keith Ablow freely mixes psychiatric assessments with political criticism, a unique twist in cable news commentary that some medical colleagues find unethical.

Commentary by David Bauder as seen on the Website for Channel 10 WISTV in Columbia, South Carolina.

Here are some snippets from the column, with my own brief comment. I recommend that you read it in full at the link above

[...]

He's been a Fox contributor since 2007 after hosting a failed syndicated talk show. Identified as a member of the Fox News Medical A-Team, he hosts a regular segment about behavior titled "Normal or Nuts?" on the "Fox & Friends" morning show. There were published reports this fall that the network had extended his contract.

Rival news networks CNN and MSNBC say they don't have a psychiatrist-commentator under contract. CNN said the closest thing it has to something similar is when profilers come on the air to discuss the mental characteristics of people who commit dramatic crimes, for example. The network said medical experts don't get into politics, but others can have different interpretations. The MRC's Graham said opinion often drifts in when television medical correspondents comment on aspects of Obama's health care plan.

Ablow clearly enjoys being provocative, and his commentaries don't stick to his areas of medical expertise. Within the past two weeks he called for an "American jihad," saying the country should urge all nations to adopt a government form based on the U.S. Constitution. His comment this summer that Michelle Obama "needs to drop a few" pounds was widely noticed.

[...]

Dr. Jeffrey Lieberman, chairman of psychiatry at Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons, said Ablow seems more interested in entertaining than in reflecting well on his profession. Lieberman is past president of the American Psychiatric Association, which discourages members from speculating on psychiatric characteristics of non-patients.

"It is shameful and unfortunate that he is given a platform by Fox News or any other media organization," Lieberman said. "Basically he is a narcissistic self-promoter of limited and dubious expertise."

Ablow isn't an APA member, having resigned in 2011 in a dispute over transgenderism.

It's not unusual for there to be an uncomfortable relationship between the medical community and doctors who get into television. Talk show hosts Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz have their critics. Dr. Drew Pinsky took heat for exposing rehab patients to the pressure of a televised recovery.

While doctors are entitled to political opinions like anyone else, the way Ablow tries to connect his views to medical analysis "is really just irresponsible and it's embarrassing for physicians in general," said Ford Vox, a staff physiatrist at the Shepherd Brain Injury Rehabilitation Center in Atlanta.

Ablow has occasionally taken heat from Fox colleagues about his commentaries. Greg Gutfeld of "The Five" said that "we should probably avoid blaming people for tragedies," in response to Ablow's criticism of Obama on Ebola. And the four women co-hosts of "Outnumbered" clearly didn't appreciate the attack on the first lady's weight, made in context of her efforts to promote healthy eating.

Keith Ablow is a doctor without ethics, and is likely accusing President Obama of the the very things that Mr. Ablow is suffering from himself. Things like "severed himself from all core emotions." and so much more. Mr Bauder has done a great service in pointing out the professional hypocrisy and lack of ethics of Mr. Ablow. Too bad that Fox news has decided to profit from his lack of ethics instead of upholding professional standards.

We also note several followup columns on Mr. Ablow such as these

The strange case of Dr. Keith Ablow [Politico]

White House Foolishly Ignores Insights Of Fox ‘Dr.’ Keith Ablow, World’s Worst Psychiatrist [Wonkette]

Fox’s Keith Ablow Doubles Down on Psychoanalyzing Obama as a ‘Narcissist’ [Mediate]

Which is hilarious since Mr. Ablow is ever so likely to be a Narcissist himself.

Of course, he had to something to defend himself, not that it did him any good

Fox’s Keith Ablow fires back after fellow psychiatrists denounce him as a hack

Media Matters posted a mashup of some of Ablow’s past commentaries on Friday, which can be seen below.



On the basis that he is guilty of what he is accusing the President of, Keith Ablow is Toxic, and it is dangerous for your mental health to believe Keith Ablow.

While there may be plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike and and disagree with President Obama, those of discredited psych Keith Ablow are dangerous to American Politics.

The British Parliament's Health Select Commitee has issued a damning report on the alarming failings in children’s mental health services

You can read the report online here and download a PDF of the 179 page report as well.

As reported in the Mirror:

Thousands of mentally unwell children are being failed because of “serious and deeply ingrained problems” in the provision of care, MPs warn today.

In a damning 117-page report, the Health Select Committee lays bare the alarming failings in children’s mental health services.

The official House of Commons probe was prompted in part by a series of campaigning articles in the Mirror, which submitted evidence to the committee’s inquiry.

Its report warns how “in many areas early intervention services are being cut or are suffering from insecure or short term funding”.

[...]

Earlier this year the Mirror uncovered how 4,391 children aged 10 or under had received treatment for stress, anxiety or depression since 2009 at two of the biggest NHS mental health trusts.

But Tory MP Dr Sarah Wollaston said it was a “disgrace” that data had not been collected centrally for over a decade.

She highlighted how the cost of a child’s in-patient bed in a mental health ward costs £25,000 a month. If that sort of cash had been spent on early schemes such as drop-in services it could have helped avoid the need for dozens of children to be admitted to hospital, she said.

While it is praise worthy that they want to do something for the children, they seem to be overlooking the inherent failure of psychiatry itself. No wonder the system is in such deplorable condition.

Waterboarding, Interrogations: The CIA's $1,000 a Day Specialists

As reported on ABC News

As the secrets about the CIA's interrogation techniques continue to come out, there's new information about the frequency and severity of their use, contradicting an 2007 ABC News report, and a new focus on two private contractors who were apparently directing the brutal sessions that President Obama calls torture.

According to current and former government officials, the CIA's secret waterboarding program was designed and assured to be safe by two well-paid psychologists now working out of an unmarked office building in Spokane, Washington.

Bruce Jessen and Jim Mitchell, former military officers, together founded Mitchell Jessen and Associates.

Both men declined to speak to ABC News citing non-disclosure agreements with the CIA. But sources say Jessen and Mitchell together designed and implemented the CIA's interrogation program.

Click here to see Jessen refusing to talk to ABC News.

"It's clear that these psychologists had an important role in developing what became the CIA's torture program," said Jameel Jaffer, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union.

Click here to see Mitchell refusing to talk to ABC News.

Former U.S. officials say the two men were essentially the architects of the CIA's 10-step interrogation plan that culminated in waterboarding.

Associates say the two made good money doing it, boasting of being paid a $1,000 a day by the CIA to oversee the use of the techniques on top al Qaeda suspects at CIA secret sites.

"The whole intense interrogation concept that we hear about, is essentially their concepts," according to Col. Steven Kleinman, an Air Force interrogator.

Both Mitchell and Jessen were previously involved in the U.S. military program to train pilots how to survive behind enemy lines and resist brutal tactics if captured.

Mitchell and Jessen Lacked Experience in Actual Interrogations

But it turns out neither Mitchell nor Jessen had any experience in conducting actual interrogations before the CIA hired them.

"They went to two individuals who had no interrogation experience," said Col. Kleinman. "They are not interrogators."

The new documents show the CIA later came to learn that the two psychologists' waterboarding "expertise" was probably "misrepresented" and thus, there was no reason to believe it was "medically safe" or effective. The waterboarding used on al Qaeda detainees was far more intense than the brief sessions used on U.S. military personnel in the training classes.

"The use of these tactics tends to increase resistance on the part of the detainee to cooperating with us. So they have the exact opposite effect of what you want," said Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich).

The new memos also show waterboarding was used "with far greater frequency than initially indicated" to even those in the CIA.

Abu Zubaydah was water boarded at least 83 times and Khalid Sheikh Mohamed at least 183 times.

Former CIA Officer John Kiriakou Says Waterboarding is Torture

That contradicts what former CIA officer John Kiriakou, who led the Zubaydah capture team, told ABC News in 2007 when he first revealed publicly that waterboarding had been used.

He said then, based on top secret reports he had access to, that Zubaydah had only been water boarded once and then freely talked.

Kiriakou now says he too was stunned to learn how often Zubaydah was waterboarded, in what Kiriakou says was clearly torture.

"When I spoke to ABC News in December 2007 I was aware of Abu Zubaydah being waterboarded on one occasion," said Kiriakou. "It was after this one occasion that he revealed information related to a planned terrorist attack. As I said in the original interview, my information was second-hand. I never participated in the use of enhanced techniques on Abu Zubaydah or on any other prisoner, nor did I witness the use of such techniques."

A federal judge in New York is currently considering whether or not to make public the written logs of the interrogation sessions.

The tapes were destroyed by the CIA, but the written logs still exist, although the CIA is fighting their release.

A CIA spokesperson declined to comment for this report, except to note that the agency's terrorist interrogation program was guided by legal opinions from the Department of Justice.

Top 10 Evil Human Experiments

As seen on the List Universe.

Human experimentation and research ethics evolved over time. On occasion, the subjects of human experimentation have been prisoners, slaves, or even family members. In some notable cases, doctors have performed experiments on themselves when they have been unwilling to risk the lives of others. This is known as self-experimentation. This is a list of the 10 most evil and unethical experiments carried out on humans.

[WARNING] This list contains descriptions and images of human experimentation which may cause offense to some readers.]

We are only posting the link above; the full list is too long to copy here.

Judge sealed cases against psychiatrist - Two lawsuits among hundreds kept secret

As reported in the Review Journal

Prominent Las Vegas psychiatrist Robert L. Horne was the target of two lawsuits in four years, and both cases were sealed from public view by the same judge, according to newly unveiled court records.

Those lawsuits were among the hundreds of cases, many involving wealthy or well-known individuals, that Clark County judges shielded from scrutiny for unknown reasons.

The existence of the Horne lawsuits and District Judge Michelle Leavitt's role in sealing them is among details of Nevada court business newly revealed as District Court clerks re-examine 298 sealed cases, dating back to the 1990s. They are unsealing some entirely and "properly sealing" others in accordance with the judge's original instructions.

[...]

Both the new rules and the current District Court review were prompted by Review-Journal stories last year which showed some District Court judges believed they had unbridled discretion to seal lawsuits, and did seal many without explanation.

[...]

As for the Horne lawsuits, Leavitt inherited one case shortly after she took the bench in 2003. She sealed the entire case from the public, even though the previous judge sealed only individual records from the 1999 lawsuit.

A separate lawsuit was filed against Horne in 2003. Again, Leavitt sealed the entire case from public view before it was settled out of court in January 2007.

While those sealed cases remained in District Court without the public's knowledge, the state Board of Medical Examiners in April 2005 filed a confidential complaint against Horne charging him with malpractice, according to board records.

Horne couldn't be reached for comment.

A licensed psychiatrist in Nevada for 23 years, Horne is a former member of the state's Commission on Mental Health and Developmental Services and is executive director of the International Scouting Museum in Las Vegas.

A summary of the Medical Examiners complaint says his conduct "fell below the appropriate standard of care when he engaged in a relationship with a former patient" in violation of state law.

Horne fought the complaint, but the board in March approved a settlement agreement with Horne, said Ed Cousineau, deputy general counsel for the board.

"Dr. Horne is in a position of prominence in the state and he debated (the complaint) back and forth, but we had enough to take it to a public hearing" before Horne agreed to settle the complaint, Cousineau said.

The settlement requires that a letter of reprimand be issued against Horne, that Horne pay a $2,500 fine and that he submit for 18 months to monthly monitoring and evaluations at his own expense.

State law prohibited Cousineau from disclosing information about the board's investigation of Horne, or whether the complaint was prompted by a malpractice lawsuit filed in 2003 by a woman named Patricia Ambrosio.

However, Cousineau did say that state law requires physicians, the courts and a physician's malpractice-insurance company to notify the board when a malpractice lawsuit is filed and when it is settled.

The 2003 case filed by Ambrosio was properly sealed by the courts, and the newly available records don't provide much information about the complaint.

The 1999 lawsuit against Horne was filed by Vincent Gulino and Gulino's parents. The complaint and all documents in the case remain sealed.

However, based on minutes of court hearings, motions filed and other information made available recently, the case appears to involve payment of a $750,000 settlement to Gulino.

Among other cases partially unsealed was a medical malpractice case in which the judge's intention was to seal only the confidential settlement. The suit was brought by a California man, Albert R. Peraza, against the now-closed Lake Mead Hospital and Medical Center in North Las Vegas and emergency room physician Richard C. Green Jr.

The doctor diagnosed Peraza as simply suffering from hyperventilation before the man was driven home to Southern California, where another hospital determined hours later that Peraza had suffered a stroke, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit accused the hospital of violating a state law that requires hospitals to provide emergency care to all patients regardless of their ability to pay. It appears the case was settled out of court and dismissed in June 2005.

On the Web site for the state Board of Medical Examiners, which licenses physicians, there is no mention of any discipline handed down in response to the lawsuit or settlement.

The case was assigned to District Judge Jessie Walsh.

One of the properly sealed cases was against the Creative Beginnings child-care center on East Bonanza Road.

The lawsuit involved ex-employee Kimya Winbush, serving a life sentence for sex crimes committed outside the center on two boys he met there.

The attorney for former Lt. Gov. and Clark County Commissioner Lorraine Hunt asked that the public be cleared from the courtroom before hearings on her lawsuit against former Clark County Public Administrator Jared Schafer.

The case appears to involve her ex-husband's estate. Hunt's attorney asked District Court Judge Jackie Glass to seal the case.

Minutes in the case state that Glass urged the parties to settle their differences "rather than have the family history laid out for everyone to hear" in court

It's for the Kids: Three major advocates of antidepressant use in children got millions of dollars from drug makers.

From Wired Science

Three prominent advocates of antidepressant use by children received millions of dollars from antidepressant manufacturers, casting into question the integrity of their already-controversial research.

The New York Times reported Saturday that Harvard University psychiatrists Joseph Biederman and Timothy Wilens received $1.6 million each from drug companies between 2000 and 2007. Thomas Spencer, another Harvard psychiatrist, received $1 million.

The payments were uncovered by Congressional investigators searching for conflict-of-interest violations. Federal law requires researchers who receive National Institutes of Health funding to report annual outside earnings above $10,000 to their universities. Biederman, Wilens and Spencer all took NIH money, but never reported the full extent of their drug company income.

That the researchers' results were influenced by the payments isn't clear, but the situation is ugly. Biederman has a very high profile; as the Times describes, he

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 ... and a rapid rise in the use of antipsychotic medicines in children.

Childhood antidepressant use is hotly debated by scientists: it's not clear whether they work as well in kids as in adults, and the drugs may have profound effects on still-developing brains.

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), leader of the Congressional investigation, has pushed for a national registry of commercial payments to researchers.

As one columnist has noted

Drug companies make drugs

Drug companies want to sell those drugs to the largest market possible

Doctors make research

Doctors make research that shows drugs are beneficial for use in children

Drug companies profit

Doctors profit

Any questions?

Convicted killer working as psychiatrist - Patients don't know he killed his wife

From the Sydney Morning Herald:

The family of a woman killed by her psychiatrist husband in 1987 is disgusted he was later able to be reregistered to practise.

Dr George Sliwinski shot his former wife Alice in 1987 and was sentenced to eight years' jail after pleading guilty to manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility.

Dr Sliwinski had been struggling with alcoholism and the use of prescription drugs, which during the 80s had led to a number of breakdowns and admissions to psychiatric hospitals.

After being released on parole in 1990, in 1994 Dr Sliwinski successfully appealed to the Medical Tribunal of NSW to be reregistered.

Since 1996 he has been employed as a psychiatric registrar at Gosford and Wyong hospitals.

The Australian Medical Association opposed his reappointment, Fairfax has reported.

News that Dr Sliwinski was again practising has alarmed his late wife's family, with the victim's sister, Noleen Tasoulis, saying it was "disgusting".

But Dr Sliwinski has been defended by his colleagues and NSW Health.

A spokeswoman for the Northern Sydney Central Coast Area Health Service said there had been no formal complaints about his work.

"All appropriate background checks required at the time of his employment were conducted," she said.

Senior psychiatrist Chris Tennant defended his colleague, saying Dr Sliwinski "met all the conditions imposed on him by the board".

Many of Dr Sliwinski's current patients do not know of his past, as he is under no obligation to tell them, Fairfax says.

Of course, there's been a small uproar over this discovery. We also have this extended report

NINE years after he shot and killed his wife, George Sliwinski was back in his job as a psychiatrist, treating mentally ill patients in public hospitals.

Dr Sliwinski himself had a history of mental illness. This led him to either leave or be dismissed from four medical facilities in the 1980s. In 1987, after a decade of chronic drug and alcohol abuse, he shot his former wife, Alice, four times, a month after their divorce. One of the shots, to her head, killed her.

