What's an emergency?

"emergency warning" issued after 2,173 deaths

In May of 2004 Washington State's preferred drug list took effect the only preferred drugs on it for long term chronic pain were methadone and morphine.  For years afterwards the rising death toll was a topic of discussion and debate at the monthly Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee meetings without any definitive corrective action being taken.


Two years and nine months after the Feb. 18, 2009 meeting of the P&;T committee, during which it was stated that the deaths due to methadone overdose were continuing to occur; it was also stated that this 'issue' had been a regular topic for 3-4 years by then.  AFTER the death toll was publicized by the Seattle Times on December 10, 2011, the State of Washington's Medicaid program announced that it was issuing an EMERGENCY WARNING---Issuing a warning after two thousand people have died, is kind of like teaching your child about fire after they have burned your house down playing with matches... 

Strictly speaking, issuing a warning years after the State P&T committee members were aware, (and after over 2,000 deaths!) is not really much of a warning...it's obvious the situation wasn't considered an EMERGENCY---it seems as if it was issued because the deaths were publicized.


here are some excerpts from that 2009 meeting

WASHINGTON STATE PHARMACY AND THERAPEUTICS COMMITTEE MEETING
February 18, 2009

"So I mean…I can’t remember if it’s sixth or third, but the bottom line is Medicaid is almost 50% of all prescription related deaths in the State of Washington and growing. And so we’re just now doing the 2007 runs where we actually load DOH’s death certificate data into our claim system, and so we’ll be able to feedback and see, you know, are we now 50+% of the deaths. And I just think, you know, this is something I’m hopeful the state could start taking on a little bit stronger, because I think this is a distinction that we don’t want, and it just keeps growing. And quite frankly, I’m at a loss of what to do.

"The issue is not just opiates. The issue is who are getting these opiates? And then this is a slide that shows the ratio…or the percent of clients who have a psychiatric dose…or psychiatric diagnoses as it relates to the deaths. And basically, it says that at less than 120 mg of morphine equivalent, you know, a little less than 60% of the people have a mental health diagnosis. What is a sad fact is as we increase the amount of morphine that goes into our clients, the more likely we’re treating also a person that has a mental health issue.

"So we are giving our most vulnerable clients in the State of Washington huge doses of narcotics, and so that’s the first face. The next face applies to substance abuse, so that the more you get in a morphine equivalent, the more likely you are to have a substance abuse issue.

"And when you consider that on top of this we’re treating some of our bi-polar clients and schizophrenic clients and other, now, children who are getting some of these other medications, including the atypical antipsychotics as well as the antidepressants…I mean, the…we just compound the issue.

"And then I think the sad fact is now we’re creeping down into the teenagers. So these are teenage deaths with narcotics that are prescribed to the teenagers who have a coroner or a death certificate data that state on a more likely than not basis that the death was related to a narcotic. (emphasis mine)

"And so what is the distribution by prescribers? Well, you can see that in over 1,000 milliequivalents per day, we have about 35 providers that prescribe in these doses.

"in the 35, it includes the University of Washington, Harborview as well as some very reputable pain specialists as well as some solo practice, ARNPs, and family practice, etc., etc.

"there’s no agreement on how high you can go, and it is a number of small providers that believe that you can go up several thousands of milligrams a day. I think our highest is up to 7,000 or 8,000 milligrams of morphine a day.

"And then again, I think methadone is an issue. I mean, we would hope that these 35 prescribers actually know about the issues with methadone and its depo effect and that small genomic class of clients who might actually have the unfortunate gene history to actually have increased amounts of this. But methadone is not our only high use, it includes hydromorphine as well as fentanyl, and so some of that fentanyl is actually even being used at nursing homes. I mean, that’s a very frequent event where fentanyl is used in lieu of multiple dosing through the day to save some nursing time. But I would stipulate that it’s all the drugs; and just eliminating methadone alone from the preferred drug list is not, I think, the solution. Next slide.

