Neurodiversity – The Latest Psychiatric Disability Trend

We’ve written a considerable amount previously about topics involving various disabilities and their relation to psychiatric fraud and abuse; here is a small selection for example:

People With Disabilities

The Disabled Community has many advocates helping them survive better in the world. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines a disability as “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities”. Traditional physical disabilities such as blindness, deafness, missing or impaired body parts, all have their advocates.

However, the psychiatric industry has made it their special emphasis to target people with so-called mental disabilities: Autism, PTSD, Learning Disabilities, Dyslexia (problems with reading), ADHD, Dyspraxia (problems with movement or coordination), Dyscalculia (problems with mathematics), Tourette Syndrome (involuntary, repetitive movements and vocalizations), Hydrocephalus (a buildup of fluid in the brain.)

Neurodiversity

With so many different “mental disorders” and no real clues about curing them, psychiatrists needed a new all-encompassing word to describe them. They picked “neurodiversity” — diversity based on some neurological condition.

Neurodiversity is a concept where neurological differences are to be recognized and respected as any other human variation. Neurodiversity activists may reject the idea that any of these conditions should be cured, since they don’t know how to do so, advocating instead for support systems that help people get along in life with their disability.

Now, we’re not advocating for any particular support system, and we certainly think that helping people with disabilities get along better in life is a laudable activity and deserves support.

Psychiatry

One theory of biological psychiatry is that these various neurological conditions are the result of normal variations in the human genome. Unfortunately, this attitude tends to lean toward eugenics, which is the track taken in Nazi Germany to eliminate anyone with so-called genetic defects from the breeding population. Psychiatrists developed the racial purity ideology used by Hitler which lead to the Nazi euthanasia program and, later, ethnic cleansing in the Balkans.

We question whether the psychiatric industry has anyone’s best interests at heart, let alone the interests of the disabled. In 2009, the Florida Sun Sentinel reported about the use of dangerous prescription medications for children and adults in residential and group home facilities licensed by the Florida Agency for Persons with Disabilities.

In 1987, “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder” (ADHD) was literally voted into existence by a show of hands of American Psychiatric Association members and included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Within a year, 500,000 children in America alone were diagnosed with this, and to expand the client base it has also been associated with Asperger syndrome and Autism spectrum disorder.

In 2018, the media reported on a Massachusetts school which will be allowed to continue administering electric shocks to its special needs students after a judge ruled the procedure conformed to the “accepted standard of care,” in spite of the practice being condemned by disability rights groups and the ACLU.

Our Point

The psychiatric industry continues to find new patient populations in the disability community, and imposes coercive and damaging “treatments” that further compromise people’s mental and physical health.

A parent with a child on psychotropic drugs can receive disability payments as a financial incentive. We observe that psychiatric drugs cause disability, regardless of any pre-existing conditions.

Even the United Nations recognizes the pervasiveness of abuse in the mental health care system. In its July 24, 2018 Annual Report of the High Commissioner, “Mental health and human rights,” it states, “States should ensure that all health care and services, including all mental health care and services, are based on the free and informed consent of the individual concerned, and that legal provisions and policies permitting the use of coercion and forced interventions, including involuntary hospitalization and institutionalization, the use of restraints, psychosurgery, forced medication, and other forced measures aimed at correcting or fixing an actual or perceived impairment, including those allowing for consent or authorization by a third party, are repealed. States should reframe and recognize these practices as constituting torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and as amounting to discrimination against users of mental health services, persons with mental health conditions and persons with psychosocial disabilities.”

We rest our case. We need your help. Let us know if you have some volunteer hours to help us expose psychiatric fraud and abuse.

Guilty of Bad Taste

And we don’t mean the “Bad Taste” 1987 science-fiction comedy horror splatter film about aliens harvesting humans for their intergalactic fast food franchise.

We mean that something is in bad or poor taste when it exhibits poor judgment by being tasteless, unsuitable, unseemly, improper, inappropriate, politically incorrect, impolite, lewd, offensive, insensitive, vulgar, crude, rude, obscene, meanspirited, or uncalled for. It is not a morally wrong action, but the reporting of current events often hypes what is essentially just bad taste by elevating it to a crime or a mental illness.

It should be obvious that the judgment of what is in good or bad taste is pretty subjective, socially entangled, and can be described by hoards of synonymous words.

Of course, we all know what good taste is. It’s what we have, and other people don’t.

Then again, bad taste could just be a failure to police oneself due to some extremely distracting condition, such as intoxication.

It occurred to us, reviewing some of the recent “news” in main stream media, that psychiatry has been (horrors) guilty of labeling bad taste as mental disorders.

Here are some examples of what could be just incidents of bad taste, or related to incidents of bad taste, from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). These are the fraudulent psychiatric diagnoses for which harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs can be prescribed, and for which insurance will pay the cost.

