Zantac Lawsuit

Researching drug company and regulatory malfeasance for over 16 years
Humanist, humorist

Thursday, March 31, 2011

10 Year Old Boy Hangs Self - High levels of Prozac and Ritalin found in body


This from the Daily Mail today.

"Post-mortem tests on his body found the level of anti-depressant drugs found in his system were above the normal therapeutic level for adults."

Once again a young life taken. Once again the victim of suicide. Once again the British drug regulator, the MHRA, have failed to safeguard human health.

The inquest into this poor 10 year old boy, who was prescribed Ritalin for "ADHD" and an antidepressant [believed to be Prozac] found that he was being bullied and, as a result, was self-harming.

The Daily Mail writes:

Harry Hucknall was a 'troubled boy' who had suffered at the hands of bullies but he did not commit suicide, an inquest into his death was told.

Post-mortem tests on his body found the level of anti-depressant drugs found in his system were above the normal therapeutic level for adults.

The coroner, Ian Smith said he did not criticise their prescription in Harry's circumstances, nor did he argue that the drugs should not be used by children, but he pointed out that doctors must be 'extremely careful' in prescribing powerful drugs to 10-year-olds.

I guess that's a start, a coroner speaking out against the power of these drugs.

He added, "We as a society quite rightly try to stop children dabbling in street drugs and yet a child with this label of ADHD is prescribed, under supervision, mind-altering drugs of a very powerful nature - the full consequences of which I still do not believe are fully understood.

"It is very difficult to speculate how these two drugs could affect Harry's mental state. It seems very much to me that these drugs and their levels and the measurement of those levels are still a work in progress from the point of medical science."

Well, Mr Smith, do your homework and you will find that there is no medical science to ADHD, furthermore the drug Ritalin is being dished out to kids as young as 4 here in the UK, probably much younger if truth be known.

Quite why this poor child was prescribed both Ritalin and Prozac is a mystery, to me at least. Here we have two very powerful drugs, two drugs that adults find hard to tolerate, two drugs whose history shows a long list of suicidal acts. Benefits outweigh the risks, huh?

If, as coroner, Ian Smith suggests, "...these drugs and their levels and the measurement of those levels are still a work in progress..." then God help the children who are part of that 'work in progress'.

Don't expect the MHRA to intervene...they are too busy back-slapping one another for cracking down on people selling fake Viagra - thus saving their paymasters wads of cash.

Full story HERE



"We Speak For The Dead...To Protect The Living" - Unless Drugs Are Involved.

It appears the Coroner's Court in Ontario, Canada, are once again poking their noses into matters and rejecting strong evidence that supports prescription medication that can lead to suicide.

As in the Sara Carlin case, some ignorant buffoon type, in the shape of Coroner Dr. Bonita Porter, has ruled that in the case of Moncton teen, Ashley Smith, no video evidence of forced drug injections by staff at Joliette Prison in Quebec can be allowed as evidence in her inquest.

The video's, which were plastered all over youtube last year, show Ashley's final moments.

Ashley Smith, a 19 year old Canadian woman who was incarcerated for the crime of throwing an apple at a postman. She was just 15 years of age when a 30 day sentence was handed down to her. The 30 day sentence spread to 4 years as Smith was transferred on 17 separate occasions by Corrections Canada. The transfers spanned four of the five regions of the Correctional Service of Canada.

Last year I wrote about a report that had surfaced from 2008.

The report includes historical facts excerpted from document archives and video footage provided by five governmental departments as well as relevant information provided by departmental authorities, experts and other stakeholders. It includes a review of the services provided by the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Social Development, the Department of Health, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice. The report outlines 25 recommendations to government. The Ombudsman and Child and Youth Advocate is committed to reviewing and measuring the progress made with regards to these recommendations by the aforementioned departments and to release publicly a progress report in a year’s time.

The full report can be downloaded HERE

Coroner Dr. Bonita Porter ruled the July 2007 videos of prison staff at Joliette forcibly giving the girl needles are not relevant to Smith’s death. She added, "I am not aware of any information … that suggests a nexus between [the forced injections in July 2007] … and the pattern of ligature use which eventually led to her death."

Judge for yourselves then ask yourself why Dr. Bonita Porter feels this way.

The Ontario Coroner's Court motto is, "We Speak For The Dead...To Protect The Living"

Yup, of course you do!



Wednesday, March 30, 2011


Shane Clancy

FIDCAST - Episode one features an interview with Leonie Fennell, the mother of 22 year old Shane Clancy, who, after only 17 days on the SSRi Cipramil [Celexa], killed a young man and seriously injured two other people before killing himself.

The FIDCAST features music from Arun Bhanot and Ask Alife, both unsigned artists.

I sincerely hope Lundbeck listen to this, I also hope the medicine regulatory authorities listen to it too. To be brutally honest, the regulatory authorities, whether they be in Ireland, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada or the US, should hang their heads in shame for allowing this group of drugs on to the market...and for continuing to allow them to be prescribed to children and adolescents.

Other Cipramil [Celexa] stories from can be read HERE




Leonie's blog can be found HERE

SSRI Withdrawal guidance **Please remember, this is just a guidance.

To contact FIDCAST please EMAIL



Sunday, March 27, 2011





Saturday, March 26, 2011


I was browsing through youtube the other day and stumbled upon one of those sickly sugar flavoured pharmaceutical adverts. The ad, for the "ADHD" drug, methylphenidate, brand name Concerta, features a mother speaking about how all of her children have ADHD...and all of them are on Concerta, Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Inc wonder pill. The mother proudly boasts that she too has ADHD and is also on Concerta.

The ad carries the disclaimer, "The individuals appearing in this video have been compensated for their participation and are not actors."

The mother, known as 'Natalie' talks through the first segment of the video:

"...if there's a child in the family that has ADHD, there's a chance that one of the parent's will also have ADHD"

She continues:

"I'm an adult that was recently diagnosed with ADHD and I have four children. My oldest son is named Max, he is 14 years old, he has ADHD.

"I have an 11 year old son, whose name is Sam, he also has ADHD.

"I have a 9 year old daughter named Mia, she also has ADHD.

"And I have an 8 year old son named Judah who was just recently also dignosed with ADHD."

Bravo to Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Inc for the vomit inducing advert. Perhaps they should go into detail and describe exactly how ADHD is diagnosed or better still show the scientific proof that ADHD actually exists.

The ad appears on the "ADHD" channel on youtube, a channel that carries the Concerta logo at the top of its page and hosts various videos regarding ADHD and its treatment.

