Eyes Wide's profileEyes Wide Open Internati...PhotosBlogListsMore Tools Help
    June 29

    Anti-Psychotic Drugs Destroy Lives of Dementia Patients

    Anti-Psychotic Drugs Destroy Lives of Dementia Patients...
     
    NaturalNews) Although not authorized for such use, anti-psychotic drugs continue to be used to sedate Alzheimer's and other dementia patients with potentially devastating consequences.

    Anti-psychotic drugs are designed for patients whose schizophrenia or bipolar disorder causes them to experience hallucinations or delusions. Due to their sedating effects, however, the drugs are often used on dementia patients who demonstrate aggression or agitation.

    This use is considered "off-label," meaning that it is not authorized by drug regulation agencies. In spite of this status, such drugs are widely prescribed, particularly in nursing homes. Critics charge that the drugs are being used simply to make life easier for nursing home staff, and not for the benefit of the patients.

    According to a recent study by world-renowned dementia expert Professor Clive Ballard, the use of anti-psychotics on dementia patients not only provides no medical benefits but is actually harmful.

    Ballard studied 165 dementia patients who had been taking anti-psychotic drugs for an extended time period, then took half of the group off the medication. After one year, Ballard found that the patients still on the drugs did not appear to have demonstrated any improvement, nor did those not on the medicine appear to have deteriorated faster. On the contrary, those taking anti-psychotics had more trouble thinking and communicating than those who had been taken off the drugs.

    In addition, evidence suggests that anti-psychotics shorten the lives of dementia patients.

    Cheryl Byrne had personal experience with the effects of anti-psychotics when her father, an Alzheimer's patient, was placed on the drugs.

    After starting the drug course, Byrne's father stopped moving around and became practically comatose, sitting slumped in a chair at all times, with the exception of bursts of agitated behavior. One time, he stood and sat a total of 17 times in 10 minutes.

    In an attempt to force a resistant nursing home staff to take her father off the drugs, Byrne secretly filmed her father to prove her point.

    "I never thought he was the same again after he'd been prescribed those drugs," Byrne said. "I thought something was lost."

    Can You Be Sabotaging Your Health by Not Knowing the Truth About Sugar? =PLEASE READ=

    Can You Be Sabotaging Your Health by Not Knowing the Truth About Sugar?
     
    NaturalNews) We are encouraged to think of sugary foods as wholesome and desirable. Our children's fairy tales and stories are filled with sugary references, Hansel and Gretel for example. Every special occasion and holiday has its own sugar icon. Birthday cakes for birthdays, candy for Valentine's Day, Easter baskets for Easter, candy canes for Christmas.

    Cookbooks call for cups of sugar for dessert recipes. Coffee breaks would hardly be breaks without sugared coffee and doughnuts. Bake sales are huge ways to raise money and Girl Scout cookies are a much-anticipated annual event.

    We even equate sugar with goodness. Little girls are made of sugar and spice and everything nice. They then grow up to be someone's "honey" or "sugarplum".

    Question: Is America committing gastronomic suicide with our current rate of sugar consumption?
    Sugar (or sucrose as it is technically called) is more a drug than a food. Foods are supposed to have vitamins, minerals, proteins, fats, trace minerals and elements. Sugar has none of these elements that are essential for life.

    Most people don't know how much sugar they eat. Why? It's not a matter of just keeping track of how many teaspoons you sprinkle on your cereal or pour into your coffee. 75% of the sugar we eat is already present in the prepared and packaged foods and beverages we buy.

    Sugar is virtually invisible. Very few food items are sugar-free and sugar is the largest single ingredient in the American diet.

    So, what happens when you eat a piece of chocolate cake?

    First, your teeth come into contact with sugary foods. Tooth decay affects almost every person in the U.S. Sugar in the diet influences the sort of organisms that can colonize and grow on tooth surfaces. Everyone has some of these organisms, but people who consume a high-sugar diet have much more dental plaque.

    When your chocolate cake reaches the small intestine, the sugar content of the cake passes quickly through the intestinal walls. This causes a fast and dramatic rise in the body's blood glucose levels... your blood sugar level. Glucose is blood sugar and is the energy source for each cell in our bodies. Every move of our muscles burns glucose and the brain needs glucose for all of its activities.

    When this is working properly, we have a constant and even amount of glucose circulating in the bloodstream. Want to hear something amazing? This amount is only approximately 2 teaspoons! Your chocolate cake contains 10 teaspoons. Far too much for your bloodstream to absorb and use. Insulin, which controls the amount of glucose in your blood, is secreted from the pancreas. As it attempts to regulate this excessive amount of sugar, more insulin is issued. The insulin does its job, but frequently does it too well. Your blood glucose level will drop back to normal and will actually continue to drop until too much glucose has been removed from the blood stream. This means that now our muscles, tissues, brain, and other vital organs will not have enough glucose available to perform the necessary functions that they need to accomplish.

    Your piece of chocolate cake disrupts the normal blood glucose levels and actually leaves you hungrier in the long run.