Adult antisocial behavior
Alcohol intoxication
Caffeine intoxication
Caffeine withdrawal
Cannabis intoxication
Cannabis withdrawal
Child or adolescent antisocial behavior
Cocaine intoxication
Cocaine withdrawal
Conduct disorder
Discord with neighbor, lodger, or landlord
Disinhibited social engagement disorder
Exhibitionistic disorder
Histrionic personality disorder
Insomnia disorder
Intermittent explosive disorder
Narcissistic personality disorder
Opioid intoxication
Opioid withdrawal
Personal history of military deployment
Phase of life problem
Relationship distress with spouse or intimate partner
Sibling relational problem
Social exclusion or rejection
Target of (perceived) adverse discrimination or persecution
Tobacco withdrawal

There are undoubtedly more diagnoses that could fit this categorization.

In other words, by exhibiting bad taste one could be diagnosed with a mental disorder and prescribed harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs. And who among us has not slipped up and said something they later regret? The point is, bad taste is not a mental illness, but it has been used by the psychiatric industry as a money-maker and a control mechanism by psychiatrists who assert that they know how you should behave in every circumstance.

With the DSM, psychiatry has taken countless aspects of human behavior and reclassified them as a “mental illness” simply by adding the term “disorder” onto them. While even key DSM contributors admit that there is no scientific or medical validity to the “disorders,” the DSM nonetheless serves as a diagnostic tool, not only for individual treatment, but also for child custody disputes, discrimination cases, court testimony, education, immigration, and more. As the diagnoses completely lack scientific criteria, anyone can be labeled mentally ill, and subjected to dangerous and life threatening “treatments” based solely on opinion.

It used to be that the term “mentally ill” was limited to mean crazy people like those talking to themselves in the streets and those acting irrationally, oblivious to the world around them. However, the symptoms of mental illness, today, have been re-defined and broadened by psychiatry to fit under the umbrella of any non-optimum behavior, including what is considered normal for that age. Basically, “mentally ill” now is just an opinion about something that a psychiatrist doesn’t like.

Since there is no laboratory test that can identify mental illness or suicide risk, the diagnosis of a mental disorder or of a suicide risk is entirely subjective. Basically, it is the opinion of a psychiatrist who has decided he does not like what a person is thinking or feeling. This is what we mean when we say that psychiatry is being used as a social control mechanism.

The psychiatricizing of normal everyday behavior by including personality quirks and traits is a lucrative business for the American Psychiatric Association because by expanding the number of “mental illnesses” even ordinary people can become patients and added to the psychiatric marketing pool.

People can and do experience depression, anxiety and sadness, children (and adults) do act out or misbehave, and some people can indeed become irrational or psychotic, or be guilty of bad taste. This does not make them “diseased.” There are non–psychiatric, non–drug solutions for people experiencing mental difficulty, there are non–harmful alternatives.

Psychiatry and Cannabis

There is an abundance of research literature highlighting the harmful effects of cannabis (marijuana), yet a large number of psychiatrists still advocate for additional research in the hope that they can find some beneficial use for it.

Some Cannabis History

The demonization of cannabis was an extension of the demonization of Mexican immigrants in the early 1900’s. The idea was to have an excuse to search, detain and deport Mexican immigrants. The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 effectively banned its use and sales. While the Act was ruled unconstitutional in 1969, it was replaced with the Controlled Substances Act in 1970 which established Schedules for ranking substances according to their dangerousness and potential for addiction. Cannabis was placed in the most restrictive category (Schedule I.)

In 1967, a group of prominent psychiatrists and doctors met in Puerto Rico to discuss their objectives for psychotropic drug use on “normal humans” in the year 2000. In what could well be a sequel to Huxley’s novel — only it wasn’t fiction — their plan included manufactured “intoxicants” that would create the same appeal as alcohol, marijuana, opiates and amphetamines, producing “disassociation and euphoria.” The rise of such psychotropics was likely related to the illegality and relative unavailability of other psychedelic drugs.

Psychiatry Promoting Cannabis

Partly due to the questionable legality of marijuana, it was not generally available as a psychiatric treatment, although various psychiatrists have promoted it for such.

In the 1840’s French psychiatrist Jacques-Joseph Moreau promoted marijuana as a medicine. Psychedelic drugs were studied for mental health conditions in the 1950’s and 1960’s, and a renewed push for their research and use is currently underway. The Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), was founded in 1986 by Rick Doblin specifically to promote marijuana and psychedelics as “medicines.”

In 1992, Australian psychiatrists called for heroin, cocaine and marijuana to be sold legally in liquor stores.

Another example is the psychiatric research paper “Therapeutic Potential of Cannabinoids in Psychosis” from 2016.

This quote expresses the psychiatric hope for cannabis: “Australian psychiatrist Patrick McGorry, renowned for his debunked and dangerous theory that pre-drugging adolescents with antipsychotics can prevent psychosis, now plans to prescribe medical cannabis to treat ‘anxious’ 12 year olds.”

This quote expresses another point of view: “…medicinal marijuana research suggests a joint a day might keep your psychiatrist away,” said Dr. Jeremy Spiegel, a psychiatrist on the east coast.