"You know, and again, when we work together…and I think Siri’s come up with a really nice in the original 320 group that were 10 or more prescriptions per month, which we found out was not 100% sensitive and specific for abuse or misuse, that when we notified the prescribers, we saw an instant 25% reduction because of the poly-prescribing issue." Jeff Thompson

"The prescriber got the client into this issue. I’m going to be really…I’m going to be firm. On the 1,000 mg, it is a prescriber issue. It’s not a client issue, because the majority of these clients are getting them from just one prescriber. Out of the 800, there’s about 200 that are getting it from more than one prescriber. So this is a prescriber issue, not a client issue. I’m sorry, these are, but I really…I think that we’ve gotten ourselves into this problem as medical professionals. It’s not the client’s problem. unnamed man

"Jeff, this is Carol Cordy. It sounds like you’ve spoken with some of these 35 prescribers personally
Jeff: Yeah.
Carol Cordy: You have?
Jeff: Yeah.
Carol Cordy: And do they…I mean do you get the sense that they don’t want to be in that position  not to be prescribing all that narcotic?
Jeff: They typically don’t see the problem.
Carol Cordy: They don’t? So there is the problem."
here the discussion about pain killers begins on pg 86

In 2010 Senator Charles Grassley asked for information on the top prescribers of pain medications and neuroleptic drugs because of the rampant illegal marketing, and Medicaid fraud. What is interesting is an email from the Governor's Office:

Why wouldn't  Washington State respond?

 Then there is this:

A top prescriber who accounted for 1-2% of the entire Rx budget but the problem is considered resolved when SHE closes her office---

via The Seattle Times

State plans emergency warning on risks of methadone

Washington state will issue a public health advisory that singles out the unique risks of methadone, a commonly prescribed pain medicine that's linked to the most accidental overdose deaths.

By Michael J. Berens and Ken Armstrong

12-21-2011

A few excerpts:

"To save money, the state steers Medicaid patients, workers' compensation recipients and state employees toward methadone, a long-acting painkiller that costs less than a dollar a dose. Since 2003, at least 2,173 people in Washington have died from unintended overdoses linked to the drug, The Times found.

"Committee Chairwoman Karen Keiser, D-Kent, became frustrated with Dr. Gary Franklin, medical director for the Department of Labor & Industries, which handles workers' compensation.

"Keiser asked Franklin — a principal defender of the state's decision to designate methadone as a preferred drug — if the painkiller is more difficult to manage than other long-acting narcotics. When Franklin responded by discussing the toll of long-acting opioids in general, Keiser said: "Dr. Franklin, answer the question about methadone."

"She later told him: "That's something I'd like to get a straight answer on. And I'm not getting a straight answer."

"Franklin told lawmakers that methadone is not at the heart of the state's struggle with painkiller overdoses. "It's dose, not a specific opioid," he said.

"Almost no one dies from a single opioid. When you look at death certificates, and I've reviewed many of these at L&I, you never see just methadone or just OxyContin or just fentanyl listed," he told the committee.

"Coroners, in fact, will not ever say on a death certificate that this death is from methadone. It is always a combination of multiple opioids plus other drugs."

"But a Seattle Times analysis of death certificates turned up 443 cases since 2003 in which methadone was the only drug listed when someone fatally overdosed. And this was using a conservative sift, excluding cases where the deceased had so much as a history of alcoholism.

emphasis mine)

"Sen. Cheryl Pflug, R-Maple Valley, told Franklin that she was troubled even by those cases in which methadone had combined with other drugs to cause a fatal overdose.

