Zantac Lawsuit

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

Friday, March 28, 2014

The Abhorrent Treatment of Justina Pelletier (Video)

A video to share on Twitter and Facebook. Please include the hashtag #FreeJustina. Kudos to the creator of the video.

Bob Fiddaman

Thursday, March 27, 2014

Tweet For Justina

Time to up the ante.

Twitter is a great place for meeting, or at least cyber-typing your heroes and heroines, namely those people who record music, act in moves or, make us laugh.

All of the following people have links to Massachusetts, the state who believe they own the life of Justina Pelletier. Well, they don't.

It's time to grow folks and you can all play a major part in getting this Twitter campaign off the ground.

Remember #FreeJustina is the hashtag you should all use when tweeting.

It's time to ask famous people who have links to Massachusetts to lend their voices.

It's up to you if you want to direct them to links pointing to Justina's plight. You could just simply ask them to retweet #FreeJustina to their followers, some of which run into the millions.

This girl and her family need your help.

Happy tweeting folks.


Orny Adams, comedian, actor, Teen Wolf -

Mike Birbiglia, comedian -

Bo Burnham, comedian -

Bill Burr comedian, actor -

Louis C.K. comedian, director -

Steve Carell comedian, actor, The Office US -

Dane Cook comedian, stand up, and actor -

Nate Corddry comedian, actor, The Daily Show -

Rob Corddry comedian, The Daily Show -

Bill Cosby comedian, actor -

Jamie Denbo comedienne, actress, Terriers -

Christian Finnegan comedian, actor, Are We There Yet? -

Gary Gulman, comedian -

Pete Holmes comedian, comedy writer, TV personality, voice-over actor -

Penn Jillette comedian, illusionist, juggler, writer -

Mindy Kaling comedian, actor The Office US -

Robert Kelly comedian, actor, NYC 22 -

Jen Kirkman comedian, actress, writer, SuperNews! -

John Krasinski comedian, actor The Office US -

Denis Leary comedian and actor -

Jay Leno comedian and talk show host -

Eugene Mirman comedian and writer, Bob's Burgers -

BJ Novak comedian, actor, and head writer of The Office US -

Conan O'Brien comedian and talk show host -

John Pinette stand-up comedian, actor, Parker Lewis Can't Lose -

Joe Rogan comedian, actor -

Matt Selman writer, producer, The Simpsons -

Jenny Slate comedian, actress, Saturday Night Live -

Doug Stanhope, comedian -

Steven Wright, comedian, actor -

Actors and film people

Ben Affleck, Oscar-winning screenwriter, director & actor -

Elizabeth Banks, actress -

Michael Beach, actor -

Michael Chiklis, actor -

Misha Collins, actor -

Jennifer Coolidge, actress -

Marcia Cross, actress -

Jeffrey Donovan, actor -

Illeana Douglas, actress -

Eliza Dushku, actress -

Lisa Edelstein, actress -

Scott Grimes, actor -

Pooch Hall, actor -

Jay Harrington, actor -

Judith Hoag, actress -

Amy Jo Johnson, actress -

John Krasinski, actor -

Maria Menounos, actress -

Bridget Moynahan, actress -

Leonard Nimoy, actor, director -

Edward Norton, actor, director -

Tricia O'Kelley, actress -

Elizabeth Perkins, actress -

Matthew Perry, actor -

Ellen Pompeo, actress -

Patrick Renna, actor -

Taylor Schilling, actress -

TJ Thyne, actor -

Steven Van Zandt, actor, musician -

Donnie Wahlberg, actor and musician -

Mark Wahlberg, actor and former musician -

Alicia Witt, actress -

Kenny Wormald, dancer, actor -


Neil Cicierega, singer and internet cult icon -

Norman Greenbaum, singer -

Juliana Hatfield, guitarist/singer-songwriter -

Tom Hamilton Bassist Aerosmith -

Joey Kramer, Drummer Aerosmith -

Aaron Lewis, lead vocalist and rhythm guitarist of Staind -

Jo Dee Messina, country artist -

Joe Perry, guitarist, singer Aerosmith, The Joe Perry Project -

Carly Simon musician, singer, composer -

Donna Summer singer, songwriter -

Rob Zombie singer, director -

When tweeting this blog post please ensure that you include the #FreeJustina hashtag.

Eg - Tweet For Justina - - #FreeJustina

Bob Fiddaman

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Justina Pelletier - The Ruling

"...psychological and clinical evaluations of the parents are necessary." 

The ruling regarding the future care of 15 year-old teen Justina Pelletier has been posted online.

Reading through the ruling one cannot help but to feel angry and frustrated that hearsay seems to be the basis upon which Judge Joseph Johnson arrived at his decision. He seems to have been convinced by apparent experts that Justina "suffers from a persistent and severe Somatic Symptom Disorder." I've yet to see any scientific evidence that such a disorder exists. If someone could point me to brain images of this disorder then I'd be eternally grateful.