Rachna J. Patel, a psychiatrist in California, treats patients with marijuana.

The Harm that Cannabis Does

However, in 2013 the American Psychiatric Association said, “There is no current scientific evidence that marijuana is in any way beneficial for the treatment of any psychiatric disorder.” The research was starting to show significant harm from cannabis use.

Here are some relevant quotes about the harmful effects of cannabis:

“There’s consistent evidence showing a relationship over time between heavy or repeated cannabis use (or those diagnosed with cannabis use disorder) and an experience of psychosis for the first time.”

“The heaviest users of cannabis are around four times as likely to develop schizophrenia (a psychotic disorder that affects a person’s ability to think, feel and behave clearly) than non-users. Even the ‘average cannabis user’ (for which the definition varies from study to study) is around twice as likely as a non-user to develop a psychotic disorder.”

Use of cannabis to treat depression appears to exacerbate depression over time.”

“Cannabis can activate latent psychiatric issues.”

Cannabis is not a safe drug. Depending on how often someone uses, the age of onset, the potency of the cannabis that is used and someone’s individual sensitivity, the recreational use of cannabis may cause permanent psychological disorders.”

Cannabis Addiction

Today, psychiatrists are embracing all things marijuana because they are getting so many patients with marijuana-related problems such as addiction and psychosis. “Marijuana-related problems fall well within the scope of psychiatric practice: many patients use marijuana, which is likely to affect their psychiatric symptoms and response to treatment.”

In fact, marijuana addiction is such a significant problem that there are 31 entries in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) related to this addiction:

Cannabis intoxication
Cannabis intoxication delirium
Cannabis intoxication delirium, With mild use disorder
Cannabis intoxication delirium, With moderate or severe use disorder
Cannabis intoxication delirium, Without use disorder
Cannabis intoxication, With perceptual disturbances
Cannabis intoxication, With perceptual disturbances, With mild use disorder
Cannabis intoxication, With perceptual disturbances, With moderate or severe use disorder
Cannabis intoxication, With perceptual disturbances, Without use disorder
Cannabis intoxication, Without perceptual disturbances
Cannabis intoxication, Without perceptual disturbances, With mild use disorder
Cannabis intoxication, Without perceptual disturbances, With moderate or severe use disorder
Cannabis intoxication, Without perceptual disturbances, Without use disorder
Cannabis use disorder
Cannabis use disorder, Mild
Cannabis use disorder, Moderate
Cannabis use disorder, Severe
Cannabis withdrawal
Cannabis-induced anxiety disorder
Cannabis-induced anxiety disorder, With mild use disorder
Cannabis-induced anxiety disorder, With moderate or severe use disorder
Cannabis-induced anxiety disorder, Without use disorder
Cannabis-induced psychotic disorder
Cannabis-induced psychotic disorder, With mild use disorder
Cannabis-induced psychotic disorder, With moderate or severe use disorder
Cannabis-induced psychotic disorder, Without use disorder
Cannabis-induced sleep disorder
Cannabis-induced sleep disorder, With mild use disorder
Cannabis-induced sleep disorder, With moderate or severe use disorder
Cannabis-induced sleep disorder, Without use disorder
Unspecified cannabis-related disorder

So there is a shift in psychiatry from treatment of mental health problems with cannabis to treatment of cannabis addiction. They go where the money is.

Psychiatrists and other behavioral health professionals need to better understand the relationship between cannabis and mental disorders so that they can respond to increasing medical and recreational marijuana use among their patients.”

Unfortunately, the last thing any psychiatric treatment has achieved is rehabilitation from addiction.

Since the 1950’s, psychiatry has monopolized the field of drug rehabilitation research and treatments. Its long list of failed cures has included lobotomies, insulin shock, psychoanalysis and LSD.

Due to their drug rehabilitation failures, psychiatry redefined drug addiction as a “treatable brain disease,” making it conveniently “incurable” and requiring massive additional funds for “research” and to maintain treatment for the addiction. This has led to Medication-Assisted Treatment, where the drugs used to treat addiction are as addictive as the original ones.

The Latest Bandwagon, CBD

Since there is so much harm done by the THC in cannabis, many psychiatric researchers are putting their bets on cannabidiol (CBD), which is a cannabinoid lacking THC — such as psychiatrist José Alexandre S. Crippa of Brazil, who says “that cannabinoids may, in the future, become an important option in the treatment of psychiatric symptoms and disorders.”

Research findings in “Cannabidiol (CBD) as an Adjunctive Therapy in Schizophrenia: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial” “suggest that CBD has beneficial effects in patients with schizophrenia.”

Diana Martinez, Columbia professor of psychiatry, said, “If cannabidiol is moved off of Schedule I, a lot more research will be able to happen.”

Robert D. McMullen, a psychiatrist in New York, “remains hopeful that we will be able to develop substances that are going to target types of anxiety and depression with these cannabinoids but we haven’t reached that point yet.”