"I don't really care that the coroner isn't willing to say this was caused by methadone," she said. "If the person has a toxic level, and they were taking methadone and other drugs known to have a synergistic, respiratory depressive effect, and they quit breathing, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know we might have a problem."  State Plans Emergency Warning 12-21-2011

PHARMACY AND THERAPEUTICS COMMITTEE MEETING

February 15, 2012

a few excerpts:

"And we’re left with the background problem, which is what we had when we looked at the Oregon Medicaid study from 2007, which is that the number of people who are prescribed methadone have a much higher rate of substance abuse history and also a much higher risk of opioid death than people prescribed other types of long-acting opioids. And so to pin the cause of those deaths on methadone relative to other long-acting opioids is tricky. And in the 2007 study when they controlled for history of substance abuse there was no longer and increased risk with methadone. I would say that there is no question that this is a very high risk class" Barak Gaster

I'd like to know Mr. Gaster, if this is an accurate statement, how many were dying before??!!

"it’s interesting that when the PDL was instituted in 2004 it coincided roughly with a…the brakes being put on and the rise of methadone deaths. And so it’s hard to say that methadone being on the PDL is contributing in a significant way to the number of deaths." Really Mr. Gaster... 

"So if you remember back in August… this is Jeff Thompson. We brought to you the top 20 prescribers represent 70% of the high dose in Medicaid and we sent letters and gave them feedback reports and I personally called all 20. And they are all actively engaged in the new law. They are getting education. Some are pain specialists. Some are primary care doctors. Some are ARMPs that do refill mills or refills. And all very concerned with what’s going on and are actively engaged with us."  

Susan Rowe: "This may crossover into DUR but we’ve talked about other classes of medications that also increase respiratory depression. And so my thought is that on our agenda for this next year would be to look at some of our pain patients and how many are getting concomitant benzodiazepines, muscle relaxants and other things that put them in danger as drug combinations are used." here

What a good idea! I can't help but wonder why education about the use of prescription drugs and over the counter drugs which pose a risk when used concomitantly with opiate pain medications were not part of prescriber education already... 

via Investigate West

New Prescription Drug Law Holds Promise, but Concerns Linger

JANUARY 22, 2012
By Carol Smith
InvestigateWest

a few excerpts:

"The passage of a new law, regarded as one of the toughest in the nation, makes Washington the first state to require dosing limits for doctors and others who prescribe these medicines. The law, RCW 2876, went into effect January 2, but those who have watched the epidemic spiral out of control still see significant challenges ahead."

Lax Oversight

"A key limitation of the new law: While it gives state regulators a reason to discipline doctors, the statute does not require the state to check whether doctors or other medical professionals are breaking it.

"That’s in contrast to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, which monitors whether medical professionals with narcotic permits are following its rules. The new state program also falls short of Washington’s Medicaid program, which routinely tracks how much narcotic medication doctors hand out. Instead, the system set up by the new law relies on complaints from patients or medical professionals to trigger investigations.

"As a result, the Medical Quality Assurance Commission, which investigates doctors and other healthcare professionals, can’t say how much of a problem excessive prescribing is for Washington doctors, dentists, advanced nurse practitioners, physicians assistants and other providers licensed to prescribe these powerful medications.

"The state’s actions came after the doctor’s offices had been raided the previous year by DEA agents, an action that resulted in charges related to financial transactions the DEA indicated could be used to hide drug trafficking activity.

"Doctors and others disciplined for drug-related issues are usually given chances to go into rehab, get additional training, or pay fines. In 2009, however, Spokane-area doctor Keith L. Hindman, went to prison for health care fraud and prescribing controlled substances for non-medical purposes.

"The DEA, in contrast to the state, does carry out surprise inspections. The agency has shut down the top five prescribers in the state over the last several years, including a clinic in Vancouver, Washington.

"For his part, Thompson of Medicaid sent a letter last summer to the top 20 doctors prescribing opiates to Medicaid patients, alerting them that they’d been flagged for the volume of their prescribing.

“That doesn’t mean they are good or bad doctors,” he said. “There is no definition. However, it does say, it’s worth looking at why they are so high.” here

Jeff Thompson: 

In 2009 there were 35 prescribers that Thompson was concerned about. Between Feb. 2009 and April 2010 the five top pain drug prescribers were prosecuted. A sixth, the top neuroleptic prescriber, whom Thompson stated in his April 22, 2010 email accounted for 1-2% of the entire Medicaid Rx budget closed her office. It seems that it would be advisable to investigate and prosecute her criminal behavior, and perhaps retrieve the money defrauded from the public coffers...NO Effort was made to recoup the money defrauded from the people of Washington through the Medicaid program...   

