Blogging Since 2006

Blogging Since 2006
WHEN INJUSTICE BECOMES LAW, RESISTANCE BECOMES DUTY
Showing posts with label Australia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Australia. Show all posts

Sunday, February 16, 2014

The Boss Plays the Music of His CEO's




Bruce Springsteen is da man, the guy richly deserves all the plaudits. He's known as "The Boss", and rightly so. His music has inspired many, his concerts have sold out across the world. He is, without doubt, the main man.

Imagine my deep joy when a good friend of mine, and massive Springsteen fan, Arun Bhanot, sent me a link to a video of Springsteen opening his show in Adelaide.

Springsteen has been touring Australia and opening up his shows with AC/DC's Highway To Hell. Most of you will know I am a huge fan of AC/DC. In fact, chapter one of my book is subtitled 'Highway To Hell'

So, why am I writing about Springsteen and AC/DC on a blog that is predominently about pharmaceutical companies and piss poor regulators? Well, because even I need a break from all this dark, seedy stuff.

Writing and researching about the death of someone kinda takes its toll... so allow me to indulge.

Here's Springsteen covering AC/DC's Highway To Hell.

For Bon




AC/DC are set to hit the studio in May this year to record a new album. A 40 date tour will follow shortly after [source]


Bob Fiddaman




Saturday, February 16, 2013

To Hell and 'Back' With GlaxoSmithKline



It never rains but it pours for poor old GlaxoSmithKline, or should that be GlaxoSmithSpine? Fresh on the back [ahem, excuse the pun] of a $3 billion fine from the US Department of Justice they have now been told by the Australian Federal Parliament to set up a charity and look after a possible 60,000...yes, that's 60,000, victims harmed by it's product, Myodil.

There's an estimated 60,000 Aussies who have been left crippled with pain, paralysed and incontinent because they were injected with a dye during an x-ray procedure. The dye was, at the time, the only way doctor's could see the spine clearly.


Sunday, March 18, 2012

'Climate Change Delusion' - The Latest Mental Disorder From the Field of Psychiatry

Just when you'd thought you'd heard everything that the field of psychiatry could throw at you to tell you that you have an illness related to chemical changes in your brain, comes a real gem from Australia.

Climate Change Delusion is, apparently, an obsession related to climate change.



The study, carried out by Mairwen K Jones, Bethany M Wootton, Lisa D Vaccaro and Ross G Menzies found that a substantial proportion of Obsessive-compulsive disorder [OCD] patients with checking compulsions have climate change concerns.

The wizards of Oz found that fourteen of the 50 participants [28%] were identified as having OCD concerns directly related to climate change and they concluded:

"Our findings demonstrate that the types of obsessions and compulsions experienced by 28% of our sample were directly aligned with the current issue of climate change and the perceived dangers associated with this phenomenon. To our knowledge this represents the first documentation of the significant impact of climate change on the nature of the concerns experienced by people with OCD checking subtype. We suggest that mental health professionals need to be aware of, and assess for the presence of such concerns."


The last line is startling, isn't it?

We suggest that mental health professionals need to be aware of, and assess for the presence of such concerns.


The power of suggestion is, it seems, alive and well in Australia.

The study claims that, "The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper." In other words, it wasn't, ahem, ghostwritten.

In other news... Orthorexia Nervosa, [ON] the compulsion to eat healthy foods pure or organic foods, has also been created out of thin air by those wacky white coated lunatics.



I kid you not.

This from the online abstract:

"The majority of participants stated that ON can be serious and incapacitating, and that it had mental, physical, social, and financial consequences."


It's apparent, to me at least, that the field of psychiatry have, or want to, corner every market. Turning over in your sleep will soon become a mental disorder at this rate!



Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK HERE


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE





Monday, March 12, 2012

Aussie Mental Health Minister Helen Morton in Mud Slinging Campaign

WA Mental Health Minister Helen Morton


Well, it appears that the Western Australian Health Minister, Helen Morton, has joined the ranks of the DeLorean driving posse [Paddy McGorry et al] and slammed those who have slammed the draft of the proposed changes in the Aussie mental health legislation. One of the proposals is to allow children to consent to being prescribed mind-altering medication and treatment such as ECT.

In typical [now unfashionable] fashion, Morton has accused the Church of Scientology of running a scare campaign.

[Insert laughter here]

ABC News Australia showed how The Citizen's Commission on Human Rights Australia [CCHR] have been handing out thousands of leaflets to protest against the new proposals, prompting Morton to label them.

Oh the irony.


Does Morton think that every single person who criticises these farcical proposals is a Scientologist?

The ABC News footage can be viewed here, most striking comment comes from Morton herself, via the reporter:

"The draft bill is just that and it's unlikely than many of the proposals will end up in the final version."


Anyone else think that Morton is missing the bigger picture here?

She should be criticising rather than name-calling, although it's common place for people to refer to mental health critics as Scientologists, usually because the person mud-slinging really does not have a clue what they are talking about and even if they did...they just don't know what to do about it.

So, sit back Ms or Mrs Morton, rest those weary feet of yours and do nothing. Meantime, the draft bill proposal will be assessed and pushed by the powers that be to include the latest set of mental health illnesses that can only be cured by Pharma drugs, in turn making millions of Aussie tax dollars for the current Australian government. Even Paddy McGorry has openly criticised the draft bill.

I'm left wondering what religion Morton is behind, it's a fair enough question, isn't it?

I don't see Catholics, Muslims or any other religion speaking out against these moronic proposals. I do, however, see a growing number of academics and patient advocates rising up, many of which cannot be labelled by the likes of Morton and the rest of the DeLorean driving posse from down under.

When a cause is effective there will be those who wish to shoot it down. CCHR are effective and that, ladies and gentlemen is pissing off the hierarchy so much that the only thing they can come back with is the Scientology slur.

I'm not a Scientologist, despite being labelled one many times usually by my pensioner stalker, a mindless cretin from Northern Ireland. I have many Scientologist friends, same as I have many Catholic, Muslim and Hindu friends. I don't judge people because of their need to have a religion in their life. I do, however, question the likes of Morton who can openly claim that CCHR are scaremongering. I think if she reads the proposals for the DSM-5, she will see clearly who the ones are that are scaremongering.

