AUSI WAKE UP !

Population Control By Drugging

 Do Big Phama’s Target Children, Pregnant Mother’s and the Elderly for Profit? 

YOU BE THE JUDGE

Has Your Child Been Fraudulently Labled As ADHD ? 

Or Administered Psychotropic Medication?

Please Become Informed

 ADHD Testing

What method is used to diagnose children for ADHD?

 The following are just a few of the Official Diagnostic Indicators used by parents, guidance officers, counselors, psychologists, doctors and psychiatrists to evaluate a child for ADHD.

·         A lot of people, including his parents, complain that he just doesn't seem to listen when spoken to.

·         He can't keep his mind on what he's doing for very long unless it is very exciting, or very entertaining. 

·         He really tries to avoid doing homework or chores.

·         He gets distracted easily, or pays attention to the wrong thing.

·         He is often forgetful and has to be reminded to do things often.

·         He often loses things necessary for tasks or activities (e.g., toys, school assignments, pencils, books, or tools)

·         He often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat.

·         And He often blurts out answers before questions have been completed.

This diagnostic criteria has no justification in being used to label children with Disorders that are, normal childhood behaviours. According to Dr. Louria Shulamit, a family practitioner in Israel “ADHD is a syndrome, not a disease. The symptoms are so common that we can conclude that all children fit this diagnoses.”

New research indicates that serotonin is also a signaling molecule between immune cells. Dendritic cells pick up serotonin at inflammation sites and pass it along to T cells. This affects T cell growth and division into new cells.

However, when Prozac was introduced at inflammation sites, it blocked this type of serotonin uptake.

Blood February 1, 2006; 107(3): 1010-1017

Dr. Mercola's Comment:

A few months ago, an insightful report in the British Medical Journal argued brilliantly that antidepressants offer no meaningful benefit and emotional problems can be better handled without taking a toxic drug.

Now there's another health-harming reason to stay away from them. Antidepressants like Prozac don't just block serotonin when doing so would be helpful; they also block it when doing so will cripple your immune system.

This is yet more evidence you should be avoiding antidepressants altogether, and using safer, healthier options that have nothing at all to do with taking a pill to treat the true cause of your problem:

Matthew died at age 14
The death certificate says it was due to the use of Ritalin used for ADHD.

Info for Parents of Children who are being Pressured to Diagnose & Drug their child for ADD, ADHD, Story behind our Sons Death Caused from ADHD Drug, Ritalin.

Death From Ritalin

March 21, 2000 our fourteen-Year-old-Son Matthew died. The cause was determined to be from the long-term (age 7-14) use of Methylphenidate, a medication commonly known as Ritalin.

The Certificate of Death under due to, (or because of) reads Death caused from Long Term Use of Methylphenidate, (Ritalin).

According to Dr. Ljuba Dragovic, The chief pathologist in Oakland County Michigan, upon autopsy, Matthew's heart showed clear signs of small vessel damage, the type caused by stimulant drugs like Methylphenidate.

The medical examiners told me that a full-grown man’s heart weighs about 350 grams and that Matthew's heart weight was about 402 grams.

There were no known pre-existing heart disease or defects. The medical examiner said this type of heart damage is not easy to detect with the standard test necessary for prescription refills.

No one ever informed us of other crucial tests (echo-cardiogram) that we could have had done that would have discovered the enlargement of the heart muscle, caused from scar tissue which these types of drugs cause. The standard test performed consists of blood work, listening to the heart, questions about school behaviors, sleeping and eating habits.

It all started for Matthew, Kelly and I when Matt was in the first grade. Monica Fuchs, the school social worker in Berkley, Michigan kept calling us in for meetings. One particular morning before an IEP meeting, Monica, Kelly and I, were waiting on the others to arrive for the meeting.

Monica made us feel very threatened when she said, if you continue to refuse a follow-up which meant, "taking Matthew to the doctor with their evaluation of ADHD and their recommendation for Ritalin" "that Social Services (Child Protective Services) would charge us for neglecting his educational and emotional needs".

My wife and I were worried of the possibility of Heather and Matt being taken away from us if we refused to comply with the school, so we did. Monica happily gave us a list of a few doctors she recommended.

While visiting the doctor with the school’s evaluation and the recommendation for Ritalin, the doctor seemed frustrated and asked us to let the school know, “I am not a pharmacy.” This leads us to believe that we were not the first parents sent to this doctor, with the schools evaluations and recommendation for Ritalin.

After doing as the school recommended, or should I say threatened, the doctor did not give us a prescription for Ritalin.

Below is a copy of the letter Monica, the school social worker sent to the doctor.

Letter from school psychologist asking doctor for our six-year-old to be put on medication

11/22/91

IEP will be on December 6. We have recognized his learning difficulties. We'll likely give him maximum time in a resource room (3 hours/day).

Our concern is that his psychological testing has shown strong average intelligence. Sub-scores are weakest in the areas of attention and memory (which our psychologist believes are indications of ADHD)

He has had a long history of impulsive over-activity. We (social worker-psychologist witnessed this in Matt's pre-school at Miss Molly's, That's why we certified him eligible for PPI - pre- primary-impaired. He had his PPI year, then kindergarten year and now 1st grade.

Many environmental changes have been tried to help Matt concentrate and focus, yet he is still at a beginning kindergarten readiness. We believe his high level of distraction is even more of a handicap than his learning deficits.

We had hoped by September you and Matt's parents would have begun a trial of medication so that we could assess whether his learning would have benefited by increased focus and concentration.

Would you consider simultaneously having Matt begin his 3 hours in a resource room with a prescribed medical therapy? Parents indicate they would feel comfortable with this decision if you do.

We are so concerned that Matt has begun to see himself as "bad" and doing "bad things" I, as the school social worker, will continue to work with Matt on self-esteem and social skills.

Matthew supposedly needed this drug Ritalin because of a subjective diagnosis called ADHD until it silenced him forever on March 21, 2000, even sadder I have learned that thousands of children have died as a direct result of using psychotropic medications over the years.

  The Truth Behind ADHD

Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD has been an adult & child neurologist, in private practice, for 35 years. Making "disease" (real diseases--epilepsy, brain tumor, multiple sclerosis, etc.) or "no disease" (emotional, psychological, psychiatric) diagnoses daily, he has discovered and described real, bona fide diseases.

Labels like ADHD, ADD, ODD, LD etc are in no sense true diseases. There are no reliable diagnostic methods. Psychiatrists cannot even agree among themselves about how to diagnose ADD/ ADHD.

It is this particular medical and scientific background that has led him to view the "epidemic" of one particular "disease"--Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)--with increasing alarm. Dr. Baughman describes this himself. Referring to psychiatry, he says:

"They made a list of the most common symptoms of emotional discomfiture of children; those which bother teachers and parents most, and in a stroke that could not be more devoid of science or Hippocratic motive--termed them a 'disease.' Twenty five years of research, not deserving of the term 'research.,' has failed to validate ADD/ADHD as a disease. Tragically--the "epidemic" having grown from 500 thousand in 1985 to between 5 and 7 million today--this remains the state of the 'science' of ADHD."

 In addition to scientific articles that have appeared in leading national and international medical journals, Dr. Baughman has testified for victimized parents and children in ADHD/Ritalin legal cases, writes for the print media and appears on talk radio shows, always making the point that ADHD is fraudulent--a creation of the psychiatric-pharmaceutical cartel, without which they would have nothing to prescribe their dangerous, addictive, Schedule II, stimulants for--namely, Ritalin (methylphenindate), Dexedrine (dextro-amphetamine), Adderall (mixed dextro- and levo-amphetamine) and, Gradumet, and Desoxyn (both of which are methamphetamine, 'speed,' 'ice').

 The entire country, including all 5-7 million with the ADHD diagnosis today, have been deceived and victimized; deprived of their informed consent rights and drugged--for profit! It must be stopped. Now!

