ON THE COMPLETE ALTERNATIVE TO PSYCHIATRY
By Justice Lover

There is a singular, one alternative to psychiatry, and it is political. It requires profound changes in the political systems under which humanity lives. These changes must come, and they had better come early, because psychiatry is only one aspect of the horrendous crisis to which we presently are increasingly exposed - a crisis which is worsening with every passing year - namely, the ecological, political, social and economical disintegration of the status quo on our planet. Our planet can no longer continue to sustain life under the rule of big business; therefore it is in the urgent interests of humanity to replace the existing plutocracy system with a direct and participatory democracy.

Previous posts in this series have exposed the atrocities and horrendous injustices perpetrated by the combine of Big Pharma and psychiatry with the approval of the entire ruling class. In this blog there is one post which lists over 30 alternatives to psychiatric “treatment”. Our concern here ,on this post,goes far beyond that, because psychiatry - being the fascist quackery that it is - does not offer any real therapy to people in emotional crisis. Instead, and in line with its fundamental fraud of “mental illness”,its shrinks torture and kill people under the pretext of coercive psychiatric “treatment”. Psychiatry is actually the cause of most of the psychiatric “illnesses” it claims to “treat” under the false pretences of a Medical Specialty. Therefore, alternatives to that “treatment” offer only temporary relief which ,although far better than the psychiatric “treatment”, do not offer a long term solution, much less prevent such problems from occurring in the first place.

Plutocracy, the regime under which we live, has been continuously generating all kinds of existential problems for individuals, as for society as a whole. Based on profit making, exploitation, and power grab the system is essentially inhuman and depressing. As a result, the vast majority of the people are powerless, depressed and unhappy. Yet , psychiatry would tell the suffering individuals that there is something wrong with them, rather than with the system. Having defined the suffering individuals as sick, the shrinks then force on them their “treatment” : psychiatric drugs, electric shocks and “psycho-surgery”. It is obviously, no treatment, and much less is it a therapy. It is torture - compulsory torture leading to permanent damage to the brain, and/or other forms of maiming, or death !

Human beings are social animals - the most social of all animals on our planet. Like a living tissue, where every cell is dependent on the well being of each cell in the entire tissue, and the entire tissue is dependent for its well being on that of each cell ,no person can survive separately, outside society. Even monks who seek solitary life have got their own small scale society. From birth to grave we are dependent on each other and on society for our well being. Therefore any individual who is rejected by and ejected from society is bound to suffer ,as a result, from a severe emotional crisis, and it is bound to affect the rest of the society.

To solve such problems society must establish its own mechanism, which would be the body to approach by any suffering individual before the onset of the crisis, and when it occurs. Such a social body would represent the entire society, and by embracing the individual back into the fold it would send a very strong message to the individual, namely, that he/she is wanted back into the fold of society ( rather than condemn the suffering individual with the present psychiatric stigma ). Such a message is a message of love and cooperation on an equal basis. It cannot exist under a regime which is unjust, exploitative and devoid of love, hence the need to change the political regime first. There was an historic precedent for the successful implementation such an alternative to psychiatry, but it was short lived because the world forces of capitalism have crushed it to death shortly after it had began.

The historic precedent took place in the People’s Republic of China, during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (1966- 1976). Then all psychiatric institutions in China were closed down and all the psychiatrists were sent to the countryside for manual work and re-education, so that they could experience the daily life of the peasants and learn from them. In the cities neighbourhood committees sprang up, made up of elected local residents, and one of their important functions was to embrace the local individuals who were “treated” as “mental patients” by the shrinks. The committee members embraced them, empowered them, and treated them as equals,so as to enable their unhindered return to society. No psycho-therapy can match such power of love and cooperation between human beings. Needless to say that with such an alternative political system very few people, if any, would find themselves in need of any emotional/mental therapy, because the source which generates the crisis would be completely eliminated !

"Did Drug Company Gifts Kill the Gift Ban?

http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/2008/07/did-drug-company-gifts-kill-gift-ban.html

Wednesday, July 2, 2008

"Did Drug Company Gifts Kill the Gift Ban?

In April, the Massachusetts State Senate passed a total ban on all drug company gifts to physicians (see my post here). Spearheaded by Senate President Therese Murray and supported by many others, the ban appeared certain to be approved in some form by the House, and Massachusetts could have bragged about taking the hardest line of any state against this form of legalized bribery.

But in what must go down as one of the greatest ironies in political history, the legislators visited BIO 2008, a massive Biotech conference in San Diego and one of the last of the great dug company swagfests--and now even Senator Murray wonders whether gifts might be necessary for good medicine. According the the State News Service, covered here in the Policy and Medicine Blog, Senator Murray said researchers in San Diego told her the ban would prevent productive interactions between doctors and researchers who are trying to treat the same diseases. “It’s something that we didn’t discuss when we did it, because we were looking purely at gifts to doctors,” Murray said in a telephone interview with the News Service. “But the fact is that some of these companies do bring researchers and doctors together to go over the latest research.”

Wow. Something happened at the convention to hoodwink our finest legislators into believing that doctors can't learn about research without being given free lunches. I didn't attend BIO 2008, but my colleague Harry Tracy did. Dr. Tracy is the writer and publisher of NeuroInvestment, quite possibly the best single source of cutting edge information for those investing in the pharmaceutical industry. Here is his review of BIO 2008, reprinted with his permission from his latest newsletter:

“At the BIO International Convention, 24,000 attendees had the opportunity to watch companies who were limited to fifteen minute sound bites, and much of the fun was to be had in the Exhibits area, where various companies, countries, and municipalities handed out tapas, wine, single-malt scotch, novelty pens, and miniature stuffed koalas, while holding raffles for everything from laptops to trips to London. Indeed, the local paper of record, the San Diego Union-Tribune, devoted a high-profile article to the bounty of "swag" available to attendees. Apparently they overlooked the gift available at the State of New Hampshire booth, which was a plastic band-aid dispenser. While we will treasure ours forever, this stretches the definition of "swag" beyond recognition. But these silly 'Freebies' are just a minor symptom of a larger problem with public relations and perception. San Diego, as it does for other large conventions, literally walled off for an afternoon and evening a five block section of the Gaslamp District, for a BIO-only party. There were three soundstages and seemingly acres of free food laid out for the occasionally semi-intoxicated revelers. Of course, those without a BIO badge were not allowed in, the party was only for "VIP's." As much as NI enjoys VIP treatment, there was something unsettling about seeing the excluded public peering over the barriers at the party-goers. At a time when the pharma industry is widely perceived as concerned with profit rather than with patient care, at a time that the industry is under siege by the Charles Grassley's of the world who believe that the industry deserves to be taken down a notch, this seems unwise. It is probably naive to think that the industry will police its excesses, but if it does not, its losses in the court of public opinion will continue to mount, and few in the audience will protest when the guillotines are brought out.”

I don't mean to imply that Senator Murray, or any other legislators, accepted any of these freebies in San Diego. But there's no question that they allowed their opinions to be influenced in a carnival of swag. Meanwhile, BIO 2008 has announced that Massachusetts Deval Patrick is their "Governor of the Year" on the strength of his support for a $1 billion Life Sciences initiative. I assume they will honor the Massachusetts Legislature with a similar award, depending on the outcome of the vote on S 2660.

Posted by Daniel Carlat, M.D"

EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVES TO PSYCHIATRIC "TREATMENT", EVEN WITHOUT CONSIDERING PSYCHIATRIC DOGMA AS QUACKERY'S CRAP, WHICH IT IS OF COURSE
by Justice Lover

As we have seen in this and in the preceding 13 blogs, the daily atrocities perpetrated by shrinks in the name of medical treatment have no justification whatsoever, not even from a psychiatric point of view. Yet, in most of the world's countries the shrinks have the legal power to force their "treatments" on their patient-victims, and with very little accountability. They can and did get away with murders (covered up by their "mental illness" lies). They do collaborate with Big Pharma to the detriment of their patients, and they get away with accepting bribes from Big Pharma in return for the colossal profits they amass for Big Pharma with their prescriptions and coercion.

There is now plenty of proof, scientific proof, that the Antipsychotics - like the Antidepressants - are useless from a psychiatric point of view, therefore prescribing them is one huge racket for the benefits of Big Pharma. We are accepting for argument sake that "mental illness"does exist, and similarly we are accepting that there are "psychotic patients" who require treatment to help the patients recover. However , psychiatric "treatment" does not work, is very dangerous ( likely to cause permanent brain damage or even death), is causing daily suffering, shortens life by 25 years, and stigmatising the patients for the rest of their lives !

The following list of effective alternative treatments was compiled by people who accept the psychiatric dogma of "mental illness", but they are realistic enough to conclude that what the shrinks force on people in emotional crisis, namely, psychiatric drugs, electric shocks and "psycho-surgery" do not help people. The shrinks torture them rather than provide a helpful treatment. Consequently, by offering effective alternatives to the shrinks' torture no justification
(if there ever was one) is left for coercive psychiatry. It must be outlawed now !


http://psychrights.org/Research/Digest/Effective/effective.htm

Effective Non-Neuroleptic Treatment

• Factors Involved in Outcome and Recovery in Schizophrenia Patients Not on Antipsychotic Medications: A 15-Year Multifollow-Up Study, A longitudinal study of 145 patients found a 40% recovery rate for those who did not take antipsychotics, versus a 5% rate for those who did, Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, Vol 195, May, 2007, No. 5: 407-414

• Five-year experience of first-episode nonaffective psychosis in open-dialogue approach: Treatment principles, follow-up outcomes, and two case studies, by Jaakko Seikkula1, Jukka Aaltonen, Birgittu Alakare, Kauko Haarakangas, Jyrki Kera¨Nen, & Klaus Lehtinen, Psychotherapy Research, March 2006; 16(2): 214/228. This study of the Open Dialogue approach in Finland that used as little neuroleptics as possible found that in a group of 42 patients, 82% did not have psychotic symptoms at the end of five years, 86% had returned to their studies or jobs, and only 14% were on disability allowance. Only 29% had ever been exposed to a neuroleptic medication at all during the five years, and only 17% were on neuroleptics at the end of five years. Other studies of this program are:

  • Open Dialogue Approach: Treatment Principles and Preliminary Results of a Two- year Follow-up on First Episode Schizophrenia, by Jaakko Seikkula, Birgitta Alakare, Jukka Aaltonen Juha Holma and Anu Rasinkangas, Ethical and Human Sciences and Services, 2003, 5(3), 163-182.

  • Open Dialogue in Psychosis II: A Comparison of Good and Poor Outcome Cases, by Jaakko Seikkula, Birgitta Alakare and Jukka Aaltonen, Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 14:267-284, 2001.

• Recurrent Psychotic Depression Is Treatable by Psychoanalytic Therapy Without Medication, by Bertram P. Karon, PhD, Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry. Volume 7. Number I . SIJring 2005

• Treatment of Schizophrenia Without Neuroleptics: Psychosocial Interventions Versus Neuroleptic Treatment, by Matt Irwin, Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 6, No. 2, Summer 2004.

• Remember Our Heritage, by Cloe Madanes, Psychotherapy Networker, November/December 2004. 2.2 Megabytes.

• Reversal of Schizophrenia Without Neuroleptics, by Matt Irwin, Howard University Hospital, Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, Volume 6, Number I, Spring 2004

• The Tragedy of Schizophrenia without Psychotherapy, by Bertram P. Karon, PhD, Journal of The American Academy of Psychoanalysis und Dynamic Psychiatry, 31(1), 89- 118, 2003.

• Soteria and Other Alternatives to Acute Psychiatric Hospitalization A Personal and Professional Review, by Loren R. Mosher, M.D., The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 187:142-149, 1999.

• Cognitive Therapy for the Prevention of Psychosis in People at Ultra-High Risk: Randomised Controlled trial, by Anthony P. Morrison, Paul French, Lara Walford, Shon W. Lewis, Aoiffe Kilcommons, Joanne Green, Sophie Parker and Richard P. Bentall, British Journal of Psychiatry, 2004;185, 291-7.

• The Michigan State Psychotherapy Project study compared standard medication treatment for those diagnosed with severe schizophrenia with quality controlled psychotherapy both alone and with medication as an adjunct. The study demonstrated extremely more favorable long-term outcomes (at lower cost) for those receiving psychotherapy alone from psychotherapists with relevant training and experience.

• Treatment of Acute Psychosis Without Neuroleptics: Two-Year Outcomes from the Soteria Project by John R. Bola, Ph.D., and Loren R. Mosher, M.D., Journal of Nervous Mental Disease, 191 (2003):219-29, finds that a relationally focused therapeutic milieu with minimal use of antipsychotic drugs, rather than drug treatment in the hospital, should be a preferred treatment for persons newly diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

• Luc Ciompi, M.D., Professor Emeritus, MD, Switzerland
  • The Soteria-concept. Theoretical bases and practical 13-yearexperience with a milieu-therapeutic approach of acute schizophrenia, Special lecture given at the 93 Annual Meeting of the Japanese Society of Psychiatry and Neurology, Tokyo, May 29th-31th, 1997, published in Psychiatria et Neurologia Japonica 99: 634-650, 1997.
  • The Concept of Affect Logic: An Integrative Psycho-Socio-Biological Approach to Understanding and Treatment of Schizophrenia, Psychiatry, Vol. 60, Summer 1997.

• The Effects of Medicating or Not Medicating on the Treatment Process by Bertram P. Karon, Ph.D. discusses both the harm caused by neuroleptics and the efficacy of a psycho-dynamic process (2003). Longer version presented at Division of Psychoanalysis (39), American Psychological Association, New York, NY, April, 2002.

• Psychotherapy with "Schizophrenia": Analysis of Metaphor to Reveal Trauma and Conflict, by Richard Shulman, PhD, Co-published simultaneously in The Psychotherapy Patient (The Haworth Press, Inc.) Vol. 9, No. 3/4, 1996, pp. 75-106; and: Psychosocial Approaches to Deeply Disturbed Persons (eds: Peter R. Breggin, and E. Mark Stern) The Hawthorn Press, Inc., 1996, pp.75-106.

• The Benefits of Individual Psychotherapy for People Diagnosed with Schizophrenia: A Meta-Analytic Review by William H. Gottdiener and Nick Haslam, Ethical Human Sciences and Services, (2002) 4 (3), pp. 163-187. This comprehensive review of the literature finds that psychotherapy is as effective as medication and that adding medication does not increase effectiveness.