Judge Johnson has accepted the word of mental health, he has taken it at face value. It's akin to a prosecutor in a criminal trial claiming to have the murder weapon...then, once asked by the Judge to produce it, tells the Judge that he doesn't have it in his possession but he saw it...ergo it must exist.

Furthermore, it now appears that Justina's parents have come under the scrutiny of the psychiatric 'guesswork' profession.

"...psychological and clinical evaluations of the parents are necessary." 

Is fighting for your child now deemed as a mental illness?

The one thing this case has highlighted is how mental health likes to widen the net. Lou and Linda Pelletier have, for the past 14 months been fighting to regain custody of their daughter, and rightly so. If they hadn't have been fighting for her then I would probably suggest that they had some sort of callous disorder. In truth, they have done what any parent, under the same circumstances, would have done. To try and label their 'natural response' as a mental disorder shows exactly how the field of mental health works.

Disagree with da man in da white coat at your peril. Show defiance against a mental health diagnosis and you too will be labelled with a disorder... or at the very least be psychologically and clinically evaluated!

Here's the ruling... Faxed by Judge Joseph Johnson. [Click on images to enlarge]

Please use the hashtag #FreeJustina when tweeting this post.

Bob Fiddaman

Back Stories:

Boston Children’s Hospital - A Prison For Children

Justina Pelletier: A Pawn in a Psychiatric Game of Chess

Marriott Hotels and the Case of Justina Pelletier

Car Trouble (Justina Pelletier)

Justina Pelletier - Condition Deteriorates

Judge Joseph Johnson delivers blow to the family of Justina Pelletier

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

Judge Joseph Johnson delivers blow to the family of Justina Pelletier

Judge Joseph Johnson delivered a blow to the family of Justina Pelletier earlier today when he ruled that Justina Pelletier remain in “permanent” custody of the state agency, furthermore it will now be up to the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families [DCF] to decide if and when the 15-year-old will be returned to her parents custody.

Kind of ironic given that it was the DCF who removed Justina from her parents care back in February 2013.

Earlier this week Justina's sister, told Fox CT that "she has never seen her in worse condition."

Jennifer Pelletier said, “Her physical appearance, just from seeing her, it’s scary.  Her legs are more swollen. They’re cold to the touch. She has no feeling in her feet,” Jennifer said on air here.

Almost 14 months ago Justina Pelletier was being treated for mitochondrial disease, a genetic disorder that affects muscle tissue, by doctors at Tufts Medical Center. She was admitted to Boston Children’s Hospital when she came down with the flu. Doctors at BCH disagreed with the Tufts doctors and diagnosed her with somatoform disorder, a mental illness. At no stage have Boston Children’s Hospital offered any concrete evidence that supports their diagnosis.

I challenge them to show the evidence that Justina has a mental illness... this is something Judge Joseph Johnson should have done.

One doesn't have to be Einstein to see how Justina's health has deteriorated during her spell under the care of the government [images below]

Thousands of people on Twitter have expressed their outrage at Judge Joseph Johnson's ruling and many are vowing that they will step up a gear in seeking justice for Justina and the Pelletier family.

Justina's case has captured the hearts of thousands of people worldwide, the majority of whom being sickened by this latest in the Justina Pelletier saga. There has been an outpouring of support on social media networks such as Twitter and Facebook.

This news comes as no surprise to me. When Mental Health Services pry into family matters there really is only ever one outcome. Label the child with a mental disorder, drug them and/or, in the case of many, remove them from their family home.

Justina has been diagnosed as having somatoform disorder, an apparent mental illness where the subject feels pain but no physical cause is found. The pain is, according to the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, thought to be due to psychological problems.

Notice the use of the word 'thought'?

In truth, somatoform disorder is nothing but a theory, it's not an actual disease of the brain. Ask any psychiatrist if somatoform disorder, or any other disorder for that matter, can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

I suspect that Justina Pelletier is wondering why she is still not with her parents tonight, I suspect her parents are baffled, nae devastated by this latest ruling.

All those involved in the care and well-being of Justina Pelletier have failed and they have failed on a catastrophic level.

As for Judge Joseph Johnson, he would have been aware of Justina's deteriorating condition under the 'care' of the government. He would have seen the photos that have circulated over the internet during the past month or so. One has to ask why he has deemed that the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families is the best place for Justina.

A petition to the white house demanding a criminal investigation into Massachusetts DCF and BCH needs just two more signatures to reach the goal of 100,000 by April 24.

