What was once an illusion is now delusion

via ScienceDaily:

Science News

Unruly Kids May Have a Mental Disorder

a couple excerpts:

"ScienceDaily (Apr. 29, 2012)  When children behave badly, it's easy to blame their parents. Sometimes, however, such behavior may be due to a mental disorder. Mental illnesses are the No. 1 cause of medical disability in youths ages 15 and older in the United States and Canada, according to the World Health Organization.

"It's also important to understand that mental illnesses are a developmental brain disorder even though they can look like behavior problems," Dr. Insel explained." read here

Insel's statement is not grounded in scientific findings, ethical medical principles or common sense. 

Thomas Insel, has been the front man for an effort to maintain the charade that psychiatry is an ethical medical specialty that treats actual diseases. Apparently, the "Stay the Course" agenda of treating emotional and behavioral difficulties children and adults experience as if the difficulties are symptoms of an unidentified "brain disease" requires no actual evidence. Without definitive evidence supporting the disease hypothesis, it isn't even a theory, let alone a scientific finding or medical certainty. Insel's statement is merely an unsubstantiated belief; a belief that belies understanding of the existent "evidence-base" and ethical medical principles. Insel is entitled to his opinions, but it is irresponsible and ethically unacceptable for him to share his opinions when being interviewed in his official capacity as the Director of National Institutes of Mental Health. The fact that his belief is shared by others who are convinced that the discovery of evidence that will vindicate their belief is right around the translational science corner, Insel's statement compounds the potential for confusion about what is and is not known about etiology of psychiatric diagnoses. Insel's lack of judgement in voicing his personal opinion, in effect, seems to confer a patina of scientific validity to a belief.

Firmly held beliefs and shared opinions are no substitute for empirical evidence; shared beliefs and opinions  do not imbue the standards used in psychiatric clinical practice with validity, safety and effectiveness. Absent the scientific evidence that is (theoretically) required in order for a diagnostic criteria and treatment protocol to be considered a valid, ethical, medical standard; mental illnesses have been declared by psychiatric decree to be caused by disease and/or defect, and treatment standards are developed using the same quasi-democratic process of consensus; becoming standards simply because they have been decreed to be standards by psychiatrists.  Psychiatry "validated" diagnostic and treatment standards with a quasi-democratic process, i.e. a vote taken by psychiatrists. If one carefully reads these standards and protocols it is apparent that empirical evidence is often not cited in support of the conclusions; empirical support is required to comply with and conform to ethical scientific and medical principles. The primary basis of psychiatric diagnoses and treatment protocols designated as standards of care for use in clinical practice is consensus; i.e. evidence of agreement. Agreement is no substitute for empirical evidence; consensus does not support or verify diagnostic and treatment validity, reliability, safety or effectiveness. Consensus cannot quantify risks to patients.  

Psychiatrists have been perpetrating fraud. Shared beliefs and opinions have been substituted for empirical evidence. Conviction that one's beliefs are valid is not empirical evidence of the validity of a hypothesis, nor is it a justification for psychiatry abusing it's medical authority or violating the trust of patients and families in the misguided notion the foundation of psychiatry's standards of care could be supported and validated by beliefs and opinions. More importantly, how does a conviction that one's beliefs and opinions are valid cause an individual, let alone virtually an entire medical specialty to justify using deceit, fraud and coercion to manipulate patients, to misinform and manipulate parents and others to be complicit in manipulating, controlling and coercing patients into being "treatment compliant?" Psychiatry has been using fraud, a crime, to implement and enforce an unethical standard of care in order to "medically treat" unidentified metaphorical diseases. This is not an ethical, medical practice obviously; nor is it done with an altuistic intent to serve a patient's best interest. Fraud is never used to benefit those who are being deceived; this fraud has been used to implement and enforce what psychiatry claims is "necessary medical treatment" for children and vulnerable adults diagnosed with mental illness for decades. Some are compelled under Court Order if they are unwilling to submit to psychiatric authority, which belies the claim that necessary medical treatment is what psychiatry provides, When did deceit, fraud, and coercion; outright criminal behavior, become acceptable methods to use in the practice of medicine?

The fraudulent claim is used in standard clinical practice to coerce patients and parents of children who are patients into believing there is a disease which requires psychotropic drugs to treat it. It is a fraudulent claim meant to convince patients and parents of children, of the necessity for "treatment compliance." It is used in order to perpetrate fraud.  A claim that is not based on facts used in the hope that if believed, it will modify a person's behavior and gain their cooperation, is by definition, a fraudulent claim, This particular claim is used specifically to convince adult patients, children, youths and their parents to comply with psychiatric treatment. People who believe the claim and comply with psychiatric treatment have, more often than not, sustained iatrogenic injuries; some have been disabled or killed by the direct adverse effects of the drug/s they were prescribed. How many patients and their families have been misled, and were never warned about the well-known adverse effects, iatrogenic injuries and diseases that are well-documented intrinsic risks of the drugs they are prescribed? 

