Migrant Children, a New Psychiatric Patient Pool?

April 25th, 2015

Migrant Children, a New Psychiatric Patient Pool?

While we hesitate to comment on the controversy surrounding the federal government’s amnesty program for illegal immigrants, we do see a potential effect of interest to the concerns of CCHR and those who recognize the potential for psychiatric fraud and abuse.

The Wall Street Journal reported that “Such students [illegal aliens, or “migrant children”] often require a variety of services, including subsidized meals, English-language instruction, tutoring and psychological counseling…”

It’s that last phrase, “psychological counseling”, that caught our attention.

Could migrant children be considered a new pool of patients to be abused by the psychiatric and psychological industries?

There are already research articles being published on the “mental health of migrant children.” Look out for a proliferation of media, studies, and requests for funding for this expanding population as a new pool of “mental health care” patients.

Contact your local, state and federal officials and your school boards to be on the lookout for psychiatric fraud and abuse within the migrant population.

Commercial Airline Pilots & Mind-Altering Drugs

April 18th, 2015

Commercial Airline Pilots & Mind-Altering Drugs

Medical records indicate that Andreas Lubitz, the co-pilot who crashed the Germanwings plane in the French Alps, was on medications for depression, anxiety and panic attacks, including lorazepam [an anti-anxiety drug] that can have dangerous side effects, German newspaper Bild reported.

Mania, psychosis, hallucinations, depersonalization and suicidal and homicidal ideation. These all are documented side effects from 134 international drug regulatory agency warnings on the very drugs that commercial airline pilots are allowed to take. While not everyone taking these drugs will experience these side effects, what is certain, based on hundreds of drug warnings and studies, is that a percentage of the population will.

Andreas Lubitz, co-pilot of Germanwings flight 9525 blamed for purposefully flying the aircraft into the French Alps and killing all on board, had a long history of mental “treatment” and psychiatric drug use. According to German police investigators, numerous prescriptions for psychiatric drugs were found at Lubitz’s home, including antidepressants. His former girlfriend, who ended the relationship in 2014, also said he was in psychiatric treatment, according to Germany’s Bild newspaper.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), a federal agency charged with protecting consumer safety, placed its most serious “black box” warning on all antidepressants citing suicidality in addition to other side effects on the drug labels including hallucinations, mania and a host of other abnormal behaviors. Incredibly, despite being fully aware of this, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reversed its 70-year ban restricting pilots taking antidepressants and other mind-altering psychiatric drugs from flying.

Does the FAA have a choice about whether to revisit its pilot psychiatric drug policy? Can the FAA be in direct contradiction with the FDA about the possible deadly consequences associated with psychiatric drugs? Not if the public has any say in the flying experience. Click here to read this article in full.

Take Action – Missouri Legislature

April 3rd, 2015

Take Action – Missouri Legislature

Periodically we let you know the progress of various proposed legislation making its way through the Missouri General Assembly and suggest ways for you to contribute your viewpoint to your state Representative and state Senator.

You can find your Representative and Senator, and their contact information, by entering your 9-digit zip code here.

This time, we’d like to discuss House Bill HB118 and Senate Bill SB239. Often, the same (or similar) bills are introduced simultaneously in the House and in the Senate. These two bills address the same issue. The apparent problem these bills are attempting to resolve relates to the fact that English common law, rather than Missouri Statute, rules claims for damages arising out of the rendering of or failure to render health care services by a health care provider, which can lead to claims for very large sums of money. The proposed legislation places limits on such claims.

Basically, someone can claim that a “health care provider failed to use that degree of skill and learning ordinarily used under the same or similar circumstances by members of the defendant’s profession and that such failure directly caused or contributed to cause the plaintiff’s injury or death.”

This is often called a “standard of care”. All too often, however, when it comes to psychiatric treatment, the standard of care is “she’s depressed and she has Medicare.” This so-called standard of care is often being dictated by the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry, rather than competent and knowledgeable (non-psychiatric) physicians and health care providers.

We do understand the problem this legislation is trying to fix. Claims for damages can be out of line with reality, leading to a greedy and litigious justice system. Placing a Statute on the matter, with limits on damages, is an attempt to resolve this.

Here’s the HOWEVER. Psychiatric “treatments” are inherently damaging. Psychiatric drugs are inherently damaging. The psychiatric “standard of care” is psychiatric drugs. Therefore, suing a doctor for damages who failed to follow the psychiatric profession’s standard of care by not prescribing psychiatric drugs, thus claiming that damage to the patient was caused by not prescribing psychiatric drugs — well, we trust you get the point. This legislation places an undeserved degree of legal legitimacy on the prescription of psychiatric drugs and other psychiatric treatments, just because all the psychiatrists do it.

