Category Archives: FDA

MORE EVIDENCE PSYCHIATRY IS A FAKE SCIENCE

More evidence psychiatry is a fake science

by Jon Rappoport

September 4, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Evidence isn’t something you make up out of thin air. You dig it up. If you’re fortunate, you find crucial evidence in statements of the very people who are pretending to tell the truth. That’s the jackpot.

I’ve written several articles debunking the “science” behind psychiatry. As you might guess, this is not a popular approach with the gatekeepers of our culture.

The gatekeepers want psychiatry to be thought of as a science, and since it isn’t, they exercise their only option: they lie. And then they lie again. It’s the time-honored strategy of all propaganda. Keep repeating the falsehood until people believe it and accept it.

Evidence doesn’t work that way. You don’t need to keep repeating it in order to make it real. If you’re digging in the sand to uncover clues to a lost city, you don’t need to re-dig that area of sand hiding the temple and the road and the statues. You do it once and that’s enough. You say, “See? Here’s the city.”

But culturally speaking, you do need to keep flashing photos of the lost city, because people have been trained to think there was no civilization way back when. You have to separate people from the false thinking and indoctrination.

So now I’m flashing evidence I’ve uncovered before. It’s a statement made by a prominent psychiatrist on an episode of PBS’ Frontline series. The episode was: “Does ADHD Exist?”

Here it is.

PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

BARKLEY (Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center): That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid. [Emphasis added]

Dr. Barkley blows the whistle on his own profession, and then he turns around and makes it even better by claiming the incontrovertible evidence isn’t evidence at all. He claims we’re all illiterate when it comes to fathoming what science is all about.

So let’s take Dr. Barkley to school. Medical science, and disease-research in particular, rests on the notion that you can make a diagnosis backed up by lab tests. If you can’t produce lab tests, you’re spinning fantasies.

These fantasies might be hopeful, they might be “educated guesses,” they might be launched from traditional centers of learning, they might be backed up by billions of dollars of grant money…but they’re still fantasies.

If I said the moon was made of green cheese, even if I were a Harvard professor, sooner or later someone would ask me to produce a sample of moon rock that was tested for “cheese qualities.” I might begin to feel nervous, I might want to tap dance around the issue, but I would have to submit the rock to a lab.

In the case of psychiatry, the DSM, which is the bible of the American Psychiatric Association, currently lists 297 official mental disorders. They are named, labeled, and described. Dr. Barkley admits there is no lab test for any of those 297 disorders.

Yes, there is a lot of chatter about “chemical imbalances in the brain,” but there is no test.

Dr. Barkley employs a version of logical analysis in his statement to the PBS Frontline interviewer. Barkley is essentially saying, “There is no lab test for any mental disorder. But if a test were the standard of proof, we wouldn’t have science at all, and that would mean our whole profession rests on nothing—and that is absurd, so therefore a test doesn’t matter.”

That logic is no logic at all. Barkley is proving the case against himself. He just doesn’t want to admit it.

If psychiatry were nothing more than an intellectual game in a vacuum, it wouldn’t matter. But each diagnosis is followed by powerful and dangerous drugs, and people take those drugs.

In a business sense (and psychiatry is a business), the DSM is really a book that tells psychiatrists what they can bill insurance companies for. That’s the essence of the book. There are 297 ways a psychiatrist can get paid. No insurance company is going to step up to the plate and declare psychiatry a rank fraud. Insurance companies don’t operate that way. They are in partnership with psychiatry. Insurance companies employ actuaries to figure out how claims can be paid and still leave nice profit margins. That’s the game.

Think of all the studies that have been done to show that street drugs harm people. Has that stopped traffickers from selling heroin and cocaine? Well, the analogy has merit. Do you expect psychiatrists and insurance companies to hold a press conference and admit their whole operation is a top-to-bottom fraud with devastating health consequences?

At the root of this ongoing RICO crime is the issue of personal freedom. Do people have the absolute right to refuse psychiatric medication? If, for example, in the United States, Obamacare is not repealed, there are going to be many, many more diagnoses of mental disorders. Eventually, accepting these diagnoses, and the drug prescriptions that follow, is going to be made a condition of membership in the national insurance plan. That’s why drug companies and insurance companies are on board. They are looking forward to more business.

I have made this offer before, and I’m making it again. Let’s have an extensive web debate about the science of psychiatry. Let’s air the whole thing out, with people from both sides at the podium. I’m not talking about sound bites. I want a thorough exposition. Let’s see who makes more sense.

Here is what I believe would be exposed. People would finally understand that committees of psychiatrists, in their deliberations, take menus of human behavior, and then they group behaviors into clusters. For each cluster, they determine there is a disorder. They sit in a room and argue all this out, and come up with labels and symptoms—and in this thoroughly unscientific fashion, they recycle human suffering and emotional pain and confusion and problems into neat categories. They provide no tests. They simply make the rules, and they expect obedience, because they are the self-appointed authorities.

This is a staggering fact. It may be hard to acknowledge the depth and breadth of the fraud, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t fraud. It only means people have been indoctrinated to salute “the experts.”

It also means other explanations are going to be needed for what we say are “crazy behaviors.” But that need doesn’t imply that the experts are right. It simply indicates we have been following an unproven path and we need to shift gears.

It’s always easier to give in to the experts. But Easier is not a scientific standard that should win our approval. Easier is what we opt for when we prefer a manufactured rigged consensus.

Independent thinking is a whole different animal. It applies and it challenges us across the board of our entire civilization. Should we believe what we are told without reflection? Should we buy the most popular items for sale? Or should we explore what lies beyond the comfort zone?

Close to 50 years ago, psychiatry was dying out as a profession. Fewer and fewer people wanted to see a psychiatrist for help, for talk therapy. All sorts of new therapies were popping up. The competition was leaving medical psychiatry in the dust.

As Dr. Peter Breggin describes it in his landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry, a deal was struck. Drug companies would bankroll psychiatry and rescue it. These companies would pour money into professional conferences, journals, research. In return, they wanted “science” that would promote mental disease as a biological fact, a gateway into the drugs. Everyone would win—except the patient.

So the studies were rolled out, and the list of mental disorders expanded. The FDA was in on the deal as well, as evidenced by their drug approvals, in the face of the obvious damage these drugs were doing.

So this is how we arrived at where we are. This was the plan, and it worked.

Under the cover story, it was all fraud all the time. Without much of a stretch, you could say psychiatry has been the most inept and widespread profiling operation in the history of the human race. Its goal has been to bring humans everywhere into its system. It hardly matters which label a person is painted with, as long as it adds up to a diagnosis and a prescription of drugs.

Fake science comes in many forms. Psychiatry is one of the most egregious forms ever invented.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

OBAMA AND ROMNEY ADORE THE THIRD LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH IN AMERICA

OBAMA AND ROMNEY ADORE THE THIRD LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH IN AMERICA

By Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama have done everything they can to bring more people into the US medical system.  Radically changing that system has never occurred to these two clueless politicians.

Like much of America, they accept the cliches and slogans about American medicine.  “It’s the best in the world.”  “People are being denied treatment.”  “We must take care of our citizens.”

How about this accurate slogan: “Let’s force more Americans to die in the care of doctors.”

The American healthcare system, like clockwork, causes a mind-boggling number of deaths every year.

On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, came to the following conclusions:

Every year in the US there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

THAT’S 2.25 MILLION PEOPLE KILLED PER DECADE.

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in the US, behind heart disease and cancer.