I know from pain-filled experience that when these risks become actual injuries, psychiatrists will often claim the drugs do not cause the brain damage and other iatrogenic injuries; many will declare that even obvious iatrogenic injuries are simply symptoms of the psychiatric diagnosis itself.  I can assure you, as the mother of a victim of psychiatric abuse and torture, my agony is, at times unbearable, I know my son was intentionally victimized by dishonest, unethical psychiatrists who lied repeatedly, psychiatrists who abused their authority and power and used the disease hypothesis as an excuse to justify medical malpractice. Treatment not supported by evidence of safety and effectiveness is human experimentation; and it is an accepted practice in the standard of care used in clinical psychiatric practice. Every psychiatrist who treated my son, particularly the lead researcher for childhood schizophrenia, Jon McClellan, intentionally perpetrated fraud in their (mis)treatment of my son. A belief that my son's symptoms were evidence of an underlying disease, is not actual evidence---this now familiar metaphor is simply an intrisic part of the fraud being perpetrated by psychiatrists,  My son is neurologically and cognitively impaired; he has been victimized repeatedly in effect, he was tortured by psychiatrists who acted with impunity. Every single one of the so called doctors who (mis)treated my son knew he was a victim of horrific abuse; and every single one of them knew he had severe PTSD and Left Temporal Lobe Epilepsy as a result.

This new program that Thomas Insel is marketing, is the same old progrom.  It is certainly no way to regain lost credibility; absent ethical integrity, the psychiatric profession will continue to lose credibility for failing to be accountable for the harm psychiatric diagnosis and treatment causes. Stating this particular claim with authority when psychiatry still does not have valid and reliable diagnostic criteria, is unethical; and it is entirely irresponsible without definitive evidence an actual disease even exists.  In effect, Insel is claiming that without duplicable, reliable i.e. valid, data; that psychiatric diagnoses are in fact the result of an unidentified, and incurable pathology that has not yet been found.  This is nothing more than an attempt to use his authority and pseudo-scientific sounding terminology to continue to market the same old illusion that psychiatry is treating actual medical diseases. In truth, the drugs psychiatry uses cause diseases that psychiatrists then medically neglect; increasing the risks for iatrogenic disabilities, and decades early sudden death, which is in truth, homicide.  Insel apparently believes that psychiatrists can practice ethical patient-centered medicine without valid diagnostic criteria, and without relying on empirical evidence as the evidence-based foundation for practice parameters, treatment protocols, and standards of practice. 

Psychiatry isn't "evidence-based medicine." Without evidence, i.e. valid research data that supports and validates reliable diagnostic criteria, the treatments provided, and the standards of care used; it is evident that psychiatry does not value using sound ethical medical judgement or obtaining informed consent from patients. To some psychiatrists, these are not ethical duties performed, but affectations that are barely paid lip-service.

Primum non nocere.

What was once an illusion is now delusion.

portions of this post first published as "The illusion of psychiatry and 'Translational Science'" 4-29-2012

Ducktors Nemeroff and Insel: quacks can't be Kosher...

Ducktors Thomas Insel and Charles Nemeroff 

The investigation is OPEN.

It is a clearly a questionable decision to award a Federal Grant to a psychiatrist whose conduct has been under investigation by both the Office of Inspector General for Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice for quite some time.  It is simply unethical to award Charles Nemeroff a grant prior to the investigation being over.  That is exactly what has happened though. The investigation has been completed; but the DOJ has not announced whether it will be filing criminal charges or lettting Nemeroff off the hook. 

The grant Nemeroff was awarded is to study the neurpsychobiological risk factors for post-traumatic stress disorder. Translation: Chuck is being paid to hunt down the evidence needed to declare  Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is a neurobiological disease. ($$$ good!)

4 out of 5 psychiatrists recommend Ethic-Eze

IT'S NOT JUST FOR Ad Men any more!

