Committee on Quackery Hides Psychotropic Drug Proliferation

The 1963-1974 American Medical Association Committee on Quackery set out to discredit chiropractors, with the AMA urging its members to lend “their full support to the continuing vigorous attack on medical quackery and to the education program on the cult of chiropractic.”

The AMA recommended that Congress exclude payment for chiropractic services from federally supported health programs. On August 25, 1987, Federal Judge Susan Getzendanner, in U.S. District Court, found the AMA had engaged in an illegal boycott against chiropractors and an injunction against such activity was entered and affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit on February 7, 1990.

Chiropractors, of course, do not prescribe drugs.

It is not surprising that the AMA — also top heavy with psychiatrists as members — feared chiropractors. By the mid 1970s, 48% of American adults had taken a prescribed psychotropic drug. In 1977 alone, there were 85 million prescriptions for tranquilizers and 5 billion doses of pills, with an estimated 50 deaths related to Valium use alone. In 1970, 150,000 children were prescribed Ritalin, a figure that nearly doubled over the next two years to 250,000.

Cocaine-like stimulants such as Ritalin, now known to cause strokes, heart attacks, psychosis and death, were being handed out like candy for a completely fictitious “mental disorder.” Since then chiropractors and doctors practicing complementary medicine have continued to speak out against psychiatric drug practices.

In 2000, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) revealed the results of studies on both animals and humans who were given cocaine and Ritalin. The test subjects could not tell the difference. The DEA concluded that, “They produce effects that are nearly identical.”

Overdoses from methylphenidate, the primary ingredient in Ritalin, doubled between 2004 and 2005.

By 2006, nearly 7 million Americans abused prescription drugs, including Ritalin — more that the number who abused cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, Ecstasy and inhalants, combined. In the US, the number of stimulant prescriptions soared from around 5 million in 1991 to nearly 35 million in 2007.

There are thousands of physicians, acupuncturists, holistic psychiatrists, nutritional psychologists, nutritionists, chiropractors, herbalists, and other healers who do not rely upon psychiatric drugs.  Instead we are bombarded with ads that continually shove their message that psychiatric drugs are the solution to all our problems.

In the US today, more than 8 million children have been put on mind-altering psychiatric drugs. Psychiatric drugs can only chemically mask problems and symptoms; they cannot and never will be able to solve problems. The true resolution of many mental difficulties begins, not with a checklist of symptoms, but with ensuring that a competent, non-psychiatric physician completes a thorough physical examination.

While life is full of problems, and sometimes those problems can be overwhelming, it is important for you to know that psychiatry, its diagnoses and its drugs are the wrong way to go.

For more information go to www.CCHRSTL.org.

Psychiatric Hospitals With Safety Violations Still Get Accreditation

The Wall Street Journal reported December 26, 2018 that 141 psychiatric hospitals across the U.S. remained fully accredited despite serious safety violations between 2014 and 2015, including the death, abuse or sexual assault of patients.

A lot of money is at stake: Medicare payments to inpatient psychiatric facilities reached $4.5 billion in 2017, growing an average of 1% each year since 2006.

Evidence repeatedly shows that patients are at risk in for-profit psychiatric facilities that lack effective oversight.

The largest U.S. psychiatric hospital chain, owned by Universal Health Services (UHS) has approximately 200 behavioral facilities in the U.S. alone. As of September 2018, UHS had set aside $90 million in reserves to potentially settle a Federal Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into its billing practices involving 30 behavioral facilities and UHS headquarters. UHS continues to come under scrutiny for patient abuse, yet is allowed to purchase or build more psychiatric hospitals.

Another major behavioral hospital chain is owned by Acadia Healthcare, which has 586 mental health and substance abuse facilities nationwide. Both these chains capture billions of dollars in Medicaid and Medicare funding in an overall $220 billion-a-year U.S. behavioral health industry.

The potential for fraud in these two chains alone could be upwards of $230 million to $460 million. Over the past decade, UHS has already accounted for about $37 million in False Claims Act settlements and fines.

Psychiatric Times estimates that between 10 and 20 percent of state mental health funds are lost to fraud, waste, and excess profits to for-profit managed care companies—representing $5 billion-$10 billion.

The National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association (NHCAA) says that individual victims of health care fraud are sadly easy to find. These are people who are exploited and subjected to unnecessary or unsafe medical procedures, or whose medical records are compromised or whose legitimate insurance information is used to submit falsified claims.

Many health care fraud investigators believe mental health caregivers, such as psychiatrists and psychologists, have the worst fraud record of all medical disciplines.

What is needed is legislation that provides not only more effective oversight but also stronger accountability measures: criminal and civil penalties, removal from Medicare and Medicaid programs and their funding, and hospital closure where systemic abuse is found.

Click here for more information about massive psychiatric fraud.

Involuntary Commitment Under Another Name

The Acting Cook County Illinois Public Guardian filed a class-action lawsuit (Golbert et al v. Walker et al) December 13, 2018 on behalf of hundreds of children and teenagers in state care who have been held in psychiatric hospitals after they had been cleared by doctors for release, calling the practice inhumane and unconstitutional.

The lawsuit follows a ProPublica Illinois investigation that found nearly 30 percent of children in DCFS care who were sent to psychiatric hospitals between 2015 and 2017 were held there after doctors had cleared them for discharge.

It may not legally be Involuntary Commitment, but it has the same harmful physical and emotional effects. Some children were sexually exploited.

Every 1¼ minutes, someone in the U.S. becomes the next victim of involuntary incarceration in a psychiatric hospital. And there’s nothing they can do about it.

With health care eating up vast amounts of our national budget, the first spending cut to make is the cost of “treating” people who prefer not to be mentally treated or whose treatment is no longer necessary. Involuntary incarceration hikes federal, state, county, city and private health care costs under the strange circumstance of a patient–recipient who is not allowed to leave when treatment is over. ProPublica Illinois found that DCFS spent nearly $7 million on medically unnecessary hospitalizations between 2015 and 2017.

Read more about this here.

The Psychiatric Scientific Double Standard

When it comes to psychiatric scientific research, there is a double standard that favors what makes money and disavows what does not make money. When we say “double standard” we mean some rule or principle which is unfairly applied in different ways to different groups or situations, or that favors one group or situation over another. The actual principle in question here is called “evidence-based science.”

Many scientists, particularly those in the psychiatric-pharmaceutical industry, mouth that they favor “evidence-based science” when in fact they favor what can make the most money regardless of the evidence.

A recent Scientific American editorial (“The WHO Takes a Reckless Step“, April, 2019) denigrates Traditional Chinese Medicine because it is purportedly not “evidence-based.”

Yet Scientific American promotes psychiatry and psychiatric drugs, when it knows that every psychiatric drug on the market has somewhere in its fine print a statement to the effect that “we don’t know how it works,” while the FDA approves these drugs based on so-called “evidence.”

Here are some representative quotes:

  • The fine print for Rexulti (brexpiprazole, an antipsychotic) says, “the exact way REXULTI works is unknown”.
  • The fine print for Latuda (lurasidone, an antipsychotic) says, “It’s not known exactly how LATUDA works, and the precise way antipsychotics work is also unknown”.
  • The fine print for Xanax (alprazolam, a benzodiazepine anti-anxiety drug) says, “Their exact mechanism of action is unknown”.

So much for evidence-based practice! The actual evidence is, they don’t have a clue how these drugs are supposed to work — it’s all conjecture!

As we continue to examine the actual evidence, we come up against the adverse reactions, or side effects, of these drugs. This is hard evidence, not conjecture.

What is a Side Effect?

Side effects (also called “adverse reactions”) are the body’s natural response to having a chemical disrupt its normal functioning.

One could also say that there are no drug side effects, these adverse reactions are actually the drug’s real effects; some of these effects just happen to be unwanted.

The FDA takes the adverse side effect of suicide seriously by placing a Black Box Warning on certain psychiatric drugs. For example, the FDA says that “Antidepressants increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior (suicidality) in children and adolescents with MDD [Major Depressive Disorder] and other psychiatric disorders.”

What about those who say psychotropic drugs really did make them feel better? Psychotropic drugs may relieve the pressure that an underlying physical problem could be causing but they do not treat, correct or cure any physical disease or condition. This relief may have the person thinking he is better but the relief is not evidence that a psychiatric disorder exists. Ask an illicit drug user whether he feels better when snorting cocaine or smoking dope and he’ll believe that he is, even while the drugs are actually damaging him. Some drugs that are prescribed to treat depression can have a “damping down” effect. They suppress the physical feelings associated with “depression” but they are not alleviating the condition or targeting what is causing it.

Once the drug has worn off, the original problem remains. As a solution or cure to life’s problems, psychotropic drugs do not work.

For the first time the side effects of psychiatric drugs that have been reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by doctors, pharmacists, other health care providers and consumers have been decrypted from the FDA’s MedWatch reporting system and been made available to the public in an easy to search psychiatric drug side effects database and search engine. This database is provided as a free public service by the mental health watchdog, Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHR).

Hear This — Zone Out on Zonisamide

The March 15-21, 2019 issue of the St. Louis Business Journal noted a $10.5 million Army grant to the Washington University in St. Louis Medical School to study the epilepsy drug Zonisamide to see if it could prevent hearing loss from loud noises. This seemed like such an imaginative stretch that we decided to look into it in more detail.

The justification given is that Zonisamide is conjectured to protect hearing loss when given ahead of exposure to loud noises. We wondered how this came about. We also note that other epilepsy drugs are psych-related, so we wondered if there was a psych drug connection here as well.

In a rat study, researchers proposed using a substance that blocks calcium channels to see if it could prevent hearing loss against loud noises. Zonisamide also blocks calcium channels. Gee, maybe Zonisamide can prevent hearing loss.

Zonisamide is the generic name used in the United States for a seizure drug whose common brand name is Zonegran. It was first used in Japan in the early 1970’s to treat so-called psychiatric disorders, and has been used off-label by psychiatrists in the U.S. as a mood stabilizer. The FDA approved it for seizures in 2000, although it is totally unknown as to how it works to prevent seizures. The FDA notes that taking this drug may increase the risk of depression, psychosis and suicidal thoughts or actions.

Using Zonisamide during pregnancy may present a significant risk to the fetus due to the possibility of birth defects.

Zonisamide was first studied in Japan in the 1970’s during exploratory research on drugs for psychiatric disorders. The drug alters the concentration of dopamine in the brain, but is apparently dosage dependent — that is, different dosages can increase or decrease dopamine concentrations, leading to unpredictable results.

Zonisamide is metabolized in the liver by Cytochrome P450 enzymes, so its side effects can be magnified in those persons with a genetic lack of these enzymes.

Typically we see that the psychiatric research community makes a guess about re-purposing some old drug so it can be re-used for a new patient population, guesses how it might work in the rat brain, then guesses how it might work in the human brain, each time asking for more funding to make further guesses, eventually leading to the FDA approving a new use for an old drug even though they still don’t know how it “works.”

While medicine has advanced on a scientific path to major discoveries and cures, psychiatry has never evolved scientifically and is no closer to understanding or curing mental problems, thus must continually seek to find new uses for old treatments.

While medicine has nurtured an enviable record of achievements and general popular acceptance, the public still links psychiatry to snake pits, straitjackets, and “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.” Psychiatry continues to foster that valid impression with its development of such brutal treatments as ECT, psychosurgery, the chemical straitjacket caused by antipsychotic drugs, and its long record of treatment failures including Zonisamide as a mood stabilizer.

In over 40 years, “biological psychiatry” has yet to validate a single psychiatric condition/diagnosis as an abnormality/disease, or as anything neurological, biological, chemically imbalanced or genetic.

The drugs prescribed for psychiatric conditions, such as using Zonisamide as a mood stabilizer, only exacerbate the conditions they are supposed to treat. And when these drugs are used for other non-psychiatric conditions, they continue having the same adverse reactions, such as depression and suicide when Zonisamide is used for epilepsy. It will have the same adverse reactions if it is ever used for hearing loss. And they will still not know how it “works.”

We suggest that funding only be provided for workable medical treatments that dramatically improve and cure health and mental health problems. For more information, download and read the CCHR booklet “Psychiatric Hoax – The Subversion of Medicine – Report and recommendations on psychiatry’s destructive impact on health care.

Knock Yourself Out with Spravato (Esketamine)

A nasal spray version of the anesthetic drug ketamine was approved by the FDA on March 5, 2019 for treatment-resistant depression.

Janssen Pharmaceuticals says that the cost for a one-month course of treatment for Spravato (generic esketamine) will be between $4,720 and $6,785.

Esketamine is the S-enantiomer of ketamine, which means that it is one of the two mirror images of the chemical structure of ketamine, S (for the Latin sinister) being the left image. It enhances glutamine release in the brain. Glutamine is an amino acid used in the synthesis of proteins, among other things. In the brain, glutamine is used in the production of neurotransmitters. It is believed that glutamine plays a role in raising or lowering aggression levels.

Treatment requires that doses be taken, in conjunction with an oral antidepressant, in a doctor’s office or clinic, with patients monitored for at least two hours, and their experience entered in a registry.

Because of the risk of serious adverse outcomes and the potential for abuse and misuse of the drug, it is only available through a restricted distribution system. At least you can’t take it home with you.

The Spravato labeling contains a Boxed Warning that cautions that patients are at risk for sedation and difficulty with attention, judgment and thinking (dissociation), abuse and misuse, and suicidal thoughts and behaviors after administration of the drug.

Basically, it knocks you out so you don’t feel so depressed anymore. You don’t feel much of anything, actually, since you’ve just taken an anesthetic in the snout.

There were four phase 3 clinical trials; two of them failed to show any statistical improvement, but the drug was approved anyway because it was on the Fast Track and Breakthrough Therapy paths.

A 9/5/2018 update from Consumer Reports said, “All these drugs [Ketamine, Phenylbutazone, Chloramphenicol] are prohibited in beef, poultry, and pork consumed in the U.S. Yet government data obtained by Consumer Reports suggest that trace amounts of these and other banned or severely restricted drugs may appear in the U.S. meat supply more often than was previously known.”

Note that “depression” is not an actual medical illness; it is simply a symptom of some undiagnosed and untreated condition. A diagnosis of depression is a prime example of psychiatric fraud.

Any form of ketamine used to treat so-called depression is unethical and harmful, since it precludes the patient from finding out what is actually wrong and getting that treated. Psychiatrists pushing ketamine or esketamine are shameful drug pushers who are making a buck off people’s misfortune.

Go here for more information about alternatives to drugs.

Depression and The Marketing of Madness

The high-income partnership between psychiatry and drug companies has created an $80 billion psychotropic drug profit center, requiring constant marketing to push harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs on a vulnerable public.

How did psychotropic drugs, with no target illness, no known curative powers and a long and extensive list of harmful side effects, become the go-to treatment for every kind of psychological distress? And how did the psychiatrists espousing these drugs come to dominate the field of mental treatment?

Clever marketing hides the harm in a succession of consumer ads constantly churning through “new revelations.”

The most recent we’ve seen have been these gems:

— A new marketing catchphrase is being used in a Trintellix commercial — “Depression is multiple symptoms.”

— Another new marketing catchphrase is being used in a Latuda commercial — “A different type of depression.”

Psychiatry continues heavily pushing false data about depression

The fact is, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Medical Association and the National Institute of Mental Health admit that there are no medical tests to confirm depression as a disease but do nothing to counter the false idea that these are biological/medical conditions when in fact, diagnosis is simply done by a checklist of behaviors.

There are 77 entries in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) using some variation of the word “depressive”, so that nearly anyone can be so diagnosed and prescribed harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs.

Yes, people experience various symptoms of mental distress. This does not make them “mentally diseased” and there is no evidence of physical/medical abnormality for the so-called diagnosis of “depression.” This doesn’t mean that there aren’t solutions for people experiencing difficulty; there are non harmful, medical alternatives. But they do not require a psychiatric “label” to treat them. There is no mental illness test that is scientifically/medically proven. This isn’t a matter of opinion — psychiatrists who are opposed to the labeling of behaviors as mental illness openly admit this.

Dr. Thomas Szasz said, “The term ‘mental illness’ refers to the undesirable thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of persons.” More properly, it is just what psychiatry and psychiatrists have inappropriately labeled as “undesirable behavior;” the prime undesirable antisocial people on the planet telling you what they think is undesirable!

Find out more about the fake “disease” called depression and the harm that anti-depressive drugs do.

Watch the documentary exposing the truth behind the slick marketing schemes and scientific deceit that conceal a dangerous and often deadly sales campaign.

The Marketing of Madness Education Package is the ultimate resource for educating others on the dangerous effects of psychotropic drugs, and the multi-billion-dollar psychiatric-pharmaceutical partnership now dominating the field of mental health. CCHR is offering this kit for free to educators and lecturers to assist them in educating others about the risks of these mind-altering drugs, and to furnish information that is generally not told to patients or physicians. Arm yourself with the facts about psychiatry.

Is It a Drug Allergy or a Side Effect?

We noticed that most drug advertisements now say something like “Do not take this drug if you are allergic to it or any of its ingredients.” We wondered when this caveat started.

We have repeatedly warned about the side effects of psychiatric drugs, also called adverse reactions. Side effects are the body’s natural response to having a chemical disrupt its normal functioning. One could also say that there are no drug side effects, these adverse reactions are actually the drug’s real effects; some of these effects just happen to be unwanted.

So we were curious about how warnings of drug side effects have apparently morphed into warnings about being allergic to drugs. Was this another example of the psycho-pharmaceutical industry redefining terms to downplay the adverse reactions?

Well, what is an allergy? Allergies occur when the immune system overreacts to a foreign substance by producing antibodies which identify the substance as harmful. The word itself comes from German allergie, from Greek allos “other” + Greek ergon “work” or “action”.

We often think of an allergic reaction as from something environmental, such as inhaling pollen, which causes the immune system to reject the substance.

The experts say that the difference between an allergy and a side effect is that an allergy generally results from the immune system rejecting the substance, and a non-allergic side effect is a predictable result from some particular chemical or biological property of the substance not involving the immune system.

We get the difference, but we still see the psycho-pharmaceutical industry starting to emphasize allergic reactions over side effects in their public relations campaigns, even though allergic reactions are rare compared to side effects, reported as less than 10% of the cases.

The implication seems to be that an allergic reaction is not the drug’s fault, it’s the body’s reaction, whereas a side effect is caused by the drug. We think the distinction is moot, but is being used to downplay drug side effects and transfer the attention and blame off the drugs.

One reference says this about it: “A drug allergy occurs when your immune system mistakenly identifies a drug as a harmful substance.” Aha, a deliberate attempt to cast drugs as non-harmful.

The literature shows discussions about the difference between allergy and side effect over many years, but it’s only recently that we’ve noticed the emphasis in advertisements on allergy instead of side effect.

There are also some genetic effects that confuse the issue. An adverse reaction can also be a reaction to drugs or toxins which cannot be metabolized due to a genetic lack of cytochrome P450 enzymes.

We also remind people that the real problem is that psychiatrists fraudulently diagnose life’s problems as an “illness”, and stigmatize unwanted behavior or study problems as “diseases” so that they can prescribe drugs. Psychiatry’s stigmatizing labels, programs and treatments are harmful junk science; their diagnoses of “mental disorders” are a hoax – unscientific, fraudulent and harmful. All psychiatric treatments, not just psychiatric drugs, are dangerous.

We do suggest that people review the potential known side effects of any prescribed drugs; this is one of the cardinal precepts of Full Informed Consent.

Human Rights in the Mental Health Care Industry

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goal number 3.4 says, “By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.” This is certainly a laudable goal.

We are particularly interested in promoting mental health and well-being. The United Nations measures its success with this goal by reducing the suicide mortality rate. We think this is a useful measure.

Unfortunately, the current “standard of care” in the psychiatric mental health industry heavily promotes and prescribes harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs which are known to cause violence and suicide, exactly the opposite of this goal. How might we engage to counter this sorry state of affairs?

CCHR To The Rescue

The Citizens Commission on Human Rights® (CCHR) is a non-profit watchdog organization whose purpose is to restore human rights to the field of mental health by ensuring that criminal abuses are speedily investigated and prosecuted and that people’s rights are legally protected. CCHR was founded in 1969 by the late Professor of Psychiatry Emeritus Dr. Thomas Szasz and the Church of Scientology. The CCHR St. Louis chapter was incorporated in 1989 in Missouri.

The mission of CCHR is to investigate, expose and eradicate violations of human rights by the field of psychiatry. To be sure, CCHR’s investigations over the last 50 years have consistently shown that the field of psychiatry itself is a human rights violation.

By depicting those they label mentally ill as a danger to themselves or others, psychiatrists have convinced governments and courts that depriving such individuals of their liberty is mandatory for the safety of all concerned. Wherever psychiatry has succeeded in this campaign, extreme abuses of human rights have resulted.

Through the broad dissemination of CCHR’s internet sites, documentary videos, books, newsletters, booklets and pamphlets, more and more patients, families, professionals, lawmakers and countless others are becoming educated on the truth about psychiatric fraud and abuse, and that effective action can and should be taken.

Has Your Life, or The Life of Someone in Your Family, Been Affected by Fraud or Abuse in the Mental Health Industry?

Here are some examples of psychiatric fraud and abuse:

No Mental Health Help When Needed
ElectroConvulsive Therapy (ECT, Electroshock)
Harmful and Addictive Psychiatric Drugs
Suicide
Violence
Involuntary Commitment
Being Threatened with Involuntary Commitment or Punishment for Refusal of Treatment
Being Coerced into Hospitalization or Treatment
Treatment Without Prior Informed Consent
Medical Kidnapping
Forcible Removal of Children to Foster Care
Forcible Drugging of Foster Children
Misdiagnosis
Sexual Assault
Elderly Abuse
Insurance Fraud
Forcible Restraints
Psycho-Surgery
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Deep Brain Stimulation
Vagus Nerve Stimulation

Tell us how this has affected you. Report psychiatric Abuse. It’s a Crime.

Orilissa May Cause Suicidal Ideation

Orilissa (generic elagolix) is a drug from AbbVie Inc. and Neurocrine Biosciences, approved by the FDA in the summer of 2018, and prescribed for women with moderate to severe endometriosis pain. Endometriosis is a chronic disease in which uterine lining tissue grows outside the uterus. The drug shuts down the hormonal cycle, stopping the monthly menstrual period. It is currently being heavily advertised, with a list price of approximately $850 per month.

It caught our attention because some of the serious side effects are suicidal thoughts, actions, or behavior, and worsening of mood.

The prescribing information advises that patients with new or worsening depression, anxiety or other mood changes should be referred to a mental health professional. We urge caution, because a psychiatrist may misdiagnose such symptoms as a mental disorder rather than a drug side effect, and prescribe harmful psychotropic drugs instead of properly handling the side effects.

Suicidal ideation and behavior, including one completed suicide, occurred in subjects treated with Orilissa in the endometriosis clinical trials. Users had a higher incidence of depression and mood changes compared to placebo. Some of the most common adverse reactions in clinical trials included anxiety, depression and mood changes.

The drug is a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, which means it blocks the receptors of certain hormones in the brain’s pituitary gland, leading to the suppression of luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, estradiol, and progesterone. Patients are advised to limit the duration of use because of bone loss; bone mineral density loss is greater with increasing duration of use and may not be completely reversible.

The drug is metabolized in the liver by cytochrome P450 enzymes, so a person genetically deficient in these enzymes, or who is taking other drugs that inhibit CYP450 enzymes, is at risk of a toxic accumulation of the drug leading to more severe side effects.

There does not appear to be any scientific data about exactly why suicidality and behavior changes are potential adverse reactions, but we might surmise that messing with hormones in the brain is not exactly a well-known precision science.

The major issue we see is that mood changes as a side effect from Orilissa are likely to be misdiagnosed. Since psychiatrists do not perform clinical tests and are wont to prescribe an antidepressant rather than get to the root of the problem, we want to be sure every candidate for this drug understands the issue and practices full informed consent to any psychiatric treatment.