The psychiatric “standard of care” in this case is itself damaging. We’ll be suing doctors for doing the right thing!

It’s not that the proposed legislation is bad — it’s that it doesn’t really address the correct issue. A better focus point would be, did the patient provide fully informed consent to the treatment? Did the doctor provide full disclosure of both benefit and harm of the treatment to the patient?

Contact your Missouri state Representative and Senator, and let them know what you think about this. An amendment to the proposed legislation might help — such as, this law does not apply to electroshock, psycho-surgery, and psychiatric drugs, since they are all inherently damaging to patients and should not be held as standards of care.

Germanwings Co-pilot Who Purposefully Crashed Plane Had Spent 18 Months In Psychiatric Treatment

March 29th, 2015

Germanwings Co-pilot Who Purposefully Crashed Plane Had Spent 18 Months In Psychiatric Treatment

Numerous reports are now surfacing that Germanwings co-pilot Andreas Lubitz who purposefully crashed Flight 9525 into the French Alps, killing all 150 people on board, had in fact been under psychiatric care.

What media had not initially been reporting is the fact that Lubitz, in all likelihood was under the influence of antidepressants, drugs documented to cause depersonalization, mania, psychosis, and even homicidal ideation, considering he spent more than 18 months undergoing “psychiatric care.”

Late-breaking news from The Straits Times indicates that “German police have found medical treatments for psychological illness at the home of the co-pilot” and “Investigators made the discovery in a search of the home of Andreas Lubitz in the western city of Duesseldorf and seized a number ‘of medicines for the treatment of psychological illness’, Welt am Sonntag weekly said.”

Moreover, Lubitz would not be the first commercial pilot to purposefully crash a plane while under the influence of psychotropic drugs — In 2010, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), issued a report on the probable cause of a 2008 plane crash in Mount Airy that killed everyone on board, showing that toxicology tests revealed the pilot had the antidepressant Zoloft in his system. The NTSB report stated, “Officials say the pilot ‘displayed non-professional behavior’ and that a cockpit voice recording documented the pilot singing, ‘Save my life, I’m going down for the last time'” shortly before crashing the plane.

The emerging facts regarding Lubitz’ psychiatric treatment:

Russia Today (RT) reports, “Lubitz had spent 18 months overall under psychiatric treatment, Bild (a German newspaper) reported on Friday, citing anonymous sources within Lufthansa, Germanwings’ parent company. The pilot was diagnosed with a ‘severe depressive episode’ in 2009.”

According to Reuters, “The pilot who appears to have deliberately crashed a plane carrying 149 others into the French Alps received psychiatric treatment for a ‘serious depressive episode’ …. Citing internal documents and Lufthansa sources, Bild said Lubitz spent a total of one and a half years in psychiatric treatment.”

The Guardian reports, “Investigators searching the Düsseldorf apartment of the co-pilot on the Germanwings flight that crashed into the French Alps on Tuesday have found evidence he hid an illness from his employers, prosecutors said on Friday. The evidence is a torn-up doctors’ note, signing him off work on the day of the crash. ‘Medical documents were found that indicate an ongoing illness and suitable medical treatment,’ Düsseldorf prosecutors said in a statement.”

Mirror states that, “Killer co-pilot Andreas Lubitz was treated in hospital just two weeks before the plane crash which killed 150 people. The 27-year-old attended a clinic at the University of Dusseldorf Hospital in February and March. The most recent visit was March 10, exactly a fortnight before he guided the Germanwings Airbus A320 into its fatal descent. The hospital said Lubitz attended for ‘diagnostic evaluation’ but insisted he was not treated for depression…. They confirmed he was suffering from a serious illness which he had concealed from his employers Germanwings. One of the sick notes was reportedly signed by either a local neurologist or psychologist.”

While the psychotropic drug policies of Lufthansa, the parent company of Germanwings, are unknown, in the U.S, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) allows the use of antidepressants among pilots, a policy instituted in 2008. This is despite the fact there have been 134 regulatory warnings from eleven countries, including the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Russian, Italy and Germany on antidepressants causing suicidal ideation.

Given the increasing number of questionable aircraft disasters, which, on their surface, provide no rhyme or reason for a motive, one may begin to question the use of antidepressants, especially in light of a 2007 FAA report that revealed that of the 61 air crashes between 1990-2001, “the pilot’s psychological condition and/or SSRI use was reported to be the probable cause or a contributing factor in 31% (19/61) of the accidents.”