Ed Silverman's article and the comment left by 1Boring Old Man are a must read.  Ed's article and 1 Boring Old Man's comment lay out the disturbing facts about how Insel purposely minimized the egregious nature of Nemeroff's unethical conduct, then helped to secure him a faculty position at another public institution of Higher Learning, the University of Miami. By all appearances, unethical behavior was dismissed or minimized.  It appears that a plan for Nemeroff to avoid the consequences that NIH and Emory had laid out for his unethical conduct was planned and executed by the Director of the National Institutes of Mental Health, Thomas Insel, and the unscrupulous Charles Nemeroff.  One doesn't have to be a Rabbi to know that Nemeroff and Insel's unethical conduct destroys altogether the delusion that ethical integrity is valued by psychiatric researchers or valued by the Director of NIMH.

Ducktors Insel and Nemeroff are not even close to Kosher...

via Pharmalot:
NIH Insists Latest Nemeroff Grant Is Kosher

By Ed Silverman // August 13th, 2012 // 9:59 am

Three months ago, US Senator Chuck Grassley demanded that the National Institutes of Health justify a recent decision to award a multi-million-dollar research grant to Charles Nemeroff, the University of Miami medical school psychiatry chair, who has been at the center of a far-reaching probe into conflicts of interest involving academic researchers and the pharmaceutical industry. The grant is for research into post-traumatic stress disorder. here 

Poor Judgment and Academic Misconduct Qualify Psychiatrists to Lead Ethics Reform and to be "Scientific Advisers"

Dennis Cook AP Images 
Thomas R. Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health, 

shown here testifying before a House subcommittee, led an effort to strengthen 

ethics rules for medical researchers yet helped a doctor known for not disclosing 

his financial ties to drug companies get a new position.

Apparently, we Americans are expected to believe that people employed at the NIMH who have exhibited seriously poor judgement and outright unethical behavior, have the capacity to develop Ethics Guidelines to correct the serious lack of oversight and accountability in federally funded academic research.  Lack of accountability is the phrase that best describes Thomas Insel, Director of NIMH, and Charles Nemeroff.  Nemeroff, one of the worst offenders discovered to date, has yet to experience any negative consequences for his unethical behavior.  Instead of being held accountable, or experiencing negative consequences, Nemeroff is, according to NIH spokesman, John T. Burklow, being "granted full eligibility for agency activities" Burklow  said, and appointed to serve on "scientific panels reviewing grant applications." 


It does not appear that either the NIH or the NIMH are taking federal administrator's, academic researcher's/federal grant recipient's dishonesty, conflicts of interests and lack ethics, seriously at all...

excerpted from The Chronicle of Higher Education:

"The Administrator, Thomas R. Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health, also encouraged the researcher, Charles B. Nemeroff, to apply for new NIH grants, even though Emory had agreed on its own to restrict Dr. Nemeroff from NIH grant eligibility for two years. The NIH also allowed Dr. Nemeroff uninterrupted eligibility to serve on NIH advisory panels that help decide who receives NIH grant money."

"Instead, the new NIH rules would require researchers only to give their universities more details of such outside payments, and require the universities to publicize both the money and their plans for mitigating its influence on science. The proposal contains no new penalties for researchers or universities that fail to comply. Past audits by the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have criticized both universities and the NIH as insufficiently attentive to the problem. The latest inspector-general report, issued in November, recommended many of the changes ultimately outlined last month by the NIH. But the inspector general also called for more vigorous overall oversight by the NIH, and watchdog groups have suggested that the actual amount of energy spent by the NIH on enforcing its new rules will represent the critical unknown element in the regulations' ultimate success."


"An NIH spokesman, John T. Burklow, answering written questions about the matter, confirmed Dr. Nemeroff's full eligibility for agency activities and said he will begin serving this coming week on two scientific panels that review NIH grant applications, his first such assignments in two years. The NIH must "treat everyone equally unless they have been 'debarred' from funding," Mr. Burklow said. 

"Mr. Burklow's response did not deal with other questions posed by The Chronicle, including a request for details of how Dr. Insel came to be named co-chairman of the NIH panel that wrote the new rules on financial conflicts of interest, and whether NIH policies should prohibit or restrict participation by researchers with a track record such as that of Dr. Nemeroff."  read  here.

hat tip:

Surviving Antidepressants

Does Francis Collins, Director of NIH know he works for the American people?

In a move very similar to the one the FDA made when it discovered that drugs approved based on phony documents and scientifically invalid results from Cetero Research;, the NIH has failed to make any changes that will benefit the America people in it's efforts at Ethics Reform. 


via: Project on Government Oversight:

By PAUL THACKER and NED FEDER

After almost four years of horrible press over medical research tainted by conflicts of interest, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) was presented with a great opportunity to make fundamental changes to their rules, increase transparency, and strengthen public trust in taxpayer-funded research.

Instead, they stepped up to the plate...assumed a power stance...and struck out.