Concerta is basically a sustained release version of Ritalin, a drug manufactured by Novartis.

In the United States, methylphenidate is classified as a Schedule II controlled substance, the designation used for substances that have a recognized medical value but present a high likelihood for abuse because of their addictive potential. It is approved for use in children and adolescents in both the US and UK.

The youtube page has a host of links that direct viewers to the Concerta website where you are greeted with screening tests and offers [vouchers]

To get a 30 Day FREE coupon offer, all you need to do is sign up to the website.

They write:

Sign up today and receive a free coupon in printable PDF format. Ask your healthcare professional about managing the everyday challenges of ADHD symptoms with CONCERTA®. Then, submit coupon at your pharmacy along with your prescription for a free 30-day* supply of CONCERTA®. (Restrictions apply)

I actually couldn't see what the "restrictions" were?

The website adds:

The most common adverse reaction (>5%) reported in children and adolescents was upper abdominal pain.

No mention whatsoever of:

Aggravation, nervousness, hostility, sadness, drug dependence, tics, insomnia and prolonged sleepiness or psychosis, all of which are listed adverse reactions to Concerta.

If you feel brave enough, you can take the online screening test to see if you have ADHD... or let your children try, they have a kiddies version too.

The British drug regulator, the MHRA, report that there has been 991 adverse drug reactions to Concerta and a total of 13 deaths - remember this is the MHRA's yellow card reporting system, a system that is about as transparent as a brick wall.

It's been said that any figures from the MHRA's flawed system should be, at the very least, multiplied by 100.

Here's the video:


It has never been proven that ADHD is inheritable, it's just a theory.

The cause of ADHD has not been fully defined.

ADHD symptoms and signs are basically found in every single child, "signs" such as;

  • The child often fails to give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes in schoolwork, work, or other activities.
  • The child often has difficulty sustaining attention in tasks or play activities.
  • The child often does not seem to listen when spoken to directly.
  • The child often does not follow through on instructions and fails to finish schoolwork, chores, or duties in the workplace.
  • The child often has difficulty organizing tasks and activities.
  • The child often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to engage in tasks that require sustained mental effort (such as schoolwork or homework).
  • The child often loses things necessary for tasks or activities (toys, school assignments, pencils, books, or tools).
  • The child is often forgetful in daily activities.

Hand on heart, can anyone out there say that they have not experienced the majority of the above during their childhood years?

Couldn't all of the above be down to tiredness?

Doncha just wish that Concerta or Ritalin were around when we were kids.

PHARMA - Drugging children for forgetfulness and daring to feel tired.

In 2002, The Netherlands Advertisement Code Commission (Reclame Code Commissie) ruled that the country's Brain Foundation cannot claim that the controversial psychiatric condition Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurobiological disease or brain dysfunction. The Commission ordered the Foundation to cease such false claims in their advertising.

The Advertisement Code Commission was responding to a complaint brought by the Dutch chapter of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) [1]

God, if indeed there is such a thing, must be rubbing his hands in anticipation and waiting for those responsible for the ADHD fraud to finally knock on the pearly gates of his Kingdom.

**An updated version of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), a manual where ADHD was borne, is due out soon.

For more on 'informed consent', visit Ablechild.

[1] 'ADHD is not a brain disorder' Dutch Commission finds psychiatric claim false.



Wednesday, March 23, 2011





Judge Ponders Possible Dismissal of Case Against Ex-Glaxo Counsel Lauren Stevens


The case against ex-Glaxo Counsel, Lauren Stevens, may be dropped according to press reports this past week or so. King and Spalding, Glaxo's team of highly paid lawyers, will breathe a sigh of relief if the Judge rules in Steven's favour.

The indictment accused the Glaxo official, Lauren C. Stevens of Durham, N.C., of lying to the Food and Drug Administration in 2003, by writing letters, as associate general counsel, denying that doctors speaking at company events had promoted Wellbutrin for uses not approved by the agency. Ms. Stevens “made false statements and withheld documents she recognized as incriminating,” including slides the F.D.A. had sought during its investigation, the indictment stated. [Back story]

It would appear she may get off on a technicality - don't you just love the law!

Anyway, these are for you Lauren.



My Thoughts on the Psychopharmacuetical Monopoly

Since I returned from LA I've wrote a lot about other SSRi's and personal stories, in particular the death of 17 year old Toran Henry from New Zealand [Prozac] and the death of Matthew Schultz [2 hours old] [Effexor]

In the past I have wrote about Sara Carlin [Seroxat/Paxil], Sharise Gatchell [Seroxat/Paxil] and have other personal stories lined up, stories of children who have left us and left behind grief stricken families.

What LA taught me was there is a huge problem with SSRi medication. It is effecting all walks of life, adults, children, pregnant mothers.

There is something dark at work here folks, it stretches far beyond the manufacturers of these drugs and embroils psychiatry, medicine regulators, government and coroners.

With such a powerful field of opposition the small man has very little chance of getting his voice heard.

We have the pharmaceutical industry denying that they have done any wrong in not being open and honest about SSRi clinical trials, psychiatrists being paid by the said pharmaceutical companies to 'big up' the drugs, medicine regulators who, quite honestly, are about as useful as a chocolate kettle, government officials that only care about any issues if it benefits them getting votes at the next local elections and coroners who are so distanced from grief that they cannot see the wood through the trees.

All of he above are part of the problem. All of the above are responsible for the grief stricken parents, the thousands, if not millions, of people who struggle on a day-in - day-out basis with withdrawal from these addictive drugs. Their only form of defence is:

1. What else is there?

2. These drugs are safe, those that speak out are Scientologists

3. The benefits outweigh the risks

Do they understand how utterly ridiculous they look when they tout 1,2 and 3?

More and more families are being introduced into the seedy world of the Psychopharmacuetical Monopoly. Their children are being targeted by psychiatrists that invent labels of some new psychiatric disorder that the majority of us passed off as being 'just life' when we were children. Family doctor's are agreeing with them because they need a solution for Mrs Jones son who is being boisterous and rebellious in class or Mr Smith's daughter who, at 15, is having mood swings.

We've got complete buffoonery going on with an Australian psychiatrist who cannot only predict if your child has a 'disorder', he can predict if they will get one in future years! For this absurd fantasy he was voted as 'Australia's Man of the Year!

Cheekily, I added myself to his Facebook page and threw out the following question to him:

"Hey, do you think you could predict this weeks Lotto numbers for me, only I hear you can predict whether or not a child will get some sort of mental illness in future years."

He deleted me from his page...without answering. To be honest, I expected nothing less.

