More Shady Behavior Found In the World of Psychiatric Drugs

Police LIne Photo Credit

Photo Credit

“The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry” just published an article in which a host of MD’s and PhD’s explored the idea that many individuals who use antidepressants have no current or lifetime history of mental disorders.

Of those currently taking anti-depressant drugs, researchers found that 38 per cent of SSRI users did not meet the criteria for a mental disorder, and 69 per cent did not meet the criteria for major depressive disorder.

But instead they had been prescribed anti-depressants for a variety of   physical problems – back pain, hypertension, bladder control problems, etc.

The study conclusion stated: “Many individuals who are prescribed and use antidepressant medications may not have met criteria for mental disorders. Our data indicate that antidepressants are commonly used in the absence of clear evidence-based indications.”

Dr. Howard Forman, medical director of the Addiction Consultation Service at Montefiore Medical Center commented on the study saying,

“We all experience periods of stress, periods of sadness, and periods of self-doubt. These don’t make us mentally ill, they define us as human.”

However, the business model of the psychiatrist and drug manufacturer has taken the opposite view:

  1. Create more and more psychiatric labels so that more aspects of normal life require treatment with an anti-depressant or anti-psychotic drug.
  2. Find ways to get these psychiatric drugs approved for treatment of  physical problems as well as mental ones
  3. Market the drugs heavily to psychiatrists, psychologists , family physicians, pediatricians, and anyone else who can write a prescription –including off-label use
  4. Market the drugs directly to the consumer with media video and print ads
  5. Promote the idea that if the first SSRI doesn’t work then a combination of anti-depressants is the answer. Or one can add an anti-psychotic drug to the patient’s daily prescriptions.

The plan has been wildly successful. Data from the US shows 11 per cent of Americans over 12-years-old use anti-depressants.

A psychiatric drug continued to hold the number one spot when compared to all prescription drugs sole in the US – more sales volume than any drug for blood pressure, cancer, diabetes, etc.

This antipsychotic Abilify (aripiprazole) continued to have the highest sales, at nearly $6.9 billion, according to the latest data from research firm IMS Health.

The data from (April 2013 – March 2014) on the top 100 drugs by total sales and total prescriptions in the United States.

1. Abilify        $6,885,243,368

Holding down position 8 in sales was an anti-depressant.

8. Cymbalta    $4,095,537,942

How Did Cymbalta Rise to Make the Top Ten?

Partly because it was approved to treat conditions other than depression such as anxiety, fibromyalgia, OCD, insomnia, and neuropathic pain, it instantly became more popular.

“As this drug gained approval to treat conditions other than depression, it quickly leaped to the top of antidepressants in regards to both sales and number of prescriptions. The primary reason that this drug is the top antidepressant is related to the number of conditions that it can be used to treat. Additionally it has only been on the market for approximately 10 years, meaning it is still considered a very new antidepressant.” A study in the French medical journal “Prescrire” found Cymbalta to carry significant side effects and be no more effective than other antidepressants.

Partly because new drugs are Flashy – “Let’s face reality… if you’ve tried a bunch of medications on the market and haven’t experienced relief from your depression, you’re probably waiting for the next big drug to get approval. So many people end up hoping that the next drug that comes out will be better than the rest – and usually this is not the case. Many times, people find that new drugs end up making them feel worse than older options. However, it’s the initial flash that can lure people into trying a new drug.”

Finally it’s the marketing campaigns: “These days drug companies have become more innovative with their marketing. Especially for antidepressants like Cymbalta that have been approved to treat multiple conditions. Everywhere you look: TV, internet, doctors’ offices, street corners, etc. there’s an advertisement for the drug. The heavy marketing is what gets many people to consider trying the drug.”

How Did Abilify, an Anti-psychotic Not Unlike Thorazine That Can Numb a Raving Psychotic into Apathetic Docility, Become the Number 1 Selling Prescription Drug in America?

Breaking the law is how it was done.

“Did Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) offer kickbacks and push Abilify for off-label uses? Some former sales reps-turned-whistleblowers claim it did. And given the fact that Bristol-Myers already paid $515 million to settle some off-label marketing claims related to Abilify, they say, the company violated its “we’ll behave” promises to the Federal Government.

The whistleblower suit, now spearheaded by the U.S. Department of Justice, also ropes in the U.S. unit of Japan’s Otsuka, which co-promotes the drug. Otsuka has its own corporate integrity agreement, too.

So, with their latest amended complaint in the False Claims Act suit, filed last month, the former reps say the court is looking at a couple of repeat offenders.”

The reps are saying BMS and Otsuka pushed Abilify for use in children before the drug was approved to treat anyone under 18 and then promoted Abilify for indications still not FDA-approved for kids. The company also doled out the usual speaking fees, free meals, paid programs, and other incentives to persuade doctors to write more prescriptions.

A website ironically named “Everyday Health” described what to expect if you take Abilify.

  • Children, teenagers, and young adults (up to age 24) who took Abilify for depression were more likely to become suicidal.
  • Children under 18 years old shouldn’t take Abilify to treat depression, but in some cases, a doctor may decide this medication is the best option for a child.
  • Abilify may affect your mental health in unexpected ways, even if you are older than 24. You may become suicidal, especially at the start of treatment.
  • Thoughts of suicide or harming yourself
  • New or worsening depression
  • Panic attacks
  • Extreme worry
  • Agitation
  • Aggressive behavior
  • Difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep
  • Acting without thinking
  • Severe restlessness
  • Mania (feeling frenzied or abnormally excited)

Also we learn this medicine is in the FDA’s Pregnancy Category C, which means it’s not known how Abilify will affect an unborn baby.

  • Tell your doctor if you are pregnant or plan to become pregnant before you take Abilify. Taking this medicine during the last months of pregnancy can cause problems in newborns after delivery.
  • You should also talk to your doctor before breastfeeding while taking Abilify. The drug has been detected in breast milk, but there’s little information on the risks Abilify might present to a breastfeeding infant.