You know, if I was a kid I'd like someone to watch out for me. I'm reminded of the film 101 Dalmations and the character Cruella de Vil. In this instance the victims are children and not dogs.

Words fail me. Fortunately CCHR Australia are not failing, they are creating an awareness that da man just doesn't like. Da man's only form of weaponry is his mouth and the tired, worn out excuse that those wishing to safeguard children are Scientologists.

Blow it out yer arse Australia!

For the record, I believe in Karma.





Related: Psychiatrists slam WA plan to seek children's consent








Friday, February 17, 2012

Hickie Getting Picky With Lancet

Aussie Psychiatrist Ian Hickie


Oh, I do love it when a professional spits his dummy out of the pram, particularly when that professional is a psychiatrist who has ties to the pharmaceutical industry.

Professor Ian Hickie, whom I've wrote about numerous times on this blog, is in a tizz, it seems, with Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet. You see, Hickie wrote a review that appeared in The Lancet last year, a review that drew some scathing criticism from fellow psychiatrists. Hickies review was, in essence, bigging up the use of Valdoxan [agomelatine] an antidepressant marketed for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Hickie was chastised by his critics for not revealing his ties to Valdoxan manufacturer, Servier.

Now, it seems, the editor of The Lancet has joined in the fun and games. Hickie is accusing Horton of defamation because of tweeting an opinion about the review.

So, Hickie has come out fighting. A full response to Horton's tweet can be viewed on the crikey.com website where Hickie writes:
Sadly, tweeting has not only replaced the academic journal itself as the major source of credible information — the new social media is perceived to be the place where people say what they really believe. Any allegation in cyberspace is instantly assumed to be true and relayed extensively throughout the social network that is modern media.
Do I sense a mild form of paranoia here? "Any allegation in cyberspace is instantly assumed to be true and relayed extensively throughout the social network that is modern media."


Oh lighten up Prof, get down off that pedestal you climbed up upon. You really are not that important.

Hickie, in typical fashion, skirts over the issues of conflict of interest [of which he has many not just Servier] and goes on to tell everyone how hard done by he is]

**Diddums

He further writes:
My professional colleagues who conduct original research, our institutions, health journalists and many of the editors of Australia’s major medical and mental health journals, are well used to receiving these social media missives from the same small band of local anti-medicine or anti-psychiatry warriors.
If it were such a small band of  local anti-medicine or anti-psychiatry warriors then why is Hickie getting so upset about a piddling little tweet?

Hickies professional colleagues include Patrick McGorry, an Australian psychiatrist who drives around town in a DeLorean predicting futures for children. He has a unique ability to spot signs of early psychosis in children - no x-rays, no blood samples, no PET or MRI scans or even urine samples - just a series of interviews and forms with boxes. I've also wrote about McGorry before.

Another of Hickie's professional colleagues is Professor Graham Burrows, who recently hit the news down under for prescribing experimental psychiatric drugs to his patients, a lawsuit against Burrows is pending.

Hickie has every right to come out and defend his name, quite why he would though is baffling. Personally, I believe the God factor has come into play here. Hickie et al have been group back-slapping for so many years now that they cannot see that having financial ties to a product is a conflict of interest. They cannot see how they can be criticised by academics and anti-psychiatry warriors. I've news for Hickie, there's a whole bunch of feisty anti-drug writers out here in cyberspace, most of whom have been harmed by the very same drugs he and his cronies dish out, many of whom have had children harmed by drugs he and his cronies dish out.

The anti-psychiatry warriors, as Hickie puts it, are here to stay. If Hickie does not like opposition or if he is feeling the heat then it may be wise for him to step out of the kitchen and take a good look at himself in the mirror - the image bouncing back is, it appears, living in that great Egyptian river [De Nile]

For the record - I wear a Tarzan-like loin cloth, have a bone through my nose and carry spears, arrows and other weaponry in my ruck-sack - That, I guess, makes me some sort of warrior in Hickie's eyes.

Oh, I regularly tweet too.

Hickie's full response to Twittergate can be read in full HERE, it's already creating a lot of responses, most of which continue to slam him. Will these psychs ever learn. TUT-TUT.

More about Hickie and his professional colleagues below:


Patrick McGorry: "Hey... Paddy... Leave Those Kids Alone"

Patrick McGorry - Torn Asunder Down Under

Early Intervention, McGorry, Politics & TV Shows

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

Is Australia's "Number One Man" Misleading The Public?

Pre-Mental Disorder Screening & Drugging - THE PHARMACEUTICAL DELOREAN

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Pulls Over For New Passenger

The Defence of Prof. Ian Hickie

Australian Psychiatrist Ian Hickie's Lancet Paper Heavily Criticised

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Australian Psychiatrist Graham Burrows Denies Any "Wrongdoing"

Professor Graham Burrows - The "Cosmetic Psychiatrist?"




Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK HERE


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE




Friday, January 13, 2012

Professor Graham Burrows Accused of "Guinea Pig" Trial

Australian psychiatrist Graham Burrows has been accused by a former patient of using a non-approved psychiatric drug on her, 7 News has revealed. The patient told 7 News that when she confronted Burrows he threatened her with involuntary committal in a psychiatric ward

Burrows, whom I have highlighted many times on this blog, faces scrutiny as other former patients have now come forward with the intention of legal action.






Previous posts about Burrows:


News 7: More Complaints Against Prof Graham Burrows

Australian Psychiatrist Graham Burrows Denies Any "Wrongdoing"

Professor Graham Burrows - The "Cosmetic Psychiatrist?"






Monday, November 21, 2011

Apocalyptic Australia



Shocking news from The Australian newspaper yesterday revealed that parents are being forced to have their children medicated with psychiatric drugs.

Experts...and I use the term loosely, have warned parents that if they don't medicate their children who have been diagnosed with ADHD then they face being referred to the child protection authorities.

This is utter lunacy and surely a human rights issue...although I expect the 'experts' have already trawled through human rights issues and will claim it's a child's human right to receive the medication he/she needs. I guess they'd have a point...if the child actually had a proven illness!

It amazes me how, in this day and age, witchcraft is still being practiced, because ladies and gentlemen, that's exactly what this is.

In essence the 'experts' are telling parents we will raise your kids for you because you are not capable of doing it.


  • Don't smack your child for being naughty - drug them
  • Don't ground your child for being naughty - drug them
  • Don't stop your child's weekly allowance for being naughty - drug them
  • Don't stop your child from watching TV for being naughty - drug them


If your child is naughty send them to the white-coated 'experts' who can explain in detail that your child's behavioral problems are due to a biochemical imbalance of the brain. Ask them to show you the proof of this imbalance and sit back and watch them stutter their way through supposed evidence.

Pushing pills on children has become a pastime, it's growing in popularity not only in Australia but other countries too.

Consider the bullet points above for a few moments and ask yourselves what punishment you received for being naughty, it certainly wasn't a trip to the local head-shrinker to be forced fed mind altering drugs, was it?

Yesterday, with the help of Maria Bradshaw [Casper], I wrote about a New Zealand psychiatrist who goes against what drug regulators say about prescribing children as young as two mind altering drugs. Prof John Werry believes that children need medicating, he cannot show us any scientific evidence that supports his claim apart from 'depression sclaes' that are as old as the hills and about as useful as a trapdoor in a rowing boat!

Not content wit targeting children as young as two, the world of psychiatry has gone stark raving bonkers with the early intervention program, masterminded by former Australian of the year Patrick McGorry. I've wrote about McGorry numerous times on here. He, along with his fellow DeLorean posse have claimed that they can predict if your child will fall foul of a mental illness in future years. I'm reminded of gypsy women selling lucky heather and guiding one to have their palm read on the sea-front.

The 'experts' in Australia are nothing more than vendors of lucky heather, if you refuse to buy the lucky shrub then a curse will be bestowed on you...in this instance you will be reported to the Australian child protection authorities.

I'm left wondering exactly who has the mental illness here, is it the children of Australia for being children or is it the experts who believe that box-ticking forms can prove if one has a biochemical imbalance.

Full story in The Australian HERE


 Hat-tip Stephany - Soulful Sepulcher






Thursday, September 29, 2011

Paddy McGorry's DeLorean Program - The Survey



The early intervention program is akin to the chemical imbalance theory in as much that it is based purely on speculation. There is no science behind it, none at all. Possibility is not an excuse for treatment, if it were, then smokers would be offered chemotherapy years in advance of "possibly" developing lung cancer. McGorry et al can no more predict a mental disorder than you or I can next weeks Lotto numbers. To fund any program based on speculation is a high risk... in as much as the same way of treating the disorders with psychiatric medications that have a proven track record of causing suicide and horrific withdrawal problems.

You can now complete an online survey and also offer your thoughts on Patrick McGorry's EPPIC model. 

Take the survey HERE

More about McGorry and the DeLorean Mob:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28,




Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE
OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE




Sunday, September 25, 2011

Are the Australian Government Under the Spell of the Pharmaceutical Industry?

"Huggy Bear"  Fictional character who played a pimp in the 70's cop show Starsky and Hutch.


Quite often when a reader throws me a link to research I sit and ponder whether or not it merits further investigation. When a sharp eyed Australian reader of my blog recently sent me a link to the Australian Medicines Industry webpage, I kinda shrugged my shoulders and muttered "Yup" under my breath.

The Australian Medicines Industry,  formerly known as The Pharmaceutical Association, represents 80% of all Australian pharmaceutical companies. They appear to lobby the government and get consumer organisations to promote drugs, at least that's the way I see it.

What I find baffling is another body, namely Medicines Australia.

As far as I can see, Medicines Australia represents The Australian Medicines Industry but they would appear to be one and the same.

Here, Dr Brendan Shaw announces a new public website that seeks to raise awareness of the industry’s contribution to the health and wealth of the nation. The article cites Shaw as being The Australian Medicines Industry spokesman.


Yet this video sees him as the spokesperson for Medicines Australia?

Confused?

Even more confusing is the registrant of The Australian Medicines Industry website is Medicines Australia [Fig 1]

Fig 1


The Australian Medicines Industry and Medicines Australia are basically the equivalent of The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry [ABPI], the body that protects pharma from pesky patients requesting information about pharmaceutical products, they probably coined the term, "Talk to your doctor."

One only has to contact GSK to ask them about one of their prescription products. Any "Dear GSK, Can you help me withdraw from your product" type of letter is usually met with, "Dear Consumer, Under the ABPI Code of Practice...blah, blah, blah.... we therefore suggest you talk to your doctor....blah, blah, blah....

I can only assume that they have the same system set up in Australia.

A short time ago, I received a promotional pack of Aropax through the post. Aropax is yet another brand name or the SSRi antidepressant Seroxat, known as Paxil in the US and Canada and a whole host of different names throughout the world.

The Aropax promotional pack is from 2002 and it's my understanding that only a handful of these still exist today, luckily I have one.

I have, on two occasions, contacted GSK Australia and asked them about this particular promotion. They have never replied. With this in mind, I sent the following to Medicines Australia to see if they could have thrown some light on the 2002 promotion of Aropax in Australia:


1. How many patients were enrolled in the a plus project?


2. How many of the patients were under the age of 18?


3. Did the starter packs just contain packets of Aropax with 20mg tablets or were there starter packs with lower doses?


4. What were the qualifications and training of the counsellors on the a plus project?


5. What were the sales trends of Aropax in Australia before, during and after the a plus project?


6.How much did GlaxoSmithKline pay individual key opinion leaders, including (but not limited to) Professor Graham Burrows and Professor Bruce Singh? What were the services for which each was paid?


7. What were the goals of the a plus project?


8. How long did the a plus project run for?


9. How many adverse reactions were reported for Aropax during the project?


10. Were participants on the a plus project ever followed up or did GlaxoSmithKline Australia lose touch with the participants once the project had finished?


11. Why was the project ended?


12. Was the a plus project deemed a success by GlaxoSmithKline?


13. Has GlaxoSmithKline or its subsidiaries ever offered similar counselling sessions to patients taking other drugs manufactured by the company?


14. How much did GlaxoSmithKline pay for sponsorship of the Depression Awareness Journal around the time of the a plus project?