So, to fight back, what do we, as advocates, concerned citizens, have at our disposal?

Well, we have lawyers. Go bust this pharmaceutical company for us and show the public just what they are really like. In Britain, at least, a law firm against a pharmaceutical company is akin to a flea biting an elephant, no more better than the average blogger speaking out against this sick industry. At least we, as bloggers, don't have to bow down to lawyers etiquette. We can pretty much go for the jugular when writing about pharmaceutical companies and regulators and their complete lack of transparency, at least that's what I try to do with my writing.

There are an abundance of human beings suffering at the hands of drugs that were given to them to make them feel better. When they seek help they are told it's not the drugs. When they are vocal, they are attacked from pharmaceutical whores, those in the pocket of the industry, those who clearly have their own agenda's in suppressing the truth.

Coroner's will drag out their reports, leaving a family in limbo, often refusing to carry out the toxicology tests that would show traces of SSRi medication. Once dragged to the limits of a two year wait for such a report, the family are handed the report... time barred from seeking any recourse from the pharmaceutical industry because...well, that's the way the law is.

The limp-wristed cowards that make up the medicines regulators sleep well at night because their sub-committees highlight that there are problems with SSRi's, they forward letters of warnings to doctor's, nurses, psychiatrists who don't even have to open them. Why would they? I can only assume that they think the regulators are basically those who grant licences to drugs, anything else they have to offer is of no importance.

Then along comes a group of noisy revelers, bloggers, campaigners, lobby groups who highlight the dangers of these drugs only to be appeased by the powerless regulators who spend more time targeting natural remedy shops than those they claim to protect from unsafe prescription drugs [the public]

You know, filling an adverse reaction report in and sending it off to a regulator shouldn't just be it. Any reports collected should be thoroughly researched, instead it's just another statistic put into a database that shows that the regulator are doing their job when in reality they are merely sweeping this problem under a very big carpet.

Every single child who commits suicide should have a screening to see if traces of antidepressant medication is found, not a standard screening either, a thorough one. The wizard psychiatrists are quick to screen them when they are alive so why not allow them the dignity of a screening process when they are dead?

I was recently asked if I wanted to attend a meeting with the MHRA to discuss SSRi withdrawal issues. A campaigner had written to the UK Health Minister who, in turn, had passed the letter of concern onto the MHRA. Same old story, pass the buck until the campaigners grow tired. I refused to be part of any such meeting as I have been down that road before. Why sit with a bunch of people who nod their heads when they hear horrific stories of withdrawal, suicide, self-harm then do absolutely nothing to eradicate the problem.

"Oh, we will send a letter out to warn doctor's"


They are at a loss of what to do because they are paid for by the pharmaceutical industry, how could they chastise their paymasters?

Our government are scared to speak out because the industry will just move their business elsewhere leaving an already depleted Britain in a further financial mess. Meantime, more and more children will fall into the system of the Psychopharmacuetical Monopoly - Pharmaceutical companies - Psychiatry - Regulators - Coroner's.

1. Pharmaceutical companies - Manufacture a remedy
2. Psychiatry - Create an illness for that remedy
3. Regulators - Grant licence for remedy to treat the illness created by psychiatry
4. Coroner's - Find no apparent connection with treatment - blame it on the created illness.

It's a vicious cycle of greed, manipulation and cowardice, each one finding excuses to blame the person before them.

Psychiatrist - It wasn't my fault I prescribed the drug, it's the manufacturer of said drug.

Regulator - It's not our fault, we sent warning letters out to psychiatrists.

Coroner's - We have been assured by the pharmaceutical industry that these drugs do not cause suicide.

Pharmaceutical companies- These drugs are not meant to be given to children.

In truth, the pharmaceutical companies have a good argument, thing is, they know their drugs are being given to children and they do nothing about it.

As a parent, would you allow  someone to give a cigarette to your 4 year old, or maybe half a bottle of vodka?

Same thing, the pharmaceutical industry know this goes on but it makes them bucket loads of cash, more cash to pay psychiatrists to invent new illnesses...and so the cycle continues.

They can tout the 'these drugs are not meant for children' all they want - It's obviously a lie, why else would GlaxoSmithKline be trialling out Paxil/Seroxat on children as young as 7 in Japan?

Chances are the CEO's are pharmaceutical companies have children and grandchildren, what's the betting that they are never given psychiatric drugs?

Same goes for regulators families, why allow their children, grandchildren to take a class of drugs that they know so much about...but do very little about it.

No doubt the MHRA will swarm over this post - if they don't like it.... let them send me a letter.

I won't open it.



Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Two Hours With Matthew - The Story of "Effexor Baby", Matthew Schultz.

Over the years I have been writing this blog I have come across some truly heart rending stories with regard to the loss of life. I've spoken at length with parents of those who have fallen foul to the greed of pharmaceutical companies, strived to highlight the truth that the mainstream media are too afraid to publish for fear of lawsuits hanging over their heads from manufacturers of antidepressants who wish to keep the truth within the confines of their vaults. Up to now, I've never really dived into the death of newborns, those unfortunate souls who died within months, weeks, days, and in the case of Matthew Schultz, hours.

Matthew was born on February 21, 2009. His parents, Amery and Christiane, spent just two hours with him before he passed away. He weighed just 7 pounds 3 ounces. He went into cardiac arrest shortly after he was born.

Matthew died from Effexor exposure, although at the time his parents didn't know this. Why would they? Effexor carried no warning. Neither Amery or Christiane were warned about the potential dangers of taking Effexor whilst pregnant, they were told many, many times that Effexor was safe.

Matthew's mother had been taking Effexor during her pregnancy, she was prescribed it by her doctor, who had diagnosed that she was suffering with "severe chronic depression", as a matter of fact, Christiane had been taking Effexor for 8 years prior to giving birth to Matthew.

"Christiane was never really truly depressed", recalls husband Amery, "Effexor never really changed her moods at all. However, once Christiane was on Effexor she found it almost impossible to get off." Amery added, ".. they turned her into an emotional zombie. Although she still had depressive symptoms, she never truly had happy moments."

During her 8 years on Effexor, Christiane had given birth to three other children, two of them were born with heart murmers whilst the third was born extremely under-weight at full term and also had a lung disorder. At no point did doctors associate Effexor being the causation of the three children being born with defects.

During her pregnancy with Matthew, Christiane asked the OBGYN, the physician who specializes in medical and surgical care to women with expertise in pregnancy, childbirth, if it was safe to take Effexor whilst pregnant. The reply, recalls Amery, was, "Women take this stuff all the time, we don't see any problem with it."

Christiane recounts on an early blog post of hers that both her and husband, Amery, had done a lot of research since their son had died. She writes:

Since Matthew died, we have done a lot of research. Turns out that my antidepressants have serious side effects. Not only to me, but my children through me. That would explain why out of 5 pregnancies, I have had something wrong with all of them. And why each subsequent pregnancies were more and more difficult.

Furthermore, both Christiane and Amery supplied their doctor with large amounts of evidence regarding Effexor and infant death they had obtained off the internet. Their doctor was astonished.

Too little, too late for Amery and Christiane.

The Canadian drug regulator, Health Canada, have, in the past, issued warnings to doctors regarding taking SSRi/SNRi medication whilst pregnant. This, however, is just not implemented, in fact, doctor's don't even have to read any warnings they get from Health Canada.

On June 28, 2004 some 5 years before Matthew was born, the FDA and Wyeth [Effexor's then manufacturer] issued a new MedWatch drug Alert to healthcare professionals: [1]

"Neonates exposed to Effexor, other SNRIs (Serotonin and Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors), or SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors), late in the third trimester of pregnancy have developed complications requiring prolonged hospitalization, respiratory support, and tube feeding."

This information was sent out to the medical profession in America. Two years later, in 2006, Health Canada issued a warning to all pregnant women considering becoming pregnant that SSRI drugs similar to Effexor may pose life-threatening risks to their babies. Nursing mothers were also warned that SSRIs could be secreted in milk and could have an effect on nursing infants. [2]

So, why, if this information was out there, did Christiane continue taking Effexor?

It's simple really, the public are rarely told by the medical profession about such warnings because the doctor's, nurses, OBGYN's, psychiatrists, rarely read the warnings. Like the UK, there is no system in place to make the medical profession read the warnings. The regulator has a clear conscience because they can profess that they did everything to warn about the dangers.

We know that's bullshit, right?

If the CEO of Health Canada saw his daughter climbing into a rubber dinghy and he knew that rubber dinghy had two holes in it, do you honestly think he would send her a letter of warning?

Of course not, it's absurd.

With millions of dollars spent on the promotion of these drugs, is it too much to ask Health Canada, or any other regulator for that matter, that when a warning as severe as death occurs, they shout it from the rooftops rather than send a letter that may never be opened by the recipient?

It's common sense really...then again, if Health Canada are anything like the British drug regulator, the MHRA, common sense won't be in their dictionary.

Amery and Christiane have been at loggerheads with their coroner regarding Matthew's death. In February, 2011, Amery received the final coroner's report. It was delivered to him on the 21st February, Matthew's 2nd birthday and 2nd anniversary of his death.

Fantastic timing huh?

What is utterly perverse about the coroner's report is that Coroner Robert Saunders, Province of British Columbia, stated that there was no anatomical or toxicological cause of death. Yet under the heading, "Other Significant Conditions Contributing to Death", Exposure to venlafaxine in utero is listed? Furthermore, the coroner adds that this is "Natural" [See pic below]

Click to enlarge

In essence, Saunders is stating that it is natural for anyone to die after being exposed to Effexor in utero.

Amery, obviously, was incensed, who wouldn't be? This prompted him to write a blog entitled, "How far could your head be up your ass?" He opens with the paragraph;

This past week I recieved what is supposed to be the final report from the Coroner on Matthew’s brief life and death. As I allude to in the title of this posting, the presiding coroners have their heads firmly implanted in their collective asses. I have taken the liberty of uploading the three pages of the report here. The irony of this report being issued on Matthew’s second birthday was not lost on us.

One has to question the insensitivity of the coroner here. He can't claim to not know the date of Matthew's death as it is plastered all over the report, so why send it out to parents on what would have been such a sombre date for them?

The Coroners Service of British Columbia is responsible for the investigation of all unnatural, sudden and unexpected, unexplained or unattended deaths. It makes recommendations to improve public safety and prevent death in similar circumstances.[3]

I've said in previous articles I have wrote that coroner's deal with death on a daily basis, seeing a dead body is like eating a bowl of cornflakes, it's such a regular occurrence but for crying out loud, show some tact when sending out reports to grieving parents!

Amery and I have corresponded over the years. I feel for him and I also greatly admire him. Yet again, life has been snatched away from loving parents, a life that was not given a chance because a greedy pharmaceutical company and an inept medicines regulator failed in their duty to give Matthew Schultz a chance of life. It's a despicable act and one that should never be forgotten.



Further reading

Matthew's Facebook page

**The following video contains images that some viewers may find deeply upsetting. It is with the wishes of both parents that these pictures be shown to highlight the dangers of taking SSRi/SNRi medication whilst pregnant.


Saturday, March 19, 2011

Please Sir...May I Have Some Ritalin-style medication?

A shocking report surfaced via the Guardian newspaper today with news that UK children, as young as four, are being given Ritalin type drugs, which has prompted a national review by a leading psychological society.

Prescription rates, based on data given by 459 GP's, were highest for children aged six to 12, doubling to just over eight per 1,000 in the five years up to 2008. Children aged 13 to 17 had the second highest rate at six per 1,000.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence [N.I.C.E.] said they were concerned that children under six should not be receiving drugs at all.

The UK, as I have said time and time again on this blog, are now following in the steps of America. There is no 'what if we follow', it's happening now and something needs to be done about it.

The Guardian reported that a five-year-old from the West Midlands was found to be receiving a double dose of Ritalin, the drug used to treat "ADHD", despite his school insisting that he is "among the best-behaved children in his class".

The Guardian continues with:

In notes seen by the leading educational psychologist in the case, the boy's headteacher reports that the school does not believe he has ADHD, but that the medication is being prescribed "to help mum at home".

In another case in the West Midlands a five-year-old was put on the drugs for three years at the request of his parents without any consultation with teachers or psychologists.

What sort of society have we become when we allow a dangerous drug to become our children's babysitter - that's the reality of it all. Parents have the quick fix at hand, they are practically giving their children a plastic bag to play with, a box of matches...all those things we were warned about when we were children. "Keep away from the edge of the platform", "Don' t talk to strangers", "Look both ways when you cross the road"

Sound advice. But what we are forgetting, or maybe ignoring, is these types of drugs are just as dangerous as suffocating with a plastic bag, burning yourself with a box of matches, a busy road, a stranger or standing on the edge of a platform. The difference being, parents are told that they are safe, they are effective. The men in white coats tell them little Johnny will be right as rain after a few weeks on the pills or that little Julie needs to increase her dosage due to the fact that she is becoming violent.

