Prescription Drugs: Who Do We Blame?

After reading Katinka Newman's new book, 'The Pill That Steals Lives' in just under 5 hours it left me with many burning questions, one above all has plagued me for some time, namely; who is responsible?

Who do we, the consumer of psychiatric medication, point the finger of blame at when it's the drug that causes the problems? We are tossed the line that we should have read the patient information leaflet regarding the side effects that these drugs "may" cause, ergo the responsibility lays firmly on our shoulders.

When questioned about a possible drug reaction many doctors, who remember have studied hard to get where they are, often dismiss our claims, opting instead to add yet more medications into the mix to try and fix the problem caused by their original prescription, all the time the doctor assumes he is trying to fix a problem in the patient's head rather than the idea he/she came up with in his/her head that the patient has some form of mental disorder. If they stood back, or stepped out of their bubble occasionally they would see that their original diagnosis was made upon guess work rather than actual scientific evaluation.

The British drug regulator, the MHRA, are the referee, the umpire in what has become an uneven match between patient and healthcare professional. Sadly, the MHRA are limp-wristed, nae powerless to intervene when they see obvious adverse reactions to medications. What is the point of having a regulator in place who are a; scared of their own shadow when it comes to reprimanding, and b; powerless?

The MHRA are pretty good at one thing but it does not involve the drugs you and I are prescribed by healthcare professionals. They are the self appointed masters of controlling fake drugs that slip into the market by way of back street sellers or, more popularly, internet websites promising cheap Viagra.

Where they fail on a grand scale is regulating the drugs dispensed by pharmacists on the so-say of a prescription written by a professional.

The MHRA have, for many years, proudly boasted about the adverse event reporting system they have in place, they call it the Yellow Card Reporting System - it's basically a flawed system whereby professionals and patients fill in a card and list what they think the drug in question may have caused, be that a skin rash or a major psychotic episode. What the MHRA do is add these reports to a database - they don't, as one would expect, go out and visit the professional or patient making these claims. Adding it to a database seems to be the only thing that they do - one has to ask how they see this as regulating and safeguarding human health?

Then we have the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture these medications - more often than not these days they are making out-of-court settlements with consumers affected by their products. No admission of guilt and a licence to continue promoting and selling the very same drugs they have recently paid out millions in compensation to victims of the said drugs. It's a lucrative way to run a business and one which only pharmaceutical companies can get away with.

Imagine for one minute that your small business made a product that made people ill or, worse still, killed them, do you really think that you, as CEO of your small business, would be able to 'buy off' those injured or the families of the deceased?

This is exactly what pharmaceutical companies do and it's something that we have just learned to accept, pretty much in the same way that we have learned to accept that some drugs may harm some people.

We accept this in an almost shrug of the shoulders fashion - it is what it is. We are so blazè with our attitudes in much the same way that prescribing professionals, the MHRA and pharmaceutical companies are - this really needs to change. Our apathetic attitude is playing into the hands of those who cook, who oversee the cooks, and finally those who spoon feed us in the form of a prescription.

I, of course, and not speaking for everyone here. There are many advocates out there that have been calling for changes regarding the way in which we are prescribed mind-altering drugs on the whim of someone's belief that losing your home or a failed marriage equates to a tennis ball sized tumorous growth inside your head, a growth that needs slowing down.

Depression, we are told, should be talked about, it should not be a taboo subject. I've often wondered if it was marketing teams involved with pharmaceutical companies that came up with the taboo line in efforts to get people talking about product a,b, or c.

The behaviour of pro-antidepressant psychiatrists has become laughable. Just a quick glance at some of the newer disorders that have appeared over the years is quite comical, yet tragic in equal measures.

Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Conduct Disorder, Disorder of Written Expression, Expressive Language Disorder, Mathematics Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder Reading Disorder, Rumination Disorder ~ and these are just childhood disorders!

Tell a prescribing psychiatrist that he just may have misdiagnosed you and you will witness something borne by his profession, namely Delusional Disorder, an apparent disorder by which the individual experiences the presence of either bizarre or non-bizarre delusions which have persisted for at least one month. - In your shrink's case - the delusion is that he believes he can see inside your brain and know exactly what disease you have going on inside there. He needs no medical device - he can just tell based upon answers you give him.

Meantime, the pharmaceutical companies have a vast selection of pills to treat the invisible disease inside your head, the one that your psychiatrist found by staring at you as you gave him answers to questions. The MHRA are busy busting Joe Bloggs for selling Viagra pills out the back of his van - they don't really care much for the pills you've been prescribed for an illness that you haven't got.

All of the above provide us with their credentials - it keeps them on top of the pile and us where they think we belong ~ at the bottom with our begging bowls (Please sir, can I have some more?) - and more they give us ~ and the more we succumb to life itself.

And so the cycle continues...


Bob Fiddaman

Letters From Generation RX - Radio Interview

Kevin has been instrumental in creating awareness regarding the way psychiatric prescription medications are handed out willy-nilly to patients whom are rarely informed about the side-effects.

In Kevin's ground-breaking first movie, Generation RX, he showed the infiltration of the DSM and FDA by pharmaceutical companies and the volume of people who seem to be profiting from the sales of these drugs.

In this interview, from Truth News Australia, Miller talks about his new movie, 'Letters From Generation RX'.

It's well worth the listen particularly for the way Miller explains how people are targeted when they speak out against the pharmaceutical industry and psychiatry.

If you are having difficulty with the player then you can download the MP3 direct HERE


Kevin P. Miller can be followed on Twitter here and the 'Letters' Facebook page is here.



Bob Fiddaman



Related:

Exclusive: Interview With Kevin P. Miller (Letters From Generation RX)

Exclusive: Interview With Kevin P. Miller (Letters From Generation RX)

International Award Winning Film Director, Kevin P. Miller

Yesterday I interviewed Internationally acclaimed filmmaker Kevin P. Miller.

Kevin has been instrumental in creating awareness regarding the way psychiatric prescription medications are handed out willy-nilly to patients whom are rarely informed about the side-effects.

In Kevin's ground-breaking first movie, Generation RX, he showed the infiltration of the DSM and FDA by pharmaceutical companies and the volume of people who seem to be profiting from the sales of these drugs.

Generation RX also challenged the labelling of children with psychiatric disorders and featured many experts who also challenged the model of using psychiatric medication as a first line treatment in children.

Footage was also shown from an FDA hearing where parents, husbands and wives, who had lost loved ones to suicide as a result of antidepressants, were given a chance [3 minutes] to try to convince the FDA that there was a suicide link with these drugs. It's well worth the watch and can be ordered here.

One would think, after watching Generation RX, that Miller had made his point. Job done so to speak. But Miller has more to say on the subject and his latest offering, Letters from Generation RX, is due for release next year.

I spoke with him yesterday about his new movie. The result of which is below.


BF: Firstly, congratulations on the success of Generation RX, It has received much critical acclaim, is this the reason that prompted you to make the second movie, Letters From Generation Rx?

KM: Thanks Bob. Letters From Generation RX really came about because I received about 2000 emails, letters and more from family members, teens, and others after I released Generation RX. Some said "Generation RX told the story of my life," others shared truly tragic tales of how their life went off the rails or loved ones died once they started using psychotropics. The outpouring of support and the avalanche of the emotional letters I received really motivated me to produce Letters From Generation RX.

BF: As an International award-winning filmmaker your work takes you all over the world. Do you feel that medicine regulators, such as the FDA, MHRA, Health Canada etc are doing enough to warn the public about the dangers of psychiatric medication?

KM: No I do not. What Generation RX revealed was that the FDA and others were actually helping the drug companies behind closed doors by strategizing to counter the negative publicity associated with the serious adverse events surrounding Prozac and the antidepressants in general. They plotted and schemed, even after they discovered the violence and suicidality these drugs can cause. That's what I really resent...that they would put all this energy and PR into protecting the drug companies without first rushing to make the public aware of the serious potential consequences. That is so unethical it's mind blowing. I've been following the FDA for 25 years. Over that time, I've constantly heard people say, "FDA does not have enough funding to do its job properly." What nonsense. Instead of protecting the public, FDA has colluded with the very groups they are charged to regulate. It is unconscionable.

BF: Have you faced opposition from medicine regulators, psychiatrists or the pharmaceutical industry?

KM: It's funny you ask that, Bob. On the first day that Generation RX was released, 12 drug companies and/or their PR firms purchased a copy of the film. So I knew immediately that the drug companies were going to do their utmost to try to discredit the film. They took the film apart like the competition does with a new iPhone, too see how it was assembled. They did their best to find inaccuracies and to deflect the science I included in GenRx. But they could not.

This is why it is so vital to produce films with integrity to force Pharma to deal with the cold, hard truths.

So, yes, I'm definitely on their radar. Do I care? No.

BF: There's been a lot of talk in the media over the years regarding the mass school shootings and the link to psychiatric medication. Does your new movie, Letters From Generation Rx, cover this subject?

KM: Letters From Generation RX does cover some of the tragic shootings over the past three years, but it is not the main emphasis of my new film. my main focus on real people and how their lives were altered by these drugs, in addition to what alternatives exist.

BF: Healthcare professionals, on average, spend about 5-10 minutes with a patient, more often than not they then use antidepressants as a first line treatment. How do you believe we can change the shift in healthcare professionals thinking?

KM: I had a scientist contact me recently who saw the teaser for Letters From Generation RX. She said she was moved to write because of the video. It was a long and effusive letter, a beautiful letter, truly. She said that my video forced her to examine the way her own science is conducted; how it affects patients’ outcomes...real people. I think that is the way forward. We need to move medical doctors and others who are prescribing these drugs to "put themselves and their neighbors shoes," or to at least to listen to the voices of their neighbors, and learn from them. Remove the arrogance from science.

There has been so much blow-back on psychiatric medicines since the release of Generation RX that many doctors are beginning to understand the unnecessary tragedies that are occurring and are questioning whether these drugs are appropriate for their patients. I don't think that's ever happened before on this kind of scale. In order to create meaningful change, this is vital.

BF: As an author and blogger I sometimes feel that I am preaching to the converted. In Letters From Generation Rx do you talk to people who were shocked when they learned the truth about some of the dangers with psychiatric medications?

KM: Absolutely. As a matter of fact, I always aim for the widest audience humanly possible. I often ask "how can I entice someone to examine this issue, particularly if they have no vested interest in it?" I have determined that it is through telling stories to the eyes of our neighbors.

BF: This time around your movie is accompanied by a book. Why did you decide to write a book and what is the book about?

KM: Again, I received 2000 emails and letters following the release of Generation RX. As you will see in the new film, so many of them are so powerful, so powerful, in fact, that I could not fit nearly the number of stories into the film that I wanted to. There will be dozens of other stories in the book, which will be released after the film has been completed. It’s just one more way to educate others and share stories that I think are so tragically important.

BF: Tell me a little bit about the Indiegogo campaign and how people can help with donations.

KM: We are in the middle of an Indiegogo campaign to raise the finishing funds for the film. This is the New Way, Bob. I have never enjoyed "Michael Moore budgets," so I must rely on real people who care about these issues. I see it as an opportunity for people to make their voices heard. I've never done this before, so it is a bit like throwing yourself at the feet of the public worldwide. It is daunting and humbling, because we are depending upon others to get involved so that we can finish the film. And make people proud they did so.

BF: Thanks for talking to me Kev.


Below is a trailer for Letters From Generation RX. It's a movie that will make pharmaceutical companies and medicine regulators squirm. It's a movie where those harmed by psychiatric medications or those left behind to pick up the pieces of a suicide get their chance to tell it like it is.

It's also a movie that should be seen by healthcare professionals. It's a wake-up call and the clear message is that this problem is not going to be tackled by the likes of the FDA or MHRA, it has to be tackled by the agents [doctors] who hand these drugs out blindly.

I've never really been a fan of global regulators, they've had many years to get their house in order and they have constantly failed on a huge scale to protect the public from unsafe drugs.

The only thing regulators seem to be efficient at is closing down websites that offer cheap generics because, apparently, these cheaper generics, are poorly made. They have no concern about the content of these drugs, they close down and target these websites because the pharmaceutical industry are losing money to such competition. If the regulators really cared about the content of these drugs then they would never have granted them a licence in the first place. They are also very good at telling us that safety committees have reviewed the evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of psychiatric medications. What they fail to tell us is that members of those committees have financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry.

The British drug regulator, the MHRA, recently announced the retirement of its CEO Kent Woods. He was replaced by Ian Hudson. Hudson was World Safety Officer at SmithKline Beecham, who later became known as GlaxoSmithKline. It's almost like a movie itself. If you've ever watched The Omen trilogy you'll know exactly what I mean.

Miller's new offering, Letters From Generation RX, should be on your list of things to watch... if only to protect yourselves and your children from the harm these drugs can cause.

Here's the trailer. [Opens in new window]

For more information go to lettersfromgenerationrx.com/

Kevin P. Miller can be followed on Twitter here and the 'Letters' Facebook page is here.

Bob Fiddaman

Mimicking Depression: The Wrong Diagnosis

A lot has been said on the use of antidepressants and whether they are safe and effective in those that use them.

The majority of healthcare professionals who prescribe these medications on a daily basis seem to think that antidepressants have a place in today's society. The majority prescribe them because they have been told, and are still told, that they are safe and effective.

Of course, your average GP doesn't just think that the evidence that these drugs work is based around the clinical trials, spokespersons of pharmaceutical companies and thought leaders. They, apparently, see the results first hand. Depressed Joe feels a whole lot better because of the Prozac that Dr Jones prescribed him 2 months ago. The change in Joe is enough for his Dr to believe that the Prozac is working. The placebo effect rarely enters the mind of Joe or Dr Jones.

I find the history of marketing antidepressant medication fascinating in as much that it is rarely questioned by the masses, even if it was questioned by your average layperson it's, more often than not, met with a shrug of the shoulders and an 'Ah well' attitude.

It couldn't happen to me, right? I'd never allow myself to become depressed, to take an antidepressant people must be weak, why don't they just get a grip of themselves?

Attitudes like this may have there place but the genius of pharma marketing is that they are very convincing but always driven by profit.

Who Cares About Sweden Trilogy - The SSRi Swindle

A great set of videos to watch regarding the dangers of SSRi's.

"Who Cares About Sweden" released by ARTIMUS Film SVB AB will make you angry, sad, frustrated and all the other emotions one faces when realization sets in about how we, as consumers, have been duped by the pharmaceutical industry and the field of psychiatry.

My Thoughts on the Psychopharmacuetical Monopoly

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. What else is there?

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

3. The benefits outweigh the risks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Whoopiefuckingdoo!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I won't open it.


Fid

ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
SIGNED COPIES HERE OR UNSIGNED FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING