Johnson & Johnson Will Pay $2.2 Billion

Johnson & Johnson Will Pay $2.2 Billion to Settle Charges of Illegally Promoting Antipsychotic Drug

This past month Johnson & Johnson agreed to pay more than $2.2 billion in fines to settle accusations that it improperly promoted the antipsychotic drug Risperdal to older adults and children.

It is the third-largest pharmaceutical settlement ever in the U.S. and the largest in a string of cases involving the marketing of antipsychotic drugs. It also reflects a decade-long effort by U.S. authorities to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable for illegally marketing drugs to older patients with dementia as well as children, despite the grave health risks of the drugs.

The U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, recently announced that the rate of mass shootings in the U.S. is increasing. Although the information could hardly come as a surprise to most Americans, what is interesting is that the nation’s top cop provided no clues as to what may be causing this severe increase in deadly violent acts.

A beginning point might be to ask if there is a common denominator among the shooters. For instance, at the same time that mass-shootings have increased in the U.S., so has the use of prescription psychiatric drugs.

Psychiatrists prescribe antipsychotic drugs to children in one third of all visits, which is three times higher than during the 1990’s, and nearly 90 percent of those prescriptions written between 2005 and 2009 were prescribed for something other than what the Food and Drug Administration approved them for. Antipsychotics such as the Risperdal improperly promoted by J&J have been described as a chemical lobotomy because of their ability to disable normal brain function.

Click here to read more information about this.

Obesity and Psychiatry

Obesity and Psychiatry

On June 18, 2013 the American Medical Association voted to declare obesity a disease.

Obesity and various eating disorders have been a topic of discussion at the American Psychiatric Association for some time. The debate continues, whether to declare obesity a psychiatric disorder or not.

Obese: (medical definition) An abnormal accumulation of body fat, usually 20% or more over an individual’s ideal body weight, where ideal body weight corresponds to the weight having the lowest death rate for individuals of a specific height, gender and age. In general practice, obese corresponds to a Body Mass Index (BMI) over 30, where BMI = (weight in pounds)*703 / [(height in inches)*( height in inches)].

BMI is used because for most people it correlates with the amount of body fat, although BMI does not directly measure body fat. Observation and judgment are therefore part of the determination. There are many other considerations that could be taken into account, including age, gender, culture, body frame size, and general health.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Revision 4 (DSM-IV) includes “Eating Disorder Not Otherwise Specified,” and only discusses obesity as needing further research.

The latest revision, DSM-5, goes a step further by including “Binge Eating Disorder,” a type of overeating, but again sidesteps the topic of obesity.

While obesity is not explicitly in the DSM, the APA has certainly not dismissed its interest in eventually including it in future revisions, as soon as they can point to any research that might link obesity with any “mental disorder.” It is a topic of extensive speculation.

Interestingly enough, there is actual medical science being done on the subject of obesity. Enough, in fact, that we can look forward to actual medical or dietary conditions that will obviate any inclination to categorize it as a mental disorder and hence ripe for psychiatric drugging.

The September, 2013 issue of Scientific American contains an article by Gary Taubes of interest about obesity, “Which one will make you fat?” subtitled “Rigorously controlled studies may soon give us a definitive answer about what causes obesity — excessive calories or the wrong carbyhydrates”.

This article’s conclusion is that, “One ultimate goal is to assure the general public that whatever dietary advice it receives — for weight loss, overall health and prevention of obesity — is based on rigorous science, not preconceptions or blind consensus.”

One truly hopes for rigorous science in this regard, since the alternative seems to be the blind consensus of the psychiatric industry co-opting obesity for its own nefarious purposes, much as it did for autism.

It should be further noted that weight gain is a common side effect of anti-depressant drugs, anti-psychotic drugs, and anti-anxiety drugs.

You might be interested in exactly why psychiatric drugs do not help. Check it out here!

Fake Article in Psych Research Journal

Fake Article in Psych Research Journal

A Norwegian study that claims to have observed significant brain changes in mental patients who switched from so-called “first generation” antipsychotic drugs to second generation varieties has been retracted from the peer-reviewed journal BMC Research Notes. As announced by Retraction Watch, the foiled paper was pulled after it was discovered that researchers had literally switched their data sets and come to completely opposite and false conclusions.

BMC Research Notes (BioMed Central Ltd)

This is the official retraction statement for the article, “Does changing from a first generation antipsychotic (perphenazin) to a second generation antipsychotic (risperidone) alter brain activation and motor activity? A case report:

“The authors have retracted this article as the fMRI data presented in the case report are incorrect. The activation data reported for session 1 are the activation data for session 2 and vice versa. As a result the discussion and conclusions of the case report are based on the wrong set of data and are no longer valid. The authors apologise for the error.”

Here are some more references about fake psychiatric research:

Has psychiatry been corrupted beyond repair?

Psychiatry’s New Schizophrenia test – more fake science

The DSM fraud