Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: anon on July 20, 2003, 10:37:00 PM
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-17 08:56 ]
-
4 million plus kids "running on ritalin" is not a miracle, it is an American tragedy. What is wrong with our society that we must impair the brains of children with psychotropic drugs as the answer to "helping" them be more efficient at home and in the classroom? No where else in the world are so many children being drugged into compliance with the expectations of their parents and teachers. America is becoming a toxic wasteland of junk food, junk therapy and junk parenting.
Read what Doc Diller has to say about Generation Rx.
http://www.docdiller.com (http://www.docdiller.com)
:roll:
-
Karen,
I respect you and your opinion, but at the risk of offending you, I must say your stance on ADD/Meds sounds a tad bit like a program parent. Are you a psych professional? I'm sure you are just presenting what you have heard as "fact".
Personally, I'd rather hear your personal experience with the drug than a broad generalization.
Yes, some kids have the "desired" effect from stimulants. But, there are less potentially dangerous options available.
There are kids who have experienced dramatic positive changes with simply a change in diet. Some are found to have a different learning style. Some have been found to have allergies. Some have been found to have bonefided medical problems that interfere with attention. Kids deserve the least harmful method of treatment. Sounds like what we say about programs !!
As I've said to program parents, demonstrate some tolerance for different opinions. Parents get to make their own decisions after reviewing many opinions and experiences. No one's attacking you personally.
This in response to your comment, "I do wish people would refrain from stating there is no such thing as ADD/ ADHD, and that parents are just not wanting to parent. So many parents won't get their kids the help they need because they'd herd someone make this statement, and don't want to be labeled as a 'bad' parent. So, the poor kid struggles threw school, feeling dumb, and waiting for the day they can walk away from the hell of the class room."
I wish those who say there is such a thing would present the proof or alter the way they speak about it. There are other ways to interpret behaviors and analyze what the child needs. There are many ways to alter one's brain chemistry. One major problem I think is rampant in the US is inadequate nutrition, lack of exercise, and excessive and unnatural stimulation. Not a good mixture. A good run can have an immediate effect on thinking and feeling.
Deborah
-
I can see where both Karen and Deborah are coming from. I was diagnosed with ADD when i was in 4th grade, im now a senior in high school. When i was young my mother didnt believe in giving me any medication or ritilin, so she gave me some herbal stuff which deffidently didnt work. I went on struggling until i was in 9th grade and i finally convinced her to at least let me try the ritilin and see how if it helped me. Let me tell you...it was a life saver for me! It calmed me so much, i always had this restless feeling whenever i was sitting down for more than 10-15 minutes at a time, i didnt feel like this when i was talking the ritilin.
But then again, inadequate nutrition and lack of exercise is a lot of the reason why many people struggle on focusing and thinking about one thing at a time, but if there is no such thing as ADD/ADHD then what was wrong with me all this time?
Brittany-
-
First of all, it bothers me that at least 2 proponents of this drug can not properly spell the word RITALIN. Second, just because Ritalin works doesn't mean parents should view this drug as a magic bullet. I mean, GAS-X works wonders to control unwanted bloating but so does changing one's diet.
:rofl:
-
>>But then again, inadequate nutrition and lack of exercise is a lot of the reason why many people struggle on focusing and thinking about one thing at a time, but if there is no such thing as ADD/ADHD then what was wrong with me all this time?
Brittany,
No anti-drug advocate denies a child may be having issues with focus and attention or behaviors that cause them problems in social settings.
The ones I know advocate looking at all aspect of the child's life and fulfilling any real needs that have gone unmet.
Here's a link to just one example of how one incredible woman deals with this issue in her Montessori classroom. My sons attended her school, as did their friend whose mother wanted him on drugs. I watched him be transformed over the years. The teacher couldn't change the utter chaos in his home, but provided consistency, stability and acceptance on a daily basis.
http://www.austinmontessori.org/donnabr ... apter9.htm (http://www.austinmontessori.org/donnabryantgoertz/readChapter9.htm)
-
Deborah, you write: Personally, I'd rather hear your personal experience with the drug than a broad generalization.
You have herd my personal experience. Its what I base my opinions on.
Also, from working in an LD/BD class room, I saw a good cross section of kids, and was able to judge for myself if the med in question helped or hurt.
Anon, you write: First of all, it bothers me that at least 2 proponents of this drug can not properly spell the word RITALIN. Second, just because Ritalin works doesn't mean parents should view this drug as a magic bullet. I mean, GAS-X works wonders to control unwanted bloating but so does changing one's diet.
Your attitude is exactly what I was trying to explain. You seem to be saying Brittany and I are not worth listening to, because we are so stupid we can't spell Ritalin in the conventional way.
I suspect if Ritilin had been available when I was in school, I might have been able to learn to spell. However, as it wasn't, I was thought to be retarded for the first 4 years of school. If not for a perceptive 4th grade teacher, my ability to Think may not have been discovered, and I might have gone much longer thinking I was retarded.
Back to Deb, you write: Yes, some kids have the "desired" effect from stimulants. But, there are less potentially dangerous options available.
There are kids who have experienced dramatic positive changes with simply a change in diet.
This is true about the diet change. I know. But it isn't always helpful. It depends on what the problem is - if its a food allergy, or just way to much sugar and fat in a kids diet - a change will help.
However, if its ADD, all the diet changes in the world won't help much. Some, maybe, but not enough to really make a big difference.
If (IF)it is ADD, then the drug does work. And it is extremely safe, if used appropriately.
As for the Program Parent thing - I can't imagine how I sound like a P. P by stating an opinion that goes against the grain of the majority : )
I don't mind that you hold your opinion, and I would strongly support your decision not to medicate your child. I just wish you and others wouldn't state your Opinion so strongly as fact - as their are many people unable to make the distinction, and who may not allow giving the med a try based on your opinion. In my opinion, this could deprive the child in question the opportunity to succeed and achieve in school.
Someone mentioned Loving our kids as they are - well of coarse! We love our kids very much even tho they may have all kinds of problems that make life a challenge. And because we love them, we do what we can to help with the challenges.
All I'm saying is if a child has this particular problem, the drug in question can help. I disapprove of this judgmental attitude towards parents who decide to give their struggling child this help. Once again, if ADD isn't the problem, the drug in question is not going to help! If it doesn?t help, then it is time to look for other answers, assuming the problem isn't obvious, like needing glasses, or sleep, or food.
You mention exercise - your absolutely right it can help a lot! And yet, we have schools doing away with recess. Kids growing up in neighborhoods where its not safe to go out and run around wild the way we did. People today fear even letting kids play alone in their own yards, and sadly, with good reason.
But again, IF the problem is ADD, exercise won't make any difference. Its a wild and disorganized way the brain functions in these kids. Its a brain chemistry situation that doesn?t respond to exercise the way some other disorders do.
Clearly we have to agree to disagree on this - and thats fine. I'm really not trying to flip your opinion. I'm just hoping to persuade you to be less judgmental of those who disagree.
-
Ritalin clearly helps some people-- and there are thousands of papers in the psychiatric literature, which compare it to placebo *and* to behavioral treatment and find it more effective.
What does that mean? More people get better-- ie, do better in school and relationships-- on Ritalin than do when given behavioral treatments or an inactive medication.
The people who say Ritalin works are *not* just like program parents who say the program works.
The program parents have only their own personal experience to back their statements; the proponents of Ritalin have hundreds of peer-reviewed papers. The opponents of Ritalin, however, are in the same situation as the program parents-- no data aside from anecdotes!!!
There is a reason that science frowns on anecdotes: they cannot prove cause and effect. Only controlled studies, comparing people who get the drug or intervention, to those who get placebo or a different intervention, can do that.
Why? If I put my kid in a program, and he gets better, I may credit the program, but how do I know he wouldn't have gotten better if I left him alone or if I made him stand on his head for two years? I don't. It's impossible to say for sure. But if we randomly assign 200 kids to the program, another 200 to be left alone, and another 200 to stand on their heads, and the program kids do best, then we know the program works. Conversely, if the head-standers do best, we should set up a program that incorporates that.
But if the left-alone kids do best, we need to recognize that and look for interventions that improve on nature or just leave the kids alone!
Without a "left alone" group, you can't tell anything because naturally, most kids mature out of their problems. There are dozens of studies which follow troubled kids over time that show this. Therefore, you need controlled research to even begin the debate.
And sure there are problems with controlled research, too-- but these are nowhere near as severe as the biases that afflict anecdotes. They are simply a higher standard of evidence, the highest one that we humans can achieve.
Further, arguing that ADD doesn't exist is like arguing that MS doesn't exist because there isn't a lab test for it. Tell that to people who can't move or control their bowels anymore because their immune systems are attacking their nervous systems!!! ADD diagnoses stand up to the tests used for other psychiatric and neurological diagnoses-- but there are simply people out there who don't like the idea of it, unlike with MS.
Finally, this doesn't mean that you should put everyone on drugs or that drugs should be the first choice. But if you have a diagnosed kid and everything else doesn't work, it's crazy to rule out drugs!
-
I have no experience with WWASP programs (thankfully), but I wound up here while researching them (I have a tendency to go on semi-random research binges when I run across topics that interest me). I do, however, have a whole lot of experience with medication for AD(H)D. I am seventeen years old (eighteen soon). I was diagnosed with ADD at the age of six. I currently take Concerta (essentially timed-release Ritalin), Zoloft, and, when it's necessary to supplement the Concerta, Ritalin. I have taken a ridiculous number of medications in the past (I'll name them as necessary). I am not personally affiliated with any psychiatric or pharmaceutical group. Why am I posting? Because it frustrates me to see stupid misconceptions tossed around about something that's been such a significant part of my life. Some of the people here seem to have made up their minds regardless of whatever else they might learn, but some might be at least willing to consider other possibilities.
I got by well enough in preschool and kindergarten. Then I hit first grade, and due to my stubbornness and curiosity combined with a bad teacher, I became infamous for my disruptive behavior. Eventually, my parents took me to be evaluated by a whole battery of psychiatrists, psychologists, and therapists. I even went to a hospital to have various neurological and physiological tests conducted. This wasn't a matter of a principal telling an irresponsible parent, "Hey, your kid's being a pain in the ass--pop her some pills so we don't have to deal with her crap." In fact, much of my history with the public education system has been one of struggling to get them to acknowledge my troubles as something more than stubbornness and laziness. (Not that I haven't been stubborn and lazy at times, of course.)
On advice from one of my constantly rotating battery of psychosomethings, my parents tried giving me coffee to see if the caffeine would help me focus. It wasn't enough. So eventually they did, in fact, give me Ritalin. It worked. It didn't solve everything (no silver bullets here), but that's another story: the key point is that it worked. I did not get addicted. When we (that is, my parents and I) decided that Ritalin was no longer helping me enough to justify my continued use of it, we sought professional help on other alternatives. So for a while I took Adderall instead, and that worked well into puberty. Eventually, after an epic saga of much attempting to find The Perfect Drug That Would Solve Everything, I wound up on my current medications. Ritalin works, so long as I don't expect it to solve everything. (I hear it solves everything for some people, which is great, but that's not the case for me.)
The fact that some medications have helped me doesn't mean I happily swallow whatever pill my psychiatrist wants to feed me. I've had bad experiences with medication as well. I've learned to be firm with psychiatrists. I didn't always know how to do this, though. "So in summary, yeah, I've got some mood swings, but what really troubles me is the ADD and the depression." "I'd like you to try a mood stabilizer." "That doesn't sound good. Besides, I'm fine with the mood swings, I can deal with them--" "I want to see how you react to the mood stabilizer." The mood stabilizer was a Bad Idea, to say the least; I'd worried that it would eliminate my "highs" and worsen my "lows," and it did exactly that. I later found out that it was actually an antipsychotic that was frequently prescribed as a mood stabilizer. I also learned that, while the psychiatrists had been feeding me a barrage of shiny new antidepressants, all I needed on that front was Zoloft, which does wonders for my ability to control my own thoughts.
So no, not all medication is good. When a psychiatrist recommends something, research it, demand more information, firmly reject it if you think it would do you more harm than good--but don't reject it just because Drugs Are Bad, No Matter What. Think a specialized diet would do an ADD kid good? By all means try it out, but if it doesn't work, at least consider trying Ritalin or Adderall. Put whatever effort is necessary into finding psychiatrists and other doctors who know what the hell they're talking about and are willing to work with every child as an individual rather than as a blank sheet to stamp with their biases about treatment. That's the most important bit, really. Do what works best for the kid, even if it means setting aside cherished biases first.
--Annwyd
-
So far, I think Deborah's original post (as copied below) is holding more water than the arguments made by the ADD/ADHD proponents. But then again, maybe I'm suffering from some kind of disease that afflicts millions of adults who grew up without taking Ritalin, Adderal, Concerta and/or my Flintstone Vitamins!! Seriously folks, medicating kids with mind-altering drugs is BIG BUSINESS and getting bigger every day. Just look at the ads for Concerta now being soft-pedaled in women's magazines, among other consumer outlets, including television, if I am not mistaken.
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 4:43 PM
Subject: ADHD and the Meaning of Evidence
ADHD and the Meaning of Evidence
Barry Turner. BA MPhil.
There are some people that are denying that Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder exists. They are accused of being irresponsible, causing the condition to be underdiagnosed and even causing the sufferers of this disease to "unwittingly self medicate with illegal drugs or alcohol". If it were not for the fact that the explosion in ADHD diagnosis and treatment with stimulants such as Ritalin (Methylphenidate) represents the greatest medical catastrophe
since Thalidomide these statements would be laughable.
Do the makers of such statements really believe that the millions taking Ecstasy (MDMA), and other illegal substances that are closely related to Ritalin (methylphenidate), at thousands of night-clubs every weekend, are "self medicating" because they have not been "properly diagnosed". How can a "medical scientist" say that a "disease" is underdiagnosed (based on what
data?)
There is absolutely no reason why those opposed to the myth of ADHD as a disease need to justify that position. The matter is clear. It is for those who maintain the position that ADHD is a disease to adduce evidence of it. That evidence must be in the form of data collected in experimental conditions that can be validated by objective repeat studies.
Evidence is made up of three elements. The autoptic evidence which relates to material or physical evidence such as chemical residues or fingerprints. Direct evidence, which is that, proposed by a witness or an expert, and
circumstantial evidence, the weakest form of all. What do the proponents of ADHD have in the way of evidence from these sources?
Autoptic evidence is perceived by the senses and is commonly called 'real' evidence. In disease this evidence is always present. In carcinomas biopsies will reveal evidence of cell mutation. In cardiovascular disease necrotic muscle tissue, arterial plaques or calcified arteries can be observed. In infectious diseases the pathogens causing the infections can be collected and
identified. The evidence is there for all medical professionals to see. Not so with ADHD.
Direct evidence is that which an eyewitness or expert describes from their own first hand observations. What do the experts say?
ADHD may be (may be?) genetic¦ no one has extended this to its logical and necessary conclusion by identifying which chromosome has this defective gene and why the defect is there. Blue eyes incidentally are genetically determined
does that make them a disease?
ADHD may be due (again) to biochemical imbalance¦Not one piece of evidence exists to indicate this. Indeed where biochemical imbalances are suggested there is again a signal lack of empirical evidence to support the theory.
(Empirical means that it can be repeated, tested, measured, verified.)
ADHD may be (and again) hereditary¦ Just as in quoting spurious "genetics" this is meaningless at best and deliberately misleading at worst. Criminal behavior is also hereditary, criminal fathers more often than not are followed by criminal sons (and daughters) The behavior is learned and just as musical parents produce musical children and enthusiastic sports loving parents produce sporting offspring this is no indicator of genetics or hereditary cause. It
should be noted that Chinese children have a propensity to grow up speaking Chinese if they grow up in China. Those that have been adopted by western parents and taken to America for instance have not as yet spontaneously begun to speak Chinese because it is hereditary or genetic for them to do so. Language like behavior is learned.
What about the weakest form of evidence, circumstantial. Ah, well here at last the ADHD proponents have something. Children misbehave and run about wildly, they are defiant and get bored easily. Er, yes they always have done. The
circumstances of this "aberrant" behavior suggest to these ADHD observers that something is wrong, the child must be "ill". It perhaps should be put to them that the children are fine, it is they that are suffering from "Observational Inaccuracy and Distortion Disorder"
What about the famous suggestion that these children have "different" or smaller brains? Well the studies that came up with that theory look good until you spend five minutes reading them. After five minutes the reader will notice that the "research cohort" is in fact mixed, some children on medication, some not. Some of the "normal" children are several years older than those with the smaller brains. The statistics invite the well known scientific and legal observation "correlates are not causes". This is the kind of science that concludes that oranges are different to avocados based on the fact that oranges are less green than avocados. How much more enlightened these "scientists"
would become if they actually tasted the fruit.
The language of the ADHD lobby is a wonderful indicator of how exact the science is that created it. "ADHD may be¦" "ADHD is probably¦" "Studies indicate¦" "Scientists believe...". Not one piece of evidence exists to
categorically place this condition in any classification of diseases.
The three kinds of evidence mentioned above are the categories of legal evidence. They are the material that decides the case for or against, guilty or not guilty. There is one that has been missed out.
Hearsay evidence is that which is reported second or third hand. Its value to probandum (actual proof) is severely limited as it cannot be tested by the normal methods employed to examine the other kinds of tangible evidence. The person that relates it does not know the facts, only the facts as they were reported to them. Just like the Connors rating for ADHD. Little Johnny is
hyperactive says the teacher. Give him Ritalin says the doctor. Little Jimmy can't concentrate on his schoolwork says the teacher. Give him Adderal says the doctor. Little Sally misbehaves in class says the teacher. Give her Concerta says the doctor. How many doctors prescribe insulin to patients because their neighbour reports that they have seen them drinking lots of water and heard that their feet often tingle?
If in the future the proponents of ADHD find themselves indicted for inflicting this scourge onto the world they will surely demand that their accusers bring strong evidence before they are convicted. Rest assured they would complain
about rights abuses if they were convicted on circumstantial and hearsay evidence. What an irony that such poor evidence is sufficient to convince them they are right now, so right in fact that on hearsay and circumstantial evidence alone they will give addictive and dangerous medicines to children some of whom are barely out of infancy
Those of us who oppose this outrageous abuse of medical science do not need to justify our position. We do not need to produce evidence that ADHD does NOT exist any more than we need to produce evidence that Santa Claus does not exist. The proponents need to answer these questions.
§ What is the etiology of ADHD?
§ Where is the hard evidence? (objective, scientific and empirically validated)
§ If it is actually a disease, why is no one looking for a CURE?
In the lack of coherent answers to these questions ADHD is a belief system only, like believing in fairies or Santa Claus, not a disease or any other kind of medical condition.
The author is a Lecturer in Legal Studies in Forensic Science in the Department of Biological Sciences, University of Lincoln, Criminal Litigator and Mental Health Law Consultant
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Hi Ann,
Thanks for posting. Lots to think about there.
I'll tell you that I have a very personal, anectdotal reason for being very skeptical of shrinks with pills.
When I entered first grade, I got the diagnosis and so did my favorite 6 or so playmates.
I and one other kid's parents passed on the ritalin, the others went along. I and the other kid remained alternately bored, high strung, occasionally brilliant and fully engaged. He and I both wound up winning a trip to Sea Camp as a reward for tackling a seriously challenging marine biology program in 5th grade.
The other 4 just sort of sat and drooled, followed instruction but often didn't laugh at jokes or really engage on a social level at all.
So Ritalin 'helped' them to become more compliant students. But I'm not sure they got the better end of the deal.
And I sounds to me asif you and I share exactly the same brand of skepticism. Every time I deal with any kind of medical professional they re-enforce my thesis that you really can't place all the responsibility on them and we shouldn't expect it of them. We have to, if we want good health, take personal responsibility for our healthcare decisions.
So.... why the need for prescription and why the criminal status for certain of those drugs? If you've looked into pharmacology, and it's clear that you've been doing your fair share of that, then you know that most pharmacological drugs are just synthetic versions of their illegal counter-parts.
Do you think we'd all be better off if we'd never started the rumor that professionals can and should make all of our healthcare decisions?
Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.
--Anonymous
-
>>However, if its ADD, all the diet changes in the world won't help much. Some, maybe, but not enough to really make a big difference.
If (IF)it is ADD, then the drug does work. And it is extremely safe, if used appropriately.
You might benefit from speaking to parents whose kids have died, and took the drugs appropriately. I guess the "window of loss" theory applies here as well. Hey atleast they were "successful" in school for a few years.
>>As for the Program Parent thing - I can't imagine how I sound like a P. P by stating an opinion that goes against the grain of the majority : )
Karen, your opinion and voice is very much a part of the majority, in case you haven't noticed. My voice is absolutely in the minority and why I speak at every opportunity. Parents have a RIGHT to evaluate all sides of an issue before deciding. Sorry you were humiliated for not being "smart"... and that no one helped you learn how not to react to that... and that you (and millions of others) were part of a system of education that allows such hurtful behavior and doesn't meet the needs of all students. Life could've been different for you without the "benefit" of Ritalin.
Re: sounding like a program parent. Step back a moment and read your comments. You started a new thread to ensure everyone read your defensive post. That's how I perceived it. You weren't presenting your opinion, you were preaching and prostelitizing, imho. I couldn't imagine why you had such a vested interest either way. I think I understand now. FYI, I was called stupid. I made straight As until high school. I quit in the 10th grade, got my GED and later attended college. I had a 4.0 GPA, but still fought off the internal voice that reminded me, "you're still stupid". There are sooo many options for kids who don't do well in a system that is flawed in design because it only teaches to a percentage of the students. The problem is the ed system, not the kids.
>>I don't mind that you hold your opinion, and I would strongly support your decision not to medicate your child. I just wish you and others wouldn't state your Opinion so strongly as fact - as their are many people unable to make the distinction, and who may not allow giving the med a try based on your opinion.
Jeeezzzz, would you read this a few times. You don't mind that I hold my opinion? You wish I "wouldn't state my opinion so strongly as fact= as there are many people unable to make the distinction". Give me a break Karen. You have missed the point completely. The point being, your opinion (based on what you have read) is not fact. Go back to my original post and take the challenge I presented. Post the emperical evidence. Otherwise, shouldn't you take your own advice. Tell the truth. ADD is not genetic or hereditary. Truth is they don't know what "causes" it. But by accident, discovered that 'hyperactive' kids seem to slow down when given stimulants that are equivalent to cocaine. There are no long term studies to prove its safety, therefore one's child will basically be a guinea pig. But, the drug might possibly work in terms of helping one fit it and be liked and do better in school.
>>But again, IF the problem is ADD, exercise won't make any difference. Its a wild and disorganized way the brain functions in these kids. Its a brain chemistry situation that doesn?t respond to exercise the way some other disorders do.
Karen, back up these statements. It is my understanding that many things affect brain chemistry. Do you know a good cry can change one's brain chemistry and improve attention, almost immediately?
Brain chemistry/emotional distress is like the chicken and the egg. It's a catch 22, one feeding the other. The method you support is one of dependence on drugs to alter brain chemistry, rather than one of digging for the real issues below the "symptoms" and interrupting the cycle. All aspects of the child's life should be examined to find the source. Change the factors that are negatively influencing brain chemistry and you see "symptoms" disappear.
I don't recall being judgmental toward parents. But, I'll bet you 10 - 1 the majority of parents who go this route are coerced by schools or psych professionals and/or do not know alternatives exist. Some know but feel its too much trouble to search for the real causes. Most advocates are about education and feel it is unacceptable for parents to be coerced or to risk losing their children if they don't persue drugs. THAT is the reality in most states. Parents don't really have an choice !! (Think the drug makers have anything to do with this policy?) Drug your child or face loosing him or her to CPS. I have lots of judgment about that. Its unacceptable. Period.
Deborah
-
What scares me about these kinds of drugs being prescribed to young children is the fact that behavior modification comes in a pill. And if that doesn't do the trick, there are plenty of program referral services out there just waiting for the opportunity to sell parents on the idea of controlling or changing the behavior of their kids by "submerging" them in a controlled environment. What the hell is going on in this country that has parents and educators treating kids like adults and adults like kids? ZERO TOLERANCE is not working in the home, school or community. When will Americans wake up from this Stefordish nightmare? Where are the think tanks that are supposed to be developing public policy? Are they out-to-lunch too? Sure looks that way.
::puke::
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-17 09:01 ]
-
Karen, you might want to log on to this website for a dose of reality. While I do not doubt your sincerity in arguing your point of view, it's clear you have not done your homework.
http://www.ritalindeaths.com (http://www.ritalindeaths.com)
-
My apologies, the correct link is
http://www.ritalindeath.com (http://www.ritalindeath.com)
:wink:
-
Read about Stephanie's case, the little girl whose visions of angels proved tragically all too real.
http://www.ritalindeath.com/stephanie.htm (http://www.ritalindeath.com/stephanie.htm)
-
There's another side to that "ritalin death" story-- which is that no other expert agreed with the medical examiner who claimed that the kid died from Ritalin. I believe there may have been a court case related to this in which this came out and which did not find Ritalin responsible for the death.