The fact is, whether Lubitz was on psychiatric drugs, or in withdrawal from them, there is enough evidence to show that the use of antidepressants or other mind-altering psychiatric drugs by commercial pilots, in the U.S. and abroad, should be banned.

Drugging Missouri Foster Children

March 21st, 2015

Drugging Missouri Foster Children

 In light of a San Jose Mercury News investigation “Drugging Our Kids” exposing the massive psychotropic drugging of children under California’s foster care system, which found nearly 25% of adolescents in California’s foster care system are prescribed mind-altering psychotropic drugs, lawmakers are now understanding the urgency of legislation to curb this abusive practice.

More than 30 percent of Missouri’s foster children take psychotropic drugs, even beating California, and most of the drugs are approved only for children with severe mental problems, according to Columbia Missourian news.

Often neglected and abused, foster children are one of Missouri’s most vulnerable populations. But “experts” say the state cannot always give children the emotional support they need. Instead, their problems are dealt with another way — by prescribing harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs.

Nationally, 18 percent of foster children are given psychotropic drugs. In Missouri, it’s nearly twice that amount.

The overprescription of psychoactive drugs to foster children is alarming. Well over 5,000 Missouri foster children are taking psychiatric drugs. At least 20 percent were taking an average of two or more psychiatric drugs. Missouri spent more than $81 million on psychiatric drugs for foster children in the last five years. Antipsychotics account for more than half of the state’s spending on psychiatric medication for foster children.

In Missouri, prescription records indicate that foster children as young as 2 have been given antipsychotics.

Sign CCHR’s Petition to Prevent the Dangerous Psychotropic Drugging of California’s Foster Care Youth here.

Contact your state legislators and let them know what you think about this; urge them to do something about drugging our most vulnerable children with harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs. Find your Missouri legislators here.

CCHR St. Louis Holds Three Successful February Events

March 12th, 2015

CCHR St. Louis Holds Three Successful February Events

CCHR St. Louis had a successful February, holding three events to spread the word about psychiatric fraud and abuse.

Our annual trip to Jefferson City to speak with Missouri state legislators was February 2 through 4. We set up in the Rotunda of the state Capitol Building, and walked the halls to distribute CCHR DVDs and speak with all available Representatives and Senators.

Jeff City Statistics

Distributed 124 Public Relations Kits with Documentary DVDs
Distributed 22 Individual Documentary DVDs
Distributed 152 Handouts & Pamphlets
Staffed by 5 CCHR Volunteers (Thank you very much!)

Our annual booth at the Working Women’s Survival Show in the St. Charles Convention Center was February 20 through 22.

WWSS Statistics

Distributed 258 Pamphlets
Distributed 9 Booklets
Sold 28 Documentary DVDs
Distributed 2,716 pieces of Literature
Talked to (at least) 190 People
Received (at least) 149 Positive Comments
Staffed by 12 CCHR Volunteers (Thank you very much!)

In addition, we spoke at a meeting of the St. Louis Bible Fellowship February 10 to discuss psychiatric suppression of religion, and distributed 15 Documentary DVDs to the attendees.

Needless to say, we had great fun educating our main public (people who need to know about psychiatric fraud and abuse and who may be in a position to Do Something About It); you are all welcome to contribute in this manner. Let us know if you would like to help by emailing CCHRSTL@CCHRSTL.ORG.

Diagnosisgate: Conflict of Interest at the Top of the Psychiatric Apparatus

March 8th, 2015

Diagnosisgate: Conflict of Interest at the Top of the Psychiatric Apparatus

“Diagnosisgate” — It is probably the most stunning story of corruption in the history of the modern mental-health system. Mysteriously, it has been kept out of major media for two decades.

In recent years, the man who has been called the world’s most important psychiatrist has painted himself as the white knight who warns the public about the dangers of Big Pharma and psychiatric diagnosis. But Allen Frances, the longest-running head of psychiatry’s “bible,” the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders — which earned more than $100 million under his reign — actually worked hand-in-glove with a major drug company to misrepresent research on a massive scale in order to market misleadingly one of their most dangerous drugs, Risperdal.

Nearly a year ago, my attention was drawn to a blockbuster of a document that revealed these distortions of science and the whopping conflicts of interest. It was essential to inform the public, because it is the mental health system’s Watergate and has led to enormous harm. One editor after another of both general publications and scholarly journals fled from publishing the story. This surprised me, given how important the story is and the fact that it was almost completely unknown to the public and professionals.

The brave Dr. David Holmes, editor of the journal APORIA, based at the University of Ottawa, has just published the article, and I hope that you will read it at http://www.oa.uottawa.ca/journals/aporia/articles/2015_01/commentary.pdf and help spread the word.