It appears the warning letters sent were a response to Grassley's investigation. 

A strange thing about the data that Washington State sent to Senator Grassley's office: Why weren't the national provider numbers issued in 2007 used to identify the top prescribers listed?

Seeding Trials planned in an effort to validate current clinical practice

On April 27th I wrote about the Army's Surgeon General, warning against the use of neuroleptic and other psychotropic drugs to treat the symptoms of PTSD. Today, I see a link to Army launches study of PTSD Meds on the Mad in America site---I can't help but think this is a response to the Army Surgeon General's office backing away from it's long standing endorsement of using psychotropic drugs to treat PTSD. Herbert Coley, civilian chief of staff of the Army's Medical Command issued a memo citing lack of efficacy and the serious risks of using neuroleptic and other addictive neurotoxins as the reason for issuing a warning against using psychiatric drugs to treat PTSD. This current announcement was made initially at the American Psychiatric Association's meeting in Philadelphia on May 5th by Army Maj. Gary Wynn of the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research and Col. David Benedik, associate director for the Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, and reported in Air Force Times appears to be announcing a plan to conduct 'seeding trials.' Seeding Trials are drug trials conducted with the primary goal of validating 'off-label' prescribing practices, gaining FDA approval to use a drug for a different symptom, and EXPAND THE DRUG MARKET. Obviously, this is unethical, This decision announced at the APA convention should be recognized as a decision to continue serving the profit interests of the drug industry, it cannot be a decision made with the well-being and recovery of Veterans experiencing PTSD as the primary focus. I wonder if Veteran's recovery was considered at all...

I cannot help but be amazed at how openly it is being acknowledged that the drugs used 'off-label' to treat PTSD without any definitive evidence to support using the drugs this way; is in fact a Standard Practice.  Using psychiatric drugs 'off-label' is not a decision  based on objective scientific data or ethical medical standards; it is based on Standard Practices and practice parameters which were adopted in the absence of objective, empirical evidence to support or validate them; ignoring fundamental, ethical medical principles.  Specifically, the principle that treatments used in Standard Practice are supposed to be derived from valid evidence of efficacy...including a risk profile which is justified by the actual benefits achieved.  The article in the Air Force Times makes it crystal clear that the treatment of PTSD for Veterans with neurotoxic psychiatric drugs is not now, and has never been based on Scientific Evidence or sound medical judgement.  

It is Human Experimentation to use drugs or other  treatments without valid evidence of effectiveness  and safety... This means that ethical medical principles are not being used when psychiatric drugs are prescribed 'off-label.'   Psychiatric treatment using drugs "off-label" that is not based on any valid or relevant evidence ignores sound medical reasoning altogether.  Small wonder the  bio-disease paradigm is an abject failure in terms of providing ethical, effective patient-centered care. Ethical clinical care requires that treatment decisions be based on ethical medical principles.  Fundamental principles of providing ethical clinical care require a clinician's primary focus be the individual patient's best interest.  This requires an honest dialogue which is respectful and honest. A professional has a duty to fully inform the patient about the diagnosis and the treatment options, which includes doing nothing; i.e. no treatment.  Informed Consent must be obtained without coercion or fraudulent claims and informing the patient about the potential risks and the possible benefits truthfully; and includes supporting the person who makes the decision to consult others of their own choosing.  Informed Consent is obtained prior to treatment starting, and is it is not a final decision; but is supposed to be an ongoing dialogue. Consent can be withdrawn without fear of or threat of punitive action, coercion or abuse of authority.

Three sentences in the article in particular indicate that treatment of PTSD with psychiatric drugs is without scientific validity; making it experimental treatment:

1. "But little data exists on which “off-label” medications work and which don’t."  