Further, the study which supposedly showed that kids on Ritalin had twice the risk of drug abuse of those who were left unmedicated was confounded by the fact that when the study was conducted, only the kids with the most extreme cases were put on medications. More recent studies, in which kids of comparable severity were compared on drug v. non-drug therapies found that actually, Ritalin cut the risk of later drug abuse by 50%.
Which stands to reason because many people with ADD use illegal drugs to medicate themselves-- but of course, illegal drugs have the disadvantage of being impure, expensive, less effective and, well, illegal!
These issues are complicated-- but what I don't get is why people think that it has to be so black and white-- ie, Ritalin = evil or Ritalin = fabulous. The data shows it helps some people, it helps more than any non-drug intervention researched so far.
That doesn't mean it helps everyone, that doesn't mean it doesn't have side effects, that doesn't mean it can't harm anyone.
But the number of deaths given the number of annual prescriptions over the number of years that it has been prescribed show that it has a pretty damn good safety record.
And this notion that Ritalin makes people "compliant" or "brainwashed" is just ludicrous. For those for whom it works, it allows them *the choice* to behave better by allowing them to focus more. It doesn't *force* them to do this-- hence all the kids on Ritalin who still misbehave, it just gives them the option of becoming more responsible. For people with ADD without the drug, the distractions are so compelling, they feel forced to respond to them-- Ritalin gives them the choice to say "No, I want to learn"
Of course, if you put someone on the wrong drug or the wrong dose, they may have side effects-- and may feel numb or drugged or unresponsive-- but that's not the effect that anyone responsible using medications seeks.
-
Tom Hartmann has a series of books that I read when my son was diagnosed with ADD. Found out that I'm an adult with ADD.
A little history: When my son's teachers said that he "must" be on medication to return to school, I reluctantly took him to a psychiatrist, who spent all of 15 minutes talking with us and asking questions and wrote a prescription for Adderall and Paxil. Worked great for about 2 weeks, then it was back to square one. During that year he began to self-medicate (weed and meth) and was still taking the "legal" meds. His behavior was out of control as was mine by that time. When a drug test showed he was using, he was weaned off the legal meds - I was with him as much as possible, however I am a single mom and had to pay the bills, so I wasn't home during the day. I had him in drug rehab, counseling, staying with relatives, and started working part time when he came home...by the end of the summer his anger had escalated, and nothing, I mean NOTHING helped. His self medicating did not work. The Adderall did not work.
What worked for him was being in a long term residential therapy program. He learned to work with vs. against his ADD. He is no longer an angry and self-destructive young man. He graduated high school with a 3.8 gpa at 18 (2 years after leaving the RTC.) What he learned was to see his life differently. We grew up with strong negative feelings about ourselves. We both learned to change our perception. The RTC used much of the same thinking as Tom Hartmann in his books. He has not been on meds in almost 4 years. In fact, his RTC prefers this approach to meds, though if a child must be on meds, then they will do this (bi-polar is one.) ADD doesn't just go away, so having my son on meds to mask the symptoms the rest of his life was not an option.
Many on this forum are against the WWASP programs. It's not for everyone, but for us, Cross Creek Center's therapist and staff created a place for us to heal. He experienced emotional abuse from his public school teachers, not from them. Is his life perfect, no.(Is anyone's?) Is he drug free,yes. The majority of his peers are also successful. It takes more than meds to heal ADD. (There is no "cure.") It takes more than loving positive parenting to heal from it. It takes more than a good diet and exercise to heal it. He learned he is a good person and loves every part of himself, especially the ADD. There is no quick fix in healing ADD - meds only work for those lucky few.
Are the other WWASP programs like Cross Creek? Don't know - no experience of the results, but I do know they provided exactly what we needed. Asking for help is not a bad (parent) thing. The price for not asking for help was much higher.
-
Ritalin May Cause Brain Change in Children
Reuters
Monday, November 12, 2001; Page A08
The stimulant Ritalin, a drug used to help children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, may cause long-term changes in the
brain, researchers reported yesterday.
The changes look similar to those seen with other stimulants such as amphetamine and cocaine, at least in rats, the team at the University of Buffalo found.
"Clinicians consider Ritalin to be short-acting," Joan Baizer, a professor of physiology and biophysics who led the study, said in a
statement.
"When the active dose has worked its way through the system, they consider it 'all gone.' Our research with gene expression in an animal model suggests that it has the potential for causing long-lasting changes in brain cell structure and function."
But Baizer said that Ritalin, known generically as methylphenidate, probably is not addictive in the way drugs of abuse are if it is used properly.
"Children have been given Ritalin daily for many years, and it is extremely effective and beneficial, but it's not quite as simple as a short-acting drug," she said. "We need to look at it more closely."
High doses of amphetamine and cocaine have been found to switch on genes known as "immediate early genes" in brain cells. One of the genes, called c-fos, has been linked with addiction when it is activated in certain parts of the brain.
The researchers gave rat pups sweetened milk carrying methylphenidate in comparable doses and at similar times to what a child would get. C-fos genes were activated in their brains in a pattern similar to that seen in cocaine and amphetamine use, the researchers told a meeting of the Society for Neuroscience in San Diego.
"These data do suggest that there are effects of Ritalin on cell function that outlast the short term, and we should sort that out," Baizer said.
She said perhaps a gene chip -- a microarray -- could be used to see just which genes are turned on and off by methylphenidate.
© 2001 The Washington Post Company
-
To this day I have never heard from positive review of a kid's experience at WWASP told by an adult former student/client/inmate on any board. It is always some kid who just got out of the program and is possibly under threat of being sent back or more often a parent who insists that their kid is now a balanced successful person thanks to WWASP.
I will believe it when I see it. All I have seen so far are the accounts of kids who were beaten, tortured, humiliated, starved, and even raped while under WWASP's care.
-
Here we go, another prime example of how the drug lords are medicalizing normal characteristics of children. If they can't hook them with fraudulent mental disorders, they'll go after physical characteristics, such as stature.
FDA Approves Wider Use of Growth Hormone
By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 26, 2003; Page A12
The use of human growth hormone to treat children who are healthy but unusually short was approved yesterday by the Food and Drug Administration
-- the first time that the agency has embraced use of the controversial drug to treat UNEXPLAINED shortness.
To advocates of the approval, it offers new possibilities for very small children who suffer from a growth disorder. But critics have attacked the expanded use as a misguided effort to turn a cosmetic or social problem into a medical one.
The FDA based its decision on studies that found the biosynthesized hormone Humatrope added between one and three inches in height to children who took it for four to six years, and that there were no SIGNIFICANT health risks
for the children.
The drug has been available since the late 1980s, but it had been approved by the FDA only for shortness caused by specific diseases and syndromes. The new approval is for shortness -- defined as an adult height of less than 5 feet 3 inches for men and 4 feet 11 inches for women -- without a known cause.
[Must we all fit in the average catagory? Must we have a pasturized, homogenous society? What happens in a few decades when short people are tallere? Those who were once considered normal or average may suddendly fall into the short catagory because the observable standard has changed.]
The approval could significantly increase the number of children who receive the expensive treatment, which doctors say can cost $30,000 to $40,000 a year, because it will put pressure on insurance companies to cover it. The drug's manufacturer says it would cost less.
But the FDA said that the maker of Humatrope, Eli Lilly & Co., has agreed not to advertise it directly to consumers; that can greatly increase demand for a medication. The company estimates that 400,000 children would fit the new category, but that only about 10 percent will get treatment.
[400,000 x $35,000= $14,000,000,000 per year or $1,400,000,000 for 10%. So some short kids can have the "opportunity" to possibly gain an inch or two?]
The medical profession is split on whether expanding the use of human growth hormone is good.
"We really don't have enough information to know how effective it will be and how widely it should be used," said Naomi D. Neufeld, a Los Angeles
pediatric endocrinologist who is a board member of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists.
"Some doctors think it can be very helpful, but we also have a small but very loud group that says, 'Don't do it.' " she said. "Clearly, this is a treatment that has to be considered on a case-by-case basis and that involves a major family decision."
She said that doctors are debating whether it makes sense to recommend the medication when it costs so much and has LIMITED effect. [No mention of possible side effects]
But a spokeswoman for Eli Lilly, Judy Kay Moore, :silly: said the new approval will bring relief to thousands of small children. "These kids have a growth disorder, just like the ones who have been getting Humatrope for years," she said. "The difference is simply that the origins of their growth disorders ARE NOT NOW KNOWN. But that shouldn't keep them from getting treatment."
The FDA decision draws on the results of two studies that followed children who were unusually short for unknown reasons, for four years and six years.
The first group received injections three times weekly, and the second group received LARGER DOSES SIX TIMES A WEEK until they reached adult height. The studies found that the final height of the children exceeded what had been PREDICTED without the drug in a majority of patients, and by as much as four inches in some of those in the second study.
[Can one accurately predict the adult height of a child? No. Maybe within an "inch or two"...about what the drug is reported to sometimes acheive.]
The FDA said the drug should be used for only the shortest 1.2 percent of children. The agency said that "short stature" -- shortness without a clear
medical reason to explain it -- is a defined condition, but some do not believe it is a necessarily treatable condition.
University of Pennsylvania ethicist Arthur L. Caplan said he was concerned about the FDA approval, because "we will start to treat the normal as a disease."
"I think it's dangerous when you take people who are normally short and say there is something wrong with them," he said.
"Whenever you take people on the low end of a distribution curve and say they have a disorder, you're starting down a slippery slope."
The FDA decision followed the recommendation of an advisory panel last month that voted 8 to 2 in favor of approving the new usage of the drug. The
chairman of the panel, Glenn Braunstein of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, said the panel concluded that the drug produced a usually SMALL BUT DISCERNABLE increase in height in MOST patients, and did not APPEAR TO cause other health problems.
"If a family thinks this will help their child, we concluded they should have the right to use it," Braunstein said. "But it has to be a really
considered and informed consent, because the cost is great and the improvement will probably be limited."
Braunstein also said that he did not think the drug should be covered by government medical programs or insurance companies unless there is a growth disorder with an identifiable cause. "There will always be someone in the
shortest group of a population."
*****************************
Should short children/people scream discrimination? Why don't they make tallness a disorder? Anyone over 6 feet should take anti-growth hormone. :lol:
******************************
http://blueprint.bluecrossmn.com/topic/hgh (http://blueprint.bluecrossmn.com/topic/hgh)
No one has thoroughly studied the long-term -- or even short-term -- side effects of taking human growth hormone for non-medical reasons. But there's reason to suspect trouble. People who naturally produce too much of the hormone or have received medical treatment for growth failure often develop abnormal hearts, bones, and nerves, and are particularly likely to suffer from osteoporosis, heart failure, and other diseases. Sports medicine researchers at the University of Massachusetts, among other experts, suspect that long-term use of supplemental HGH could have similar consequences.
http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health/endo/pu ... /alert.htm (http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health/endo/pubs/creutz/alert.htm)
People who have been treated with hGH may be at risk of adrenal crisis, a preventable condition that can kill them. These deaths can be prevented if patients and their families recognize the condition and treat it right away. Adrenal crisis is a medical emergency. Know the symptoms and how to adjust your medication when you are ill. Taking these precautions can save your life.
http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health/endo/pu ... date.htm#1 (http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health/endo/pubs/creutz/update.htm#1)
Of about 7,700 Americans who received NHPP hGH, 26 people have gotten CJD. The two things that seem to be connected with getting CJD are:
How long a person has been treated with hGH: The average treatment time with hGH was 3 years. People who got CJD typically were treated with hGH for about 9 years.
When a person was treated with hGH: All the people who got CJD had been given hGH before 1977.
Overall, 1 in about 300 people treated with hGH got CJD. All CJD patients received some hGH before 1977. Of those treated before 1977, 1 in 104 got CJD.
In 1977, the NHPP changed the way it made hGH. Scientists added a new purification step that greatly reduced and may have removed the risk of CJD. So far, no patient who started hGH after 1977 has become ill with CJD. Since CJD takes so long to develop, we still don't know for sure that those who started treatment after 1977 are safe.
The longest reported time from the start of hGH treatment to first signs of CJD is 33 years in U.S. patients. One person in Holland got CJD attributed to hGH 38 years after a very brief use of hGH. This is the longest incubation period on record.
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/health_and_med ... htm#whatis (http://www.ninds.nih.gov/health_and_medical/pubs/creutzfeldt-jakob_disease_fact_sheet.htm#whatis)
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is a rare, degenerative, invariably fatal brain disorder.
There is no treatment that can cure or control CJD.
****************************
Well, that's about all I need to read on the subject. They certainly are willing to roll the dice with other people's children.
And back to the main point, drug companies are about making humans guinea pigs, profit for themselves and stockholders. The "window of loss" is acceptable, even for "short stature". In my system of judgment, it is criminal to subject children to dangerous drugs when safe alternative exist. And for those who are short because their genes dictated shortness, well they could be best helped by learning to accept their stature.
Deborah
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-17 09:02 ]
-
A New ADHD Drug
Big News: On November 27, 2002, the US Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) approved Strattera (atomoxetine HCL), a new non-stimulant medicine for ADHD. This is the first new type of drug to be approved for ADHD in almost 30 years. Unlike Ritalin, this drug will not be a controlled substance. Studies suggest that the abuse potential is lower, and that the new medicine does not cause sleep problems in
children. It works by enhancing levels of the neurotransmitter norepinephrine (it is a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor).
I expect this drug will be a huge seller. Millions of children will probably receive this drug. Its manufacturers hope it will be the
first line treatment for ADHD. Strattera may indeed prove to be gentler and more effective than its predecessors. Nevertheless, it is
wise to keep in mind that to date, studies have only been done in a few thousand children, showing effectiveness for only 9 weeks, and
safety for only 1 year.
We do know that the drug increases both heart rate and blood pressure in children.
We also know that in the short-term studies (less than 9 weeks) the children on Strattera lost weight, while their peers were gaining. In
the longer studies, children on Strattera fell on both their weight and their height growth curves. No one knows whether or not there will be any effect on adult height -- or on the adult brain, or GI tract, or sexual organs, or any organ.
[Deborah: Hey, if the drug causes them to be SHORT, they can take hGH]
In children, the most common side effects are (occurring in at least one in twenty children and at at least twice the rate of those taking
placebo): indigestion, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, decreased appetite, dizziness, and mood swings. Sometimes it is easier to uncover side effects in adults. In adult studies, the most common side effects are (occurring in at least one in twenty adults and at at least twice the rate of those taking placebo): constipation, dry mouth, nausea,
decreased appetite, dizziness, insomnia, decreased libido, ejaculatory problems, impotence, :scared:
I am very glad that a new drug, and a new class of drug, is available. I am grateful for the brilliant thinking and the commitment to research and development that enabled its introduction.
Strattera may prove to be a great benefit to many children. I greet its arrival with caution, however, until more is known.
Alan Greene MD FAAP
December 06, 2002
http://www.drgreene.com/21_1246.html (http://www.drgreene.com/21_1246.html)
:skull: :skull: :skull: :skull:
Opinion:
Per the article, this drug Strattera is an SSRI, which is a psychotropic drug, and I believe it has all the attendant problems that other drugs have in its class (SNRIs). Just from the side effects listed, I consider it a poison, and would not recommend it for anyone. Instead of fooling around with the brain reuptake mechanisms, which can and does affect many known or unknown functions in the body, why not just use amino acids, and give the brain some extra nutrition. Julia Ross covers exactly how to do this in her
book, The Mood Cure. She spoke at our last conference recently (put on by Safe Harbor/ AlternativeMentalHealth.com). Safe Harbor and Ross are planning workshops for professionals to train them in this safe and effective technique. In the meantime, if you want to buy the book, please call me at 818-563-2392.
Denise Marhoefer
The Defense Foundation for children USA
***************************************
http://www.ritalindeath.com/board/?topic=topic1 (http://www.ritalindeath.com/board/?topic=topic1)
4 Feb 2003
I have just today stumbled on to your web site and the story of Matthew. I am deeply sadden by the tragedy. I have a son who also is on a stimulant. I am concerned and was looking forward to the release of Strattera as a replacement for the stimulants. In the first of the story you state Eli Lilly is to use children as Guinea pigs (I am assuming for the testing of Strattera) although you did not give any more insight on Strattera as to its danger of use. Is they something you know about Strattera that Eli Lilly is not telling us. Please let me know.
Hello C, To be honest with you I have not even looked into the chemical make up the new drug yet. I heard in the news that the drug company is going to start testing the new drug on children this month 2003. I just hope that parents are informed that when they allow their child to be put on this new experimental drug (Strattera), their child is being used very much, in the same way lab rats are used by drug companies.
Thanks for the input L, I have been following the progress of atomoxtine (Strattera) for about six months or so, hoping to be able to reduce the amount of meds my son takes. He is has been diagnosed Asperger's Syndrome (part of the Autistic Spectrum) after a long and difficult road. (several diagnoses later, adhd and bipolar ) I have looked at the prescribing info at:(http://www.strattera.com/cnt_common/info_pi.html (http://www.strattera.com/cnt_common/info_pi.html)) and it sounds to be promising for reducing stimulants in children.. Keep me posted if you find anything new. Thanks again. C
C, my two cents....securing an independant life for your child's future lies in education. With a child that has any type of special needs, practical nursing to teach a child to take care of himself or herself is the best medicine you can give a child. Eili Lilly has not been completely honest with the American people, but money seems to get around that. I think Larry is exactly right about the clinical trial aspect of the marketing of the drugs.
C, Eli Lilly's record has been poor as far as presenting to the public honestly and straightforwardly. With Prozac, the clinical trials were manipulated and we are now finding that suicidal ideation and violent behavior are associated with this drug. With Straterra, it appears that Lilly is attempting to get in on the market of ADHD drugs and we should hold their practices as suspect. Their stock prices went up dramatically just at the news of the testing of this new drug. On a side note, I noticed that you stated your child has been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome. I have worked as a Behavioral Specialist/ Therapist for children and adolescents with a focus on children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders. You may review my essay, "Entering Their Imaginative World" as well as some other resources that you may find valuable at http://www.geocities.com/stnektarios (http://www.geocities.com/stnektarios) Dan L. Edmunds, MA
I found the information about Eli Lily's stock going up recently very interesting to say the least, and I am watching my local CHADD chapter very cloesely now. If you learn anything else new please share the information.
Here's what I find incredibly scary about Strattera. One of the side effects listed for adults is sexual dysfunction (impotence, decreased labido, ejaculation problems) yet this drug is so new that we do not yet know the long-term affects of this drug in children whose sexual organs are still developing. Their longest clinical trial for FDA submission only lasted 10 weeks. And please, someone, tell me how Eli Lilly and Company got this drug pushed through the FDA hoops so quickly.
My son has ben on Starttera for 1 week. He has been sleping so much that it was scaring me. I kept checking on him to make sure he was OK. Yesterday I had to pick him up from school because he was so sick in his stomache. During the night he threw up a number of times. He had to stay home form school today. He is still very tired and nauseated. I took him off the medication immediately. I'm very upset that I gave it to him and casued him to be this ill. I thought it would be better than the having him on a stimluant (Adderall). I hope this works out of his system by tomorrow. I think there shoudl have been studies involving more people and over a longer period of time before the F
15 April 03
I find it interesting that this new non=stimulant drug has the same side effects of the stimulant drug. that might be a key to look at when determining what is going on with our children. also on the strattera.com website, u read through some of the side effects and then see where they say, "this is not a complete list of side effects" ask your doctor.
read read read... you can't do that enough. and be careful.
hi, i am very confused with giving my child the drug strattera, and i dont know what to do the drs. tell me he needs it but the side effects scare me to death, what does a mom do when the child does well in school and socially and is pressed to have the child take this medication
Why on earth would they be pushing drugs if your child does well in school and is socially capable? Not that the drugs actually help with either of those in the long term, it's just that those are the usual excused. Sounds like you have an extra nutty school. Don't give in! There is plenty of good info on these sites that you can copy off and bring with you to show them. A lot of people in the school system are badly misinformed about this stuff. I would ask them what problem they are trying to solve with these drugs. Then I would ask if there are any other ways they can see approaching this problem. If they won't go there, you might want to consider homeschooling or an alternative school. But in any case, don't give in. Make it TOTALLY CLEAR to them that drugging will NEVER be an option, and they might as well start talking about other approaches, because they will not be able to convince you. If they keep it up, ask them if they feel qualified to make medical decisions, and if not, well, you and your physician will make those decisions privately and let's get back to talking about education. Just don't play, and don't be intimidated by their tactics. There are always other options, and they have no business bullying you the way they are. Confront them with the information and tell them that you don't appreciate their approach, and get the talk back to educational options. They can't make you do anything you don't agree to!
9 July 03
If your child has suffered any side effects from the new experimental non stimulant ADHD miracle pill, created by Eli Lilly and Company called Strattera? (atomoxetine HCl) please Let Us Know http://ww.ritalindeath.com/contact.htm (http://ww.ritalindeath.com/contact.htm) your information could benefit many children in the future. Lawrence Smith http://www.ritalindeath.com (http://www.ritalindeath.com)
27 July 03
I was going to put in my comments about strattera on their website questionaire (link posted from your site) about how Strattera affected my seven yr old daughter. I would like very much to be of input on this because my daughter's behavior changed completely and it was NOT GOOD! I took her off it after 6 weeks - I saw the affects of the drug after 3 weeks and let it go to see if it was going ot increase or decrease - basically it made her stop eating - vomitted when she did eat, made her very mean and defiant to the point where she loved to get into trouble and do mean things to people, when she was punished she would scream and get so enraged that i feared she would pass out or have a heart attack. She was taking 40 mg a day at 60lbs. Just to let you know my daughter has ADD and it is a mild case - she gets hyper excited at times and is usually a good kid, she basically needs help with concetration at school and her processing - and if anyone out there knows first hand about the be-Calmed I would be so happy to get any info you may have.
Thank you!!!!!
-
I know nothing about this guy or what specifically HE advocates, but I found his commentary to be thought provoking.
*******************
Posted on Tue, May. 20, 2003
The Tallahassee Democrat
John Rosemond: ADHD is price we pay for bad parenting
A fellow recently approached me at a speaking engagement and asked if it was true, as he had heard, that I "don't believe" in ADHD.
My reply: I absolutely believe that a significant percentage of children in America exhibit the symptoms of attention-deficit (hyperactivity) disorder. Are these behaviors problematic? Yes. Are these behaviors caused by a gene or biological condition? I don't believe that they are, nor have I seen proof of that hypothesis.
"So you think ADHD is caused by improper parenting?"
Yes, but I'm not blaming individual parents. Just as a culture can embrace a dysfunctional political system, a culture can embrace a dysfunctional parenting philosophy. America did exactly that in the 1960s and '70s. You can't be blamed for thinking that the way 98 percent of your neighbors are raising their kids is the right way to raise kids."
I am convinced - and I am definitely in the minority, but I am not alone - that ADHD is one of many prices we are paying for adopting, 30 to 40 years ago, a "psychological" approach to child rearing, an approach that has absolutely nothing in common with the child rearing practiced before that time.
The simple fact is that you cannot raise children two entirely different ways and arrive at the same outcome. In the 1950s and before, parents and teachers did not have the sorts of problems with children that parents and teachers are having today.
Although some researchers are convinced that a biological smoking gun will eventually be found, the fact remains that one has not been found; its existence is speculative.
Pediatrician and author William Carey, who wrote "Understanding Your Child's Temperament" in 1997, says, "The assumption that ADHD symptoms arise from cerebral malfunction has not been supported even after extensive investigations" and "No consistent structural, functional or chemical neurological marker is found in children with the ADHD diagnosis as currently formulated." Carey is one of many investigators who have arrived at this conclusion.
"So, what do you think causes ADHD, John?"
The symptoms describe a child who is impulsive, unfocused, unwilling to apply himself to a task, inattentive, distractible, cannot wait his/her turn, and intrusive. That describes a typical toddler, a "terrible two."
The fact is, nearly every toddler "has" attention-deficit (hyperactivity) disorder. Furthermore, and again according to published diagnostic criteria, nearly every toddler "has" oppositional defiant disorder and bipolar disorder of childhood.
The typical toddler is unfocused, inattentive and impulsive - attention-deficit (hyperactivity) disorder. He screams "no!" when his parents tell him to pick up a toy (oppositional defiant disorder) or stop throwing his food. He flies into rages during which he hits, then bites and screams like someone possessed of demons (bipolar disorder of childhood).
