Is an Influential Australian Psychiatrist Spreading Fear?

First off, the coronavirus doesn't cause any psychiatric 'disorders'. Let's be abundantly clear about that.

I'm astonished to see Australia's leading brain pellet spokesperson Patrick McGorry (above), spreading fear on Twitter.

It appears McGorry took umbrage to a letter (below) sent into The Guardian from Dr Lucy Johnstone. The letter from Johntsone was in response to Paul Daley’s article (We face a pandemic of mental health disorders, 24 March)

McGorry, in a rather contradictory fashion, tweeted the following in response:

If, according to McGorry, fear is "100% absolutely appropriate" why does he then add his own mix of fear with, "...severe stress, economic collapse & multiple losses in a global disaster will lead to a major increase in need for MH care..."?

It seems that in the space of just two weeks psychiatrists, such as McGorry, have become expert virologists and economists overnight. They are jumping into a situation and trying to make it appear as though they have an important role in what's going on or what may happen as a result of this global pandemic.

The truth of the matter is, they don't have a clue about what is going on, they only think they do. Yes, people are fearful, I am myself, as are many of my family and friends, in fact, every time I clear my throat mild panic sets in but do we really need the likes of McGorry spreading more unnecessary fear with his crystal ball predictions? All of his claims are natural responses to situations, they are not mental disorders, therefore they should never be treated as such. A pill won't get you a job nor will it make the economy look better either.

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Let's just look at the current way psychiatrists diagnose Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)

To be diagnosed with OCD, you must have obsessions:

 - worry that you will become sick or “contaminated”
 - a belief that you or someone you love is in danger 
- Sometimes the link between the compulsion and the obsession is clear, like someone who washes their hands repeatedly to fight germs or contamination.

Now, here's some food for thought.

What if residents of Wuhan, where the coronavirus purportedly originated from, had been 'obsessive' about washing their hands repeatedly to fight germs or contamination, would we still have seen such a global spread?

What if those same residents wanted to obsess about hygiene but were fearful to do so because they didn't want to be labelled by psychiatrists as having OCD?

As I understand it psychiatry views a person who washes their hands repeatedly to fight germs or contamination as possibly having a brain disorder, or the makings of one but what would an independent psychiatrist think of McGorry's latest contradictory rant on Twitter?

McGorry is famous for his Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre [EPPIC]. Over 50% of psychiatrists who took a poll believed that EPPIC put young people at risk of being over-medicated.

McGorry, with the financial assistance of Seroquel manufacturer Astra Zeneca, also wanted to carry out a clinical trial [of sorts] with children, among others, who had not yet been diagnosed with a psychotic illness. In other words, he wanted, it appears, to trial out Seroquel, a powerful antipsychotic, on subjects who, for all intents and purposes, had nothing wrong with them.

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

McGorry pulled the trial and now denies that the complaint had anything to do with his decision.

It begs the question of who has the obsessions here, is it the people who wish to make their own choices or the people who constantly push their choices on others?

McGorry is, in essence, fearmongering. It's almost like he and many other Twitter and media psychiatrists are experiencing schadenfreude, a pleasure that one derives from another person's misfortune.

In any event, the way we view the world is likely to have some drastic changes after all this blows over ~ leaves me wondering if the field psychiatry is going to move the goalposts on their criteria for OCD - if they do then it will be an admission of 'we got it wrong' - a hidden admission at that as they rarely apologise for getting things wrong. If they don't change the criteria then they are going to look rather stupid...not for the first time.

We, as a race, will be obsessively washing our hands for years to come.

Leave the medicine to the real doctors and the choice of wanting to be as obsessive as we want about our own hygiene, please Paddy!


Bob Fiddaman

You can read more about Paddy McGorry here 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28

Hickie Getting Picky With Lancet

Aussie Psychiatrist Ian Hickie

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

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

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

So, Hickie has come out fighting. A full response to Horton's tweet can be viewed on the crikey.com website where Hickie writes:

Sadly, tweeting has not only replaced the academic journal itself as the major source of credible information — the new social media is perceived to be the place where people say what they really believe. Any allegation in cyberspace is instantly assumed to be true and relayed extensively throughout the social network that is modern media.

Do I sense a mild form of paranoia here? "Any allegation in cyberspace is instantly assumed to be true and relayed extensively throughout the social network that is modern media."


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

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

**Diddums

He further writes:

My professional colleagues who conduct original research, our institutions, health journalists and many of the editors of Australia’s major medical and mental health journals, are well used to receiving these social media missives from the same small band of local anti-medicine or anti-psychiatry warriors.

If it were such a small band of  local anti-medicine or anti-psychiatry warriors then why is Hickie getting so upset about a piddling little tweet?

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

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

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

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

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

Oh, I regularly tweet too.

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

More about Hickie and his professional colleagues below:


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

Patrick McGorry - Torn Asunder Down Under

Early Intervention, McGorry, Politics & TV Shows

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

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

Pre-Mental Disorder Screening & Drugging - THE PHARMACEUTICAL DELOREAN

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Pulls Over For New Passenger

The Defence of Prof. Ian Hickie

Australian Psychiatrist Ian Hickie's Lancet Paper Heavily Criticised

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Australian Psychiatrist Graham Burrows Denies Any "Wrongdoing"

Professor Graham Burrows - The "Cosmetic Psychiatrist?"




Fid


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


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

Australian Psychiatrist Ian Hickie's Lancet Paper Heavily Criticised

Prof Ian Hickie

Things have gone belly-up down under, it seems.

Psychiatrist Graham Burrows has recently been in the news for prescribing unapproved drugs to his patients, resulting in a class action lawsuit against him.

Yesterday an article appeared on the subscription based online website The Australian Doctor. Professor Ian Hickie had co-authored a review that appeared in The Lancet, a review that has been heavily criticised for failing to reveal Hickie's ties with Valdoxan [agomelatine] manufacturer, Servier.

Hickie has also been accused of down playing the side effects of  Valdoxan, an antidepressant marketed for the treatment of major depressive disorder.

So far six letters, in response to the Hickie review, have been published in The Lancet, all of which are critical. Hickie and his co-author Naomi Rogers have both replied to the criticism.

It comes as no surprise, to me at least, that Hickie is seen promoting the use of a psychiatric medication, he is after all part of the DeLorean Mob [EPPIC], a psychiatric service that can jump into the future to see what lays in store for the patients [adolescents] they treat. In a nutshell [pardon the pun], EPPIC can predict if a child may fall foul of psychosis. No prizes for guessing the kind of treatments used for psychosis these days.

Critics slammed Hickie for not revealing his ties [conflict of interests] in the review, something which he has since changed with his response to the critics. One has to question why he never shared this when he and Rogers submitted the review to The Lancet.

I find it difficult to understand how anyone could take his review seriously after reading the disclaimer at the foot of his latest response. Even more so that the disclaimer has only appeared after he was pulled up about it by the critiques.

IBH [Hickie] was previously Chief Executive Officer and Clinical Adviser of beyondblue, an Australian National Depression Initiative. He has led projects for health professionals and the community supported by governmental, community agency, and drug industry partners (Wyeth, Eli Lily, Servier, Pfizer, AstraZeneca) for the identification and management of depression and anxiety. He has served on advisory boards convened by the drug industry in relation to specific antidepressants, including nefazodone, duloxetine, and desvenlafaxine, and has participated in a multicentre clinical trial of agomelatine effects on sleep architecture in depression. IBH is also supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Australian Medical Research Fellowship. He is a participant in a family-practice-based audit of sleep disturbance and major depression, supported by Servier, the manufacturers of agomelatine. NLR [Rogers] has received grant support from Vanda Pharmaceuticals, Servier, Pfizer, and Cephalon, and has received honoraria for lectures from Pfizer, CSL Biotherapies, and Servier. She has previously received research funding from Vanda Pharmaceuticals, manufacturers of tasimelteon. She has also received an unrestricted educational grant from Servier. Research studies done by IBH and NLR are mainly funded by NHMRC project and programme grants.