For an introduction into GlaxoSmithKline's promotional tool for Aropax watch this short video I made: [Forgive the Brummie accent]




I though it was reasonable of me to ask Medicines Australia about GSK's marketing tactics, they do seem to have a very good relationship with them, as a matter of fact, today sees them 'big up' Glaxo on their page. The Royal Flying Doctor Service [Queensland and Victoria] and Save the Children being two key partnerships recently secured with GSK Australia.


When I see the word 'children' and 'GSK' in the same sentence I normally hear alarm bells.

Medicines Australia replied within 48 hours, it was a peculiar email to say the least.

With the above questions, I wrote:


Dear Sirs,

I have wrote to GSK Australia on two separate occasions regarding the promotion of Aropax in Australia in 2002. Sadly, for reasons only known to them, they have failed to respond.

I therefore request that Medicine's Australia intervene and either answer the questions I put to GSK or urge GSK Australia to give me answers.

Medicines Australia replied with:


You have sent your email to a non-manned mailbox at Medicines Australia.
Medicines Australia is the industry association representing pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Medicines Australia is not interested in your services and no action has been taken with regard to your email.
Many Thanks
Medicines Australia



Non-manned? Weird that a non-manned inbox has the ability to tell me that it is not interested in my services? Weird that Medicines Australia would set up an email system to 'bounce' emails back to the sender...without actually reading what was sent?

Ignorance, as they say, is bliss.

So, the 2002 Aropax promotion by GSK in Australia still remains shrouded in secrecy. GSK won't answer me, neither will Medicines Australia. I'd ask the Aussie government but it would appear they are already having a back scratching session with Medicines Australia.


Will Delaat, Chairman of the Pharmaceutical Industry Council and former "Independent" Chairman of Medicines Australia, recently addressed Medicines Australia's 2011 Parliamentary dinner, where the theme of the evening was "Innovation for the Health of the Nation."

Here's part of Delaat's speech:

It’s about shining a light on how the health and productivity of our people, and the health our economy, benefit from the Australian medicines industry.

It’s about shining a light on the importance of the right policy settings from Government to enable and encourage a viable medicines industry.

It’s about shining a light on the importance of a robust intellectual property framework in Australia.

But it’s also about something much more straightforward than that. It’s about celebrating a great success story - the Australian medicines industry.

  • An industry that delivers the latest medicines and vaccines to Australian patients and contributes to improved health and productivity outcomes.
  • An industry that employs 14,000 Australians in high-skill, high wage jobs – 72 per cent of whom are tertiary educated.
  • An industry that contributes more than $4.1 billion in manufacturing exports, more than any other high tech industry.
  • An industry that undertakes 800 clinical trials in Australia each year.
  • An industry that attracts more than $1 billion a year in global R&D investment – more than the automotive industry.In short, the medicines industry is one of Australia’s key innovative technology industries, which contributes to the nation’s social and economic development in a number of ways.

The medicines and vaccines the industry researches, develops, manufactures and brings to the community play a vital role in treating illness, and helping people live healthier, happier, more productive lives.

Tie this together with the Australian government ploughing money into Patrick McGorry's early intervention program [a model whereby children can be diagnosed with a mental disorder...before they actually get it] and you have a very cosy, exclusive pill pushing club who, when brought to task, claim that you are either a conspiracy theorist or Scientologist! [Back story]

Australian's need to start asking questions of this bed hopping. Exactly who is running your country? Is it Prime Minister Julia Gillard or is it the pharmaceutical industry?

**Footnote - The father of Prime Minister Julia Gillard is a former psychiatric nurse.


Fid 


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING 


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE


Thursday, September 15, 2011

Another Psychiatrist Slams McGorry's DeLorean Mob

Australian Psychiatrist, Patrick McGorry. A soothsayer who can predict the future mental health of children.


Superb article written by psychiatrist Tanveer Ahmed is doing the rounds. In it, he [I assume it is as he] picks apart Paddy McGorry's flux capacitor on his time-travelling DeLorean.

On September 13, 2011, smh.com.au ran with an article entitled "Politics and mental health a poor mix", McGorry and his sidekick, Prof Ian Hickie, come under scrutiny once again.

Ahmed writes:

In one of the more farcical applications of psychiatry to political debates, a report this month linked inaction on climate change to the possibility of worsening mental health. Released by the Climate Institute, it suggested that increasing natural disasters might be linked to climate change, which might lead to increased costs in mental healthcare. The evidence for every link was slight at best, yet the novelty of the report ensured widespread attention.

It was launched by Professor Ian Hickie, who has been rightly recognised for giving mental health a greater profile, but who has also played politics to do so.

Hickie has done more than any other clinician to promote tick-a-box diagnosis, particularly among general practitioners, who now regularly prescribe antidepressants through questionnaires alone. With former Australian of the Year Professor Patrick McGorry, Hickie has made overblown claims about the prevalence of mental health.

It is disingenuous to suggest, as McGorry has done, that there is no conflict of interest because their organisations are non-profit. Their bodies shared in $2.2 billion of funding in the federal budget. Their exorbitant claims - such as one in four people will suffer mental illness - are indicative of a blurring of the lines between illness and normal, human responses to adversity.

For Hickie to claim that climate change can cause mental illness  is yet another reason why people should not take McGorry's band of DeLorean driving merry men seriously. They will be predicting the weather next!

Weatherman: Tomorrow sees a north-easterly breeze and cloudy skies in the south. Please take your Paxil as not to give yourself a mental disorder.

**This forecast was brought to you by LoonHayTic Pharma PLC


Earlier this year McGorry pulled a clinical trial. He, with the financial assistance of Seroquel manufacturer Astra Zeneca, wanted to carry out a clinical trial [of sorts] with children, amongst others, who had not yet been diagnosed with a psychotic illness.


Psychiatrists, psychologists and researchers from all over the world lodged a complaint when they heard of the planned trial.

McGorry pulled the trial and now denies that the complaint had anything to do with his decision. If the 9 page complaint didn't change McGorry's mind...then what did?

If you look at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry listing you will see that it was changed to say that ethics approval had been received on 8 July 2010: [HERE]

Yet on the 16 Aug 2011 there was no mention of this - [HERE]

I find it strange that the criteria for a clinical trial can change, almost overnight, when one of it's supporters comes under fire from his peers.

It's a sunny day here as I write this, forecast for the weekend predicts rain. Anyone got any psych meds?




