The SSRIs have also been identified as playing a major role in the previously unheard of acts of violence by school-age children all over the country in recent years. Medical experts in the field of SSRIs, says virtually all of the gun-related massacres that have made headlines over the past 15 years have one thing in common, they were committed by people taking SSRIs.
For more than a decade, Dr Breggin has documented in books and scientific reports how SSRIs can lead to out-of-control behavior and violence. "From agitation and hostility to impulsivity and mania," he warns, "antidepressant-induced behaviors is identical to that of PCP, methamphetamine and cocaine-drugs known to cause aggression and violence."
"One clinical trial showed a rate of 6 percent manic reactions for depressed children on Prozac," Dr Breggin reports, while "none developed mania on a sugar pill."
The TeenScreen people claim the program is not funded by any drug company money. However, they don't mention the fact that Ms Flynn's salary was paid by Big Pharma for 16 years while she was the director of the most notorious front group supported by drug company money of all time, the National Alliance of Mental Illness (NAMI).
During Ms Flynn's reign over NAMI, an investigation by Mother Jones' Magazine found that in just one 3-year period between 1996-1999, the group received $11.72 million from 18 different drug companies.
Drug companies funnel millions of dollars every year to front groups like NAMI, and they in turn, utilize their membership to carry out the drug promotion campaigns and also provide a shield so that no Big Pharma money can be traced directly to the programs.
A clear example of how this funneling process works is the way TeenScreen uses NAMI's national convention each year to recruit members from all over the country to promote TeenScreen in their individual communities. Ms Weibert was able to obtain videos of the NAMI conventions that show the TeenScreen squad in full recruitment mode.
Under a law enacted in 1998 called the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, an evaluation of mental or psychological problems on a student cannot be administered without prior written consent from a parent.
To get around this law, when the TeenScreen team began implementing the program in schools, it promoted the use of what is known as passive consent which requires parents to return a signed form only if they do not want their child tested. Most parents say they never realized that their children could be subjected to something so serious as mental health screening without their signed consent, much less know that they must formally instruct a school in writing to not screen their children.
For instance, the consent form that was sent home to parents in Middleton, Ohio was worded as follows:
Dear Parent or Legal Guardian,
A new program developed by Columbia University called TeenScreen is being initiated at Vail Middle School for seventh grade students. The program screens students for potential mental health concerns. TeenScreen is a computerized interview and all information will be kept confidential.
Students will be able to participate in TeenScreen starting on Feb.13th. Participation in the program is strictly voluntary. A professional will be on hand to speak with the students in private if there is a positive screen. As always, if there are any concerns about your child, you will be notified.
Please complete the form below and return it to your child's Homebase teacher if you do not want your child to participate in TeenScreen.
At one NAMI convention, a member of the audience said that in the state of Oregon, consent forms were being returned to the schools with a large "NO" scribbled across the form. So noting that it was difficult to get parents to allow their children to be screened, NAMI members were asked to help convince kids to take the survey and then get them to talk their parents into signing the consent form.
During her speech, Leslie McGuire, the second in command at TeenScreen, explained that while only about 54% of parents would consent to the screening, if children themselves were asked, nearly 98% would agree to be screened.
I took zyprexa starting in 1996 the year the FDA approved it, which was ineffective for my condition and gave me diabetes.
Zyprexa is the product name for Olanzapine,it is Lilly's top selling drug.It was approved by the FDA in 1996 ,an 'atypical' antipsychotic a newer class of drugs without the motor side effects of the older Thorazine.Zyprexa has been linked to causing diabetes and pancreatitis.
Zyprexa, which is used for the treatment of psychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, accounted for 32% of Eli Lilly's $14.6 billion revenue last year.
Did you know that Lilly made nearly $3 billion last year on diabetic meds, Actos,Humulin and Byetta?
Yes! They sell a drug that can cause diabetes and then turn a profit on the drugs that treat the condition that they may have caused in the first place!
I was prescribed Zyprexa from 1996 until 2000.
In early 2000 i was shocked to have an A1C test result of 13.9 (normal is 4-6) I have no history of diabetes in my family.
All the psychiatrist I've interviewed and the information on line presents zyprexa as a worse offender than the other Atypicals such as seroquel.My doctor has stopped prescribing zyprexa altogether.
The PDR classifies zyprexa as 'severe' for causing weight gain and diabetes and seroquel as 'moderate'.
Of course the 50 year old Thorazine didn't cause diabetes and is many times cheaper but it could cause tardive dyskinesia.
Where Eli Lilly's negligence comes in,is their KNOWING and not informing consumers (black box warning) until the FDA demanded it.
Lilly's incentive not to readily disclose is they had billions coming in from state medicaid scripts.
----
Daniel Haszard http://www.zyprexa-victims.com
by
Danny Haszard (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 50 comments)
on Friday, July 21, 2006 at 2:48:03 PM
It is sad that there is NO grassroots movement to get these drugs recalled.
Even though Zyprexa's makers claimed zyprexa was superior, and was PROVEN wrong -- and assessed with a 690 million dollar to those who gained weight, got diabetes or pancreatitis, Eli Lilly continues on its merry HUGE profits way.
Some states have passed laws that doctors must show a specific reason for the new atypical antipsychotics to be prescibed - yet the government continues to allow zyprexa to be on the market. There is no proof that the drug makes any difference to achieving health -- or even alleviating symptoms. The toll continues to mount with "side effects" -- and even death -- resulting from taking these so-called medications.
While those prescibed these drugs can use the courts to get minimal satisfaction in financial terms, a movement to recall the drugs requires political ACTION. It must be done with a campaign to alert the FDA and the heads of health committees of each state or province.
My son has been prescribed zyprexa .. and I am an ACTIVIST against these drugs. I have brought it to the attention of medical schools and a provincial hospital facility. This was no easy task. But at least some of the medical professionals and hospital adminstrators are on alert now.
However, the professionals continue in the main to close ranks and protect each other. In the case of Ontario's largest mental hospital, I had to threaten to sue them if they did not see me before the doctor would even meet with me!! Later a consultant was brought in who agreed with me in toto. The doctor was just plain wrong. No questions were asked about my son's family medical history regarding diabetes. No blood sugara level test was administered before dosage was begun. The hospital couldn't even be bothered to read the magazines about the zyprexa lawsuit. (The case is still pending here in Canada.)
Meanwhile, those who have been victimized by taking zyprexa languish in pain without seeing their payout in the US!!
The onset of diabetes and pancreatitis is swift and not many signs show up right away as the pancreas is falling apart. And this leads to death ...
I have fought long and hard to keep my son off perscription drugs. He went through special ed as the ONLY child not on ridilin and other ADD drugs in his classes. These drugs are a set up for lifelong addiction as they get used to having the feeling of "rushing". Now I am told to stay quiet while zyprexa eats away at his body. Not bloody likely. This prescribing of very dangerous drugs affects the families, too!! The anxiety and the price one pays to fight back sometimes seem hardly worth the effort it takes.
Drug professionals in addiction centres do not have the education to fight these prescription drug dependencies and addictions. Plus most addiction centres are for PROFIT. Their boards of directors are driven by the need for PROFIT. So don't count on them for ADVOCACY for those damaged by ridiculous labels or whose bodies give out. Since the government and corporations are refusing to deal with this severe societal problem, we are all going to have to do our job to fight the trend to "somatize" everyone.
What is particularly abhorrant is the need to give these drugs to youth who cannot advocate for themselves.
I post Evelyn's articles and everything I can find related to this issue on my blog. It's become a "mission" for me. I called up every lawyer involved in the zyprexa lawsuit I could find .. and got told by them all .. they cannot get this drug (and others like it) recalled. WE MUST DO THAT.
Please, if you have five minutes write a letter to someone involved in this issue .. like the FDA or your state's health authority. Let them know, we are onto this sick, sick overdispensing racket and that it's time for these drugs to be RECALLED.
If the drug companies (and there are precious few of those) don't make the billions per year off these drugs, they might actually do the research to find compounds that don't damage the human body!! They might invest in real therapy for damaged children. In a six month hospital stay for paranoid schizophrenia, my son saw his psychiatrist a grand total of none for therapy -- his only visits with his psychiatrist were directly related to re-prescribing. They had him on 3 antipsychotics in 9 weeks!!Yet it was costing the Province over $1,000 a day for his bed. He left with no discharge plan, no real psychiatric testing (he also has post traumatic stress disorder) and no help with his drug problem. What are the taxpayers getting for their money for these treatments? Nothing at all.
The NYT's continues to post articles about diabetes among mentally ill populations, but says nothing about the direct connection to antipsychotics -- or that the medications to treat it are made by the same drug companies. They give no hint on how to fight back. They instead demonize the victims of a huge conspiracy, as if they were to blame for their poor health care and their feelings of being defeated.
It is a welcome relief to see the TRUTH printed here and in the other venues that publish Evelyn's fine work.
by
ladybroadoak (37 articles, 20 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 386 comments)
on Sunday, July 23, 2006 at 6:35:52 PM