    Over consumption of sugar has been directly linked to the following conditions:

    Anemia, kidney lesions, fat deposits in the kidney, hypertension, arteriosclerosis, duodenal ulcers, asthma, common cold, obesity, gout, gall stones, inflamed gall bladder, allergies, tooth decay, pyorrhea, infectious diseases, indigestion, hypoglycemia, dermatitis, heart disease, and diabetes.

    Scientists theorize that humans are born with a preference for sweet foods. This preference likely remains with us for our entire lives. However, there are healthy alternatives that do not wreak the havoc that sucrose does on the human body. The two most readily available and healthy alternatives to processed sugar are raw honey and pure maple syrup. Give your body a chance to wean itself off the drug of processed sugar and give either honey or maple syrup a chance in your diet. You will be thankful both in the short and long term!

    About the author

    Jo Hartley
    Wife, Mother of 8, and Grandmother of 2
    Jo is a 40 year old home educator who has always gravitated toward a natural approach to life. She enjoys learning as much as possible about just about anything!
    http://www.loftymatters.com
     

    The American Empire is headed towards collapse!! =MUST READ=

    The American Empire is headed towards collapse, followed by the rebirth of a new nation. What will that Next Society look like? Today's feature article explains WHY the USA will collapse (just do the math), and HOW we can put new ideas on the table to create a new society based on the greater good rather than individual profit-taking and corporate greed.

     

    I personally recommend ending representative government entirely (Direct Democracy works better), ending all patent protections on genes, seeds and medicines, switching to Instant Runoff Voting, revoking the "rights" of corporations, granting new legal rights to animals and nature (apes, mature trees, etc.), and eliminating the Federal Reserve (the national money supply should belong to the People, not a private corporation). What are YOUR ideas?

     

    Read more in today's feature article, below, and get ready for a wild ride as we witness the historical downfall of the modern world's Roman Empire...

     

    Also today: More anti-cancer nutrients in tomatoes | Acidity vs. heartburn | Ancer-cancer drug useless? | Electric car gets 300 mpg equivalent | Anti-psychotic drug dangers | Acne drug causes depression | Exclusive interviews and much more!

     

    Creating the Next Society: Your Revolutionary Ideas Needed Now

    Friday, June 27, 2008 by: Mike Adams (see all articles by this author) | Key concepts: America, corporations and the FDA

     

    NaturalNews) It's fairly obvious to anyone paying attention that the American Empire, as currently configured and operated, is simply not sustainable. Financial collapse is inevitable (and accelerating, it seems), and even mainstream America can no longer deny the obvious signs that things have gone terribly wrong: Skyrocketing fuel prices, unprecedented inflation in food prices, rampant epidemics of preventable degenerative disease, plummeting real estate prices, an increasingly-worthless national currency, disastrous war failures, rampant dishonesty in Washington, and accelerating climate changes that are causing flooding, crop failures, droughts and worse. It is becoming increasingly difficult for even the Pollyannas of the world to argue that the United States of America has a bright future.

    However, there's good news in all this. Really. What's the good news? Following the collapse of the American Empire, there will be a rare window of opportunity for radical reform where progressive, pioneering people like NaturalNews readers can play a significant role in creating what I call The Next Society.

    What is The Next Society? It's the one that replaces the United States of America after the failure of this current system. It happens all the time through world history, of course: Failed attempts at living in community are replaced by new attempts. Democracy was one such attempt, and I still think Democracy could work. Too bad we don't one operating in the United States today. Instead, we only have the illusion of Democracy that's controlled by hacked voting machines, a corrupt media, and a corporate-controlled government agenda that, at every step, works against the interests of the People.

    The USA experiment was a fun ride, no doubt. Especially the last couple of decades, filled with cheap money, cheap blow, cheap politicians and expensive medicine. We've drugged, snorted and consumed our way through trillions of dollars borrowed from other countries! The rest of the world, it turns out, has subsidized America's addiction to excess in every form: Excessive food, excessive pharmaceuticals and excessively large vehicles designed to dominate excessively crowded highways that ultimately lead to nowhere.

    Just remember this: The rest of the world is tired of funding America's consumer culture. And the free money from China, Japan, the Middle East and other regions that have subsidized America's consumption habit by purchasing worthless U.S. Treasury IOU notes are about to put an end to their practice of following good money with bad. The inevitable result of all this, of course, is that the U.S. dollar will soon be abandoned by the world (and its oil trade exchanges), and mainstream America is going to wake up one morning and find that all their bank savings deposits (which are unwisely held in U.S. currency, by the way) are utterly worthless.

    Following all that, however, what should we do to create a new society that can offer substantial improvements over the one that just collapsed?

    (If you smell something burning, by the way, don't panic. It's just Rome.)

    Creating The Next Society

    When the United States of America collapses like the Roman Empire under the weight of its debt, disease and disastrously devolving dollar, there will be an opportunity to create a new society governed by new rules. I believe that evil corporations, corrupt government regulators and the U.S. Patent Office should be among the first to be placed on the chopping block.

    Under an economic reboot scenario, Big Pharma's control over the media, the FDA and the medical profession will collapse, and the People, having witnessed their life savings lost in the economic collapse, and finally realizing their health was stolen by a fraudulent industry working in collusion with their own corrupt government (which lied to them the whole time), will not be amused. Armed with video cameras, duct tape and a healthy dose of outrage, they will storm the offices of drug companies and the Food and Drug Administration. They'll drag the CEOs into the streets, wrap them in cocoons of duct tape and pummel them with rotten fruit. (Or, if all this goes down in an airport, they'll stab them with TSA-approved plastic forks...)

    Cultural revolutions are not always a pretty thing, but they are often part of a Cathartic process through which a society to vents its anger at an institution that has committed horrible atrocities against the human race (watch some of the post-Nazi films from WWII if you want to see what this social "venting" really looks like).

    In time, I have every confidence that the reign of censorship and intimidation we've seen conducted by the FDA will abruptly end, and the campaign of chemical intoxication of the world population by Big Pharma will be brought to a sudden end. In its place, we will have the opportunity to build a new society based on free speech, respect for nature, and a philosophy of creating abundance through health rather than generating profit from disease. We can engineer a new society that rewards disease prevention, encourages healthy consumer choices, and informs consumers about the true benefits of herbs, vitamins, nutritional supplements and naturopathic modalities.

    A list of things to outlaw in The Next Society

    I have a long list of laws to recommend be implemented in that new society. They include the banning of all advertising of processed foods, cigarettes, and pharmaceuticals, the ending of all subsidies on sugar and corn, the outlawing of factory farming practices, the establishment of true Free Speech for nutritional supplement manufacturers, and the building of a Big Pharma Holocaust Museum that documents the terrible chemical atrocities that have been committed against the human race by the drug companies throughout the 20th and 21st centuries.

    I would also work to outlaw the poisoning of land, water and air through the outlawing of all chemical pesticides, for example. Genetically-engineered crops, of course, would also be banned outright. (Goodbye, Monsanto, DuPont, ADM and all the other chemical-pushing num-nuts of our modern world...)

    In that future society, conventional medicine will be virtually irrelevant. Sure, we'll need a few surgeons on staff at the hospitals to handle the emergency room visits from all the corporate CEOs being dropped off tall buildings by angry mobs, but more than 95% of the doctors pushing pills today will find themselves irrelevant, unneeded and out of work.

    This will be a day to celebrate our new health freedom, and it will be a day that the death rate will begin to plummet. Longevity will be improved, quality of life will take a leap forward, and our nation can once again begin to experience real progress that leads to abundance and happiness. Good health, of course, is the key to all this. And good health is simply incompatible with today's system of monopoly medicine and corporate greed, where profits take precedence over human health.

    MOREV HERE:   http://www.naturalnews.com/023528.html

    June 27

    HERE'S YOU CHANCE =WHO?=

    Dear friends,

    The recent votes in Congress to give Bush $165 billion more for Iraq and also to authorize warrantless wiretapping make it clear that we urgently need to elect Democrats who are "aggressive progressives," not cowards or corporate hacks.

    You probably know someone who would be a great candidate. If so, please tell Progressive Majority!

    June 21

    GREEN PEACE ALERT: =PLEASE READ/SIGN=

    Arrested for exposing the truth

    You already know that, year after year, Greenpeace activists put their lives on the line to protect whales. Today, two of our activists are sitting in jail in Japan for their undercover work to expose a stolen whale meat scandal in Japan last month as part of our campaign to save the whales.

    Following a four-month undercover investigation, we broke the news last month of a major scandal involving the embezzlement of whale meat from the Japanese government-subsidized Southern Ocean whaling program. Our activists handed over a box of whale meat as evidence of the whale meat smuggling operation, and the Tokyo public prosecutor agreed there was sufficient evidence of wrongdoing.

    But early this morning in Japan, our Greenpeace office was raided and two of our activists were arrested. Junichi Sato, 31, and Toru Suzuki, 41, are being investigated on charges of stealing a box of whale meat that they had presented as evidence in the smuggling case.

    Take Action >> Stand by Junichi and Toru by writing the Japanese Prime Minster immediately.By Japanese law, our activists could be held without charges for up to 23 days. Our activists are innocent of any crime. They have been arrested after returning whale meat that was stolen from Japanese taxpayers and for exposing a fraud that may reach high into the Japanese government agencies that run the whaling program.

    To make matters worse, rumors are flying that the prosecutor will soon announce his intent to drop the smuggling investigation, even as our activists sit in jail for exposing the truth.

    On the eve of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) meetings, I hope you'll support our activists and the whales they are working to protect. And I hope I can count on you again next week as the IWC meetings commence, and the Japanese government makes its annual attempt to lift the moratorium on commercial whaling.

    In solidarity,

    John Hocevar
    Oceans Campaigner

    June 18

    Exposed: Harvard Shrink Gets Rich Labeling Kids Bipolar =MUST READ=

    Exposed: Harvard Shrink Gets Rich Labeling Kids Bipolar

    By Bruce E. Levine, AlterNet. Posted June 18, 2008.