Can you imagine the carnage that would transpire if, as is the case in the animal kingdom, human children reached full size within 2 years? Battered parent syndrome is not a pretty picture.
The pertinent question: Do the child's parents, with a combination of powerful love and powerful discipline (not harsh, mind you, but full of power), "cure" this anti-social state before the child's third birthday? Do they turn him into a pro-social human being? Or do they - out of ignorance, fear, or downright laziness - fail to properly discharge their responsibility to the child and the rest of us?
Too many American children today are reaching full size during toddlerhood, the result of child-centered families, enabling parents, a lack of persuasive discipline and an emphasis on the child's feelings rather than his or her behavior. This is not ADHD, but TIP, Toddlerhood in Perpetuity. And indeed, it is carnage.
John Rosemond is a family psychologist. Questions of general interest can be sent to him at Affirmative Parenting, 9247 N. Meridian, Indianapolis, IN 46260 and to his Web site: http://www.rosemond.com (http://www.rosemond.com).
-
Were we really made so defective that millions of adults and children have to medicate themselves? Anybody read Peter Breggin? Toxic Psychiatry. Do these children who are on meds grow up to be scholars, physicists, scientists, doctors etc.? They grow up feeling there is something wrong with them. And we push that.They just survive and not thrive. The last documentary I saw on Ritalin showed that yes the behavior was better but NOT the grades, not the ability to learn. Alzheimers is really epidemic, could all these meds be causing this? Could our inability to deal with anger, rage, grief, our emotions be detrimental to us. HELL YES!! What about LISTENING to a child and encouraging their imagination and finding out what is REALLY causing their behavior. Main stream America will never do this because OUR PARENTING IS HORRENDOUS! And we will never acknowledge that. Children repress feelings they can't handle and it comes out in inattention and behavior!!! My God, the fear of being in day care away from mothers for children has to be horrible. My heart hurts when I see a baby being carried in a child carrier instead of a mothers' arms, so the baby doesn't get that nurturing, smelling, feeling its mother.Yes children do self-medicate, but it's to stop those horrendous feelings that no-one will listen about. And we don't even realize it
-
Breggin is affiliated with Scientology and there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE THAT PARENTING HAS ANYTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH ADD. he takes an absolutist position against all psychiatric drugs that is a complete reflection of their position.
And re: are we all defective? Why do we expect brain disorders to be uncommon when we all expect to suffer various physical disorders throughout life? No one thinks its weird that high numbers of people get cancer, heart disease, the flu, colds-- but when people start saying the rates of mental illnesses are equally high, we all think we must be overdiagnosing or something.
The brain is the most complex object in the known universe-- so why do we think it's abnormal that 3-6% of kids have a particular problem with it?
The medications help some, and there's little evidence that they do harm-- correlation is not causation and these drugs have been used for decades without a great outbreak of anything.
The rising incidence of Alzheimer's is directly linked to greater life expectancy-- people are healthier and so are now living long enough to get it in large numbers for first time in history. You don't need to grope for some drug explanation, which would have the timing wrong anyway since the first kids who took Ritalin in large numbers are only in their 30s and 40s anyway.
And in fact, parenting has very little to do with how children turn out (absent severe abuse and neglect). There are kids with wonderful parents who are sitting in prison and those with the worst parents in the world who are great humanitarians.
Parents like to believe they have all this power to make kids into something-- but anyone with kids knows that at birth, they are extremely different from one another and that anyone who tries to make a gay kid straight or an intellectual kid into a jock is simply not going to get anywhere.
Genes and peer influences (which parents can affect by what neighborhoods they live in, but not by much more than that) account for a much larger proportion of variation in human personality than parenting.
-
And thanks to people like you (mainstream America)
children will continue to be drugged. And by the way alzheimers can start in the 50's. As I said, not dealing with strong emotions can really screw up your body. What a stupid thing to say that parenting has nothing to do with how children turn out. Do research on the criminals in prison who have horrendous childhoods, and it doesn't have to be severe abuse and neglect for the person to have mental problems either, just feeling resented as a child or a burden can do it. There is no physical brain disorder with ADD, and the most important influence for a child is HIS FAMILY> not genes and peer influence. Take some child developement, I feel sorry for your children.
-
My God that constant toddlerhood thing sounded like half the people I know
in all seriousness I am a pysch major and have seen video clips of children 2 1 girl and one boy with ADDHD and they acted signifigantly signifigantly distracted and also had some tics and grimaces difficulty in social relationships
my point I think it is a real disorder it is just totally overdiagnosed now they are putting everyone who does not sit through 7hours of school which is unnatural anyway on meds
but the disorder in my opinion exsists it just now has become like prozac everyone is gettin a scrip for it if life is not prefect
people are idiots
ya'll noticed right? :question: wasn't just me thinking that was it??Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of it's victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busy-bodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those that torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
C.S. Lewis, God In The Dock
-
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSu ... 2-sun.html (http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2005/02/10/926322-sun.html)
Thu, February 10, 2005
ADHD drug alert
By CP
HEALTH CANADA has ordered a once-a-day treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder off the market after learning the drug has been linked to 20 sudden deaths and 12 strokes, including among children. And makers of related stimulants used to treat the commonly diagnosed condition have been asked to provide a thorough review of their worldwide safety data, Health Canada said in a release late yesterday.
None of the deaths or strokes associated with Adderall XR were reported in Canada, spokesman Ryan Baker said.
****
February 11, 2005
Senator Says F.D.A. Asked Canada Not to Suspend Drug
By GARDINER HARRIS and BENEDICT CAREY
WASHINGTON, Feb. 10 - A day after Canadian officials suspended the use of a hyperactivity drug amid reports of deaths associated with its use, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa contended that United States health officials
had asked the Canadian regulators not to do so.
Senator Grassley, a Republican, said on Thursday that the Food and Drug Administration had made the request of Canadian health officials because the F.D.A. could not handle another "drug safety crisis." Mr. Grassley said he was basing his contentions on reports from whistle-blowers within the agency.
Dr. Robert Peterson, director general of the therapeutic products directorate at Health Canada, said through a spokeswoman that reports that F.D.A. had asked Health Canada to refrain from suspending the drug "are untrue."
Brad Stone, a spokesman for the F.D.A., declined to respond directly to Mr. Grassley's contention but said of Dr. Peterson's rejection that, "We believe the Canadian response is the correct one."Canadian health officials, citing 20 deaths among patients taking the British-made drug Adderall XR, said on Wednesday night that they were suspending sales of the hyperactivity drug
indefinitely. The F.D.A. is allowing the drug to continue to be sold in the United States, saying there is little evidence that Adderall XR caused the deaths.
Mr. Grassley, who has been investigating the Food and Drug Administration for about a year, demanded in a letter written on Thursday that the agency answer questions about any discussions its officials may have had with the Canadians about the drug.
Dr. Robert Temple, director of the F.D.A.'s office of medical affairs, said the agency's decision to permit the continued sale of Adderall was not influenced by the controversies swirling around the F.D.A.
"It's still our job to get as close as we can to the right answer and not panic and do things for the wrong reasons," Dr. Temple said.
Matthew Cabrey, a spokesman for the maker of Adderall, Shire Pharmaceuticals Group of Britain, said Adderall was safe and effective. "We are very surprised at the actions of Health Canada, and we disagree with their interpretations of the data around these extremely rare cases of sudden
death," Mr. Cabrey said.
The controversy - and the sudden appearance of Mr. Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, in it - promises to engulf the F.D.A. in more questions about its oversight of the pharmaceutical industry.
Critics have accused agency officials of being too cozy with drug makers and of being slower than their counterparts in other nations to acknowledge drug-safety problems.
The controversy is also bound to fuel a long-running battle over whether drugs like Adderall and Ritalin are overprescribed to children, and whether the drugs' longterm risks have been adequately explored.
More than 700,000 Americans use Adderall and its extended release counterpart, Adderall XR. Shire sold $759 million of Adderall products in the United States last year and $10 million in Canada.
In the letter Thursday to the F.D.A., Mr. Grassley wrote that reports given to his staff suggested that the agency was not acting with scientific integrity.
"Unfortunately, such allegations raise additional concerns about the culture at the F.D.A.," he wrote.
Dr. Peterson of Health Canada described discussions between the two regulatory bodies as "collegial."
Differing health regulations govern the differing responses of the two agencies to the Adderall reports, Dr. Peterson said. Canadian law lets
regulators suspend a drug's sales while safety questions are investigated; United States law does not. Health Canada approved Shire's application to sell Adderall XR in January 2004. In September, the company reported to Canadian authorities that 20 people, 12 of them children, had died suddenly in the United States while taking the drug.
Shire asked the Canadian regulators for permission to change the drug's label to reflect the possible dangers, as had been done in the United States that month.
Some of the deaths, which had not been previously reported to Canadian authorities, occurred well before Health Canada approved Adderall XR for
sale, Dr. Peterson said.
Canada and the United States both require pharmaceutical companies to report all adverse outcomes from drugs promptly.
"We were surprised to find these cases," Dr. Peterson said in an interview on Thursday.
Dr. Peterson said that an early analysis of the data suggested that Adderall XR might be linked to two to three times as many sudden deaths as Ritalin and its cousin, Concerta, which are prescribed for similar disorders.
Further, Dr. Peterson said that Canadian authorities were uncertain about how to warn patients about the risks of sudden death.
"It's very difficult to generate a benefit-to-risk balance when the risk is sudden and unexpected death," Dr. Peterson said.
Mr. Cabrey of Shire Pharmaceuticals said that the company had forwarded reports of the deaths to Canadian authorities promptly.
Dr. Temple of the F.D.A. said that 7 children taking Ritalin and Concerta died during the same period that 12 children taking Adderall died,
suggesting equivalent risks. Many had structural problems with their hearts and several were engaged in vigorous exercise, he said.
There is little evidence that the drugs caused any of the deaths, he said."There is a tendency to believe that sudden death doesn't occur in
children. That is wrong," Dr. Temple said. He added: "Psychiatrists say that these drugs are needed. To get rid of them for something that may well be a background rate of death is not responsible."Doctors have known since the 1930's that stimulant medications like these can calm hyperactive, or aggressive, children. But no one knows precisely how the drugs induce this effect, and there have always been concerns about the drugs' long-term effect on development.
Prescriptions for these drugs to be used by children with attention-deficit disorder more than doubled in the 1990's, experts say, heightening the concerns of some doctors.
The drugs are far more popular in the United States than in Europe. Last year, doctors in the United States wrote more than 23 million prescriptions for the four most popular drugs used to treat attention deficit disorder.
Gardiner Harris reported from Washington for this article, and Benedict Carey from New York.
-
I believe you are confusing ADD with Multiple Personality Disorder, Which many Paranoid Schefrenics have.
-
RITALIN AND RUSSIAN ROULETTE
By Samuel Blumenfeld
February 13, 2005
NewsWithViews.com
It is estimated that in the United States between four million and eight million children are on Ritalin, the drug being used to change the behavior of children afflicted with a disease or condition called Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) or Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD).
We already know that the long-term use of Ritalin can be fatal. In March of 2000, a 14-year-old ninth-grader, Matthew Smith, dropped dead of a heart attack while skateboarding. He had been on Ritalin since the first grade. And in 1994, the very popular singer and song-writer, Kurt Cobain, committed suicide at age 27. He was known as a "Ritalin child."
What parents are not being told by psychiatrists who prescribe the drug and the school nurses who give it to the kids, that taking Ritalin is like playing Russian Roulette, simply because nobody can be sure what the side-effects will be.
Recently, I happened to come across a copy of the latest Physicians' Desk Reference on pharmaceuticals. It lists all of the drugs available to physicians and provides the drug's Clinical Pharmacology, Indications and Contraindications, Warnings, Precautions, Adverse Reactions, etc. So I looked up Ritalin. Its generic name is methylphenidate hydrochloride. It comes in two forms, a regular tablet, and a time-release tablet. It was described as follows:
Ritalin is a mild central nervous system stimulant. The mode of action in man is not completely understood, but Ritalin presumably activates the brain stem arousal system and cortex to produce its stimulant effect. There is neither specific evidence which clearly establishes the mechanism whereby Ritalin produces its mental and behavioral effects in children, nor conclusive evidence regarding how these effects relate to the condition of the central nervous system.
So we really don't know exactly how the drug works in the brain, but the book warns:
Ritalin should not be used in children under six years, since safety and efficacy in this age group have not been established. Sufficient data on safety and efficacy of long-term use of Ritalin in children are not yet available. Although a causal relationship has not been established, suppression of growth (i.e., weight gain, and/or height) has been reported with the long-term use of stimulants in children.. Clinical experience suggests that in psychotic children, administration of Ritalin may exacerbate symptoms of behavior disturbance and thought disorder.
Was the student killer at Columbine who took Ritalin psychotic? If so, he should not have been given the drug.
As for Adverse Reactions, otherwise known as side-effects, this is what the Ritalin user may also experience: Nervousness, insomnia, skin rash, urticaria (itching, burning, stinging, smooth patches usually red), fever, arthralgia (pain in a joint), exfoliative (flaking) dermatitis, erythema (skin redness) multiforme with histopathological (microscopic changes in tissues) findings of necrotizing (death or decay of tissues) vasculitis (blood vessels) and thrombocytopenic purpura (purplish patches), anorexia, nausea, dizziness, palpitations, headache, dyskinesis (impairment of body movements), drowsiness, blood pressure and pulse changes both up and down, tachycardia (rapid heartbeat), angina, cardiac arrhythmia, abdominal pain, weight loss during prolonged therapy. There have been rare reports of Tourette's syndrome (tics). Toxic psychosis has been reported.
If that isn't playing Russian Roulette with a child's health, I don't know what is. Note the number of cardiac side-effects, probably caused by the constriction of blood vessels. That's what probably caused the heart attack that killed Matthew Smith. We only hear about the worst tragedies. Skin rashes, headaches, dizziness, nausea, and palpitations don't make the headlines. They just make the users miserable.
Why would anyone subject a child to a drug with so many possible harmful side-effects simply to "cure" an attention problem? How about creating classrooms with more order and fewer distractions. The kind of chaos that now exists in American primary schools is a result of the new classroom configuration that creates attention problems.
You couldn't possibly have attention deficit disorder in the kind of classrooms that existed when I went to school back in the 1930s and '40s. In those days, the students sat at desks bolted to the floor arranged in straight rows. The walls were generally bare, with no distractions. The teacher was the focus of attention, and we were all taught the same thing. No individual education plans. And the teacher used the most rational and effective methods of instruction developed over the centuries. It was an education system that produced what Tom Brokaw called the greatest generation.
In other words, they knew how to educate well. We really don't have to re-invent the wheel. But try telling that to today's educators, for whom the successes of the past simply don't exist.
© 2005 Samuel Blumenfeld - All Rights Reserved
-
I had a friend that went thru Sarasota Straight. She was all freaked out that I was on scripts for legit pain issues (lumbar surgery and two TMJ surgeries) but she had no problem whatsoever doping herself and her two kids up with Adderall. She claimed that they were ADHD or some such bullshit and she couldn't control them. Funny, whenever they stayed with me I had no problems with them at all.
We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth...
For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth;
to know the worst, and to provide for it.
--Patrick Henry
-
On 2005-02-11 13:20:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I believe you are confusing ADD with Multiple Personality Disorder, Which many Paranoid Schefrenics have."
MPD is a separate specific disorder from Paranoid Schizophrenia. Also - MPD is extremely rare.
-
Press Release
Media Link
Whistleblower Pressured to End Demographic Research on ADHD
As the validity of ADHD is questioned and its origin exposed more and more in and around the Country, Dr. Gretchen LeFever adds fuel to a growing fire of controversy and skepticism already surrounding the issue. Where does Dr. Gretchen do this one might ask. Only On Annie Armen Live Talk Radio!!!!
Dr. Gretchen discusses her demographic research on ADHD and explores why some States have higher diagnosis rates than others. Dr. LeFever also discusses the reasons why her cutting-edge research on the demographic diagnosis of ADHD is under attack and who is launching those attacks.
With her career on the line and risking her reputation, Dr. Gretchen LeFever tells it all on Annie Armen Live!!!! Find out why some want this research shut down, and why others feel it is the key to exposing the diagnosis of Attention Deficit Disorder, its fraudulent make-up, and the misleading marketing campaign surrounding the diagnosis itself.
Exposing the Fraud of ADD / ADHD Part 7 -- Aired 04/21/05
RED HOT ANNIE ARMEN LIVE EXCLUSIVE WITH
Featured Guest / Whistleblower: Dr. Gretchen LeFever, Ph.D.
ANNIE ARMEN LIVE
EVERY Thursday Evening
5:00pm - 6:00 pm PST
7:00pm - 8:00pm CT
8:00pm - 9:00pm ET
LIVE SHOW Phone - In:
TOLL FREE: (888) 514-2100
Intl: 001 - 858-268-3068
-
It seems that whenever a child has a problem at school they are almost automatically labled ADD. I have 10 year old boy. Very sweet, intelligent. He's disorganized at school and they are tyring to label him ADD. I was just told by the school nurse that there are now four different types of ADD that have been identified. I told her that probably everyone alive has some degree of ADD then.
-
http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/breggin.html (http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/breggin.html)
Some Notes on ADHD and
Peter R. Breggin's Unfair Attack on Ritalin
Stephen Barrett, M.D.
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a commonly diagnosed childhood disorder with core symptoms that include inappropriate levels of attention, concentration, activity and distractibility. Although its cause is unknown, considerable progress has been made in managing it. Scientific studies have found that the single most effective treatment is medication with a stimulant drug, of which the most commonly used has been methylphenidate (Ritalin). Behavioral approaches that include helping parents and teachers to deal with the child's behavior are also important, but they are not a substitute for medication in most cases.
These views are strongly supported in publications of the American Academy of Pediatrics [1,2], American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry [3], American Medical Association [4], American Psychiatric Association [5,6], National Institutes of Health [7,8], United States Surgeon General [9], and an international consensus of experts [10]-- all of which reflect solid agreement within the scientific community.
In stark contrast, psychiatrist Peter Breggin claims that ADHD is not a genuine diagnosis and that the drugs used to treat it do far more harm than good. In line with these views, he has written books [11,12], testified at government hearings [13], and served as a consultant in several lawsuits. He would like you to believe that his clinical experiences and investigations have enabled him to reach a level of insight that is greater than that of the majority of mental health professionals. This article describes why I consider him untrustworthy.
Breggin's Background
Peter R. Breggin, M.D., is a Harvard College graduate who obtained his medical degree from Case Western Reserve Medical School in 1962. After training in psychiatry at Harvard and State University of New York Upstate Medical Center (Syracuse), he worked for two years at the National Institute of Mental Health. Since 1968, he has practiced psychiatry in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area [14]. Breggin describes his private practice as "psychotherapy for individuals, couples, and families, including children," with "subspecialties" in "the adverse effects of medications, electroshock, and psychosurgery" and "forensic psychiatry and patient rights." [15] His online resumé states that he has testified as an expert in about 40 cases, many of which involved psychiatric drugs, FDA regulations, and product liability [15]. His 18 books, most written for the general public, attack psychosurgery, electroconvulsive therapy ("shock treatments"), Prozac, Ritalin, and the use of psychiatric drugs in general.
In 1972, Breggin founded The International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology (ICSPP), a nonprofit organization "concerned with the impact of mental health theory and practices upon individual well-being, personal freedom, and family and community values." [15] ICSPP's 2000 federal tax report states that its primary purpose is to gather and distribute information about the "hazards of bio-medical model of psychiatry." [16] Other information I found on the Internet states that ICSPP had one part time employee [17] and less than $25,000 in annual income throughout most of its existence [16]. Breggin also launched Ethical Human Sciences and Services, a journal that began publication in 1999. He has also been listed on the advisory board of Network Against Coercive Psychiatry, an anti-psychiatry organization whose home page asserts that the "mental health establishment has conned the American people."
Breggin's Web site states that he "has been informing the professions, media and the public about the potential dangers of drugs, electroshock, psychosurgery, involuntary treatment, and the biological theories of psychiatry for over three decades." [14] The back cover of his Ritalin Fact Book describes him as "the conscience of psychiatry." [12] I believe it would be more accurate to characterize him as a harmful nuisance whose views can undermine trust in the medical profession and frighten people away from helpful treatment.
A Bit of Puffery?
Breggin's resumé and other biographical reports describe him as a Diplomate of the National Board of Medical Examiners; a "Specialist in Psychiatry" recognized by the State of Maryland, Department of Mental Health and Hygiene, Board of Physician Quality Assurance; a Diplomate of the American Board of Forensic Medicine; and a Fellow of the American College of Forensic Examiners. He also states that he is (or has been) on the editorial board of six peer-reviewed journals and has published more than 25 articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Although these accomplishments might sound impressive, they actually are much less than they might seem.
* Breggin is not certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, which is the recognized agency for certifying psychiatrists.
* Having completed three years of psychiatric training, Breggin is entitled to call himself a psychiatrist or a "specialist in psychiatry." Until 1996, the Maryland Board of Quality Assurance maintained a list of "identified" specialists. Anyone who completed an approved training program was eligible for listing. No special examination or additional qualifications were required.
* To become licensed in the United States, every physician must pass an examination given by the National Board of Medical Examiners or an equivalent examination by a state licensing board. Thus being a "diplomate" of the National Board of Medical Examiners means nothing more than the fact that the doctor has passed a standard licensing exam. Most resumés I have seen do not list this credential.
* The American Board of Forensic Examiners is not recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS), which is the recognized standard-setting organization. ABMS offers subspecialty certification in forensic psychiatry and forensic pathology, neither of which Breggin has achieved.
* Only one of the six journals with which Breggin has been affiliated is significant enough to be listed in MEDLINE, the National Library of Medicine's principal online database.
* On September 5, 2002, I found that Breggin had 33 citations listed in MEDLINE. None of these publications appears to be a research report. Eight were letters to the editor, two were books, and most of the rest were expressions of his opinion on various psychiatric topics.
ADHD: The Prevailing Scientific Viewpoint
The prevailing scientific viewpoint is that ADHD should be regarded as a neuropsychiatric disorder, that it differs from simply rambunctious behavior, and that medication has been thoroughly studied and found to be helpful in managing the problem. The American Psychiatric Association has published a list of criteria that should be used in making the diagnosis [4]. As its name implies, ADHD is characterized by two sets of symptoms, inattention and hyperactivity. Although these usually occur together, one may be present to qualify for a diagnosis.
In 1997, largely in response to Breggin's writings, the American Medical Association Council on Scientific Affairs issued a report on ADHD that was approved by the AMA's House of Delegates. The report concluded:
Diagnostic criteria for ADHD are based on extensive empirical research and, if applied appropriately, lead to the diagnosis of a syndrome with high interrater reliability, good face validity, and high predictability of course and medication responsiveness. The criteria of what constitutes ADHD in children have broadened, and there is a growing appreciation of the persistence of ADHD into adolescence and adulthood. As a result, more children (especially girls), adolescents, and adults are being diagnosed and treated with stimulant medication, and children are being treated for longer periods of time. Epidemiologic studies using standardized diagnostic criteria suggest that 3% to 6% of the school-aged population (elementary through high school) may suffer from ADHD, although the percentage of US youth being treated for ADHD is at most at the lower end of this prevalence range. Pharmacotherapy, particularly use of stimulants, has been extensively studied and generally provides significant short-term symptomatic and academic improvement. There is little evidence that stimulant abuse or diversion is currently a major problem, particularly among those with ADHD, although recent trends suggest that this could increase with the expanding production and use of stimulants.
Although some children are being diagnosed as having ADHD with insufficient evaluation and in some cases stimulant medication is prescribed when treatment alternatives exist, there is little evidence of widespread overdiagnosis or misdiagnosis of ADHD or of widespread overprescription of methylphenidate by physicians [3].
ADHD: What Breggin Says
The Ritalin Fact Book makes many claims that clash with the prevailing scientific viewpoint. Among other things, it exaggerates the problem of misdiagnosis, misrepresents what medication is likely to do, greatly exaggerates what non-drug treatment can accomplish, misrepresents the results of a scientific study, uses an out-of-context quote to attack the credibility of other professionals, and exaggerates the extent of side effects. Here are my responses to several such passages in the book:
What Breggin Says My Comments
Page 3: "Many children diagnosed with ADHD and treated with stimulants have relatively benign problems. Often they simply daydream in the classroom or dislike school a little more often than other children. Or they may be a little bit more active and energetic than most." Although misdiagnosis obviously can occur, Breggin presents no data showing that this is a major problem or that it is likely to happen when skilled professionals conduct the evaluations.