More about McGorry HERE.




Fid 


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING 


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE


Friday, September 09, 2011

Political Asylum...Down Under

"As I was decreasing the dose of (my medication) there were severe and urgent symptoms, mostly ongoing, and strong nausea," - Senator Mary Jo Fisher. [Image: The Australian]



Australia has been in the news quite a lot lately with regard to prescription medication of the antidepressant kind.

First we had Patrick McGorry and his band of DeLorean driving merry men who laid claim to the find of the century, a crystal ball that could see into the future and diagnose you, and your children with a mental disorder before you, or your children, actually got it! I have wrote about McGorry many times on this blog, if you Google the search term 'Fiddaman + McGorry' you will find the majority of posts.

In a nutshell, McGorry has convinced the Australian government to throw money at his early intervention program. It would appear the Australian government, or at least some of it's MP's, are finding out for themselves just how brutal psychiatric medication can be.

This from The Australian [Sept 8 2011]

One in five politicians is on medication for depression, claims Andrew Robb

LIBERAL frontbencher Andrew Robb claims 20 per cent of those in federal parliament are using antidepressants.

The opposition finance spokesman, who suffers a form of depression, said yesterday in Adelaide the high pressure of political life caused depressive illnesses

"I do know that at least 20 per cent of the parliament are taking some sort of antidepressant medication," he said. "I don't know who they are, but I know they are. I certainly think for people who are under a lot of stress, like politicians or senior ministers, a lot thrive on that. But others who get a lot of stress, well that can cause a depressive condition."

Full story HERE

Next we have the story that an Australian Senator, Mary Jo Fisher, is up on a charge of grocery theft and assault. Her defence, once again highlighted in The Australian [Sept 9 2011]


Senator Fisher says she hit rock bottom at time of alleged grocery theft and assault
Senator Fisher said she was in the middle of changing her medication after being diagnosed with chronic depression in 2009 and was "zoning in and out"
.
"As I was decreasing the dose of (my medication) there were severe and urgent symptoms, mostly ongoing, and strong nausea," Senator Fisher said.

"(My medication) was not getting me out of the pits of despair."

Full story HERE

I think it safe to say that this should come as a warning to those government officials who back McGorry's early intervention program. If the steak is poisoning people now then imagine what that steak could do to the future of Australian children.

Fisher's defence is not unheard of, to me it appears she is describing akathesia, ["severe and urgent symptoms, mostly ongoing."] This is a common side effect of most psychiatric medication, an adverse reaction that is played down by the psychiatrists who prescribe it, the watchdog that regulate it and the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture it. [The Psychopharma Monopoly]

This is a wake-up call for the Australian government, I'm merely a blogger from Birmingham who has experienced the devastating effects of an SSRi, there are literally hundreds of thousands of others who have experienced the same, if not worse than I.

If stopping or changing medications can cause your own Senator severe side effects...then just imagine what drugs like these can do to your children. If McGorry has his way, he'll hook them up before they get the "illness"

Ball is in your court Australia.



Fid 


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING 


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE




Sunday, September 04, 2011

Coroners Court files reveal violent deaths in Australian mental health facilities.





The Age, a popular Australian newspaper, yesterday highlighted the suppression behind Victorian mental health facilities, Victoria being the state of Australia, although more than likely the age of the facilities there too.

Data obtained by The Age revealed that 119 of the 502 coronial inquests held in Victoria between 2008 and 2010 involved people with diagnosed mental illnesses. Of those 119 mental health coronial cases, almost a third related to the deaths of patients while they were being treated at state-run and private mental health facilities, writes The Age, adding, that "36 people died unexpected, unnatural or violent deaths in Victorian mental health facilities between 2008 and 2010."



The newspaper has published an investigation into the deaths of three men who died in state-run psychiatric wards across Melbourne between 2007 and 2009: Adam White, 31, Anthony Travaglini, 40, and Jeffery Hartwig, 43.


Southern Health, the health service responsible for the care of Mr Hartwig and Mr White, tried to stop The Age from reporting. A suppression order was made but, it appears The Age have, rightly so, ran with the article.


The Age:

■ Mr Travaglini, who died in September 2008 at Eastern Health's Upton House psychiatric hospital in Box Hill, was killed by a combination of powerful anti-psychotic medications given to him by staff, according to a Victorian government pathologist. Staff and patients aware of the circumstances of his death say the 40-year-old was pleading not to be given more drugs on the night he died. Staff and patients also allege there was an attempt to conceal information about the circumstances of his death from his family.

■ Mr Hartwig died at the Monash Medical Centre in December 2009 after he went into a coma following a suspected overdose of illicit drugs supplied by unknown visitors. His family says the hospital's psychiatric ward kept no visitor log nor did it supervise visits to patients. Police sources say the hospital's legal department interfered with their investigation and ordered staff not to speak about the circumstances of Mr Hartwig's death.

■ Mr White's 2007 death at Dandenong Hospital's psychiatric ward during a struggle with security guards was the subject of a recent inquest. A finding has yet to be made, but evidence to the inquest suggests Mr White was asphyxiated while being held face down by security staff. A witness told the inquest that Mr White apparently yelled ''I give up'', but security did not ease off. He died soon after.


In what appears to be a feeble excuse, Victoria's chief psychiatrist, Ruth Vine claims, "..it is difficult to manage fairly large, fairly aggressive men and I think it is the case in some of these [deaths] that there was a degree of physical unwellness underlying.''

No shit doc! You ever asked yourself why they are "fairly large" and have "a degree of physical unwellness underlying?"

Medication, such as those used in psychiatric facilities, have been known to cause weight gain and psychotic episodes.

I applaud The Age for it's two-fingered salute to Southern Health and for highlighting the abhorrent abuse of human life.

Full article, by Richard Baker and Nick McKenzie can be read HERE




Fid 


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING 


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE



Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Patrick McGorry, Clinical Trials and the Flaws



A thought just occurred to me regarding Aussie shrink Patrick 'DeLorean' McGorry and his heavily criticised early intervention program.

For those that have never heard of McGorry he is the Australian psychiatrist who basically can predict if a child will fall foul of a "mental illness" in future years. This is based on family history and...well, erm... likelihood. In other words it's a guessing game.

Anyway, whilst browsing the Clinical trials website it occurred to me that many, if not all pharmaceutical companies, have an exclusion criteria when carrying out clinical trials. An example would be a recently completed Paxil trial. Some of exclusion criteria was:

Patients with a history or complication of another (non-MDD) mental disorder (schizophrenia, etc.)
Patients with a history or complication of manic episodes

Patients diagnosed as having an attentional deficit disorder or hyperactivity disorder

Patients with a 3 or more-point score of "suicide" (HAM-D Item 3) or with a strong suicidal tendency by C-SSRS and investigator clinical judgement.

The full exclusion criteria for this particular trial can be read HERE.

Anyway, the point I am making here is thus:

If Paddy McGorry believes he can predict if a child will fall foul of a psychosis like illness and he firmly believes his early intervention program is fool proof then what of future exclusion criteria in clinical trials?

Surely if, in the above instance, those deemed to have been diagnosed with "ADHD" could not be part of certain clinical trials then what of McGorry's line of kids he has waiting to tick boxes to see if they will fall foul of such a disorder in future years?

Pharma can't have their cake and eat it. Maybe they should contact McGorry to pre-test all the children they add to their clinical trials.

**ring ring ring ring

"Hello, Paddy McGorry speaking."

"Hello Paddy, GSK here. We was just wondering if you could screen a bunch of kids for us to see if they will fall foul of a mental disorder sometime in the future."

**KA CHING

"Of course, send them over."


Maybe with the DeLorean Intervention Program, McGorry may just stop kids being picked for trials by pharmaceutical companies who, despite knowing their psychiatric medication is not safe for kids, continue to find ways to use it on kids.

If McGorry's program is so fool proof then why don't pharmaceutical companies use it before accepting children and teens onto their clinical trials?

I think my argument is valid, don't you?

Your move Paddy.




More about McGorry HERE.


Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE










Monday, August 22, 2011

Who Moved The Goalposts on Patrick McGorry's Clinical Trial

The DeLorean v Google Cache


So, Former Australian of the year Patrick McGorry has published a rebuttal on his blog to all the criticism he has received.

It's a response to an article by Jill Stark that appeared in The Age, a popular Australian newspaper.

McGorry writes:

The article is entirely based on misleadingly linking two entirely separate events. These events are: the decision of Orygen Youth Health Research Centre (for which I am Executive Director) not to proceed with an already ethically approved trial of the medication.

I'm glad he has raised the ethical issue.

If you look at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry listing you will see that it was changed to say that ethics approval had been received on 8 July 2010: [FIG 1]

Yet on the 16 Aug 2011 there was no mention of this - [FIG2]

I find it strange that the criteria for a clinical trial can change, almost overnight, when one of it's supporters comes under fire from his peers

So, one has to ask why McGorry's claim that his trial was 'ethically approved' only appeared on Sunday night, hours after he had been slammed by the Australian press? The Google cache is a journalist's DeLorean Mr McGorry. It may also be your downfall.

FIG 1 How the clinical trial looks today


FIG 2 How the clinical trial looked on Aug 16, 2011

A glitch in the flux capacitor, perhaps?


Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE




Sunday, August 21, 2011

McGorry Seroquel Drug Trial - The Complaint

Former Australian of the Year, Patrick McGorry
Jill Stark's superb exposé on Australian psychiatrist Patrick McGorry has caused a storm down under. 

McGorry, with the financial assistance of Seroquel manufacturer Astra Zeneca, wanted to carry out a clinical trial [of sorts] with children, amongst others, who had not yet been diagnosed with a psychotic illness.

Psychiatrists, psychologists and researchers from all over the world lodged a complaint when they heard of the planned trial.

McGorry pulled the trial and now denies that the complaint had anything to do with his decision. If the 9 page complaint didn't change McGorry's mind...then what did?



McGorry appeared an Australia's Lateline 24 hours prior to Jill Stark's article went to press


video

Related Articles:

Patrick McGorry: "Hey... Paddy... Leave Those Kids Alone"

Patrick McGorry - Torn Asunder Down Under

Early Intervention, McGorry, Politics & TV Shows

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

Is Australia's "Number One Man" Misleading The Public?

Pre-Mental Disorder Screening and Drugging - THE PHARMACEUTICAL DELOREAN

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Pulls Over For New Passenger

Patrick McGorry and Co Under Fire

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Psychiatrist's Assessment of Patrick McGorry

Patrick McGorry's "Back to the Future" 2008 Study

Australian Doctor Magazine Sees Patrick McGorry Defend His Position

Are The Wheels Coming Off Patrick McGorry's DeLorean?

 Professor Graham Burrows - The "Cosmetic Psychiatrist?" [Updated 7.34pm]

 Patrick McGorry Responds to Criticism by Allen Frances

Australian Member of Parliament, Martin Whitely, also speaks out against McGorry's Headspace initiative HERE.

Patrick McGorry's Headstrong DeLorean Posse Part I 



Can someone ask Paddy to define better?


 




Fid

ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE








Saturday, August 20, 2011

Was McGorry Forced To Pull AstraZeneca Funded Trial on Children?

Australian psychiatrist/soothsayer, Patrick McGorry


Jill Stark has a revealing article about Prof. Patrick McGorry running in tomorrow's edition of 'The Age'. Because of the time difference UK/Australia...or maybe because I've been pushed into the future 'DeLorean' style, that article is now available online.

Stark's investigation shows how McGorry planned to carry out a trial using the antipsychotic Seroquel on children as young as 15. The trial, funded by AstraZeneca, was to "investigate whether the drug would decrease or delay the risk of people aged between 15 and 40 with early signs of mental illness developing a psychotic disorder such as schizophrenia", writes Stark.

Psychiatrists, psychologists and researchers from all over the world lodged a complaint when they heard of the planned trial, resulting in the trial being pulled.

I cannot quite grasp why anyone would want to give someone a mind altering drug to see if it would deter an onset of an illness that the subject may or may not get. It defies logic. Then again, when have pharmaceutical companies applied any logic when it comes to medicating children with disorders invented by those nutty professors in white coats?

McGorry claims the decision to scrap the trial was made in June and is unrelated to the complaint. Yeh right, and I've just witnessed a pig fly past my window and an owl and a pussycat rowing a pea green boat!