     
    Meet the man who got rich by popularizing bipolar disorder for children. Congressional investigators and the NY Times expose the scandal.

    What Dick Cheney is to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, psychiatrist Joseph Biederman is to the explosion of psychiatric medications in American children. Recently, Biederman was nailed by congressional investigators and the New York Times for overestimating just how greedy an elite shrink is entitled to be. Beyond a peek into the corruption of psychiatry at its highest levels, the scandal is an opportunity to reconsider the Big Pharma financed view of why kids become disruptive and destructive.

    On June 8, 2008, the New York Times reported the following about Joseph Biederman: "A world-renowned Harvard child psychiatrist whose work has helped fuel an explosion in the use of powerful anti-psychotic medicines in children earned at least $1.6 million in consulting fees from drug makers from 2000 to 2007 but for years did not report much of this income to university officials, according to information given congressional investigators."

    Due in part to Biederman's influence, the number of American children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder increased 40-fold from 1994 to 2003, and as Bloomberg News reported (September 2007), "The expanded use of bipolar as a pediatric diagnosis has made children the fastest-growing part of the $11.5 billion U.S. market for anti-psychotic drugs."

    Pediatrician and author Lawrence Diller notes about Biederman, "He single-handedly put pediatric bipolar disorder on the map." Biederman has been in a position to convince many doctors to diagnose bipolar disorder in children and to medicate them with anti-psychotic drugs. In addition to being a professor at Harvard, Biederman is also chief of research in pediatric psychopharmacology at the Massachusetts General Hospital, which publishes more than 30 papers yearly on psychiatric disorders. And Biederman himself has authored and co-authored approximately 500 articles, 70 book chapters, and more than 450 scientific abstracts, as well as being on the editorial board of many professional journals.

    Biederman (and two of his colleagues in the psychiatry department at Harvard Medical School who received an additional $2.6 million from drug companies from 2000 to 2007), by failing to report income from drug companies while at the same time receiving federal funds from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), violated rules designed to police conflicts of interest, according to Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa. Grassley concluded, "Obviously, if a researcher is taking money from a drug company while also receiving federal dollars to research that company's product, then there is a conflict of interest." In one example, Biederman neglected to report his 2001 income from Johnson & Johnson (makers of the anti-psychotic drug Risperdal); Johnson & Johnson reported to Grassley that it had paid Biederman $58,169 in 2001.

    In addition to his popularization of bipolar disorder for children, Biederman is one of the most significant forces behind the commonplace diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Congressional investigators also found that Biederman conducted studies of Eli Lilly's attention deficit hyperactivity disorder drug Strattera that were funded by NIH at the same time he was receiving money from Lilly that exceeded the maximum amount permitted.

    NIH rules state that researchers cannot take more than $20,000 in payments from a drug company whose drug they are funded by NIH to research and that researchers must disclose any payment received from a drug company of $10,000 or more. Apparently, for drug researchers taking federal funding from NIH, there is no law against being on the take from drug companies, but there are rules against greed.

    Mental health treatment in the United States is now a multibillion-dollar industry, and all the rules of industrial complexes apply. Not only does Big Pharma have influential psychiatrists such as Biederman in their pocket, virtually every mental health institution from which doctors, the press, and the general public receive their mental health information is financially interconnected with Big Pharma. The American Psychiatric Association, psychiatry's professional organization, is hugely dependent on drug company grants, and this is also true for the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill and other so-called consumer organizations. Harvard and other prestigious university psychiatry departments take millions of dollars from drug companies, and the National Institute of Mental Health funds researchers who are financially connected with drug companies.

    MORE HERE:   http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/88333/

    June 11

    A =MUST WATCH= VIDEO =WE ARE "NOT" OUT OF OIL=

    A "MUST WATCH" video!! PLEASE take the time to watch it.

     

     

    There Is Enough Crute Oil, and Gas in America for 200 Years

    US Politics & Gov't  (tags: Oil, Gas, corruption, dishonesty, lies, media, usa )

    Evert Jan
    - 48 seconds ago - video.google.com
    There is enough crute oil, and gas in America for 200 years (see the video)

    Free Energy Suppression and the Global Elite's Agenda =MUST READ=

    The 9/11 Truth Movement, Free Energy Suppression and the Global Elite's Agenda,  May 2008

    By CB_Brooklyn

    www.checktheevidence.com
    Imagine utilizing free energy technology in daily life. No more petroleum-based fuels; no more outrageous oil and gas prices. Humanity would definitely benefit from this. The technology for water powered cars has been in the news, such as in this NBC-affiliate clip. This FOX-affiliate clip reveals the development of this technology for the military. From the FOX clip we learn that Radio Frequencies are key to this technology. As you read further you'll discover another building block of free energy: Tesla Coils.

    So why are these technologies suppressed? Basic Answer: Control.

    The Global Elite plan a New World Order with an enslaved "police state" culture. How might this be done? One way is the Patriot Act. Another could be the 800 FEMA detention camps fully constructed, staffed, and awaiting prisoners. What else might they do? They could slow the economy. Control over oil and gas makes accomplishing this easy. All they have to do is notch those prices up little by little, and the average citizen gets poorer and poorer. Not only do these increases affect the gas pump and home boiler, they affect food manufacturing plants, public water supplies, and other necessities as well.