Here's just two letters sent to The Lancet in response the Hickie's review, the other four are similar in content. [1]  [2]

Last year I wrote about Hickie regarding his connections to former Australian of the year and psychiatrist Patrick McGorry - Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Also - The Defence of Prof. Ian Hickie


"If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits eighty-eight miles per hour... you're gonna see some serious shit." - Dr. Emmett Brown [Back To The Future 1985]

Professor Graham Burrows Accused of "Guinea Pig" Trial

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

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

Previous posts about Burrows:


News 7: More Complaints Against Prof Graham Burrows

Australian Psychiatrist Graham Burrows Denies Any "Wrongdoing"

Professor Graham Burrows - The "Cosmetic Psychiatrist?"

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Proposal...FAIL

A recent poll undertaken by Psychiatry Update, an e-newsletter and website with the latest psychiatry news from Australia and overseas, has shown that almost 60% of psychiatrists think the Federal Government’s focus on Patrick McGorry's Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre [EPPIC] (1) is inappropriate. Over 50% of psychiatrists who took the poll also believe that EPPIC puts young people at risk of being over medicated.


Out of the 222 who took the survey, 121 were psychiatrists, almost half of whom also left comments

Psychiatry Update writes:

Among the non-psychiatrists, the biggest group was GPs (23.8%), followed by psychologists (21.8%) and then mental health nurses (12.9%).When asked about the risk of over-medication in EPPIC, 52.1% of psychiatrists thought it would put young people at risk of being over-medicated, with 14.9% “strongly agreeing” it would.A similar proportion of nonpsychiatrists also agreed.

This latest opposition to McGorry's DeLorean machine comes hot on the heels of a proposed clinical trial by McGorry.

McGorry, with the financial assistance of Seroquel manufacturer Astra Zeneca, wanted to carry out a clinical trial [of sorts] with children, among others, who had not yet been diagnosed with a psychotic illness. In other words, he wanted, it appears, to trial out Seroquel, a powerful antipsychotic, on subjects who, for all intents and purposes, had nothing wrong with them.

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

McGorry pulled the trial and now denies that the complaint had anything to do with his decision.

The planned trial, which was apparently 'ethically approved' is shrouded in mystery.

On Aug 16 2011, the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry [ANZCTR] showed that the planned study had NOT received approval from at least one ethics committee. Yet 6 days later the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry had been mysteriously amended and showed that the planned trial HAD received approval from at least one ethics committee.

Here's the rub, the icing on the cake if you will. McGorry pulled the trial, so he claims, in June 2011, almost two months before the ANZCTR showed that the planned study had NOT received approval from at least one ethics committee. Maybe the flux capacitor in his time travelling DeLorean was playing up or maybe the ANZCTR had been altered? It's fair to assume something smells here, isn't it?

I'm surprised none of the major Australian newspapers picked up on this 'faux pas'

Melbourne Health said its mental health research ethics committee was "satisfied the process and the decision to give ethics committee approval of the study were appropriate".

The health organisation said the study had been abandoned by the research team for "logistical reasons".

I wonder if they asked why the ANZCTR had miraculously changed overnight to show McGorry's planned trial had received approval?

It will be interesting to see if McGorry and his soothsaying henchmen respond to the Psychiatry Update poll. They have, in the past, slammed their critics and labelled them as an odd mix of armchair critics, conspiracy theorists and Scientologists.

The response from McGorry and Co should prove interesting, I anticipate that it will be published... 6 days ago and appear 6 days later - such is the power of the DeLorean posse.

You can follow Psychiatry Update on Twitter

(1) The Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre (EPPIC) is an integrated and comprehensive psychiatric service aimed at addressing the needs of people aged 15-24 with emerging psychotic disorders in the western and north-western regions of Melbourne.

Related articles:


Patrick McGorry Responds to Criticism by Allen Frances

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

The Defence of Prof. Ian Hickie




Fid


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

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

Paddy McGorry's DeLorean Program - The Survey

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

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

Take the survey HERE

More about McGorry and the DeLorean Mob:

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




Fid


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

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

The Defence of Prof. Ian Hickie

Prof Ian Hickie

Patrick McGorry's sidekick, Prof Ian Hickie, has come out fighting this week with an opinion piece that was published on the Sydney Morning Herald website.

One would have thought that Hickie, who I have highlighted before on this blog, [Back story] would have used the Sydney Morning Herald as a platform to show evidence that the DeLorean Machine [The Early Intervention Program] was fool proof and robust.

Instead, Hickie chose to slam his critics...and he did so in the style and ahem, candour, that anyone who opposes his fairy tale theories would expect.

Here's a snippet:

...an odd mix of armchair critics, conspiracy theorists and a former chairman of the American Diagnostic and Statistical Manual taskforce, Dr Allen Frances, oppose the expansion of early intervention programs for teenagers and young adults. Conversely, child advocates have attacked the proposed reforms for putting too little emphasis on the expansion of specialised child services.

In parallel, the Scientologists have repeatedly used freedom of information legislation to mount an ''investigation'' into the work of McGorry, our colleagues and myself. Various members of these groups have made highly personal ''conflict of interest'' allegations in an attempt to distract attention from the evidence that favours these new approaches.

Way to go Hickie!

When all else fails shout conspiracy or Scientology. One would have thought psychiatrists and professors would have devised a better argument after all these years. Amazing isn't it, they can pluck an "illness" out of thin air yet call them to task over it and you are labelled an armchair critic, conspiracy theorist or Scientologist.

These guys just love their labels eh.


Ian Hickie was the inaugural CEO (2000-2003) of 'beyondblue: the national depression initiative', which has very successfully sold depression in Australia, with many millions of dollars of government money. This has worked brilliantly for the drug companies, and beyondblue does not accept pharma funding, so the drug companies get the promotion for free. I've previously wrote about beyondblue back in November 2008.


Beyondblue and Hickie paved the way for EPPIC, a psychiatric service aimed at addressing the needs of older adolescents and young adults with emerging psychotic disorders.

Hickie and McGorry had already been working together for several years, in fact Hickie is a key player in McGorry's 'Headspace'.

The PDF above is a seemingly egregious example of the conflicts of interests that exist: a whole journal supplement based on the SPHERE project clinical audit. The audit was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (see p. S54), the manufacturer of Serzone. The publication of the supplement was funded by beyondblue with Commonwealth [Australian] Government money (see title page).

The audit, which used Hickie's SPHERE questionnaire, found ridiculously high rates of mental disorders. This was reported in the supplement by Hickie, Davenport, Naismith, & Scott (2001, p. 52) as:

'Sixty-three per cent of people attending general practice have some evidence of mental disorder (including alcohol or other substance misuse) by self-report or GP's diagnosis of psychological difficulties.'

63%?

That's some cash cow huh?

Not surprisingly, if you scroll to the bottom of the PDF you will find: Source: Hickie et al. Educational Health Solutions; 2000

As long as the DeLorean Mob continue to berate their critics with name-calling, their critics will continue to press for the science behind their theories.

To be honest, any name-calling aimed in my direction really is water off a duck's back. It just highlights the inability of the other side to prove their point and shows them to be straw clutchers. It's just their way of stifling voices.

I'm reminded of my childhood days:

Scene: Early 70's School playground, me eating a packet of crisps.

CLASSMATE: Give me a crisp Fid.

ME: No.

CLASSMATE: You big gay!

Some things just never change.

Related posts: -

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

33 year old mother slams Hickie

This one is especially for Ian Hickie and his DeLorean mob:

Another Psychiatrist Slams McGorry's DeLorean Mob

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

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

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

Ahmed writes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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


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

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

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

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

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

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

More about McGorry HERE.