This scandal affects vast numbers of people … two enormous groups are military servicemembers and veterans (though by no means only them). Have a look at this quotation from http://www.nextgov.com/defense/2012/04/broken-warriors-test/55389/:

“Veterans Affairs Department reported in August 2011 that Risperidone was no more effective in PTSD treatment than a placebo. VA spent $717 million on the drug over the past decade. The military has spent $74 million over the past 10 years on Risperidone, a spokeswoman for the Defense Logistics Agency said.”

Thank you for any assistance you can give in making sure this truth will be widely known — feel free to forward this email, post the URL on Facebook and Twitter, etc.

Paula J. Caplan, Ph.D.
Associate, DuBois Research Institute, Harvard University

www.paulajcaplan.net

John Oliver: How Big Pharma Makes Doctors Into Drug Pushers

February 22nd, 2015

John Oliver: How Big Pharma Makes Doctors Into Drug Pushers

In this hilarious and chillingly honest video, John Oliver reveals the stunning truth about how doctors are bribed to push drugs. It turns out that nine out of the top ten drug makers spend more money on marketing than they do on research. And most of that money is spent not on marketing to consumers, but rather, on marketing to doctors. Watch and share!

State of Fear

January 24th, 2015

State of Fear

The following extended quote is from the author’s appendix to the novel State of Fear by Michael Crichton. Stay with us here, we’re sure you’ll get the importance of it quickly.

“Imagine that there is a new scientific theory that warns of an impending crisis, and points to a way out.

“This theory quickly draws support from leading scientists, politicians, and celebrities around the world. Research is funded by distinguished philanthropies, and carried out at prestigious universities. The crisis is reported frequently in the media. The science is taught in colleges and high school classrooms.

“I don’t mean global warming. I’m talking about another theory, which rose to prominence a century ago.

“These efforts had the support of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Medical Association, and the National Research Council. It was said that if Jesus were alive, he would have supported this effort.

“All in all, the research, legislation, and molding of public opinion surrounding the theory went on for almost half a century. Those who opposed the theory were shouted down and called reactionary, blind to reality, or just plain ignorant. But in hindsight, what is surprising is that so few people objected.

“Today, we know that this famous theory that gained so much support was actually pseudoscience. The crisis it claimed was nonexistent. And the actions taken in the name of this theory were morally and criminally wrong. Ultimately, they led to the deaths of millions of people.

“The theory was eugenics, and its history is so dreadful—and, to those who were caught up in it, so embarrassing—that it is now rarely discussed. But it is a story that should be well known to every citizen, so that its horrors are not repeated.”

There is a lot more the author has to say about this; we highly recommend it.

He reaches some conclusions:

“First, … there was no scientific basis for eugenics. … Second, the eugenics movement was really a social program masquerading as a scientific one. … Third, and most distressing, the scientific establishment in both the United States and Germany did not mount any sustained protest. … And that is why the intermixing of science and politics is a bad combination, with a bad history. We must remember the history, and be certain that what we present to the world as knowledge is disinterested and honest.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The psychiatric profession, the original perpetrators of eugenics, purports to be the sole arbiter on the subject of mental health and “diseases” of the mind. The facts, however, demonstrate otherwise. Psychiatric “disorders” are not medical diseases. Psychiatrists deal exclusively with mental “disorders,” not diseases. Psychiatry has never established the cause of any “mental disorders.” The theory that mental disorders derive from a “chemical imbalance” in the brain is unproven opinion, not fact. The brain is not the real cause of life’s problems.

In 1883, British psychologist Francis Galton created the term “eugenics,” from the Greek word eugenes, meaning “good stock,” and defined certain racial groups as “inferior.” Through their history of invented racial “diseases,” psychiatry and psychology have not only legitimized modern racism, but also provided the justification for outright genocide.

In 1879, German psychologist Wilhelm Wundt of Leipzig University provided the ultimate scientific “proof” for eugenics and racism, by arrogantly declaring that as man’s soul could not be measured with scientific instruments, it did not exist.

In 1895, Alfred Ploetz, a Swiss-German psychiatrist, published his race inferiority theories. Hitler and his Nazi regime would use this to promote their brand of eugenics.

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood of America and a eugenicist, planned to exterminate the Negro population by sterilization.

1n 1994, Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein’s book The Bell Curve arrogantly and audaciously claimed that African-Americans and Hispanics are genetically disabled.

In the last few months, violence erupted across the U.S. as racial tensions were fueled by conflicts with police. Police department Crisis Intervention Teams across the country are being taught by psychiatrists and psychologists how to “handle” people with mental trauma.

If you think these attitudes have been purged from society, think again.

And who is it that claims to be able to ease these conflicts? Why of course, get some counseling from your local psychologist and get some anti-anxiety drugs from your local psychiatrist. They should know; after all, their professions created the attitudes in the first place.

OK, yes, we know that there was undoubtedly racial tension prior to 1883. We know you might have been rankled at the phrase “their professions created the attitudes in the first place.” But we’re not the Boston Fern here, tracing our ancestry back to the Garden of Eden. (To make a racially suspect joke about it.) We’re trying to make a point, and we think belaboring that point is necessary, because so many people around the country are simply not being allowed to get it.

The point is, racism is alive today because it is being continually created and reinforced by psychiatry and psychology, as it has been for at least the last 132 years.

The U.S. President’s Commission on Excellence in Education revealed that 40% of children in Special Education were falsely labeled with learning disorders simply because they weren’t taught to read.

For minorities, Special Education is covert psychiatric racism; a means of getting millions of children hooked on mind-altering psychiatric drugs.

For many years, schools have employed destructive psychological curricula, and are constantly pushing for compulsory “depression screening” of schoolchildren.

The psychiatric profession has a profit interest in ensuring that racist ideas continue to influence us — in our educational institutions, religious institutions, and other areas of society. The way to ensure freedom from their consequences is to continue to identify and limit the influence of the exact source of this social poison—psychiatrists and psychologists.

For more information about racism, download and read the CCHR booklet “Creating Racism – Psychiatry’s Betrayal – Report and recommendations on psychiatry causing racial conflict and genocide.”

The Accessibility of Care

January 18th, 2015

The Accessibility of Care

The political, financial and medical worlds rank the mental health of the nation’s citizens based on their access to “mental health care”, not on the actual state of their mental health nor on the outcomes of treatment. New reports from Mental Health America underscore these wrong targets.

These are some of the measures used in these reports to rank the 50 states and the District of Columbia on their citizens’ mental health status:

  • Number of people with “mental illness”
  • Number of children who have “Emotional Behavioral Developmental Issues” (EBD)
  • Number of people who have suicidal thoughts or who have attempted suicide
  • Number of children who have had “at least one major depressive episode”
  • Number of people who do not have access to mental health care or to mental health care insurance
  • State hospital re-admission rates

As you are undoubtedly aware, counting the number of people with “mental illness” or with “EBD” or with “depression” is totally specious, as the diagnostic criteria in psychiatry’s billing bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), are fraudulent.

As you are also undoubtedly aware, counting the number of people who have suicidal thoughts or who have attempted suicide is equally specious, as some of the known side effects of psychotropic drugs are violent behavior, and suicidal thoughts or attempted suicide.

State hospital re-admission rates are evidently how they measure the effectiveness of treatment, under the assumption that the higher the re-admission rate the less effective the treatment. Again, a specious measure, as the side effects of psychotropic drugs all but guarantee re-admissions and thus provide an argument for even more “treatment.”

And if you did not already know, “specious” means “superficially plausible but actually wrong.”

The emphasis in these reports is to identify and treat so-called “mental illness” at the youngest age possible. The psychiatric industry wants to hire an additional 30,000 child psychiatrists to handle this imagined need.

So we are basically left to surmise that reporting on the mental health status of the various states is an attempt to “show” that there is not enough insurance available to get everyone, particularly children, into the mental health care system, and that the various insurance companies, states and the federal government need to spend more on this fraudulent, ineffective and abusive mental health care system.

Missouri, by the way, is ranked 22nd in its citizens’ overall access to this kind of mental health care. A critical aspect of these reports is to show the impact of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on access to mental health care; particularly, they hope to show that the ACA does not provide enough improvement in access to psychiatric mental health care, and that more money is needed to get more children into this system and taking psychotropic drugs. One of the other targets of these reports is to provide evidence suggesting that the definition of “medically necessary” be expanded so that more people fit into the category of needing “behavioral health care,” and thus needing more psychotropic drugs.

The mental health monopoly has practically zero accountability and zero liability for its failures. This has allowed psychiatrists and psychologists to commit more fraud and abuse than any other area of health care.

The primary purpose of mental health treatment must be the therapeutic care and treatment of individuals who are suffering emotional disturbance. The only effective measure of this treatment must be “patients recovering and being sent, sane, back into society as productive individuals.”

For more information, visit www.CCHRSTL.org. Please forward this newsletter to your family, friends and associates, and recommend that they subscribe.