Stark's article can be read in full HERE

It seems more and more people are now speaking out against McGorry's soothsayer ways, something the citizens commission on human rights [CCHR] have been doing for years. Long may it continue.


Related Articles:

Patrick McGorry: "Hey... Paddy... Leave Those Kids Alone"

Patrick McGorry - Torn Asunder Down Under

Early Intervention, McGorry, Politics & TV Shows

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

Is Australia's "Number One Man" Misleading The Public?

Pre-Mental Disorder Screening & Drugging - THE PHARMACEUTICAL DELOREAN

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Pulls Over For New Passenger

Patrick McGorry & Co Under Fire

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Psychiatrist's Assessment of Patrick McGorry

Patrick McGorry's "Back to the Future" 2008 Study

Australian Doctor Magazine Sees Patrick McGorry Defend His Position

Are The Wheels Coming Off Patrick McGorry's DeLorean?

Professor Graham Burrows - The "Cosmetic Psychiatrist?" [Updated 7.34pm]

Patrick McGorry Responds to Criticism by Allen Frances

Australian Member of Parliament, Martin Whitely, also speaks out against McGorry's Headspace initiative HERE.

Patrick McGorry's Headstrong DeLorean Posse Part I



Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE
OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE




Friday, August 19, 2011

Professor McGorry Defends Early Intervention DeLorean Program

Australian Psychiatrist, Patrick McGorry. A soothsayer who can predict the future  mental health of children.


Australian soothsayer Patrick McGorry has been defending his early intervention program by appearing on Lateline, an Australian Broadcasting Corporation current affairs programme.

McGorry, who I have highlighted on this blog many times, claims the early intervention model he promotes has been proven to reduce mental illness symptoms and reduce costs to the health system.

'Proven' is past tense by the way.

Most notably, McGorry stated:

'What the studies actually show is there is no need to use anti-psychotic medications as first line in these patients [at high risk of developing psychosis].'

NB: The phrase 'first line' signals that he is not completely backing away from the use of antipsychotics in at-risk patients.

Also notable was the patronising but predictable dismissal by McGorry, Mendoza, and Crosbie of criticism as envy, in-fighting, bizarre, ignorant, self-defeating.... [I've seen playground bullies with better tactical skills]

Here's the transcript of his performance on Lateline


Related Articles:

Patrick McGorry: "Hey... Paddy... Leave Those Kids Alone"

Patrick McGorry - Torn Asunder Down Under

Early Intervention, McGorry, Politics & TV Shows

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

Is Australia's "Number One Man" Misleading The Public?

Pre-Mental Disorder Screening & Drugging - THE PHARMACEUTICAL DELOREAN

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Pulls Over For New Passenger

Patrick McGorry & Co Under Fire

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Psychiatrist's Assessment of Patrick McGorry

Patrick McGorry's "Back to the Future" 2008 Study

Australian Doctor Magazine Sees Patrick McGorry Defend His Position

Are The Wheels Coming Off Patrick McGorry's DeLorean?

Professor Graham Burrows - The "Cosmetic Psychiatrist?" [Updated 7.34pm]

Patrick McGorry Responds to Criticism by Allen Frances

Australian Member of Parliament, Martin Whitely, also speaks out against McGorry's Headspace initiative HERE.

Patrick McGorry's Headstrong DeLorean Posse Part I


OTHER LINKS

Jill Stark did an excellent article about criticism of Patrick McGorry in The Sunday Age on 7 August. The Age is Melbourne's main newspaper, and the article was apparently on the front page, so the article would have been at least glanced at by many people. Six letters (including one from McGorry) were published in response:

McGorry accused of conflict of interest

The Big Issue: Mental Health

Not surprisingly, McGorry also responded with a piece on his website:
Merchants of doubt do no favours for people with mental illnesses


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US & CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE









Thursday, June 23, 2011

Professor Graham Burrows - The "Cosmetic Psychiatrist?" [Updated 7.34pm]

 Professor Graham Burrows: "I don’t think there’s anyone in the world today who could emphatically say how an anti-depressant works." 




As Australian psychiatrist Professor Graham Burrows defends his corner against recent allegations of over medicating patients, misdiagnosing and bed-hopping with the pharmaceutical industry, many of his former patients are trying to get their lives back on track. Burrows, is, it appears, a firm believer in the pharmaceutical products he prescribes - one such product is GSK's Seroxat, known as Aropax in Australia and Paxil in the US and Canada.

In a 2002 short documentary Burrows claimed that shyness was a treatable condition, treatable with Aropax. In fact much of Burrows' statements from the 2002 transcript leave me wondering whether he was merely promoting GSK's product, I think it fair to make that assumption, tell me what you think:

Narration: Paxil or Aropax as it’s known in Australia is one of the Prozac-like antidepressants. And while many psychologists say they meddle with human nature, psychiatrists like Graham Burrows claim they’re merely much-need medications.

Professor Graham Burrows: I don’t consider it meddling if in fact this person is suffering so much that it’s interfering with their life that they want to be changed. They want to feel more comfortable, they want to be able to deal with the social situations. They want to enjoy life when they’re not enjoying life. That couldn’t really be called meddling.

The narrator continued by announcing that Burrows believed that up 13% of Australians had "chronic shyness" and more than half of them probably need permanent medication to turn their lives around.

Opposing this was psychologist Dr Sallee McLauren:

"One of the central things with people who suffer from anxiety is the sense of powerlessness. They think that they cannot control the anxiety. Now this is simply not true. We can certainly learn to manage that anxiety. That’s why it’s very important for people who suffer from anxiety not to just adopt that passive approach of just popping a pill. It’s very important instead to learn how to be an agent in your own life. So how to stand up to the anxiety".

Here's Burrows response to McLauren:

"That’s not true and I’d disagree with that sort of opinion and that’s often a divided opinion between psychologists and psychiatrists, it depends who you go to because there are people who have claimed that the person can be well, but in fact when you take them off the medication they get bad again and you get back into the CBT and they still have problems, that’s when they have to face the fact that this person needs medication."

"When you take them off the medication they get bad again?"

Did it, or indeed does it, ever occur to Burrows that they 'get bad again' due to the side-effects of the drug they are taking? Furthermore, to just take someone off Aropax is not recommended as the withdrawal symptoms can be horrendous.