“While there are trials that suggest potential benefit of cannabinoids for [various psychiatric conditions], insufficient conclusion could be made due to the low quality of evidence…” [November 30, 2017]

Again, expressing the psychiatric hope: “While it is still unclear exactly how CBD works, we know that it acts in a different way to antipsychotic medication, so it could represent a new class of treatment.”

The jury is still out about the science and any potential benefit (or harm) of CBD, but the competition to get there first is intense, due to the potential of billions of dollars in taxes, pharmaceuticals, research funds, and other economic and psychiatric vested interests.

Psychiatric Drug Pushers

The history of psychiatry makes it clear that over many, many years they have been pushing dangerous drugs as “medicines.”

LSD moved into psychiatric ranks in the 1950’s as a “cure” for everything from schizophrenia to criminal behavior, sexual perversions and alcoholism. Ecstasy was used in the 1950’s as an adjunct to psychotherapy. Benzodiazepine tranquilizers became known as “Mother’s Little Helper” in the 1960’s. The cocaine-like addictive stimulant Ritalin (known among children as “Vitamin R”) is still in use for childhood behavioral problems, and suicide is a major complication of withdrawal from this and similar amphetamine-like drugs.

Today at least 17 million people worldwide are prescribed minor tranquilizers. Coincidentally, the world today is suffering from massive social problems including drug abuse and violence. We don’t have enough data yet about CBD to know its long-term effects; but then, we didn’t originally know about the long-term destructive effects of LSD, Ecstasy, benzodiazepines, Ritalin, and so on when they were first pushed onto an unsuspecting society.

These 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.

People in desperate circumstances must be provided proper and effective medical care. Medical, not psychiatric, attention, good nutrition, a healthy, safe environment and activity that promotes confidence will do far more than the brutality of psychiatry’s unproven drug treatments.

Mental Health and Social Justice

Social Justice: Fair and just relations between the individual and society, assigning rights and duties in the institutions of society, so that people receive basic societal benefits in return for their cooperation and participation.

In the Health Care field, social justice often means affordable access to ethical and effective health care.

In the field of Human Rights, we defer to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948.

In Mental Health Care, we promote the Mental Health Declaration of Human Rights. All human rights organizations set forth codes by which they align their purposes and activities. The Mental Health Declaration of Human Rights articulates the guiding principles of CCHR and the standards against which human rights violations by psychiatry are relentlessly investigated and exposed. Under the banner of the Mental Health Declaration of Human Rights, tens of thousands of people around the globe have joined CCHR and taken to the streets to protest psychiatric drugging and other inhumane mental health practices.

Through stigmatizing labels, unscientific diagnoses, easy seizure commitment laws and brutal, depersonalizing “treatments,” thousands around the world suffer under psychiatry’s coercive system every day. It is a system that exemplifies human rights abuse. Modern psychiatry still has no scientific veracity and knows and admits it, but keeps up the charade for the sake of profit.

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.

One of CCHR’s primary concerns with psychiatry is its unscientific diagnostic system. Unlike medical diagnosis, psychiatrists categorize symptoms only, not disease. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5) published by the American Psychiatric Association is notorious for low scientific validity.

Understanding this fraudulent diagnostic premise, we can see why psychiatry and psychology, entrusted with billions of dollars to eradicate the problems of the mind, have created and perpetuated them. Their drug panaceas cause senseless acts of violence, suicide, sexual dysfunction, irreversible nervous system damage, hallucinations, apathy, irritability, anxiousness, psychosis and death. And with virtually unrestrained psychiatric drugging of so many of our schoolchildren, it is no surprise that the largest age group of murderers today are our 15–to–19–year–olds.

Drugging children with addictive, violence-causing mind-altering psychotropic drugs is the “social justice” currently being employed by the psychiatric mental health industry. The rationale is, the drugged kids will now be able to compete with children from wealthier families who attend better schools. Rutgers psychiatrist Ramesh Raghavan, formerly at Washington University in St. Louis, chillingly said, “We are effectively forcing local community psychiatrists to use the only tool at their disposal [to ‘level the playing field’ in low-income neighborhoods], which is psychotropic medicine.”

The whole basis for this “social justice” program in low-income communities—that the ADHD drugs will improve school performance of kids and “level the playing field,” so they can compete academically with children from wealthier families—this whole program is based on a lie to begin with.

Meddling with the brains of children via these chemicals constitutes criminal assault, and it’s time it was recognized for what it is.

CCHR believes that everyone has the right to full informed consent regarding psychiatric drugs and other psychiatric treatments. Find out more by clicking here.

Immigration and Mental Health

“An open-borders group that has benefited from U.S. taxpayer dollars and is funded by left-wing billionaire George Soros launched a smartphone application to help illegal immigrants avoid federal authorities.” [Quotes from a Judicial Watch article.]

The group behind the app is called United We Dream, and was started by the National Immigration Law Center (NILC). Both the NILC and its offshoot, United We Dream, get funding from Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Also, “Between 2008 and 2010, NILC received $206,453 in U.S. government grants.”

“The organization…claims to have played a leadership role in spearheading Barack Obama’s amnesty program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which has shielded hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens from deportation.”

The United We Dream battle cry is “We changed the immigration debate by courageously declaring that we are ‘undocumented, unafraid and here to stay!'”

You might ask why CCHR may be interested in this?

After reviewing the lawsuit we previously reported about the coercive psychiatric drugging of immigrant children, we thought there might be further connections between this whole immigrant thing and the mental health industry. And no surprise, we found it.

The United We Dream and other associated websites point to a “Mental Health Toolkit” “designed to alleviate not only the stress and anxiety of folks across the nation and keep ours [sic] families secure, but also to give the reader tools that will allow them to conduct safe zone events and incorporate stress reducing activities within their community work and daily lives.”

Uh-huh. And how do you think they propose to do this?

Well, they refer legal and illegal (they prefer to say “undocumented”) immigrants directly into the mental health system, where they can be prescribed harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs.

“Mental Health America Resources: Available in English, and Spanish. This page includes several resources including, a local MHA affiliate locator, psychoeducation for mental health, support groups/resources, and national resources for mental health.”

Plus, legal and illegal immigrants are directed to call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline if needed. The NSPL is funded by the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the same agency which fraudulently claims that 1 in 5 Americans are mentally ill.

All this “mental health” information is cheerfully provided to immigrants by Dr. Luz M. Garcini, PhD, MPH, a clinical psychologist at Rice University.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5®) costs $210 and in 991 pages lists all 955 of the diagnostic codes needed by psychiatrists for insurance reimbursement. None of its diagnoses have clinical tests as a mental disorder (they are evaluated by opinion), and many of them can be assumed to directly apply to illegal immigrants. Who would have thought in 2013 when DSM-5 was released that it was preparing for the surge of new migrant patients? For example:

Academic or educational problem
Acculturation difficulty [i.e. cultural modification of an individual by adapting to traits from another culture]
Acute stress disorder
Adjustment disorder
Adjustment disorder, Unspecified
Adjustment disorder, With anxiety
Adjustment disorder, With depressed mood
Adjustment disorder, With disturbance of conduct
Adjustment disorder, With mixed anxiety and depressed mood
Adjustment disorder, With mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct
Discord with neighbor, lodger, or landlord
Discord with social service provider, including probation officer, case manager, or social services worker
Disruption of family by separation or divorce
Exposure to disaster, war, or other hostilities
Extreme poverty
Generalized anxiety disorder
Homelessness
Imprisonment or other incarceration
Inadequate housing
Insufficient social insurance or welfare support
Lack of adequate food or safe drinking water
Language disorder
Other personal risk factors
Other problem related to employment
Other problem related to psychosocial circumstances
Personal history (past history) of neglect in childhood
Posttraumatic stress disorder
Problems related to other legal circumstances
Target of (perceived) adverse discrimination or persecution
Unavailability or inaccessibility of health care facilities
Unavailability or inaccessibility of other helping agencies
Victim of terrorism or torture

We’re sure there are other relevant diagnoses, we just lost count.

So what exactly is this all about?

1. The mental health industry is targeting the immigrant community as ripe for exploitation.

2. The U.S. government has been suckered to pay for the “mental health” of illegal immigrants.

This all points to the extraordinary pervasiveness of fraudulent and harmful psychiatric and psychological mental health practices throughout society.

“Defectives” was the sweeping label in 1916 that Canadian psychiatrist Charles Kirk Clarke, a founder of the Canadian Mental Health Association, applied to immigrants from eastern and central Europe. Only now, with such a large and increasing immigrant population, and with public outcry rising against fraudulent and abusive psychiatric practices, the mental health industry is trying to bolster its services by targeting immigrants as one of their newest sources of income.

Fueled by a glut of research papers decrying the risk of immigrants with mental disorders, a hysteria fueled by tales of immigrant gangs running wild, and a government willing to pay for anything SAMHSA and Soros want, we now have a full blown immigration crisis with no one looking at its psychiatric foundations.

Whatever solutions there may be for these various problems, the most basic one, the one needing the most confront, and the one with the most potential return on investment, is the obliteration of the psychiatric industry and its affront to human rights.

Are You A CryptoCurrency Addict?

You think we’re joking, right?

But a hospital in Great Britain has a website devoted to cryptocurrency as a gambling addiction.

Castle Craig Hospital in Peeblesshire, Scotland (near Edinburgh) has a handy ten-question screening test to help you determine if you have such a gambling addiction, and they would be happy to treat you for it. If you answer “yes” to just one of these questions, you are likely addicted and desperately need help.

The “screening test” sounds a lot like the fraudulent “depression screening” tests promulgated by unscrupulous psychiatrists eager to prescribe you psychotropic drugs.

The recommended treatment is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), supplemented with an antidepressant to help you with low moods, and the publicly funded National Health Service in the United Kingdom would be happy to help you get treatment.

CBT, as we’ve remarked previously, is a form of psychotherapy that attempts to modify dysfunctional emotions, behaviors, and thoughts — by evaluating for the person, challenging the person’s behaviors, and getting the person to change those behaviors, often in combination with psychiatric drugs.