Bob Fiddaman

Back Stories:

Boston Children’s Hospital - A Prison For Children

Justina Pelletier: A Pawn in a Psychiatric Game of Chess

Marriott Hotels and the Case of Justina Pelletier

Car Trouble (Justina Pelletier)

Justina Pelletier - Condition Deteriorates

Sunday, March 23, 2014

Justina Pelletier - Condition Deteriorates

The sister of Justina Pelletier, a West Hartford teen who has been held from her parents since they admitted her to Boston Children’s Hospital in February 2013 with flu-like symptoms, has told Fox CT that "she has never seen her in worse condition."

Jennifer Pelletier said, “Her physical appearance, just from seeing her, it’s scary.  Her legs are more swollen. They’re cold to the touch. She has no feeling in her feet,” Jennifer said on air here.

Last Monday, Judge Joseph Johnston failed to deliver his ruling in the Justina Pelletier custody case, opting instead to deliver his verdict on Friday. On Friday Judge Joseph Johnston, once again moved the goalposts, this time opting to give his verdict on Tuesday. He provided no explanation for the delay.

Meantime, 15 year-old Justina remains in a facility in Framingham, Mass. She has been held by the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families for 14 months, during which time she has been diagnosed with a mental disorder and treated accordingly. It's unknown if Justina has been prescribed any psychiatric drugs. The Massachusetts  DCF have refused to acknowledge that the cause of Justina's real illness is  a muscular disease known as mitochondrial disease.

Hasn't this young girl been through enough?

Not only has Justina been diagnosed with an illness that cannot be proven, she has had medication for her original diagnosis halted because a bunch of white-coated imbeciles wish to play God, in essence they are using a 15 year-old girl as a guinea pig and their stubborness is causing her health to deteriorate and her heart to break.

Justina needs to be stopped being used as a pawn here and returned to her parents. Judge Joseph Johnston needs to look into the diagnosis offered by the The Massachusetts  DCF and Boston Children's Hospital. He needs to ask questions about Somatoform Disorder, once such question being, "Can you show this court Somatoform Disorder in any x-rays or scans or maybe blood samples?"

Going up against Mental Health should be easy for a Judge. Any Judge worth his salt will rigorously look at the evidence before him, he should question the experience and background of those providing the evidence.

Here we have a case where high ranking government officials are stipulating evidence without actually showing it - it's akin to telling a jury that a murder weapon has been found that will prove the guilt of the accused... then not showing that evidence.

Judge Joseph Johnston should not just take it at face value that Justina has Somatoform Disorder. He should ask for proof as he would in any other case he may have been part of in the past or any he is part of in the future.

Failing that, Judge Joseph Johnston should just take a look at the picture below and not only return Justina to her parents but hand over relevant documents to prosecutors who should, in turn, make arrests and charge those responsible for this barbaric treatment of Justina Pelletier.

Bob Fiddaman

When Tweeting this post please add the hashtag #FreeJustina

Back Stories:

Boston Children’s Hospital - A Prison For Children

Justina Pelletier: A Pawn in a Psychiatric Game of Chess

Marriott Hotels and the Case of Justina Pelletier

Car Trouble (Justina Pelletier)

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Woman Develops Priapism in 'Clinical Trial' for Libido

The Daily Mail, a British tabloid, is running a story today regarding a 29-year-old woman who had been on a clinical trial taking medication to boost her libido.

The drugs in question, Wellbutrin [GSK] and Trazodone [generic].

Priapism is a condition that usually affects men but in rare cases, can affect women too.

The condition is where a penis or clitoris becomes engorged with blood, causing a painful, long-lasting erection.

'The pain had become debilitating, as she was unable to walk, sit, or stand without significant worsening of the pain,' according to the case report in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, writes the Daily Mail.

When she was examined, doctors discovered her clitoris had become a purple colour and swollen to 2.0 × 0.7 centimeters (0.8 × 0.3 inches).

Wellbutrin is an antidepressant known by its generic name of bupropion, it is also marketed and sold as a smoking cessation drug... given the new brand name of Zyban.

Quite why this was given in combination with Trazodone is unknown.

Worryingly, and something the Daily Mail didn't pick up on, combining these medications may increase the risk of seizures [1]

In 2012 GlaxoSmithKline were found guilty of fraud and fined a record $3 billion. One of the drugs they were fraudulently promoting was Wellbutrin.

Glaxo, with the help of PR firms and the appeal of lavish vacations to convince medical professionals to prescribe the antidepressant Wellbutrin for weight loss, sexual dysfunction, drug addiction and ADHD, even though the drug is FDA approved only to treat depression.

Tavy Deming, an attorney for one of the whistle blowers, told the AP that during a regional meeting of sales representatives in Las Vegas in 2000, the reps were told to promote Wellbutrin as the drug that makes patients “happy, horny and skinny,” as part of a national slogan repeated to doctors. [2]

I think the term 'clinical trial' used by the Daily Mail may be a tad misleading here. It's possible that the 29 year-old's doctor just tried these combination of drugs on her. Nevertheless, who ever prescribed them in combination, or indeed to 'cure' libido', needs their licence revoked.

Bob Fiddaman.

[1] Drug Interaction - bupropion - trazodone

[2] Breaking Down GlaxoSmithKline’s Billion-Dollar Wrongdoing

Monday, March 17, 2014

Glaxo - Enter the Spin Doctors.

Spin Doctor -  a public relations person who tries to forestall negative publicity by publicizing a favorable interpretation of the words or actions of a company.

GlaxoSmithKline, the British pharmaceutical company who have promised that they won't be bribing doctors or key opinion leaders anymore, have come up with a wonderful alternative that has 'SPIN' written all over it.

The smokescreen it will be operating under is called "Patient First", another piece of carefully crafted spin. "Patient First" was a scheme put into place as part of Glaxo's Corporate Integrity Agreement which saw them fined a staggering $3billion by the Department of Justice for misdemeanours involving, bribery, kickbacks and off-label promotion of dangerous drugs to children. [Back story]

Fed up of being the bad guys Glaxo have promised to do away with top University boffs to promote their drugs, opting instead for in-house doctors on their payroll. Hey, nobody can accuse them of bribery if they are paying an annual salary to someone employed by them, right?

Forget the potential conflict of interest that looms just press ahead and hire specialist doctors...give them a wage, give them a list of what they can or can't say and voila... we have a KOL by proxy.

Genius spin once again from GlaxoSmithKline.

Bloomberg write:

Glaxo has been reforming marketing practices to improve its reputation. In 2012, the company agreed to pay $3 billion to settle allegations that it illegally promoted its Paxil and Wellbutrin anti-depressants and failed to report safety data on the Avandia diabetes drug. Hiring doctors and medical experts to speak as in-house representatives of Glaxo will provide more transparency, Connelly said.

Glaxo's Deirdre Connolly said, "We'll continue to disseminate this very important information on drug benefits and risks, but we’re just not going to do that by hiring external speakers,” Adding, “We want to ensure that no one even perceives us to be doing anything wrong.”

Hmmm, it would be easy for me, as a critic of GSK, to jump on that last quote... I much prefer to ask why Connolly chose to use the word 'continue' as if they [GSK] had been doing the right thing even when they did hire external speakers!

This latest move from the masters of spin should serve as a stark warning to all those journalists and TV doctor's who actually believe GSK are really going to clean up the rot that their CEO, Andrew Witty, once described as being an 'era'.

In the words of Jack Black, "Read between the between the lines."

Bob Fiddaman

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

MHRA Decline to Meet With Human Rights Movement

What is the difference between the British drug regulator, the MHRA, and the human rights movement, the CCHR?

Well, in short, the MHRA claim to protect us from unsafe drugs but...they fail on a grand scale whereas the CCHR continue to fight the corner of the small person on the street, trying to protect the health of the public by raising issues and questions to officialdom.

For those that don't know, MHRA stands for the Medicines Healthcare and products Regulatory Agency. Their job is to monitor the medicines the British public take. They are an agency that is fully funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Their Chief Executive is Dr Ian Hudson, a former World Safety Officer for GlaxoSmithKline [then SmithKline Beecham]

The CCHR stands for the Citizen's Commission on Human Rights. They have many purposes, two of which is to flag growing concerns regarding psychiatric drugs and those that prescribe them. They are a non-profit, non-political, non-religious mental health watchdog. Their UK's Executive Director is Brian Daniels who has no links to the pharmaceutical industry.

Back in July 2013 Brian, representing the CCHR, wrote to June Raine of the MHRA. He had previously wrote to the MHRA some months earlier but they had failed to respond.

The CCHR were concerned about the growing list of antidepressant 'adverse incidents' in the UK and proposed a meeting with the MHRA for an 'open debate'.

The CCHR even offered a database... "A set of data has been compiled consisting of 1637 incidents involving antidepressants. It has been made available on a web site It came to the attention of this organisation as it aligned with documents gathered over decades regarding this category of drug and the adverse drug reactions."

Here's the letter in full.

The MHRA [eventually] replied in their usual classic fashion. They declined to meet with the CCHR citing the previous correspondence they had sent to the CCHR.

I've saw the correspondence, in fact, I have an uncanny ability to predict any correspondence from the MHRA when the subject of antidepressants are concerned... move over Doris Stokes. [1]

Here's the MHRA's bog-standard response they sent to the CCHR... they have sent me the same in the past.

So, 10 years ago, write the MHRA, an 'expert' working group published its findings regarding the balance and risks of SSRi antidepressant use. The 'experts', in relation to suicidal behaviour in adults, concluded that there was a modest increase in the risk of suicidal thoughts and self-harm for SSRis compared to placebo. They added that the MHRA follow up all cases of suicide that are reported to them. Reports can only be sent to them via their yellow card reporting system. 

I don't know about you but if I wanted to learn more about the quality of food served at a restaurant I'd ask a customer and not someone paid by the restaurant manager.

Ben Scott, who wrote the reply to the CCHR, lists himself as the MHRA's 'Customer Services Manager'.

Customer Services?

Nice job Ben. It must have taken you all of three minutes to copy and paste that to the CCHR. I wonder if MHRA clerical staff are given a typing test for such positions. I wonder if Ben, when filling out his application form for the customer services manager position, wrote, "I can type 40 words per minute". I bet my left nut it was met with senior management rolling around the floor laughing. "HAHAHA, guffaw, titter, this Ben chap seems to think we actually type our responses to customers, HAHAHAHAH, has he not heard of our standard stonewalling template?"

I don't mean to have a pop at Ben Scott here, he's probably a decent sort who believes he's working for an agency that really have their finger on the pulse of dangerous medications...even if that finger hasn't been lifted since 2004.

I've had many public spats with the MHRA. I've had meetings with them, I've been labelled by them, I think the term was  "loose cannon". Yeh, I'm a loose cannon, I fire when I need to fire and not when someone tells me to, least of all some lickspittle agency that bends over in front of the pharmaceutical industry merely to 'take one for the team'.

Men, women and children are killing themselves whilst taking antidepressant medication. It's no cause for concern for the MHRA because their 'experts' told us 10 years ago that the benefits outweigh the risks.

Here's what Facebook looked like 10 years ago.

Facebook, unlike the MHRA, have changed. Many, if not all of their changes, have come as a result of listening to what the customer wants.

The MHRA, have remained in the same position regarding their stance on the safety of antidepressants, it's a position highlighted in the following picture...

Take a good look at the picture. It shows two things. It highlights how the MHRA like to bury their head in the sand, at the same time sticking their ass in the air so the Pharmafia can politely butt-fuck them when they step out of line. [Ooops, there's the loose cannon in me rearing its wayward head]

If using profanity is what it takes for this agency to sit up and take notice about the huge SSRi problem then swear I shall.

I ceased communication with the MHRA a few years ago. I have, since, sent them a few minor requests. I publicly noted my reasons for severing my ties with them in my book.

The MHRA will not meet with the CCHR because they don't want the cold, hard facts thrown at them. They don't want to have to go back to the issue of the safety and efficacy of antidepressants because by doing so it will highlight just how utterly incompetent they are as an agency. They don't want their 2008 investigation into GSK rehashed because it embarrasses them greatly. In brief, the MHRA carried out a four year investigation. The investigation  focused on whether GSK had failed to inform the MHRA of information it had on the safety of Seroxat in under 18’s in a timely manner. Despite finding that GSK HAD been slow in releasing this information, the MHRA decided not to prosecute them. Instead they opted to send them a letter asking them not to be naughty again. [GSK really took heed of that 2008 warning huh?]

In the words of Charles Medawar, "They [MHRA] have failed and they have failed miserably"

Bob Fiddaman

[1] Doris May Fisher Stokes, born Doris Sutton, was a British spiritualist and psychic medium.

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

A Search for Justice – Death in Bray - Review

To write an opinion piece without offending is always going to be tricky. In the past I have wrote many articles where I have never really given any thought to my opinions hurting anyone because, in the main, I write about pharmaceutical companies, medicine regulators and psychiatrists whom I don't really care much for.

This piece is different as it concerns a number of people who are all suffering loss, all, who I mention, in the following piece, are searching for answers. We have a bunch of people divided by opinion which makes it increasingly difficult for any of the parties to accept facts.

My opinion, it will be argued, is one of bias - I cannot refute this but can offer my reasons for sitting on one side of the fence opposed to sitting on the other side or, indeed, sitting on the actual fence.

Last night TV3, an Irish network channel, aired a 90 minute special that covered the death of 22 year-old Sebastian Creane. The documentary, 'A Search for Justice – Death in Bray', has, if anything, raised some questions that need answering.

Before I go on I would just like to stipulate that I did not know Sebastian Creane nor Shane Clancy. I have, since this tragic incident, met with Shane Clancy's mother, partner and family on numerous occasions and they, like other families I have met and wrote about, have become good friends.

So, many may think that my bias will originate from this friendship. I can state clearly that this is not the case.

It was my father who, many years ago, said to me, "Always write about the things you know about", which is something that I have tried to do. As a writer my job is similar to the programme-makers of 'A Search for Justice – Death in Bray' in as much that I wish to raise certain concerns and my ultimate wish is that those concerns are debated.

Watching the documentary was difficult as many people have been affected by the tragedy it covered, none more so than the parents of Sebastian Creane and Shane Clancy.