"Some children with ADHD are very angry, out of control, and difficult to be around. When children have these more serious behavioral or emotional problems, stimulant medication is likely to worsen their mental condition and behavior." This advice is extraordinarily irresponsible. The fact that stimulant medication can calm many hyperactive children has been known for more than 60 years and has been demonstrated by many well designed clinical studies. Breggin has published no clinical study and provides no data to back his claim.
Page 3: "Even the most difficult and out-of-control children can be helped by informed adult intervention without resort to drugs." On pages 161-174, Breggin supports this statement with passages about a nurse he met during a train ride and two experienced teachers who told him how they dealt with children that were considered hyperactive. The techniques they described are standard ones that would work with mildly disturbed children and might help but would not be sufficient to control truly hyperactive children. Breggin assumes that the descriptions were accurate, concludes that the techniques would work for all hyperactive children, and treats this anecdotal evidence as more important than well-designed studies in which children have been formally diagnosed and their behavior carefully monitored.
Pages 36-37: "A 1997 study published in Pediatrics confirms high rates of stimulant-induced depression in 125 children . . . who were given relatively small doses of Ritalin or Dexedrine. Two children on Ritalin and two on Dexedrine developed severe enough adverse effects to be terminated from the study. One eight-year-old became 'over-focused, extra sensitive, and increasingly anxious,' and a five-year old became 'extremely aggressive and tearful' . . . . Side effects from amphetamine (Dexedrine) were higher than those from Ritalin for 'trouble sleeping, irritability, prone to crying, anxiousness, sadness/unhappiness, and nightmares.'" Breggin's description distorts what the study showed. The study, which lasted two weeks, was done to compare the side effects of Ritalin and Dexedrine and to identify which symptoms might be due to the underlying condition rather than to the drugs. The researcher's concluded that overall, both drugs "were well tolerated by most subjects" and that "many symptoms commonly attributed to stimulant medication are actually preexisting characteristics of children with ADHD and improve with stimulant treatment." [18] A 3% dropout rate caused by temporary symptoms is certainly is not reason to avoid use of the medications. What do you think it means that Breggin uses data from a highly favorable study to argue that stimulant drugs should be avoided?
Page 85: "Pronouncements made in public by professional advocates for stimulants paint glowing pictures about the effectiveness of these drugs. But professional reviews and textbooks often present a more conservative picture -- one that hardly justifies exposing children to such great dangers. A review in the American Psychiatric Press Textbook of Psychiatry concluded: 'Stimulants do not produce lasting improvements in aggressivity, conduct disorder, criminality, education achievement, job functioning, marital relationships or long-term adjustments.'" The textbook sentence is quoted out-of-context. The paragraph from which it comes begins: "Treatment outcome studies of ADHD have led to some striking findings. in addition to helping reduce inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity, treatment with psychostimulants can lead to enduring improvement in social skills and attitudes toward self." [19] The sentence is part of a long discussion of the benefits, risks, and limitations of various treatment methods. The authors clearly state that stimulant drugs are likely to be useful for the majority of children with ADHD, but that special educational or psychological help may still be needed.
Pages 93-94: "Starting with the first dose, almost any psychiatric drug . . . can worsen the symptoms commonly thought of as ADHD-like. . . . People who persistently use psychiatric drugs legally or illegally for several months or more are likely to become forgetful, overlook details, and lose their focus on difficult tasks. Similarly, they may begin to experience "disinhibition" or "loss of impulse control." The earliest signs are irritability and unexpected outbursts of anger, followed eventually by dangerous expressions of violence. I have seen this pattern develop in dozens of clinical and legal cases involving both adults and children." Breggin, who states on page xvii that he never starts anyone on psychiatric medication, cites no source for this sweeping condemnation other than his own vaguely described observations (mostly with people who come to him because they are dissatisfied with their treatment). All effective medications can produce adverse effects. However, competent prescribers will adjust dosage and/or change medication to produce maximum benefit with minimum or no adverse effects. Millions of people believe they have been helped by psychiatric drugs. Does Breggin think that they, the doctors who prescribe the drugs, and the thousands of researchers who have studied the effects of such drugs are dishonest or are fooling themselves?
In the book's introduction (pages xviii-xx), Breggin attempts to justify his contrary views by portraying himself as privy to unique information.
In addition to more than three decades of clinical work, this book draws upon the years of work required for writing dozens of scientific books and articles; the workshops I have given for professionals and the public; teaching I have done in the past at universities . . . and presentations I have made at national conferences for health professionals and attorneys. . . .
I often hear about newly discovered adverse drug reactions long before most professionals become aware of them. . . .
I have yet another unique source of information and knowledge. For many years I have been a consultant and medical expert in legal actions involving psychiatric drugs, including the stimulants described in this book. . . . .
My most specialized source of information about psychiatric drugs comes from my work as a medical expert in cases against giant pharmaceutical companies that are charged with negligence or fraud in developing or publicizing their products. In this fascinating legal arena, I can gain access to secret "inside information" about psychiatric medications that is literally unavailable to any other physician in the world. . . .
Based on my publications and consultations, a series of class-action suits have been brought against Novartis, the manufacturer of Ritalin, charging the company with conspiring with the American Psychiatric Association and the parents' group Children and Adults with Attention Deficit Disorder (CHADD) to fabricate the ADHD diagnosis and foster the overuse of Ritalin.
Research? Unique private communications? Access to "secret" documents? A big conspiracy? As far as I can tell, Breggin has made no systematic clinical reports, and the book provides no relevant "insider information" or alleged facts about any conspiracy. The suits to which he refers were filed during the year 2000 in California, Florida, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and Texas and were not legitimate. The California and Texas suits were dismissed by the courts for failure to state a proper cause of action [20]. The New Jersey suit was withdrawn after the judge made it clear that he was highly skeptical of plaintiffs' allegations of conspiracy [21], and the others were quietly withdrawn, presumably because the plaintiffs realized they were certain to lose. The final withdrawal took place on August 16, 2001. Yet The Ritalin Fact Book' (publication date July 2002) and Breggin's Web site still portray the suits as legitimate and pending.
Russell A. Barkley, PhD, a university-based psychiatry professor who has specialized in ADHD and related disorders for more than 20 years and has published more than 150 scientific papers, book chapters, and books, reached a parallel conclusion about the first edition of Breggin's Talking Back to Ritalin. In a blistering review, Barkley said:
Literally from its opening pages, this book makes contorted attempts at the appearance of scholarship, replete with quotes, footnotes, and references to scientific papers and other sources. Throughout, any quote is mustered from scientific papers that can be taken out of context to support the author's biases along with every exaggerated fact and figure he can find to support his call to alarm, no matter the credibility (or lack of it) of his sources. However, the flaws of both his research methods and his arguments are evident to any scientist even slightly familiar with the scientific literature on the topics covered here [22].
Barkley also led a team of 75 experts who recently issued a international consensus statement expressing concern about the "inaccurate portrayal of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in media reports." Although the statement did not name Breggin, it obviously referred to him in the following passage:
Occasional coverage of the disorder casts the story in the form of a sporting event with evenly matched competitors. The views of a handful of non-expert doctors that ADHD does not exist are contrasted against mainstream scientific views that it does, as if both views had equal merit. Such attempts at balance give the public the impression that there is substantial scientific disagreement over whether ADHD is a real medical condition. In fact, there is no such disagreement -- at least no more so than there is over whether smoking causes cancer, for example, or whether a virus causes HIV/AIDS [9].
Breggin's credibility has also been skewered during three legal actions in which judges either excluded his testimony or gave it no credibility. The first two involved dubious claims that a medication had caused severe harm, and the third was a contest between parents about whether or not a child with ADHD should be treated with Ritalin.
This court finds that the evidence of Peter Breggin, as a purported expert, fails nearly all particulars under the standard set forth in Daubert and its progeny. . . . . Simply put, the Court believes that Dr. Breggin's opinions do not rise to the level of an opinion based on "good science." The motion to exclude his testimony as an expert witness should be granted. -- Magistrate Judge B. Waugh Crigler in Lam v. The Upjohn Company, No. 94-0033-H, W. Dist., of VA (Harrisonburg Division, U.S. District Court, 1995)
The court believes not only is this gentleman unqualified to render the opinions that he did, I believe that his bias in this case is blinding. . . . I find that he . . . was not only unprepared, he was mistaken in a lot of the factual basis for which he expressed his opinion. . . . The court is going to strike the testimony of Dr. Breggin, finding that it has no rational basis. -- Judge Hilary J. Caplan in Lightner v. Alessi, No. 94013064/CL174959 (Baltimore City Circuit Court, 1995).
Dr. Breggin's observations are totally without credibility. I can almost declare him, I guess from statements that floor me, to say the he's a fraud or at least approaching that He has made some outrageous statements and written outrageous books and which he says he has now withdrawn and his thinking is different. He's untrained. He's a member of no hospital staff. He has not since medical school participated in any studies to support his conclusions except maybe one. . . . I can't place any credence or credibility in what he has to recommend in this case. -- Judge James W. Rice in Schellinger v. Schellinger, No. 93-FA-939-763 (Milwaukee County Circuit Court, 1997)
The Bottom Line
Peter R. Breggin , M.D., would like you to believe that his personal experience and judgment enable him to out-think and outperform the collective wisdom of the science-based mental health community. Some of the things he describes may reflect genuine problems. However, he is prone to exaggeration and has certainly failed to substantiate his ADHD-related criticisms. The Ritalin Fact Book should be classified as junk science.
For Additional Information
* Book Review: Talking Back to Ritalin
* International Consensus Statement on ADHD
* American Academy of Pediatrics
o ADHD and your school-aged child. AAP Parent Page, Oct 2001.
o Understanding ADHD: A Guide for Parents (booklet)
o ADHD: A Complete and Authoritative Guide (book, 2003)
* A trick question: A hoax that turns out to be true: Excellent article by Michael Fumento.
* American Psychiatric Association fact sheet
* New Zealand Guidelines for ADHD Assessment and Treatment
* Dr. Larry Silver's Advice to Parents on ADHD (book)
*
References
1. American Academy of Pediatrics. Clinical Practice Guideline: Diagnosis and evaluation of the child with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Pediatrics 105:1158-1170, 2000.
2. American Academy of Pediatrics. Clinical Practice Guideline: Treatment of the school-aged child with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Pediatrics 108:1033-1044, 2001.
3. Practice parameters for the assessment and treatment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 30:1-3, 1991.
4. Goldman LS and others. Diagnosis and treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. JAMA 279:1100-1107, 1998.
5. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV-TR. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, 2000.
6. Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. American Psychiatric Association fact sheet, March 2001.
7. Diagnosis and treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. NIH Consensus Statement 16(2), Nov 16-18, 1998. [Download PDF]
8. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. NIH Publication No. 96-3572, printed 1994, reprinted 1996. [Download PDF]
9. Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, 1999, pp 142-150.
10. Barkley RA and others. International Consensus Statement on ADHD. ADDitude magazine, Jan 2002.
11. Breggin PR. Talking Back to Ritalin: What Doctors Aren't Telling You about Stimulants and ADHD. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing, revised edition, 2001. (Previous edition published in 1998 by Courage Press, Monroe, ME.
12. Breggin PR. The Ritalin Fact Book: What Doctors Won't Tell You about ADHD and Stimulant Drugs. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing, 2002.
13. Breggin PR. Testimony at Hearing on Behavioral Drugs in Schools: Questions and Concerns. Held by the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives, Sept 29, 2000.
14. Breggin PR. Psychiatric drug facts: Biography. Accessed Sept 6, 2002.
15. Breggin PR. Peter R. Breggin resume. Accessed Sept 6, 2002.
16. ICSPP. Form 990-EZ for 2000.
17. Schaler JA. Double-think at the ICSPP corral: A rejoinder to Peter R. Breggin, M.D. Psychnews International 4(1), March 1999.
18. Efron D and others. Side effects of methylphenidate and dexamphetamine in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a double-blind, crossover trial. Pediatrics 100:162-166, 1997.
19. Popper C, West CA. Disorders usually first diagnosed in infancy childhood, or adolescence. In Hales RE and others, editors. The American Psychiatric Press Textbook of Psychiatry, Third Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, pp 825-855.
20. Hausman K. Last of Ritalin-based lawsuits against APA comes to a close. American Psychiatric News, April 5, 2002.
21. Dismissal of New Jersey lawsuit strengthens CHADD's Resolve: New Jersey plaintiffs drop lawsuit after judge criticizes complaint. CHADD press release, Feb 21, 2002.
22. Barkley RA. ADHD, Ritalin, and Conspiracies: Talking Back to Peter Breggin Originally posted to CHADD Web site, 1998.
Quackwatch Home Page
This article was revised on September 23, 2002.
-
On 2005-05-17 09:53:00, Paul wrote:
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a commonly diagnosed childhood disorder with core symptoms that include inappropriate levels of attention, concentration, activity and distractibility.
Inappropriate to what, is the question. I've heard perfectly sane seeming kindergarten and 1st grade teachers brag to me that they enforce strict standards of professionalism in their classrooms.... classrooms full of very sad, stressed out little children! Children are not supposed to act like professional adults. They're supposed to play and sing and giggle and... be childish! That's what they do! That's what they are! It's not a disorder!
It's not the kids who are disordered. It's the self serving, sadistic, child hating adults in charge.
Come to the woods, for here is rest. There is no repose like that of the green deep woods. Here grow the wallflower and the violet. The squirrel will come and sit upon your knee, the logcock will wake you in the morning. Sleep in forgetfulness of all ill. Of all the upness accessible to mortals, there is no upness comparable to the mountains.
-- John Muir
-
On 2005-05-03 10:00:00, Deborah wrote:
ADHD is characterized by two sets of symptoms, inattention and hyperactivity. Although these usually occur together, one may be present to qualify for a diagnosis.
Dismissing entirely the obvious fact that school is boring (hence the inattention) and that normal kids, when bored, get fidgety.
Any priest or shaman must be presumed guilty until proven innocent.
--Robert A. Heinlen, American science-ficiton author
-
Now Paul honey, you're gonna have to do better than mr quackbuster. This egotistic maniac is out-to-lunch and hardly qualified to critique Breggin.
In 1998, after a lengthy discussion on the Healthfraud list, I posted a reward on the Internet for $100,000.00 in cash to anyone who could name just one fluoridation safety study that used a method capable of finding what the researchers were supposed to be looking for.
According to Dr. Barrett, "There are HUNDREDS of pertinent articles." However, although the reward was widely advertised, it remained unclaimed for over a year, and was removed in the Fall of 1999 when the sponsor, Philip Heggen, was found dead at his home in Oregon.
As a result of my efforts to expose the fraudulent claim for "hundreds of studies," Stephen Barrett sued me in U.S. District Court in Oregon for $100,000.00 (plus costs). When the case finally came to trial in September 2002, Judge Hogan asked Dr. Barrett if he could name one of the hundreds of articles he mentioned earlier. Although Barrett had been making the claim for decades, he had to admit he was unable to name EVEN ONE study demonstrating the safety of fluoridation. In fact, there were no studies which indicate that researchers used methods capable of detecting cases of chronic fluoride poisoning -- but failed to find them -- in any fluoridated U.S. cities in the past.
As they say, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
Judge Hogan ruled in my favor.
Excerpts from the Decision: http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/000222.htm#no-studies (http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/000222.htm#no-studies)
Stephen Barrett, a de-licensed MD, operating out of his basement in Allentown, PA, took issue with my opinion piece titled ?The Last Days of The Quackbusters.?
Well, sort of...
Barrett didn?t challenge ME over the piece, he challenged, and threatened, OTHERS that circulated it. I suspect Barrett is well aware he has no legal case against me, and I don?t get intimidated by the neighborhood bully. So far, Barrett has made seven (7) EXTORTION attempts of people on the internet. He has demanded from $500 to $10,000, or in his words ?I will flatten you.?
If he has done this to you, contact me immediately. I am in contact with the Allentown, Pennsylvania Police Department, and the Lehigh County (Pennsylvania) District Attorney?s office (where Barrett lives). We are gathering data at this time.
Besides the money demand, Barrett is ordering the extortion victims to put a link from their website to his. Barrett wrote what he calls a ?response? and has set up a place on his website for everyone to read it. I want you to read it. I?ll tell you where to look in a minute?.
http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpie ... scator.htm (http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpieces/obfuscator.htm)
Excerpted below my letter to Barrett are exerpts from the court transcript in which the Judge severely called to task the legitimacy of the National Council Against Health Fraud, and seriously called into question qualifications of Stephen Barrett, MD (OF ALLENTOWN PA) and Wallace Sampson, MD to appear in court as supposed "expert witnesses" in cases involving alternative medicine. Although it is difficult to imagine that these two men will continue their outrageous attacks on alternative medicine in the aftermath of this sort of public humiliation, they show every sign of being very hard headed gluttons for punishment, so my guess is that they will continue bringing frivolous lawsuits such as this against more plaintiffs until they get kicked in the teeth a few MORE times just as they did here, until they are writhing on the ground in total agony to the point where they can no longer bear the pain of this kind of humiliation?
http://www.iahf.com/antiquackbusters/20020105a.html (http://www.iahf.com/antiquackbusters/20020105a.html)
I posted quite awhile back asking about the validity of , a website mainly ran by Dr. Stephen Barrett (http://www.quackwatch.org/10Bio/bio.html (http://www.quackwatch.org/10Bio/bio.html)), who also runs other related web sites (the old post appears to no longer be around).
Well, I am asking again. Is Dr. Barrett someone like Steve Milloy (http://www.junkscience.com/Junkman.html (http://www.junkscience.com/Junkman.html)) or is he, and his intentions, legit?
I discovered the following articles by Dr. Barrett criticizing organic foods:
In the article he writes:Many "organic" proponents suggest that their foods are safer because they have lower levels of pesticide residues. However, the pesticide levels in our food supply are not high. In some situations, pesticides even reduce health risks by preventing the growth of harmful organisms, including molds that produce toxic substances.With a reference to a scientific status summary by Institute of Food Technologists (http://www.ift.org/ (http://www.ift.org/)) (IFT).
Checking out IFT's site provides little information about their members and funding; you have to be a member to access that information. However, some interesting information is accessible, like the companies listed as IFT Student Association Sponsors, : The Campbell Soup Co., Kraft Foods, Inc., Frito-Lay, Inc., M&M/Mars, Hershey Foods Corp, Balchem Encapsulates, and others (check out Balchem Encapsulates (http://www.balchem.com/encapsulates/ (http://www.balchem.com/encapsulates/)) site, you cannot get much farther from organic than these folks).
Checking out , the IFT Student Association site, IFT has quite a few ties to colleges and univeristies. Maybe IFT is something the PR Watch folks may want to look into.
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/archive/in ... -1384.html (http://www.prwatch.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-1384.html)
http://www.chirobase.org/01General/sbinterview.html (http://www.chirobase.org/01General/sbinterview.html)
Interview with Chiropractor Journal Editor- a Hoot!
For more of his ridiculous opinions and shenanigans:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Steph ... rt=20&sa=N (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Stephen+Barrett,+M.D.%22&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&start=20&sa=N)
-
I was talking to a friend of mine,
a mother of two.
She was curious, in the good ole
days, before any of our conveniences
where invented and we all had to do
chores for just about all our needs.
Did exhaustion take care of kids energy?
Did exhausted kids, and adults, have
any distractibility problems?
Perhaps we are just paying the price
for an easy life, and these illnesses
instead of being ignored, are an
unintended result of progress?
I don't really know ...
-
Deborah,
Thanks for bringing up this teaching method.
I have not heard anything but good things
about Montessori.
I will read your referring article tonight!
-
Hope you enjoy it. The woman is a saint in my book. I learned so much by volunteering in her school. I wish every child could be so fortunate as to have a Montessori experience. With that being said, like everything else, there are good and bad ones. This one was extraordinary!!!
My favorite part of the story:
One day I noticed an eerie calm in a corner of the room. A group of children, frozen between attraction and repulsion, watched as Quentin chewed off thick chunks of color from his vest with a small, dull pair of children's scissors inadequate for such slaughter. His expression was inscrutable. I moved slowly and thought fast.
"Quentin is cutting up his vest!" one child breathlessly dared to pronounce the words.
"Why is he doing that?" yelped another child, breaking the mood of hideous fascination.
I spoke loudly but calmly. "Because he is so sure that he can make another one much, much better. And because he has great courage. See how beautiful the pieces look falling upon the floor, like the reflection of a rainbow broken across rippled water."
Children asked Quentin whether they might have pieces of his vest to keep. Thinly but evenly, without moving his lips, he said yes.
Another vest began to grow.
"No, not a vest this time," announced Quentin. "It will be a dress for Molly."
And this:
"Destroy" was Quentin's motto. He knew everyone hated him, so he hated them first. But mostly he hated himself. He screamed his hatred at everyone, vowing to kill them, me, and himself and to destroy the entire universe. His mother had brought him to our primary school when he was four from one that had demanded he be medicated with Ritalin. It was certainly a demand we could understand, one that had its appeal, but nonetheless one we firmly resisted. Integrating Quentin into the class would take time, energy, dedication, skill, intuition, and a lot of luck.
***
What would happen to this boy if that had happened in a public school? Chances are good that the police would be called, he'd be hauled away in handcuffs and possibly charged. And, most definitely refered for an rx or hospitalized to be 'stabilized'.
I really do feel that short of brain injury, the problem is with genuinely ignorant adults, not 'diseased' children.
It's from her book, "Children Who Are Not Yet Peaceful"
-
So what happened to him? Did he eventually chill out? I hope so.
They came with a Bible and their religion- stole our land, crushed our spirit... and now tell us we should be thankful to the 'Lord' for being saved.
--Chief Pontiac, American Indian Chieftain
-
I had emotional probs in 5th grade that was precipitated by and made worse by an asshole father and an apathetic teacher.
Shed frequently ignore me pleas for help from bullying fighting or teasing, and one time I was shoved over onto some stumps left from a bush that was cut off at the ground level (but on an angle) with a chainsaw. My back was cut up, and I was bleeding.
I showed her the wounds and she just looked at me, the bitch!
So, what does Wake County in all its wisdom do? Send some 20-something social worker bitch to stare at me in class and jot down notes!
Now, I had an undiagnosed communication problem masked by how smart I was... they thought I was "just nerdy". But well, when I was going through the problems of having an apathetic bitch of a teacher, my parents divorcing (and my dad being about as supportive as trying to hold jello up on a wall with a nail) and the usual teasing bullying and occasional fight happened, I had this teacher standing around staring like an idiot. So, when shit happened, I raised hell to get the bitches attention.
(Thinking back I think the social worker bitch planted it!) someone wrote "fuck you chris" on a table in the art room in remarkably adult handwriting. I "put on a show" raising hell about it because I was so sick of the bullshit and got sent off to "bridges" for kids with emotional disturbances for 2 months while they all scratched their asses and nuts like the idiot apes they are and figured out the problem wasnt me it was that nobody gave a fuck. So, I got pulled out.
But, well, the school work at 'bridges' was a JOKE, and they often restrained kids with what I know now to be rather illegal ones. They also had a locking 'time out room' with that infamous spring-loaded lock - so that if the person who locked the kid in let go, they'd be released... because a kid died in a fire there.
So yeah. Kids are largely a product of how you treat them.
Impiety: Your irreverence toward my deity.
--Ambrose Bierce
-
Not sure, even that Quentin is the boy's real name. But, my friend's son did. And, he was a kid that, as they say, only a mother could love. She wanted to drug him, but wanted him in the school more, so didn't. He's in college now, and doing fine. He was very dramatic (like mom), had tons of energy and prefered interacting with someone over doing 'work'. Fortunately the Montessori structure allowed much more of that than public school. He was never shamed or punished.
-
http://www.latimes.com/business/custom/ ... &cset=true (http://www.latimes.com/business/custom/cotown/la-fi-fda29jun29,1,3438064.story?coll=la-headlines-business-enter&ctrack=1&cset=true)
or
http://tinyurl.com/cceht (http://tinyurl.com/cceht)
June 29, 2005
FDA to Warn on J&J's Concerta Drug
From Bloomberg News
Johnson & Johnson's Concerta attention-deficit disorder drug users have had hallucinations, psychotic behavior, suicidal thoughts and heart
complications such as high blood pressure, U.S. regulators said.
The Food and Drug Administration is considering how best to tell doctors and consumers about these complications, the agency said in a statement posted Tuesday on its website.
A panel of FDA advisors will discuss Concerta's potential complications at a meeting Thursday in Rockville, Md.
Concerta, a once-daily form of Novartis' Ritalin, is the most prescribed drug for attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, according to a
Johnson & Johnson website. The FDA said last year that it had Shire Pharmaceuticals Group give doctors warnings about sudden cardiovascular
death linked to its Adderall drug for the same disorder.
"The FDA is pursuing additional means to better characterize the cardiovascular risks for all drug products approved for ADHD," the agency
said in its statement.