Here, Burrows defies all the odds with one of the most eye-opening claims I have ever seen from a psychiatrist:

"There are people who have abnormal biochemistry in their brain. We can show that by blood tests. We can show that with positron emission tomography a neuro-imaging technique. We’ve done some studies to show that they actually have altered chemistry and by giving them the medication, their chemistry is converted back to normal if you like and they don’t have the anxiety and the depression they had beforehand."

First and foremost, THERE IS NO PROVEN PET SCAN to diagnose mental disorders.

Positron Emission Tomography, more commonly known as a PET scan is a pretty daunting procedure and one that doctors [GP's] certainly don't carry out before handing out psychiatric drugs, in fact, many of Burrows former patients have come forward to complain that he over-medicated them, one such patient claimed that Burrows prescribed him/her a psychiatric drug after just 30 seconds of diagnosis! If true, how did Burrows know his patient had a disorder?

The PET scanner is a ring-shaped apparatus with an attached table. You will lie on the scanning table, and the table will slide slowly through the opening in the scanner ring. One or two scans might be taken before the tracer is administered. After this initial scanning, either you will inhale the tracer or it will be injected into one of your veins, usually in your arm. Additional scans will be taken while the tracer is in your body.

During the scanning procedure, you must lie very still. The scanning table will glide you through the PET scanner, so you won't need to move. If your head is being scanned, special cushions may be placed against your head to hold it in place. The entire scan should take 30 minutes to two hours. Afterward, you can go home and resume your normal activities. [Source]

So if it takes a PET scan between 30 minutes and 2 hours plus the time taken for a medical team to assess the images caught, how can Burrows, or indeed any healthcare professional diagnose a patient with a 'mental disorder' based on a brief consultation? More importantly, if the PET scan is, once again, just based on theory it makes the whole process of dishing out psychiatric medication a complete nonsense, an unproven science with unproven disorders treated with unproven drugs.

The clincher, if a clincher was needed, of the 2002 short documentary come when Burrows made the following statement:

"I don’t think there’s anyone in the world today who could emphatically say how an anti-depressant works – whichever antidepressant group and having said that we do know a lot of chemistry about what actually occurs. Now I sometimes say does anyone know what electricity is, but we use it."

If Burrows can find the time I suggest he do a Google search, simply type in, "How does electricity work?"

In fact, Burrows should know how electricity works, in a study he co-authored [MJA 2007; 186 (3): 142-144] the use of electroconvulsive therapy is cited as being "the most effective treatment for severe depression."

Google the term, "How does electroconvulsive therapy work?" and you will find that nobody knows how it actually works, it's all based on theory, same as the chemical imbalance theory promoted by GlaxoSmithKline, manufacturers of Aropax.

The procedure for electroconvulsive therapy [ECT] is, for want of a better word, Frankensteinian. The treatment involves placing electrodes on the temples, on one or both sides of the patient's head, and delivering a small electrical current across the brain.

We know electricity can be dangerous if used incorrectly, after all, we wouldn't tell a child to go and stick his or her wet fingers into a live plug socket would we? We'd warn them of the dangers, the risks.

Children today are being prescribed psychiatric medication, the number is growing and it will grow larger if programs, such as Patrick McGorry's EPPIC program is not opposed. McGorry claims he can predict if a child will fall foul of a 'mental illness' in future years. The Australian government seem to back him, having thrown millions of dollars in is direction.

As Burrows rightly states, "I don’t think there’s anyone in the world today who could emphatically say how an anti-depressant works." Yet antidepressants are prescribed despite the medical and psychiatric profession not knowing how they work on the brain. If they don't know how antidepressants work then they won't know how to combat the side effects and, I put it to Burrows et al, that they are not in a position to defend the huge number of claims that antidepressant medication can cause those taking them to commit suicide or homicidal acts, all of which have been well documented.

Incidently, The a plus project was promoted in Burrows' Depression Awareness Journal (which was funded by GSK). The project saw starter packs being handed out to patients in 2002, around the same time the documentary was made. Counselling was offered to patients on the proviso that they continued taking Glaxo's drug, Aropax!

Burrows' (2002) editorial:

We also examine the a plus project, a partnership of patients, GPs, pharmacists and psychologists, working together to improve treatment outcomes in depression.

Singh (2002):

The a plus project is a national programme for the treatment of clinical depression which employs a multidisciplinary, cooperative approach to ensure patients achieve the maximum benefit from their treatment. The a plus project is an example of a healthcare partnership in action, as it adopts a cooperative mental health approach featuring GPs, pharmacists, psychiatrists, psychologists and patients. (p. 8)

According to Singh, the a plus project was developed to improve the treatment received by GP patients: 'It was in response to such unmet community need that the a plus project was devised' (p. 10).

Singh likened the a plus project to beyondblue:

Australia recently witnessed another first in the treatment of depression building on the major national initiative of beyondblue. (p. 8)



Burrows, Graham D. (2002, June). From the Editor in Chief. Depression Awareness Journal, 11, inside front cover.

Singh, Bruce. (2002, June). The a plus project: A partnership in action. Depression Awareness Journal, 11, pp. 8-11.




[Professor Singh is and was a prominent, influential psychiatrist.]



Memo to Burrows:

If you are going to promote the use of Aropax for shyness, here's an idea - find out how it works and what the possible implications are when taking it. Until you have all the answers and scientific data may I suggest that you promote products that have been scientifically tested and that have been proven to be safe and effective - a simple cup of tea could be right up your street, make sure you are careful when plugging in that electric kettle though.

PS - Shyness IS NOT a mental disorder...unless you can prove otherwise?

**If you, or anyone you know, is struggling withdrawal problems with GlaxoSmithKline's Aropax [Seroxat/Paxil], contact GSK directly and ask them for help. If they refer you to your doctor, please contact me by email. [Email address in left hand sidebar]



Transcript segments taken from COSMETIC PSYCHOLOGY, ABC Television.

Related Articles:

The Marketing of Aropax in Australia and the A Plus Project

Australian Psychiatrist Graham Burrows Denies Any "Wrongdoing"

Are The Wheels Coming Off Patrick McGorry's DeLorean?

News 7: More Complaints Against Prof Graham Burrows