This approach assumes addiction is a disease. This is patently false; such addiction is a moral failing. It cannot be cured with drugs.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) lists “Gambling disorder” as a mental disorder, but then it also lists “Religious or spiritual problem” as a mental disorder, so you can see that it is not really helpful, since the traditional and most effective treatment for gambling is religious or spiritual.

The World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases version 11, released 18 June 2018, has a number of entries for various addictions, which it also considers as diseases — new in this edition is Gaming Disorder. Other so-called addictive behaviors in ICD-11 are Gambling Disorder, and of course the two catch-all disorders for the rest of us, “Other specified disorders due to addictive behaviours” and “Disorders due to addictive behaviours, unspecified.”

If someone is exhibiting behavioral problems, there are many things that can be done besides the exclusive drug- and behavior modification-based options that are the backbone of mental health services today.

The entirety of these psychological and psychiatric programs are founded on the tacit assumptions that mental health “experts” know all about the mind and mental phenomena, know a better way of life, a better value system and how to improve lives beyond the understanding and capability of everyone else in society.

The reality is that these mental health programs are designed to control people towards specific ideological objectives at the expense of the person’s sanity and well-being. Do we really want to institutionalize mandatory psychiatric counseling and screening, which is where all this is heading?

By the way, if you’re clueless about cryptocurrency, you can find out more about it by clicking here, but please refrain from gambling on it.

Crime and Mental Distress

A recent news report suggests that “Having a mental illness makes people more vulnerable to becoming the victims of a crime.”

We wondered about this, because it sounds just like the incessant and inane psychobabble coming out of the “psychology today” brain mill.

These results are suspicious because the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) lists “Victim of crime” as a mental disorder. So it’s hard to imagine that both “mental illness causes being a victim of crime” and “being a victim of crime causes mental illness.” It’s a no-win situation, and the fact that the DSM is a fraudulent machine used to sell psychiatric drugs does not make it more palatable.

The DSM-5 also has fourteen other diagnoses about being a victim in various abusive situations, and thirteen diagnoses about being the perpetrator of abuse or violence. It would seem that both victims and perpetrators are the focus of a lot of attention; so many ways to prescribe psychiatric drugs known to cause violence.

The study authors are using these questionable results to assert that people with mental illness are more likely to be victims rather than perpetrators of crime, giving the benefit of doubt to those who commit violence and further contributing to the perception of the “dangerous environment” so necessary to the existence of coercive psychiatry.

They are trying to prove that school shooters are not mentally ill, because this taint goes against the massive psychiatric public relations campaign to “stop the stigma of mental illness,” which is really a campaign underwritten by pharmaceutical companies to sell drugs.

The fact is, the real criminals here are psychiatrists and psychologists.

The soaring crime rate began to rise when psychiatrists and psychologists infiltrated the fields of education and law. When you put criminals in charge of crime, the crime rate rises.

If psychiatrists and psychologists actually knew what they were doing, the crime rate would drop. Instead, they conduct sham research about the relationship between crime and mental illness, instead of actually curing people and cementing the safety and security of society.

Real criminals would want to obfuscate the issues and point the finger away from themselves. Guess what? When the criminal mind accuses others, he is likely disclosing his own type of crime. And the fact is, psychiatric drugs cause violence, proven again and again as psych-drug-addled school shooters rage on.

Criminals think everyone else is a criminal, since they cannot envision people being decent. Psychiatrists and psychologists, focusing their attention on crime and illness, fail to observe human decency, and think there is nothing else but crime, deceit, and violence — all to be suppressed with harmful and addictive drugs, electroshock, psycho-surgery, involuntary incarceration, and restraints.

Recommendations

1. Legislative hearings should be held to fully investigate the correlation between psychiatric treatment and violence and suicide.

2. Toxicology testing for psychiatric and even illicit drugs should be mandatory in cases where someone has committed a mass shooting or other serious violent crime.

3. Train law enforcement officers, school security and teachers in the adverse effects of psychotropic drugs in order to recognize that irrational, violent and suicidal behavior in persons they may face could be influenced by these drugs.

4. No student shall be forced to take any psychotropic drug as a requisite of their education, in alignment with Title 20 of United States Code: Chapter 33, “Education of Individuals with Disabilities,” Subchapter II, (25) “Prohibition on mandatory medication.”

Nuedexta, PCP in Disguise

Nuedexta (dextromethorphan hydrobromide and quinidine sulfate) marketed by Avanir Pharmaceuticals is FDA approved for the treatment of PseudoBulbar Affect (PBA), a so-called neurological condition thought to cause involuntary, sudden, and frequent episodes of crying and/or laughing, observed with patients having amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), multiple sclerosis (MS), strokes, or traumatic brain injury. It was originally approved in 2010 by the FDA for such emotional instability.

Dextromethorphan may cause serotonin syndrome, a buildup of an excessive amount of serotonin in the body, and this risk is increased by overdose, particularly if taken with other serotonergic agents, SSRIs or tricyclic antidepressants.

Side effects of serotonin syndrome can be altered mental status, muscle twitching, confusion, high blood pressure, fever, restlessness, sweating, tremors, or shivering. Use of Nuedexta with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or tricyclic antidepressants increases the risk of these side effects.

These are not all the possible side effects.

The quinidine in the formula is used to suppress metabolism of the dextromethorphan in order to increase the bioavailability of the dextromethorphan, and is not part of the treatment for PBA. Dextromethorphan acts on the central nervous system, but the mechanism by which dextromethorphan exerts any therapeutic effects in patients with PBA is totally unknown — it’s just a guess from clinical observations that it might have such a symptomatic effect.

Dextromethorphan, derived from an opioid analgesic, is sometimes referred to as DXM or the poor man’s PCP (phencyclidine, or Angel Dust), and is also used recreationally — acting as a dissociative anesthetic producing hallucinogenic states, delusions, or paranoia. At high concentrations, DXM can result in a false-positive for PCP on a drug screen. It is a nonselective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Its previous primary use since 1958 is as a cough suppressant. Regular use over a long period of time can cause withdrawal symptoms. DXM is often used as a substitute for marijuana, amphetamine, and heroin by drug abusers, and its use as an antitussive (cough suppressant) is now known to be less beneficial than originally thought.

We think that part of the danger of this drug is that it can be prescribed for various symptoms in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) just because of its claims of symptomatic relief — in spite of the fact that its mechanism of operation is unknown, its use can be severely abused, and its side effects can be fatal; and the symptoms of its side effects as well as the original medical issues can lead to the prescription of other dangerous and addictive psychiatric drugs.

Examples of DSM diagnoses that may be involved are “Histrionic personality disorder”, “High expressed emotion level within family”, “Adjustment disorder, With mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct”, and “Unspecified mental disorder due to another medical condition”.

Nuedexta is not thought of or advertised as a psychotropic drug, but exposing its camouflage one can now see that essentially it is psychoactive and should be avoided — another example of a psychiatric drug disguised as a legitimate medical drug.

Click here for more information about dangerous psychiatric drugs.

Autism

We wish we could give you all the true data about autism, but we don’t know it all. Instead, we can give you many related facts and a few opinions; perhaps these can help you evaluate the subject. The reason we discuss it at all is because the psychiatric industry has claimed this disorder for its own purposes, and continues to wrestle with the line between unusual and abnormal behavior. For obvious reasons, we mis-trust anything that psychiatry has to say about the condition, especially about treating it with psychotropic drugs.

The word “autism” was coined in 1912 by Swiss psychiatrist Paul Bleuler (1857-1939) from the Greek autos- “self” + –ismos a suffix of action or of state. The notion was originally of “morbid self-absorption.”

The number of people diagnosed with autism has increased dramatically since the 1980s, partly due to changes in diagnostic criteria and practice; the question of whether actual prevalence has increased is unresolved, since diagnosis is based on behavior, not cause or mechanism.

Autism, sometimes called “autism spectrum disorder,” “pervasive developmental disorder,” or “Asperger syndrome,” apparently does not have a single definitive definition that can be used across the board to provide a basis for correcting the condition; it generally refers to a range of symptoms characterized by impairment of the ability to form normal social relationships, by impairment of the ability to communicate with others, and by stereotyped behavior patterns.

A study was once done to figure out how common Asperger’s was, and the results were clear — it was vanishingly rare. Then Allen Frances put it in the DSM, and the number of kids diagnosed with the disorder exploded.

Of course, while Dr. Hans Asperger is credited with shaping our ideas of autism and Asperger syndrome, one may not want to give him that much credit, since he is now linked with the Nazi’s child euthanasia program, recommending dozens of children to be sent for euthanasia.

There are many competing theories about autism’s etiology [its causes or origins]. We have seen articles relating autism to toxins (mercury, pesticides, etc.), nutrition, incomplete breakdown of casein or gluten, vaccination, genetic predisposition, neurological brain disorders, an alteration in how nerve cells and their synapses connect and organize, birth defects, the stress of circumcision, antidepressants, ad nauseum.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), psychiatry’s billing bible, may perpetuate the perception, whether true or false, that autism is related to mental retardation where it discusses atypical autism arising most often in profoundly retarded individuals.

Where to go from here?

Well, we’re not going to spend any more time discussing etiology and treatment, since you can Google those thousands of articles as well as we can. The real point we want to make is that psychiatry currently owns autism, listing “Autism spectrum disorder” in the DSM-5.

In future revisions of the DSM psychiatrists may make it easier to diagnose, increasing the number of children into the mental health system; or they may make it harder to diagnose, excluding children whose families are currently receiving, or hope to receive, some kind of monetary disability support. In any case, the hue and cry is already demanding more psychiatric funding for whatever they are currently calling autism.

At least a million children and adults have an autism diagnosis or a related disorder, such as “Unspecified neurodevelopmental disorder” (and there are ten categories of “developmental disorder” in the DSM-5.)

There are as many recommended therapies for autism as there are theories about the condition; these therapies may include diet, nutrition, behavioral modification, and many other non-invasive alternative health treatments. Of course, the treatment of choice for psychiatrists is the usual list of harmful and addictive antidepressants, antipsychotics, and anti-anxiety drugs, whose devastating side effects are well-documented.

Autism is big business — meaning big profits. One check on the Missouri government web site (www.mo.gov) revealed the word “autism” appearing 1,880 times, and “autistic” appearing 607 times.

The Missouri Department of Mental Health budget in 2012 included over $10 million for various autism services. In 2018 the autism budget is still roughly $10 million, but the budget for the Division of Developmental Disabilities is going to be over one billion dollars.

Granted, there is social justification for providing help to children and families coping with traumatic health situations. Given, however, psychiatry’s history of fraud, abuse, and use of damaging drugs, due diligence suggests examining this field very closely for exaggeration and mis-use.

The Drug Controversy

It is estimated that more than half of autistic school age children are on one or more psychotropic drugs. In at least one study, it was shown that prenatal use of antidepressants increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder in newborn children.

Children with autism are more likely to be prescribed addictive and harmful antipsychotic drugs than their typical peers, according to a large study. They are also prescribed antipsychotics such as risperidone at younger ages, and for longer periods of time. Doctors often prescribe antipsychotics to manage behavioral problems in children with autism rather than as any kind of actual treatment for the condition, since the drugs act to suppress the central nervous system. Other studies also indicate that many children with autism who take antipsychotic medications are not first offered safer and more effective options. A 2017 study suggested that about 20 percent of children with autism in the U.S. are prescribed antipsychotics.

An article in the Los Angeles Times on April 23, 2012 headlined, “Report says studies overstate drugs’ ability to treat autism symptoms.” It went on to say that “Antidepressants are not specifically approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treating autism, but they have become the go-to drugs for trying to control some of its key symptoms. By some estimates, the drugs have been prescribed for as many as one-third of children with the diagnosis. … A series of standard statistical tests designed to check the consistency and reliability of the published data [about the effectiveness of psychiatric drugs prescribed for autism] strongly suggested publication bias. The effect appeared to be so great that the researchers could no longer deem the anti-depressants effective.” [Publication bias occurs when studies that show a drug or treatment is effective are more likely to be published than studies with negative findings.]

Find out more about what you can do to expose psychiatric fraud and abuse, and support CCHR St. Louis so that it can continue to expose psychiatric fraud and abuse. Go to http://www.cchrstl.org/takeaction.shtml.

They’re Coming to Screen You

The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention has released guidelines for suicide prevention (“Recommended Standard Care for People with Suicide Risk“).

The NAASP, a project of Education Development Center, is partially funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), and the Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS).

Their main point of view is that suicide prevention should be managed by health care providers in the same way as prevention of common medical conditions.

The rate of suicide deaths in the U.S. rose significantly between 2000 and 2015 — from 10.44 per 100,000 to 13.26 per 100,000 — coincident with the increase of prescriptions for psychotropic (mind-altering) drugs.

“At least two thirds of suicide deaths occur within about 30 days of a medical contact, be that an emergency department (ED), a primary care practice, or a mental health professional” and up to 70% among the older male psychiatric population. This is not a good recommendation for seeing a psychiatrist.

They believe that suicide screening should be a standard action for all patients in the mental health care system. Mental health screening aims to get the whole population on drugs and thus under control. Contrary to how screening is presented by psychiatrists, there is no scientific evidence to substantiate these claims of screening for suicide risk.

The psychopharmaceutical industry has invented hundreds of mental health screening questionnaires devised from the fraudulent symptoms of “disorders” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), with drug companies paying for and copyrighting these. These questionnaires are all over the Internet, where any “lay person” can complete it, diagnose themselves and go ask their doctor for the drug recommended for it.

Unfortunately, they neglect to mention that the subjective questions used in these screenings are based on the DSM, which medical experts say is an unscientific and unreliable document. In 2004 the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, an independent panel of experts in primary care and prevention, “found no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality.” It’s just a way to put more people on prescription drugs. Some suicide risk assessments are designed to fit hand-in-glove with the effects of these drugs, emphasizing the physical symptoms that most respond to psychiatric drugs.

One such screening test called TeenScreen went out of business after admitting that it had a large chance that 84% of children screened could be wrongly identified as suicidal. Screening and early intervention sounds like a great idea until you turn out to be the one being screened.

Since there is no laboratory test that can identify mental illness or suicide risk, the diagnosis of a mental disorder or of a suicide risk is entirely subjective. Basically, it is the opinion of a psychiatrist who has decided he does not like what a person is thinking or feeling.

There certainly should be more attention paid by health care providers to the risk of suicide; however, that attention should be directed toward finding and fixing actual medical conditions and getting patients off of harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs.

Click here for more information about the history of mental health screening and its fraudulent nature.