    Raising oil/gas prices is the Global Elite's way of destroying our way of life.

    But they can't raise prices without a reason, so they concocted one: Peak Oil. That way, people assume the increased costs and fuel limits are natural with no way around it. But Peak Oil is a hoax. In the 1970s, a huge oil field was discovered in Alaska that could fuel the United States for 200 years, but its existence has been classified. Those is power have planned their New World Order for some time, and didn't want an Alaskan field getting in the way. Instead, they approached the Saudi's for an "oil deal", a way of ripping them off and entrapping the United States. Information regarding this is linked later in this article; much from a video presentation by Lindsey Williams, a former "insider" turned whistleblower.

    It is all too common for those in control to suppress and weaponize new technologies.

    Suppression can be accomplished simply by spreading choice phrases such as "raygun nutcase". Even the production of sci-fi TV/movies helps associate these weapons with "science fiction". As one example, the body cloak technology portrayed in the film "Predator" is very real, and was reported in Time and WIRED magazines. It is pretty well known that these technological advances are light years ahead of what is publicly admitted.

    This technology is far from sci-fi and has existed for many decades.

    The first microwave oven was built in 1947 by Raytheon, a major defense contractor. What advances could they have made in the past sixty years? A look at the documentary "Star Wars in Iraq" reveals weaponry based on these technologies.

    So what's "crazy" about it? What would people sixty years ago have said about cell phones? "Wacky"?? How about The Wizard of Oz on an ultra-thin shiny little disc? "Nutjob"?? What about embedding spy chips on insects? "Insane"?? Technology has come a long way in the last 100 years.

    The first major free energy scientist, Nikola Tesla, knew the direction his research would someday take. In 1915 he said "I have not thought it hazardous to predict, that wars in the future will be waged by electrical means". The Star Wars in Iraq video proves him right.

    Of course, the Global Elite need the public at large to consider free-energy "crazy". They want this "black op" technology as their secret weapon to use against us and they attack those who speak up. One example is well known pioneer of free energy research, John Hutchison. After he and Dr Judy Wood publicized their paper "Anomalies at the WTC and the Hutchison Effect", Hutchison ran into problems with the Canadian authorities. Another is Dr Eugene Mallove who, after writing an open letter to the world requesting free energy research funds, was killed. This "2005 Cold Fusion Colloquium" at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology had a special tribute to Dr Mallove. A number of mysterious deaths are connected to free energy suppression.


    Every 9/11 Truther should take this one minute test. Although not 9/11 related, this video makes an important point about distraction:

    DO THE TEST: http://www.dothetest.co.uk

    9/11 Truth is an extremely important issue and only those who really care are ever involved. But 9/11 is just one of the issues that absolutely need attention. Other issues are equally as important.

    One thing the Global Elite do not want revealed is the existence of free-energy technology.

    This technology has the capability of revolutionizing the world by removing oil/gas as main sources of fuel, but instead has been weaponized and used against us. Directed energy weapons and weather control are among the dangers we now face.

    **Might this technology have been used on 9/11? What if the "truth movement" was steered by those affiliated with free energy technologies, including those who discredited it decades past? What if pictorial evidence shows resemblance to the Hutchison Effect? Would this be worth exposing?

    **Might this technology be responsible for recent weather-related disasters? Have hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, cyclones, and volcanic eruptions shown an increase lately? What if pictorial and other data show resemblance to the Hutchison Effect? Would this be worth exposing?

    Not many know that a major hurricane - Hurricane Erin - was in the Atlantic Ocean in September of 2001. In fact, Erin was closest to NYC, and at its largest size, on 9/11 itself. But the TV news networks had little reporting on this hurricane. Contrary to Erin, however, Hurricane Katrina had virtually 24 hour coverage, even before it hit land. Interestingly, Erin was stronger than Katrina the day before 9/11. So why didn't the media cover Erin, say, on September 10? The astronauts in the space station commented on the WTC smoke plume, but made no mention of the monstrous hurricane next to it. How come? Those interested in learning the secret between hurricanes and Tesla Coils should see Dr Judy Wood's new paper "9/11 Weather Anomalies and Field Effects". It's chock full of photos and analysis and is highly recommended.

    Those who control the energy control the world.

    As prices for oil, gas, food and other types of energy go higher and higher, one must ask themselves what they are to do. What holds for the future?

    Harvard psychiatrist drug money cover-up exposed =PLEASE READ=

    Subj: Sun. NY Times: Harvard psychiatrist drug money cover-up exposed
     

        Sunday NY Times: Congress discovers that Harvard psychiatrist 
    covered up drug money

    Tomorrow's Sunday New York Times (8 June 2008) will have an item 
    about a drug money cover-up by a world-famous Harvard psychiatrist 
    who is considered a catalyst for the enormous increase in psychiatric 
    drugging of USA kids. See the text of the article below.