The NIH released its final rule today, and gone are the provisions that would’ve injected some much-needed transparency into taxpayer funded research.

Here’s how they could’ve written the rule to hit a home run:

Before disbursing federal funds to an academic researcher, the university must disclose that researcher’s outside income and a plan to manage the researcher’s conflicts of interest. Both the outside income and the management plan will be posted on the NIH RePORTER website, which details other information about the grant. read the rest  National Institutes of Health New Ethics Rules: A Swing and a Miss

via Health Care Renewal: 

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Redux

                                  Revised HHS Rules for Conflict of Interest Fall Short 

a couple of excerpts from Bernard Carroll's article:

"A second failing is that the revised regulations do not close the regulatory loophole through which Charles Nemeroff strolled when he moved from Emory to the University of Miami.


"If it is left up to compromised federal bureaucrats like Thomas Insel, and institutional administrators like Pascal Goldschmidt at Miami, then nothing has changed. It's business as usual, folks."   read the entire article here.

As I understand it:
We expect the fox to guard the hen house...

after he's killed half of the hens...

Why is it that Collins and Insell (among others) do not seem to realize it is the American people that they work for?

More from POGO:

New NIH Rules on Conflicts of Interest

Putting US Troops In Harms Way: It's Not Accident or Oversight

Psychiatric Drugs Are Killing Our Troops   

It is a known, not uncommon outcome of taking psychiatric drugs for PTSD and/or other psychiatric diagnoses that the drugs cause neurological dysfunction and iatragenic illness; but, do not in fact correct any identified underlying pathology or dysfunction.  Even though the drugs are advertised as "safe and effective," this marketing claim is fraudulent as there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  Not a single study has ever been published in which it has been definitively concluded that a psychiatric diagnosis is the result of a specific pathology or disease, or neurobiological dysfunction that is responsible for causing the symptoms.  The drugs used are teratogenic;which means, the drugs can actually cause psychiatric symptoms and actual neurobiological diseases. If the etiology is unknown, mental health treatment providers should not be misleading and outright lying to patients or their loved ones. It is entirely inaccurate to state the drugs are treating 'diseases;' it is blatant fraud to state drugs treat either an illusory disease or the symptoms of the illusory disease, in order to gain "treatment compliance." It is false advertising, using propaganda to "educate" patients and the public; it is evidence of perpetrating fraud, not "practicing medicine." 

Some patients report feeling better, and do not develop chronic illness;' this is not the same thing as demonstrating in ethical clinical trials that the drugs are "safe and effective."  Psychiatry and big pharma are doing more than this, they are changing public policy, and molding public attitudes towards "the mentally ill" for the worse to justify forcing them to take deadly drugs no matter what, States have changed laws and public policy using the pharma funded "education and advocacy" campaigners and "grassroots support groups" as Lobbyists, which effects all of us.   That this is all based on pseudo-science, greed, fraud and corruption, is sickening. 


What is clear however, is the drugs do in fact cause a broad range of biological dysfunctions; and ultimately, lead to illness and death for those who take them over any length of time.   Why is this the course that has been taken?  Could it be because E. Fuller Torrey AKA the brain collector, is on the Staff of The Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences?--Torrey did NOT earn this position; like everything else in the last couple of decades (since meeting Ted Stanley) it is a position bought and paid for, by the generous Mr. Stanley and The Stanley Family Foundation, isn't it amazing how much influence and social control money can buy?   


In a little over twenty years spending a little more that $300 million on misinformation and propaganda both about "mental illness" and trauma; the psychiatric drugs used to "treat" unpleasant symptoms (and socially unacceptable behaviors) with dangerous drugs possessing very harmful effects, which are called "side effects."   Who pays?  There are the primary victims, some pay with their lives.  The survivors and those who love and take care of them, know that they were used by those driven by greed.  Psychiatric drugs prescribed robbed children, veterans and the elderly, of life, liberty, physical and cognitive abilities, and some have no idea to this day they were lied to about the drugs.  In robbing vulnerable American people of their health, and their lives;  every single American who pays taxes was also robbed.  Tax-dollars that fund the Federal Medicaid and Medicare paid out billions of  to the pharmaceutical industry in fraudulent claims when these two programs paid for 80-90% of the psychiatric drugs prescribed---How is it that even the cost of "uncovered" drugs were paid?  For decades, fraudulently billed claims, for "treatment" of "mental illness" have been inexplicably paid for psychiatric drugs---how is it this was paid for?  Who at CMS determined to pay all claims for psychiatric drugs prescribed NO matter what?.  This fraud has virtually bankrupted Our Nation's publicly funded Medicaid and Medicare systems, Social Service and Child Welfare Systems.  And a lot of people got rich by killing, maiming and defrauding Americans right here in the Good Ol'. US of A.  


Another effect of this loss of life and health is the numbers of those disabled from psychiatric diagnosis and "treatment" is adding Americans to every Federally funded disability insurance/social service payment systems at an alarming rate. SSDI and SSI, receive so many claims, there is a 2 year wait for a initial determination, some are approved after five or more years and receive benefits from the date of application, once finally approved.    The corporate charlatans, and the American Psychiatric Association working in concert have robbed children, the elderly and traumatized veterans of their lives; and defrauded the American People to do it.   In spite of enormous fines paid by the pharmaceutical industry, these crooks are continuing to conduct business as usual.  I want to know how many more lives are we going to let them take?   I would like to know when are unethical prescribers going to jail?  

Psychiatric Drug Trials Serve One Unethical Purpose

To Expand the Market and Increase Corporate Profit 

  It is Experimentation on Human Subjects.

thank you D. Bunker for reporting this...
“In 2009 there were 239 suicides within the Army, including the Reserves, 160 active duty suicides, 146 active duty deaths from drug overdoses and high-risk behavior, and 1,713 suicide attempts, says the Army’s suicide report released in July."


"More troops are dying from their own hands than in combat, says the Army report, titled “Health Promotion, Risk Reduction, and Suicide Prevention.” Thirty-six percent of the suicides were among troops who were never deployed."  


read the whole story at Psychiatry, It's a Killing:  Psychiatric Drugs are a US National Security Problem


The Russians are studying this as a "Weakness in the US Military"  No shit!?!  I wonder why?  NOT!  This is NOT something WE need to "study"  It is something WE must stop--given the scientific fraud, financial fraud, the number killed and disabled, these are obviously NOT "safe and effective" drugs; unless outcomes of death and disability are the new "recovery" offered people experiencing what is called PTSD and "Mental Illness?"


You know, that weirdo Torrey collects Human Brains in real life?  There are families who have brought lawsuits attempting to have loved ones brains returned.  Torrey and his twisted TAC or whatever he calls his  research/Brain Collector Activity.   Two of these families are suing for their loved ones brains being removed by the employee who was gifted to the King County, Washington Office of the Coroner by the Brain Collector.  Two brains were removed, and flown in a private jet to join E. Fuller Torrey's collection of Human Brains.  This freak, E. Fuller Torrey, has kept the brains of victims whose families have sought the return of.  Torrey has WAY more money behind him(thank you Mr. Stanley!) money for lawyers and employees to donate to County Coroners, who without proper authorization, and with seeming impunity, remove the entire brains of the deceased, to send on private jet to E. Fuller Torrey...  


This is only one example of the truly twisted shit this guy comes up with.  Incredibly, according to NAMI, Torrey is a Humanitarian!  That would not be MY diagnosis!  What kind of Humanitarian refuses to return the Brain of a loved one to their grieving family?  NAMI considers the Brain Collector to be THE Lead Researcher of Schizophrenia in the Nation!  He is no Humanitarian, no researcher or even a "doctor" in any real sense.   What he is doing is NOT scientific, not humane, and not "medicine" for fuck's sake!  NAMI National has given The Brain Collector Humanitarian Awards---it makes me sick!  What a truly evil thing to do, collect brains... 


Why is the mainstream press ignoring these stories anyway?  Could it be a lack of Journalism Ethics coupled with a glaring Conflict of Interest?  All of the major "News" Print and TV/Radio/Internet sources receive a nice income from direct-to-consumer advertising and marketing of psychiatric drugs, as well as from the Law firms who are suing the Pharmaceutical Industry on behalf of the victims/survivors of a number of unsafe drugs.


All too often, the psychiatric drugs which are approved by the FDA are approved on insufficient and/or fraudulently obtained or reported data and once approved for any use or population allowed to be used for any and every diagnosis or age group.   Where is the protection in that?  The FDA is not protecting the American people, it is putting them at risk.  By not regulating the use of drugs not safe for children, indeed not "safe and effective" for most adults either; many children have been disabled and have died.  By not requiring physicians and all prescribers to report adverse events, including death, to the Adverse Events data base; some important data is, purposefully not being collected.  The failure to mandate that prescribers of any and all drugs report adverse events potentially related to FDA approved drugs, protects the corrupt drug industry, unethical prescribers and the FDA.  The FDA is failing to collect the data which would quantify how "safe and efficacious" any FDA approved drug is in real world practice.  Seems criminal to me.