"Potential options under consideration include population-based pharmaco-epidemiologic studies, long-term safety trials and other targeted
CV risk studies."
Canadian health officials in February ordered Shire to withdraw Adderall, also an amphetamine, because it was linked to at least 20 deaths.
Attention deficit disorder affects about 4.1% of people ages 9 to 17 in any given six-month period, according to the National Institutes of Health's website.
Johnson & Johnson will not discuss the FDA's statement ahead of the meeting, said Kathy Fallon, a company spokeswoman.
"It would be inappropriate for us to comment at this point, as we have not seen the complete FDA presentation," Fallon said.
The FDA said it would add details to the Concerta label about the psychiatric complications.
-
For any of you that watched Tom Cruise on NBC last week, HOORAY for him!
Instead of Matt Lauer defending those that choose psychotropic drugs, Matt would have better served the world by asking Tom about what to do instead of drugging our kids.
Now Matt Lauer is all butt hurt and even made a snide remark about Tom this morning while introducing the movie.
Poor Poor Matt... Where in the World is Matt Lauer????
-
Youre defending a SCIENTOLOGIST.
You really must be a troll to be saying bullshit like that - defending scientology, 'thetans' and otherbullshit when there are reasons for using drugs to treat actual mental illnesses. You cant fix bipolarism with a damn seminar, dolphin.Religion is based . . . mainly on fear . . . fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand. . . . My own view on religion is that of Lucretius. I regard it as a disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race.
--Bertrand Russell, British philosopher, educator, mathemetician, and social critic
-
On 2005-06-29 14:20:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Youre defending a SCIENTOLOGIST.
You really must be a troll to be saying bullshit like that - defending scientology, 'thetans' and otherbullshit when there are reasons for using drugs to treat actual mental illnesses. You cant fix bipolarism with a damn seminar, dolphin
Who's defending Scientology? I agree that Matt Lauer lives in a vacuum and only sees the negative side of life...Hey, he's a journalist, that's his job. Even when he's supposed to be positive, he's negative. Too bad he didn't see that he couldhave made a huge difference by asking different questions instead of defending.
Of course these people FELT better after taking the medication, but as Tom so rightly pointed out, IT IS A MASK!
No, Nilewhatever, it can't be fixed by a seminar, but it CAN be fixed.
Do I agree that BIOPOLARS can go without medication? I would have loved to hear what Tom knows about this instead of being judgmental and closed off. That's saying that there's only ONE way to look at it. Any information out there to substantiate his statement that there are no chemical imbalances? THe drug companies would love to close that discussion down...
PHX :wink:
-
Nihilanthic - it looks like anyone that disagrees with you is a troll.
-
On 2003-07-20 21:02:00, Deborah wrote:
Personally, I'd rather hear your personal experience with the drug than a broad generalization.
Deborah, you have stated recently that you have no involvement with anyone who is mentally ill.
I would like to ask you, the same thing that you ask of others:
Let's hear your personal experiences with mental illness rather than your broad generalizations?
-
Yes, this is a bump. Deborah please remember to respond in the same manner that you asked this question to others:
Let's hear your personal experiences ...
Posted: 2005-06-29 22:47:00
On 2003-07-20 21:02:00, Deborah wrote:
Personally, I'd rather hear your personal experience with the drug than a broad generalization.
---
Deborah, you have stated recently that you have no involvement with anyone who is mentally ill.
I would like to ask you, the same thing that you ask of others:
Let's hear your personal experiences with mental illness rather than your broad generalizations?
-
Paul, are you mentally ill?
-
Not everyone who disagrees, just dolphin.
Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will [America's] heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.
--John Quincy Adams, Speech to the U.S. House of Representatives [July 4, 1821]
-
On 2005-06-30 21:36:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Paul, are you mentally ill?"
Yes
-
Who ?IS? Paul? Curious?
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... m=9#114154 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=10711&forum=9#114154)
-
http://www.healthday.com/view.cfm?id=526657 (http://www.healthday.com/view.cfm?id=526657)
2 July 2005
Researchers Urge Caution on Ritalin-Cancer Link Finding
Excerpts:
The concerns about the drug, a stimulant that has been used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for decades, surfaced during a FDA pediatrics advisory committee meeting Thursday. The findings, by researchers from the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas, showed damage to the chromosomes of 12 children who had taken Ritalin for three months.
The advisory committee had been called to discuss yet another health issue surrounding the class of ADHD medications known as methylphenidates, to which Ritalin belongs: Some psychiatric side effects have been reported among children using Concerta, Ritalin and other versions of these drugs.
The FDA had been considering labeling changes to all methylphenidates with regard to psychiatric events and potential cardiovascular side effects. A review had found 36 psychiatric events for Concerta, compared to 16 for Ritalin and other methylphenidates. These side effects included hallucinations and suicide ideation. Concerta had 20 cardiovascular event reports, while the other methylphenidates had four such reports.
Almost 2 million children in the United States have been diagnosed with ADHD, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.
-
http://www.healthday.com/view.cfm?id=526657 (http://www.healthday.com/view.cfm?id=526657)
Researchers Urge Caution on Ritalin-Cancer Link Finding
Despite FDA concerns, Texas scientists say their study was only preliminary
By Amanda Gardner
HealthDay Reporter
FRIDAY, July 1 (HealthDay News) -- As the U.S. Food and Drug Administration moved to examine a potential link between Ritalin and cancer, the scientists who first unearthed the connection stressed Friday that the finding was preliminary and should not be cause for panic.
The concerns about the drug, a stimulant that has been used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for decades, surfaced during a FDA pediatrics advisory committee meeting Thursday. The findings, by researchers from the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas, showed damage to the chromosomes of 12 children who had taken Ritalin for three months.
The advisory committee had been called to discuss yet another health issue surrounding the class of ADHD medications known as methylphenidates, to which Ritalin belongs: Some psychiatric side effects have been reported among children using Concerta, Ritalin and other versions of these drugs.
But the Texas scientists said their Ritalin study was far too small to prompt the parents of ADHD patients to abandon the drug.
"We're not telling people to all go off their medication because you don't know what this means," said Melissa L. Bondy, co-author of the study, which first appeared in the Feb. 16 online issue Cancer Letters. "You can't base changing practice on 12 patients. Look how many millions of kids are on this. Do you want to tell all the mothers and fathers to take their kids off of the drugs?"
Bondy said she and her colleagues have submitted a grant proposal to the National Institutes of Health for a larger study looking at more patients and more ADHD drugs.
"We definitely need a larger study," said lead researcher Dr. Randa A. El-Zein. If approved, the study would not even be funded until March 2006.
The government interest is there, however.
Scientists from the FDA, the NIH and the Environmental Protection Agency traveled to Texas on May 23 to examine the study methods used by the researchers. "They thought, 'Yes, we do have a public concern,' and that a larger study should be performed," El-Zein said.
"We're hoping that they'll see this as a major public health issue, and as something that needs to be done," Bondy added.
Meanwhile, the question of labeling changes because of possible psychiatric effects of Ritalin and other methylphenidates have been put on hold after the advisory committee told FDA officials that it was hesitant to recommend such changes.
According to an FDA release, committee members suggested waiting until more safety data have been collected on two other types of drugs used to treat ADHD -- methamphetamines such as Adderall and the non-stimulant Strattera, something that won't happen before early 2006.
The FDA should "delay the labeling change until they have a good sense of class effect," Acting Committee Chairman Robert Nelson, of The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, told FDA officials according to the release.
"We heard there is no terrible signal," Office of Pediatric Therapeutics Director Dianne Murphy sadded.
The FDA had been considering labeling changes to all methylphenidates with regard to psychiatric events and potential cardiovascular side effects. A review had found 36 psychiatric events for Concerta, compared to 16 for Ritalin and other methylphenidates. These side effects included hallucinations and suicide ideation. Concerta had 20 cardiovascular event reports, while the other methylphenidates had four such reports.
Despite the committee's advice, Murphy said the agency still may change labeling about psychiatric side effects to "try to make it clearer what the situation is with regard to certain adverse events."
The FDA's decision to take a closer look at the psychiatric side effects of medications for ADHD did not surprise some experts.
"These types of issues theoretically were possible with the medication because of the way it works. It's not surprising that they've had some reports that relate to psychiatric side effects... " said Dr. Lenard Adler, director of the Adult ADHD Program at New York University Medical Center.
The drugs have been around for 40 years, Adler added, and have a "wide margin of safety."
"Any medicine that has therapeutic effect can have some side effects," Adler continued. "This is appropriate scrutiny by the FDA, but the benefits are also very clear and clearly outweigh the risks."
Another expert believes labeling changes may not be the answer.
"Labeling is an oversimplification of the problem," said Dr. Eugenio M. Rothe, director of the child and adolescent psychiatry clinic at Jackson Memorial Hospital and an associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Miami School of Medicine. "It scares people, and it doesn't address the other problems that are affecting the outcome. The problem is much more complex than that, and has to do primarily with the stigma associated with mental health conditions."
This is just the latest chapter in the ongoing debate over the safety of ADHD medications.
In February, Health Canada ordered Adderall XR off the market, after reports of sudden cardiac death in 20 patients. The FDA, however, elected at the time only to require the company to update Adderall's label to warn that it should not be used in anyone with structural cardiac abnormalities.
Almost 2 million children in the United States have been diagnosed with ADHD, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.
More information
Visit the National Institute of Mental Health for more on ADHD.
SOURCES: Randa A. El-Zein, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor, epidemiology, and Melissa L. Bondy, Ph.D., professor, of epidemiology, both of University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston; Lenard Adler, M.D., director, Adult ADHD Program, New York University Medical Center, and associate professor, psychiatry and neurology, New York University School of Medicine, New York City; Eugenio M. Rothe, M.D., director, child and adolescent psychiatry clinic, Jackson Memorial Hospital, and associate professor, psychiatry, University of Miami School of Medicine; June 30, 2005, news release, FDA Advisory Committee Web site
Last Updated: Jul-01-2005
Copyright © 2005 ScoutNews, LLC. All rights reserved.
-
On 2005-06-30 23:42:00, Paul wrote:
"
On 2005-06-30 21:36:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Paul, are you mentally ill?"
Yes"
no shit
-
First published on http://www.Huffingtonpost.com (http://www.Huffingtonpost.com)
Thanks Tom Cruise
By Peter R. Breggin, M.D.
On June 25, 2005 Tom Cruise did the unthinkable on TV. Actually, he did several "unthinkables" in a filmed interview with NBC's Matt Lauer for the Today Show.
First, Tom stopped smiling. He deprived us of that multi-million dollar grin and got serious. For a star to do this to the American public was unthinkable.
Second, Tom pointed out that Matt Lauer actually was very "glib" (shallow) and didn't know what he was talking about. He also urged Matt to be "more responsible" and to learn something about psychiatry before touting it. For a star to do this to a media personality was unthinkable. Since nearly all of them are shallow, this was a threat of potentially epidemic proportions. Suppose other guests began pointing out that media hosts don't know what they are talking about and are shallow?
Third, he got serious about one of the most important issues in our personal lives, in this case our widespread use of psychiatric drugs to solve our personal distress and anguish. Tom concluded, "I'm passionate about life." For anyone to speak this way on television, except perhaps on the Catholic channel, is truly beyond the TV pale; and even the Catholic channel doesn't criticize psychiatry.
Fourth, he criticized psychiatry and drew attention to its genuine flaws and failings. I suspect he's actually read my book, Toxic Psychiatry. Tom said that psychiatry had a long history of abusing people, including electroshock. He said, "There is no such thing as a chemical imbalance." He said that antidepressants can only "mask the problem" and that "these drugs are very dangerous." He called psychiatry a "pseudoscience" and suggested that there are better approaches. He was right about all of this.
A few days later NBC invited me to New York City as a psychiatric expert to discuss the Tom Cruise affair on the Today Show, and when I began by saying it sounded like Tom had been doing some serious reading about psychiatry, I got cut off, again and again, throughout the show.
Why was the media both drawn into the story and shocked by it? It was too good a story to simply ignore: "Tom Cruise Gone Wild" was the theme. It should have been, "Tom Cruise gets serious."
The media would have liked to attack Tom on the grounds that he's a Scientologist. Scientologists seem to share a number of views about psychiatry with me, including everything Tom said. In fact, I'd go further. Modern biological psychiatry is a materialistic religion masquerading as a science.
How can I say that my profession of psychiatry is a materialistic religion? Because modern psychiatry makes believe that psychological and spiritual problems, such as anxiety and depression, are caused by mechanical failures in the physical brain, and because psychiatry then attempts to correct these psychological and spiritual problems with physical interventions such as drugs and electroshock. Modern biological psychiatry takes these views and implements these interventions on faith and it has won a lot of converts with the help of billion-dollar marketing campaigns. If you want more detailed analyses of the faith and fake science behind the claims of modern psychiatry, you'll find them in my books such as Toxic Psychiatry (1991), Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (1997), Talking Back to Ritalin (Revised, 2001), the Antidepressant Fact Book (2001) and the Ritalin Fact Book (2002). You can find my scientific papers on my website, http://www.breggin.com (http://www.breggin.com). In my books and on the website you'll also find discussions of the many drug-free alternatives that are available for helping people with problems such as anxiety and depression.
The media kept hinting that the problem was Tom's Scientology beliefs but they didn't want to say it. To some extent it's not politically correct to criticize someone's religion, especially when people like Tom and John Travolta are members. But that was really not the issue. The media is afraid of Scientology because the religion has been extremely aggressive toward media critics, often charging them or threatening to charge them with libel and slander.
I was also invited on to CNBC's the Donny Deutche talk show. This time I remained in Ithaca, New York only a few blocks from my office in a high tech TV studio. I was kept waiting in front of the live camera for almost an hour and a half to get a word in as I watched Tom get excoriated. Although I could see the show on the uplink for this entire time as I sat waiting at any moment to be called upon, they decided not to link me into the show at all and I never got to say a thing in Tom's defense or in criticism of biological psychiatry, drugs and electroshock. Sitting upright that long without twitching in anticipation of momentarily appearing on millions of televisions was hard enough, but listening to Donny was worse.
While I sat listening to the CNBC show that I was never brought onto, I felt a mixture of outrage and sadness. Outrage that the show host Donny Deutche bragged up his work in advertising where he helped to produce the Zoloft TV ads with their clever little bouncing faces that made the antidepressant so much more "accessible," in his words, to millions of Americans. Donny was bragging about an actual fraud-ads that falsely suggest that Zoloft corrects biochemical imbalances and that leave out the warning that the drug causes mania, not to mention psychosis, violence and suicide.
What was tragic? Donny's guest was Jane Pauley who was flogging her new book, Out of the Blue. Jane is the epitome of a media personality, having anchored the Today Show with Tom Brokaw and Bryant Gumbel, and having earned many broadcast awards. Jane is also a promoter of psychiatry. She admitted to having developed "hypomanic" (milder than full-blown mania) symptoms on an antidepressant. At the time, she explained, her mind and thoughts were racing and she couldn't control them. But then she added that of course the drug didn't make her become manic; the drug just "brought out" her underlying or pre-existing bipolar disorder.
Of course, I don't know anything about Jane Pauley except what she's told us and she's not really the issue. Celebrities are actively recruited by marketing departments to promote medical and psychiatric treatments. I do know that psychiatrists often lie to patients to protect themselves and their drugs. My colleagues lie by saying the antidepressant merely "brought out" their mania, psychosis, violence or depression, rather than the drug caused it in the otherwise innocent victim. Jane Pauley thinks she is a victim of bipolar disorder when she sounds to me like a victim of psychiatry.
It's no small matter to falsely inform a person that their drug-induced mania shows they have bipolar disorder. It results in a false diagnosis and a stigmatizing label (bipolar or manic-depressive disorder) that follows people for the rest of their lives. It leads to additional medications, often including antipsychotic drugs like Zyprexa and Risperdal that can cause lethal diabetes and pancreatitis, and tardive dyskinesia, a potentially disfiguring and disabling neurological disorder characterized by bizarre-looking abnormal movements.
So the media personalities had a feast promoting their religion, psychiatry, while Tom Cruise got hammered for criticizing psychiatry, and indirectly promoting his religion, Scientology.
No, I'm not a Scientologist. Except when they occasionally say hello to me at conferences, I have hardly spoken to a Scientologist in more than thirty years. But when I saw Tom's bravery come out from behind his marvelous smile, I wanted to help, and I made clear I wanted to defend him.
Well, Tom, you said on TV things I've been saying in the media and in my books and scientific articles for three decades-but boy did you generate a lot more attention to the issues. Thanks!
-
Barry Turner UK Medical and Legal Ethics Lecturer on Psuedoscience
Tom Cruise is most certainly right. Modern psychiatry is, and will remain a pseudoscience and the only caveat to that statement is that it may give it more credibility than it deserves.
I speak as a medical ethicist and I congratulate Tom Cruise first for his courage to speak out on such issues and second on his obvious dedicated interest in the subject demonstrated by his knowledge of the issues. The detractors especially those who support psychiatry because it has 'helped them' miss the point. Tom Cruise is speaking about the subject, they are speaking about themselves. The subject is this. Psychiatry demands recognition within the healing arts and claims to be both a science and a branch of medicine. It is neither for these reasons.
For years psychiatry has propagated a myth that mental illness are biological and has even gone so far in may cases to deny that we are creatures of free will at all. For years those who refuse to accept this dogma have asked then for evidence, not conjecture, to support this position. It has not been forthcoming and the best they have ever been able to come up with are "maybes", "possiblies" and "we believe". Not one piece of real evidence has ever been adduced and it places this branch of 'science' in the same category as that that searches for the Yeti and the Sasquatch, except of course that those who believe in Yetis and Sasquatches have never had access to the vast research funds that the biopsychiatry fraternity have.
Medicine is bound by an ancient and laudable tradition of ethics in which primum non nocere (first do no harm) is the foundation stone that the doctines of benificence and non-maleficence are built on. Those ethics are abrogated and control has primacy over care, first do no harm but second do what you like. Lying to patients in any branch of medicine is a breach of that ethic. Forcing medication is a breach of that ethic, denying the right of consent is a breach of those ethics and if those ethical conditions cannot be met then psychiatry does not belong in their world.
Respect for autonomy is a pillar of medical ethics. Autonomy is a myth in psychiatry and cannot be found in any psychiatric hospital or in any society where medication with dangerous drugs is a condition of liberty. Justice is the fouth pillar of medical ethics and as with the others it is totally absent in psychiatry. Where is the justice in telling patients that 'mental illness is for life' when that excludes them from many areas that those of us who are not 'mad' take for granted. Where is the justice in lying to patients that mental illness means they must take drugs forever when real science has shown that is not the case. Where is the justice in detaining people against their will, without due process, on the spurious grounds that they are a risk to themselves. Where is the justice in billions of dollars being spent on mood adapting drugs while those drugs that save lives 'cannot be afforded'
Even if psychiatry was a 'science' it would belong in the field of what is now described as the most dishonest science of all, Biological Science. This once noblest of sciences was originally a search for knowledge and truth. It is now a search for dollars and when truth gets in the way of that it is buried. Case after case is now coming to light where the bioscientists have lied to get research dollars, kudos and personal wealth. Some of these scientists gone bad are now facing well deserved jail sentences. Manufactured mental illness have provided the biggest growth industry to these characters, puffing up egos and fattening wallets. Real science and real people have suffered the cost of this with real illness neglected and real science ignored.
In my home town here the caring practice of psychiatric medicine began. Drs Charlesworth and the Reverend Dr Willis both were local to here. Dr Charlesworth who took the mentally ill out of the lunatic asylums and freak shows has his statue just a few hundred metres from where I live. Dr Willis who treated King George the Third for his mania, now known to have been porphyria, has a ward at the hospital named after him. I believe that if both Dr Charlesworth and Dr Willis could come back today they would either be gripped with rage or total sadness at what they began has now become.
Biopsychiatry is the biggest pseudoscientific lie since eugenics, to which it is of course closely related, A big hand to Tom Cruise and all who keep reminding us of this.
Barry Turner
Lecturer in Medical Ethics and Law
University of Lincoln
-
Do you agree with this position that post partum depression can be cured with exercise and vitamins??? Do you have a medical degree? Does Tom? I think not. The only person who can determine whether or not someone's depression can be cured with alternative methods other than prescription medications is a doctor. If Brooke had taken Tom's advice two years ago, she and/or her daughter might not be alive today. He was totally out of line to suggest that he knew what the best treatment for Brooke was. To voice his personal distaste for psychiatry is one thing, to suggest he knows what is best for Brooke is another. I was quite disapointed with him after that interview and had no idea he was that much of a crackpot.
-
I agree w/ you. I think that sometimes, diet and excercise changes, vitamis, change of setting or other less invasive measures can help w/ post-partum depression. And it's always best, except in cases of extreme emergency, to start out w/ the least invasive measures that hold any promise.
But that's a far cry from some actor proposing to give unasked for medical advice to someone in public. Of course Tom is a crack pot! Just read Dyanetics and consider that this joker views it as his Bible. Or read Bare Faced Massiah. Freedom has a thousand charms to show, That slaves, howe'er contented, never know.
William Cowper, a British Christian poet & hymn writer (18th century)
-
http://newsobserver.com/news/story/2646 ... 3217c.html (http://newsobserver.com/news/story/2646224p-9083217c.html)
Excerpts:
By CINDY GEORGE, Staff Writer
TARBORO -- Prosecutors will paint a picture starting today of a young man who unjustifiably gunned down two innocent bystanders outside a football game.
But for people who watched Timothy Wayne Johnson and his younger brother grow up, that image doesn't square with the two fair-haired, look-alike siblings they remember.
Johnson is accused of killing two men at a tailgate party outside Carter-Finley Stadium in Raleigh on Sept. 4, when N.C. State University was
playing its opening game of the season. The victims were a Camp Lejeune Marine headed to Iraq and his friend, who was visiting from Chicago.
Jurors will assemble this morning in the Raleigh courtroom where Johnson will be tried on two counts of first-degree murder. Opening statements are scheduled for 9:30.
His attorneys concede that he was the shooter, although Johnson has pleaded not guilty on both counts. He faces the death penalty or life in prison without parole if convicted.
On Sept. 4, Johnson was months away from finishing his NCSU degree. He planned to become a psychologist. His younger brother, Tony, had come to Raleigh for the day.
Their mother, Ann Johnson, blames the "party lifestyle" for distracting all three of her sons from an upbringing that taught right and wrong.
"You always think what you could have done or said that would have changed how quickly they got off the track with drugs and alcohol," she said. "They wouldn't be in the position to have gotten in a fight that night that got out of hand."
After seven years of marriage and no children, the Johnsons adopted a 2-month-old boy and named him Thomas Mitchell Johnson Jr. They called him
Mitch.
Then, after nearly 20 years of marriage, Ann became pregnant with Timothy. Two years later, she was carrying Tony.
During Mitch's young adult years, his preteen brothers watched him fall into drugs.
"He was about 21 when he got into a bad crowd," Ann Johnson said of her eldest son. "Like with Tim and Tony, too, it's very tempting -- shiny, like tinsel."
Still, during an interview at their Tarboro home, Tommy Johnson, 61, and Ann, 58, said they kept a close watch over their younger two.
"They were not allowed to hang out. What we did, we did together as a family," Ann said. "You see where our computer is. We monitored their TV; we
monitored this computer and their friends."
Timothy and Tony did well in grade school but became restless in middle school, their mother said. Both had trouble sitting still and completing schoolwork.
"That age is a hard age, and then they hit those hormones and they're ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder]. You put those three together ...," Ann Johnson said.
Aiming to achieve
Timothy, the middle child, wanted to do well in school and asked for the drug Ritalin after seeing a commercial, his father said. Timothy's
improvement earned him student-of-the-year honors in the eighth grade.
Shortly afterward, he served as a General Assembly page. Among his mother's keepsakes is a photo of her son at the legislature.
"Tim was my easiest to manage. Tony and Mitchell were more likely to push," she said. "If you said no, Tim would go on back to his room and leave you
alone. If you had a rule, he didn't push the limits as much."
After Tarboro High, Timothy enrolled at NCSU. Two years later, Tony moved to Raleigh to live with his brother and attend Wake Technical Community
College. But after Tony didn't do well in school, he returned to Tarboro and worked in construction.
Felonies on record
Earlier this year, the brothers were sentenced for crimes related to an August 2004 home invasion and robbery in Raleigh, in which armed assailants broke in, restrained people with duct tape, then left with drugs, cash and guns.
Timothy, 23, pleaded guilty to robbery and burglary charges in that case and was sentenced to at least 10 years in prison. A jury found Tony, 21, guilty on robbery, kidnapping and burglary charges, for which he was sentenced to
at least 16 years.
Those violent felonies on their records make both eligible for the death penalty if they are convicted of first-degree murder.
Testimony and evidence in the home invasion revealed that Timothy Johnson sold drugs during his high school and college years. His murder trial defense lawyers admit he smoked marijuana before the shootings and had a gun stashed in his car.
On visits to Raleigh, Ann Johnson said she never saw drugs or weapons in the apartment her sons shared and can't wrap her mind around revelations that Timothy was a drug dealer or that her sons were involved in a revenge scheme to reclaim cocaine stolen from Timothy's apartment.
In the tailgate shootings, Timothy's lawyers say he acted in defense of his younger brother. Prosecutors paint Tony Johnson, whose murder trial is set for October, as the "instigator and catalyst" in the shootings of Kevin McCann and 2nd Lt. Brett Harman.
Rob Harman, Brett's older brother, sees wasted potential for all four young men.
"[Timothy Johnson] made horrible decisions, and Brett and Kevin were killed as a result," he said. "If Brett had died in Iraq, that would have been the path that he chose, and as painful as that would have been, it would have meant something."
Hard to comprehend
Friends and relatives of the Johnsons in Tarboro say it's hard to understand how two boys they watched grow up playing sports and going to church could, as young men, face responsibility for ending two lives -- and possibly death
themselves.
A week later, with Timothy and Tony Johnson in jail, their parents were surrounded by church members who prayed for them.
Ann Johnson knows that even if her sons are acquitted, they still have lengthy prison sentences for the home invasion.
Staff writer Cindy George can be reached at 829-4656 or cgeorge@newsobserver.com.
-
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/com ... t-opinions (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-eberstadt25sep25,0,3602544.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions)
Or
http://tinyurl.com/7uenc (http://tinyurl.com/7uenc)
September 25, 2005
A prescribed threat
Among the harshest critics of the child wonder-drug regimen? Think rock icons.
By Mary Eberstadt, MARY EBERSTADT is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of "Home-Alone America," newly released in paperback by Penguin/Sentinel.
WHEN TOM CRUISE and his fellow Scientologists took a hammering earlier this year for their public opposition to psychiatric drugs, neither they nor their critics could have anticipated the releases in July and August of two weighty reports offering evidence that at least some psychiatric prescription-writing has run amok.
If these two reports by Columbia University's National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, or CASA, have it right, more kids than ever have their fingers - and sometimes their noses - in somebody else's psychiatric prescription pill bottle.
The July report ("Under the Counter: The Diversion and Abuse of Controlled Prescription Drugs in the U.S.") estimates that while self-reported use of prescription drugs by people of all ages nearly doubled between 1992 and 2003, abuse by teenagers during those years tripled.
Similar increases appear in the August report, "National Survey of American Attitudes on Substance Abuse X: Teens and Parents." Between April 2004 and June 2005, for example, "the percentage of teens who know a friend or classmate who has abused prescription drugs jumped 86%."
In his introduction to the July report, CASA Chairman and President Joseph A. Califano Jr. zeroes in on the problem: "Particularly alarming is the 212% increase from 1992 to 2003 in the number of 12- to 17-year-olds abusing controlled prescription drugs, and the number of teens trying these drugs for the first time."
Nor does Califano sugarcoat the question of just how close to home the problem hits: "The explosion in the prescription of addictive opioids, depressants and stimulants has, for many children, made the medicine cabinet a greater temptation and threat than the illegal street drug dealer, as some parents have become unwitting and passive pushers."
At a time when many doctors, teachers and parents swear by the beneficial effects of prescription stimulants for minors, words as unsparing as
Califano's are likely to be dismissed as alarmist.
But these reports are not the only evidence of the harm done by these drugs to at least some kids. If we look at what kids say, sing and report about psychiatric medications, we learn that among the harshest critics of the child wonder-drug regimen are some of its intended beneficiaries and graduates.
Consider two music icons. The late grunge-rock guru Kurt Cobain appears in retrospect as a kind of anti-poster boy for child stimulants. Prescribed Ritalin from the age of 7, Cobain believed that the drug led to his later abuse of related substances. (He committed suicide by shotgun in 1994.)
Cobain's widow, Courtney Love, put the connection this way to biographer Charles R. Cross: "Kurt's own opinion, as he later told her, was that the
drug was significant. Courtney, who also was prescribed Ritalin as a child, said: 'When you're a kid and you get this drug that makes you feel that [euphoric] feeling, where else are you going to turn when you're an adult?'
Marshall Mathers, a.k.a. bad-boy rap superstar Eminem, is another prominent self-perceived child victim of the label-and-medicate momentum. In an
article in Rolling Stone magazine, Howard Stern said that Eminem told him that his mother "misdiagnosed him with attention deficit disorder. 'My mother said I was a hyper kid, and I wasn't,' he said. 'She put me on Ritalin.' " One telling Eminem hit called "Cleaning Out My Closet" includes the lyric, "My whole life I was made to believe I was sick when I wasn't."
It seems almost too perverse to be true: Cobain's and Eminem's fans might get a stronger anti-stimulant message from their icons' examples than from their own parents, teachers and doctors.
Criticism of the child-drug phenomenon also comes from writers who self-identify as members of "the Ritalin generation." One is Elizabeth Wurtzel, author of the books "Prozac Nation" and "More, Now, Again." The latter detailed her harrowing descent into Ritalin addiction after a
well-meaning doctor prescribed the drug to help her "focus" on writing.
Advocates of psychiatric medication for children often argue, and passionately, that these drugs alleviate the suffering of many children and
families. But if that positive experience is to be a legitimate test, so too should the negative feelings and experiences of others be acknowledged.
"These [stimulants] are very safe medications," a child psychiatrist at Harvard Medical School told a reporter in the wake of the July CASA report.
"They have been used for 70 years, and we haven't had terrible catastrophes."
Yet it doesn't take a Scientologist to wonder whether "terrible catastrophe" is the most accurate measurement.
-
On 2005-09-26 14:06:00, Deborah wrote:
"http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-eberstadt25sep25,0,3602544.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
self-reported use of prescription drugs by people of all ages nearly doubled between 1992 and 2003, abuse by teenagers during those years tripled.
Darn, this whole time I thought it was the introduction, then proliferation of crystal meth.
If it is indeed Ritalin, I am tossing my DVD copy
of "Salton Sea"
-
There are some who claim to have the symptoms of ADD and ADHD just to get the amphetamines for use as recreational drugs. Too many children are being given speed for no reason. It's outrageous.
-
On 2005-09-27 08:21:00, RN on Board wrote:
"There are some who claim to have the symptoms of ADD and ADHD just to get the amphetamines for use as recreational drugs. Too many children are being given speed for no reason. It's outrageous."
If a person speeds on speed I heard then they do not have ADD or ADHD.
If they slow down, then they do.
Is this correct?
If so, then why can't the medical people, and the teacher's as well as the parent's note this and inform the doctor?
-
Ritalin is a street drug.
Kids on Ritalin have died.
Is it really that important to feed your kid a drug to make them a more "efficient" kid?
This is social engineering at it's worse.
God help America's youth ... being drugged into compliance with the demands and expectations of their parents and teachers.
LEAVE NO CHILD BEHIND? Shit, it should be LEAVE NO CHILD UNMEDICATED.
I am disgusted!
-
On 2005-09-27 13:34:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Ritalin is a street drug.
Kids on Ritalin have died.
Huh?
Where you recently disgusted or 70 years ago when it came on the market?
-
On 2005-09-27 14:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-09-27 13:34:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Ritalin is a street drug.
Kids on Ritalin have died.
Huh?
Where you recently disgusted or 70 years ago when it came on the market?"
Researchers from the Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt have found that anti-psychotic medications are being prescribed at an alarming rate for Tennessee children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD. The use of anti-psychotic drugs has more than doubled since 1996, and today children are not only being dosed with Ritalin -- a powerful narcotic drug -- but now anti-psychotic drugs to mask other symptoms related to behavioral disorders.
Every time I write about this subject, I can't help but be outraged at the fact that we are a nation dosing our children with powerful narcotics in order to alter their brain chemistry rather than teaching them how to avoid the foods that cause these behavioral disorders in the first place. We don't teach our children how to eat right, nor do we teach our parents how to teach good dietary habits to their own children. Instead, we turn our children into literal druggies by forcing them onto extremely dangerous narcotic and anti-psychotic drugs.
In this nation, there appears to be a drug for every problem out there, including undesirable behavior on the part of children. In reality, ADHD is not a behavioral disorder, nor is it some sort of mysterious chemical imbalance in the brain. It is simply the natural effect of pursuing a diet that is very high in refined carbohydrates and very low in optimum nutrition.
This dietary pattern almost perfectly describes the pattern pursued by virtually all children in the United States. They load up on high-sugar breakfast cereals, soft drinks, candy bars, sweets, cookies, and desserts, and then, just in case they don't have enough sugar in their system already, when they go to school they get rewarded with more candy and desserts, and they even have the opportunity to purchase soft drinks (see related ebook on soft drinks) and candy bars from vending machines that are actually supported and promoted by the school bureaucrats.
So on one hand, we have public schools deriving funding from the sale of soft drinks and candy that promote ADHD in children, and then on the other hand, instead of addressing this problem at its source, we have a fast-expanding collection of mental health professionals who are increasingly putting children on powerful narcotic drugs in order to mask the symptoms caused by the widespread consumption of sugars and processed foods.
The victims in all of this are, of course, the children themselves, who end up being unable to learn as well as they normally could, since their brains have been dulled by multiple prescription drugs -- and who end up going through the public school system with increased risk for obesity, diabetes and other diseases promoted by the consumption of food ingredients like white flour or refined white sugar.
And people wonder why we have such high rates of obesity, diabetes, and drug dependency in our adult population. It's not mystery -- just look at the children we're raising in this country. We're raising yet another generation of drug-addicted, chronically diseased, overweight, brain-numbed zombies -- and proudly declaring it "public education."
see
http://www.ritalindeath.com (http://www.ritalindeath.com)
BUYER BEWARE .... RITALIN KILLS
-
(http://http://ritalindeath.com/_borders/ADHD-Matt.jpg)
-
Each family should just say no
to medication therapy, if they
do not want it.
Are these people saying no?
-
On 2005-09-27 15:15:00, Anonymous wrote:
"(http://http://ritalindeath.com/_borders/ADHD-Matt.jpg)"
Matthew (pictured above) died at age 14
The death certificate says it was due to the use of Ritalin used for ADHD.
The number of Childrens' Deaths caused from ADD & ADHD drugs is staggering. Here is the death toll:
http://ritalindeath.com/ADHD-Drug-Deaths.htm (http://ritalindeath.com/ADHD-Drug-Deaths.htm)
-
On 2005-09-27 15:19:00, Anonymous wrote:
The death certificate says it was due to the use of Ritalin used for ADHD.
Show us ...
-
"
On 2005-09-27 15:19:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
The death certificate says it was due to the use of Ritalin used for ADHD.
Show us ..."
Sheesh, can't handle the truth that Ritalin kills kids, eh? Well ... let's just hope you don't have any kids of your own b/c ignorance is not a good thing when it comes to parenting.
:flame:
-
On 2005-09-27 15:18:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Each family should just say no
to medication therapy, if they
do not want it.
Are these people saying no?"
Hello? Kids can't just say no to legalized drugs shoved down their throats by their dumbass parents.
-
Today his show was about ADD,
medications or not.
Her recommended a book:
The ADD Answer
By Frank Lewis and Phil McGraw
-
http://www.additudemag.com/PDF/LivingWithADD.pdf (http://www.additudemag.com/PDF/LivingWithADD.pdf)
-
FDA Withdraws Approval for ADD Drug
WASHINGTON (AP) - The FDA has withdrawn approval for a drug used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder because it has been associated with liver problems, including death, agency officials said Monday.
The move means drug manufacturers will no longer produce generic versions of pemoline, which was developed by Abbott Laboratories and sold under the name Cylert. Abbott discontinued the drug earlier this year, but generic versions
have remained available.
ABBOTT LABORATORIES
NYSE:ABT
Updated: 10:06 ET
43.42 +0.52
FDA is not recalling the drug, instead allowing pharmacies to sell their remaining stock as doctors still using it switch patients to alternative treatments, the agency said in a statement.
The lack of a recall drew fire from the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen.
``It is reckless and insensitive to the health and lives of children and adults using this drug for the FDA and the involved drug companies to fail to institute an immediate recall of these dangerous products,'' said Drs. Sidney Wolfe and Peter Lurie, who lead the organization's Health Research Group, in a letter to the FDA.
In a statement, the FDA said it has 13 reports of liver failure resulting in transplant or death among people who took the drug, which has been available for 30 years. There are additional reports of less serious problems.
Although that is a small number, it is well above what the normal rate of such problems among the general population, the FDA said.
``FDA has concluded that the risk of liver failure with this drug outweighs the potential benefits,'' the agency statement says, noting that alternative treatments for ADD have come on the market since pemoline was introduced.
The drug acts as a stimulant to the central nervous system.
*************
The nonprofit group Public Citizen petitioned the FDA yesterday to remove Cylert -- including all generic versions of the drug -- citing an increased risk of serious liver problems and death from liver failure.
The petition says that as of May 1996, Cylert had caused 13 cases of acute liver failure, resulting in death or liver transplantation in 11 cases. The petition also says that from 1975-1996, there were 193 "adverse drug reactions involving the liver in patients younger than 20 years old."
http://my.webmd.com/content/article/102/106852.htm (http://my.webmd.com/content/article/102/106852.htm)
-
On 2005-09-27 15:18:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Each family should just say no
to medication therapy, if they
do not want it.
Are these people saying no?"
Sometimes that works. Sometimes they get threatened or charged w/ medical neglect for saying no. Most of the time they're young and illinformed (or misinformed) and they just do whatever the experts tell them to do.
Many times, something as simple and obvious as eliminating excessive sugar, dyes and additives from a kid's diet could work better than speed. But, crazy as this sounds, most people wouldn't even think to try it. If the teacher and the guidance counselor and the shrink all say the kid needs speed, why then the kid must need speed, right?
What's worse? Too often, the 'dysfunction' they're trying to treat is not a dysfunction at all. It's more like a normal, healthy (if inconvenient) response by an imature kid to being forced to behave like a 40yo professional.
...the coercive collectivist State is distinctly uninterested in the cultivation of intelligence and wisdom. This is understandable...for the State has no uses to which persons of intelligence and wisdom can be put.
--Albert Jay Nock.
-
I'm not an expert, I'll admit that.
But I do have good common sense and I have been around a while. Enough to know that something is very wrong when so many children need to be medicated. Or should I say, when so many parents and doctors believe kids should be medicated.
I don't know about any of you, but I graduated in the early 70's from high school and I don't recall kids being diagnosed as ADD, ADHD, ODD, etc. OK, kids were not perfect then. But they were kids. There were kids with problems, I will admit that. But it was in vogue to send them away to be fixed like it is today. I realize there were programs like Straight, Inc., that did exist and they were horrible. Worse than that. But I don't think there were as many programs, is what I'm trying to say. I don't think as many kids were being sent away. At least I personally never knew of any.
What I don't get is why parents feel that they aren't capable of solving their own problems with their own children. Why do so many feel they need to seek outside help when so many times they could resolve problems on their own with some love, kindness, understanding, and guidance. I think that's what kids of today are looking for. Not much to ask, really.
I still go back to the fact that parents of today are so busy dealing with their own emotion shit that they don't have much left for their kids. I could be wrong, it's just the impression I'm being left with. I'm not trying to blame it all on the parents, please don't get me wrong. Kids need to be accountable for their actions as well. I just think that many cases point back to the parents and their parenting, or lack thereof, of their children.
I'm a parent and I know that there have been times in my life when I was dealing with my own personal problems. During those times I felt I was not as attentive to the needs of my children. Lucky for me those times didn't last long and I was able to refocus on the kids again. But in so many cases that simply is not the case, such as when there is a divorce, etc.
And part of this is that drug companies are out there to make money and they'll do so at any cost. We should all know that by now. It's not a matter of thinking what the long-term effects will be on the people taking the drugs, it's a matter of thinking how much money can we make off this drug and how can we market it to be most effective.
-
From above: But it was in vogue to send them away to be fixed like it is today./////
Oooops, I meant to say "but it was NOT in vogue to ....." ::rocker::
-
ADHD (ADD has been officially dropped) is nothing more than society more narrowly defining what behavior is acceptable. That places a higher percentage children out of the acceptable bounds. They are then diagnosed.
One poster described how things used be different in the 1970s. I would like to add that less was expected of kids back then. Kindergarden was a half day and we did not learn to read until first grade. We had more recess and far less homework. Bs and Cs were good enough, after all, a C was average. It was okay to be an average kid. Now every kid is expected to be the next Steve Jobs.
I took my kid to school one Monday and the teacher was concerned because he did not have his weekend homework done. I asked her if she really expected a third-grader to do this by himself. She said, "We expect a certain level of parental involvement." I said, "So, you are giving ME homework!" I cannot imagine my parents doing homework with me.
84% of the children diagnosed as ADHD are boys. Fidgety, active, motion detectors, that were never designed to sit still at a desk for eight hours straight.
I received my son's progress report last week. All Es (excellent) and Ss (satisfactory) on the left side list (math, science, reading, etc.). On the right side under Character were all Is (needs improvement) in things like; follows directions, personal appearance, works independently, etc. I was pleased. It was perfect. He is smart and rebellious.
The best part was the teacher's comment that my son is "physically inappropriate" with other students. I asked her what that meant. I expected her to say he was hitting other kids. She told me, "He hugs his friends in the halls." WTF!?
-
Yeh, WTF!!
Just sickening.
http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.ph ... 46&forum=9 (http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=3746&forum=9)
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... rt=0#27206 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=3746&forum=9&start=0#27206)
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=40#62903 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=5804&forum=9&start=40#62903)
-
Fortunately, my son attends a private school. It is an inner-city school with a very diverse attendance and so the school and parents tend to be fairly tolerant of different cultures and attitudes. I don't think he is at risk of expulsion. We pay the bills.
-
Wow, AA. You hit some things right on. It's amazing what is expected of children nowadays, just wasn't like that in the old days.
I can remember 5th and 6th grades. I got the dreaded teacher in 5th. She was strict, later became the principal. Just when I thought I'd managed to get through it she decided to teach 6th. I got her again. I spent many a day sitting in the hallway for talking too much with friends. Wow, I wonder what they would do to me today? I wonder what kind of diagnoses they could pin on me? Back then, it was normal girl behavior, I wasn't the only one sitting in the hall.
And the boys. They were just gross most of the time. Of course I was a girl, boys had cooties back them. Seriously, most of them were obnoxious in some way, always fidgety, noisy, doing something they should not be doing. Ya, they got disciplined but they weren't taken to the school psychiatrist. They were considered normal boys. I remember one kid, Johnnie, he was quiet and always good. He never, and I mean never did anything wrong. His nose was always in a book, he always listened to the teacher, he always raised his hand and had the right answers. Guess what? Everyone thought he was really weird, including the teacher!
Parents, please let your kids be kids and stop over analyzing them. Don't let others control how you should be raising your kids. If you do it with love, respect, and kindness, I just don't think you can go wrong. It's not all that hard, really.
It's a given that kids are going to misbehave, that they are going to get into trouble, that they are going to explore their world in ways that we parents would rather they not do. But remember back when we were kids? We explored too, and most of us (not all of us, that's for sure) were not sent to a program, we weren't sent to a psychiatrist, we weren't drugged. I know some were, but nothing like today.
Every time I turn around I hear a parent say their child was just diagnosed with ADHD and now they're on Ritalin, or some other drug. I shake my head and wonder why? And if not ADHD, then it's Oppositional Defiance Disorder (ODD), or any of the other new diagnoses.
I wonder if parents are trying other things before agreeing to drugging their children?
I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the child might have food allergies? Do they know that many kids are allergic to milk, to wheat, to food coloring, and that those allergies can mimic the symptoms of ADHD and other conditions like ODD?
Do parents know that a child's environment may be making him ill? Too many antibiotics, chemicals, molds, the list goes on?
If parents would send their child to a naturopathic doctor instead of an MD, one that would actually spend time with the child to figure out what is wrong, rather than quickly concluding they have this or that condition, and dealing with the problems rather than drugging the child, I think there would be a lot less Ritalin being handed out. Of course the drug companies wouldn't like that. They're lovin' it.
-
Well, AA, I don't know how different it was really in the 70s. I was diagnosed in the 70s with ADD, too, except that it wasn't called that then, it was called hyperactivity disorder. I was put on ritalin, and then taken off, because I couldn't eat or sleep. They tried all of these other meds, too, but none of them helped. Maybe diagnosing and medicating children wasn't as widespread as it is now, but it was certainly present.
-
On 2005-10-26 00:19:00, sorry... try another castle wrote:
"Well, AA, I don't know how different it was really in the 70s. I was diagnosed in the 70s with ADD, too, except that it wasn't called that then, it was called hyperactivity disorder. I was put on ritalin, and then taken off, because I couldn't eat or sleep. They tried all of these other meds, too, but none of them helped. Maybe diagnosing and medicating children wasn't as widespread as it is now, but it was certainly present.
"
That's interesting. I'm fairly well read and never even heard of ADHD when I was a kid. We labled some kids 'hyperactive' only as a tease. I don't think I knew anyone who took meds.
I remember getting hit with a wooden paddle for talking when I was not supposed to. That was in 6th grade. One good, hard swack to the butt. It hurt, too. I thought then, and still do, that it was an excessive punishment for whispering to my neighbor. It was my first offense. There was no warning. I told my Dad about it. He knew the teacher and said the guy was an asshole, but he did not do anything about it.
-
I think what we're seeing here is some fallout from the radical cultural shifts behind the Industrial Revolution.
It all happened pretty fast, really. Over the course of just a couple of generations we went from a loose network of largely rural communities (roughly 80%) and turned that on it's head. We now have roughly 80% urban and suburban populations.
We don't do anything for ourselves anymore. I kid you not, when we lost power during Hurricane Andrew, I found out that not a single one of my dozen or so co-workers understood how a toilet works. They'd been filling up the bowl for an entire shift believing that, until the power came back on, they couldn't flush the damned thing. One girl actually wanted to page the tech guy and ask if we could use some of the generator power that was running the computers and PBX to do it.
And these were, by no means, unintelligent people. All were competent (ok, most of them) answering service operators.
I think we just got caught up in the idea a couple of generations ago that everything new is better; that experts would make all of our lives better and easier, longer, healthier and more pleasurable.
And now we're bumping up against a wall. I don't think there's really so much more over-medicating and over-diagnosing as there is more reporting of it and criticizm of it.
I can still remember when, less than 20 years ago, my very good pediatrician tried to convince me that bottle feeding was better for my baby's nutrition, better for her overall health and sooooo much easier than breastfeeding anyway. Seems astounding now, but he believed it then.
I think we're slowly coming around in the private sector, though the public sector is still bouncing off the walls. I don't think they get anywhere near enough accountability. Whatever they do, however badly they do it or however misguided their ideas, they never suffer the consequences. When their programs and plans fail, they demand (and get) more money and power.
Here's one subtopic that exemplifies what I'm saying. HeadStart.
Don't we all pretty much understand by now that little kids need personal attention from a small group of stable, caring, dedicated adults and older kids? A family or neighborhood setting, in other words. Don't we pretty much all (in the private sector, anyway) understand that the best thing in the world for a little kid is to have a parent or other caring adult at home, available all the time, aware of what's going on in the context of that particular kid's history, temprement and personality? So then, why are the child advocates screeching and screaming for more money and authority to extend schooling down to the age of 4? Don't they read the papers?
And why do we take their word for anything? Their claim to expertise is nothing but a littany of failure dating back to the beginnings of the New Deal. When will we, as a society, start to hold them accountable to at least basic common sense?
There's a little slight of mind going on here. It works like this. We all know we're good parents. When we agree to these programs and policies to better socialize, adjust and educate children, we're thinking of other people's children. You know, that massive army of horrible parents out there? What? Never seen them? They're on the news. But I've never seen many of them in the real world either.
I believe that human beings arrive on this Earth wanting to know absolutely everything, and the best thing we can do as parents is to get out of the way -- just be there to let them know what opportunities are there
-- Dorothy Werner, media liaison for the National Homeschool Association
-
And what about a program they have in Helena, Montana that's for kids as young as 4? They take kids with attachment disorder. Well, to me if a kid has some attachment disorder and can't bond with the parent, is the answer taking the kid hundreds or thousands of miles from the parent? Somehow, I'm not getting it. Maybe they know much more than I do about raising kids, but it seems if a kid and parent are having trouble bonding, what they need is local help where they can learn together. How are they going to learn to bond when they're miles apart? Maybe someone has the answer.
-
On 2005-10-26 12:48:00, Anonymous wrote:
And what about a program they have in Helena, Montana that's for kids as young as 4?
I honestly think those people must be patently insane!Religion is all bunk.
--Thomas Edison, American inventor
-
Ya, I totally agree. I tried to visit while I was in Helena but I wasn't allowed in, cuz it was after hours.
I saw kids taking in large bins but couldn't see to much else. There was a guy playing ball on the grass with two little boys. I asked him a few questions but he was really guarded. Then I asked about the age of kids there and he said 4-12. The oldest boy piped up and said "and some are 14, too." The guy quickly quieted the kids down and said they had to go in.
The whole experience left me feeling really strange, knowing that little children as young as 4 were in there, being cared for by strangers, with parents miles and miles away.
The taxi cab driver asked if I was a parent and I said no. He said he gets lots of parents coming out there to visit their kids, so he knew well where the place was.
Very sad. I can't even imagine a child that young in an institutionalized setting. I know it happens, but it bothers me deeply to think about it.
I was assured by some, well let's say people of power, that all was well there and that it was a wonderful place, a place that worked wonders for children.
Somehow I just couldn't buy into it. Especially finding they are "regulated" by NATSAP of all things, the same outfit that regulates Mission Mountain School that we read about here on Fornits. John Mercer is on their board, the owner of Mission Mountain.
-
On 2005-10-26 09:19:00, Antigen wrote:
"I think what we're seeing here is some fallout from the radical cultural shifts behind the Industrial Revolution.
It all happened pretty fast, really. Over the course of just a couple of generations we went from a loose network of largely rural communities (roughly 80%) and turned that on it's head. We now have roughly 80% urban and suburban populations.
We don't do anything for ourselves anymore. I kid you not, when we lost power during Hurricane Andrew, I found out that not a single one of my dozen or so co-workers understood how a toilet works. They'd been filling up the bowl for an entire shift believing that, until the power came back on, they couldn't flush the damned thing. One girl actually wanted to page the tech guy and ask if we could use some of the generator power that was running the computers and PBX to do it.
And these were, by no means, unintelligent people. All were competent (ok, most of them) answering service operators.
I think we just got caught up in the idea a couple of generations ago that everything new is better; that experts would make all of our lives better and easier, longer, healthier and more pleasurable.
And now we're bumping up against a wall. I don't think there's really so much more over-medicating and over-diagnosing as there is more reporting of it and criticizm of it.
I can still remember when, less than 20 years ago, my very good pediatrician tried to convince me that bottle feeding was better for my baby's nutrition, better for her overall health and sooooo much easier than breastfeeding anyway. Seems astounding now, but he believed it then.
I think we're slowly coming around in the private sector, though the public sector is still bouncing off the walls. I don't think they get anywhere near enough accountability. Whatever they do, however badly they do it or however misguided their ideas, they never suffer the consequences. When their programs and plans fail, they demand (and get) more money and power.
Here's one subtopic that exemplifies what I'm saying. HeadStart.
Don't we all pretty much understand by now that little kids need personal attention from a small group of stable, caring, dedicated adults and older kids? A family or neighborhood setting, in other words. Don't we pretty much all (in the private sector, anyway) understand that the best thing in the world for a little kid is to have a parent or other caring adult at home, available all the time, aware of what's going on in the context of that particular kid's history, temprement and personality? So then, why are the child advocates screeching and screaming for more money and authority to extend schooling down to the age of 4? Don't they read the papers?
And why do we take their word for anything? Their claim to expertise is nothing but a littany of failure dating back to the beginnings of the New Deal. When will we, as a society, start to hold them accountable to at least basic common sense?
There's a little slight of mind going on here. It works like this. We all know we're good parents. When we agree to these programs and policies to better socialize, adjust and educate children, we're thinking of other people's children. You know, that massive army of horrible parents out there? What? Never seen them? They're on the news. But I've never seen many of them in the real world either.
I believe that human beings arrive on this Earth wanting to know absolutely everything, and the best thing we can do as parents is to get out of the way -- just be there to let them know what opportunities are there
-- Dorothy Werner, media liaison for the National Homeschool Association
"
It's all about day care. They want to start kids at Headstart to save the money it would cost to send them to day care. Here in NJ day care is hard to find and can cost up to $1000.00 per month for a four-year-old.
The same is true for after-school programs, longer school days and years, and the people that are pushing for year-round school. It simply shares the day care burden to all taxpayers.
Simply put. We don't raise our own children, anymore. Institutions do. I am guilty of this. Tonight, my son had an after-school art class followed by after care before one of us (Mom or me) could pick him up at six. We are divorced and both work. We don't like it. That is the way life works.
-
At dinner this evening, with my ex-wife (a psychiatrist), she was venting about the kids on medication. She says some of these meds are amphetamines similar in chemical makeup to methamphetamine and that they cause the same form of permanent brain damage. She said, "Just wait until these kids grow up and stop taking this shit."
-
Yeah, there seems to be a growing awareness of these problems among the shrninks. Sooner or later, they'll have to realize that the dissenters are really in the majority.
We long for homes we can never have as long as we have institutions like school, television, corporation, and government in loco parentis.
John Taylor Gatto
-
Sooner or later, they'll have to realize that the dissenters are really in the majority.
Yup, you are right, eventually the 25 million people
on psych meds will realize what the dissenters are forcing on them!
That even though are are doing better, they really are not!
Without the dissenters how would the people doing better ever realize they where doing worse?
Viva La Dissenters
-
On 2005-10-26 15:32:00, Antigen wrote:
"
On 2005-10-26 12:48:00, Anonymous wrote:
And what about a program they have in Helena, Montana that's for kids as young as 4?
I honestly think those people must be patently insane!Religion is all bunk.
--Thomas Edison, American inventor
"
Yet another thing that's not as new as you think.
With all of the supposed behavior problems I had as a child, one psychiatrist recommended just that thing, a boarding-type program school for troubled kids, so I could get treatment. I was five at the time. Remember, this was the 70s.
Fortunately, my parents toured the facility, and the idea of sending me away at five devastated them so much, they couldn't bring themselves to do it, thank god.
-
Thank God your parents listened to their intuition.
-
What is the name of the program in Helena...and are you saying that the youths there as young as 4-5 are boarding students?
-
On 2005-10-27 08:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
Sooner or later, they'll have to realize that the dissenters are really in the majority.
Yup, you are right, eventually the 25 million people
on psych meds will realize what the dissenters are forcing on them!
That even though are are doing better, they really are not!
Without the dissenters how would the people doing better ever realize they where doing worse?
Viva La Dissenters"
Define 'better.' In this case, I would define 'better' as; behaving in a more narrowly defined set of expectations imposed by modern educational institutions.
Once again, keep in mind that the mechanism these drugs use is the same as methamphetamine and causes the same kind of brain damage. This brain damage never heals. Prolonged use only makes it worse. These people will have real, irreversible brain damage as adults and we will have to deal with the consequences of that.
I have talked to more than one psychiatrist that has said that ADHD is very often an excuse for bad parenting. ADHD symptoms are a subset of other mental illnesses (such as bipolar disorder). Thus, the only legitimate way to diagnose ADHD is to rule out all these other diagnosis first. Very often, this is not done and psychologists go straight to the ADHD diagnosis. Then they use referrals to a psychiatrist who can write the prescription and gets paid for it. Very often, drugs are used as the first resort, not the last.
-
What is the name of the program in Helena...and are you saying that the youths there as young as 4-5 are boarding students?
I'll look it up for you and let you know. Yes, the kids are boarders. It's supposed to be a wonderful place but I have a problem when parents feel a need to send a child as young as 4 away because they can't bond with them. Bets are most of those kids have been adopted, abused, etc. And then they're the ones who pay the price by being institutionalized. I don't care how good the place is, it's not home.
-
I guess I should follow up to my last statement. I do understand that for some children these places could be safer and better than home. How sad is that??
-
This is a NATSAP approved program. Make you all feel better now?
Intermountain Children's Home and Services
Residential Treatment Center
Helena, MT
Ages 4-11 (though the kid who was there slipped up and said there were kids older than 11 - he was quickly hushed)
http://www.natsap.org/programs_list.asp (http://www.natsap.org/programs_list.asp)
-
http://www.americandaily.com/article/10043 (http://www.americandaily.com/article/10043)
It takes a village to destroy a child
By Tom DeWeese (11/04/05)
In the old days, children were warned not to smoke because it would stunt their growth. Apparently the same warning can now be issued on Ritalin. Researchers at the University of Sydney have analyzed 29 separate studies on the subject and have concluded that there is indication that some Ritalin users may experience slow or even stunted growth.
"Parents should expect their children to lose some weight and grow more slowly for a time after starting on stimulant medication, and this should be monitored, " says pediatrician Sally Poulton of the University.
Two of the studies reviewed by Poulton and colleagues suggest that children who experience nausea and vomiting as an early side effect of Ritalin may be uniquely vulnerable to slow growth. University of Iowa psychologist John R.
Kramer, PhD, who led one of the research teams, said that this small sub group of Ritalin users ended up more than 2 inches shorter than other
Ritalin users.
Ritalin, of course, is the drug of choice give to children diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The drug is now
administered to over 10 million American children, beginning as early as four years old. Promoted by federal education policies, use of the drug increased more than 500% in the 1990s.
Yet, as usage continues to rise, Dr. Fred Baughman, a leading critic of ADHD theory, warns that there still is no valid research to prove that ADHD even exists! To date, according to Baughman, there has never been a single bit of
physical evidence to confirm the disease exists. So-called experts on the subject have refused to answer the simple question, "is ADD /ADHD a real
disease?" Medical researchers charge that ADHD does not meet the definition of a disease or syndrome or anything organic or biologic. Instead, Baughman charges, ADHD was literally invented by the American Psychiatric Association
(APA).
The explosion of new ADHD cases in the 1990s, which continues today, can be traced directly to a 1991 change in eligibility for federal education grants allowing schools to be paid $400 in annual grants for each child diagnosed with ADHD, after classifying it as a handicap.
Ritalin is known to cause cardiac arrythmia, tachycardia and hypertension. Research has proven that Ritalin can interfere with body phospholipid
chemistry (body fat), causing the accumulation of abnormal membranes visible with an electronic microscope.
Ritalin is early training to introduce children to drug abuse. Today, a black market for obtaining Ritalin without a prescription has developed on some college campuses, where some students actually crush the pills and snort them like cocaine. In fact, research has shown that children on Ritalin are three times more likely to develop a taste for cocaine.
Yet, with the money pouring into school coffers, education officials, acting like local street pushers, keep forcing it on unsuspecting, worried parents and their innocent children. Ritalin: it will stunt your child's growth; shrink their brains; cause violent mood swings and cause addiction, just to treat a disease that doesn't exist. And Americans wonder what's wrong with
public education.
-
Which habit should we elimate first
to determine why there is an increase
in ADD/ADHD.
TV
Computer games
Radio
Friends
Couches
-
On 2005-11-07 09:58:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Which habit should we elimate first
to determine why there is an increase
in ADD/ADHD.
TV
Computer games
Radio
Friends
Couches
"
Public School
Church, Temple, Mosque, etc...
-
Sex
-
On 2005-11-07 11:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Sex"
HAHA, get real, virgin. :lol:
-
http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/ ... 0513-7347r (http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID=20051116-050513-7347r)
House: Don't require Ritalin in school
By TODD ZWILLICH
WASHINGTON, Nov. 16 (UPI) -- The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a measure Wednesday banning schools from requiring students to take Ritalin or other anti-hyperactivity drugs as a condition of attending class.
The bill is aimed at what lawmakers say are anecdotal but disturbing reports of officials barring disruptive children from schools unless they use drugs to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or attention deficit
disorder.
---
Doctors often rely on teachers to identify persistently disruptive behavior in kids that could be a marker of an illness. Backers of Wednesday's bill, which passed 407-12 with one member voting "present," said the measure was
not intended to discourage such alerts or use of the drugs.
"This bill is not anti-school, anti-teacher or anti-medication," said Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., the bill's main sponsor.
"Parents should never be forced to medicate their child against their will and better judgment in order to ensure their child will receive educational services," he said.
House Education and Workforce Committee Chairman John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, said he had received "a number of complaints" from parents accusing school
officials of coercion.
Dr. Lance Clawson, a child psychiatrist based in Cabin John, Md., said that drug coercion was not a widespread problem and that the bill could have a chilling effect on teachers and schools.
"It's already illegal for schools to diagnose or treat illnesses. They can't force anyone to do it," said Clawson, who has testified in front of Congress against the legislation.
"If you put schools in the position where they can't encourage and in some ways pressure parents to get an assessment, you do the child a disservice," he told United Press International.
Gina Moran, a spokeswoman for Ritalin manufacturer Novartis, declined to comment directly on the legislation. But she said teachers often play an important role in getting ill children into treatment.
"This belongs between a parent and a physician. But sometimes the teacher is the one to first notice that something is going on with the child," she said.
A similar measure passed the House in 2003, though the Senate never passed a bill of its own.
-
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/642 ... earch.html (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420AP_WA_Mall_Shooting_Search.html)
OLYMPIA, Wash. -- The man accused of shooting six people in the Tacoma Mall purchased an assault rifle through a classified ad, and the seller is
cooperating with investigators, police say.
"Detectives also found the attention deficit drug methylphenidate -sometimes sold under the brand name Ritalin - along with marijuana paraphernalia and a box of knives in the room."
-
On 2005-11-28 12:21:00, Anonymous wrote:
"http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420AP_WA_Mall_Shooting_Search.html
OLYMPIA, Wash. -- The man accused of shooting six people in the Tacoma Mall purchased an assault rifle through a classified ad, and the seller is
cooperating with investigators, police say.
"Detectives also found the attention deficit drug methylphenidate -sometimes sold under the brand name Ritalin - along with marijuana paraphernalia and a box of knives in the room."
"
Take Ritilin + Murder = All Ritalin causes Murder
Current Ritilin users = eventual murderers
Ritilin users + pre-emptive jailings = Safety
-
Jim Carey on Ritalin
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Conten ... 9483191630 (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1134687010535&call_pageid=968867495754&col=969483191630)
"I have one coffee a day now rather than seven, because I think the world is living in a coffee-induced hyperbolic mode that is insane. It's part of the reason why our kids are on Ritalin. I don't believe there is such a thing as
Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD)....
"If somebody had given me Ritalin (as a child) I wouldn't be here. I wouldn't be where I am. Because all of those instincts would have been
squashed, you know? So I really worry about that stuff, what they're doing with kids."
-
On 2005-11-29 07:36:00, Anonymous wrote:
Ritilin users + pre-emptive jailings = Safety
Well, yeah. They do that now if the amphetamines are not legally prescribed and from a licensed pharmacy.
But I think a more reasoned, helpful approach would be to just know the facts so individuals who may decide to use speed, for whatever reasons, can properly assess the risk/benefit. "The Program" and two years will get you a vastly improved kid in *EXACTLY* the same way that "The Program" and four bucks will get you a cup of espresso at Starbucks.
Timoclea
-
Calls Come For FDA ADHD Panel Member to Step Down
Victims and Advocates who plan on testifying before the February 9th FDA Risk Management Advisory Review Panel on ADD Drugs' Link to Deaths, Heart Attacks are asking for one of it's panel members to step down due to a concern over a conflict of interest. Stephanie Crawford, an associate professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Pharmacy has been selected to sit on the advisory panel to weigh-in on ADD Drug Risks.
Parent and child advocates question Ms. Crawford's longstanding affiliation with the University of Illinois and its long history with ADHD Research. The University of Illinois receives millions of dollars in Attention Deficit
Drug Research. Both ADD and ADHD known as Attention Deficit Disorder with or without hyperactivity are subjective psychiatric labels for which there are no demonstrable objective tests. Without legitimate scientific testing
to verify the existence of these labels, researchers have resorted to using highly subjective questionnaires, surveys, or rating scales in determining a diagnosis. A widely used and controversial rating scale, the "Acter's
profile for boys (or girls)" comes from the University of Illinois and its research department. This one screening method or random survey is being unlawfully used within the public education system without the approval of any Local, State, or Federal Government to diagnose school children throughout the United States. These research screenings are being casually
passed off to parents and school personnel without full informed consent and are currently being legally challenged within Federal Courts. "Parents are simply not being told that their children are participating in research,"
says Sheila Matthews Founder of Ablechild a non-profit organization.
Ms. Crawford's own participation in ADHD Research under grant application PA-98004 Drug Abuse and ADHD in Adults and Their High Risk Offspring further demonstrates the just cause for her removal from the panel. Though the FDA has a conflict of interest screening process and waiver criteria, there are still some conflicts of interest that are simply not manageable and should
be challenged.
To have a panel member that works for this particular University that receives a tremendous amount of pharmaceutical and psychiatric financial
support to conduct research on this very same label defeats the purpose, authority, and function of the panel itself.
Ablechild is an IRS approved, nonprofit, tax-exempt, Section 501(c) (3) charitable organization, and donations are tax deductible under the provisions of the IRS Code. Ablechild and the Ablechild logo is a Trademark of Ablechild, Inc. For more information, go to http://www.ablechild.org (http://www.ablechild.org)
-
Nailed that ... you go !
-
Big Corporate Pharma hopes that American families, schools, and treatment professionals will continue to buy the medical model / behavioral disorders of childhood myths. Keeping kids on (legal) dope puts billions into the pockets of pharma executives.
-
[ This Message was edited by: LauraLee on 2006-01-22 07:05 ]
-
Is there really an epidemic of 'mental illness' or are we just experiencing the backlash of being an overfed and undernourihsed nation?
Like putting low octane in a high octane vehicle and expecting it to perform well.
http://www.just-food.com/news_detail.asp?art=63032 (http://www.just-food.com/news_detail.asp?art=63032)
UK: Intensive food production linked to mental ill-health
16 Jan 2006
Source: just-food.com
New research released today (16 January) adds to the growing body of evidence that food can have an effect upon a person's mental health and behaviour that is both immediate and lasting because of the way it affects the structure and function of the brain.
Feeding Minds, a report published by the Mental Health Foundation (MHF) and Sustain suggests that some foods damage the brain by releasing toxins or oxidants that harm healthy brain cells, while an unbalanced diet that fails to include adequate amounts of complex carbohydrates, essential fats, amino acids, vitamins and minerals and water can lead to mental ill-health.
Changing methods of farming have introduced higher levels and different types of fat into our diet. To take one example, chickens now reach their slaughter weight twice as fast as they did 30 years ago, which has changed the nutritional profile of the meat. Whereas a chicken carcass used to be 2% fat, it is now 22%. Also, the diet
fed to chickens has changed dramatically, which has reduced omega-3 fatty acids and increased omega-6 fatty acids in chicken meat.
This is significant in that the fats we eat directly affect the structure and substance of the brain cell membranes. Essential fatty
acids omega-3 and -6 make up 20% of the fat in our brain, and must be derived from our diet as the body cannot make them itself. Unequal intakes of the two different types of fat are implicated in mental health problems, with experts suggesting that the Western diet now includes too much omega-6 and insufficient omega-3.
The report makes 14 key recommendations aimed at government departments and a range of other stakeholders.
-
Nice theory except that the per capita percentages of mental illness are the same throughout every country.
Race, economic status, food intake and cultural mores have not made a difference.
Since the beginning of recorded societies mental illness has existed. There have been many opinions and theories ... but no one answer!
Perhaps you have the magical answer that would be
something an individual could follow, other than
criticism, opinion and obsession on mental illness?
-
Cardiac, Neuropsychiatric Events From ADHD Drugs To Be Discussed By Pediatric Committee
FDA's Pediatric Advisory Committee will address neuropsychiatric and cardiovascular events possibly related to attention deficit/
hyperactivity disorder medications at a March 22 meeting.
"In continuation of a prior committee discussion of adverse events for the class of methylphenidate products used to treat attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), the committee will hear and discuss neuropsychiatric adverse events possibly related to other approved ADHD medications," FDA said.
In June, the committee concluded that reports of suicidality with Johnson & Johnson's Concerta and other methylphenidate products did not constitute a new signal for concern.
In September, FDA issued a public health advisory on suicidal thinking in children and adolescents taking Lilly's Strattera for ADHD. The agency said it would not add a warning to other ADHD products pending an analysis of post-marketing adverse events from those products.
"The committee will also receive an update on efforts to better understand cardiovascular adverse events possibly related to ADHD medications," FDA noted.
FDA's Drug Safety & Risk Management Advisory Committee is meeting Feb. 9-10 to discuss studies that could be used to determine whether ADHD products increase the risk of cardiovascular events.
Shire's ADHD amphetamine product Adderall XR was suspended from the Canadian market in February 2005 due to reports of sudden death, cardiac deaths and stroke in pediatric and adult patients. The marketing authorization for the product was reinstated in August 2005 after it could not be conclusively determined that Adderall XR caused the events.
In the U.S., Adderall XR carries a warning that sudden deaths have occurred in patients with structural cardiac abnormalities.
The committee will hear pediatric adverse event reports for Adderall XR as part of its review under the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act. Adverse event reports for Abbott's Meridia (sibutramine), Bristol-Myers Squibb/Sanofi-Aventis' Avapro (irbesartan) and Genzyme's Clolar (clofarabine) will also receive review by the committee.
On March 23, FDA's Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory will review Cephalon's ADHD drug Sparlon (modafinil), currently marketed as Provigil for narcolepsy.
To watch a webcast of this meeting, click the button below. To arrange for live videoconferencing, or to order videotapes & DVDs, email FDATV@elsevier.com or call 800-627-8171.
Posted: Thursday, January 26, 2006
-
Parents Sort Through Many Mixed Messages on ADHD
USA TODAY - February 16, 2006
Parents who are concerned about the heart risks of stimulants to treat attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder may hear conflicting advice from doctors, depending on whom they consult.
Last week, an advisory panel to the Food and Drug Administration voted 8-7 to suggest adding the agency?s strongest warning label to Ritalin, Adderall and similar medications. The panel based its decision on an FDA report that found 25 children and adults had died suddenly from 1999 to 2003 after taking ADHD drugs.
Steven Nissen, an advisory committee member, says many of the 4 million people who use the drugs may not realize that they have serious side effects. "I want parents and doctors, before they prescribe amphetamines and amphetamine-like drugs to children, to think a little harder whether they need them," says Nissen, interim chairman of the Cleveland Clinic?s department of cardiovascular medicine.
Nissen suggests patients ask their doctors questions such as: "Do I really need these drugs? Am I on the lowest possible dose? Are there safer alternatives?"
The FDA typically follows the advice of its advisory committees. But Thomas Laughren, director of the FDA?s division of psychiatry products, says it would be unusual for the agency to issue a "black box" warning based on such thin evidence. He notes that the reported number of sudden deaths in patients taking stimulants is lower than the figure that experts would expect to see among people who aren?t taking the drugs. A second FDA committee, which focuses on pediatrics, will consider the drugs? safety next month, Laughren says.
Edward Hallowell, a doctor and co-author of Driven to Distraction, notes that about one in 10 of his patients stop using stimulants for ADHD because of side effects, which can include loss of appetite, abnormal heartbeats, elevated blood pressure, tics and twitches. "These meds are far from perfect," Hallowell said in an e-mail. "But they are the best medication option we have and are very safe when used correctly."
Worried patients have been calling David Goodman for several days. Goodman, an assistant professor of psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, says he sees no reason for his patients to stop taking the drugs. Goodman notes that teenagers who do not treat their ADHD face risks because such children are more likely than others to use drugs, drop out of school or get into accidents.
Lawrence Diller, author of Running on Ritalin and Should I Medicate My Child?, notes that people often rush to use medications for problems that might be addressed by changing parenting strategies, exploring special education or improving classroom management. These non-medical options can help some children avoid prescription medications and allow others to reduce their doses.
Although stimulants might seem like an easy fix, Diller says, "just because it works doesn?t make it an ethical substitute for giving kids the proper attention at home and school."
-
Space-Age Technology Claimed
as Cure for Attention Deficit
Independent, The; London (UK) - February 21, 2006
A British millionaire has announced that he may have discovered a way of curing children suffering from the worst form of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) without resorting to drugs.
Wynford Dore said yesterday that years of painstaking research have shown that, by using space-age technology normally reserved for testing astronauts returning from space, doctors may be able to rebalance the brains of those suffering from such disorders.
The treatment could help revolutionize how children in Australia - where Dore now lives - and millions of others worldwide are treated for chronic learning difficulties.
Children with ADHD are thought to have problems with the cerebellum, a part of the brain that controls the organization and direction of thought and behavior. Dore?s new theory gives rise to hopes that stimulating the dormant parts of the cerebellum, using a series of balance and eye exercises, could expand it and encourage it to work better without needing to use chemical treatment.
Dore, who originally made his money selling fire-resistant paint, said that the new findings were discovered by accident.
"These are wonderful, incredible results and yet we didn?t even try and do this," he said at a press conference in Sydney. "By accident, we stumbled on something that could have the most dramatic effect on individuals? lives."
The battle against ADHD became something of a personal crusade for Dore after his daughter tried to commit suicide because of her chronic learning difficulties. But the new treatment does not come cheap. The therapy costs pounds 1,700 and takes up to 15 months to complete.
As many as one in every 20 children suffers from some form of attention disorder and the problem, scientists believe, has dramatically increased over the past 50 years.
Statistically, boys are three times more likely to suffer from the condition. ADHD is usually treated by a group of drugs known as psychostimulants which, while effective, can have unpleasant side effects.
-
I asked a few 20something college students what were the most popular mind altering substances used on campus. In order of preference: alcohol, prescription Rx (psych/pain), then pot.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cct ... 997536.htm (http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/nation/13997536.htm)
Study finds 7 million misuse ADHD drugs to aid performance
By Shankar Vedantam
WASHINGTON POST
WASHINGTON - More than 7 million Americans are estimated to have misused stimulant drugs meant to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and substantial numbers of teenagers and young adults appear to show signs of addiction, according to a comprehensive national analysis tracking such abuse.
The statistics are striking because many young people are using these drugs recreationally or to boost academic and professional performance, doctors say.
Although the drugs may allow people to stay awake longer and finish work faster, scientists who published a new study concluded that about 1.6
million teenagers and young adults had misused these stimulants during a 12-month period and that 75,000 showed signs of addiction.
The study published online in February in the journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence culled data from a 2002 national survey of about 67,000
households.
The data paint a concrete and sobering picture of what many experts have worried about for years and present ethical and medical challenges for a
country where mental performance is highly valued and where the number of prescriptions for these drugs has doubled every five years, said Nora
Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
"We live in a highly competitive society, and you want to get the top grades and you know your colleagues are taking stimulants and you feel pressured," she said. "Yes, you are going to study better in the middle of the night if you take one of these medications. The problem is a certain percentage of people become addicted to them, and some have toxic effects."
Volkow said it was impossible to disentangle the skyrocketing prescriptions of drugs for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder from the risks of
diversion and abuse.
"As a child, you have multiple friends who are being treated with stimulant medications," she said. "You get the sense that these are good."
Studies have shown that the drugs are highly effective, especially among children, and also that they reduce the risk of substance abuse among those correctly diagnosed with the psychiatric disorder, which is characterized by
inattention and unruly behavior. Untreated ADHD has also been associated with conduct and academic problems.
At the same time, there have been growing concerns that the drugs are overprescribed. A Food and Drug Administration panel last month warned that the medications carried risks of rare, but serious, cardiovascular problems, and it recommended the agency place serious "black box" warnings on the drugs as a way to restrain spiraling prescriptions.
Lawrence Diller, a pediatrician in Walnut Creek, who prescribes the drugs but is worried about their overuse, said the new study showed the real
health concerns are with diversion and abuse, not with rare side effects.
"Seventy-five thousand addicts to prescription stimulants is much more troublesome than the 100 to 200 adults who have strokes," he said. :eek:
The study found that men and women were equally likely to be misusing the drugs, but women seemed to be at greater risk of dependence -- characterized by a lack of control, physical need and growing tolerance for the drug -- while men seemed to be at greater risk of abuse, in which the medication was used in dangerous situations, said lead author Larry Kroutil, who studies
health behavior and education at RTI International, a nonprofit research group.
To obtain their findings, Kroutil and a team of researchers culled data from a 2002 national survey conducted by the federal government's Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. H. Westley Clark, director of
SAMHSA's Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, said the 2002 data were obtained through face-to-face interviews. RTI has not yet culled data from
subsequent years regarding the misuse of ADHD drugs.
Since then, prescription rates and the popularity of various drugs have changed, and Kroutil said continuing research is needed to track the
phenomenon. Clark noted that data from 2003 suggested the problem of stimulant misuse was greater among adults 18 to 25 years old than among
teenagers.
The RTI study was paid for by Eli Lilly and Co., which makes the nonstimulant ADHD drug Strattera. Although nonstimulant treatments such as Strattera were an option for ADHD patients, they were often not as potent as stimulant drugs, Volkow said.
Both Volkow and Scott Kollins, who heads Duke University's ADHD program, said the full range of ADHD drugs is a valuable tool. But Kollins said the study brought home what he has seen anecdotally: A colleague who visited his
college-age son's fraternity was mobbed by requests for Adderall prescriptions by young men seeking to boost academic performance.
"If I took Ritalin, I would probably stay up longer and write my grants faster," Kollins said. But besides the fact that he did not think this is
right, Kollins said the rare side effects highlighted by the FDA panel meant people using the drugs for nonmedical purposes were placing themselves at risk for those adverse events.
Volkow was more blunt: "You are playing roulette," she said. "If you get addicted, you will not only not get into Harvard, you will not finish high school."
-
ADHD Lawsuit
ADHD Drugs Adderall, Ritalin Lawsuit Information-
unsafe ADHD Drugs Put 2 Million Children at Risk
Attention Defecit Hyperactivity Disorder Drugs May Cause Sudden Cardiac Death The Food and Drug Administration has received reports that ADHD drugs like Adderall XR (Amphetamine-Dextroamphetamine) and Ritalin (Methylphenidate) may be linked to sudden death, strokes, heart attacks, and hypertension in children and adults.
In Canada, Adderall XR was pulled from the market for six months in response to 20 sudden deaths and 12 strokes in adults and children using the drug. In February of 2006, the FDA reported 51 fatalities in patients using ADHD drugs.
If your child takes Adderall XR or Ritalin to treat symptoms of ADHD, I want you to be concerned about possible deadly side effects of these drugs. You trust these drugs to help your child feel better, but the risks might outweigh the rewards.
Children deserve nothing less than total protection from harm. Children on ADHD drugs should never have to worry about heart attacks and strokes, but now questions about the safety of these drugs need to be on every parents' mind.
Arm yourself with information. If your child has actually suffered from a heart attack, stroke, or other cardiovascular event, tell the lawyers at Weitz & Luxenberg. Let us help you and your child fight back against irresponsible drug makers and help your child heal. To get started with a lawsuit, fill out this form.
your next step . . .
http://www.weitzlux.com/adhd/adderallri ... 56854.html (http://www.weitzlux.com/adhd/adderallritalinlawsuit/strokeheartattackdeath_156854.html)
-
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/HealthScience/050928a.asp (http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/HealthScience/050928a.asp)
Stop Medicating Your ADHD Child
By Darla Sitton
CBN News Producer
CBN.com - (CBN News) Today, there are millions of children diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD -- kids who are
hyperactive, or unable to concentrate.
Most of the treatment has focused on giving kids stimulant drugs like Ritalin. But there are concerns about the long-term side-effects of those
drugs.
And there is also a growing movement to get away from drugs. Brain researcher Russell Blaylock says ADHD drugs can lead to brain diseases later
in life.
He says, "The big question (is), are we producing a lot of children that, when they become 40 and 50 years old, they're going to end up with
Parkinson's disease?"
Blaylock recommends nutrition as a better alternative to treating ADHD.
Physician Don Colbert agrees. He has written a booklet on overcoming Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and hyperactivity naturally.
Another key, these two doctors say, is to let an abundance of fruits and vegetables crowd out the junk food from a kid's diet.
Blaylock says it is a difficult initial task to gather the good foods and supplements and avoid all the bad foods, but it is well worth it for the
long term -- for the whole family.
And, he says that every child, as well as adults, whether ADHD or not, should avoid a range of food additives that are toxic to the brain. The
technical name for these toxins is excitotoxins - the title of one of Blaylock's books.
Excitotoxins cause nerve cells to be hyper, damaged, or they may even kill brain cells. Although often called MSG or glutamate, dozens of food additives have these toxins.
And those additives have stealth names that hide their toxicity, such as aspartame, flavoring, hydrolyzed protein, broth, and soy protein isolate.
In practice, that means avoiding the majority of grocery items such as box mixes, prepared soups, flavored chips, and canned tuna.
But healthy choices, such as canned tuna that has only tuna and water, or another that has the ingredients tuna, olive oil, and salt.
"ADHD kids, in particular, when they're exposed to monosodium glutamate or one of the excitotoxins in food, it really throws them out of kilter -- they become excessively hyperactive," Blaylock explained.
A related no-no for the ADHD brain is sugar. Sugar, strangely enough, can actually bring on abnormally low sugar levels in the blood. And that
increases glutamate release in the brain, yet another excitotoxic cause of hyperactivity.
Kids would do better to eat fresh fruit like apples - they are sweet, but they carry many nutrients, especially in the skins.
But you should be cautious of buying just any apples. Organic apples may be best because regular apples are often high in brain-harming pesticides.
Plus, Blaylock warns, it is best to avoid fruit in juice form because it can cause low blood sugar, and thus increase excitotoxins in the brain.
On the positive side, multivitamins with minerals are important for normal brain function. Kids' varieties should include iron, which is essential for brain growth and development.
And indeed, there are other brain-boosting minerals as well -- zinc and magnesium -- whether from multivitamins, individual supplements or food.
"Magnesium is really important in brain function," Colbert said. "Again, magnesium comes mainly from seeds and nuts. About 75 percent of the population is low in magnesium intake."
But there are minerals that interfere with normal brain function, and parents need to consider avoiding these toxins:
- Tap water often has aluminum added by water treatment facilities
- Many vaccines contain both aluminum and mercury
http://www.mercola.com/2006/mar/21/cdc_ ... ccines.htm (http://www.mercola.com/2006/mar/21/cdc_fights_mercury_removal_in_vaccines.htm)
--Flu shots high in mercury--
- Dental fillings known as amalgams contain mercury.
Again, on the positive side, probably the most basic brain supplement of all, one that kids (and adults) should be taking-are fish oils that feed the brain like no other substance. Fish oils contain omega-3 fats.
Recognizing the importance of those fats, supplement makers are producing more and more options designed for kids. Fruit flavors like lemon and strawberry make omega-3's easier to consume.
The most crucial omega-3 fat is called DHA. Some products concentrate the DHA to make the fish oil even more powerful for kids' brains.
"People who consume more EPA, but particularly DHA, have a reduced risk of Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, macular degeneration -- these
nerve disorders where they need that fat to make the nerves work," said nutrition analyst Bill Sardi.
For helping prevent ADHD in the first place, Blaylock says pregnant and nursing women should take omega-3s and avoid excitotoxins.
Blaylock said, "The brain undergoes rapid growth in the last trimester of pregnancy, all the way to age two. That's where 80 percent of all brain
growth occurs. If they're exposed to these products, it severely interferes with the formation of these brain pathways."
Omega-3 oils are critical during this period, because the DHA provides the raw ingredients of the brain, and it blocks excitotoxins.
So what overall strategy should parents use? Blaylock says a cold turkey approach to junk foods is best, otherwise, you continue to stimulate kids' appetites for addictive tastes.
But Colbert suggests that parents use a gradual approach, at least for a portion of their strategies.
"It's taking these children and going through the withdrawals -- the sugar withdrawals, the caffeine withdrawals, the video game withdrawals -- it's really tough," Colbert admitted. "So that's why they have to get a plan, they have to do it maybe as a group. Many of these parents will have to get together and start weaning them off it slowly, so they don't crash them."
And a gradual weaning from medication can be accompanied by introducing dietary changes -- dietary changes that mean better brain health for the entire family.
-
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/15 ... drine.html (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/1500AP_FDA_Dexedrine.html)
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
ADHD drugs to have stronger warning
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON -- The Food and Drug Administration on Monday announced changes to the labels for Dexedrine, an amphetamine used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and narcolepsy, to warn of possible heart problems it may cause.
There have been reports of sudden death caused by stimulant treatment in children and adolescents with serious heart problems, the FDA said. The new warning labels will reflect that information.
Earlier this month, Dexedrine manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline advised health care professionals of changes to the drug's labeling. "Sudden deaths, strokes and myocardial infarction have been reported in adults taking stimulant drugs at usual doses for ADHD," the company warned.
The new labels also warn that pre-existing psychotic disorders, such as bipolar illness, may be exacerbated. The advisory also said that new psychiatric symptoms, such as hallucinations or delusional thinking, may emerge.
-
http://us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ym/us/Sho ... &uid=31251 (http://us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ym/us/ShowLetter?box=Inbox&login=1&uid=31251)
Dear Reader,
What are the symptoms of being a preschooler? Parents need to be on the alert for these six warning signs that their child is being childlike:
A tendency to color outside the lines
A desire to sing favorite songs over and over and over again
Refusal to mask grumpiness after naps
Sometimes "unable" to hear parents speaking
Organizationally challenged
No hesitation to pout, cry, or scream in public places
If you notice any of these symptoms (sometimes all within the same hour) then you have a typical preschooler. But don't worry. All these symptoms can be easily smoothed over, creating a sort of permanent "time out"...as long as you're okay with giving your three-year-old a powerful prescription drug.
--------------------------------------------
Don't make me stop this car
--------------------------------------------
I don't know what's more disturbing; the fact that Columbia University recently conducted a Ritalin study on 300 children aged three to five, or the fact that so many parents were willing to allow their preschoolers to be medicated.
Ritalin, of course, is the attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) drug that's been approved by the FDA for use in children age six and above.
But why wait until a child is six? Ask any parent: Ages three through five are often just as challenging as the terrible twos. So, gee, wouldn't it be nice to just pop a pill in your little tyke and undo all the tantrums, crying jags, and incessant demands?
Half of the kids in the Columbia study were given low doses of Ritalin and half received a placebo. In the November 2006 issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the authors write that Ritalin "produced significant reductions on ADHD symptom scales in preschoolers compared to placebo."
Such as it is, that's the good news.
--------------------------------------------
Safety net
--------------------------------------------
Now for the bad news, which is all about adverse events (AE). The study authors note: "Thirty percent of parents spontaneously reported moderate to severe AEs in all study phases after baseline. These included emotional outbursts, difficulty falling asleep, repetitive behaviors/thoughts, appetite decrease, and irritability."
Arguably, the most unsettling item on this list is "difficulty falling asleep." Have you ever known a three-year-old with insomnia?
But here's the kicker. Some media outlets actually portrayed the results as safe! Here are headlines from two different sources:
"Ritalin Safe for Hyperactive Preschoolers"
"Popular ADHD drug Ritalin safe and effective for pre-schoolers"
What are they thinking? Nearly ONE THIRD of the medicated kids had adverse events. How can anyone interpret that as safe?
Eleven percent of the children in the medication group were pulled out of the study because of unfavorable side effects. I wonder...if we checked with the parents of those kids, do you suppose they would describe this drug as safe for a three-year-old?
-
This makes me wonder if ODD is the Adolescent eq of ADD. Afterall most teeneagers would at least have one or 2 symptoms of this "disorder", I would probably be a little dissapointed if i had a 15 year old who was not a little bit oppositional or defiant.
-
All I have to say is fuck Ritalin...
-
My son has the whole diet thing and has done for years and years, cos I knew he hd ADHD 8 years before I could get a diagnosis, he's always taken Omega supplements, his diet is very strict to cut out any of the crap that sends him beserk and he happily eats fruit until he's sick
But he still needs Ritalin, he can't cope without it, he gets really low without it because he goes on a hyper and then thinks he's thick and stupid because he can't concentrate long enough to take anything in
And his heart's fine
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLRIsK2CFDU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLRIsK2CFDU)
-
Why would u give a child a stimulant that messes up his circadian rhythm?
That leads to neuropsychiatric problems.
I traced all my behavioral problems as a kid (defiance, michief, early chronic masturbation etc.) to the fact that between birth and age 1 i suffered a traumatic brain injury caused by anoxia.
then i suffered a series of concussions between age 4 and 7.
result: insomnia.
My mother's method of treating my behavioral problems: idle threats to be sent to a treatment centre for mentally challenged people, a centre that was closed down long after stories about the abuse of children who were sent there surfaced.
Thanks Mom for doing nothing: you saved me from drugs.
Even so my insomnia never abated. It's been about 6 month since I managed to get it under control alone by myself.
I even had disability benefits now.
But what if things were controlled at age 10?
Would I be more successful (but still dysfunctional aka vanilla aka "just like everyone else")?
Would I have begat kids to send to CEDU-like TBS's if I felt they weren't adapting to vanilla society, that they were too kinky for their own good, experimenting with drugs and premarital sex before 18?
So in a way I am thankful I delayed things as much as possible.
Fuck "normal." That's ruining Western society. Its vanilla qualities are symptoms of dysfunction.
"Abnormal" behavior actually is more normal and natural, though it tends to harm more than help without structure.
Maybe all those kinky people in the closet are more sane than vanilla society is.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/15/us/15 ... ref=slogin (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/15/us/15bipolar.html?_r=1&oref=slogin)
Debate Over Children and Psychiatric Drugs
Gary Higgins/Associated Press
Michael and Carolyn Riley were arraigned last week on charges related to the death of a daughter.
By BENEDICT CAREY
Published: February 15, 2007
Early on the morning of Dec. 13, police officers responding to a 911 call arrived at a house in Hull, Mass., a seaside town near Boston, and found a 4-year-old girl on the floor of her parents' bedroom, dead.
She was lying on her side, in a pink diaper, the police said, sprawled across some discarded magazines and a stuffed brown bear.
Last week, prosecutors in Plymouth County charged the parents, Michael and Carolyn Riley, with deliberately poisoning their daughter Rebecca by giving her overdoses of prescription drugs to sedate her.
The police said the girl had been taking a potent cocktail of psychiatric drugs since age 2, when she was given a diagnosis of attention deficit disorder and bipolar disorder, which is characterized by mood swings. :o :rofl:
The parents have pleaded not guilty, with their lawyers questioning whether the child should have been prescribed such powerful drugs. :question:
The case has shaken a region known for the excellence of its social and medical services. The director of the state's Department of Social Services has had to defend his agency, which had been investigating the case before the girl's death.
The girl's treating psychiatrist has taken a voluntary, paid leave until the case is resolved. And New Englanders are raising questions that are now hotly debated within psychiatry, and which have broad implications for how young children like Rebecca Riley are cared for.
Tufts-New England Medical Center, where the child was treated, released a statement supporting its doctor and calling the care "appropriate and within responsible professional standards."
Indeed, the practice of aggressive drug treatment for young children labeled bipolar has become common across the country. In just the last decade, the rate of bipolar diagnosis in children under 13 has increased almost sevenfold, according to a study based on hospital discharge records. And a typical treatment includes multiple medications.
Rebecca was taking Seroquel, an antipsychotic drug; Depakote, an equally powerful mood medication; and Clonidine, a blood pressure drug often prescribed to calm children.
This is INSANE. She was TWO years old. Someone needs to hang for this. :flame:
The rising rates of diagnosis and medication use strike some doctors and advocates for patients as a dangerous fad that exposes ever-younger children to powerful drugs. Antipsychotics like Seroquel or Risperdal, which are commonly prescribed for bipolar disorder, can cause weight gain and changes in blood sugar - risk factors for diabetes.
Some child psychiatrists say bipolar disorder has become an all-purpose label for aggression.
"Bipolar is absolutely being overdiagnosed in children, and the major downside is that people then think they have a solution and are not amenable to listening to alternatives," which may not include drugs, said Dr. Gabrielle Carlson, a professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at Stony Brook University School of Medicine on Long Island.
Paraphrasing H. L. Mencken, Dr. Carlson added, "Every serious problem has an easy solution that is usually wrong."
Others disagree, insisting that increased awareness of bipolar disorder and use of some medications has benefited many children.
"The first thing to say is that the world does not see the kids we see; these are very difficult patients," said Dr. John T. Walkup, a child and adolescent psychiatrist at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Dr. Walkup said that when drug treatment was done right, it could turn around the life of a child with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder.
Dr. Jean Frazier, director of child psychopharmacology at Cambridge Health Alliance and an associate professor at Harvard, said that up to three-quarters of children who exhibit bipolar symptoms become suicidal, and that it is important to treat the problem as early as possible.
"We're talking about a serious illness with high morbidity, and mortality," Dr. Frazier said, "and for some of these children the medications can be life-giving."
Still, most child psychiatrists agree that there are still questions about applying the diagnosis to very young children. Recent research has found that most children who receive the diagnosis are emotionally explosive but do not go on to develop the classic features of the disorder, like euphoria. They are far more likely to become depressed.
And many therapists have found that some patients referred to them for bipolar disorder are actually suffering from something else.
"Most of the patients I see who have been misdiagnosed have been told they have bipolar disorder," said Dr. Bessel van der Kolk, a professor of psychiatry at Boston University who runs a trauma clinic.
"The diagnosis is made with no understanding of the context of their life," Dr. van der Kolk said. "Then they're put on these devastating medications and condemned to a life as a psychiatry patient."
Details about what happened to Rebecca are still emerging. A relative of her mother, Carolyn Riley, 32, told the police that Rebecca seemed "sleepy and drugged" most days, according to the charging documents.
One preschool teacher said that at about 2 p.m. every day the girl came to life, "as if the medication Rebecca was on was wearing off," according to the documents.
Defense lawyers are also focusing on the question of medication. "What I want to know," said John Darrell, a lawyer for Mr. Riley, "is how in the world you diagnose a 2-year-old and give her these strong medicines that are not approved for children."
A lawyer for Rebecca's psychiatrist, Dr. Kayoko Kifuji of Tufts-New England Medical Center, did not return calls seeking comment.
Some experts say the temptation to medicate can be powerful.
"Parents very often want a quick fix," Dr. Carlson said, "and doctors rarely have much time [don't MAKE time] to spend with them, and the great appeal of prescribing a medication is that it's simple.
"To me one of the miracle of children's brains is that we don't see more harm from these treatments."
Katie Zezima contributed reporting from Boston.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.
-
I am a fully grown adult and have taken some of these meds in this article and they were WAY too strong and debilitating for me, and I was on the minimum sized dose. I cant even imagine what that shit does to a two year old. The psychiatrist be the one charged with poisoning. Did the parents just give the child the prescribed dose? If so, the doctor should be held responsible I think. If they were lazy child abusing parents, pill feeding their kid ten times what they should have been, then yeah, they should be charged. After reading the article I was not clear on what more accurately describes the situation.
-
Those posters who"love ritalin" are the fakest posters Ive ever seen.
"hello. yes. I just happened to come accross this obscure forum for gulug survivors. I like to go to random forums for things I have no experience with. I also frequent forums on whaling nd the best way to remove "cyns" a celuloid that can irritate your skin if you spend to much time using ballons as an alternative to regular industry grade rubber to experiment with velocity.
Once there I seek out threads on the use of ritlan and post about my fantastic experience with it"
Kelly
-
And what about a program they have in Helena, Montana that's for kids as young as 4? They take kids with attachment disorder. Well, to me if a kid has some attachment disorder and can't bond with the parent, is the answer taking the kid hundreds or thousands of miles from the parent? Somehow, I'm not getting it. Maybe they know much more than I do about raising kids, but it seems if a kid and parent are having trouble bonding, what they need is local help where they can learn together. How are they going to learn to bond when they're miles apart? Maybe someone has the answer.
I think its pretty clear who has the "attatchment disorder" there.
Any kid who cant bond with someone who clearly has no regard for their child is a very sane and mature 4 year old. Poor thing
-
http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/breggin.html (http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/breggin.html)
-
:bump:
-
i have to say from presonal expreanace Ritalin and addarol can "take the edge off" for me any and make it MUCH easyer to function in a class room
thats not say i have to have it or i cant at all i can it just take much more work on top of what im suposed to be learning
this is not to say that ADD and ADHD are over diganosed they are imo but for us that have it what ever you want to call it it takes extra work to keep focused
i can do this now and mind you im 27 now when i was 8 not a chance the skills i have basicly taught my self can only be had with time and the will to better ones self
no program or drug can do that if the person doesnt want to in the first place
now the question is does the end justify the means? for some yes depends on how bad it is for that person and how well they can cope on there own for younger kids that had no copping skills yet some kind of drug may be needed till they can develope the skills and slowly take the kid off the drug
some thing i see here are people pull there kids off durgs cold turkey which can be just as bad as taking the drug SNRI's for one is really bad idea to stop cold like that
now i did take Ritalin from about 8 to 12 with no gaps and then after that when on and off and later tryed all kinds of cocktails of stuff in highschool and i do have wonder how much of what happend later were side effects my history much more complex so who knows but still was its amped from the ritalin? who knows
im all for trying any thing that COULD help with in limits any way i have been in 3 programs more if count the Maryland Public Schools Special Ed system
since i was in 3rd grade
i still think SUSE did some thing good for me since after that i had less incidents the following year in highschool
the other places not so much
since high school i have tried all kinds of drugs none have done any thing for me
lt;dr
what works for some may not for others
do your homework befor going on any meds
weight the risks out and ask is it worth it