2. "Physicians still assess their patients and treat their symptoms based on their own medical experience as well as patient history and treatment preferences." 

3. “We’re trying to advance the science to catch up with clinical practice,” Wynn said. “This effort will seek to provide clinicians with a higher level of evidence when choosing a drug.” 

Theoretically, treatments used in Standard Practice are derived from scientific evidence, e.g. BASED on empirical evidence that a drug is safe and efficacious treatment for the condition it is being prescribed for; with the data supported by subjective observation and opinion.  In the biomedical paradigm of psychiatric care, standard treatment recommendations are overly reliant upon and sometimes entirely derived from subjective opinions.  A consensus of even well-educated opinions is no substitute for scientific evidence, and pretending that it is is ethically and morally reprehensible.   Clinical treatment "standard practices" are often not supported by the evidence; in some cases, the treatment is contraindicated by the clinical trial data making it unethical and unnecessarily risky. 

Psychiatry is using a bio-medical paradigm not grounded in valid research findings

or based on ethical medical principles.

  

via Air Force Times: 

By Patricia Kime - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday May 8, 2012 16:21:49 EDT

Military and Veterans Affairs Department physicians often prescribe medication to ease the symptoms of combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder, even though only two antidepressants — Paxil and Zoloft — are approved specifically by the Food and Drug Administration to treat the disorder.

But little data exists on which “off-label” medications work and which don’t. 

The Army is hoping to change this, launching a major research initiative next year on the effectiveness of commonly prescribed medications for PTSD.

Speaking at the American Psychiatric Association meeting in Philadelphia on Monday, Army Maj. Gary Wynn of the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research and Col. David Benedik, associate director for the Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, said the service will start clinical trials next year to evaluate commonly prescribed PTSD medications such as the antidepressant Cymbalta, mirtazapine, prazosin, and atypical antipsychotics like Seroquel.

VA and the Defense Department published joint guidelines in 2010 to provide doctors with assessments of the known research on many psychiatric medications used for PTSD.

But the guidance, which recommends strongly against the use of benzodiazapines like Valium and Xanax and several other medications, is not absolute. Physicians still assess their patients and treat their symptoms based on their own medical experience as well as patient history and treatment preferences.

Often this means prescribing medications developed to treat other mental conditions.

The Army research will test commonly prescribed medications over the next several years at multiple sites with hundreds of service members and veterans.

“We’re trying to advance the science to catch up with clinical practice,” Wynn said. “This effort will seek to provide clinicians with a higher level of evidence when choosing a drug.”

Wynn and Benedik hope their efforts will lead to better treatments for PTSD in both combat veterans and civilians.

“For pharmaceuticals that show benefits in treating combat-related PTSD, the Department of Defense may work toward a new indication or change in labeling,” Wynn said.

Published results from the first trial are expected by 2016.

First-Line Pharmacological Treatment For PTSD: Developed From Insufficient Evidence

Do neuroleptics like Seroquel and Risperdal, have a valid medical purpose used "off-label"?

Champions of Change? God Bless America and Protect Her Defenders...

FYI:

This makes me fighting mad: Military continues off-label drug use

via Broken Warriors
BY BOB BREWIN 09/28/2011

This is the fifteenth story in an ongoing series.

a few excerpts:

"The U.S Central Command continues to back the use of Seroquel, a powerful antipsychotic, to treat insomnia in troops deployed to combat zones despite an expert panel's recommendation six months ago to cease the practice. The drug, known generically as quetiapine, has been linked to adverse effects, including heart failure.

In May, the Defense Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee at its semiannual meeting said that the Food and Drug Administration had not approved any drugs in the class known as atypical antipsychotics, which includes Seroquel, for treatment of insomnia. Nonetheless, CENTCOM has approved the use of Seroquel in low, 25-milligram doses to treat sleep disorders.