Fid 


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


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

Political Asylum...Down Under

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

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

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

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

This from The Australian [Sept 8 2011]

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

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

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

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

Full story HERE

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

Senator Fisher says she hit rock bottom at time of alleged grocery theft and assault

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

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

Full story HERE

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

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

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

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

Ball is in your court Australia.



Fid 


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


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

Patrick McGorry, Clinical Trials and the Flaws

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

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

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

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

Patients diagnosed as having an attentional deficit disorder or hyperactivity disorder

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

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

Anyway, the point I am making here is thus:

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

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

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

**ring ring ring ring

"Hello, Paddy McGorry speaking."

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

**KA CHING

"Of course, send them over."


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

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

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

Your move Paddy.

More about McGorry HERE.


Fid


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

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

Who Moved The Goalposts on Patrick McGorry's Clinical Trial

The DeLorean v Google Cache

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

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

McGorry writes:

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

I'm glad he has raised the ethical issue.

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

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

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

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

FIG 1 How the clinical trial looks today

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

A glitch in the flux capacitor, perhaps?


Fid


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

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

McGorry Seroquel Drug Trial - The Complaint

Former Australian of the Year, Patrick McGorry

Jill Stark's superb exposé on Australian psychiatrist Patrick McGorry has caused a storm down under. 

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

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

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

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

Related Articles:

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

Patrick McGorry - Torn Asunder Down Under

Early Intervention, McGorry, Politics & TV Shows

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

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

Pre-Mental Disorder Screening and Drugging - THE PHARMACEUTICAL DELOREAN

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Pulls Over For New Passenger

Patrick McGorry and Co Under Fire

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Psychiatrist's Assessment of Patrick McGorry

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

Australian Doctor Magazine Sees Patrick McGorry Defend His Position

Are The Wheels Coming Off Patrick McGorry's DeLorean?

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

 Patrick McGorry Responds to Criticism by Allen Frances

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

Patrick McGorry's Headstrong DeLorean Posse Part I 



Can someone ask Paddy to define better?


 




Fid

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

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

Was McGorry Forced To Pull AstraZeneca Funded Trial on Children?

Australian psychiatrist/soothsayer, Patrick McGorry

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

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

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

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

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

Stark's article can be read in full HERE

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


Related Articles:

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

Patrick McGorry - Torn Asunder Down Under

Early Intervention, McGorry, Politics & TV Shows

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

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

Pre-Mental Disorder Screening & Drugging - THE PHARMACEUTICAL DELOREAN

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Pulls Over For New Passenger

Patrick McGorry & Co Under Fire

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Psychiatrist's Assessment of Patrick McGorry

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

Australian Doctor Magazine Sees Patrick McGorry Defend His Position

Are The Wheels Coming Off Patrick McGorry's DeLorean?

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

Patrick McGorry Responds to Criticism by Allen Frances

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

Patrick McGorry's Headstrong DeLorean Posse Part I



Fid


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

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

Professor McGorry Defends Early Intervention DeLorean Program

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

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

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

'Proven' is past tense by the way.

Most notably, McGorry stated:

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

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

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

Here's the transcript of his performance on Lateline


Related Articles:

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

Patrick McGorry - Torn Asunder Down Under

Early Intervention, McGorry, Politics & TV Shows

Psychiatrist Patrick McGorry Slams His Critics [Diddums]

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

Pre-Mental Disorder Screening & Drugging - THE PHARMACEUTICAL DELOREAN

Patrick McGorry's Delorean Pulls Over For New Passenger

Patrick McGorry & Co Under Fire

Hickierie Dickory Doc - McGorry Turns Back the Clock

Psychiatrist's Assessment of Patrick McGorry

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

Australian Doctor Magazine Sees Patrick McGorry Defend His Position

Are The Wheels Coming Off Patrick McGorry's DeLorean?

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

Patrick McGorry Responds to Criticism by Allen Frances

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

Patrick McGorry's Headstrong DeLorean Posse Part I


OTHER LINKS

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

McGorry accused of conflict of interest

The Big Issue: Mental Health

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


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

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE