Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit


Citizens Commission on Human Rights Award Recipient (Twice)
Humanist, humorist

Friday, August 31, 2012

Brain Scan Bedlam From Leading Psychiatrist



A recent article that appeared on the Bloomberg Business Week website had me in a complete state of apoplexy [pass me the Paxil] so comical so that I nearly chewed off the side of the couch arm.

The antidepressant market... or those that find unique ways to push the poison pills, are always on the lookout for innovative ways to sell their wares. None more so than the latest from the school of the ridiculous and the latest scam offering patients a safety procedure before they take their drugs, like every good little person should.

Thee companies, namely, CNS Response Inc. (CNSO), AssureRx Health Inc. and Brain Resource Ltd. (BRRZY), are rolling out the latest in bio-technology. You are just going to love this...

The brain scan, offered by CNS, apparently works by matching electrical activity that’s recorded in the brain. From this, it is claimed, a medication can be prescribed that is just right for you.

"If a number of people with similar brain waves do well on the same medicine, then that drug will probably work for the new patient as well", CNS Chief Executive Officer George Carpenter said.

Oh yippie!

The article also quotes Mark Schiller, a San Francisco-based psychiatrist.

“I’ve had a number of patients tell me it’s really been life changing.

“They’ve been in treatment for God knows how many years, never got the right medication, and suddenly we got the right medication and they’re no longer suicidal.”

Wait a minute, is Schiller actually saying that the previous meds these people were on made them suicidal?

One thing Schiller definitely isn't saying is that he is director of medical affairs for CNS Response, Inc which provides the technology he is referring to.

Schiller practices out of the MindTherapy Clinic in California, his specialties include, addiction, adoption, anxiety or fears, attention deficit (ADHD), child or adolescent depression, divorce, domestic abuse, domestic violence, eating disorders, infertility, life coaching, loss or grief, obsessive-compulsive (OCD), relationship issues, substance abuse, trauma and PTSD, dissociative disorders, impulse control disorders, personality disorders and psychosis.

So, pretty much all bases covered then.

That's nice!

With more and more people speaking out against these drugs and with lawsuits being filed all over America it's hardly surprising that some white-coated organisation has come up with a remedy...as a pre-cursor to a remedy... that isn't really a remedy at all.

The chemical imbalance theory has been debunked - now we have the electrical activity that’s recorded in the brain to target the pill pushers.

Psych: I've recorded your electrical activity and Prozac or Paxil just isn't for you. Counting the electrical impulses and adding a multiplication of 7, because there's 7 days in a week, I recommend that you take Celexa because others with the same electrical pattern as you are also on it.

Patient: Thanks God.

Psych: Oh, I'm not God...I'm just second to him.


Hubble, bubble, toil and trouble.

Whatever next?

Gotta fly, need to contact someone who can  reupholster the arm of my couch.

The wacky article can be seen in full HERE.




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, August 24, 2012

Plea For MHRA and EMA to Get Their House in Order



Bravo to Patrick H for starting this petition. It takes courage and resilience to stand up for what you believe in. Too many people sit around and wait for others to act, whilst others criticize those for standing up to be counted. Respect Patrick.

This from the online petition:


To the UK’s MHRA and EU’s EMA: The drugs on our shelves and those recommended by our doctors should first do no harm. As concerned citizens we call on you to put safety first and implement the reforms below:

1) Investigate and act against pharmaceutical companies employing illegal marketing activities by appointing an independent watchdog not funded by the drug industry who can be freely contacted by patients and by doctors witnessing bribery and encouragement to prescribe a drug ‘off label’- for a condition it has no licence to treat - by pharmaceutical representatives.

2) Tighten up requirements for licensing new drugs to include a thorough assessment of benefits versus risks, as well as withdrawal effects.

3) Record and minute meetings to be made publicly available, including representation from consumer groups.

4) Enforce pharmaceutical companies to publish their trial data, without hiding adverse effects, on their website for free access.

5) Take patient reported adverse reactions seriously and encourage patients who have had adverse effects to share them on the website rxisk.org so other patients and doctors are informed.