But Dr Sliwinski was released on parole in 1990. And he was employed as a resident medical officer at the Central Coast Mental Health Service in July 1994, shortly after successfully appealing to the Medical Tribunal of NSW to be re-registered. The Australian Medical Association publicly opposed the re-registration.

Dr Sliwinski was employed as a psychiatric registrar at Gosford and Wyong hospitals in 1996, and continues in this role.

But, to this day, many of his patients are unaware of his past - and there is no obligation for DrSliwinski or authorities to tell them.

The case of Dr Sliwinski raises difficult issues of a patient's right to know the record and background of their doctor and the ability of someone to redeem themselves and begin a new life.

In 1994 the Medical Tribunal said it had "some difficulty" deciding whether he was fit to be a doctor. But it concluded he was suitable because he did not intend to kill his wife, had no history of violence and was supported strongly by three psychiatrists who gave evidence that he had been fully rehabilitated and was very unlikely to relapse.

And yet questions remain unanswered. The Health Department will not reveal how it monitored Dr Sliwinski to ensure he met strict conditions imposed by the tribunal, such as regular urine and/or blood tests, psychiatric treatment and constant supervision. The tribunal also appeared to be unaware that Dr Sliwinski's wifealleged he had a history of violence against her. It found the killing was an "isolated occasion", despite her allegations, set out in an Apprehended Violence Order summons issued in the year before her death.

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists - which is responsible for ensuring the suitability of psychiatrists - has refused to comment on what processes it undertook to assess him. And in the 1990s the NSW Medical Board was not required to independently notify employers of a doctor's restrictions. A spokeswoman for the board, Edwina Light, said it was prohibited from revealing why DrSliwinski's strict conditions were lifted in 1999.

Doctors are not legally obliged to tell patients they are working under conditions or have been deregistered in the past, and the Health Department has no policy requiring disclosure.

Dr Sliwinski went on trial in the Supreme Court for the murder of Alice on October 1, 1987, a month after they divorced.

He pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the fourth day of his trial, in 1988, and was sentenced to a maximum of eight years' jail.

He had shot Alice four times but said he could not recall the incident and successfully argued diminished responsibility because of his intoxicated state.

In sentencing him, Justice Ray Loveday said there was no motive for the killing and described it as "quite bizarre".

According to the tribunal's 1994 judgment, he had been abusing alcohol and a cocktail of prescription drugs, mostly tranquillisers, for almost a decade and had sought psychiatric help several times from 1979, including stays at psychiatric hospitals in 1985 and 1987. He feared "dying and going mad".

His drinking dated back to the late 1960s, when he drank on the job as a medical trainee because he found attending cancer wards difficult.

His father died of bone cancer when Dr Sliwinski was 11 and his mother had schizophrenia.

The drug addiction began in 1977 after his first wife, Barbara, left him with their children and a doctor gave him Serepax after he was unable to administer anaesthesia due to a panic attack at Moree Hospital.

However, in its judgment in 1994 the tribunal concluded that Dr Sliwinski was not an intrinsically violent person. "[The shooting] does not indicate a tendency to vice or violence or any lack of probity. It has neither connection with nor significance for any professional function. There is no evidence that the appellant [previously] committed acts of violence towards his ex-wife or any other person …" the tribunal said.

However, a summons was issued to Dr Sliwinski over an allegation that he assaulted her by attempting to choke her in August 1986.

The AVO application, seen by the Herald, alleged that Dr Sliwinski, who had been drinking heavily, said to his wife, "If I hear you have done anything to foul up my career I will kill you", and had assaulted her three or four times during their five-year marriage. The AVO was withdrawn by his wife.

Three years before the killing, he was twice told to take sick leave from his job as a psychiatric registrar at Morriset Hospital due to his depressed mental state and concerns that he was suicidal.

He was also told to take sick leave from the Mater Hospital in Newcastle not long after that.

In 1987 he was sacked from a practice at Kilburn Bay and told to seek psychiatric help. He had come to the North Coast after he left Moree Hospital in 1980 after "difficulties with the Medical Board, [and] with the Hospital Board", and moved to Newcastle, the tribunal said.

He had been investigated by the Medical Board for failing to attend to an unconscious patient at Moree who had had a stroke, and was cautioned over the incident.

A spokeswoman for the Northern Sydney Central Coast Area Health Service, Jenny Dennis, said: "All appropriate background checks required at the time of his employment were conducted." She later confirmed "this included the NSW Medical Board".

"Central Coast Mental Health Service can confirm that Dr Sliwinski complied with the restrictions placed on him by the Medical Board," she said. She said there had been "no formal complaints about his work".

Ms Light, said it was the responsibility of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists to determine whether Dr Sliwinski was fit for psychiatry. The college would not comment.

The board's registrar, Andrew Dix, said it regularly monitored conditions. "It's up to the doctor to comply but if they don't comply we know about it very quickly because we've got a data base following this," Dr Dix said.

Alice's sister, Noleen Tasoulis, said the family was devastated that Dr Sliwinski was practising psychiatry. "I think it's disgusting," Mrs Tasoulis said.

She alleged that at the time of his marriage to her sister he was a "violent" alcoholic and her sister supported him with $335,000 she won in a lottery just before they married. "The seven years that he was married to my sister … he was in various [psychiatric] clinics … so it seems rather unbelievable that he could even practise."

Dr Sliwinski had a solicitor, Denis Williams, contact the Herald to arrange an interview yesterday to respond to questions about his past and what monitoring he was subjected to by the area health service.

Dr Sliwinski did not show up but a senior psychiatrist, Chris Tennant, who is a visiting medical officer at Gosford and Wyong hospitals, did, and strongly defended him.

Professor Tennant said "he met all the conditions imposed on him by the board".

He said whether he told the tribunal he was considering a career in psychiatry was irrelevant. "It's not their business," he said.

He declared the Herald "mother f---ers" after the meeting.

Mr Williams said Dr Sliwinski's suitability had been "extensively considered" by the college and the tribunal. "There's been no record anywhere of this bloke not doing the right thing since the day he was readmitted," he said.

Asked whether Dr Sliwinski divulged to the tribunal that there had been other allegations of assaulting his wife, Mr Williams said: "It's too long ago."

Asked about the alleged threat Dr Sliwinski made to his wife that he would kill her, Mr Williams said: "I think we'll end this now. Goodbye."

Grief Counseling Counterproductive

The Scientific American Podcast has this typically

“You need to talk about your feelings.” “Do you want to talk about it?” “We need to talk.” Whether it’s the aftermath of a failed relationship or the horrors of a school shooting, Americans do like to talk about things. Talking, we feel, is healthy. Talking will help us heal.

But a study from the University of Buffalo suggests that talking’s not the panacea we seem to think it is. Psychologists there have found that people who don’t discuss their feelings after a tragedy actually fare better than those who do.

The researchers were studying the mental and physical toll of grappling with a community-wide trauma—in this case, 9/11. Shortly after the attacks, they offered participants an opportunity to share their thoughts. Some did, some didn’t.

Two years later, the scientists found that people who kept it inside were better off than those who let it all hang out. The findings appear in the June issue of the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. So maybe we should give the grief counselors a vacation. Turn on some music. Maybe talk a walk. Feel our feelings. But not feel like we have to share them with everyone else.

School — 1957 vs. 2007

Quoted because of the observations on the psych abuse, but also because of the insights on political correctness As seen on Los Cuatro Ojos

Scenario #1:

Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school.

1957 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up buddies.

2007 - Police called, SWAT team arrives, arrests Johnny and Mark… Charge them with assault, both expelled even though Johnny started it.

Scenario #2:

Jeffrey won’t be still in class, disrupts other students.

1957 - Jeffrey sent to office and given a good paddling by the Principal… Returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.

2007 - Jeffrey given huge doses of Ritalin… Becomes a zombie. Tested for ADHD. School gets extra money from state because Jeffrey has a disability.

Scenario #3:

Billy breaks a window in his neighbor’s car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1957 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.

2007 - Billy’s dad is arrested for child abuse… Billy removed to foster care and joins a gang… State psychologist tells Billy’s sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison… Billy’s Mom has affair with psychologist.

Scenario #4:

Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school.

1957 - Mark shares aspirin with Principal out on the smoking dock.

2007 - Police called, Mark expelled from school for drug violations… Car searched for drugs and weapons.

Scenario #5:

Pedro fails high school English.

1957 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English, goes to college.

2007 - Pedro’s cause is taken up by state. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that teaching English as a requirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuit against state school system and Pedro’s English teacher… English banned from core curriculum… Pedro given diploma anyway… but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.

Scenario #6:

Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from 4th of July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle, blows up a red ant bed.

1957 - Ants die.

2007 - ATF, Homeland Security, FBI called. Johnny charged with domestic terrorism, FBI investigates parents, siblings removed from home… computers confiscated. Johnny’s Dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.

Scenario #7:

Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary… Mary hugs him to comfort him.

1957 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

2007 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in State Prison… Johnny undergoes 5 years of therapy.

State police seize documents from Massachusetts "shock" school

The Judge Rotenberg Educational Center in Canton, Massachusetts is an institution that has long earned our distaste and disdain. So news of a search with a search warrant is most welcome. As reported in the Boston Globe earlier this month

State Police seized documents late last week from the offices of the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center in Canton that are related to a prank phone call last summer that led two students to wrongfully receive dozens of punishing electrical shocks, according to two people with direct knowledge of the investigation.

The collection of evidence has to do with a yearlong grand jury investigation led by the office of Attorney General Martha Coakley, said Kenneth Mollins, a New York lawyer who has filed several lawsuits against the school and who said he spoke to a representative of Coakley's office about the Rotenberg investigation. Mollins said he was told the grand jury is also examining possible financial improprieties by the school.

The second source, who works for the state and asked to remain nameless because this person is not authorized to speak about grand jury proceedings, said State Police investigators came with a search warrant and left with boxes of documents. The source said the investigation had an ambitious scope and involves multiple government agencies.

Reached last night, Ernest Corrigan, a spokesman for the school, did not confirm that a seizure of documents had occurred last week. He said only that school officials have been cooperative with state and local police ever since they reported the prank phone call to police last summer.

"We've been supportive of the investigation," he said.

A spokesman for Coakley declined to comment, saying the office never confirms or denies an ongoing investigation.

The special-education school, which serves about 250 adults and children from across the country with emotional and behavioral problems, has been the target of numerous government investigations related to its unorthodox behavior-modification methods, including skin-shock treatments to deter inappropriate behavior. Rotenberg officials, who have weathered two attempts by Massachusetts officials to close the center, have defended its treatment methods as effective for some students.

School officials have also said they have instituted numerous safeguards to prevent a repeat of the Aug. 26 incident, in which two emotionally disturbed students wrongfully received dozens of electrical shocks based on instructions from a caller posing as a supervisor. The incident was caught on 24-hour surveillance tapes, which were shown to investigators last summer. The tapes were subsequently destroyed by school officials, even though investigators had instructed them to preserve the tapes.

After hearing about the destruction of the tapes, Senator Brian A. Joyce, a Democrat from Milton who has sought to ban shock therapy at the school, said he intended to ask the attorney general's office to look into the matter.

Psychiatrist Pleads Not Guilty To Murder

As covered widely in the Australian press, and as seen in the Australian

A FORMER NSW psychiatrist has pleaded not guilty to the shooting murder of South Australia's former mental health chief, Margaret Tobin, in 2002.
Appearing in the South Australian Supreme Court today, Jean Eric Gassy, 52, declared emphatically he was not guilty when asked to plead to the murder charge.

Dr Tobin was fatally shot as she walked from a lift on the eighth floor of an inner-city office building in Adelaide in October 2002.

She was 50 years old.

Justice Trish Kelly said the trial would be listed for hearing at the earliest opportunity.

Dr Tobin's widower, Don Scott, said outside court the day had been an emotional one for him.

Mr Scott said he would attend the trial, even though it might bring back “horrific” memories for him.

Representing himself, Mr Gassy was remanded in custody for a directions hearing in two weeks.

He flagged his intention to apply for a “suppression order” from the court, but Justice Trish Kelly suggested he raise it at the directions hearing.

Prosecutor Peter Brebner QC asked the court for more time to prepare the Crown case, because of the large number of witnesses expected to be called.

“Checking their availability will take quite some time,” Mr Brebner said.

As noted in this news item from Adelaide Now, this is a re-trial, due to the original conviction being overturned due to technical errors by the Judge in the case.

A Supreme Court judge has told prosecutors that the retrial of the man once convicted of the shooting murder of Dr Margaret Tobin should be held as soon as possible.

Justice Trish Kelly today said that a retrial for Jean Eric Gassy should be held as soon as possible.

"From the court's point of view, this matter should proceed in August," Justice Kelly said.

Gassy, 51, today pleaded not guilty to murder and plans to represent himself at trial.

The former Sydney psychiatrist was jailed for life with a 34-year non parole period for the shooting murder of Dr Tobin in October 2002.

Dr Tobin, then South Australia's mental health chief, was shot four times as she walked from a lift at her city office building.

Earlier this month, the High Court of Australia overturned Gassy's murder conviction and sentence.

The High Court found that Supreme Court Judge Ann Vanstone had erred in her directions to the jury during their deliberations in Gassy's original trial.

Prosecutor Peter Brebner QC said more than 160 witnesses were likely to be called when the matter again goes to trial.

Dr Tobin's widower Don Scott attended this morning's hearing, which lasted a little over two minutes.

Gassy will be back in court in June, when another judge will set a date for the trial.

First-ever government review shows fluoride may be toxic to the thyroid gland causing fatigue, weight gain, fuzzy thinking, depression, body pain, etc

Of course, our interest is in the psychiatric malfunctions, and the misdiagnosis of these conditions as actual psychiatric ailments.

As seen in this press release

There is clear evidence that small amounts of fluoride, at or near levels added to U.S. water supplies, present potential risks to the thyroid gland, according to the National Research Council's (NRC) first-ever published review of the fluoride/thyroid literature.(A)

Fluoride, in the form of silicofluorides, injected into 2/3 of U.S. public water supplies, ostensibly to reduce tooth decay, was never safety-tested.(B)

"Many Americans are exposed to fluoride in the ranges associated with thyroid effects, especially for people with iodine deficiency," says Kathleen Thiessen, PhD, co-author of the government-sponsored NRC report. "The recent decline in iodine intake in the U.S could contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals," says Thiessen.

"A low level of thyroid hormone can increase the risk of cardiac disease, high cholesterol, depression and, in pregnant woman, decreased intelligence of offspring," said Thiessen.(C)

Common thyroid symptoms include fatigue, weight gain, constipation, fuzzy thinking, low blood pressure, fluid retention, depression, body pain, slow reflexes, and more. It's estimated that 59 million
Americans have thyroid conditions.(D)

Robert Carton, PhD, an environmental scientist who worked for over 30 years for the U.S. government including managing risk assessments on high priority toxic chemicals, says "fluoride has detrimental effects on the thyroid gland of healthy males at 3.5 mg a day. With iodine deficiency, the effect level drops to 0.7 milligrams/day for an average male."(E) (1.0 mg/L fluoride is in most water supplies)

Among many others, the NRC Report cites human studies which show

- fluoride concentrations in thyroids exceeding that found in other soft tissues except kidney

- an association between endemic goiter and fluoride exposure or enamel fluorosis in human populations

- fluoride adversely affects thyroid and parathyroid hormones, which affect bone health

"If you have a thyroid problem, avoiding fluoride may be a good preventive health measure for you," writes Drs' Richard and Karilee Shames in "Thyroid Power."(F).

Over, 1,700 Physicians, Dentists, Scientists, Academics and Environmentalists urge Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation is ineffective and has serious health risks. (www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html)

Please sign the petition and Congressional letter to support these professionals

www.FluorideAction.Net

References:

(A) "Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards," Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies of Science. March 2006 Chapter 8 www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571

"Thyroid Function: Fluoride exposure in humans is associated with elevated TSH concentrations, increased goiter prevalence, and altered T4 and T3 concentrations." (Page 262)

"(The thyroid effects are associated with average fluoride intakes that) will be reached by persons with average exposures at fluoride concentrations of 1-4 mg/L in drinking water, especially the children." (Page 260)

(B) Sodium Hexafluorosilicate and Fluorosilicic Acid Review of Toxicological Literature, October 2001
ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/Chem_Background/ExSumPDF/Fluorosili ..

(C) Chemical & Engineering News, "Fluoride Risks Are Still A Challenge," by Bette Hileman, September 4, 2006,
pubs.acs.org/cen/government/84/8436gov1.html

(D) Mary Shomon, About.com Thyroid editor, Patient Advocate -- Author of "The Thyroid Diet" and "Living Well With Hypothyroidism"
thyroid.about.com/

(E) Fluoride, "Review of the 2006 National Research Council Report: Fluoride in Drinking Water," July-September 2006, by Robert J. Carton
www.fluorideresearch.org/393/files/FJ2006_v39_n3_p163-172.pdf

(F) Thyroid Power and Feeling Fat Fuzzy or Frazzeled"by Richard Shames MD & Karilee Shames RN, PhD
www.thyroidpower.com
www.feelingfff.com/


Fluoride/Thyroid Health Effects
www.fluoridealert.org/health/thyroid/

Sources of Fluoride
www.fluoridealert.org/f-sources.htm

Sulfuryl Fluoride Pesticide Residues Allowed on Foods
www.fluoridealert.org/pesticides/sulfuryl.f.all.food.html

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Fluoride Database of Selected Beverages and Foods
www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Fluoride/Fluoride.html

---

Kontaktinformation:

New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc

PO Box 263
Old Bethpage, NY 11804

Kontakt-Person:

Phone:
E-mail: e-mail

Web: http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof

---

Autor:

Nys Cof
e-mail
Web: http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof
Telefon: 5165551212

Psychiatric Drugs are the New Opiate of the Masses.

We stumbled across an interesting post on the Intellectual Conservative political blog, entitled The Hard Truth about a Soft Science: Why Psychology Does More Harm Than Good, starting off with this sentence

If you convince people they’re not responsible for their actions, you’ve set the stage for great evil to occur, as they will be able to justify anything suiting their fancy.

It makes a number of interesting points. While we are not taking sides in terms of politics here, a lot of the observations are spot on, especially as they get to the conclusion of the article.

Yet the implications of this collective sense that we aren’t responsible for our actions and that they can’t be “wrong” anyway go far beyond the resulting social breakdown. They even go beyond the governmental response, which is to step in and control from without people who do not control themselves from within. For the truly scary implication under such a scenario is not just that people will not govern their impulses, but that they cannot do so.

After all, if we are merely organic robots, at the mercy of our genes (hardware), chemistry and upbringing (software), we have no free will. It then follows that we cannot choose among, well, call them what you will, God’s morals or man’s values, as we are directed by things beyond our control. This reduces us to animals. While Christianity teaches that the two things making us like God and separating us from the animal kingdom are intellect and free will – two qualities necessary to be fully human – this idea tells us that, bereft of the second quality, we are mere automatons.

Of course, if Freud et al. are correct, that is all we are, chemicals and water arranged in a most interesting fashion – with a good helping of illusion thrown in for good measure. Thus, insofar as psychology succeeds in convincing us that there is no accountability because there is no free will – no ability to choose sin because there is no sin, only disease – it dehumanizes us.

Perhaps this dehumanization is why psychiatry has quite a history of using humans as guinea pigs. There was Benjamin Rush (the father of American psychiatry) and his bloodletting; Nazi experiments; electric shock and lobotomies; our MK ULTRA mind-control program; and Canadian psychiatrist Heinz Lehmann, who illegally used Thorazine on subjects in the 1950s.

Etc.

Yet another in a number of articles showing the decline of psychiatry.

One last quote:

As to this, I recently read about psychiatrists who are labeling the desire to engage in excessive text messaging a mental disorder. Then there is “Muscle Dysmorphia,” or the obsessive belief that one isn’t muscular enough; “celebriphilia,” the strong desire for amorous relations with a celebrity; “Intermittent Explosive Disorder,” or road rage; “Sibling Rivalry Disorder;” “Mathematics Disorder;” “Caffeine Related Disorder;” and “Expressive Writing disorder,” to cite just a handful of the hundreds of made-up conditions in the DSM. And every time a new variety is conjured up, psychology’s market and earning potential increases. I have to wonder, though, what do they call the obsession with labeling behaviors mental disorders? Some might call it greed.

Yet, as ridiculous as this seems, it’s also very consistent and understandable. Whether a religionist or atheist, one can’t help but notice that these organic robots don’t operate the way most of us would like. The Christian explanation for this is that we’re all sinners, but this is religious terminology and quite inappropriate for a machine. So psychology says we’re all mentally ill; it’s just a malfunction in the CPU, you see. Then, because a machine cannot commit sins but can be “out of order,” it calls them disorders. Thus, a defiant child or employee isn’t ruled by pride but has “Oppositional Disorder,” a person with a lack of gratitude isn’t just that but one who suffers from “Chronic Complaint Disorder,” and a man who is shallow and vain isn’t just that but one plagued by “Muscle Dysmorphia.” So there is a limit to the number of disorders that can be “invented,” and it’s roughly equivalent to the numbers of ways in which people can sin.

This brings us to an irony. In a strange way, this “study of the soul” is aptly named, as in a great measure psychology has usurped the role of religion. It co-opts sins, renames them, and then takes credit for their discovery; you could call it spiritual plagiarism.

I also might say that mental health professionals have become the new priesthood. After all, whereas years ago people might have gone to a man of the cloth for guidance, now they are likely to lie on a therapist’s couch. The prescriptions they get are far different, too. A priest, minister or rabbi would usually render advice steeped in tradition and God-centered, but the psychologist is most likely to offer relativistic counsel, where the focus is on feelings and is thus self-centered.

And what happens when the matter of religion is raised? If you’re like many, including someone I know of, you may be told you’re taking your faith too seriously, that such devotion is akin to a mental illness. This isn’t surprising, I suppose. What future could a person have with an “illusion,” even the very attractive one that Freud seemed to believe was the opiate of the masses?

Yet, with over 20 million Americans, 40 percent of college students and 1 out of 9 schoolchildren on psychiatrist-prescribed psychoactive drugs, one is left to wonder what realm is truly most deserving of that title.

Ahhh yes, Psychiatric Drugs are the New Opiate of the Masses.

Drug Czar Plays Politics With Mental Illness, Suicide And Marijuana

Via Furious Seasons, a report from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. This comment at Furious Seasons hits the nail on the head:

Yes, pot makes people kill themselves. That's such a bizarre assertion that it's embarrassing--and, indeed, claiming pot causes anxiety and suicide while perfectly legal drugs such as Paxil, Zoloft, Effexor and so on have been linked to suicidality and suicides and to cases of very extreme agitation is the very height of hypocrisy. A 2001 study published in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry found that 8.1 percent of admissions to one hospital's psych unit in a 14-month period were due to "antidepressant-associated mania or psychosis." In fact, a Whether you like or hate pot, you ought to be against the feds making such hypocritical claims or you ought to be in favor of Walters warning parents of teens about the dangers of anti-depressant-caused psychosis. I simply don't know of any studies proving that pot causes suicide. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's highly unlikely that such a link is very strong.

Anti-depressants are much more of a suicide threat.

Half of Americans are in some way mentally ill, and one-quarter of the population has taken anti-depressants, not including that one time at a rave

Another person is waking up to the fraud the is Modern Psychiatry. An Editorial in the NY Sun, by Christoper Lane

America has reached a point where almost half its population is described as being in some way mentally ill, and nearly a quarter of its citizens - 67.5 million - have taken antidepressants.

These statistics have sparked a widespread, sometimes rancorous debate about whether people are taking far more medication than is needed for problems that may not even be mental disorders. Studies indicate that 40% of all patients fall short of the diagnoses that doctors and psychiatrists give them, yet 200 million prescriptions are written annually in America to treat depression and anxiety.

Those who defend such widespread use of prescription drugs insist that a significant part of the population is under-treated and, by inference, under-medicated. Those opposed to such rampant use of drugs note that diagnostic rates for bipolar disorder, in particular, have skyrocketed by 4,000% and that overmedication is impossible without over-diagnosis.

To help settle this long-standing dispute, I studied why the number of recognized psychiatric disorders has ballooned so dramatically in recent decades. In 1980, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders added 112 new mental disorders to its third edition, DSM-III. Fifty-eight more disorders appeared in the revised third edition in 1987 and fourth edition in 1994.

With over a million copies in print, the manual is known as the bible of American psychiatry; certainly it is an invoked chapter and verse in schools, prisons, courts, and by mental-health professionals around the world. The addition of even one new diagnostic code has serious practical consequences. What, then, was the rationale for adding so many in 1980?

After several requests to the American Psychiatric Association, I was granted complete access to the hundreds of unpublished memos, letters, and even votes from the period between 1973 and 1979, when the DSM-III task force debated each new and existing disorder. Some of the work was meticulous and commendable.

But the overall approval process was more capricious than scientific.

DSM-III grew out of meetings that many participants described as chaotic. One observer later remarked that the small amount of research drawn upon was "really a hodgepodge - scattered, inconsistent, and ambiguous." The interest and expertise of the task force was limited to one branch of psychiatry: neuropsychiatry. That group met for four years before it occurred to members that such one-sidedness might result in bias.

Incredibly, the lists of symptoms for some disorders were knocked out in minutes. The field studies used to justify their inclusion sometimes involved a single patient evaluated by the person advocating the new disease. Experts pressed for the inclusion of illnesses as questionable as "chronic undifferentiated unhappiness disorder" and "chronic complaint disorder," whose traits included moaning about taxes, the weather, and even sports results.

Social phobia, later dubbed "social anxiety disorder," was one of seven new anxiety disorders created in 1980. At first it struck me as a serious condition. By the 1990s experts were calling it "the disorder of the decade," insisting that as many as one in five Americans suffers from it. Yet the complete story turned out to be rather more complicated.

For starters, the specialist who in the 1960s originally recognized social anxiety - London-based Isaac Marks, a renowned expert on fear and panic - strongly resisted its inclusion in DSM-III as a separate disease category. The list of common behaviors associated with the disorder gave him pause: fear of eating alone in restaurants, avoidance of public toilets, and concern about trembling hands.

By the time a revised task force added dislike of public speaking in 1987, the disorder seemed sufficiently elastic to include virtually everyone on the planet.

To counter the impression that it was turning common fears into treatable conditions, DSM-IV added a clause stipulating that social anxiety behaviors had to be "impairing" before a diagnosis was possible. But who was holding the prescribers to such standards? Doubtless, their understanding of impairment was looser than that of the task force. After all, despite the impairment clause, the anxiety disorder mushroomed; by 2000, it was the third most common psychiatric disorder in America, behind only depression and alcoholism.

Over-medication would affect fewer Americans if we could rein in such clear examples of over-diagnosis. We would have to set the thresholds for psychiatric diagnosis a lot higher, resurrecting the distinction between chronic illness and mild suffering. But there is fierce resistance to this by those who say they are fighting grave mental disorders, for which medication is the only viable treatment.

Failure to reform psychiatry will be disastrous for public health. Consider that apathy, excessive shopping, and overuse of the Internet are all serious contenders for inclusion in the next edition of the DSM, due to appear in 2012. If the history of psychiatry is any guide, a new class of medication will soon be touted to treat them.

Sanity must prevail: if everyone is mentally ill, then no one is.