PLEASE READ! chemical warfare on humans - psychiatric drugs

http://www.naturalnews.com/011353.html

I don't know if anyone has shared this before, but I found it a while ago randomly. I know it's really really long, but please read the whole thing, it is SO worth it. It's quite terrifying, really...I have been on psychiatric drugs for 3 years. Currently I am taking 60mg Cymbalta (recently down from 120mg), 100mg Trazedone, 7.5mg Deplin and 50mg Benadryl for sleep.

Hey,

I disagree completely with the author with regard to the general idea that drug companies have lied to the public about the mal-effects of drugs. However, I do agree with him that the review of new drugs is inadequate. However, the only way that the review process could be adequate would be to carry-out trials of new drugs on people over an entire lifetime. Obviously, this could mean decades, when, in fact, people need drugs NOW in order to survive.

So, the biggest grey area in the pharmaceutical industry is in relation to the long-term effects of drugs (which the pharmaceutical industry cannot be 100% accurate on).

What are your own opinions? I am of the belief that people are naturally attracted to the idea of a conspiracy but, in this case, I don't believe that there is any lies/conspiracy at play.

Kevin

I also get the feeling that a lot of people are very excited at the idea of conspiracy theories and tend to run away with them. But I think he has some great points to make, especially about many psychiatric drugs causing more psychosis and mania in consumers than if they were not being treated with them. I agree that psychiatric drugs have helped many people, but I think that at the same time, there are probably a lot of people out there taking them that don't need them. I especially agree with his take on Ritalin, Adderall, and other drugs that treat ADHD. Way too many kids are on these drugs, it's normal, entirely, for a kid to be restless in a long day of sitting at school, yet way too many kids are getting mis-diagnosed with ADHD. I do not agree with the author in the idea that he has that it is only a theory that the whole premises of depression is low levels of serotonin and that bi-polar is caused by high levels of dopamine. You can't create drugs and sell them to people and have people using them SO widely spread and have it based on a theory. That's ridiculous. The bottom line is that the pharmaceutical companies NEED to be giving us more detailed information on long-term effects of drugs, which yes, you can't be totally accurate about, but maybe include previous cases of side effect occurrences.

I am agreeing with you with regard to the general theme of it being a bad thing when drugs (such as Ritalin) are prescribed to young children who are hyperactive. I mean, since when was hyperactivity such a bad thing? It's only bad becaus the parent struggles to cope with the kid; but why should the kid suffer? I also agree with you in that some drugs can potentially indice a state of psychosis in people. As I've already mentioned, the long term effects of drugs isn't known, but I am of the belief that these drugs make the brain/mind weaker, long term.

Kevin

You can't create drugs and sell them to people and have people using them SO widely spread and have it based on a theory. That's ridiculous.

Yes and no.

Science proceeds by means of theory. All advances in drugs are premised on theory.

What differentiates products in terms of effectiveness is how well the theory is supported in clinical testing. Drug companies are constrained in the claims they can make by the results of clinical drug testing.

Medical doctors who prescribe the drugs also care about the theory, and they tend to widely prescribe a drug when it repeatedly is shown to be effective with their patients. But no doctor ever wants to shrug his shoulders when asked 'Why' or 'How' a drug works. So they must understand, at a deep theoretical level, the theory behind the drugs action.

these big businesses can't be stopped.
the fda can't keep track of $#%^ and these big companies throw money and lawyers at everything.

they are reticent to spill any side-effect unless threatened. they know many side-effects, yet you must coax them into releasing their data about their own drug.

how much money will we lose? how much gain? will the general public be fooled?

You really can't "disagree" that pharmaceutical companies have misled or outright lied, there are many examples that are undeniable. It's not a matter of some wing-nut conspiracy theory, it's been shown to have happened and continues to this day. The drug companies are not required to publish all drug trial studies. They selectively publish in order to portray a favorable profile and thus get approved. Known to occur, undeniable. Known to occur that they have suppressed knowledge of harmful side effects and have later been sued successfully when they were proved to have purposefully misled the public about the safety and efficacy of a drug. Ghost written research studies are a common occurrence. Look up study 329 for a good example. Google "criticism of the FDA, criticism of NIMH" etc. (kinda lazy, don't feel like doing your homework for you ). Conspiracy is part of any big business these days unfortunately, and the pharmaceutical industry is one of the biggest industries out there. Psychiatric medications are among their top sellers. The editor of JAMA stated the she felt the pharmaceutical industry has negatively impacted every aspect of healthcare and medical education in America. I can't remember her exact quote, but it is something to that effect.

And please tell me what psychiatric drugs have been shown to be effective. SSRI's were shown to be no more effective than a sugar pill, and yet when they arrived on the scene they were touted as being just as effective as their predecessors with less side effects. Hmm, so I guess their predecessors are equally ineffective? And the WHO study showed that people in third world countries who suffer from schizophrenia have better long term outcomes than those in developed nations, due to the fact that they don't have access to anti-psychotics. So neuroleptics not only make things worse in terms of the actual disease, but you get the added benefit of tardive diskinesia. YAY!!!
Scientific theory is only that if it is predictive. It isn't theory if the model doesn't coincide with observation and isn't reproducible. And the theory isn't being questioned when the results are inconsistent, as is the case with psychiatry. And doctors often prescribe medications that don't yield results, regardless of what theory is proposed.

If you are interested in getting to know the history of psychiatric drugs in-depth without conspiracy theories attached to it, read the book Super Pills by Steven Manners.

https://www.amazon.ca/Super-Pills-Presc ... uckgo-d-20

The author isn't some sort of Youtube nut job.

"Steven Manners (Montreal), former vice president of a medical publishing company, has an insider's knowledge of the pharmaceutical industry and has contacts in all of the major companies, including Merck, Pfizer-Pharmacia and Eli Lilly. He publishes regularly in journals such as Lancet, the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry and the Canadian Pharmaceutical Association Journal as well as in Canadian Doctor, the Medical Post and Ontario Medicine. Manners has co-authored three books on medicine for physicians. "

He uses verifiable information and lists all his sources correctly. It's a real eye-opener.

Robert Whitaker's research can be found on his website now at <http://www.madinamerica.com/>. He's quoting reputable studies from the NIMH and WHO which no doubt has ruffled some feathers. Whitaker's books has a much more limited scope than Manners' too-- dealing only with psychiatric medications.