Why this is important

The profit-hungry drug company GlaxoSmithKline has been peddling a diabetes drug they knew was causing heart attacks without informing doctors or patients of the risk. Regulators in the EU knew about the dangers but failed to act fast enough, putting lives unnecessarily at risk. Previously, UK regulators knew about anti- depressants causing suicide but took over ten years to do anything about it. The same complacency is happening again with new anti-depressants and other drugs.

Earlier this month GSK pleaded guilty to criminal charges relating to anti-depressant and diabetes drug frauds and agreed to pay a $3 billion fine. That brings total fines against big pharma in the US in the last four years to almost $10 billion! But no fines in the UK or EU. Why do we put up with it?

A massive push from thousands of people right now will add to pressure from the media and force regulators to act faster and more decisively against dangerous drugs. As a citizen of the UK I need to know that my family and I are safe and that drug companies put patients before profits. But drug companies will only do the right thing if regulators force them.

Let’s join together in a gigantic outcry for the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulation Agency and EU’s European Medicines Agency to put safety first. Sign the petition!

----

I truly hope the petition will make the MHRA stand up and listen. I suspect they will, as usual, pretend to listen then do absolutely nothing about the issues raised. They are limp-wristed and powerless and claim to be the best regulator in the world. To be the best of a truly awful bunch is not something I'd be proud of.

The MHRA are in bed with the pharmaceutical industry, they are not just sleeping with them they are performing all sorts of kinky sex acts. Just follow the money trail folks, case in point being these 4 articles I wrote back in 2010.


GlaxoSmithKline/MHRA - When Ignorance Turns To Bliss - Part I of IV

GlaxoSmithKline/MHRA - When Ignorance Turns To Bliss - Part II of IV - Witness For The Defence

GlaxoSmithKline/MHRA - When Ignorance Turns To Bliss - Part III of IV - Expert Statistician


GlaxoSmithKline/MHRA - When Ignorance Turns To Bliss - Part IV - The Colour of Money


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




Tuesday, August 21, 2012

No Free Lunch at GSK




So, I was browsing the the Cafepharma message boards and it appears that Witty has cracked the whip at GSK.

Disgruntled reps are complaining that they have received news that they can no longer have more than two lunches with doctor's in the space of a month, furthermore, they cannot bring doctor's staff any foodstuffs.

Dang it, no more doughnuts for the, already heavy, receptionist.

This got me thinking.

What if Witty really did start to crack the whip at GSK, maybe his memo would look something like this...




NEW GSK REP POLICY

Dress Code:

1. You are advised to come to work dressed as a gopher. Costumes can be hired from the Department of Justice Department for a small fee.

2. You cannot wear anything from the 80's or 90's - they are both era's that we wish to forget about.

3. We have a range of product memorabilia, including t-shirts, that you can purchase for a small fee. Unfortunately we have no adult sizes as these product placement shirts were not intended for adult use.

XX Small - "I Just Took My Paxil" T-Shirts - 200,000 in stock

XX Small - "We Love Karen Wagner" T-Shirts [Paxil logo on back]- 200,000 in stock

XX Small - "Keller Is Da Daddy" T-Shirts - [Paxil logo on back] - 200,000 in stock

Kiddy Lunchboxes [Paxil Logo on Lid] - 200,000 in stock

Mr Men Series, Vol 9 - "Mr Grumpy Gets Better" - [Mentions Paxil] 200,000 in stock

Fake Dog Turds [Paxil 329 Limited Edition, signed by Sally K. Laden] ONLY 99 LEFT!

Paxil Rope - 12 LEFT

Paxil Razor Blades - 4 LEFT

Benbow Bear - A true to life talking teddy bear. Just pull the chord and hear, "These drugs are  not addictive", "Dr Healy has been proved to be wrong on every single occasion", "The evidence, however, is clear, these medicines are not linked with suicide, these medicines are not linked with an increased rate of self harm", "Generally these symptoms are mild to moderate", "The information in the patient leaflet and in the information we supply to doctors, is based on fact", "I think patients have nothing to fear from taking Seroxat", "I utterly refute any allegations we are sitting on data", and "We take the safety of our medicines extremely seriously".


Sick Days: 
We will no longer accept a doctor's statement as proof of sickness. If you are able to go to the doctor, you are able to come to work, unless you are involved in an internal dispute with the company, in which case you shall remain on sick leave without pay. Any doctor's statement as proof of being fit to work will not be accepted.