    NY Times reports that US Congressional investigators led by Senator 
    Charles E. Grassley discovered that Harvard's Dr. Joseph Biederman 
    illegally did not disclose to Harvard authorities much of the more 
    than a million dollars he received from psychiatric drug companies.

    Says NY Times: "[Dr. Biederman's] work helped to fuel a controversial 
    40-fold increase from 1994 to 2003 in the diagnosis of pediatric 
    bipolar disorder." Please forward. At bottom is commentary from 
    MindFreedom and how you can take action.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    NY Times article with photos on MindFreedom web site:
    http://www.mindfreedom.org/kb/psych-drug-corp/ny-times-biederman-
    harvard/grassley-v-harvard

    Or on NY Times web site:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/08/us/08conflict.html?hp

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Sunday New York Times

    Child Experts Fail to Reveal Full Drug Pay

    By Gardiner Harris and Benedict Carey

    June 8, 2008

    A world-renowned Harvard child psychiatrist whose work has helped 
    fuel an explosion in the use of powerful antipsychotic medicines in 
    children earned at least $1.6 million in consulting fees from drug 
    makers from 2000 to 2007 but for years did not report much of this 
    income to university officials, according to information given 
    Congressional investigators.

    By failing to report income, the psychiatrist, Dr. Joseph Biederman, 
    and a colleague in the psychiatry department at Harvard Medical 
    School, Dr. Timothy E. Wilens, may have violated federal and 
    university research rules designed to police potential conflicts of 
    interest, according to Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of 
    Iowa. Some of their research is financed by government grants.

    Like Dr. Biederman, Dr. Wilens belatedly reported earning at least 
    $1.6 million from 2000 to 2007, and another Harvard colleague, Dr. 
    Thomas Spencer, reported earning at least $1 million after being 
    pressed by Mr. Grassley's investigators. But even these amended 
    disclosures may understate the researchers' outside income because 
    some entries contradict payment information from drug makers, Mr. 
    Grassley found.

    In one example, Dr. Biederman reported no income from Johnson & 
    Johnson for 2001 in a disclosure report filed with the university. 
    When asked recently to check again, he reported receiving $3,500. But 
    Johnson & Johnson told Mr. Grassley that it paid him $58,169 in 2001, 
    Mr. Grassley found.

    The Harvard group's consulting arrangements with drug makers were 
    already controversial because of the researchers' advocacy of 
    unapproved uses of psychiatric medicines in children.

    In an e-mailed statement, Dr. Biederman said, "My interests are 
    solely in the advancement of medical treatment through rigorous and 
    objective study," and he said he took conflict-of-interest policies 
    "very seriously." Drs. Wilens and Spencer said in e-mailed statements 
    that they thought they had complied with conflict-of-interest rules.

    John Burklow, a spokesman for the National Institutes of Health, 
    said: "If there have been violations of N.I.H. policy - and if 
    research integrity has been compromised - we will take all the 
    appropriate action within our power to hold those responsible 
    accountable. This would be completely unacceptable behavior, and 
    N.I.H. will not tolerate it."

    The federal grants received by Drs. Biederman and Wilens were 
    administered by Massachusetts General Hospital, which in 2005 won 
    $287 million in such grants. The health institutes could place 
    restrictions on the hospital's grants or even suspend them altogether.

    Alyssa Kneller, a Harvard spokeswoman, said in an e-mailed statement: 
    "The information released by Senator Grassley suggests that, in 
    certain instances, each doctor may have failed to disclose outside 
    income from pharmaceutical companies and other entities that should 
    have been disclosed."

    Ms. Kneller said the doctors had been referred to a university 
    conflict committee for review.

    Mr. Grassley sent letters on Wednesday to Harvard and the health 
    institutes outlining his investigators' findings, and he placed the 
    letters along with his comments in The Congressional Record.

    Dr. Biederman is one of the most influential researchers in child 
    psychiatry and is widely admired for focusing the field's attention 
    on its most troubled young patients. Although many of his studies are 
    small and often financed by drug makers, his work helped to fuel a 
    controversial 40-fold increase from 1994 to 2003 in the diagnosis of 
    pediatric bipolar disorder, which is characterized by severe mood 
    swings, and a rapid rise in the use of antipsychotic medicines in 
    children. The Grassley investigation did not address research quality.

    Doctors have known for years that antipsychotic drugs, sometimes 
    called major tranquilizers, can quickly subdue children. But 
    youngsters appear to be especially susceptible to the weight gain and 
    metabolic problems caused by the drugs, and it is far from clear that 
    the medications improve children's lives over time, experts say.

    In the last 25 years, drug and device makers have displaced the 
    federal government as the primary source of research financing, and 
    industry support is vital to many university research programs. But 
    as corporate research executives recruit the brightest scientists, 
    their brethren in marketing departments have discovered that some of 
    these same scientists can be terrific pitchmen.

    To protect research integrity, the National Institutes of Health 
    require researchers to report to universities earnings of $10,000 or 
    more per year, for instance, in consulting money from makers of drugs 
    also studied by the researchers in federally financed trials. 
    Universities manage financial conflicts by requiring that the money 
    be disclosed to research subjects, among other measures.

    The health institutes last year awarded more than $23 billion in 
    grants to more than 325,000 researchers at over 3,000 universities, 
    and auditing the potential conflicts of each grantee would be 
    impossible, health institutes officials have long insisted. So the 
    government relies on universities.

    Universities ask professors to report their conflicts but do almost 
    nothing to verify the accuracy of these voluntary disclosures.

    "It's really been an honor system thing," said Dr. Robert Alpern, 
    dean of Yale School of Medicine. "If somebody tells us that a 
    pharmaceutical company pays them $80,000 a year, I don't even know 
    how to check on that."

    Some states have laws requiring drug makers to disclose payments made 
    to doctors, and Mr. Grassley and others have sponsored legislation to 
    create a national registry.

    Lawmakers have been concerned in recent years about the use of 
    unapproved medications in children and the influence of industry money.

    Mr. Grassley asked Harvard for the three researchers' financial 
    disclosure reports from 2000 through 2007 and asked some drug makers 
    to list payments made to them.

    "Basically, these forms were a mess," Mr. Grassley said in comments 
    he entered into The Congressional Record on Wednesday. "Over the last 
    seven years, it looked like they had taken a couple hundred thousand 
    dollars."

    Prompted by Mr. Grassley's interest, Harvard asked the researchers to 
    re-examine their disclosure reports.

    In the new disclosures, the trio's outside consulting income jumped 
    but was still contradicted by reports sent to Mr. Grassley from some 
    of the companies. In some cases, the income seems to have put the 
    researchers in violation of university and federal rules.

    In 2000, for instance, Dr. Biederman received a grant from the 
    National Institutes of Health to study in children Strattera, an Eli 
    Lilly drug for attention deficit disorder. Dr. Biederman reported to 
    Harvard that he received less than $10,000 from Lilly that year, but 
    the company told Mr. Grassley that it paid Dr. Biederman more than 
    $14,000 in 2000, Mr. Grassley's letter stated.

    At the time, Harvard forbade professors from conducting clinical 
    trials if they received payments over $10,000 from the company whose 
    product was being studied, and federal rules required such conflicts 
    to be managed.

    Mr. Grassley said these discrepancies demonstrated profound flaws in 
    the oversight of researchers' financial conflicts and the need for a 
    national registry. But the disclosures may also cloud the work of one 
    of the most prominent group of child psychiatrists in the world.

    In the past decade, Dr. Biederman and his colleagues have promoted 
    the aggressive diagnosis and drug treatment of childhood bipolar 
    disorder, a mood problem once thought confined to adults. They have 
    maintained that the disorder was underdiagnosed in children and could 
    be treated with antipsychotic drugs, medications invented to treat 
    schizophrenia.

    Other researchers have made similar assertions. As a result, 
    pediatric bipolar diagnoses and antipsychotic drug use in children 
    have soared. Some 500,000 children and teenagers were given at least 
    one prescription for an antipsychotic in 2007, including 20,500 under 
    6 years of age, according to Medco Health Solutions, a pharmacy 
    benefit manager.

    Few psychiatrists today doubt that bipolar disorder can strike in the 
    early teenage years, or that many of the children being given the 
    diagnosis are deeply distressed.

    "I consider Dr. Biederman a true visionary in recognizing this 
    illness in children," said Susan Resko, director of the Child and 
    Adolescent Bipolar Foundation, "and he's not only saved many lives 
    but restored hope to thousands of families across the country."

    Longtime critics of the group see its influence differently. "They 
    have given the Harvard imprimatur to this commercial experimentation 
    on children," said Vera Sharav, president and founder of the Alliance 
    for Human Research Protection, a patient advocacy group.

    Many researchers strongly disagree over what bipolar looks like in 
    youngsters, and some now fear the definition has been expanded 
    unnecessarily, due in part to the Harvard group.

    The group published the results of a string of drug trials from 2001 
    to 2006, but the studies were so small and loosely designed that they 
    were largely inconclusive, experts say. In some studies testing 
    antipsychotic drugs, the group defined improvement as a decline of 30 
    percent or more on a scale called the Young Mania Rating Scale - well 
    below the 50 percent change that most researchers now use as the 
    standard.

    Controlling for bias is especially important in such work, given that 
    the scale is subjective, and raters often depend on reports from 
    parents and children, several top psychiatrists said.

    More broadly, they said, revelations of undisclosed payments from 
    drug makers to leading researchers are especially damaging for 
    psychiatry.

    "The price we pay for these kinds of revelations is credibility, and 
    we just can't afford to lose any more of that in this field," said 
    Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, executive director of the Stanley Medical 
    Research Institute, which finances psychiatric studies. "In the area 
    of child psychiatry in particular, we know much less than we should, 
    and we desperately need research that is not influenced by industry 
    money."

    - end -

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Commentary by David Oaks, Director, MindFreedom International

    I was was once a Harvard student. Grandson of coal miners, at Harvard 
    on scholarships, I developed mental and emotional problems.

    Harvard psychiatrists ordered my forced psychiatric drugging in a 
    Harvard teaching hospital, McLean. Harvard psychiatrists told me 
    point blank I had to stay on powerful neuroleptic ("antipsychotic") 
    drugs for the rest of my life.

    They were wrong.

    I graduated anyway in 1977. With honors. I've been off all 
    psychiatric drugs ever since.

    In my senior year, a Harvard volunteer agency -- Phillips Brooks 
    House -- placed me in a psychiatric survivor group (thank you PBH!). 
    I've spent the last few decades working to prevent psychiatric human 
    rights violations.

    But I almost became one of the early teenagers to be diagnosed 
    bipolar (and "schizophrenic") and placed on neuroleptics for all this 
    time.

    An unreported problem is that a diagnosis of "psychosis" like 
    "bipolar" can lead to decades, or a life-time, of neuroleptic 
    drugging (antipsychotics). We at MindFreedom are pro-choice on the 
    personal health care decision to take a prescribed neuroleptic, but 
    these drugs really are pushed and pushed hard without adequate 
    advocacy, information, alternatives, etc.

    To check out what mainstream medicine has long known about what long-
    term neuroleptics can do the frontal lobes of primates, check out the 
    monkey study in this folder:

    http://www.mindfreedom.org/kb/psychiatric-drugs/antipsychotics/
    neuroleptic-brain-damage

    or use this web address:

    http://tinyurl.com/ypj8vf

    Ben Carey, one of the reporters for the above great NY Times article, 
    has done a lot of work on investigating psychiatric drug industry 
    corruption, and he should be applauded. But Ben and I have 
    communicated, and he knows about the neuroleptic brain damage story. 
    But -- like all other mainstream media -- he has chosen not to report 
    it.

    ACTION: Thank Ben Carey for his courageous reporting, but ask when he 
    will report that neuroleptics cause frontal lobe shrinkage.

    E-mail for Ben Carey is: bencarey@nytimes.com

    Perhaps somewhere in some college -- perhaps Harvard? -- there is 
    hopefully a future "Al Gore of mental health" who will one day show 
    PowerPoint slide shows to millions of people about this "Greenhouse 
    effect" of the mind:

    The tragic and literal mass chemical lobotomy of millions of young 
    people through decades of neuroleptics, needlessly, without any 
    informed consent about the structural brain change, when humane 
    alternatives exist but are not offered.

    Yes, diabetes and weight gain from neuroleptics are horrendous, and 
    can kill.

    But chemical lobotomy?

    That could have been me.

    And I take that personally.

    You can also thank Senator Grassley, and let him know about the 
    neuroleptic brain damage issue. Very few elected officials have ever 
    been informed.

    MindFreedom supports legislating criminal penalties for individuals 
    such as Dr. Biederman; make his a humane prison, with lots of humane 
    alternatives for rehabilitation, but sentence some real time behind 
    bars, and we can begin to address this crisis.

    You can also encourage Sen. Grassley to pass laws to help make 
    behavior like Dr. Biederman's a criminal offense.

    Sen. Grassley web contact form:

    http://grassley.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home

    or use this web address:

    http://tinyurl.com/2wtnz9

    ~~~~~~~~~~~

    ACTION ACTION ACTION: Please forward to all appropriate places on &
    off Internet, NOW!

    PAXIL BABIES =PLEASE READ=IMPORTANT=

    Two excellent articles by our friend Bruce Levine...

     

    http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/87298/


    https://www.chelseagreen.com/common/files/pdf/HighTimesLevine.pdf

    Long Live the Freedom Center,



    Bruce E. Levine, Ph.D.
    Clinical Psychologist
    5725 Dragon Way, Suite 303
    Cincinnati, Ohio 45227
    513-271-1777
    www.brucelevine.net

    June 05

    "Kill them." Bloodthirsty speech by BUSH =PLEASE READ=

    Shocking Bush 'Pep Talk' to His War Cabinet on Iraq: 'We Are Going to Wipe Them out!'  

    Shocking Bush 'Pep Talk' to His War Cabinet on Iraq: 'We Are Going to Wipe Them out!'
    By Tom Engelhardt, Tomdispatch.com
    "Kill them." Gen. Ricardo Sanchez's memoirs contain a transcript from a bloodthirsty and over the top private speech by Bush. Read more »

    Can Pot Extend Ted Kennedy's Life? =PLEASE READ=

    Oh...how things come back to haunt us.
     
    Can Pot Extend Ted Kennedy's Life? Too Bad It's Illegal  

    Can Pot Extend Ted Kennedy's Life? Too Bad It's Illegal
    By Paul Armentano, NORML
    Scientific studies indicate that marijuana can halt the spread of numerous cancer cells, including the type that Kennedy suffers from. Read more »

    Another Lier!! Just what we need!! =WATCH!!=

    Another Lier!! Just what we need!! WATCH!!
     
    One Million See McCain's YouTube Problem!  

    One Million See McCain's YouTube Problem!
    By ZP Heller, Brave New Films
    Reaching an audience most cable news shows only dream of. Read more »