Psychiatric experts with ties to drugmakers urge pills for grief
Dec 28, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Day
It was a simple experiment in healing the bereaved: Twenty-two patients who recently had lost a spouse were given an antidepressant.
#1 Dec 28, 2012
Stay away from these creeps in the mental health industry. They have no science. no evidence based medicine. No medical model and no test for chemical imbalance of the brain. The mental health industry is based on hearsay, voodoo, tarot card readings and crystal ball gazing. The industry has political intent for the New World Order and wants the power and control over the population. They have violated the human right worldwide and the civil rights of some countries.
They are a danger to all forms of government.
#2 Dec 28, 2012
Death, violence, erratic behavior and the suicide by mind drugs
Psychiatry: An industry of death
Psychiatry No Science
Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness
Every so often Al Frances says something that seems to surprise even him. Just now, for instance, in the predawn darkness of his comfortable, rambling home in Carmel, California, he has broken off his exercise routine to declare that “there is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.” Then an odd, reflective look crosses his face, as if he’s taking in the strangeness of this scene: Allen Frances, lead editor of the fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (universally known as the DSM-IV), the guy who wrote the book on mental illness, confessing that “these concepts are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the boundaries.” For the first time in two days, the conversation comes to an awkward halt.
Pasted from < http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/12/ff_dsmv... ;
There are no genetic tests, no brain scans, blood tests, chemical imbalance tests or X-rays that can scientifically/medically prove that any psychiatric disorder is a medical condition.
#3 Dec 28, 2012
ychiatric Diagnosis: Too Little Science, Too Many Conflicts of Interest [i]
Paula J. Caplan, Ph.D.
There is a lot of pain and suffering in the world, and it is tempting to believe that the mental health community knows how to help. It is widely believed, both by mental health professionals and the general population, that if only a person gets the right psychiatric diagnosis, the therapist will know what kind of measures will be the most helpful. Unfortunately, that is not usually the case, and getting a psychiatric diagnosis can often create more problems than it solves, including a lifetime of being labeled, difficulties with obtaining affordable (or any) health insurance (due to now having a pre-existing condition), loss of employment, loss of child custody, the overlooking of physical illnesses and injuries because of everything being attributed to psychological factors, and the loss of the right to make decisions about one’s medical and legal affairs. The creation and use of psychiatric diagnosis, unlike, for instance, psychiatric drugs, is not overseen by any regulatory body, and rarely does anyone raise the question of what role the assignment of a psychiatric label has played in creating problems for individuals.[ii]
The Problematic History
These serious limitations have not prevented the authors of the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), sometimes known as “the therapist’s Bible,” from making expansive claims about their knowledge and authority and wielding enormous power to decide who will and will not be called mentally ill and what the varieties of alleged mental illness will be. The DSM’s current edition is called DSM-IV-TR, and it was preceded by the original DSM (in 1952), then DSM-II (1968), DSM-III (1980), DSM-III-R (Third Edition Revised)(1987), DSM-IV (1994), and DSM-IV-TR (2000). The DSM-V is currently in preparation and slated for 2013 publication. Each time a new edition appears, the media ask whichever psychiatrist is the lead editor why a new edition was necessary, and like clockwork, each editor replies that it was because the previous edition really wasn’t scientific (Caplan, 1995). And each time a new edition appears, it contains many more categories than does the previous one. For instance, DSM-III-R contained 297 categories, and DSM-IV contained 374 (Caplan, 1995).
I served as an advisor to two of the DSM-IV committees, before resigning due to serious concerns after witnessing how fast and loose they play with the scientific research related to diagnosis (Caplan, 1995). The DSM is widely used, not only in the mental health system, but also in general medical practice, in schools, and in the courts. I have been involved since 1985 in trying to alert both therapists and the public to the manual’s unscientific nature and the dangers that believing in its objectivity poses. Since then, I have watched with interest a national trend toward gradually increasing openness to the idea that psychiatric diagnosis (A)is largely unscientific,(B)is highly subjective and political, and (C)can cause untold harm, ranging from the patients’ lowered self-confidence to loss of custody of children to loss of health insurance (because any psychiatric label can be considered evidence of a pre-existing condition) to loss of the right to make decisions about their medical and legal affairs.
More of this article:
#6 Dec 28, 2012
These guys are dangerous. Gone are the days of using common sense and logic and today its pill poping for everything. Pharma has taken over the disipline just as it took over mainstream medicine.
#7 Feb 5, 2013
We are into a dangerous situation in the society caused by mind drugs and forced drugging by the court. The mental health industry since the Reagan / Bush presidency represents a coup detat. The mind drugging of America began under the Bush Sr presidency.
#8 Feb 5, 2013
In the momentous article "Medical Science Under Dictator-ship," Dr. Leo Alexander, the chief U.S. medical consultant at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials, examined "the process by which the German medical profession became a willing and unquestioning collaborator with the Nazis." He noted the early changes in medical attitudes that predisposed German physicians to first collect data on their patients to conduct what today we call "cost-effective analysis," and then to use the latter information as a vehicle to commit medical genocide under the auspices of the totalitarianism of National Socialism. Dr. Alexander warns us that "from small beginnings" the values of an entire society may be subverted, leading to the horrors of a police state. The "small beginnings" in Nazi Germany that Dr. Alexander referred to first led the physicians to collect data from their patients and then violate their patients' privacy and medical record confidentiality by supplying the information to the state.(6) Organizations with humanitarian-sounding names were set up in Nazi Germany to institute "health" programs, under deceptive, euphemistic terms. For example, questionnaires collected by a "Realm's Work Committee of Institutions for Cure and Care" gathered and reported information on patients who had been ill five years or more and who were unable to work. "On the basis of name, race, marital status, nationality, next of kin, whether regularly visited and by whom, who bore financial responsibility, and so forth," decisions were ultimately made for the patient euthanasia program heralded by the Nazi government for the good of the state and the "health of the nation." The first steps taken toward barbarism were the result of the physicians' willingness to participate in patient data collection and the violation of medical privacy. "Corrosion," as Dr. Alexander wrote, "begins in microscopic proportions." German physicians were, more than any other profession, heavily represented in the Nazi Party, which they joined in droves. German psychiatrists were no exception, and they also enthusiastically supported Nazi Germany's gun control laws of 1938 that disarmed the civilian population and left a monopoly of force in the hands of the German military and the SS. The rest, as we say, is history.
AMA Becomes Political
As to the commitment of the AMA to weakening medical privacy and individual-based ethics in favor of population-based ethics and achieve a partnership with government, there is no longer any doubt.(7,8) In the case of the American Psychiatric Association, one only has to peruse its position statement on homicide prevention and gun control promulgated by its leadership as early as 1993: "In view of the need to reinforce individual and group sanctions against the use of violence as a social instrument, behavioral mode, or adaptorional [sic] pattern, as psychiatrists have done with drug abuse, suicidal actions, and antisocial behavior, the American Psychiatric Association recommends that strong controls be placed on the availability of all types of firearms to private citizens."(9) Why would the AMA and organized medicine become involved in this politically expedient but potentially explosive issue of gun control and condone the systematic violation of the privacy of vulnerable patients?
Don't believe everything the Republicans tell you . The Republicans are against guns and that is noticeable since the shootings at Virginia Tech and the allowing by a Republican Congress to make laws for the rights of the mental health industry to control guns (against) both in the public sector and the returning Gi's including Vets that have been purposely drugged by the mental health industry in Iraq and Vietnam. It's a ALEC plan IMO.
#9 Sep 24, 2013
I have ordered 2 times from this website PILLSMEDSHOP. COM . I called yesterday the customer care and asked for a discount as i was about to order twice the regular amount.
#10 Sep 27, 2013
Very great deal and very smooth transaction. PILLSMEDSHOPdotCOM was on top of my order and shipped it within a day. Thats all that they have control over and they done it fast. It sat in customs for a little bit but they have no control over the sluggishness of how customs work.
#11 Jan 30, 2014
I've been on Effexor from http://goo.gl/PJZwMF only one week but am cautiously very optimistic. Prior to this I was on citalopram but still feeling very low and sleeping poorly, feeling like I needed to be in bed 12-16 hours a day. Now I am waking naturally after only 8 hours sleep and finding it much easier to concentrate at work. I can hardly believe it is working so quickly but I feel so much better. I've had no side effects.
Add your comments below
|The Lancet journals: Three-quarters of depresse...||6 hr||MMR CAUSES AUTISM||2|
|Adding therapy to meds may speed depression rec...||10 hr||robina||2|
|Is depression curable? Of course it is||15 hr||HumanSpirit||1|
|Accutane Side Effects Exposed: Side Effects of ... (Feb '07)||Thu||Guller||2,553|
|Viagra May Help Women (Jul '08)||Thu||jennis||4|
|How long before feeling the effects of Zoloft (...||Wed||DeniseT||35|
|Trouble sleeping: a warning sign of suicide in ...||Aug 27||Pharma Maims Kills||8|
Find what you want!
Search Depression Forum Now