Parents fall for it. With the white coated men comes a sense of belief, of trust, a God-like figure who has been through med school so he/she knows exactly what they are talking about.

Ironically, I met with two volunteers from CCHR yesterday in my hometown of Birmingham. I shared a coffee with Sarah and Vicky and we spoke at length about kids in Birmingham being drugged. We brainstormed about ways to put a stop to this. It would appear that parents have to go back to school to get educated, don't expect any help from the UK medicines watchdog, the MHRA, they are all too busy taking the money from the pharmaceutical companies and pussy-footing around with statistics that are clearly wrong. In any event, they are powerless to do anything about this problem. They can issue warning letters to GP's throughout the UK but GP's are not forced to act upon them. Beggars the question why the MHRA have the audacity to use the tagline, "Safeguarding human health" - they are obviously not, particularly where our children are concerned.

Of course the pro-pill pushers [Psychiatry] deny they are doing anything wrong. This from the Guardian:

But Dinah Jayson, consultant child and adolescent psychiatrist at Trafford general hospital and a spokesperson for the Royal College of Psychiatrists, insisted that in some cases it could be "cruel" not to treat children of any age if all other options had been exhausted.

She said: "With every child there is a risk of doing something but there is also a risk of doing nothing. We know early [medical] intervention can help children who would otherwise be losing out."

Jayson, who earlier this year was quoted in another UK newspaper, is a firm believer that ADHD is a developmental condition characterised by inattention and difficulty concentrating, along with hyperactivity and impulsivity. She also told the Daily Mirror:

Those with it are at much higher risk of getting into trouble at school and falling into crime, substance abuse, and broken relationships, if untreated.

So where did this ADHD suddenly appear from? Why wasn't it recognised when I was still at school?

Remember when you were at school? There was always one kid who played up a lot, normally they would be less intelligent than the rest of the class, hence the disruption. I'm no psychologist but it's quite easy to fathom out why a kid is disruptive. It's borne out of frustration, in essence it's a child screaming from within, "TEACH ME, TEACH ME." Either that or the kid is just totally bored by the teacher quoting the Pythagoras theory or the difference between stalactites and stalagmites.

You want to change how children behave? Make education more interesting, don't give them a drug that will turn them into a dribbling suicidal wreck.

I cannot for the life of me understand why people put their faith in the headshrinkers, they are a breed who prescribe these drugs without any knowledge of how these drugs work. They'll tout the chemical imbalance theory to unsuspecting parents, sadly, the parents will believe them. Doctor's or psychiatrist's don't lie, do they?

Outside of school, the children go home to the latest computer console system or sit in front of a monitor leaving messages to friends on their Facebook walls, the same friends who probably live within walking distance of their keyboard. But that's okay, it leaves mom and dad to get on with what needs to be done around the house.

As a youngster I was never in, I chose to play out, running, playing football, Postman's knock [a kissing game with local girls] I'd even knock the door and run, it was all good fun back then, it was fresh air and exercise. These days a kid will go into school and tell his friends about the wonder goal he scored... on his PS2...or is it 3? I just can't keep up with technology these days.

Of course, I generalise. Not all parents are like this, neither are their children but it's only a matter of time before Mrs Jones tells Mrs Smith at the school gates that her son has calmed down so much since he was put on this wonder pill prescribed to him by the family doctor. "Oh, the change is fantastic, he no longer wants attention, he just goes to his room and plays quietly, there are the odd times when he still has an outburst but we just give him his pills and everything is back to normal again." [normal]

I only hope Mrs Smith doesn't have to tell Mr Jones some years down the line that her son killed himself.

The evidence is out there in abundance. Far too many children have died by suicide whilst on these types of medication, far too many have self-harmed, far too many have committed crimes.

Don't let your child become one of the above. Ask you doctor about the drug he is prescribing your child. Write his answers down if you have to. Then go home and do your homework and research the brand name of the drug. If it's Ritalin [which seems to be the psychiatrist's choice of weapon these days] Google 'Ritalin forum' - you should be educated enough to know which ones are pharma funded and which ones are patient run.

Still unsure?

Watch the powerful documentary, 'Dead Wrong: How Psychiatric Drugs Can Kill Your Child' and don't be fooled into thinking that it won't happen to your child.

The Guardian article can be read HERE

You can watch 'Dead Wrong: How Psychiatric Drugs Can Kill Your Child' HERE




Coming soon to this blog will be a series of podcasts with advocates, bloggers, patients, parents and other like-minded individuals.

If you have something to say and you wish to get it off your chest by way of a podcast, then feel free to email me at

It will be different from your run of the mill podcasts, offering a slot to unsigned artists and advertising/sponsorship for businesses.

For an opportunity to advertise/sponsor, I will be offering 15-30 second slots during each of the podcasts. It would be preferable if you have your own company jingle in mp3 format. For more information please contact me.

More information over the coming weeks.



Friday, March 18, 2011


I met Janis Hough online via Twitter, she'd made a comment about Seroxat. Formalities were exchanged, she met with the obligatory interruption from my Irish simpleton stalker, he targets those I make friends with too, when he's not slagging off Scientology or using dead children to goad me in to a response.

Anyway, enough about Glaxo's number one whore.

Janis has a cracking post up on her blog regarding Seroxat. The post, entitled, "Living without Seroxat and other Antidepressants", highlights Janis' work with a patient who has an addiction to Seroxat. She speaks of a client who has reduced from 30mg of Seroxat down to 1mg and is having panic attacks and anxiety.

Janis writes:

As a therapist and coach I see many clients who want to become free of the very drug that was supposed to help them feel better yet paradoxically they feel worse. So fuelled by seeing the latest client I wanted to add my experience in order to help others feel better.

So first off they are not a magic pill, there is no magic pill. They don’t fix the problem.
Latest research says that taking seroxat can lead you to feel suicidal, so which would be better to feel ‘depressed’ or ‘suicidal’, well neither, however if I was prescribed something to help I really would be depressed that it made me feel worse.

I sincerely hope she can help her client, whom I also know.

The full post can be viewed here


Pfizer's Stranglehold on the Canadian Market


Pharmaceutical giants, Pfizer, have been putting it about lately. Not content with teaming up with the UK medicines regulator [The MHRA] they have now branched further afield and teamed up with the Canadian Medical Association.

Pfizer, whose rap sheet is almost as big as GlaxoSmithKline's, have been causing me concern over the past year or so. With no advertising allowed for prescription drugs here in the UK they, it would appear, are advertising on TV and proxy.

Back in January 2009 I reported how the British drug regulator, the MHRA, had teamed up with Pfizer in a massive public relations exercise with regard to fake prescription drugs being purchased over the internet. The MHRA teamed up with Pfizer to launch a series of advertisements throughout British cinemas, later they would get the message out on TV advertising slots.

The advertisement campaign was hard-hitting and, I believe, designed to stop people buying cheaper drugs on the internet. All above board... or so we were led to believe.

The advert depicted a male opening a parcel and highlighted just how dangerous it could be when buying drugs over the internet. Here's the 30 second ad.

You'll note that viewers are directed to a website at the end of the ad. The website is brought to you by Pfizer. Visitors to the site are greeted with a dark image of a body lying on a coroner's table.

Pfizer have now teamed up with The Canadian Medical Association [CMA] and, according to an article that has appeared in The Globe and Mail, are facing huge criticism.

The CMA have apparently sought the expertise of Pfizer to create an education program for physicians across the country. The Globe and Mail writes:

Some members of the medical community say the CMA is heading down a dangerous road and warn that partnering with Pfizer Canada Inc. may cross a serious ethical line that could negatively influence doctors' treatment decisions.

No shit Sherlock!

Pfizer, who manufacturer the controversial antidepressant Zoloft, appear to be slipping through the back door to promote their wares. If they ain;'t teaming up with a limp-wristed medicines regulator, they are worming their way into doctors surgeries throughout Canada. One can only guess at the incentives they will be giving doctors to promote and prescribe their products.

Pfizer also manufacture other drugs that have received less than favourable consumer approval over the years, drugs such as Chantix, Effexor [due to merger with Wyeth in 2009], Neurontin, Viagra, Xanax and Zoloft.

Pfizer pleaded guilty in 2009 to the largest health care fraud in U.S. history and received the largest criminal penalty [$1.19 billion] ever levied for illegal marketing of four of its drugs. One of Pfizer’s drugs they had been pushing doctors to prescribe was the epilepsy drug Neurontin for uses the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] had never approved.

Should alarm bells be ringing in Canada? I think so. With a company who has pleaded guilty to the illegal promotion of marketing a number of drugs for unapproved uses, it would appear that Canada, or in particular the Canadian Medical Association, are giving Pfizer Carte blanche to, once again, be the puppet masters of the medical profession.

I'd bet a week spent in the company of Shania Twain and a box of Viagra [not that I'd need them] that Pfizer are also entering the medical system of other countries too, we just don't know it...yet.

Or maybe I'm just an old cynic.


Coming soon

The evidence, however, is clear...the Seroxat Scandal - The paperback

Wednesday, March 16, 2011


SSRISTORIES.COM has a collection of 4,400+ news stories with the full media article available, mainly criminal in nature, that have appeared in the media (newspapers, TV, scientific journals) or that were part of FDA testimony in either 1991, 2004 or 2006, in which antidepressants are mentioned.

SSRi Stories is a great resource, here's just a small number of SSRi related suicides I have highlighted in this video.


Long-term Effects of Psychiatric Medications - Robert Whitaker

In Anatomy of An Epidemic, Robert Whitaker, acclaimed medical author and journalist, asks "Why has the number psychiatric diagnoses given to adults and children skyrocketed over the past 50 years? Why does this epidemic parallel so closely the growth and dominance of psychiatric drugs as treatment?". The acclaimed US medical journalist documents a history of science and medicine that raises a heretical question: Could this drug-based approach actually be fuelling this modern-day plague? Whitaker argues we need to start an open conversation about how to stem the epidemic of disabling mental distress in society and move to an approach that helps people get well and stay well over the long term.

Robert's lecture begins around the 19.30 mark.


Thanks to the Truthman for sending me the link.


Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Psychiatry - Pre-DSM Meeting

**Contains adult language.



Sunday, March 13, 2011

DSM - From Boneheads to Boners!

"Honey, you need a psych pill."

The Mail Online reported last week that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM] are to list "sex addiction" as a mental disorder, strangely the article is accompanied by a photo of US golfer, Tiger Woods. Oh yeh, he had an extra-marital affair, therefore he must have a sex addiction.

This is just another example of psychiatry wanting to target normality.

Sex is one of the most natural things known to humans...animals too, without it we wouldn't be here.

On a personal front, I haven't played hide the salami for a while now but it doesn't stop me thinking about it, that, in itself, must be a mental disorder going by what the DSM will more than likely print in their comic later this year.

Never one to miss out on inventing an illness, the boneheads who compile the DSM must have latched on to Tiger Woods and his treatment last year. Woods booked himself into a clinic. He basically got busted by his wife for hiding the pickle with another  woman. With no excuses he came up with the "But honey, I have an addiction" excuse. Oh puhleeeeaaaase. You got caught with your pants down, take it like a man and stop making dumb ass excuses.

I just wonder how doctors/psychiatrists are going to diagnose this new 'illness', maybe they will use a word association game with their patient?

Doctor: Ok Mr Jones, I'll show you an object or two, you have to tell me what they remind you of.

Patient: Ok doc.

**Doctor holds up a pair of melons.

Patient: Oh tits doc, big juicy tits.

**Doctor then holds up a pair of grapefruits.

Patient: Oh big juicy tits doc!

**Finally, the doctor holds up a pair of car windscreen wipers.

Patient: Oh huge juicy tits doc!

Doctor: Really?

Patient: Yes, really, huge wobbly tits doc.

"Hold on a minute," said the doctor, "melons and grapefruits may remind you of breasts. But windshield wipers?"

"Yeah!" replied the man, moving his head from left to right making kissing noises, "First this one then that one then this...!"

The patient was last seen leaving the doctor's surgery with a prescription for a psychiatric drug.

I envisage a future where contraceptives [rubbers] and vibrators [dildos] are sold with the standard psychiatric medication.

DSM, I'll shit em.

This goes out to all the boneheads who compile the DSM.

**AC/DC were last seen running down the street away from men in white coats.



Thursday, March 10, 2011

Billion Dollar Drug Company Law Firm Restructures Connecticut Welfare System


By Bob Fiddaman and Shelia Matthews

For some time now, Sheila Matthews has been suspicious about her home state of Connecticut’s treatment of its most vulnerable children. As a mother of two children and co-founder of Ablechild, her instincts led her to scrutinize the dubious relationships among Connecticut's Department of Children and Family Services [DCF], the pharmaceutical industry and a billion dollar law firm who has defended the likes of Pfizer Inc and Merck & Co., among others.

Sheila’s investigation has led her on a journey that links a non-profit children’s advocacy group, with assets over $15 million [2009] with nationally-renowned mass tort and class action defense law firms, to the Connecticut DCF - an $865 million bureaucracy, as described by the Connecticut Mirror.

The Connecticut DCF serves approximately 36,000 children and 16,000 families across its four Mandate Areas:

1.Child welfare;
2.Children's behavioral health;
3.Juvenile Services; and

Sheila’s Ablechild has been questioning the Connecticut DCF since 2003, when Ablechild demanded that the Connecticut DCF immediately ban the use of the antidepressant Paxil in its treatment of mental disorders after multiple studies confirmed Paxil increased the risk of suicide in children and adolescents. This was more than a year prior to America’s Food & Drug Association (FDA) announcement that all antidepressants, including Paxil, should bear a black box warning regarding this suicide risk. Ablechild was disturbed that children in state custody were being prescribed this dangerous psychotropic medication. Ablechild’s public pressure paid off, and the Connecticut DCF deemed Paxil unsafe for children and adolescents, and according to the DCF drug approval list, Paxil has not been approved for use in over eight (8) years.

In August 2003, less than one month later, Ablechild reported that the commissioner of the Connecticu DCF held a 'behind closed doors' meeting with Glaxo officials. This meeting was reported by the Associated Press, who wrote:

The maker of the anti-depressant Paxil plans to meet this week with Connecticut officials, weeks after the State stopped using the drug to treat young people in its care.

GlaxoSmithKline, a British pharmaceutical company, is sending its regional medical director and a medical team to meet with officials from the Department of Children and Families. [Source]

Despite repeated requests from Ablechild, the Connecticut DCF refused to inform the public what was discussed at this secret meeting.

Eight years later, Sheila and Ablechild continue to raise concerns and investigate potential wrongdoings and conflicts within the Connecticut DCF. Last month, in February 2011, Sheila attended a meeting sponsored by the Connecticut Behavioral Health Partnership [CBHP], where its medical director, Dr Steven Kant, presented the Husky Behavioral Pharmacy Data. The CBHP is a state vendor that provides mental health services to DCF children. These services are paid, in part, by the State-run insurance program, HUSKY. Incredibly the pharmacy data presentation showed that dangerous psychotropic drugs, like Paxil, are still being prescribed to thousands of children and adolescents. In fact, the Pharmacy Data presentation showed that the HUSKY program, financed by taxpayer dollars, paid drug companies over $60 million for psychotropic drugs for Connecticut’s children and adolescents in 2009 alone – many of which are not approved by the FDA for use in the pediatric population and all of which carry the most serious warning possible regarding the risk of suicide.

According to the pharmacy data presentation: [Which can be downloaded as a Powerpoint presentation HERE]

More than 50% of HUSKY Youth Behavioral med utilizers are on stimulants.
Close to 30% of HUSKY Youth Behavioral med utilizers are on antipsychotics.

The pharmacy data also revealed the following:

Most Frequently Used Behavioral Meds for DCF-Involved Youth

Medications for ADHD

Ritalin (10%)

Adderall (5%)

Vyvanse (4%)

Strattera (3%)

Atypical Antipsychotics

Abilify (11%)

Risperdol (10%)

Seroquel (8%)


Hydroxyzine (2.5%)


Prozac (4.5%)

Zoloft (4%)

Zyban (3%)

Desyrel (2.5%)

Celexa (2%)

Mood Stabilizers

Lithum (3%)

Depakote (3%)

Lamictal (2.5%)

Curiously, none of the above medications are on the Connecticut DCF list of approved/unapproved drugs listed in its DCF PMAC document.

With this in mind, Sheila Matthews contacted Dr Steven Kant and inquired as to whether any of the above drugs were approved by the Connecticut DCF for use in children.

Dr Kant replied:

... the answer to your question is not that straight forward.. . . Medications may be indicated by age and/or by specific treatment needs so it is not either a simply “yes” or “no”. Also, some medications may have the age indication but for a totally different condition, such as anti epileptic condition. . .Also FDA indications are static, they do not change over time though medical practice is constantly evolving...

Contradicting the very document that lists Connecticut’s approved and unapproved drugs, a "check-off" list that verifies the status of medications, Dr Kant replied, "I don’t think a “check off” for each medication would work in terms of verifying their status."

With such an ambiguous response from Dr. Kant, we found the DCF Approved Medication List on the Internet. This particular version was revised in 2009.

It appears that the DCF has approved drugs in children that have not been approved for children by the FDA. In fact, the FDA has issued multiple advisories and alerts since 2004 about the increased risk of suicide in children, adolescents and young adults up to age 25 who are treated with psychotropic medications.

And while Fluoxetine (Prozac) is the only medication approved by the FDA for use in treating depression in children ages 8 and older, it still carries a black box warning regarding the risk of suicide.

In contrast, the DCF seems to be ignoring the conclusions of the FDA. Its list of approved medication in children and adolescents include every single antidepressant except paroxetine [Paxil] and venlafaxine [Effexor].

Forest Lab’s citalopram [Celexa] - APPROVED

Forest Lab’s escitalopram [Lexapro] - APPROVED

Solvay Pharmaceuticals’ fluvoxamine [Luvox] - APPROVED

Pfizer's sertraline [Zoloft] - APPROVED

GlaxoSmithKline's bupropion [Wellbutrin -also marketed as an anti-smoking cessation drug under the name of Zyban] - APPROVED [1]

Alarmingly, the DCF has produced a guide entitled, "MEDICATIONS USED FOR BEHAVIORAL & EMOTIONAL DISORDERS - A GUIDE FOR PARENTS, FOSTER PARENTS, FAMILIES, YOUTH, CAREGIVERS, GUARDIANS, AND SOCIAL WORKERS" where it writes, "Most of the side effects from the medications are mild and will lessen or go away after the first few weeks of treatment." The guide also points out possible side effects of SSRI's/SNRI's:

SSRIs and SNRIs:

Weight Loss

One of the most dangerous side effects of these medications, suicidal thoughts/ideation, doesn't even make the 5 bullet-pointed list. The Guide does, however, add the following: "Watch for worsening of depression and thoughts about suicide."

The DCF Approved Medication List writes:

"The DCF Approved Medication List is a list of psychotropic medications that has been carefully established by the Psychotropic Medication Advisory Committee, a group of DCF and community professionals."

Sheila has since investigated other advocacy groups that were concerned about the off-label prescribing of psychiatric medications to youths in state custody. This is where she stumbled upon Children's Rights, a non-profit charity based in New York City.

