The NIMH Pharmaceutical Advocacy or Scientific Research?

"Whenever a doctor cannot do good, he must be kept from doing harm."  Hippocrates

via Holistic Recovery from Schizophrenia, NIMH table spreads cheer at NAMI convention 

an excerpt:

"Or, this is what your government wants you to believe about mental illness.

The NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) invites you to visit our table at the NAMI 2011 Annual Convention

Chicago, IL July 6-9, 2011
Exhibit Booth 106 – Southeast Exhibit Hall
Location: Chicago Hilton
720 S. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL60605  Now available to view on the NIMH website:

Brain Basics

"A self-guided education module that uses images and animation to show how the brain works, how mental illnesses are disorders of the brain, and ongoing research that helps us better understand and treat disorders."

It is less than honest or ethical for the NIMH to authoritatively state that,  "mental illnesses are disorders of the brain."   The fact that this misstatement comes from the agency entrusted to research and disseminate accurate information about psychiatric diagnoses and treatments, is totally unacceptable and irresponsible.  The statement lacks scientific accuracy, it is simply a hypothesis; that to date, has not been validated by a single study.  To me, coming from the NIMH, the statement is indicative that this agency's scientific mission and ethical duty to the American people is not understood by it's leadership.  It is probable that the NIMH has leadership that is biased due to the conflicts of interest that permeate the membership of the American Psychiatric Association and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.   The continued focus on a potential biological cause/s of emotional and behavioral symptoms of distress, is troubling; with the potential deleterious effects of the biological treatments, and the significant treatment failures experienced by a statistically significant percentage of those treated.  It seems to me that a more balanced approach of scientific inquiry would be prudent.

Specifically, the study of potential social, economic, political and environmental causes, triggers and contributing factors which cause  and or exacerbate psychiatric symptoms.  This would potentially lead to the identification of treatments and services that would effectively ameliorate other contributory and causal factors of distress. Environmental causal and contributory factors should not be given less attention than biological research.    

The myopic focus and inexplicable devotion to biological explanations and treatments of emotional and behavioral symptoms is not supported by the research conducted thus far.  In my experience, the bio-disease psychiatric paradigm  minimizes or denies altogether the relevance of the subjective experiences of those in distress; exaggerates the benefits of chemically treating symptoms; and alarmingly, minimizes the serious risks of using drugs.  People who can not tolerate the drugs, or who complain about the effects of the drugs themselves, and/or the abusive nature of the treatment, are labeled as having a lack of insight; perceived to be so "mentally ill" they don't know what's good for them!  In my son's case, known effects the drugs were minimized, ignored altogether, or worse yet, attributed to progression of his so-called "brain disease."  

Deception about the nature and validity of psychiatric diagnoses, the subjugation of the people who have them, the deleterious effects of the treatments used, the coercion of patients and family members, all of this is done to gain "treatment compliance." How is this ethically justifiable? It is based on subterfuge and fraud.  The biological focus minimizes the benefits of the cognitive/behavioral, social/educational/vocational treatments and services which are Evidenced-Based and do not cause diabetes, heart disease, obesity, sexual dysfunction, or brain damage.  Conversely, the biological paradigm dismisses or minimizes the impact of social, environmental, and subjective experiences which precipitate the patient's difficulties; even factors which can be clearly seen as having caused or worsened their symptoms!  Are we to pretend that these supposed "brain diseases" and the symptoms used to diagnose them, develop in a biological vacuum and bear no relationship to the person's life experiences?

The brain disease/disorder theory advocating use of the drugs as a first line treatment is not Evidence Based.  Practice parameters are based on subjective opinions and consensus, and are not always supported by clinical research, have become "Standard Practices."  Psychotropic drugs have become the first line of treatment for every single psychiatric diagnosis, in spite of the fact that clinical drug trial results do not empirically support using the drugs in this manner. Using drugs which are potentially disabling and fatal; without full disclosure of the potential risks  prior to prescribing them, in effect, is assault and battery. The biological approach of treating symptoms of emotional distress and behavioral dysfunction as if they are biological diseases or chemical imbalances, has proceeded without ever validating the brain disease hypothesis!    

The drugs used to treat psychiatric diagnoses have been pushed in spite of the lack of evidence; not because they were supported by the evidence. The NIMH is well aware of the results for CATIE, TEOSS and Paxil 329 drug trials, among others.  Claiming psychiatric drugs are "Evidenced Based" treatments, when an objective analysis of the evidence does not support such a conclusion, is fraud!  It is insulting that such a claim is made by a Federal Funding agency  that does not  accurately, openly and honestly report drug trial data from clinical trials if funds; and does not accurately inform patients or the public  about identified risks and actual effectiveness rates for the drugs researched; it is criminal fraud.  

The claim that it is a medical necessity to "treat" individuals with a diagnosis with the symptom of psychosis, even against their will, effectively ensures that people will be harmed. It ensures that people will be stigmatized by a diagnosis which is purported to be caused by an  biological defect; although no disease or defect has ever been identified!  This is an obvious abuse of power and authority and is frequently coupled with coercive treatment strategies.  Mental Health practitioners who use deception, coercion, and bullying to implement treatment protocols, are practicing social control, not "medicine."  Psychiatrists and advocates claim these deceptive practices are necessary to gain "treatment compliance;" this claim does not change the nature of what is in fact being done.  Claims stated by a psychiatrist which are not supported by clinical trial data, are not medically or ethically  justifiable; they are in fact, fraudulent and unethical.   When these claims are about the nature of the conditions being "treated," drug safety and effectiveness, and are coupled with a failure to  disclose known risks, or acknowledge those who have been harmed or killed by the drugs it is criminal.  The fact that this unethical and aberrant behavior is widespread, does not make it ethical, moral, medically justifiable.  The only reason it is a Standard Practice, and therefore, technically "legal" is because it is common.       

People can and do recover from diagnoses of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and other psychiatric diagnoses: there are many who report that learning cognitive/behavioral/spiritual tools in a supportive environment helps them to do just that.  Almost universally, those who are diagnosed and functioning well without intensive psychiatric support, report having at least one person who accepts them, believes in them and encourages them; and that lowering the dosages or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs altogether, is critical to their success. 

It is not surprising that the bio-disease paradigm has not been successful; psychiatry has devolved into pseudo-science.  It is a natural consequence of the way psychiatry has "done business."  What is surprising is the lack of response from the medical professionals who treat people with the iatrogenic illnesses caused by standard psychiatric drug "treatment," particularly incidences where harm is caused and the professional is aware of the lack of Informed Consent prior to "treatment."  What is morally reprehensible is the almost universal failure of legal advocates and mainstream patient advocacy groups to assist, defend or advocate for those who are victimized; the people who are disabled and killed by psychiatric crimes; are further stigmatized by their victimization.  

"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." 
Edmund Burke