The Starfield study is the most explosive revelation about modern healthcare in America ever published in the mainstream.  The credentials of its author and the journal in which it appeared are, within the highest medical circles, impeccable.

Yet, on the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, although media reporting was extensive, it soon dwindled.  No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation.  Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.

All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this mind-boggling situation preferred to ignore it.

On December 6-7, 2009, two years before her death, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email.  Here are excerpts from that interview.

What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it.  He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to [remedy] the effects of the US medical system?

NO.

Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [of its new drugs]—which puts the FDA into a untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

Aren’t your 2000 findings a severe indictment of the FDA and its standard practices?

They are an indictment of the US health care industry: insurance companies, specialty and disease-oriented medical academia, the pharmaceutical and device manufacturing industries, all of which contribute heavily to re-election campaigns of members of Congress. The problem is that we do not have a government that is free of influence of vested interests. Alas, [it] is a general problem of our society—which clearly unbalances democracy.

Can you offer an opinion about how the FDA can be so mortally wrong about so many drugs?

Yes, it cannot divest itself from vested interests. Again, [there is] a large literature about this, mostly unrecognized by the people because the industry-supported media give it no attention.

Would it be correct to say that, when your JAMA study was published in 2000, it caused a momentary stir and was thereafter ignored by the medical community and by pharmaceutical companies?

Are you sure it was a momentary stir?  I still get at least one email a day asking for a reprint—ten years later!  The problem is that its message is obscured by those that do not want any change in the US health care system.

Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies.  Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated…The US public does not seem to recognize that inappropriate care is dangerous—more does not mean better…Some drugs are downright dangerous; they may be prescribed according to regulations but they are dangerous.

Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

Do the 106,000 deaths from medical drugs only involve drugs prescribed to patients in hospitals, or does this statistic also cover people prescribed drugs who are not in-patients in hospitals?

I tried to include everything in my estimates.  Since the commentary was written, many more dangerous drugs have been added to the marketplace.

Some comments from the interviewer:

Both presidential candidates ignore the truth about the US medical system.  They argue about whose plan is better for bringing more people into this killing machine.  And the major media play along.

There are reports, outside the mainstream, which conclude that far more than 225,000 people in the US die every year as a result of medical treatment.  For example, see the work of Carolyn Dean, Trueman Tuck, Gary Null, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio, Dorothy Smith.

http://www.webdc.com/pdfs/deathbymedicine.pdf

This interview with Dr. Starfield reveals that, even when an author has unassailable credentials within the medical-research establishment, the findings can result in no changes made to the system.

Yes, many persons and organizations within the medical system contribute to the annual death totals of patients, and media silence and public ignorance are certainly major factors, but the FDA is the assigned gatekeeper, when it comes to the safety of medical drugs.  The buck stops there.  If those drugs the FDA is certifying as safe are killing, like clockwork, 106,000 people a year, the Agency must be held accountable.  The American people must understand that.

As for the other 119,000 people killed every year as a result of hospital treatment, this horror has to be laid at the doors of those institutions.  Further, to the degree that hospitals are regulated and financed by state and federal governments, the relevant health agencies assume culpability.

It is astounding, as well, that the US Department of Justice has failed to weigh in on Starfield’s findings.  If 225,000 medically caused deaths per year is not a crime by the Dept. of Justice’s standards, then what is?

To my knowledge, not one person in America has been fired from a job or even censured as result of these medically caused deaths.

Dr. Starfield’s findings have been available for 12 years.  She has changed the perception of the medical landscape forever.  In a half-sane nation, she would be accorded a degree of recognition that would, by comparison, make the considerable list of her awards pale.  And significant and swift action would have been taken to punish the perpetrators of these crimes and reform the system from its foundations.

Nutrition, the cornerstone of good health, is ignored or devalued by most physicians.  Meanwhile, the FDA continues to attack nutritional supplements, even though the overall safety record of these nutrients is superb; whereas, once again, the medical drugs the FDA certifies as safe are killing 106,000 Americans per year.

Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies.  These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent.  In other words, the whole literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.

We are talking about crimes on the scale of holocaust and genocide.  Yet, we can hold a presidential election in which neither candidate even mentions the truth.  They sail on into the nominating conventions; they argue about issues on which they basically agree; they play the left-right paradigm like a harp; they practice the art of sounding sincere; they drag us further into a collectivist future in which murderous medical care will be required for all, from cradle to grave.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ihm8NwzIZtg&w=480&h=270]

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California.  Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe.  Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

FDA drug reviewer: “One manager threatened my children”

FDA drug reviewer: “One manager threatened my children”

by Jon Rappoport

August 15, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

In a stunning interview with Truthout’s Martha Rosenberg, former FDA drug reviewer, Ronald Cavanaugh, exposes the FDA as a relentless criminal mafia protecting its client, Big Pharma, with a host of mob strategies.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/10524-former-fda-reviewer-speaks-out-about-intimidation-retaliation-and-marginalizing-of-safety

Cavanaugh: “…widespread racketeering, including witness tampering and witness retaliation.”

“I was threatened with prison.”

“One [FDA] manager threatened my children…I was afraid that I could be killed for talking to Congress and criminal investigators.”

Cavanaugh reviewed new drug applications made to the FDA by pharmaceutical companies. He was one of the holdouts at the Agency who insisted that the drugs had to be safe and effective before being released to the public.

But honest appraisal wasn’t part of the FDA culture, and Cavanaugh swam against the tide, until he realized his life and the life of his children was on the line.

What was his secret task at the FDA? “Drug reviewers were clearly told not to question drug companies and that our job was to approve drugs.” In other words, rubber stamp them. Say the drugs were safe and effective when they were not.

Cavanaugh’s revelations are astonishing. He recalls a meeting where a drug-company representative flat-out stated that his company had paid the FDA for a new-drug approval. Paid for it. As in bribe.

He remarks that the drug pyridostigmine, given to US troops to prevent the later effects of nerve gas, “actually increased the lethality” of certain nerve agents.

Cavanaugh recalls being given records of safety data on a drug—and then his bosses told him which sections not to read. Obviously, they knew the drug was dangerous and they knew exactly where, in the reports, that fact would be revealed.

Read the entire landmark interview for yourself and see what the FDA really is. We are not dealing with isolated incidents of cheating and lying. We are not dealing with a few isolated bought-off FDA employees. The situation at the FDA isn’t correctable with a few firings. This is an ongoing criminal enterprise, and any government official, serving in any capacity, who has become aware of it and has not taken action, is an accessory to mass poisoning of the population.

Twelve years ago, the cat was let out of the bag. Dr. Barbara Starfield, writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association, on July 26, 2000, in a review titled, “Is US health really the best in the world,” exposed the fact that FDA-approved medical drugs kill 106,000 Americans per year.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2009/12/09/an-exclusive-interview-with-dr-barbara-starfield-medically-caused-death-in-america/

In interviewing her, I discovered that she had never been approached by any federal agency to help remedy this tragedy. Nor had the federal government taken any steps on its own to stop the dying.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

Mental disorders do not exist

by Jon Rappoport

August 9, 2012

(To join my email list, click here.)

To say that a person should have a right to consider himself mentally ill and to take a drug is one thing. This is an argument from the principle of individual freedom.

To say that such a person knows what he is doing by some objective standard is quite another thing.

Objectively speaking, mental illnesses and disorders do not exist.

Officially, all mental disorders are said to be chemical imbalances in the brain. Not just any imbalances, but specific ones. This is assertion is unproven. There is no evidence for it.

For example, for any of the 297 so-called mental disorders listed in the official publication of the American Psychiatric Association, there are no defining physical tests. No blood tests, no urine tests, no saliva tests, no laboratory tests of any kind.

This is a fact.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/04/25/why-you-must-have-a-mental-disorder/

Since it is a fact, it is odd that all psychiatrists are medical doctors. What are they doing that is medical?

Well, they are prescribing drugs. Yes. But I could prescribe drugs if I had a license to do so and a prescription pad.

The profession of psychiatry asserts that these drugs erase or alleviate “the brain chemical imbalances” that form the basis for all mental disorders. Yet the brain-imbalance hypothesis is unproven. It may “make sense” to some people, but that doesn’t constitute evidence.

People, of course, are free to believe the brain-chemical-imbalance hypothesis is true. Belief doesn’t make it true.

People are also free to believe the hypothesis that strange behavior emanates from the Devil or a Karmic curse.

A person says, “I was diagnosed with clinical depression and I took Prozac, and ever since then I’ve felt much happier.”

Yes. Fine. I have no interest in challenging that statement. I merely point out that there are people who have felt depressed and took a crystal they claimed was sacred, rubbed it on their heads, and felt better from then on.

There are people who have joined a church and prayed and felt better.

Why is the Prozac experience more compelling than crystals or prayer?

I’m not talking about what a person says makes him feel better. I’m talking about what psychiatrists claim is science. And when you scratch the surface of that, you come up with: no compelling evidence.

Yet, in courts and in doctors’ offices and at academic conferences and in the pages of professional journals and in political gulags, the science of discrete and separate and definable mental disorders is treated as settled, confirmed, verified, certain. That is a baldfaced lie.

All 297 official mental disorders, listed in the (DSM) publication of the American Psychiatric Association, are defined and approved by committees of psychiatrists. Whether it is schizophrenia or autism or ADHD or clinical depression or bipolar disease, the definitions consist wholly of described behaviors. That’s all.

Psychiatrists will tell you these symptomatic behaviors are signs of underlying chemical imbalances or genetic aberrations, but again, they have no tests to back up this assertion. Therefore, all they left with are the behaviors and their own menu-like collections of those behaviors.

Yes, people suffer in life, and they experience confusion and doubt. They have problems. They have trouble with relationships. They feel sad. They feel all sorts of things. They feel pain. They don’t know how to move ahead with plans. They sometimes feel their lives are at an impasse. Yes.

This is far different from claiming they have a specific and detectable chemical imbalance which can be tested for.

“Well,” many psychiatrists say, “the hypothesis of chemical balance is confirmed if the drugs work, because the drugs are, in fact, based on the idea that chemical imbalances underlie mental disorders.”

Let’s examine that approach. Take, for example, Ritalin.

The 1994 Textbook of Psychiatry, published by the American Psychiatric Press, contains this review (Popper and Steingard): “Stimulants [such as Ritalin] do not produce lasting improvements in aggressivity, conduct disorder, criminality, education achievement, job functioning, marital relationships, or long-term adjustment.”

Not a ringing endorsement.

How about, say, the antidepressants prescribed to children?

A shocking review-study published in The Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases (1996, v.184, no.2), written by Rhoda L. Fisher and Seymour Fisher, called “Antidepressants for Children,” concludes: “Despite unanimous literature of double-blind studies indicating that antidepressants are no more effective than placebos in treating depression in children and adolescents, such medications continue to be in wide use.”

Here is a link to the official psychiatric definition of autism disorder. It’s worth reading:

https://www.firstsigns.org/screening/DSM4.htm

Notice that all the criteria for a diagnosis are behavioral. There is no mention of laboratory tests or test results. There is no definitive mention of chemical imbalance or genetic factors.

Despite public-relations statements issued by doctors and researchers, they have no laboratory findings to establish or confirm a diagnosis.

But, people say, this makes no sense, because children do, in fact, withdraw from the world, stop speaking, throw sudden tantrums. Common sense seems to dictate that these behaviors stem from serious neurological problems.

What could cause the behaviors listed in the official definition of autism disorder: vaccine injury; a head injury in an accident; ingestion of a neurological poison; an environmental chemical; a severe nutritional deficit; perhaps the emotional devastation accompanying the death of a parent…

However, in that case, why bother to call it “autism?” Why not just say vaccine injury or head injury? The answer should be clear. By establishing a label like autism, medical drugs can be sold. Studies can be funded. An industry can be created.

In fact, when it comes to the US government’s compensation program for parents whose children have suffered vaccine injury, the government can engage in a con game. The government can say, “In order to establish a cause for autism, we must find a single underlying factor that applies to all cases of autism. Since we know that some children who are diagnosed with autism have not received vaccines, or have not received vaccines containing a neurological poison (mercury), we do not compensate parents whose children are vaccine-injured on the basis that they have autism.”

But, of course, what is called autism (merely a label) is not one condition caused by one factor. It is a loose collection of behaviors that are caused by various traumas.

The official mental disorder called autism disorder does not exist.

People find such statements very unsettling. They argue, “My child’s life was stolen away from him. He must have autism.”

This proves that a label provides some measure of relief for the parents. It doesn’t prove that the label actually means something. In fact, the label can be a diversion from knowledge that would actually help the child. Suppose, for example, that after receiving the DPT vaccine, the child went into a screaming fit and then withdrew from the world. Calling that autism tends to put the parents and the child in the medical system, where there is no effective treatment. Outside that system, there might be some hope with vaccine detox or, say, hyperbaric oxygen treatments.

What is stated here about autism applies to all 297 official mental disorders. They are labels. There is no reason to suppose that, for each label, there is a single cause. There is no reason to suppose that the labels name actual conditions. Research that attempts to find a single cause for a label stands no better chance of succeeding than research designed to prove a man on the moon is selling land leases to citizens of Fiji.

Again, people have every right to believe they have been helped by a psychiatric diagnosis and a prescribed drug. But they also have the right to reject that paradigm and seek knowledge and help elsewhere. The whole thrust of official psychiatry and its allies is to monopolize their self-appointed territory and use all necessary means to eliminate the competition. This approach has nothing to do with science. It has everything to do with profit and fascist control.

“But my cousin was depressed. He took Zoloft and felt much better.”

Read this article again. It neither denigrates your cousin nor makes your cousin’s experience the basis of actual far-reaching science. This article is about science.

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

To read Jon’s articles on Substack, click here.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails here.

SELLING THE PSYCHIATRIC PARADIGM

Selling the psychiatric paradigm

by Jon Rappoport

August 4, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

The culture of psychiatry goes beyond the brain-scrambling effects of the drugs.

It begins with the idea that there are distinct and definable mental disorders shared by many people. This is a false premise the most hinky grifter and con man would never dare to peddle.

It’s technical voodoo made to appear like science: the science of The Mental Disorder.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2011/06/30/biggest-bullshitter-in-america/

For every disorder, a drug. For every diagnosis, a prescription. For every false claim to scientific legitimacy, a denial of the uniqueness of the patient.

Psychiatry is covert collectivism: “we all have mental disorders of one kind or another and we need to acknowledge that and help each other limp down the road of life.”

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/08/02/the-batman-op-expands-you-shot-those-people/

The notion that you can “cure a mental condition” and thereby set a person free is an illusion. There are no mental conditions. The 297 disorders listed in the current bible of the psychiatric profession are merely pharmaceutical marketing ploys and guidelines for insurance billing.

As I stated in a recent article, the history of the human race is the record of the struggle to bring, from WE, the idea of I, the individual. From many cultures based on the collective WE, a tremendous revolution overthrew the manufactured consensus, and the singular I emerged out of the swamp. Now we are witnessing a reversal, a falling back into the primitive WE, and this absurd journey is festooned with slogans and assurances that some sort of paradise awaits us if we will only give in and melt down.

The goo is All!

That is the true underlying slogan, and it should be engraved across the front facade of the White House and the headquarters of the American Psychiatric Association.

The psychiatric adhesive that promotes collectivism is “mental disorders that are shared by millions of people.”

But who owns your mind? Who is the expert? Who is the court of last resort? Who ultimately can take those energies and direct them toward the discovery and fulfillment of a vision? Who decides what the vision is? Who has that freedom and that choice?

A group? A collective? A professional who makes diagnoses and dispenses drugs?

Who finally makes meaning out of your existence and charts a course?

Are you prepared to give that away?

Read the words of a man who was once the most widely praised psychiatrist in the world, the president of Canadian Psychiatric Association, the president of the American Psychiatric Association, the president of the World Psychiatric Association, the president of the American Psychopathological Association, the president of the Society of Biological Psychiatry:

“In the electro-shock procedure, we have means of producing graduated amnesia, and it is of interest to note that there is a proportional relationship between the number of electroshocks given within a period of time and the extent of the amnesias. It is quite possible, for instance, to produce a long-lasting, probably permanent, amnesia by setting the number of electroshock treatments to be given within a predetermined period.”

(1963, “The Processes of Remembering,” British Journal of Psychology, 109: 325-340)

Donald Ewen Cameron, once the king of psychiatry, wrote those words and administered many, many high-intensity shock treatments to patients, with the goal of erasing their memories and installing, in the second phase of his monstrous treatment-torture, entirely new personalities of his own choosing.

That was his view of the inviolable nature of the Individual.

If you think electroshock is the only psychiatric treatment capable of rendering such great harm, read Dr. Peter Breggin’s landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry. For example, how does, at minimum, 400,000 cases of motor brain damage from just one class of psychiatric drug strike you?

And read Dr. Gary Kohls’ excellent article on the role of psychiatric drugs in homicides:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32135

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Ritalin is not a soft psychiatric drug

Ritalin is not a soft psychiatric drug

by Jon Rappoport

July 31, 2012

NoMoreFakeNews.com

In the wake of the Aurora shootings, we are seeing another round of questions about the psychiatric drugs that can cause harm and impel violence.

Here is an excerpt from my 1999 white paper, WHY DID THEY DO IT? AN INQUIRY INTO THE SCHOOL SHOOTINGS IN AMERICA. All the data in it are from that time period. Since then, several million more children have been put on Ritalin in the US.

Ritalin, manufactured by Novartis, is the close cousin to speed which is given to perhaps two million American schoolchildren for a condition called Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), or ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder).

ADD and ADHD, for which no organic causes have ever been found, are touted as disease-conditions that afflict the young, causing hyperactivity, unmanageability, and learning problems. Of course, when you name a disorder or a syndrome and yet can find no single provable organic cause for it, you have nothing more than a loose collection of behaviors with an arbitrary title.

Correction: you also have a pharmaceutical bonanza.

Dr. Peter Breggin, referring to an official directory of psychiatric disorders, the DSM-III-R, writes that withdrawal from amphetamine-type drugs, including Ritalin, can cause “depression, anxiety, and irritability as well as sleep problems, fatigue, and agitation.” Breggin then remarks, “The individual may become suicidal in response to the depression.”

The well-known Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics reveals a strange fact. It states that Ritalin is “structurally related to amphetamines… Its pharmacological properties are essentially the same as those of the amphetamines.” In other words, the only clear difference is legality. And the effects, in layman’s terms, are obvious. You take speed and after awhile, sooner or later, you start crashing. You become agitated, irritable, paranoid, delusional, aggressive.

A firm and objective medical review needs to be done in all of the school shootings, to determine how many of the shooters were on, or had at one time been on, Ritalin.

In his landmark classic, Toxic Psychiatry: Why Therapy, Empathy and Love Must Replace the Drugs, Electroshock, and Biochemical Theories of the ‘New Psychiatry’ (St. Martin’s Press, 1991), Dr. Breggin discusses the subject of drug combinations: “Combining antidepressants [e.g., Prozac, Luvox] and psychostimulants [e.g., Ritalin] increases the risk of cardiovascular catastrophe, seizures, sedation, euphoria, and psychosis. Withdrawal from the combination can cause a severe reaction that includes confusion, emotional instability, agitation, and aggression.”

Children are frequently medicated with this combination, and when we highlight such effects as aggression, psychosis, and emotional instability, it is obvious that the result is pointing toward the very real possibility of violence.

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed over a hundred adverse affects of Ritalin and indexed published journal articles for each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects then, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

• Paranoid delusions
• Paranoid psychosis
• Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
• Activation of psychotic symptoms
• Toxic psychosis
• Visual hallucinations
• Auditory hallucinations
• Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
• Effects pathological thought processes
• Extreme withdrawal
• Terrified affect
• Started screaming
• Aggressiveness
• Insomnia
• Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphatamine-like effects
• psychic dependence
• High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
• Decreased REM sleep
• When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
• Convulsions
• Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

Many parents around the country have discovered that Ritalin has become a condition for their children continuing in school. There are even reports, by parents, of threats from social agencies: “If you don’t allow us to prescribe Ritalin for your ADD child, we may decide that you are an unfit parent. We may decide to take your child away.”

This mind-boggling state of affairs is fueled by teachers, principals, and school counselors, none of whom have medical training.

Yet the very definition of the “illness” for which Ritalin would be prescribed is in doubt, especially at the highest levels of the medical profession. This doubt, however, has not filtered down to most public schools.

In commenting on Dr. Lawrence Diller’s book, Running on Ritalin, Dr. William Carey, Director of Behavioral Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, has written, “Dr. Diller has correctly described… the disturbing trend of blaming children’s social, behavioral, and academic performance problems entirely on an unproven brain deficit…”

On November 16-18, 1998, the National Institute of Mental Health held the prestigious “NIH Consensus Development Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [ADHD].” The conference was explicitly aimed at ending all debate about the diagnoses of ADD, ADHD, and about the prescription of Ritalin. It was hoped that at the highest levels of medical research and bureaucracy, a clear position would be taken: this is what ADHD is, this is where it comes from, and these are the drugs it should be treated with.

That didn’t happen, amazingly. Instead, the official panel responsible for drawing conclusions from the conference threw cold water on the whole attempt to reach a comfortable consensus.

Panel member Mark Vonnegut, a Massachusetts pediatrician, said, “The diagnosis [of ADHD] is a mess.”

The panel essentially said it was not sure ADHD was even a “valid” diagnosis. In other words, ADD and ADHD might be nothing more than attempts to categorize certain children’s behaviors-with no organic cause, no clear-cut biological basis, no provable reason for even using the ADD or ADHD labels.

The panel found “no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction [which malfunction had been the whole psychiatric assumption].”

The panel found that Ritalin has not been shown to have long-term benefits. In fact, the panel stated that Ritalin has resulted in “little improvement on academic achievement or social skills.”

Panel chairman, David Kupfer, professor of psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh, said, “There is no current validated diagnostic test [for ADHD].”

Yet at every level of public education in America, there remains what can only be called a voracious desire to give children Ritalin (or other similar drugs) for ADD or ADHD.

Nullifying the assurances and prescriptions doctors routinely give to parents of children who have been diagnosed ADD or ADHD should be a national goal.

The following pronouncement makes a number of things clear: The 1994 Textbook of Psychiatry, published by the American Psychiatric Press, contains this review (Popper and Steingard): “Stimulants [such as Ritalin] do not produce lasting improvements in aggressivity, conduct disorder, criminality, education achievement, job functioning, marital relationships, or long-term adjustment.”

Parents should also wake up to the fact that, in the aftermath of the Littleton, Colorado, tragedy, pundits and doctors are urging more extensive “mental health” services for children. Fine, except whether you have noticed it or not, this no longer means, for the most part, therapy with a caring professional. It means drugs. It means the drugs I am discussing in this inquiry.

In December 1996, the US Drug Enforcement Agency held a conference on ADHD and Ritalin — “Stimulant Use in the Treatment of ADHD.” Surprisingly, it issued a sensible statement about drugs being a bad substitute for the presence of caring parents:

“[T]he use of stimulants [such as Ritalin] for the short-term improvement of behavior and underachievement may be thwarting efforts to address the children’s real issues, both on an individual and societal level. The lack of long-term positive results with the use of stimulants and the specter of previous and potential stimulant abuse epidemics, give cause to worry about the future. The dramatic increase in the use of methylphenidate [Ritalin] in the 1990s should be viewed as a marker or warning to society about the problems children are having and how we view and address them.”

The Brookhaven National Laboratory has studied Ritalin through PET scans. Lab researchers have found that the drug decreased the flow of blood to all parts of the brain by 20-30%.[emphasis added]

That is of course a very negative finding. It is a signal of danger.

But parents, teachers, counselors, principals, school psychologists know nothing about this. Nor do they know that cocaine produces the same blood-flow effect.

In his book, Talking Back to Ritalin, Peter Breggin expands on the drug’s effects: “Stimulants such as Ritalin and amphetamine… have grossly harmful impacts on the brain — reducing overall blood flow, disturbing glucose metabolism, and possibly causing permanent shrinkage or atrophy of the brain.” [emphasis added]

In the wake of the Littleton shootings, we find that “the American people” and lawyers and pundits and child psychologists are pointing the finger at Hollywood, at video games like Doom, at inattentive parents, and at the availability of guns. We have to wonder why almost no one is calling out these drugs.

Is it possible that the work of PR people is shaping the national response?

The Matrix Revealed

The PBS television series, The Merrow Report, produced in 1996 a program called “Attention Deficit Disorder: A Dubious Diagnosis?” The Educational Writer’s Association awarded the program first prize for investigative reporting in that year. I can recall no other piece of television journalism since the Vietnam war which has managed to capture on film government officials in the act of realizing that they have made serious mistakes.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMNhdvg8kgA&w=480&h=360]

John Merrow, the series’ host, explains that, unknown to the public, there has been “a long-term, unpublicized financial relationship between the company that makes the most widely known ADD medication [Ritalin] and the nation’s largest ADD support group.”

The group is CHADD, based in Florida. CHADD stands for Children and Adults with ADD. Its 650 local chapters sponsor regional conferences and monthly meetings, often held at schools. It educates thousands of families about ADD and ADHD and gives out free medical advice. This advice features the drug Ritalin.

Since 1988, when CHADD and Ciba-Geigy (now Novartis), the manufacturer of Ritalin, began their financial relationship, Ciba has given almost a million dollars to CHADD, helping it to expand its membership from 800 to 35,000 people.

Merrow interviews several parents whose children are on Ritalin, parents who have been relying on CHADD for information. They are clearly taken aback when they learn that CHADD obtains a significant amount of its funding from the drug company that makes Ritalin.

CHADD has used Ciba money to promote its pharmaceutical message through a public service announcement produced for television. Nineteen million people have seen this PSA. As Merrow says, “CHADD’s name is on it, but Ciba Geigy paid for it.”

It turns out that in all of CHADD’s considerable literature written for the public, there is rare mention of Ciba. In fact, the only instance of the connection Merrow could find on the record was a small-print citation on an announcement of a single CHADD conference.

In recounting CHADD’s promotion of drug “therapy” for ADD, Merrow says, “CHADD’s literature also says psychostimulant medications [like Ritalin] are not addictive.”

Merrow brings this up to Gene Haslip, a Drug Enforcement Agency official in Washington. Haslip is visibly annoyed. “Well,” he says, “I think that’s very misleading. It’s [Ritalin’s] certainly a drug that can cause a very high degree of dependency, like all of the very potent stimulants.”

Merrow reveals that CHADD received a $750,000 grant from the US Dept. of Education, in 1996, to produce a video, Facing the Challenge of ADD. The video doesn’t just mention the generic name methylphenidate, it announces the drug by its brand name, Ritalin. This, at government (taxpayer) expense.

We see a press conference announcing the release of the video. The CHADD president presents an award to Dr. Thomas Hehir, Director of Special Education Programs at the US Dept. of Education.

This sets the stage for a conversation between Merrow and Dr. Hehir, providing a rare moment when discovery of the truth is recorded on camera, when PR is swept aside.

MERROW: “Are you aware that most of the people in the film [the video, Facing the Challenge of ADD—referring to people who are giving testimonials about how their ADD children have been helped by treatment] are not just members of CHADD … but in the CHADD leadership, including the former national president? They’re all board members of CHADD in Chicago. Are you aware of that? They’re not identified in the film.”

HEHIR: “I’m not aware of that.”

MERROW: “Do you know about the financial connection between CHADD and Ciba Geigy, the company that makes Ritalin?”

HEHIR: “I do not.”

MERROW: “In the last six years, CHADD has received $818,000 in grants from Ciba Geigy.”

HEHIR: “I did not know that.”

MERROW: “Does that strike you as a potential conflict of interest?”

HEHIR: “That strikes me as a potential conflict of interest. Yes it does.”

MERROW: “Now, that’s not disclosed either. Even though the film talks about Ritalin as a—one way, and it’s the first way presented—of taking care of treating Attention Deficit Disorder. That’s not disclosed either. Does that trouble you?”

HEHIR: “Um, it concerns me.”

MERROW: “Are you going to look into this, when you go back to your office?”

HEHIR: “I certainly will look into some of the things you’ve brought up.”

MERROW: “Should they have told you that all those people in that film are CHADD leadership? Should they have told you that CHADD gets twenty percent of its money from the people who make Ritalin?”

HEHIR: “I should have known that.”

MERROW: “They should have told you.”

HEHIR: “Yes.”

This funded video, in which CHADD devotes all of twenty seconds to mentioning Ritalin’s adverse effects, is no longer distributed by the US Department of Education.

CHADD has now told its members that it receives funding from Ciba. It says it will continue to take money from Ciba.

This is an example of how a corporation can, behind the scenes, bend and shape the way the public sees reality.

In the case of the school shootings, has an attempt been made to mold media response? To highlight various causes and omit others?

Real action is going to have to come from the public. Mothers in Littleton and Springfield and West Paducah and Jonesboro [where school shootings occurred] are going to have to ask the hard questions and become relentless about getting real answers. They are going to have to learn about these drugs. They’ll have to learn which violent children in the school shootings were on these drugs. They are going to have to throw off robotic obedience to authorities in white coats. And they are going to have to join together.

If they do, many people will end up standing with them.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Another example of psychiatry’s Muder Inc. program?

Another example of psychiatry’s Muder Inc. program?

by Jon Rappoport

July 30, 2012

NoMoreFakeNews.com

AP reports a man separated from his wife shot their two children and then committed suicide.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20120729/DA0AL9RG0.html

Is this another instance of the psychiatric drug plague that has been spreading across America for decades?  Was the killer’s brain scrambled in a storm induced by Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil?

Daryl Benway, 41, shot his two children, killing his 7-year-old daughter, Abigail, in their Oxford, Massachusetts, home.  His 9-year-old sin, Owen, is in serious condition at a local hospital.

Benway’s wife, Kelleen, came to the house to see it surrounded by police and media, unaware of what had happened.

Husband and wife had been separated.  There was no restraining order on the husband.  He had no criminal record.

For background on the violence-causing effects of psychiatric drugs, see:

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/02/11/the-school-shooting-white-paper/

The connections between the drugs and suicide and homicide are firmly established.

As long as the police and prosecutors are reluctant to pursue the psychiatric-drug angle, many crimes will remain inexplicable.  A large sector of the public will refuse to believe these drugs are potentially deadly, and will consider any inquiry into the subject irrelevant.  This is because the pharmaceutical industry, with its advertising money, holds the press captive, and therefore the press doesn’t do its own investigations into murder/suicides like this one.

Family, friends, and co-workers of the Benways go into shock and grief, wring their hands, and try to put their lives back together.

Yes, there may be a non-drug explanation for the killings in Oxford.

But I’m saying that every bizarre violent crime must, in the aftermath, be subjected to a probe about the psychiatric drugs.  This should be as standard as fingerprinting, blood and DNA analysis, weapons forensics, and document searches.

Ever since the introduction of Ritalin into psychiatric treatment, 50 years ago, the profession of psychiatry, hand in glove with its pharmaceutical partners, has been randomly seeding the population with dangerous drugs that can and do induce violence.

The archons of psychiatry are well aware of the drugs’ effects.  Their refusal to do anything about it signals their ongoing crime of chemical warfare against humanity.

From 2008, here is another example of a murder no one could put together.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=26915.80

At Northern Illinois University, student Stephen Kazmierczak, whom everyone seemed to like, stepped into his geology class one day with several weapons and opened fire.  AP reported he had stopped taking his medication shortly before his killing spree.  No drug was named at the time.

Psychiatrist Peter Breggin has a new and important book coming out in August: Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal.  (www.breggin.com)  Breggin states that drugs such as the SSRI antidepressants can cause violence while being taken and also during withdrawal.  For years, Breggin has warned people about the withdrawal period and how it should be managed by a professional who knows what he’s doing.  Unfortunately, the number of those doctors is small.

If James Holmes was indeed on psychiatric medications, even if he had stopped taking the drugs prior to July 20th, he still could have been under their influence.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

How medical criminals are faking medical science every day

by Jon Rappoport

June 28, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Before we jump in, I want to announce I’ll be making a one-hour audio presentation tomorrow, Friday, at 7PM Eastern Time, on the naturalnews.com 3-day Healing Summit. Click here for details. Mike Adams has a whole lineup of audio presenters rolling on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. It’s free.

In recent articles, I’ve revealed a smoking sizzling gun located on the FDA’s own web site (for all articles on this breaking story click here).

From the startpage.com search engine, type in “FDA Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions” and you’ll find the page. The FDA is completely aware their approved medical drugs are killing 100,000 Americans a year. THAT’S what’s on that page.

How can all those dangerous drugs the FDA certifies as safe move through the pipeline of approval and get to the public?

Yes, we all know that some doctors who sit on FDA panels have financial ties to the very companies whose drugs they are okaying. But the story goes much deeper than that.

Drug companies run clinical trials of new drugs on humans before FDA approval can occur. And those clinical trials are written up and published in medical journals.

Now, if 100,000 Americans are dying every year from the effects of drugs the FDA says are safe, the FDA is looking at published studies that are…what? The studies claim drug after drug is safe. But the drugs kill. Paradox. Contradiction. Conclusion? The published studies are fraudulent. Not just a few studies. Hundreds and thousands of them. The drug companies are providing studies that are outright criminal lies.

That’s what we have here. Since the FDA knows the drugs they approve as safe are killing 100,000 Americans every year, like clockwork, the FDA ALSO KNOWS THOUSANDS OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHED STUDIES ARE LIES. The FDA knows that huge numbers of studies on drug safety are faked. Faked studies are a crime. It’s called fraud. And when the fraud leads to the deaths of people taking a drug, that’s a lot worse than fraud.

The FDA knows the studies are faked, BUT THEY DON’T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. THEY LET IT RIDE. That makes them an accomplice to the ongoing crime.

In a legitimate honest courtroom, if one existed, I would present that case against the FDA every day of the week and I would win.

Should we tread daintily when we know the federal agency responsible for drug safety is allowing 100,000 people to die every year? This is murder. It’s not really negligent homicide, not when it keeps happening. It’s murder. It’s on the order of a Nazi war crime.

Try this image: you are a gatekeeper. Your job, on the first day of every year, is to unlock the gate and leave it open, so people can pass through. But you know that, when you open the gate, 100,000 people who pass through will die in the following year. Yet, every January 1, you keep opening the gate.

That’s what the FDA is. That particular gatekeeper.

Case closed.

power outside the matrix

But there is further evidence that huge numbers of published studies of drugs are fraudulent. We actually have statements from medical insiders. That’s right. For example, here is one, and it comes from a devastating source, a woman who edited the most famous medical journal in the world:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

Marcia Angell, MD, “Drug Companies and Doctors: A story of corruption.” NY Review of Books, Jan. 15, 2009.

What do doctors rely on? What do medical schools rely on? What do medical journals and mainstream medical reporters and drug companies and the FDA rely on?

The sanctity of published clinical trials of drugs. These trials determine whether the drugs are safe and effective. The drugs are tested on human volunteers. The results are tabulated. The trials are described in papers that are printed by medical journals.

This is science. This is rationality. This is the rock. Without these studies, the whole field of medical research would fall apart in utter chaos.

Upon this rock, and hence through media, the public becomes aware of the latest breakthrough, the newest medicine. Through doctors in their offices, the public finds out what drugs they should take—and their doctors know because their doctors have read the published studies in the medical journals, the studies that describe the clinical drug trials. Or if the doctors haven’t actually read the reports, they’ve been told about them.

It all goes back to this rock.

And when mainstream medical advocates attack so-called alternative or natural health, they mention that their own sacred profession is based on real science, on studies, on clinical trials.

One doctor told me, “The published peer-reviewed studies are what keep us from going back to the Stone Age.”

He smiled. He was confident. He was sure of himself. He had science on his side. And he was dead wrong. The science is a sham, it’s in tatters, it’s broken, crushed, smashed.

Here is more evidence. I quote an article in the NY Review of Books (May 12, 2011) by Helen Epstein, “Flu Warning: Beware the Drug Companies.”

“Six years ago, John Ioannidis, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Ioannina School of Medicine in Greece, found that nearly half of published articles in scientific journals contained findings that were false.”

Here’s another quote from the same article:

“Last year, GlaxoSmithKline’s diabetes drug Avandia was linked to thousands of heart attacks, and earlier in the decade, the company’s antidepressant Paxil was discovered to exacerbate the risk of suicide in young people. Merck’s painkiller Vioxx was also linked to thousands of heart disease deaths. In each case, the scientific literature gave little hint of these dangers.”

And here is yet another statement from Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine:

“A review of seventy-four clinical trials of antidepressants, for example, found that thirty-seven of thirty-eight positive studies were published. But of the thirty-six negative studies, thirty-three were either not published or published in a form that conveyed a positive outcome.”

It turns out that the source of the informational pipeline that feeds the entire perception of pharmaceutical medicine is a rank fraud.

Doctors say: “We have the clinical trials of studies on drugs and they are published in top-rank journals. We are the epitome of science.”

Yes, false science. Riddled from top to bottom with lies.

Perhaps this will help the next time a friend, pretending he actually knows anything, tells you pharmaceutical medicine is a resounding success.

If you need more, cite Dr. Barbara Starfield’s famous study, “Is US health really the best in the world?” Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000. Starfield concludes that 225,000 people are killed by the medical system in the US every year—106,000 by FDA-approved medicines. That latter figure works out to over a MILLION deaths per decade.

The Matrix Revealed

A final note: The august editors of medical journals have a game they can play. Suppose a drug company has just finished writing up the results of a clinical drug trial and has submitted the piece to a journal for publication. The editor knows the company carried out a half-dozen other such trials on the same drug…and they didn’t look good. The drug caused wild fluctuations in blood pressure and blood sugar. There were heart attacks. Strokes. But this ONE study, the one submitted for publication, looks very positive. The editor knows if he prints it and forgets about “ethics,” the drug company will order re-prints of the piece from him and distribute them to doctors all over the world, and to reporters, professors, government officials. The drug company will order and pay for these re-prints; the medical journal can make $700,000 from publishing THAT ONE STUDY. In one hand, the editor sees: I won’t publish it=no money. In the other hand, he sees: I’ll publish it=$700,000. What to do?

As a reporter investigating deep medical fraud and crime for 30 years, I’ve spoken to people throughout the medical system. They all cling to the idea that published studies are the final and ultimate rationalization for their professional existence.

Well, the system has crashed. It’s broken up into pieces. And yet these professionals move on, as if everything is normal. It’s an illustration that consensus reality about science can be stronger than legitimate science itself. The blinders are firmly in place. March ahead. Pretend the truth is on your side. Salute high ideals. Fake it all the way. While huge numbers of people die.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Another smoking gun: the FDA vs. the American people

Another smoking gun: the FDA vs. the American people!

By Jon Rappoport

June 12, 2012

Breaking News: Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

If you worked for a federal agency that was killing people at the rate of 100,000 a year, every year, like clockwork, and if you knew it, wouldn’t you feel compelled to say or do something about it?

At the FDA, which is, in fact, killing Americans at that rate, no one has ever felt the need to step forward and speak up.

Let’s shift the venue and ask the same question. If you were a medical reporter for a major media outlet in the US, and you knew the above fact, wouldn’t you make it a priority to say something, write something, do something?

I’m talking about people like Sanjay Gupta (CNN, CBS), Gina Kolata (NY Times), Tim Johnson (ABC News), and Thomas Maugh II (LA Times).

And with that, let’s get to the latest smoking gun. The citation is: BMJ June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012:344:e3989). Author, Jeanne Lenzer. (See http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e3989).

Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices: “It calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”

The report called this “one of the most significant perils to humans resulting from human activity.”

And here is the final dagger. The report was compiled by outside researchers who went into the FDA’s own database of “serious adverse [medical-drug] events.”

Therefore, to say the FDA isn’t aware of this finding would be absurd. The FDA knows. The FDA knows and it isn’t saying anything about it, because THE FDA CERTIFIES, AS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE, ALL THE DRUGS THAT ARE ROUTINELY MAIMING AND KILLING AMERICANS.

Previously, I have documented that the FDA knows, because the FDA has a page on its own website that admits 100,000 people are killed every year by medical drugs, and two million more people are severely injured by the drugs. (Google “FDA Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions” or click here to be taken directly to the FDA page in question).

And for the past five years or so, I have been writing about and citing a published report by the late Dr. Barbara Starfield that indicates 106,000 people in the US are killed by medical drugs every year. Until her death last year, Dr. Starfield worked at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. Her report, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, was published in the Journal of American Medical Association on July 26, 2000.

Since the Department of Homeland Security is working its way into every nook and corner of American life, hyper-extending its mandate to protect all of us from everything, why shouldn’t I go along with Janet Napolitano’s advice: SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING.

This is what I see and this is what I’m saying. Maybe DHS would like to investigate the FDA as a terrorist organization.

How many smoking guns do we need before a sitting president shuts down the FDA buildings, fumigates the place, and prosecutes very large numbers of FDA employees?

Do we need 100,000 smoking guns? Do we need relatives of the people who’ve all died, in the span of merely a year, from the poisonous effects of FDA-approved medical drugs, to bring their corpses to the doors of FDA headquarters?

And let me ask another question. If instead of drugs like warfarin, dabigatran, levofloxacin, carboplatin, and lisinopril (the five leading killers in the FDA database), the 100,000 deaths per year were led by gingko, ginseng, vitamin D, niacin, and raw milk, what do you think would happen?

I’ll tell you what would happen. SEALS, Delta Force, SWAT teams, snipers, predator drones, tanks, and infantry would be attacking every health-food store in America. The resulting fatalities would be written off as necessary collateral damage in the fight to keep America safe and healthy.

But you see, the routine deaths of 100,000 Americans a year, after the FDA has certified the drugs are SAFE, isn’t a recognized political issue. It doesn’t play in a debate between Romney and Obama. It isn’t perceived as a left-versus-right, liberal-versus-conservative topic.

Such is the power of the medical cartel. All those phony stories in the press, reported dutifully by so-called medical reporters? The stories about maybe-could-be-possible-miracle breakthroughs just over the horizon of state-of-the-art research? Those stories are there to obscure the very, very hard facts of medically-caused death on the ground.

The buck stops at the FDA.

Except in the real world, it doesn’t. Which tells you something about the so-called real world and how much of it is composed of propaganda.

Retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy, once said to me, “Find a truly explosive hidden fact and put it in front of a person’s eyes, hold it there, and see what happens. The person will go blank. He’ll go blank because on a barely conscious level, he’s rapidly calculating how many deceptions he’s swallowed about all sorts of related subjects. Then he’ll blink and tell you what you just showed him is impossible…”

I would add: after he says it’s impossible, he’ll actually make excuses for the perpetrator of the crime you’ve just exposed. He’ll give you a dozens reasons to let the perpetrator off the hook. He’ll really warm up to the perpetrator and say he’s a wonderful human being. He’ll spin gossamer and rainbows from here to the moon.

It’s quite something to behold. But here is the situation. No medical drug in the US can be released for public use unless and until the FDA says it is safe and effective. That’s the rule. Therefore, if the FDA is spitting out drug approvals month after month and year after year, and if the drugs are routinely killing 100,000 people a year and maiming two million more, which adds up to a million deaths per decade and 20 million maimings per decade, and if the FDA and the federal government are doing nothing about it, even though they know what’s going on, then you have a holocaust. Murder. Not accidental death. Murder.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

HANG THE BANKERS? HANG THE FDA! EXHIBIT 2

 

HANG THE BANKERS? HANG THE FDA! EXHIBIT 2

By Jon Rappoport

May 24, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Breaking News: Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

With the recent revelation (exposed by yours truly) that FDA knows the drugs it’s approving are killing Americans at the rate of 100,000 a year (*), it’s time to shut down the buildings at Agency headquarters, fire all the employees, fumigate the place, and start over.

 

(*) Note: All articles pertaining to this breaking story have been placed under the “FDA category” on this blog (in typical reverse chronological blog order).

 

If we had a Department of Justice, I’d say prosecute the FDA offenders for mass murder, but DOJ is too busy putting pot smokers in jail, or selling guns to Mexican drug cartels, or something.

 

The FDA literally considers the pharmaceutical industry its Client, to which it owes remarkable and steadfast allegiance, through thick and thin (and it’s always thick), so shutting down the FDA would solve that corrupt love affair.

 

The close-out of this terminally corrupt Agency would also silence the tower of bullshit that ceaselessly pumps out limited hangouts to explain why drug after drug is killing and maiming Americans.

 

My number-one all-time hangout was voiced by FDA Commissioner David Kessler, in 1993 (JAMA): “If an adverse event occurs in perhaps one in 5,000 or even one in 1,000 users, it could be missed in a clinical trial but pose a serious safety problem when [the drug is] released in the market.”

 

I see. We should forget drug companies burying studies that show their drugs kill. Forget FDA drug-approval panels being stacked with doctors who take money from those drug companies. Forget researchers literally inventing diseases and disorders that “require” new drugs. No, it’s just that pesky one in a thousand in trials that has a bad reaction that’s missed. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

 

But hey. Only a million Americans die every decade from the drugs. Only 20 million experience strokes, heart attacks, neurological damage, etc., from the drugs.

 

And it’s only the FDA who looks the other way and instead goes after sellers of food supplements, which kill nobody.

 

The FDA. We’re looking at a criminal racket. Posing as Science.

 

Exhibit 1, the smoking gun, is the FDA’s own web page on which it admits the 100,000 yearly deaths. Google “FDA, Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions.”

 

I’m ready to roll out Exhibit 2. This one takes a bit of thought, so follow closely as I take you through it.

 

In the last few months, I’ve offered devastating evidence that all so-called mental disorders are sheer inventions, brazenly concocted by committees of psychiatrists. These committees arrange menus of human behaviors and label them with names like Oppositional Defiance Disorder.

 

THERE IS NO BIOLOGICAL OR CHEMICAL TEST FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDER.

 

Never has been. Not for ADHD, not for schizophrenia, not for clinical depression, not for Bipolar, not for any of 300 billable diagnoses shrinks hand out to patients.

 

ALL SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS ARE ARBITRARILY INVENTED, NAMED, LABELED, DESCRIBED, AND CATEGORIZED by a committee of psychiatrists, from menus of human behaviors.

 

Their findings are published in periodically updated editions of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), printed by the American Psychiatric Association.

 

For years, even psychiatrists have been blowing the whistle on this hazy crazy process of “research.”

 

Of course, pharmaceutical companies, who manufacture highly toxic drugs to treat every one of these fictional disorders, are leading the charge to invent more and more mental-health categories, so they can sell more drugs and make more money.

 

But we have a mind-boggling twist. One of the great psychiatric honchos, who has been out in front inventing mental disorders, has gone public. He’s blown the whistle on himself and his colleagues.

 

His name is Dr. Allen Frances, and he made VERY interesting statements to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: “Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness.” (Dec.27, 2010).

 

Dr. Allen Frances is the man who, in 1994, headed up the project to write the latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the DSM-IV. This tome defines and labels and describes every official mental disorder in the known universe. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.

 

In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, “Scientist At Work,” Daniel Goleman called Frances “Perhaps the most powerful psychiatrist in America at the moment…”

 

Well, sure. If you’re sculpting the entire canon of diagnosable mental disorders for your colleagues, for insurers, for the government, for pharma (who will sell the drugs matched up to the 297 DSM-IV diagnoses), you’re right up there in the pantheon.

 

Long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Dr. Frances talked to Wired’s Greenberg and said the following:

 

“There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

 

BANG.

 

That’s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, “Well, I knew there would be a problem.”

 

After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, “These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.”

 

Wait, there’s more.

 

It’s another nugget, this time from PBS Frontline. The program was: “Does ADHD Exist?”

 

PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

 

BARKLEY (Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center): That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for anymental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid.

 

BANG.

 

Actually, Dr. Barkley, that DOES make them invalid. And you just admitted, out in the open, that all mental disorders are concocted. Congratulations.

 

Yes, people have problems. Yes, people suffer and feel pain and confusion. Yes. We all understand that. But carving up human emotion and behavior into neat categories of “mental disorders” is one of the great con jobs of our time.

 

Especially since, what follows from these gratuitous diagnoses is TOXIC DRUGS, drugs that maim and destroy lives.

 

If you want the evidence, start combing the adverse effects of drugs like Prozac, Ritalin, Zoloft, Paxil, Lithium, Valproate, Risperdal.

 

All right. This is all background for the payoff.

 

Should we say the FDA experts are ignorant and confused, are well-meaning bumblers, or should we face the obvious truth and say, instead, that THEY KNOW ALL THESE MENTAL DISORDERS ARE CONCOCTED, THEY KNOW THERE ARE NO LEGITIMATE TESTS FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS?

 

The answer is obvious. THEY KNOW.

 

And yet they continue to approve, as safe and effective, all the toxic psychiatric drugs that treat these NON-EXISTENT conditions.

 

So here we have a compound crime. The disorders are fictional. And the drugs are toxic. And nobody at FDA blows the whistle. The silence is deafening.

 

Does this make you squirm a little? I know. We’re supposed to cut people a break. We’re supposed to say, reflexively, maybe they just don’t understand, they want to do the right thing but they’re making a mistake. They’re basically good people who are confused.

 

No.

 

In a half-sane world, the following conversation would take place:

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: Dr. Johnson, you have served on many FDA panels that have approved psychiatric drugs as safe and effective. Is that correct?

 

DR. JOHNSON: Yes, Senator.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: But now, under great stress, you’ve come forward to make a statement.

 

DR. JOHNSON: That’s right.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: You’re telling this Committee that none of the mental disorders these drugs are supposed to treat are real.

 

DR. JOHNSON: That’s correct, sir.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: And you’re also saying, under oath, that you have many colleagues at the FDA who know these mental disorders are fictions, that none of the disorders are diagnosed through legitimate tests.

 

DR. JOHNSON: Absolutely, Senator. It’s common knowledge at FDA that there are no tests. It’s also common knowledge among many doctors around the world.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: But you’re also here today to say something about the drugs.

 

DR. JOHNSON: They’re toxic, sir. Every one of them.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: This is a titanic revelation.

 

DR. JOHNSON: It is, sir. But only because it hasn’t been voiced in a public forum before. Everything I’m telling you is widely known.

 

This is what we’re talking about. This is the open secret.

 

And the FDA knows the secret.

 

And they’re doing nothing about it.

 

It’s yet another reason why they are a criminal organization. A mafia. They know how to pretty themselves up. They know how to speak nonsensical technical language. They know how to appear authoritative. But they’re a mafia.

 

And if you want an accomplice before, during, and after the fact, look no further than several miles away from FDA headquarters, where the Department of Justice makes its home. They, too, do nothing. THEY KNOW, TOO. Through their knowledge, they become a functioning part of the RICO operation that sustains grave injury and massive death-counts in Pharmaceutical America.

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com