In minutes of that meeting signed Aug. 5 by Dr. Jonathan Woodson, assistant secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, and posted to its website the same day, the committee said, "the use of low-dose AAPs [atypical antipsychotics] should be discouraged due to the lack of supportive evidence, risk of adverse events (metabolic and cardiac) and lack of monitoring (e.g. EKG) for adverse events in theater."

The Defense Health Board, a federal advisory group chartered to provide independent advice to the secretary of Defense, recommended in a draft report last month that Defense review its current guidance on the off-label or non-FDA-approved use of drugs, including Seroquel.
The pharmacy committee urged CENTCOM to use less dangerous drugs to treat insomnia. It said, "Other drug options to treat insomnia are available on the CENTCOM formulary, which have a lower risk of adverse events than the AAPs." Researchers at Vanderbilt University and the Nashville Veterans Affairs Medical Center reported in a January 2009 New England Journal of Medicine article that patients prescribed atypical antipsychotics, including Seroquel, had a significantly higher risk of sudden death from cardiac arrhythmias and other cardiac causes than patients who did not take these medications."

"An Army doctor who declined to be identified for publication, said he found it "quite remarkable that despite clear opposition to the continued use of the antipsychotics by [Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for] Health Affairs, and the [Pharmacy and Therapeutics] Committee, CENTCOM and the services continued to defend their use, all the while without anything but weak anecdotal evidence of efficacy."  read

hat tip:
D. Bunker at Psychiatry, It's a Killing

Bunker has a whole lot more on his site check it out!

Broken Warriors Series From Next Gov

This is an ongoing series on mental health issues in the military.

In the midst of two long wars, the military is facing enormous challenges at home. In this series, Nextgov examines the mental health consequences for troops and their families after nearly a decade of repeated deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Military's drug policy threatens troops' health, doctors say

BY BOB BREWIN 01/18/2011

This is the first story in an ongoing series.

Army leaders are increasingly concerned about the growing use and abuse of prescription drugs by soldiers, but a Nextgov investigation shows a U.S. Central Command policy that allows troops a 90- or 180-day supply of highly addictive psychotropic drugs before they deploy to combat contributes to the problem.
The CENTCOM Central Nervous System 
Drug formulary includes drugs like Valium and Xanax, used to treat depression, as well as the antipsychotic Seroquel, originally developed to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, mania and depression. Although CENTCOM policy does not permit the use of Seroquel to treat deploying troops with these conditions, it does allow its use as a sleep aid, and allows deployed troops to be provided with a 180-day supply, even though the drug has been implicated in the deaths of two Marines who died in their sleep after taking large doses of the drug.
The Army endorsed Seroquel as a sleep aid in the May 2010 report of its Pain Management Task Force, which, among other things, called for a reduction in the number of prescription drugs given to troops. An appendix to that report recommended taking Seroquel in either 25- or 50-milligram doses for sleep disorder.more here.


The entire series raises some serious questions about whether we are helping or harming those who serve in the  Military who experience distress, are diagnosed with depression or have PTSD; or any other psychiatric diagnosis.

The Oath Taken By Those Who Serve In The United States Military

Federal law requires everyone who enlists or re-enlists in the 

Armed Forces of the United States 

to take the enlistment oath.

The Oath of Enlistment - US Military

The text of the oath taken by those who enlist in all branches of the Armed Forces:

.I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.^{[1] Wikipedia United States Uniformed Services Oath of Office}

^{Members of the Active Military who seek assistance for dealing with PTSD, or any other mental health issue are, like most Americans, prescribed psychotropic drugs; unlike most Americans however, once they are prescribed they are then subject to being ordered to take them as prescribed by Commanding Officers.  Even if they do not help, or cause "side effects" which are intolerable or prevent the soldier from performing their duties effectively.}

^{All officers of the seven Uniformed services of the United States take swear or affirm an oath of office upon commissioning. It differs slightly from that of the oath of enlistment that enlisted members recite when they enter the service. It is required by statute, the oath being prescribed by Section 3331, Title 5, United States Code.[1] It is traditional for officers to recite the oath upon promotion but as long as the officer's service is continuous this is not actually required.[2] One notable difference between the officer and enlisted oaths is that the oath taken by officers does not include any provision to obey orders; while enlisted personnel are bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice to obey lawful orders, officers in the service of the United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States.[3]}

<sup>The drugs used are to alleviate symptoms, the drugs do not in fact treat the conditions known as PTSD and Bipolar disorder; and are often the same drugs,since these two diagnoses have many of the same symptoms.  Bipolar disorder, was recently declared by Thomas Insel, Director of the National Institutes of Mental Health, to be the leading cause of suicide Our Veteran population. http://involuntarytransformation.blogspot.com/2011/03/scientific-standards-and-ethics-needed.html


Drugs used to "treat" Bipolar disorder are, in many cases, statistically, only slightly more effective than placebo; all of them have some very serious risks: some of these risks are "drug effects" that can be permanent and debilitating to the point of disability and death; even if one stops taking the drug!  Antidepressants can actually cause an increase in suicidal thoughts, how is this an acceptable risk for a "treatment" that is barely better than a sugar pill?!  


Many of our troops are given neuroleptics to "treat" Bipolar disorder and PTSD.  The effects of trauma experienced by Veterans who serve Our Country in combat are seldom left on the battle field; detrimental effects of trauma are problematic for many Veterans for years.  Neuroleptic drugs, at one time, were only used to treat Schizophrenia, and other types of psychosis, and do a damn poor job of "treating" the symptoms they have been used for since  first being developed in the 1950s, contrary to the propaganda of the American Psychiatric Association and the Pharmaceutical industry.    Approximately 40% of those with a diagnosis of schizophrenia do not achieve a beneficial reduction in their symptoms, but still experience the drug's "side-effects" which are debilitating and are, in reality, the direct effects of neuroleptic drugs.  The debilitating effects of neuroleptic drugs are in reality, the symptoms of drug induced iatrogenic illnesses!   Long term use of neuroleptics cause life expectancy to be reduced by an average of 25-30 years.</sup>  


 A common effect is a condition called Akasthesia, a relentless, inner restlessness which is closely associated unprovoked aggression and violent behavior.  My son has Akasthesia as a result of taking neuroleptics, and has had it for many years.  It causes him to pace for hours.  The few times he has described to me how this "inner restlessness" which fuels his need to be in perpetual motion, feels; it has horrified me.  It breaks my heart to know that this tortuous, common effect of neuroleptics is referred to as a "tolerable side-effect" by so-called "mental health professionals."   Mental health professionals inexplicably believe the tolerability of any and all "side-effects"  can be determined by "mental health professionals," without the patient's input!


For the Military to function, a strict code of discipline is required.  I understand this.  I would like to ask all Commanding Officers in all branches of Our Armed Forces to consider that ordering those under their command to take dangerous psychotropic drugs may have tragic unintended consequences for their troops, psychotropic drugs can cause individual troops to be ineffective or unable to serve, and/or trigger a fatal adverse event. 


My son was used in pediatric Drug Trials funded by the NIMH without my permission and without willingly taking them.  My child was told if he ever wanted to go home, he had to take massive amounts of several teratogenic drugs.  My son wanted to be so many things, and still does.  One thing he will never be allowed to do is serve in any branch of the Military; he will never be allowed to become is a soldier.   He was heartbroken when I told him this a couple years ago; and asked, "Can't I at least go to Basic Training?"  I am just a mom who Loves the Constitution of the United States of America!   I will protect and defend it the only way that I can, and my Involuntary Transformation blog is what I can do; and still take care of my son who is now disabled.  

"God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right 

even though I think it is hopeless." 

Chester W. Nimitz 

"I believe we must speak our conscience in moments that demand it, 

even if we are but one voice." 

Richard B. Sanders

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

Thank you to all the men and women past and present, who serve The United States
with honor in the United States Military! 

I am forever in your debt!


American Veterans Are Being Drugged to Death


American Veterans: They Made It Back Alive To Die Here At Home