Bereavement Leave:
The drugs you promote for off-label prescriptions, are known to cause death in the populations they are not indicated for. By now you should be used to death. Any friend, family member or pet that dies... suck it up and deal with it. We don't pay you to have a conscience.  

Toilet Breaks:
Will only be permitted if you ingest ALLI, our failed dietry supplement. Batches of ALLI can be ordered for $2 on Ebay or for $160 from one of our executives.

Lunch Break:

No more free lunches for doctor's and their staff.

No more vouchers for Wing's Chinese restaurants, the Gringo's Mexican chain etc.

Glaxo Foodles will be available for all reps [for a small fee] along with a carton of Ribena [Vitamin D extracted due to carton staying in sun for too long]


Thank you for your loyalty to our company. If you have any issues regarding compliance then please forward them to our compliance department and we will make sure your grievances are heard... Be prepared to lose your job though. Nobody likes a smart ass!

Sir Witty.







Friday, August 17, 2012

GSK's Paralympic Irony





The GSK Facebook page is proudly boasting the following message:

"We're supporting London 2012 to help ensure the Olympic and Paralympic Games are the cleanest possible. To see the journey of an athlete's sample watch this video"

The GSK Facebook posse then highlight a video in which they basically blow their own trumpet about how good they are at what they do.

What GSK fail to tell its 49,761 Facebook followers is that they have just been implicated in a lawsuit in the US for their part in distributing doses of thalidomide to physicians for human trial, along with Sanofi Aventis.

The complaint alleges GSK's predecessor Smith Kline & French conducted a clinical trial on at least 875 people, which including pregnant women, in 1956 and 1957 in the U.S. as it pondered over a licensing agreement for the drug with Gruenenthal, which made thalidomide.

Sanofi predecessor Richardson-Merrell are alleged to have distributed more than 2.5 million thalidomide tablets to about 20,000 patients.

Research suggests that a pregnant woman participating in the Smith Kline & French trial delivered a malformed baby. Smith Kline decided not to market the thalidomide drug but, at the same time, never let the public know about its clinical trial results.

One can only assume that if Smith Kline did release information from its thalidomide clinical trial then maybe, just maybe, it would have rang alarm bells and the distribution of the drug may have been slowed, or better still, halted in its tracks.

Kevin Colgan, a spokesperson for GSK stated:

“GSK intends to vigorously defend itself against this lawsuit and the others filed previously. 

“This lawsuit involves events dating back over 50 years by a predecessor company, Smith Kline French, that no longer exists. Moreover, the plaintiffs’ complaint is replete with scientific inaccuracies and factual misstatements.”

The case, Valerie Spence et al. v. Avantor Performance Materials, case number 120800665, was filed August 9, 2012 in the Pennsylvania Eastern District Court.

Meantime, GSK's Facebook page continues to cover itself in garlands, one striking comment sums them up:

As with the Olympic Games, antidoping testing will also be carried out at our laboratory for the Paralympic Games with every athlete that wins a medal and up to 50% of all competitors being tested. Approximately 5000 tests were carried out during the Olympic Games and a further 1250 will be conducted during the Paralympic Games.

No problem in releasing these test results then, huh?



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




Saturday, August 11, 2012

Paxil - Multiple Symptoms, One Solution




So, we all know how Glaxo failed to show the efficacy and safety of Paxil use in kids, we all know how they buried data and hired a ghostwriter to dupe doctor's, journal editor's and parents of kids. Basically, a suicide link was seen in the clinical trials, Glaxo covered it up. We all know how Glaxo reps were given carte blanche by executives at Glaxo to pay doctor's large sums of money, carefully disguised as preceptorship's and/or fees for attending and sitting on advisory boards. All this on top of the lavish weekend breaks for doctor's and, in some instances, their partners.

That's business, eh folks?

The following is a letter from the FDA's Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications [DDMAC] to GlaxoSmithKline warning them about their promotional activities regarding Paxil and children.

Remember, Glaxo had not got a licence for Paxil in children, none the less they saw fit to push it on them in the despicable way.

Basically, Glaxo distributed a T-shirt during a Health Fair function at the Children's Advocacy Center of Brevard in Brevard, Florida. The front of the T-shirt saw the logo and name of the Children's Advocacy Center, while the back of the T-shirt saw the claim "Multiple Symptoms, One Solution" followed by the Paxil logo.

Here's the letter, courtesy of the Drug Industry Document Archive, from the FDA to Eloise R. Scott, D.V.M. Associate Director, U.S. Regulatory Affairs at Glaxo, formerly Smithktine Beecham Pharmaceuticals.







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, August 10, 2012

Email to Editor of JAACAP - Re Paxil 329





Below is an email I've sent to the editor of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry [JAACAP]

It follows on from the recent abhorrent behaviour of British pharmaceutical company, GlaxoSmithKline and their agreement to plead guilty with regard to the way they knowingly misbranded Paxil and knowingly falsified a ghostwritten study [329] for the sole purpose of making money from a product that had a propensity to induce suicide in children and adolescents.

A call for this fraudulent study to be retracted has previously been asked for by Jon N. Jureidini and Leemon B. McHenry, whom are both mentioned and referenced below.

I've previously called for Glaxo CEO, Andrew Witty, to contact JAACAP, seeing how it was his company that hired a ghostwriter for the article.

His limp-wristed excuse that this was part of an era just doesn't wash. If he had any morals then he would tell the journal to pull the study, although the damage has been done now and many children may have died as a result of this study being published.

More about Witty coming soon on this blog... there's some disgruntled whistleblowers out there.

Anyway, here's the email to the editor of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.


Dear Mr Martin,

I am the author of the book, The evidence, however, is clear; the Seroxat scandal, and the blog, Seroxat Sufferers. Seroxat is the UK brand name for GlaxoSmithKline's antidepressant, you will know it by its US brand name, Paxil.

The reason I am contacting you is with regard to the publication in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry entitled, "A Multi-center, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled Study of Paroxetine and Imipramine in Adolescents with Unipolar Major Depression." - Martin Keller et al.

It is my understanding that the particular study was used as a marketing tool by British pharmaceutical giants, GlaxoSmithKline, and was in fact not written by the authors, Martin Keller et al, at all but by Sally Laden, an editorial director for Scientific Therapeutics Information.

Given that this publication has been widely available since 2001 its safe to assume that many inquiring doctors, pediatrics, child psychiatrists and, in general, healthcare professionals, have used it as a guide when making a decision whether or not to prescribe Paxil off-label to children and adolescents.

It is also my understanding that the study, better known as Paxil 329, has been brought to your attention in the past by Jon N. Jureidini and Leemon B. McHenry and despite pointing out to you Paxil 329'S flaws you refused to retract it. In fact, you added that, “We have found no evidence for such errors nor any justification for retraction according to current editorial standards and scientific publication guidelines. We therefore will not proceed further with your request” [1]

I am sure you are aware of recent events regarding GlaxoSmithKline's guilty plea surrounding the illegal marketing and promotion of many of their products, one of which was Paxil.

Glaxo agreed to plead guilty to distribution of a misbranded drug due to false and misleading labeling, in violation of 21 U.S.C.  331(a), 333(a)(1) & 352(a). That 'misbranded drug' was Paxil.

Transcripts of GSK's plea and settlement agreements are available on the Department of Justice website. [2]

Regarding Paxil and their guilty plea, Glaxo settled allegations that:

From 1999 to 2003, during sales calls, dinner meetings, spa programs, lavish weekend conferences to places such as Puerto Rico and Hawaii, through a false and misleading medical journal article, and through the distribution of free samples for patient use, GSK promoted Paxil to doctors for the treatment of depression and, to a lesser extent, obsessive-compulsive disorder in patients under age 18.

and

That they conducted three placebo-controlled clinical studies to study Paxil’s safety and efficacy in treating depression in patients under age 18. In all three studies, GSK failed to demonstrate efficacy on the endpoints identified in the study protocols.

and

That they hired a contractor to write an article on one of the studies that was published in July 2001 in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (JAACAP). The article stated that Paxil “is generally well tolerated and effective for major depression in adolescents.” The article did not explicitly state that the study failed to demonstrate efficacy on either of its two primary endpoints or on any of the secondary endpoints that had been identified in the study protocol.

and

There marketing team distributed the JAACAP article to all of the Paxil sales representatives with a cover memo that stated that Paxil had demonstrated “REMARKABLE Efficacy and Safety in the treatment of adolescent depression.” Some GSK sales representatives used the article to urge doctors to prescribe Paxil to treat patients under age 18.

Given that they have pleaded guilty one would assume that the next natural step would be for the study to be retracted. I gather the responsibility falls upon you to issue such an order.

Can you tell me if you plan to retract "A Multi-center, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled Study of Paroxetine and Imipramine in Adolescents with Unipolar Major Depression." - Martin Keller et al, and/or issue an explanation as to why you wish to retract it?

If you plan not to retract it could you please explain why?

Could you please also state, for the record, that your position is that you can still see no evidence of errors nor any justification for retraction according to current editorial standards and scientific publication guidelines.

Meantime, I look forward to your reply and hope that you will find it in your heart to remove this fraudulent publication as a goodwill gesture to the parents of children that have killed themselves as a result of Paxil induced suicide after it was prescribed to them by doctor's, pediatrics, child psychiatrists and, in general, healthcare professionals, whom used your journal as a reference when weighing up their decisions to prescribe it to this vulnerable population.

Yours sincerely,

Bob Fiddaman.

[1] Jureidini, Jon N. and McHenry, Leemon B.(2011) 'Conflicted Medical Journals and the Failure of Trust', Accountability in Research, 18: 1, 45 — 54
[2] Department of Justice - GLAXOSMITHKLINE SETTLEMENT FACT SHEET - http://www.justice.gov/usao/ma/news/GlaxoSmithKline/Settlement_Fact_Sheet.pdf







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


Wednesday, August 08, 2012

Glaxo's Andrew Witty and Paxil 329





Two recent articles grabbed my attention of late, both are brilliantly written, both drag up the Paxil 329 study once more.

Jonathan Leo, Ph.D. - wrote, 'Study 329′s Authors: Should Those Who Live in Glass Houses Throw Stones?' Whilst Paul Basken penned, 'Academic Researchers Escape Scrutiny in Glaxo Fraud Settlement'

Both are well worth the read.

Both got me thinking.

With Glaxo Chief, Andrew Witty, blaming everyone but himself for the abhorrent way his company, GSK, hid the Paxil suicide link in children I can only assume that the fraudulent marketing by his company would be something he wants to obliterate from his company.

There have been calls for the academics involved in the shameful Paxil 329 study to be criminally prosecuted. The study, headed by child psychiatrist, Martin Keller, was actually written by Glaxo. Keller, along with other key opinion leaders, added their names to the paper to make it look like they had each played a part in testing the safety of Paxil in kids. Truth is, they didn't.

Truth is Paxil wasn't safe for children to take.

Keller and the rest of the 'experts' have to live with that.

The study itself was, after being passed around for three years between child psychiatrists, lawyers and PR firms, published in 2001 by the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Calls for it to be removed/retracted have been ignored by the journal.

Now, if Glaxo chief, Andrew Witty, had indeed been ashamed by his company's recent $3 billion payout for illegally promoted, among other drugs, Paxil, then surely it's down to him to contact the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry to ask them to retract the offending fraudulent study?

I'd like to give Witty a helping hand here. His company, Glaxo, haven't really done anything to help me or the  thousands of others wean off their addictive Paxil but, hey, you don't give to receive, right?

With this in mind I've devised a letter for Witty to simply sign and send off to the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

All you have to do is sign it Witty. [Just print off and send to the journal, there's a good chap.]







For those, like me, who can't read small print, here's the letter in full:




Sir Andrew Witty
GlaxoSmithKline
980 GreatWest Road
Brentford
Middlesex
TW8 9GS


Dear, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
It is with great regret that I have to report that a study, A Multi-center, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled Study of Paroxetine and Imipramine in Adolescents with Unipolar Major Depression- Acute Phase, sent to you under the guise of many highly thought of and influential psychiatrists, is actually false and misleading and could potentially cause harm to the patient population it was supposed to protect... children and adolescents.
The company I am now chief executive of, GlaxoSmithKline, have recently plead guilty and paid $3 billion as part of this criminal and civil resolution. 
We agreed to plead guilty to three misdemeanor violations of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
Regarding Paxil, we agreed to plead guilty to distribution of a misbranded drug due to false and misleading labeling, we also agreed to plead guilty to distribution of a misbranded drug due to inadequate directions for use, that drug was called Wellbutrin, you may know it as Zyban, that's down to me and my former role as VP Manager back in 1997... those were the days. Anyway, I digress, we also agreed to plead guilty to failure to report data to the FDA the adverse effects our diabetes drug, Avandia, was having on people. I heard a ripple that some folk died whilst taking this drug but I don't believe in anecdotal reports.
Anyway, back to the study.
We conducted three placebo-controlled clinical studies to study Paxil’s safety and efficacy in treating depression in patients under age 18. In all three studies, we failed to demonstrate efficacy on the endpoints identified in the study protocols.
Because of this we hired a contractor to write an article on one of the studies [329] that was published in July 2001 in your journal.
The article stated that Paxil "is generally well tolerated and effective for major depression in adolescents." The article did not explicitly state that the study failed to demonstrate efficacy on either of its two primary endpoints or on any of the secondary endpoints that had been identified in the study protocol. We kind of thought that if we would have mentioned that it had failed  demonstrate efficacy on either of its two primary endpoints or on any of the secondary endpoints then we would not have been able to have a fair fight with Eli Lilly, who, at the time, were winning the antidepressant war with their particular poison, Prozac.
The study that our article referred to wasn't in fact written by any of the names that appear on it, namely, Martin B. Keller,  Neal D. Ryan, Michael Strober, Rachel G. Klein, Stan P. Kutcher, Boris Birmaher, Owen R. Hagino, Harold Koplewicz, Gabrielle A. Carlson, Gregory N. Clarke, Graham J. Emslie, David Feinberg, Barbara Geller, Vivek Kusumakar, George Papatheodorou, William H. Sack, Michael Sweeney, Karen Dineen Wagner, Elizabeth B. Weller, Nancy C. Winters, Rosemary Oakes, and James P. McCafferty.
I realize that by coming clean on this I am bringing into dispute the names of those above, who, for years, have all claimed that they played a part in the study. In fact the whole thing was drafted by Sally Laden, an editorial director for Scientific Therapeutics Information. You may have already seen the leaked memo from my company that sees the apparent lead author of the study, Martin Keller, write to Sally with, "Dear Sally, You did a superb job with this. ... It is excellent. Enclosed are rather minor changes from me."
As you may be aware, Martin Keller, or Marty as I like to call him, has gone on to earn vast amounts of money sitting on Advisory Boards for various pharmaceutical companies who want their antidepressants given that golden hallmark. Many others in the list have faced the wrath of a growing army of patient advocates/bloggers too. Poor old Stan Kutcher took a hammering a while back and subsequently failed to get elected in Novia Scotia, Canada. Karen Wagner seems to be doing well, although I understand she's under close scrutiny for a paper she wrote [ahem] about the safety of another antidepressant apparently being safe for kids, despite a previous study claiming that it wasn't. Neal Ryan made himself look rather silly when he was confronted by that Scottish bint, Shelley Jofre, from the BBC whilst the others have been pretty good at deflecting questions about their role in writing our study.
Many children have died by suicide whilst taking our drug, Paxil, many of whom should have been protected by us as we, as a caring company, had a duty to protect the most vulnerable. Alas, we failed and we failed on a huge scale.
Well, it's time to push that era away and to start making amends. So please could you retract the Paxil study from your journal and maybe offer an apology on my part for all the kids that have died since its publication. Although we can't say for sure that they carried out killing themselves because they were taking our drug, we still can't rule it out.
Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause you but I'm turning over a new leaf to get the public believing in GlaxoSmithKline again. I'm even going to blow the lid on my own past as VP Marketing Manager, that's if that pesky whistleblower, Greg Thorpe, doesn't beat me to it.
I hope to hear from you soon.
Please remember to to do more, feel better and live longer.

Yours sincerely,
Sir Andrew Witty

{SIGN HERE}





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






Saturday, August 04, 2012

ILL-INFORMED CONSENT - A child Psychiatrist's Perspective

Dr Laura Davis:  "The pills do not change who people are. And there is no way to become addicted to these pills."
Pic savodnik.com







A recent article by Dr. Laura Davies was recently sent to me via the medium of Facebook.

More about her article in a bit.

First off,  the author, Dr. Laura Davies, is a child psychiatrist who, it seems, is either totally misguided or just plain ignorant. Either way, her stance may be putting the children, adolescents and adults she treats in serious danger.

I felt so angry at this article which lacked any scientific facts that I felt the need to subscribe to Dr Laura Davies' Facebook page. Others followed suit but, along with myself, were all removed from her page for asking a series of questions. I'd asked her if the article was ghostwritten... okay slightly tongue in cheek but I was astounded that there are still doctor's out there promoting the use of these drugs, especially child psychiatrists!

In fact browsing her Facebook page one is greeted with messages of self-indulgence, just a few included below:







"I am the expert"

If you say so Laura.

Just a few things about her article, 'Antidepressants often needlessly avoided'

First off, Laura Davies claims that antidepressants [pills] do not cause addiction or do they change people's personalities. That's quite a broad statement for an expert to make. Sadly, she offers no scientific data to support her claims.

Depression, she claims, "does not mean that one is crying all the time", she adds, "sometimes it can be a withdrawal from friends and family, irritability, difficulty sleeping, a change in appetite, thoughts of death or even suicide, a loss of hope for the future, anxious thoughts and lowered self-confidence."


So the definition of depression, according to Dr Laura Davies, being separated from friends or family, being irritable, having difficulty sleeping, not feeling hungry, being low in confidence and feeling suicidal.

I wouldn't call actual suicide, depression... I'd much prefer to call it death than give it one of Davies' psychiatric labels, but hey, she's the expert.

Her definition of depression must cater for anyone that she sees.

Who hasn't felt sad when being separated from family of friends?

Who hasn't felt irritable or had difficulty sleeping?

Not feeling hungry and feeling low in confidence are pretty normal but, then again, I'm not the expert.

Her one-sided article continues with, "Children of a depressed parent generally do worse in school and are more likely to be abused." and "Antidepressant medications have helped millions of Americans regain their interest in life and relationships. They do this in part by rebalancing serotonin, a chemical in the brain that helps relay messages from one part of the brain to another and also affects mood."

Once more Davies offers no scientific data for her claims.

The chemical imbalance theory has been debunked so many times that even the manufacturers of antidepressants have conceded this marketing spin by now adding the words, "It is thought", in front of, 'your depression is caused by a chemical imbalance.'


In fact, it could be argued that treading in a dog turd could cause a chemical imbalance. There's as much science attached to doggy-doo mishaps as there is Davies' claims about rebalancing serotonin.


Her claim of children doing in worse in school and being more likely to be abused because their parents are depressed defies all logic. It does, however, mean that this belief, however incredulous, gives carte blanche to psychiatrists to treat whole families when only one has a diagnosable 'illness'. "Hey, if mom is depressed then lets get the kids in to treat, we wouldn't want them doing bad at school or suffering abuse."


It's quite a scare tactic and one that Davies actually tries to sell in her article.

Her article finishes with, "The pills do not change who people are. And there is no way to become addicted to these pills. If you have any concerns that you may be depressed, talk to your doctor."

Well, I've seen evidence of addiction in antidepressant medication, I've also seen evidence of both doctors and psychiatrists prescribing more because they see the addiction as a return of the original 'illness'.

For a child, adolescent and adult psychiatrist at California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco to write such an ill-informed article smacks of irresponsibility of the highest order. It also highlights how the belief system ingrained into psychiatry is unscientific, ignorant and dangerous.

I wanted to debate with Laura Davies on her Facebook page. I, along with others, wished to discuss the above points with her. She opted to block anyone from entering into such a debate. She may, if she so desires, wish to debate her claims via the comment section of this blog, let's see shall we.

Davies is a Qualified Medical Examiner who was once a Faculty Member of REACH (Recommendations for Employing Antipsychotics in Children and Adolescents)


“If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done.”  ― Peter Ustinov






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



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