• How Non-Diagnostic Listening Led to Rapid "Recovery:" from Paranoid Schizophrenia: What is Wrong With Psychiatry? by Al Sieberts, Ph.D. In this paper, Dr. Sieberts finds that Psychiatry lacks insight into its own behavior, invalidates constructive criticism, avoids the kind of self-examination it urges on "patients," shows little interest in accounts of successes with schizophrenic" individuals, erroneously lumps all the schizophrenias (plural) together in research studies, feels helpless and hopeless about schizophrenia, dismisses evidence that contradicts its inaccurate beliefs, and misrepresents what is known about "schizophrenia" to the public and to patients.

• The Soteria Project: Twenty Five Years of Swimming Upriver, Loren R. Mosher, John R. Bola, Complexity and Change, (2000) 9: 68-74. This paper identifies the key ingredients to Soteria's success in treating patients diagnosed with schizophrenia without or with minimal medication.

• Approaches to Madness Shared by Cross-Cultural Healing Systems and Strategic Family Therapy, by Madeleine Richeport-Haley, Journal of Family Psychotherapy, Vol 9(4), 61-75, 1998.

• Recovery: The Lived Experience of Rehabilitation, by Patricia E. Deegan, Ph.D., revised version of paper originally published in Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, 1988, 11(4), 11-19. This very important paper describes in moving, personal terms the importance of hope in recovery. And willingness. And responsible action. It also provides very important information on how to structure a program to achieve recovery.

• Soteria-California and Its Successors: Therapeutic Ingredients By Loren R. Mosher M.D., suggests that the strikingly beneficial effects of the Soteria type treatment are likely due to (a) the milieu, (b) attitudes of staff and residents, (c) quality of relationships, and (d) supportive social processes. Dr. Mosher also discusses how leadership effects the success of these programs.
• Soteria Project: Final Progress Report, by Loren Mosher and Bob Vallone, 3/14/92. (9 megabytes)

• William Carpenter, Jr., "The treatment of acute schizophrenia without drugs: an investigation of some current assumptions," American Journal of Psychiatry, 134 (1977), 14-20.

• New Hope for People with Schizophrenia, Monitor on Psychology, Volume 31, No. 2, February 2000 discusses the growing evidence that people can and do recover from serious mental illness with the critical ingredient being psychosocial rehabilitation.

• Psychoanalysis and Psychosis: Trends and Developments by Ann-Louise S. Silver, M.D Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, Vol 31, No. 1, Spring 2001. Psychodynamic work is too often dismissed as outmoded, while no theory has been developed that rivals it in effectiveness or in ability to offer cohesive theory.

• Maurice Rappaport, "Are there schizophrenics for whom drugs may be unnecessary or contraindicated?" International Pharmacopsychiatry, 13 (1978), 100-111, concludes Many un-medicated-while-in-hospital patients showed greater long-term improvement, less pathology at follow-up, fewer re-hospitalizations and better overall function in the community than patients who were given chlorpromazine while in the hospital.

• Psychoanalysis and Psychosis: Players and History in the United States, by Ann-Louise Silver M.D., Psychoanalysis and History 4(1), 2002. In this paper, Dr. Silver outlines how psychoanalysis has had significant success in treating schizophrenia and other psychoses since the early 1900's in the United States.

• Treatment at Soteria House: A Manual for the Practice of Interpersonal Phenomenology, by Loren Mosher, Robert Vallone & Alma Menn,1992.

• Deinstitutionalized Residential Care for the Mentally Disordered: The Soteria House Approach, by Holly Skodo Tilson, 1982, Grune & Stratton, Inc. Beware: 39 Megabytes.

• Susan Mathews, “A non-neuroleptic treatment for schizophrenia: analysis of the two-year postdischarge risk of relapse,” Schizophrenia Bulletin, 5 (1979), 322-332 finds that at 12 months postdischarge, the cumulative probability of remaining well significantly favors the alternative Soteria program over the standard use of neuroleptics.

• A Child Welfare Agency Project: Therapy for Families of Status Offenders, by Kenneth W. Michaels & Robert H. Green, Child Welfare, Vol LVIII. No.3:216-219 (1979).

• Consumer Operated Support Programs
• Traditional community resources for mental health: a report of temple healing from India, by R Raguram, A Venkateswaran, Jayashree Ramakrishna, Mitchell G Weiss, British Medical Journal, v325 p38, 6 JULY 2002 bmj.com

• Loren Mosher, “Community residential treatment for schizophrenia: two year followup,” Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 29 (1978), 715-723 finding that two years after discharge while the alternative Soteria program patients didn't show significantly different readmission rates or symptoms, they received medications significantly less often, used less outpatient care, showed significantly better occupational levels and were more able to live independently.

• Effective Psychotherapy of Chronic Schizophrenia, by Nathaniel S. Lehrman, M.D., American Journal of Psychoanalysis, (1982), Vol.42, No. 2: 121-131. This 1982 paper presents the evidence already existing that over-reliance on neuroleptics was worsening outcomes. In this paper Dr. Lehrman discusses how individually tailored psychotherapy can get people who have chronically suffered schizophrenia well and back out into the community as a full member.