Sebastian Creane, 22, was stabbed to death on August 16, 2009, by Shane Clancy, 22, who then killed himself at the Creane family home in Bray. A subsequent inquest into the alleged suicide of Clancy resulted in a coroner's decision, based on evidence given, of an "open verdict".

This, it seemed, was the basis of 'A Search for Justice – Death in Bray'.

Sebastian Creane parents, Nuala and Jay, were not happy with the outcome of the Shane Clancy inquest and both they and friends of Sebastian took umbrage to Leonie and her partner, Tony, appearing on The Late Late Show [RTE] some 6 weeks after the tragic incident.

If I were a neutral watching 'A Search for Justice – Death in Bray' I would have been of the opinion that Shane Clancy was a crazed young man who killed his former girlfriend's lover and then, after realisation of his actions, decided to take his own life rather than face the consequences of those actions. I believe the documentary, although compelling, didn't really delve into the evidence of antidepressant homicide/suicide.

I have been writing and researching about the side-effects of SSRi medications for almost nine years now and this case is not too dissimilar to other cases of bizarre beahviour from those who have ingested these powerful group of drugs.

Homicide Vs Suicide - What is the difference?

Homicide is the act of killing another.

Suicide is the act of killing oneself.

So, why did the coroner in Shane Clancy's inquest deliver an "open verdict"?

Well, based upon all evidences provided to the inquest it could not be deemed that Shane Clancy knew that he was killing himself [suicide]. The reasons why he never knew this have never been elaborated on [officially].

If Shane never knew he was about to kill himself then did he know that he was carrying out an act of homicide when he killed Sebastian?

This, of course, was never answered. Shane's inquest was not about finding fault or laying the finger of blame, it was, as all inquests are, about preventing any future deaths in the manner of how Shane Clancy died.

A very important issue was raised in the documentary. If Shane had not killed himself after killing Sebastian [and attacking others] then he would have been tried and [more than likely] convicted. I say more than likely because it is very rare for accused killers or criminals to be acquitted by using induced psychosis as a result of medication being taken. Rare but not unheard of.

In February 24, 2000 Connecticut Superior Court Judge J. Arnold acquitted Christopher DeAngelo of first-degree robbery on the grounds that the defendant lacked substantial capacity as a result of mental disease or defect. The judge specifically attributed Mr. DeAngelo's impaired state to his prescribed Xanax and Prozac.[1]

David Crespi plead guilty to brutally stabbing his five-year-old twin daughters to death, but there is one person that still believes he’s innocent: their mother.

Kimberly Crespi has fought for her husband from the beginning, forgiving him for his horrific crime in 2006 and now she wants to share their story with the world.

Mrs Crespi believes Crespi killed their girls because he was misdiagnosed with a personality disorder and put on a cocktail of drugs which in turn, caused a psychotic episode. [2]

Clinical psychologist, Dr. David Antonuccio, was one of multiple doctors who gave Charles Baymiller a mental evaluation. He said that she was displaying negative drug side effects prior to the killing such as agitation and sleep deprivation and had visited her doctor to address them. Instead, a nurse practitioner increased her dosages. He said that was not an appropriate adjustment. Antonuccio said that within weeks, the drugs could have caused her to be in a drug-induced state, where she would be in a “fog-like, sleepwalking” state and later have no memory of her actions. He said the known side effects of Paxil are irritability, aggessiveness and suicidal tendencies.” [3]

Probably the most infamous of all is the case of Donald Schell. Here's the verdict of the jury [Fig 1]

These are just four incidents, there are many more if one researches.

Irish psychiatrist, Patricia Casey, who appeared in the TV3 special, claimed that there is no evidence to suggest that the SSRi group of drugs can cause homicide. Some of the instances above, may be debated but, nonetheless, they show evidence that Casey claims does not exist.

Back in 2011 Lawyers representing Patricia Casey wrote to the mother of Shane Clancy. Casey took umbrage to a blog post and subsequent comments that appeared on the Leonie Fennell blog. Fennell was, in essence, told to remove the comments or face being sued by Casey. Back stories here and here.

Casey was interviewed and appeared in the 90 minute special last night, she made assertions that Shane Clancy had a "psychiatric illness" and did not believe his actions were due to citalopram he was taking. [Whilst alive Shane was seen by three professionals, none of whom diagnosed him with a psychiatric illness]

From what I can gather, Casey has based her diagnosis around reading documents from the case and reviewing CCTV footage of Shane Clancy on the night of the tragedy. She is, like many in this case, offering her own opinion. Casey, and her supporters, will argue that she is in a position to offer such evidence because she is a professional psychiatrist. End of the day Casey has offered an opinion that cannot be backed up with any scientific facts. She cannot prove, one way or the other, that her diagnosis of Shane Clancy is correct.

Casey also touched upon her links to the pharmaceutical company Lundbeck in last night's documentary. Lundbeck manufacture the antidepressant that Shane Clancy was prescribed.

Shane's mother, Leonie Fennell, had, back in 2011, highlighted a possible conflict of interest between Casey and Lundbeck [here]

Not only does Casey not believe that citalopram may have been the cause of Shane Clancy's out of character behaviour, she also believes that antidepressants do not cause suicide. [4] Something that, I believe, is an appalling and dangerous statement given the warnings placed on the packets of SSRi's such as citalopram.

The family and friends of Sebastian Creane and Shane Clancy will always have to deal with their loss, it will never go away. Both parties will also battle with the many unanswered questions. All parties concerned will try to seek justice. On one side of the fence we have those that refuse to believe the evidence that SSRi medications can cause homicide and suicide - on the other we have parents who refuse to believe that their son could commit such a heinous crime.

On a personal front, and to add some weight to my argument, I became suicidal when withdrawing from another SSRi, namely GSK's Seroxat. I also became aggressive and, totally out of character, went out one night seeking confrontation. The area I chose was a country park in Birmingham. I wanted violence and I didn't much care about the consequences of my actions if I would have had my thirst for violence quenched. [5] Luckily, there was nobody walking through the darkened country park during the early hours of that particular morning. Had they have been then I, myself, may have been the subject of much debate and maybe Casey, or any other psychiatrist for that matter, may have been convinced that I had a chemical imbalance in my brain that made me mentally ill.

In truth, I was prescribed Seroxat for "work-related stress"

Shane Clancy was prescribed citalopram because he was dealing with matters of the heart, a relationship split with his girlfriend.

I don't think for one minute that either of us were mentally ill.

Airing a documentary on such a subject was a brave move by TV3. It was very brave of Leonie Fennell, Nuala, Jay and Dylan Creane and Jennifer Hannigan to appear in front of TV camera's, by doing so they have people talking, writing, debating, insinuating. No statements, as far as I am aware were given to the programme-makers by H. Lundbeck A/S. I find this quite astonishing given that in one of their own citalopram studies 14 patients taking citalopram attempted suicide or reported suicidal ideation compared with 5 patients taking placebo,” [6]

As always, my thoughts are with both parties here. I cannot imagine what it must feel like to lose a child, particularly in such circumstances. I sincerely hope that one day the truth will out and that those left to pick up the pieces will one day be able to embrace that truth and find the minutest bit of comfort from it.

Bob Fiddaman.

[1] Court Finds Prozac and Xanax Cause Criminal Conduct

[2] Mother forgives husband for stabbing their twin daughters to death while driven crazy by Prozac and is fighting to have him freed from jail

[3] Judge gives woman probation in Incline Village husband's slaying after children request it

[4] "Antidepressants Do Not Cause Suicide" - Patricia Casey [VIDEO EVIDENCE]

[5] The Evidence, However, Is Clear, The Seroxat Scandal [Paperback]

[6] Forest Under Fire

Sunday, March 09, 2014

Is Patricia Casey the Chosen One?

Controversial Irish psychiatrist Patricia Casey

Irish psychiatrist, Patricia Casey, is at it again.

Once again she has come out and spoke about mental illness and antidepressant use. Casey, who has received much criticism from a number of bloggers over the years, is quoted in today's edition of The Irish Sunday Times.

Tomorrow evening TV3, an Irish television station, are airing a special documentary that looks deeper into the death of Sebastian Creane, 22, who was stabbed to death on August 16, 2009, by Shane Clancy, 22, who then killed himself at the Creane family home in Bray.

An inquest into the death of Shane Clancy revealed an open verdict, in other words the evidence given at the inquest was insufficient for the Coroner to return a verdict of suicide.

The TV3 documentary, 'A Search for Justice – Death in Bray', is set to cause much controversy with the families concerned and one has to ask why this case from 2009 is being regurgitated.

Patricia Casey, who asked to give evidence at Clancy's inquest but was refused by the coroner, is featured in the documentary along with members of the Clancy and Creane families.

The Irish Sunday Times today quoted Casey, it was a quote that made me choke on the toast I was eating at the time.

Casey claims that research literature "is not in any way convincing" that the drug [citalopram] can lead someone to kill. "I do not think it was the drugs", Casey told program makers, adding, "I believe it was a psychiatric illness he [Clancy] was suffering from."

Well, good to see that Casey is only offering her belief and no hard physical evidence to back up her claims.

This pretty much sums up Casey's chosen profession, psychiatry, a profession based purely on belief and...well, nothing much else really.

Casey never met either Creane or Clancy whilst they were alive yet, in this instance, she is offering her own diagnosis of 22 year-old Shane Clancy.

Does Casey have samples of Shane's blood or a frozen urine sample? Maybe Casey has a strand of hair and has ran a series of DNA tests that show Clancy had a "psychiatric illness"?

How can Casey, who has in the past claimed antidepressants do not cause suicide [Video below] diagnose a dead person?

Here's one way of looking at it.

Patricia Casey has been chosen by God to work his miracles. She can see what others can't see because God has given her this special power... in fact Casey doesn't even need to see those sickened by mental illness, she has a gift [given to her by God] that allows her to find diseases in dead people that previous professionals missed. Clancy was seen by three separate doctors prior to his death. None of them diagnosed him with a psychiatric illness...then again, they were not chosen by God to perform the miracles that Casey can.

Then again, even Satan can induce miracles [Check out the Book of Revelation for proof of this]

Today, and even in 2009, we have pharmaceutical companies who manufacture powerful SSRi type medications, openly admit that patients taking their drugs [particularly those up to the age of 25] have to be monitored as suicidal thoughts are known to be caused by the medication. Even drug regulators around the world have had to concede this one simple fact. Casey, however, does not acknowledge this.

Here's another way of looking at it.

Patricia Casey is wrong. Patricia Casey is burying her head in the sand. Patricia Casey likes the attention. Patricia Casey has a conflict of interest where the drug citalopram is concerned. [See here and here] Patricia Casey has a mental illness [Delusional disorder] whereby she cannot tell what is real from what is imagined.

So, has she been chosen by God to perform psychiatric assessments on dead kids or does she, herself, have some kind of mental disorder?

The TV3 special runs tomorrow evening. Sadly, due to contractual reasons, people outside of Ireland will not be able to see this. That shouldn't stop us from giving an opinion though. I mean, Casey can give opinions about dead kids she never once why can't we?

I have chosen my words carefully in this blog post. Casey, you see, has a habit of setting her lawyers on people who disagree with her. Case in point being the mother of Shane Clancy, Leonie Fennell.

Back in 2011 Casey took umbrage to a post that appeared on the Leonie Fennell blog. Casey's law team, Brophy Solicitor's from Dublin, sent Fennell a letter, the crux of which claiming that Casey had her reputation "destroyed or attacked" as a result of comments left on Fennell's blog [Letter here]

Fennell replied to Casey's solicitors who, in turn, wrote back to Fennell...

Dear Ms Fennell,
We refer to our letter to you dated 22nd June.
It is extremely disappointing that your reply to this letter consisted of you posting it on your blog along with the comment in bold “I will never be bullied, intimidated or silenced by Lundbeck or Professor Casey”.
We need to point out to you that when our client first came to us, we advised her that the comments you have now removed from your blog were seriously defamatory and that she would be quite entitled to issue legal proceedings against you. She did not wish to do so because she has enormous sympathy for the tragedy you have suffered.
You have removed the defamatory comments from your blog but you now accuse our client of bullying you and trying to silence you. This is despite the fact that we specifically stated that our client did not want you to remove your blog but only wanted you to remove the defamatory comments you made about her. What part of this constitutes bullying? What part of this constitutes an attempt to silence you? Are you saying that the simple fact that you received a solicitor’s letter asking you to remove certain defamatory comments which you subsequently removed, constitutes intimidation?
We must now insist that you remove this sentence from your blog as it is absolutely clear that our client is not trying to bully you or intimidate you or silence you. What she is trying to do is to protect her good name and she will not allow herself to be defamed again. We hope you will accept that the allegation that our client is a bully and that she is intimidating you and trying to silence you is both wrong and extremely damaging for her.
We have strongly advised our client that she should issue proceedings to prevent this repetitive defamation but once again our client has said that she does not wish to do so given the background to this case but she absolutely insists that you remove the defamatory comments that are appearing on the website at the moment and confirm that you will not repeat any defamation in the future.

Yours faithfully,

As an outsider looking in it looks to me like Casey will never accept that antidepressants can cause suicide, it also seems apparent, to me at least, that Casey's beliefs about Shane Clancy's state of mind on that fateful night back in 2009 had nothing to do with the medication he was taking, despite overwhelming evidence from drug-makers and drug regulators that oppose her belief.

So, I'm throwing out three questions for Casey and for readers of this blog.

1. Has Patricia Casey been chosen by God to perform miracles through him?

2. Can Patrica Casey prove that Shane Clancy had a psychiatric illness?

3. Does Patricia Casey have some sort of delusional disorder?

TV3’s “A Search for Justice – Death in Bray” will feature interviews with Jennifer Hannigan, Seb’s parents Nuala and Jay Creane, Seb’s brother Dylan and his girlfriend Laura Mackey as well as Shane Clancy’s mother Leonie Fennell.

Judging by the media reports and TV critics it looks as though the documentary may portray Shane Clancy as nothing but a murderer. This saddens me a great deal because research and personal experience [6 years on Seroxat] has shown me that these drugs can turn even the most gentle, placid of people into monsters.

My condolences are offered to all of those concerned in this tragic series of events.

Bob Fiddaman.

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