In 2005, Children's Rights employed ten (10) attorneys and a staff of 31. It claims to use its expertise to change child welfare red tape and scrutinize failing systems. If the child welfare system fails to respond, Children’s Rights files a lawsuit. If successful, it enforces reform and then monitors its implementation.

In 1989, Children's Rights had in fact filed a suit against William O'Neill and the Connecticut state Department of Children and Youth Services [DCYS].

The suit charged that an overworked and underfunded DCYS failed to provide services including abuse and neglect investigations, adoption, foster care, mental health care, caseloads and staffing. The case has been pending for over twenty (20) years, and while there have been numerous arguments that DCYS should be more inclusive or has failed to provide certain services, the issue of massive off-label prescription of psychotropic medications has never been brought to the court’s attention.

Children's Rights is chaired by Alan C Myers, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom, a billion dollar law firm which represents the pharmaceutical industry in mass torts and class actions. Myers is also co-head of the firm's REIT Group [Real Estate Investment Trust].

Also, listed on the Children's Rights website are individuals and law firms that have served as co-counsel on Children’s Rights’ legal campaigns to reform America’s failing child welfare systems, including:

Missouri - Shook Hardy & Bacon - Eli Lilly Co. and Forest Labs, defended the original Wesbeker Prozac trial in Kentucky and still defend Prozac, Celexa and Lexapro.

New Jersey - Drinker Biddle & Reath - GlaxoSmithKline attorneys - defended Paxil as local counsel in Philadelphia cases.

Oklahoma - Kaye Scholer LLP - provides work in Pharmaceutical Products Liability defense and employs an attorney who was former General Counsel of Pfizer, Inc.

A particular success for Skadden Arps occurred in 2010 when it secured a summary judgement ruling for Pfizer Inc. in a suit filed by two insurance companies who sought $200 million in damages for Pfizer's predecessors alleged "off-label" marketing of its epilepsy drug, Neurontin.

Furthermore, in February 2011, Skadden Arps secured the dismissal of over 200 cases in a multi-district litigation pending against their client, Pfizer Inc. The plaintiffs had alleged injuries related to the use of Pfizer's anti-epilepsy drug, Neurontin.

Neurontin, the generic version is called gabapentin, is prescribed by psychiatrists for a variety of "off-label" indications. It is often tried as an alternative treatment, when patients are unable to tolerate the side effect of more proven mood stabilizers such as lithium. [2]

Gabapentin has also been associated with an increased risk of suicidal acts or violent deaths.

This is a drug that has been known to cause behavioral problems, which include unstable emotions, hostility, aggression, hyperactivity or lack of concentration.

Children dependent on child welfare systems have rights and, according to its web page, Children’s Rights is dedicated to protecting them.

It should come as no surprise that the site fails to discuss the off-label prescription of non-approved psychotropic medications to children and adolescents, unless this falls under the 'abuse and neglect' category?

If Children's Rights’ motive was to accomplish fixing the child welfare system then why hasn’t it investigated why thousands of children under state care are prescribed "off-label" psychiatric drugs? With a partner in a billion dollar pro-pharmaceutical law firm as its Chair, and supporters who also defend pharmaceutical products, is it safe to assume that its stance on the drugging of children is one that is being ignored?

Children's Rights push to remove abused and neglected children into safety.

The basic question always comes down to trust. When power, money and a good cause is mixed, it is imperative to check motives. We would be less of a society if we didn't check out all the facts. Abuse and neglect exist, always has and always will, but society is obligated to ensure those victims are not transformed into "good cause victims" and expensed out. There is no doubt we have a right to question the system and those who claim to promote change for the good of the children within it.

Children's Rights Chairman, Alan C. Myers, Medical Director of Connecticut Behavioral Health Partnership, Steven Kant and the Connecticut Department of Children and Families may get their knickers in a twist with regard to an advocate of Ablechild and a blogger from Birmingham, UK questioning their motives but hey, what's the downside of shinning a light on all these players, be they good or bad players?

Sheila’s concern is that Children's Rights with its multi-million dollar budget and with the help of its billion dollar law firms, will continue to ignore the risks of these unapproved and dangerous medications, under the guise of helping our nation’s most vulnerable children. The question remains: how can the lawyers who defend pscyhotropic drugs also be the same lawyers who advocate for abused and neglected children to get into state welfare programs which place these children on the same drugs? The conflict is clear and obvious - and it poses an unmistakable danger to children who truly need our help.

[1] Bupropion [also known as Wellbutrin, Zyban] is a non-tricyclic antidepressant.
[2] Gabapentin

Bob Fiddaman is the author of the Seroxat Sufferers blog and the book, "The evidence, however, is clear... the Seroxat scandal." Chipmunka Publishing.

Sheila Matthews is the co-founder of Ablechild and a mother of two children.


Tuesday, March 08, 2011


It's anticipated that the book should be on sale by the start of April.

Here's the cover.


Monday, March 07, 2011

Exposure to venlafaxine deemed "Natural" by Canadian coroner

Baby Matthew Schultz with his parents Amery and Christiane



utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false: an absurd explanation.

Seeing is believing...or so they say. I'm utterly dumbfounded at the recent findings into the death of infant Matthew Schultz by Robert Saunders, Coroner, Province of British Columbia.

In one of the most absurd logical ways of thinking I have ever witnessed, Saunders wrote on his report:

Medical Cause of Death

(1) No Anatomical or Toxicological cause of death.

(2) Other Significant Conditions Contributing to Death

Exposure to venlafaxine in utero.

By What Means Natural

Are you getting this?


So, Saunders admits that a 'significant' contribution in Matthew's death was venlafaxine [Effexor] in the utero then goes on to say this is natural?

Matthew Schultz died within two hours of being born. Christiane Schultz, Matthew's mother, was taking Effexor for several years and had problems with several pregnancies, culminating in the death of Matthew on February 21, 2009.

Hardly surprising that Amery Schultz, father of Matthew, has gone scorched earth over on his blog, 'Two Hours With Matthew' - where he has published the final report from the Coroner on Matthew’s brief life and death. Amery has aptly titled the post, "How far could your head be up your ass?"

I concur.

The Coroners Service of British Columbia is responsible for the investigation of all unnatural, sudden and unexpected, unexplained or unattended deaths. It makes recommendations to improve public safety and prevent death in similar circumstances.[1]

Saunders, it would appear, is about as useful as a one-legged man at an arse kicking contest!

Read more HERE




Please contact me if you would like a guest post considered for publication on my blog.