Tell your doctor if any of the following side effects become severe or don’t go away:

  • Headache
  • Drowsiness
  • Dizziness
  • Heartburn
  • Nervousness
  • Diarrhea or constipation
  • Stomach pain
  • Increased appetite
  • Pain
  • Increased saliva
  • Weight gain is a common side effect of Abilify.

After all that we get to the “Serious Side Effects of Abilify”

Call your doctor right away if you experience any of the mood or behavior effects listed in the Warning section or any of the following serious symptoms:

  • Fast, slow, or irregular heartbeat
  • Difficulty breathing
  • Tightening in the throat or difficulty swallowing
  • Seizures
  • Chest pain
  • Vision changes
  • High fever
  • Uncontrollable face or body movements
  • Confusion
  • Sweating
  • Rash, hives, or itching
  • Swelling of the eyes, face, mouth, lips, tongue, throat, hands, feet, ankles, or legs
  • Muscle stiffness

One poor psychiatric drug victim asks:

Q: I’ve been taking Abilify for more than two years to treat severe anxiety. I get side effects, too: I’ve gained about 100 pounds in two months, and I have bad tremors, dry mouth, blurred vision, and severe back pains. Are these side effects normal or should I talk to my doctor about lowering the medication? I take Prozac and Luvox as well. Would these medications increase the side effects of Abilify?

The Answer is typical of the caring responses offered by drug manufacturers:

A: Abilify is an atypical antipsychotic and antidepressant used in the treatment of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and clinical depression. It has many reported side effects, but the less common ones include blurred vision, dry mouth, weight gain, stiffness, myalgia (muscle pain), and muscle spasms. It’s unclear whether your other two medications could be amplifying these effects. You should consult with your doctor or pharmacist for guidance based on your specific condition and current medications.

Writer Jay Michaelson at “The Daily Beast” summed up his unbelief that this drug can be number one in sales:

“While Abilify’s advertising depicts it as a kind of supplement to anti-depressants, with sad women giving it a try when mother’s little helper no longer seems to help, Abilify actually is like a bazooka to conventional anti-depressants’ revolver. Critics such as Britain’s Joanna Moncrieff have argued that anti-psychotics don’t treat anything at all; they just zone people out so they don’t notice much. They’re effective in the short term, but essentially, that’s because they are really just powerful tranquilizers.

“But the notion that Abilify is simply a thermostat that you adjust up or down—I’m feeling a little blue today, I think I’ll kick it up a notch—is surely hard to justify. I’d wager most users aren’t even aware that it’s an anti-psychotic drug that’s used to treat schizophrenia. I wonder if they’d be paying $6.9 billion for it if they did.”


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Does Ritalin Stifle Creativity?

Creative Process Photo Credit: South Florida Business Journal

Photo Credit: South Florida Business Journal

Looking at a Questionable Treatment in a New Light

Some astute researchers hypothesize youngsters’ creativity is being extinguished by Ritalin.

Jeffrey Zaslow, reporter for The Wall Street Journal asks “whether the Ritalin Revolution will sap tomorrow’s work force of some of its potential genius. What will be the repercussions in corporations, comedy clubs, and research labs?”

Since many past and present geniuses, artists and entrepreneurs had “ADHD traits”, we can thank our lucky stars that Ritalin wasn’t invented 100 years ago. There might be no Picasso masterpieces, no electricity on demand, no apple computers.

What is Psychiatry Doing to the Current Generation of Free Thinkers?

The diagnosis of ADHD by today’s “authorities” may be destroying the most important asset of any civilization; the brilliance of its people.

Child psychologist Deborah Ruf asserts “People who don’t understand intelligence and giftedness and creativity think that if you’re smart you ought to know how to behave, and if you don’t behave you’re not smart — or you have something wrong with you — but that couldn’t be further from the truth.”

In a WebMD interview, Ms. Ruf says that “…an alarming number of children who are simply creative, gifted individuals are mistakenly being diagnosed with ADHD.”

Lara Honos-Webb, a psychologist at Santa Clara University, likens the effect of Ritalin to “a horse with blinders, plodding along. He’s moving forward, getting things done, but he’s less open to inspiration.”

The Right to Play God

The list of famous people who supposedly had this “disorder” includes Salvador Dali, Winston Churchill, Frank Lloyd Wright, writers Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Virginia Woolf and the brilliant inventor Nikola Tesla.

When out-of-the-box thinking, insatiable curiosity, and even excessive clowning around are deemed a disorder, it’s time to take a closer look at the source of the evaluation.

There is no definitive test for ADHD, only the opinion of those who have crowned themselves authorities; today’s psychiatrist.

Characteristics of Creativity vs ADD Symptoms

ADD symptoms and characteristics of creativity have many points in common.  So much so, that it is now commonplace for a comedian, actor, musician or artist to refer to themselves as having ADD.

The confusion is understandable, since the typical list of ADD symptoms and creative personality characteristics are almost identical.

According to the website Health Central, Dr. Bonnie Cramond states the following characteristics as being typical of the profound creative:

  • Inattention
  • Daydreaming
  • Inability to complete projects
  • Hyperactivity
  • Mood Swings
  • Hypersensitivity to Stimulation
  • Difficult Temperament
  • Sensation Seeking
  • Enthusiasm and Playfulness
  • Deficient Social Skills

It is not difficult to pick out the “ADD” symptoms inherent in this list.

The “Why” Behind ADD and ADHD Diagnosis

What the psychiatrist gets as instant gratification in money, position or perks from his connection to a pharmaceutical company may be quelling the future of our civilization.

This is not said lightly. After all, who knows how many visionary spirits are being lulled to stupefaction by the psychiatrist’s selfish and short-sighted interference with mind-numbing drugs?


Posted in ADD, ADHD, Children, Drugs in our Schools, Psychiatric Abuse, Psychiatry, Ritalin, Schools, Teens | Leave a comment

Does Psychiatry Offer Cures?

Tyrone D. Cannon, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, Yale University

Tyrone D. Cannon, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, Yale University

When it comes to curing anyone of a mental disorder, psychiatrists and psychologists are shameless in admitting failure.

Eminent psychologist Tyrone D. Cannon, Ph.D and professor of psychology at Yale University openly states:

“Many people wonder whether psychiatric disorders can be cured. A ‘cure’ represents the permanent end to the specific instance of a disease. 

“Viewed from this perspective, the available pharmacological treatments for the most severe psychiatric disorders — schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and recurrent major depression — do not represent ‘cures.’”

This psychologist suggests that more animal trials are in order to determine how best to address mental distress in human beings.

After all, psychologists and psychiatrists have been experimenting with rats for decades with no hint of a resultant cure.

Ironically, this touching tenacity to animal experimentation epitomizes Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity: “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Prideful Ineptitude goes back at Least Two Decades

Dr. Norman Sartorius, the president of the World Psychiatric Association, stated publically at a European conference in 1994, “Psychiatrists should no longer consider that they can cure the mentally ill and in future the mentally ill will have to learn to live with their illness.”

If it were true that psychiatrists at least “managed” the mental disorders of their patients, one might be forgiving towards their admitted ineptitude. But their unleashing a flood of psychiatric medications with ominous side effects goes beyond human tolerance.

Then There’s the New DSM

The newest version of the psychiatric Bible, DSM 5, is such a mishmash of poor diagnosis and invented mental disorders that even practicing psychiatrists and psychologists are up in arms about it.

For instance, this advice is given from Psychology Today online author Allen J. Frances, MD, who cites the “10 worst changes” in the new DSM:

“I would suggest that clinicians not follow these at all (or, at the very least, use them with extreme caution and attention to their risks); that potential patients be deeply skeptical, especially if the proposed diagnosis is being used as a rationale for prescribing medication for you or for your child; and that payers question whether some of these are suitable for reimbursement. My goal is to minimize the harm that may otherwise be done by unnecessary obedience to unwise and arbitrary DSM 5 decisions.”

Among the normal human behavior included in Dr. Frances’  “10 worst changes” in the DSM are childhood temper tantrums, minor forgetfulness of old age and bereavement upon death of a loved one.

Their Deadly “Cure”

Psychiatrists are modern snake oil salesmen (Definition: snake oil: A worthless preparation fraudulently peddled as a cure for many ills. – The Free Online Dictionary) advertising cures which they know are ineffective and sometimes deadly.

British psychiatrist Dr. David Healy has linked 90% of all mass school shootings to individuals under the influence of psychiatric drugs.

Dr. Healy states, “Psychotropic drugs of pretty well any group can trigger violence up to and including homicide.”

Dr. Peter Breggin, a practicing psychiatrist who abhors psychiatric drugs asserts that the media “ignores the scientific evidence linking psychiatric medications and violent behavior because psychiatry is the religion of the mainstream media, and they don’t want to see the dangers of psychiatrically prescribed drugs.”

When whistleblowers in the profession of psychiatry are ignored, the very fabric of society is put at risk. Victims of psychiatric drugs do not always commit suicide  or homicide, but when they do, the loss of innocent life is devastating.

The finger of blame for these atrocious acts must be pointed squarely at the prescribing psychiatrist.


Posted in Big Pharma, Depression, Disorders, DSM, Mental Illness, Psychiatric Abuse, Psychiatry | 3 Comments

Germanwings Plane Crash Now Linked to Psychiatric Drugs


Photo Credit:

On March 24, 2015 a Germanwings Airbus A320 owned by Lufthansa crashed in the French Alps instantly killing all 144 passengers and 6 crew.

The true story has slowly developed and is still evolving but here are some facts that have been revealed by the investigators analyzing the voice and flight data recorders found at the crash site, searching the flyer’s home and computers and interviewing friends, family, colleagues and doctors.

  • Andreas Lubitz, the co-pilot, locked the pilot out of the cockpit and deliberately crashed the plane into the mountain.
  • It was not a split second impulse but the result of days of planning on his part.
  • His medical records show that before he received his pilot’s license, Lubitz suffered from depression, with doctors recording “suicidal tendencies.” He had 18 months of psychiatric treatment for depression.
  • Lubitz informed the Lufthansa flight school when he returned in 2009 that he had experienced an episode of “severe depression.”
  • In late 2014 he relapsed and this Feb. and March just before the crash Lubitz sought help from at least 5 doctors, including specialists. He was treated at Duesseldorf’s University Hospital.
    • Investigators found torn-up sick notes at Lubitz’ home; one of the torn medical letters stated that he was unable to work and should not be flying the day he crashed the plane
    • The documents support the assumption based on the preliminary examination that the deceased hid his illness from his employer and his professional colleagues
    • The University of Dusseldorf Hospital said Lubitz was “not treated for depression” but confirmed he was suffering from a serious illness which he had concealed from his employers. However, investigators did find antidepressant medications in Lubitz’s apartment
      • The sick notes showed that neurologists and psychologists found evidence of problems severe enough to justify excusing Lubitz from work. He was supposed to show the “not fit to work” letter to his employer but he did not do this.
      • There was no evidence the co-pilot had any physical ailments but had complained of vision trouble
      • In the week leading up to the crash, Lubitz spent time online researching suicide methods and cockpit door security. Safety rules introduced after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks in the United States allow someone in the cockpit to deny others entry.
      • Shortly after takeoff from Barcelona on March 24, Lubitz offered to take over the controls while the pilot went to the toilet. Finding himself unable to enter the cockpit on his return, the pilot pleaded with Lubitz to let him back in. As proved by the flight recorders, Lubitz ignored him and repeatedly accelerated the plane before it slammed into a mountainside near the village of Le Vernet. The autopilot for the plane was reprogrammed several times by Lubitz to increase the speed during the descent.

Lubitz’s Drug Treatment – Their Warnings and Side Effects

The French and German investigators have come forth with some information about the psychiatric drugs Lubitz was treated with.

Back in 2010, Lubitz received Olanzpine injections (a very powerful antipsychotic medication) “to treat Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.”

Warning:  “This medicine can increase thoughts of suicide”

Side Effects: Blurred or other changes in vision

One of of his recent known medications was Loarzepam.

Warnings: Not to operate dangerous machinery or motor vehicles”; “in patients with depression, a possibility for suicide should be borne in mind.”