Fred Baughman's video page reads: What is ADD / ADHD, Is it a disease? Or a Fraud?, And what is the cause of the recent increase of senseless violence in our schools? Who benefits from labeling kids with ADD? (Let's "follow the money"...)

We'd like you to watch a video by Dr. Fred Baughman. He will give you some very controversial information in this video.

Watch Video Here:
What is ADD / ADHD ?

Thank you to Fred and his family

I give Peter R. Breggin, M.D. and his wife Ginger all the credit for teaching me about the dangers of giving psychotropic drugs to children. Their website can be found at: www.breggin.com

Confirming the Hazards of Stimulant Drug Treatment

By Peter R. Breggin, M.D.

Until recently, no studies have systematically examined the rate of psychotic symptoms caused by routine treatment with stimulant drugs such as methylphenidate (Ritalin) and amphetamine (Dexedrine, Adderall). Doctors who prescribe stimulant drugs often seem oblivious to the fact that they can cause psychoses, including manic-like and schizophrenic-like disorders. Without providing a scientific basis, the literature often cites rates of 1% or less for stimulant-induced psychoses (reviewed in Breggin, 1998, 1999). Recently on television I debated a well-known expert in child psychiatry who took the position that prescribed stimulants "never" cause psychoses in children.

The rate of psychotic symptoms that first appear during stimulant treatment has recently been investigated in a 5-year retrospectives study of children diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Cherland and Fitzpatrick,1999). Among 192 children diagnosed with ADHD at the Canadian clinic, 98 had been placed on stimulant drugs, mostly methylphenidate. Psychotic symptoms developed in more than 9% of the children treated with methylphenidate. According to Cherland and Fitzpatrick, "The symptoms ceased as soon as the medication was removed" (p. 812). No psychotic symptoms were reported among the children with ADHD who did not receive stimulants.

The psychotic symptoms caused by methylphenidate included hallucinations and paranoia. The authors conclude that, due to poor reporting, the rate of stimulant-induced psychosis and psychotic symptoms was probably much higher.

In my practice of psychiatry, I am frequently consulted about children who are taking three, four, and sometimes five psychiatric drugs, including medications that are FDA-approved only for the treatment of psychotic adults. The drug treatment typically began when the children developed conflicts with adults at home or at school. In retrospect, the conflicts could easily have been resolved by interventions such as family counseling or individualized educational approaches. Usually under pressure from a school, the parents instead acquiesced to put their child on stimulants prescribed by psychiatrists, family physicians, or pediatricians.

When these children developed depression, delusions, hallucinations, paranoid fears and other drug-induced reactions while taking stimulants, their physicians mistakenly concluded that the children suffered from "clinical depression," "schizophrenia" or "bipolar disorder" that has been "unmasked" by the medications. Instead of removing the child from the stimulants, these doctors mistakenly prescribed additional drugs, such as antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and neuroleptics. Children who were put on stimulants for "inattention" or "hyperactivity" ended up taking multiple adult psychiatric drugs that caused severe adverse effects, including psychoses and tardive dyskinesia.

It is time to recognize that the supposedly increasing rates of "schizophrenia," "depression," and "bipolar disorder" in children in North America are often the direct result of treatment with psychiatric drugs. They should be classified as adverse drug reactions, not as primary psychiatric disorders. Doctors need to become more expert at identifying these adverse drug reactions in children and more aware of how and why to taper children from psychiatric medications (Breggin and Cohen, 1999).

When parents are willing to take a fresh approach to disciplining and caring for their children, or when the children's school situation can be improved, it is usually possible to taper them off of all psychiatric medications. The parents are then relieved and gratified to see their children increasingly improve with the removal of each drug.

What's the answer to this widespread, unwarranted use of medication in the treatment of children? As long as we respond to the signals of conflict and distress in our children by subduing them with drugs, we will not address their genuine needs. As parents, teachers, therapists, and physicians we need to retake responsibility for our children (Breggin, 2000). We must reclaim them from the drug companies and their advocates in the medical profession. At the same time, we must address the needs of our children on an individual and societal level. On the individual level, children need more of our time and energy. Nothing can replace the personal relationships that children have with us as their parents, teachers, counselors, or doctors. On a societal level, our children need improved family life, better schools, and more caring communities.

Bibliography

Breggin, P. (1998). Talking Back to Ritalin. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press.

Breggin, P. (1999). Psychostimulants in the treatment of children diagnosed with ADHD: Risks and mechanism of action. International Journal of Risk and Safety in Medicine, 12, 3-35

Breggin, P. (2000). Reclaiming Our Children. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Books.

Breggin, P. and Cohen, D. (1999). Your Drug May Be Your Problem: How and Why to Stop Taking Psychiatric Medications. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Books.

Cherland, E. and Fitzpatrick, R. (1999, October). Psychotic side effects of Psychostimulants: A 5-year review. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 44, 811-813.

Thank you Peter & Ginger

In closing we would like to say, we hope this website has enlightened you.

Sincerely, Lawrence & Kelly Smith

Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Sydney

THE FAILSAFE FOOD STANDARD PROVE FOOD ADDITIVES LINK TO ADHD     

This Standard was developed from the scientific work performed particularly by the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Sydney, Australia.  A list of scientific references is provided on line.

This Standard addresses Food Additives, Salicylates, Amines and Flavour Enhancers in turn. It is assumed that any foods seeking to meet this Standard will also conform to the Australian Food Standards Code.

HARMFULL FOOD ADDITIVES

Harmful Food Additives are those that have been shown in scientific studies over many years to affect health, behaviour and learning. Typical effects include;

itchy skin rash, irritable bowel, asthma, tinnitus, 'restless legs', headache, migraine, lethargy, irritability, restlessness, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, impairment of memory and concentration and hyperactivity.

These symptoms are not yet considered in the food regulatory system, which concentrates on immediate medical responses and ignores delayed, additive, dose-related and cumulative effects.

Ask Your Member Of Parliament Why

  Of the many hundreds of additives used in food.    The following 50 are known to be harmful.

The food shall not contain the following additives, nor shall any of the ingredients used in compound foods contain the following additives:

If your Children display any of the above or have been prescribed   SSRI Anti-Depressant Medication for ADHD or any other reason.

Know, that these are BRAIN DAMAGING DRUGS stronger than Cocaine or Speed with Suicidal, Violent Tendencies and Depression        as their prime Side Effects.  Eg. Zoloft, Prozac, Ritalin, Effexor, Zyprexa. 

The drug Methylphenidate (trade name Ritalin) is the same chemical structure as the street drug Speed.

Know What’s In Your Shopping Trolley

Take this List on every visit to purchase your FAMILIES  FOOD or HOUSE-HOLD GOODS.         

CHECK & AVOID THE FOLLOWING

COLOURS

Artificial colours

102 Tartrazine, 107 Yellow 2G, 110 Sunset yellow FCF, 122 Azorubine, 123 Amaranth

124 Ponceau 4R, 127 Erythrosine, 129 Allura red ACM 133 Brilliant Blue FCF, 142 Green S,                        151 Brilliant Black BN, 155 Brown HT

PRESERVATIVES

Sorbic acids

200 Sorbic acid, 201 Sodium sorbate, 202 Potassium sorbate, 203 Calcium sorbate

Benzoic acids

210 Benzoic acid, 211 Sodium benzoate, 212 Potassium benzoate, 213 Calcium benzoate

Sulphites

220 Sulphur dioxide, 221 Sodium sulphite, 222 Sodium bisulphite, 223 Sodium metabisulphite

224 Potassium metabisulphite, 225 Potassium sulphite, 228 Potassium bisulphite

Antioxidants

310 Propyl gallate, 311 Octyl gallate, 317 Erythorbic acid, 318 Sodium erythorbate,                                 319 tert-Butylhydroquinone, 320 Butylated hydoxyanisole (BHA), 321 Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) 312 Dodecyl gallate

Propionic acids

280 Propionic acid, 281 Sodium propionate, (Bread) 282 Calcium propionate, 283 Potassium propionate

Nitrates & nitrites

249 Potassium nitrite,  250 Sodium nitrite,  251 Sodium nitrate,  252 Potassium nitrate

FLAVOUR ENHANCERS AND ADDED FLAVOURS

Glutamates

620 L-Glutamic acid, 621 Monosodium glutamate (MSG), 622 Monopotassium glutamate

623 Calcium dihydrogen diLglutamate, 624 Monoammonium L-glutamate, 625 Magnesium di-L-glutamate

627 Disodium guanylate*, 631 Disodium inosinate*, 635 Sodium 5' ribonucleotide*

Added flavours many

                            *********************************************

  The Boston Globe

A Dangerous Dose

The machinations of the drug industry add up to biased data and staggeringly high prices for consumers. By Carl Elliott  |  September 5, 2004

The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It
By Marcia Angell Random House, 305 pp., $24.95

How does the drug industry deceive us? Let us count the ways. It deploys an army of 88,000 sales representatives to stalk the hallways of clinics and hospitals, bribing doctors with food and trinkets to listen to sales pitches. It plies attending physicians with expense-paid junkets to St. Croix and Key West, Fla., where they are given honoraria and consulting fees to listen to promotional presentations.

It pays doctors to allow salespeople disguised as ''preceptors" to shadow them in clinics and watch them examine unsuspecting patients. It promotes new or little-known diseases such as ''social anxiety disorder" and ''premenstrual dysphoric disorder" as a way of selling the drugs that treat them. It sets up phony front groups disguised as ''patient advocacy organizations." It hires ghostwriters to produce misleading scientific articles and then pays academic physicians to sign on as authors.

It sends paid lackeys and shills out onto the academic lecture circuit to ''educate" doctors about a drug's unapproved uses. It hires multinational PR firms to trumpet dubious studies as scientific breakthroughs while burying the studies that are likely to harm sales. It controls the mind of medical America by paying for 60 percent of continuing medical education, in part by laundering the money through for-profit ''medical education and communications" companies.

It buys up the results of publicly funded research, claims exclusive marketing rights, and then charges the public vast sums to buy back what its tax dollars have produced. It maintains a political chokehold on the American public by donating more money to political campaigns than any other industry in the country.

It was not that long ago that the only people making accusations like this were aging refugees from the Berkeley counterculture, disaffected British Trotskyites, and card-carrying wing-nuts who spent their spare time brooding about alien abductions and the Kennedy assassination. Today, the very same accusations are coming from the most respectable, buttoned-down members of the medical establishment, many of them former editors of The New England Journal of Medicine.

It is as if the sign-waving radicals looked up to find themselves joined by the Board of Elders from the First Presbyterian Church. One of the most vigilant of these former editors is Marcia Angell, now a faculty member at the Harvard Medical School. Her new book, ''The Truth About the Drug Companies," is a sober, clear-eyed attack on the excesses of drug company power. In patient, step-by-step fashion, Angell explains how our health care system works, the varied roles that the drug companies play in it, where the system has gone wrong, and what is needed to fix it. The result is a lucid, persuasive, and highly important book.

How does the drug industry deceive us? Let us count the ways. It deploys an army of 88,000 sales representatives to stalk the hallways of clinics and hospitals, bribing doctors with food and trinkets to listen to sales pitches. It plies attending physicians with expense-paid junkets to St. Croix and Key West, Fla., where they are given honoraria and consulting fees to listen to promotional presentations. It pays doctors to allow salespeople disguised as ''preceptors" to shadow them in clinics and watch them examine unsuspecting patients. It promotes new or little-known diseases such as ''social anxiety disorder" and ''premenstrual dysphoric disorder" as a way of selling the drugs that treat them.

It sets up phony front groups disguised as ''patient advocacy organizations." It hires ghostwriters to produce misleading scientific articles and then pays academic physicians to sign on as authors. It sends paid lackeys and shills out onto the academic lecture circuit to ''educate" doctors about a drug's unapproved uses. It hires multinational PR firms to trumpet dubious studies as scientific breakthroughs while burying the studies that are likely to harm sales.

It controls the mind of medical America by paying for 60 percent of continuing medical education, in part by laundering the money through for-profit ''medical education and communications" companies. It buys up the results of publicly funded research, claims exclusive marketing rights, and then charges the public vast sums to buy back what its tax dollars have produced. It maintains a political chokehold on the American public by donating more money to political campaigns than any other industry in the country.

It was not that long ago that the only people making accusations like this were aging refugees from the Berkeley counterculture, disaffected British Trotskyites, and card-carrying wing-nuts who spent their spare time brooding about alien abductions and the Kennedy assassination. Today, the very same accusations are coming from the most respectable, buttoned-down members of the medical establishment, many of them former editors of The New England Journal of Medicine. It is as if the sign-waving radicals looked up to find themselves joined by the Board of Elders from the First Presbyterian Church.

One of the most vigilant of these former editors is Marcia Angell, now a faculty member at the Harvard Medical School. Her new book, ''The Truth About the Drug Companies," is a sober, clear-eyed attack on the excesses of drug company power. In patient, step-by-step fashion, Angell explains how our health care system works, the varied roles that the drug companies play in it, where the system has gone wrong, and what is needed to fix it. The result is a lucid, persuasive, and highly important book.

Through a series of legislative blunders, Americans have managed to create a drug industry that combines outrageously high profits with a disappointing lack of scientific originality. For many years the drug industry has reaped the highest profit margins of any industry in America. In 2002, the top 10 American drug companies had profit margins of 17 percent; Pfizer, the largest, had profit margins of 26 percent. So staggeringly profitable is the drug industry that in 2002 the combined profits for the top 10 drug companies in the Fortune 500 were greater than those of all the other 490 companies combined.

Why do we put up with this? According to official drug industry propaganda, these high profits are necessary to sustain a risky, financially punitive research agenda. Angell strongly disagrees. She argues that the industry research agenda is anything but a model of medical innovation. Of the 78 drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2002, only seven were classified as improvements over existing drugs.

The most profitable drugs on the market today are ''me-too" drugs, such as Pfizer's Lipitor, the fourth of six chemically similar, cholesterol-lowering drugs. What the massive industry profits are really there to sustain, she argues, is an equally massive marketing budget. By the industry's own accounting, the largest drug companies spend over twice as much on marketing and administration as they do on research.

Angell proposes a number of sensible policy changes. The FDA should require that new drugs be tested against currently available standard treatments (and not just placebos) so that clinicians know how newly approved treatments compare with what they are currently prescribing. (This would also help discourage the development of ''me-too" drugs.)

The Prescription User Fee, which drug companies pay the FDA to expedite approval of drugs, should be repealed and the FDA should be made financially independent of the pharmaceutical industry (which currently provides a hefty proportion of its funding). Exclusive marketing rights should be rolled back to open up competition from generic drugs.

Drug prices should be transparent and as uniform as possible to all purchasers. The pharmaceutical industry should have no place at all in medical education -- no matter how much money it puts up. And the federal government should set up an institute to oversee the design and analysis of clinical trials, so that the industry cannot manipulate and withhold scientific data to suit its own marketing needs.

Will Angell's excellent book help fix the system? We can always hope so. Maybe a corner has been turned. It's possible that the ongoing debate over drug pricing, the suppression of research data, the push for a clinical trials database, and congressional hearings about conflict of interest at the National Institutes of Health will come together into some kind of backlash against the industry. But it seems unlikely.

News of industry wrongdoing has become so routine that it hardly makes a ripple anymore. There are headlines for a day or so, some hand-wringing in the universities, the usual signs of public regret without any admission of wrongdoing, perhaps a blue-ribbon panel or two. But when all the fuss dies down, it's back to business as usual.

Carl Elliott is the author of ''Better Than Well: American Medicine Meets the American Dream" and co-editor of ''Prozac As a Way of Life."

© Copyright 2006 Globe Newspaper Company.

 text, images, video, widgets, etc...