MORE TOP SHRINKS ARE INVESTIGATED IN THE USA FOR ACCEPTING HEAVY BRIBES FROM BIG PHARMA
by Justice Lover

The following report was emailed to me today :


Grassley Outs Stanford Psychiatrist, Alan Schatzberg: Undisclosed $6 Million Shares in Abortion

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION
Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability
http://www.ahrp.org and http://ahrp.blogspot.com

FYI

The latest prominent psychiatrist to be outed for concealing financial conflicts of interest by Senator Charles Grassley's investigation is the chair of Stanford University department of psychiatry, Alan Schatzberg MD. http://ahrp.blogspot.com/2007/12/contemporary-hucksters-in-psychiatry.html

According to Sen. Grassley, Dr. Schatzberg disclosed ownership of more than $100,000 of stock in Corcept, manufacturer of the abortion pill, RU-86(mifepristone) which Dr. Schatzberg is testing and promoting for the treatment of depression. In 2002, Dr. Schatzberg has stated that treatment of psychotically depressed patients with the abortion drug, RU-486, "may be the equivalent of shock treatments in a pill."http://ahrp.blogspot.com/2007/12/contemporary-hucksters-in-psychiatry.html

Disclosure of $100,000 financial interest does not qualify as "full disclosure" when he actually owns $6 million in company stock. Bernard Carroll, MD, former chair of psychiatry at Duke University, is not impressed with the current vogue in disclosure statements which merely give the appearance of disclosure but fail to disclose the most salient financial conflicts of interest. "You can give a laundry list of what you'reconnected with - but buried in that, and unrecognized by the average reader,is really salient information about how close your association is with acompany," Carroll said.

Peter Whitehouse, MD, PhD, professor of neurology and bioethics, CaseWestern, is a world recognized authority on the aging brain and Alzheimer'sdisease. For twenty-five years he served as an academic consultant for drug companies conducting: scientific (basic research), clinical (tested newdrugs) and organizational / ethical areas (organized international conferences). Dr. Whitehouse was instrumental in the development of AD drugs, earning him millions of dollars. He no longer recommends the drugs and has severed his ties to industry.

In a recent article, Dr. Whitehouse explains why he no longer consults for drug companies. See: Peter Whitehouse, Why I No Longer Consult for Drug Companies, in Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 2008, vol.32:4-10 (excerpt below) Dr. Whitehouse states that he grew increasingly concerned about being a KOL(key opinion leader) when he realized how drug companies were manipulating academics like himself into promoting disease and drugs rather than seeking their independent science-based opinions.

"I earned over $50,000 of personal income per year (on average) for 20 years from the pharmaceutical industry and several millions of dollars in research and educational grants with my work in the Alzheimer field. I have recently moved as close to zero income as is possible from drug companies, but the pervasiveness of industry funding is so great it is hard to know how thoroughly it has been laundered through professional organizations and universities. I have stopped consulting for the pharmaceutical industry because I do not want to help them control not only our healthcare system but our very conceptions of health and illth."

Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav
veracare@ahrp.org
212-595-8974

(Emphasis by Justice Lover)

AN UPDATE : THE PSYCHIATRIC TORTURE OF REBECCA MERHAV CONTINUES, HER WAY TO RECOVERY BLOCKED, AND RISKS TO HER SURVIVAL INCREASE BY THE DAY AS A RESULT OF THE SHRINKS' INTRANSIGENCE
by Justice lover

In a letter to Rebecca's father received today the Chief Psychiatrist continues to ignore and/or reject all the complaints made to him on behalf of Rebecca. As if more than 30 years of Rebecca's suffering under compulsory psychiatric "treatment" are not enough, the Chief Psychiatrist insists that the "treatment" (350 mg Clozapine daily, 75mg Risperdal injections every 10 days, and daily Cogenten tablets to counter the involuntary muscle movements caused by the two Antipsychotics) is "clinically appropriate". He therefore concludes that the complaints made on behalf of Rebecca are now "formally closed", meaning that he does not want to get any more complaints from her or on her behalf.

As for the official ban on contacts and information imposed by the shrinks on Rebecca's father, the Chief Psychiatrist supports them too, and he blames Rebecca's father rather than the shrinks under him as follows :

"I am aware that you and Rebecca's treating service have reached a communication impasse...
I remain hopeful that you will in the future, be able to develope a positive relationship with the treating team as this will be in Rebecca's best interests."

Is this a new threat by the shrinks - with the approval of the Chief Psychiatrist - namely : comply with our irrational psychiatric torture of Rebecca, or else we will make her suffer more ?

On the 21st June, 2008, Rebecca's father emailed a complaint to the Minister for Mental Health as follows :

Hon Lisa Neville, MP
Minister for Mental Health
Melbourne, Victoria.

Dear Minister,

I have had no reply whatsoever from the Chief Psychiatrist to my email to him on behalf of my daughter.
As you would see for yourself (no need for any knowledge of psychiatry, just plain common sense), the article below (with emphasis added by myself ) by Dr. Fred Baughman, a veteran American neurologist, who has researched psychiatry for many years, points to the latest psychiatric atrocities in the USA, which had claimed the lives of four young men, following their consumption of psychiatric drugs. One of those drugs, the Antipsychotic drug Seoquel, which Dr. Baughman defines as "the most toxic", causing the death of the 4 young men, Rebecca was forced to consume by her capricious treating psychiatrist. Moreover, she had ordered Rebecca's incarceration at the Alfred Psychiatric Ward on the 9th of March, 2008, so that she could force an increase of the poison from 400mg per day to 600mg per day on Rebecca (on top of the 75mg Risperdal every 10 days injected into her).

Does Rebecca have to die too before they stop her psychiatric deadly torture ?

Looking forward to your early reply, Benjamin Merhav

on behalf of Rebecca Merhav

http://health.einnews.com/article.php?nid=519196

A Cluster of Veterans' Deaths; By Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD

June 20, 2008
EL CAJON, Calif., June 20 /PRNewswire/ -- Recently four Charleston, WV-area veterans -- Derek Johnson, 22, Andrew White, 23, Eric Layne, 29, and Nicholas Endicott, with "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" (PTSD), treated with the Paxil, Klonopin, and Seroquel -- died in their sleep. All were said to be in good health. (Julie Robinson, Charleston Gazette, May 24, 2008).
In a democracy, we have a right to "informed consent." Physicians have a legal obligation to tell us the facts regarding (1) diagnosis and (2) treatment. Regarding diagnosis: Is there a disease or isn't there? Which disease? If there is no disease, that leaves emotional or psychological. Regarding treatment, physicians have a duty to tell us the facts, about all available treatments, not just the treatment they prefer. The choice is ours. This is informed consent.
Were these veterans and their families told by their psychiatrists that PTSD, bipolar disorder, clinical depression and other mythical psychiatric "diagnoses" are "disorders," "diseases," or "chemical imbalances" of the brain? Were these the reasons, according to their psychiatrists, that they needed psychiatric drugs? If they were told this to gain their "informed consent" to treat, then they were lied to, and their right to informed consent was denied.
In fact, there is no such thing in the annals of medicine as a psychiatric disease. In 1948 neurology and psychiatry were made into separate specialties -- neurology to deal with actual diseases, such as multiple sclerosis, brain tumors, epilepsy, etc. -- and psychiatry to deal with emotional and behavioral problems, none actual medical diseases.

By definition, the terms "disorder" and "disease" mean an objective physical abnormality is present. Never the case in psychiatry. And yet it is standard practice in psychiatry today, to tell patients they have "chemical imbalances" of the brain; "chemical imbalances" needing "chemical balancers" -- pills.

In the DSM-IV, of the American Psychiatric Association (Introduction, page xxi, Definition of Mental Disorder), we read: "Although this volume is titled the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the term mental disorder unfortunately implies a distinction between 'mental' disorders and 'physical' disorders that is a reductionistic anachronism of mind/body dualism. A compelling literature documents that there is much 'physical' in 'mental' disorders and much 'mental' in 'physical' disorders."
Here, the APA, unabashedly claims that psychiatric diagnoses are as much diseases as those in all other medical specialties. Saying a "compelling literature" makes it so, they reference not a single proof in the medical-scientific literature, making a single psychiatric entity an actual disease.
Because psychiatric diagnoses are not actual diseases, they must be psychological or psychiatric, not medical. This means they could not cause physical complications including death.
On the other hand, all drugs, even penicillin, are exogenous chemicals, and are poisons. The pivotal question in medicine is: Are they more helpful than harmful? Of the drugs the four veterans were on, the antipsychotic, Seroquel, is the most toxic.

All antipsychotics carry this ominous black box warning: "Elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis are at an increased risk of death." "Warnings/Precautions" include: "neuroleptic-malignant syndrome" (usually fatal), "tardive dyskinesia" (permanent, grotesque, movements of the face, tongue, head, neck and body), "cerebrovascular events" "cardiovascular events," "diabetes," "obesity," "gynecomastia" (male breast development needing mastectomy), "suicidal tendencies," "impaired temperature control," "dysphagia" (trouble swallowing), "aspiration pneumonia," and "death." Nor are the other two drugs -- Paxil and Klonopin without their own long lists of side effects. The more drugs given simultaneously, the less the science and the greater the risks of injury and death. Only in psychiatry do patients end up with multiple "diagnoses" (none of them diseases), on multiple drugs.

"I want to know the cause of death," said Ray Johnson, Derek Johnson's father. "Stacie said he was fine. Everything was normal. He kissed her goodnight and went to sleep." All that is certain, he never woke up.
Because there is no such thing as a psychiatric disease, none of the veterans mentioned in this article could possibly have died from a psychiatric "disease." By process of elimination, it can be assumed that they may have died from their drugs; from their "treatments" for diseases that do not exist.
Their loved ones should begin their painful quest for justice by writing the president of the APA, Dr. Carolyn Robinowitz, (American Psychiatric Association, 1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1825, Arlington, VA 22209) and, to the current director of the National Institute of Mental Health, Dr. Thomas Insel, (National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 8184, MSC 9663, Bethesda, MD 20892-9663) and ask them for proof that PTSD or any of their psychiatric diagnoses or "disorders" are actual diseases, having, as they must a confirming, objective, physical abnormality, gross (visible to the naked eye), microscopic -- as in a Pap smear or biopsy, or, chemical -- as in the chemical abnormalities of diabetes, galactosemia, gout or phenyketonuria. I suggest they do this now, copying their US Representative, their own US Senator, Jay Rockefeller, D-WV, and Senator Charles Grassley, R-IA.
*Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD, has discovered and described real diseases. He assumes full responsibility for all statements herein.

     Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD
    fredbaughmanmd@cox.net
    1303 HIDDEN MOUNTAIN DRIVE
    EL CAJON, CA 92019
    Tele: (619) 440-8236
    Fax: (619) 442-1932

SOURCE Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD

PSYCHIATRY - BOTH ITS DOGMA AND ITS ATROCITIES - CANNOT BE REFORMED. PSYCHIATRY MUST BE OUTLAWED NOW !
by Justice Lover

The following press release was emailed to me today by the Green Party in Northern Ireland .
While it is good news to have their proposed bill made law, it is only a small beginning ! So please keep it up !

---

From: Green Party Press Office [mailto:greenparty.press.office@gmail.com]
Sent: 25 June 2008 13:57
To: Green Party
Subject: Mental health reform: Greens seek end to forced shock therapy and lobotomies

25 June 2008

Mental health reform: Greens seek end to forced shock therapy and lobotomies

Green Party Senators Deirdre de Burca and Dan Boyle will this evening in Seanad Éireann introduce a Private Member's Bill aimed at ceasing the practice of forced electro-convulsive therapy (ECT) and psycho-surgery, more popularly known as 'lobotomy.'

"The issue of informed consent is critical where the use of controversial psychiatric procedures such as ECT are concerned," said Senator de Burca. "Our Private Members Bill – "Mental Health (Involuntary Procedures) (Amendment) Bill 2008 – aims to prohibit the involuntary use of ECT and ends the practice of psycho-surgery."

Senator Dan Boyle added: "Seanad Éireann is an appropriate forum to initiate debates of this nature and to reform aspects of legislation in ways that Dáil Éireann cannot. This Bill gives the Seanad the opportunity of acting independently in addition to allowing the Green Party Senators to show our ability to act on our own initiative in progressing important policy decisions."

[ENDS]

Information:
Senator Deirdre de Burca, 086 8061450
Senator Dan Boyle, 087 2772701

---

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/24/health/24deme.html?scp=1&sq=antipsychotics
&st=cse

June 24, 2008

Doctors Say Medication Is Overused in Dementia

By LAURIE TARKAN

Ramona Lamascola thought she was losing her 88-year-old mother to dementia. Instead, she was losing her to overmedication.

Last fall her mother, Theresa Lamascola, of the Bronx, suffering from anxiety and confusion, was put on the antipsychotic drug Risperdal. When she had trouble walking, her daughter took her to another doctor — the younger Ms. Lamascola’s own physician — who found that she had unrecognized hypothyroidism, a disorder that can contribute to dementia.

Theresa Lamascola was moved to a nursing home to get these problems under control. But things only got worse. “My mother was screaming and out of it, drooling on herself and twitching,” said Ms. Lamascola, a pediatric nurse. The psychiatrist in the nursing home stopped the Risperdal, which can cause twitching and vocal tics, and prescribed a sedative and two other antipsychotics.

“I knew the drugs were doing this to her,” her daughter said. “I told him to stop the medications and stay away from Mom.”

Not until yet another doctor took Mrs. Lamascola off the drugs did she begin to improve.

The use of antipsychotic drugs to tamp down the agitation, combative behavior and outbursts of dementia patients has soared, especially in the elderly. Sales of newer antipsychotics like Risperdal, Seroquel and Zyprexa totaled $13.1 billion in 2007, up from $4 billion in 2000, according to IMS Health, a health care information company.

Part of this increase can be traced to prescriptions in nursing homes. Researchers estimate that about a third of all nursing home patients have been given antipsychotic drugs.

The increases continue despite a drumbeat of bad publicity. A 2006 study of Alzheimer’s patients found that for most patients, antipsychotics provided no significant improvement over placebos in treating aggression and delusions.

In 2005, the Food and Drug Administration ordered that the newer drugs carry a “black box” label warning of an increased risk of death. Last week, the F.D.A. required a similar warning on the labels of older antipsychotics.

The agency has not approved marketing of these drugs for older people with dementia, but they are commonly prescribed to these patients “off label.” Several states are suing the top sellers of antipsychotics on charges of false and misleading marketing.

Ambre Morley, a spokeswoman for Janssen, the division of Johnson & Johnson that manufactures Risperdal, would not comment on the suits, but said: “As with any medication, the prescribing of a medication is up to a physician. We only promote our products for F.D.A.-approved indications.”

Nevertheless, many doctors say misuse of the drugs is widespread. “These antipsychotics can be overused and abused,” said Dr. Johnny Matson, a professor of psychology at Louisiana State University. “And there’s a lot of abuse going on in a lot of these places.”

Dr. William D. Smucker, a member of the American Medical Directors Association, a group of health professionals who work in nursing homes, agreed. Though the group encourages doctors to conduct a thorough assessment and prescribe antipsychotics only as a last resort, he said, “Many physicians are absent without leave in the nursing home and don’t take an active role in the assessment of the patient.”

Some nursing homes are trying a different approach, so-called environmental intervention. The strategies include reducing boredom, providing intellectual and physical stimulation, exercise, calming music, bringing in pets for therapy and improving how the staff approaches and talks to dementia patients.

At the Margaret Teitz Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in Queens, social workers do life reviews of patients to understand their interests, lifestyle and former occupations.

“I had a patient who used to be in fashion,” said Nancy Goldwasser, the director of social services. “So we got her fabric samples. And she’d sit and look through the books, touch the fabric, and it would calm her.”

But such approaches are time consuming, they do not help all patients, they can be prohibitively expensive and they will be more difficult to provide as Alzheimer’s continues to increase.

“Our health care system isn’t set up to address the mental, emotional and behavioral problems of the elderly,” said Dr. Gary S. Moak, president of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry.

Nursing homes are short staffed, and insurers do not generally pay for the attentive medical care and hands-on psychosocial therapy that advocates recommend. It is much easier to use sedatives and antipsychotics, despite their side effects.

The first generation of antipsychotics, like Haldol, carry a significant risk of repetitive movement disorders and sedation. Second-generation antipsychotics, also called atypicals, are more commonly prescribed because the risk of movement disorders is lower. But they, too, can cause sedation, and they contribute to weight gain and diabetes.

Used correctly, the drugs do have a role in treating some seriously demented patients, who may be incapacitated by paranoia or are self-destructive or violent. Taking the edge off the behavior can keep them safe and living at home, rather than in a nursing home.

If patients are prescribed an antipsychotic, it should be a very low dose for the shortest period necessary, said Dr. Dillip V. Jeste, a professor of psychiatry and neuroscience at the University of California, San Diego.

It may take a few weeks or months to control behavior. In many cases, the patient can then be weaned off of the drugs or kept at a very low dose.

Some experts say another group of medications — antidementia drugs like Aricept, Exelon and Namenda — are underused. Research shows that 10 to 20 percent of Alzheimer’s patients had noticeable positive responses to the drugs, and 40 percent more showed some cognitive improvement, even if it was not noticeable to an observer.

“Sometimes, it’s enough to take the edge off the behavioral problems, so the family and patient can live with it and you don’t expose people to much risk,” said Dr. Gary J. Kennedy, director of geriatric psychiatry at the Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx.

Other experts cite a lack of research backing these drugs for behavioral problems.

If patients begin showing behavioral symptoms of dementia, doctors said, they should have complete medical and psychiatric workups first, especially if symptoms develop suddenly.

“Just because someone is 95 does not mean one should not do a workup, especially if she’s been healthy,” Dr. Kennedy said.

Common causes of the symptoms include ministrokes, reparable brain hemorrhage from a mild bump on the head, hypothyroidism, dehydration, malnourishment, depression and sleep disorders.

Some doctors point out that simply paying attention to a nursing home patient can ease dementia symptoms. They note that in randomized trials of antipsychotic drugs for dementia, 30 to 60 percent of patients in the placebo groups improved.

“That’s mind boggling,” Dr. Jeste said. “These severely demented patients are not responding to the power of suggestion. They’re responding to the attention they get when they participate in a clinical trial.

“They receive both T.L.C. and good general medical and humane care, which they did not receive until now. That’s a sad commentary on the way we treat dementia patients.”

To family members looking at a nursing home for an aging parent, experts recommend seeking out homes with low staff turnover, a high ratio of staff members to patients, and programs with psychosocial components.

The Medicare Web site has basic information on individual homes at www.medicare.gov/NHcompare. The National Citizens’ Coalition for Nursing Home Reform, at www.nccnhr.org, offers a consumer guide to choosing a nursing home.

If medications are necessary, a family member should communicate with the prescribing doctor, learn the goal of each medication and be involved in making the decision.

Dr. Moak, of the psychiatry association, emphasized seeking out the doctor. Family members, he said, “often speak through the nursing staff, and that’s a huge mistake.”

Family members who are not convinced that a relative is receiving the best care should get a second opinion, as Ramona Lamascola did.

The physician she consulted, Dr. Kennedy of Montefiore, stopped her mother’s antipsychotics and sedatives and prescribed Aricept.

“It’s not clear whether it was getting her hypothyroid and other medical issues finally under control or getting rid of the offending medications,” he said. “But she had a miraculous turnaround.”

Theresa Lamascola still has dementia, but she went from confinement in a wheelchair — unable to sit still and screaming out in fear — to being able to walk with help, sit peacefully, have some memory and ability to communicate, understand subtleties of conversations and even make jokes.

Or, as her daughter put it, “I got my mother back.”