Side Effects: Dizziiness, habit forming, do not suddenly stop taking, unusual tiredness – do not drive or do anything that could be dangerous, thoughts or attempts at killing oneself, unable to sleep, nightmares, restlessness and blurred vision

Another current medication was Agomelatine.

Warning: “Has potential to impair judgment, thinking and motor skills; use caution when operating machinery.”

Side Effects: Can make people suicidal, manic or psychotic, liver damage

Psychiatric Apologists Speak Out

Would you think twice about getting on your flight if you knew your pilot was on Psychiatric drugs?

Would an airline ever offer passengers a choice? Perhaps give a discount on the ticket price to fly with a pilot on SSRI’s or anti-psychotic drugs?

Despite the commonsense reaction of normal passengers to not go near such a flight, apologists for the psychiatric profession have come forth with some extraordinary statements following this tragedy.

Captain Tom Bunn is a former pilot and licensed therapist had this to say in Time magazine online:

“Once the two-person cockpit rule is fully implemented, a tragedy like this cannot happen again.”

Would you bet your life on the outcome of an in-cockpit fight between the strength of a raging manic pilot on a psych drug versus the normal pilot just calmly trying to do his job?

Next we have the President of The Royal College of Psychiatrists, Professor Simon Wessely who urged caution by those calling to prevent people suffering from depression to be allowed to work as pilots.

He insists that depression should not lead to a lifetime ban for commercial airline pilots.

 “I have dealt with some pilots with depression and when they recover they are still monitored. But the two I have dealt with returned to very successful careers.

“Why should they not? What does cause trouble is saying that if you have ever had a history of depression then you should not be allowed to do whatever. That is wrong, as much as saying that people with a history of broken arms shouldn’t be allowed to do something.”

And then this statement from Steven K. Hoge, chairman of the American Psychiatric Association’s Council on Psychiatry and Law:

“So what can anyone who is taking an antidepressant do? Only be basket weavers?”

The psychiatric arrogance in the face of the amount of death and destruction they cause by drugging people with mind altering chemicals knows no bounds.

The true solution is to eliminate the use of these anti-depressants and anti-psychotics all together.

For now we could simply not allow any pilot to fly who has ever allowed himself to be treated with these drugs.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Exposing Psychiatric Criminality at the University of Minnesota

Drug TestingPart 2 of a 2 Part Series

The first part of this series explored the suspension of psychiatric drug trials at the University of Minnesota due to the unethical and factually criminal behavior on the part of psychiatrists handling the program.

But why did the university attempt to sweep this issue under the rug for 11 years and what effort did it take to finally get a suspension imposed?

The answer to first question probably lies in the earlier history of psychiatric “incidents” at the University of Minnesota (U of M). They just didn’t want any more attention.

Carl Elliott is a professor in the Center for Bioethics and the Depts. of Pediatrics and Philosophy at UMN and the author of the book “White Coat, Black Hat: Adventures on the Dark Side of Medicine.

On his blog he cited the earlier problems of the psychiatric department:

“In Aug. of 1993 the head of child psychiatry Dr. Barry Garfinkel, supposedly a nationally recognized expert in teen suicide, was found guilty of 5 felonies by the U.S. District Court in Minneapolis for falsifying data in a drug study.”

The U of M had hidden their official 65-page report for almost 4 years. The report found this psychiatrist had knowingly participated in fraud during the drug study of  Anafranil, an anti-depressant drug. He faked reports on patient exams that never occurred or were done by staff with no medical training.

Garfield was sentenced to six months in a federal correctional facility, six months of home detention, $214,000 in fines and 400 hours of community service.

The university tried to fire him and ultimately Garfield resigned in 1995.  Did he quit psychiatry? No, he opened a private practice in Minneapolis.

Ironically, this criminal child psychiatrist’s office is now located across the street from a Whole Foods store.

In Oct. 1993, Dr. James Halikas, director of the university’s chemical-dependency treatment program , was caught conducting an unethical experiment by failing to obtain informed consent from the patients and refusing to allow them to choose a more effective treatment. Halikas gave the drug, gamma-hydroxybutyrate, known as GHB, to eight Hmong opium addicts who did not speak English. Halikas now practices in Florida.

GHB was commonly used as a date rape drug going by street names such as “Easy Lay” and “Georgia Home Boy.”

GHB had been linked to some severe side effects – vomiting, seizures, hallucinations, amnesia and coma.

In 1998 Dr. Halikas was “reprimanded” and paid a mere $3,500 fine for his crime.

Dr. Faruk Abuzzahab - After Sanctions, Doctors Get Drug Company Pay

After Sanctions, Doctors Get Drug Company Pay

Another star in UMN’s psychiatric crown was Dr. Faruk Abuzzahab former president of the Minnesota Psychiatric Society former chairman of its continuing education and ethics committees.

In 1997 the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice accused Dr. Faruk Abuzzahab of a “reckless, if not willful, disregard” for the welfare of 46 patients, 5 of whom died in his care or shortly afterward. One study subject left the ward on a day pass and jumped off a bridge into the Mississippi River. The board suspended his license for seven months and restricted it for two years after that.

Yet, he was still allowed to oversee the testing of drugs on patients and was paid for research or marketing by at least a dozen pharma companies since he was disciplined.

What did it take to break through the U of M claims that nothing was amiss and gain a suspension of the psychiatric drug trials?

Bloggers including Carl Elliott kept the 2004 suicide story of Dan Markingson in the public eye and various gatherings occurred on campus to inform the public, students, faculty and press about developments.

By October 2013 over 170 leading scholars in health law, bioethics and medical research had called on the U of M to investigate the 2004 death of the psychiatric research subject, charging that university administrators had “refused to publicly engage in a transparent, open, and critical assessment of what went wrong in this study.” The letter, led by the Scholl Chair of Health Law and Policy at the University of Toronto, and five colleagues from leading U.S. institutions, urged the Faculty Senate of the U of M to request an immediate, public inquiry into the troubled study.

The actions taken to expose this criminality included:

  • A petition signed by over 3,500 citizens went to Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton, calling for an investigation of the death.
  • A letter writing campaign to major university donors asked them to consider ending their donations to the university unless the administration took action to protect psychiatric research subjects.
  • U of M medical students led a vigil outside a room where the Board of Regents was meeting
  • Students wearing white medical coats carried a black coffin to the door of this conference room and each member of the demonstration handed a single flower to the Board of Regents Chairman.
  • In a public meeting a professor at the Center for Bioethics delivered a blistering speech to the Regents about their baffling refusal to address mounting evidence of research abuse and misconduct in the Dept. of Psychiatry.

By this time Fox 9 News in MN-St. Paul was covering these events and published the story of Robert who came forward to tell how he had been harmed in a psychiatric drug trial conducted by the Dept. of Psychiatry at UMN back in 2007.

He had developed ringing in his ears, was hearing voices and was feeling anxious. Fearing a brain tumor he went to the emergency room. He was transferred to the psychiatric unit at Fairview Riverside Hospital, diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and approached by U of M researchers.

“Immediately, they were on me to do experimental medications, non-FDA approved — and I had never been on medications in my life.”, stated Robert.

He was coerced to enroll in a trial for an experimental drug called Bifeprunox.

“Then, they say you have a giant medical bill and if you do the research, you won’t have this giant medical bill,” Robert recalled.

“They told me the drug was safe,” he said. “He told me it was going to be the next treatment for schizophrenia and everybody was going to be taking it.”

Weeks after Robert enrolled, the FDA rejected Bifeprunox for approval. Within months, the Solvay Pharmaceuticals halted all research after the medication was linked to the death of a study subject in Europe, who suffered liver failure. Robert was not told of these developments.

Robert went to the emergency room three times – once by ambulance. but the psychiatrist kept Robert on the drug until the pain was so bad Robert had suicidial thoughts and quit the study.

Finally, Nike Gjere, a senior psychiatric nurse at U of M Medical Center Fairview, came out as a whistleblower with a powerful video testimony aired by Fox 9 telling what she saw during the recruitment of Dan Markingson into his drug study, as well as the culture of fear that prevented hospital employees from speaking out.

This was a huge effort to gain a victory. It takes a lot of patience, persistence and bravery to stand up to psychiatric criminality.

But the job will get easier and faster in the future as more and more victims, their families and people working in the psychiatric profession itself come forward to challenge the trauma and death that goes on behind the closed doors of psychiatric facilities.



Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Psychiatric Drug Trials Suspended at University of Minnesota

Psych Drugs - Follow the Money

Part 1 of a 2 Part Series

On March 19th, 2015 psychiatric drug trials at the University of Minnesota were finally halted over a case that began in May of 2004 when Dan Makingson, participating in a test of a schizophrenia drug, committed suicide.

The Minnesota State Legislative Auditor recently reviewed allegations that Markingson was coerced into the study and remained in the study even when his mother requested he be dis-enrolled as she had grave concerns of the effects of the trial drug on her son.

While claiming there was no “proof that the trial drug caused the suicide”, the findings stated “We are especially troubled by the response of University leaders … they have made misleading statements about previous reviews and been consistently unwilling to discuss or even acknowledge that serious ethical issues and conflicts are involved.”

These findings were strong enough to force University President Eric Kaler to apologize to Markingson’s family and suspend all enrollments in current and upcoming psychiatric drug studies until an independent board reviews them and informs university administrators that they can safely proceed.

Noting that such an internal university review would be of questionable value, the State Legislative Auditor recommended legislation by the state of Minnesota to prevent all psychiatric drug trials until such time as the university adopts stronger patient protections.

Psychiatric Drugs – The Suicide of Dan Markingson

Dan Markingson had become delusional and was admitted to a psychiatric ward at Fairview Hospital in Minneapolis where Dr. Stephen Olson, a psychiatrist at the University of Minnesota and director of their schizophrenia program, saw him. On Olson’s recommendation a county court agreed to a civil commitment order forcing Makingson legally to obey whatever his psychiatrist recommended.

Being a paid researcher and speaker for the pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca, Olson promptly recruited Markingson into a scientifically dubious, AstraZeneca-funded study of antipsychotic drugs — despite the fact that Markingson had been repeatedly judged incompetent to make his own medical decisions.

The AstraZenceca study attempted to compare the effects of 3 anti-psychotic drugs –Zyprexa, Risperdal and their own creation – Seoquel. These drugs are a known trio of killers due to their behavioral side-effects of anger, rage, homicide and suicide.

After 2 weeks at Fairview, Dan was placed in a halfway house.

On May 8, 2004, Markingson’s body was found in a blood-soaked bathroom. Halfway house workers found a suicide noting saying “I left this experience smiling.” Blood tests later showed he was taking Seroquel.


Psychiatry’s Deplorable Ethics Record Revealed

The clinical drug trial which cost Dan Markingson his life was known as the CAFÉ study (an acronym for Comparison of Atypicals in First-Episode Schizophrenia) and was sponsored by AstraZeneca, the manufacturer of Seroquel.

The Café study investigators and the Institutional Review Board (IRB – the university’s research ethics board) both violated widely accepted ethical guidelines. Some of the more shocking violations are:

  • Dr. Olson recruited Markingson into the study while also serving as his treating psychiatrist and an adviser to the court on whether Markingson needed inpatient commitment.
  • Markingson was coerced into the CAFÉ study by the threat of involuntary commitment.
  • University of Minnesota investigators ignored warnings that Markingson was in danger of committing suicide.
  • AstraZeneca and a University of Minnesota investigator manipulated research results to promote Seroquel.
  • University of Minnesota investigators failed to disclose important financial conflicts of interest to subjects.  Dr. Charles Schulz, a co-investigator on the CAFÉ study, received over $570, 000 from the pharmaceutical industry from 2002 to 2008, with $112,000 coming from AstraZeneca. Also, subjects were not informed that the Department of Psychiatry was paid $15,648 for each subject who completed the CAFÉ study. The longer a subject stayed in the study, the more the university got paid. In total, the CAFÉ study generated $327,000 for the Univ. Of MN Department of Psychiatry.

Yet, there is much more to learn about this story.

Part 2 of this series will explore earlier psychiatric incidents at the University of Minnesota and how students and faculty managed to make a dent in this criminal structure.


Posted in Antipsychotics, Big Pharma, Drug Warnings, Involuntary Commitment, Psychiatric Abuse | Leave a comment

Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) Resurgence Despite Brain Damage


ECT seems to be enjoying a renaissance of use. Perhaps those in the “mental health” industry are hedging their bets for the future, when outraged adults (having been assaulted with psychiatric pharmaceuticals during childhood) choose to sue for damages. After all, drugs cannot be sold when no one wants them. And hopefully, that day will come sooner than later.

But when the psychiatrist is without his drugs, where can he turn to make a buck? Certainly not to counseling his patients with words and advice; his skill in this area is blatantly nil.

So, like any entrepreneur, he is looking to the future. And since he has never been required to cure anyone, ECT is as good a place to start as any.

Can electroconvulsive therapy actually be harmful? Can it cause permanent damage?

Research recently completed in the UK confirms that it does indeed cause permanent damage. The title of the paper tells the tale: “Electroconvulsive therapy reduces frontal cortical connectivity in severe depressive disorder.”

This area of the brain, the dorsolateral prefrontal cortical region is the same area that the butchers (i.e. psychiatrists) of the past addressed with their scalpels in performing a surgical lobotomy. The study concluded that ECT had “lasting effects on the functional architecture of the brain.”

Psychiatric whistle blower Peter Breggin has been demonstrating scientifically for a very long time that ECT is basically an electrical lobotomy, with damage that is severe enough to be seen on an MRI.

And we are supposed to believe this treatment is “good for the patient.” This is  typical delusionary psychiatric reasoning.

Dr. Breggin points out that all psychiatric treatment, including ECT, psychiatric drugs and lobotomy share a common factor that they supposedly “work” by damaging the brain and suppressing its function.

Even the history of ECT is barbaric. It was developed by a psychiatrist named Ugo Cerletti, whose experiments included placing an electrode in a dog’s mouth and one in his anus. Half or the animals died of cardiac arrest from this torture. Cerletti next observed pigs being shocked in a Roman slaughterhouse, and from this decided it would be a good idea to try it out on humans.

Do psychiatrists know how ECT works? Although they are full of theories, not surprisingly when one psychiatrist in California was questioned under deposition in a suit, he answered that he was no expert, and that the questioner should “Go ask an electrician.”

This explanation is not surprising, coming from a member of a profession that admits without shame his inability to cure mental distress.

What are some of the side effects of ETC?

  • Severe and even permanent memory loss
  • Brain Damage
  • Suicide
  • Cardiovascular complications
  • Intellectual impairment
  • Death

Here is a description of the procedure, from

“ECT patients are given general anaesthetic and strong muscle relaxant to virtually paralyse them, and stop dangerous physical convulsions. Their skin is smeared with gel for electrical conduction, and electrodes are taped to the forehead. The patient is then strapped on their back to a flat table, which pivots so patients can be turned upside-down if they vomit. One patient was recently given ECT on a fixed table, and when he started vomiting they couldn’t remove him quick enough to prevent him choking. He ended up brain damaged and permanently paralysed.”

This torture is one of psychiatry’s praised remedies. It speaks for itself.


Posted in Depression, Disorders, Elderly, Electro Convulsive Therapy, Informed Consent, Involuntary Commitment, Mental Illness, Psychiatric Abuse, Psychiatrists / Psychologists, Psychiatry, The Baker Act | Leave a comment

Florida School Sends Bullying Victim to Mental Hospital

Parents never quite know what might happen when they send their child off for a routine day of public schooling here in Florida.

Alishia Montelongo went off to classes at Wolfson High School in the Duval County School District in Jacksonville, Fl. on Monday, March 9th  as usual. When she didn’t come out to the car after school, her mother and older sister went to the school office to look for her. Her family discovered that Alishia had been sent to a psychiatric hospital.

The school, for whatever reason, had failed to notify the family that Alishia while at school had supposedly threatened to commit suicide and that a mental health care professional had been called in who decided Alishia should be hospitalized immediately.

She was admitted to the Mental Health Resource Center where she was kept four days before returning home.

Why did Alishia end up in a psychiatric facility?

She made a comment to a friend in the school hall that was overheard, reported to school authorities and misinterpreted to mean that Alishia was seriously thinking of killing herself.

“We were talking and I was like, ‘I don’t care if I live or die’. They took it the wrong way, and the guy said, ‘Can you come in here?’” Alishia said.

Next stop the mental health facility. Alicia said she was never serious about hurting herself but it apparently took the psychiatric facility 4 days to figure this out.

Her sister reported that Alishia had been bullied for months at the school to the point where the family had filed a formal complaint against a particular girl who had physically harmed Alishia. Her sister has kept photos of the cut on Alisha’s cheek. The complaint had gone to the State Attorney’s Office and a Feb. hearing date was set but then the hearing was postponed with no new date set.

Alishia says one day on the bus she was slapped in the face, and papers were thrown at her.

Then a few weeks ago the other girl attacked her in the school. ”She grabbed me by my hair and started beating me. She pushed me on the ground and started to kick me. I had a scratch right here on my face. It’s gone now,” Alishia told reporters.

Rather than having some common sense policy in place for a school official to immediately sort out what happened when one or more students fight and physically beat up other students, the procedure involves dragging things out in a pattern that mirrors the very slow justice system of adult criminal proceedings.

Alishia’s complaint of being bullied first has to be determined to fit the official definition.

According to Denise Marzullo, the President of Mental Health America of North East Florida, “these situations can be tough for the district to define.” ”So you’ve got to figure out if it is bullying or if it’s assault and battery. Bullying is ongoing, repeated, over time with the intent to harm somebody. So they’ve got to do a full investigation before they categorize bullying. Right now, if you just look at the behaviors for the one incident, then that is possibly battery or a fight. They have to look into that as well.”

While the bureaucrats are trying to figure out if the victim was bullied or not and what to do, if anything, about the girl who attacked her, Alishia has to live with the advice of the psychiatric professionals who evaluated her case.

Although, she was active in ROTC and a member of the school chorus and likes the school and her friends there, her “physician” has placed her in something called “Hospital Homebound”, an alternative school program for students confined to their homes or the hospital.

In other words, the victim here is going to be alone at home studying and will miss all the social life and other outdoor activities of high school because the school administrators can’t maintain a safe environment in their school.

The official definition states: “A homebound or hospitalized student is a student who has a medically diagnosed physical or psychiatric condition which is acute or catastrophic in nature, or a chronic illness, or a repeated intermittent illness due to a persisting medical problem and that confines the student to home or hospital, and restricts activities for an extended period of time.”

Where is there any evidence Alishia has a “psychiatric condition which is acute or catastrophic in nature”?

Despite her Baker Act episode being based on a statement she made that was misinterpreted, the mental hospital facility started her on “therapy” which she will be continuing at home as part of “Hospital Homebound”

Though details are missing from the news reports, it’s highly probable that this therapy is a psychiatric drug.

How is the state of Florida responding to this unfortunate misapplication of the Baker Act?

Is the legislature considering new revisions to protect citizens from unnecessary use of the Baker Act?

No, they are considering a new law that would require principals to notify parents if their child is Baker Acted at school during the school day or if students are removed from school buses and field trips and sent off to a psychiatric facility.

Although it doesn’t address the real problem with unnecessary use of the Baker Act, at least same day notice from the school would allow parents to get into action immediately to get their child out of the psychiatric institution as fast as possible.


Posted in Children, Department of Children and Families, Florida Patient's Bill of Rights, Involuntary Commitment, Psychiatric Abuse, Schools, Teens, The Baker Act, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

SalusCare, Inc. – Mental Treatment or Mental Harm?

SalusCare Inc. is just another mental health care arm stretching tentacles into an unsuspecting community, fishing for consumers.

With a purpose couched in “help,” prospective clients are reeled in, fed psychiatric propaganda, diagnosed with one or several junk-science mental disorders, and given anti-psychotics, anti-depressants, Ritalin, or whatever else the “doctor may order.”

SalusCare is now holding workshops to “educate” friends, family, teachers and police in indentifying those with mental disorders. Some may find this chillingly reminiscent of citizens spying on fellow citizens in Nazi Germany

Certified Mental Health First Aid instructor Laura Youngfleisch states, “Just as CPR training helps a layperson with no clinical training, Mental Health First Aid training helps a layperson assist someone experiencing a mental health crisis, such as contemplating suicide. The goal is to help support an individual until appropriate professional help arrives.” Ms. Youngfleish is the clinical manager of children’s outreach mental health services at SalusCare, Inc.

One wonders if this is mere foolishness on her part, or if she really believes this Orwellian propaganda. Already the infamous “Baker Act,” is a dangerous tool of the mental health industry, allowing involuntary commitment and treatment of anyone who “appears to have a mental illness” in the state of Florida.

When “mental illness” is defined by an organization that benefits financially by increasing the ranks of those so labeled, skepticism becomes a very healthy thing.

Dr. Fred Baughman, Jr., M.D., Child Neurologist, emphatically states that ADHD is a bogus disease.

Dr. Baughman is concerned that the Americans on government disability from mental illness has skyrocketed to 4 million people. Since this is an “iatrogenic” (psychiatrically caused) epidemic, it will only continue to grow as psychiatry continues to poison the populace with drugs.

The doctor also states that psychiatry is not a part of the legitimate medical community, and it is completely inseparable from the pharmaceutical industry. In no uncertain terms, Dr. Baughman advises it should be “banished from the house of medicine.”

“Until it is banished, medicine and all medical school faculties remain co-conspirators in psychiatric/psychotropic poisoning for wholly illusory, invented diseases—for profit!” Dr. Baughman does not mince words.

Another physician, Dr. Peter Breggin, known as the “consciousness of Psychiatry,” has been an advocate since the 1970s for ending psychiatry’s violent treatment of mental illness through psycho-surgery, ECT and drugs. And yes, Dr. Breggin is a psychiatrist himself, and knows the profession from the inside.

Dr. Breggin states, “The pharmaceutical industry and the psychopharmaceutical complex have used their combined authority, power and wealth to overturn the moral climate of America itself for the sake of power and profits. They have imposed upon Western society a faith in fake biological explanations, concocted diagnoses, and toxic drugs that do infinitely more harm than good. Even more millions of lives are being damaged and destroyed by years of exposure to shock treatment and drugs. In the process, they have compromised and corrupted the most fundamental human ideals of personal responsibility, personal growth, and principled living.”

When a psychiatrist is also a whistle blower, it is a good idea to pay attention. Dr. Breggin indeed has a conscience, which is more than one can say for most men and women in this profession, including those working for dubious organizations such as SalusCare.

Posted in ADHD, Children, Mental Health First Aid, Mental Illness, Psychiatry | Leave a comment

Baker Act Is Harmful Not Helpful


The Baker Act is the name of the mental health law in Florida and it covers voluntary as well as involuntary commitment.  This is the law that is exercised to involuntarily commit people to a psychiatric facility.  People that are committed involuntarily under the Baker Act must meet very specific criteria. This criteria is as follows:

394.467 Involuntary inpatient placement
(1) CRITERIA.–A person may be placed in involuntary inpatient placement for treatment upon a finding of the court by clear and convincing evidence that:

(a) He or she is mentally ill and because of his or her mental illness:

1.a. He or she has refused voluntary placement for treatment after sufficient and conscientious explanation and disclosure of the purpose of placement for treatment; or

b. He or she is unable to determine for himself or herself whether placement is necessary;and

2.a. He or she is manifestly incapable of surviving alone or with the help of willing and responsible family or friends, including available alternative services, and, without treatment, is likely to suffer from neglect or refuse to care for himself or herself, and such neglect or refusal poses a real and present threat of substantial harm to his or her well-being; or

b. There is substantial likelihood that in the near future he or she will inflict serious bodily harm on himself or herself or another person, as evidenced by recent behavior causing, attempting, or threatening such harm; and

(b) All available less restrictive treatment alternatives which would offer an opportunity for improvement of his or her condition have been judged to be inappropriate. (Emphasis added) 

This may sound like a logical idea, but it actually does a lot of harm and doesn’t help in any way. 

When someone arrives at a psychiatric facility under the Baker Act, one can be held for up to seventy-two hours by law.  The law clearly dictates a specific protocol to protect patient rights, but that is not necessarily followed.  Depending on the facility, one may be treated as if one had no rights at all. 

Back in the day, patients were put out of “danger” by placing them in strait jackets.  These aren’t obsolete by any means today, but it is more than likely that someone that is involuntarily committed will get psychotropic drugs instead.  Imagine arriving at a psychiatric ward, getting an examination and being diagnosed with a few “mental disorders.”  Multiple psychotropic drugs may be given just to calm the patient down from their supposed “hysteria,” because it qualified as “emergency treatment.”  

This could happen within the first twelve hours upon arrival.  Imagine having a very logical reason for the “crazy” behavior that no one bothered to ask about.  Imagine being drugged with antipsychotics, which sedate you so heavily your behavior is now under “control” and you are no longer a threat to yourself or others according to the powers that be.  But then perhaps the side effects of the drugs kick in and more drugs are given to handle those side effects.   The seventy-two hours isn’t anywhere near close to expiring, yet you may not know where you are or what is going on due to the effects of the drugs.  

Needless to say, in the first seventy-two hours a lot can happen to a person who is involuntarily committed.  However, some people in office think that seventy-two hours isn’t long enough.  Rep. Gus Bilirakis convened a panel recently in Land-o-Lakes to discuss mental health and substance abuse issues.  In attendance was Rep. Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania who is also a clinical psychologist.   Murphy is the author of Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act which Bilirakis has co-signed. 

Critics of Murphy say that he assumes that mental illness and violence go hand in hand.  It seems he is ignorant of the connection between psychotropic drugs and violence, which at this point in time is well documented.  If he thinks violence is linked to mental illness, he must be talking about the ones already on psychotropic drugs who are experiencing those homicidal or violent side effects that are common.  If that is the case, then those people certainly don’t need to be Baker Acted.  They don’t need to spend any time in a psychiatric ward, let alone an extended time beyond seventy-two hours, as they would just be given more drugs. 

Murphy also said the seventy-two hour time limit doesn’t make clinical sense.  What does he mean by that exactly?  Is he implying that more time is needed to observe the patient and decide on a treatment?  A medical doctor would do that because he may need to do blood tests, MRIs, urine tests and the like, which could take a bit of time to do before he could diagnose the patient.  But psychologists and psychiatrists have no medical test whatsoever that identifies a “mental illness,” so what is he referring to?  

Instead of using science, they just note the symptoms, decide on a “disorder” and prescribe mind-altering drugs.  These days, this is done by most doctors and mental health professionals in under ten minutes, so there is no logical reason as to why Murphy thinks more than seventy-two hours is needed.  

Pasco City Sheriff Chris Nocco also agrees that seventy-two hours is not long enough.  He thinks that short a time period is like putting a band-aid on a gushing wound.  Sheriff Nocco probably has had experience in handling those that were Baker Acted, but it doesn’t make him an expert on mental health.  

About five years ago, a seven year old boy in Largo was Baker Acted right in his classroom.  The boy had such a severe tantrum that the students were evacuated.  The police arrived and it was the police that decided that the boy needed a mental health evaluation and took him to a psychiatric hospital.  This is a violation of the Baker Act. 

This is nothing short of outrageous.  Even worse, the mother was there at the same time as the police and she said she could have helped to handle her child’s behavior, but the police would not let her near him while they did their investigation.  She was able to ride with him on the way to the psychiatric hospital, but the boy spent the night there alone, scared out of his mind.  

This is not the first time the boy’s behavior was beyond unacceptable, but it’s not a reason to call the police.  The school could have released the boy to his parents and helped them get help outside the school.  It would have been better to suspend the boy or even expel him from school instead of calling the police.  Putting any child in a psychiatric ward alone is any parent’s nightmare. 

In addition to extending the seventy-two hour hold, the panel advocated for additional research to find effective ways to treat mental conditions.  Most people will agree that the present mental health care system of today doesn’t work.  Most will agree that people do have behavior problems and don’t have effective solutions.  With that in mind, the panel’s idea sounds good, but the truth of the matter is something else. 

What they should be doing with that “research” is look at all the horrific side effects of psychotropic drugs and find alternative treatments.  

The panel also advocated a need to teach the employees of the school district how to identify symptoms that may indicate mental illness in its earliest stages.  This is ridiculous!  That means all employees are instant mental health professionals and are going to screen your children for mental illness.  School employees are trained in education, not mental health.  Having teachers screen for “mental illness symptoms” is not based on anything scientific.  

The opportunities for misuse and disaster are unlimited if screening is implemented.  Imagine getting a note from school saying your daughter is showing signs of depression and it is recommended that she see a psychiatrist and get some Prozac.  This could be based on your daughter looking glum for a few days because she didn’t get invited to a birthday party.  Science or random? 

The Baker Act may have been written with good intentions, but today it is misused and unnecessarily used on a regular basis.  An extension of the seventy-two hour hold would be catastrophic at the very least.  Getting a thorough physical examination by a non-drug oriented doctor would be a smart start to get down to the bottom of the cause of one’s behavior. 

Being committed against one’s will is truly a violation of one’s rights.  Know your rights regarding the Baker Act and assert them if needed, as being Baker Acted could happen to anyone.  Knowing your rights and facts will help you from becoming a victim of psychiatry, instead of becoming a patient on psychotropic drugs.


Posted in Alternatives, Antidepressants, Antipsychotics, Children, Depression, Disorders, Drug Warnings, Drugs in our Schools, Informed Consent, Involuntary Commitment, Mental Health Screening, Mental Illness, Over Prescribing Meds, Parents Rights, Psychotropic Drugs, Schools, Teens, The Baker Act | Leave a comment